Contextuality

The theory of contextuality argues that though all things may be inherently related to each other, they can be understood best when viewed in the right context. Though this may seem obvious at first, the implications are not. So often we hear people and especially politicians claim that they have been quoted out of context. The beauty of the English language is such that words, in a different tone, or even a different emphasis, can twist the entire meaning of the speaker. This is the first rule that any aspiring actor would/should learn in a drama school. If such is the case, typed or written words can always be taken out if context. Even with perfectly grammatical sentences, this fear always exists with writers.
Comprehending novels in the manner the author imagined it is nearly impossible. Which again beings us to the greatness of the language, which allows creative art to be interpreted in multiple ways. So what is not necessarily a curse for legal writers, is more than a boon to fiction writers.
When reading a novel, how to we understand the complexity of the words? In Blink, the author Malcolm Gladwell discusses the concept of thinking without thinking, the skill of immediately recognising what is relevant and what isn’t. Similarly, we find that our mind automatically defines a context for a given situation, leading us to believe that the story is moving along those lines. This context, when associated with pictures, makes the reading of a novel a more visual experience rather than a verbal one.
Now what is unusual, is that from experience, a contextual villain is made out to be more of a menace that an absolute one. Lets take the case of an average population. A part of this population, is very kind and sane and helpful. Let us assume their soul transcends to a hypothetical heaven, of sorts. Another part, not absolutely evil, but relatively so, transcend to a lesser heaven. Logically, the most evil person in heaven one should be purer than the kindest of the second lot. But our experience in the real world is such, that this judgement is not made.
What interferes with our logic, when it comes to making such choices. Yes, emotions. Again I take from Mr. Gladwell, where he talks about emotions clouding the readers ability to “thin-slice”, which is ones ability to gauge what is really important from a very narrow period of experience. This further distorts contextuality, infusing the media with lots of room for creativity and allowing them to exploit the loopholes of language. To their own advantage, of course.
Finally, another note from experience, is that even our emotions are dependent on the situation. It is very usual to feel helpless in a group of people much smarter than you. And to feel superior in a group of people less equipped than you. But to feel helpless in a group less equipped than you is not odd, it’s a different kind of hell. One I hope you don’t come to experience.