Comments for Conversational Reading

Comment on Novels Give You Time Back by Drew

Drew — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:14:03 +0000

I am re-reading A Heart So White at the moment, and have Vol 3 of YFT at home, with the other two on the way. Such a wonderful talent Marias is!

Comment on Novels Give You Time Back by DCN

DCN — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 21:10:06 +0000

Count me in as well. Infinite Face!

Comment on Novels Give You Time Back by Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 20:22:27 +0000

I’m in. Your Face This Summer!

Comment on Novels Give You Time Back by mike

mike — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 20:03:47 +0000

Yes, please do! (“Infinite Tomorrow?” “Your Face Summer?”) I’ve had the trilogy sitting on my shelf for months now. I new-year’s-resolved to read it in January, but with the days slipping away (and my pile of other books to read piling higher), I doubt I’ll get to it without some external motivation.

Comment on Writers vs. Commentators by steve mitchelmore

steve mitchelmore — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:52:58 +0000

It’s ironic Proust is the epitome of the non-commentator because – given the definition of commentator here – he is also clearly commentating on what went on before: think of the old title translation, remembrance of things past. Yet of course he is also creating or rediscovering the past as he writes; and only by writing can he do so.
Unfortunately this kind of taxonomy will also be prejorative as people value creativity over commentary because they have a romantic notion of a separation and tend to laud those authors who write in denial of the impossible separation or are unable to contain it in the work itself – Dickens for example – and sniff at writers like Vila-Matas who include everything in their work. Literature is part of the world too, albeit a strange part.

Comment on The Market for New Literature by Scott Esposito

Scott Esposito — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:19:22 +0000

Totally. In fact, I’d argue that that’s the model of a press like Open Letter, where the publisher acts as an evangelist in various media. You might also say that a press like McSweeney’s functions similarly, since it has Dave Eggers & cohorts, plus a magazine and a journal, to promote its aesthetic and books.

Comment on The Market for New Literature by Daniel E. Pritchard

Daniel E. Pritchard — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 13:26:07 +0000

It would probably be necessary to have not only a good marketer on the publishing side of things, but an evangelist on the public end as well (like a columnist or well-known critic) or even a magazine’s editors to help readers access the book and to keep it in the public’s focus.

Comment on Writers vs. Commentators by Matt Rowe

Matt Rowe — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 04:01:34 +0000

S/Z itself has been a while for me—and Moore makes it clear that he’s adapting to for his own purposes. What’s interesting is that his history presents the “writerly” text as the over/underdog, the perversely neglected star of the history of the novel. Does the writer/commentator schema also lead to mistakes about priority? Actually, I think Rex is genuinely about that, at least in part.

Comment on Writers vs. Commentators by Scott Esposito

Scott Esposito — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:01:17 +0000

Matt,
That’s another interesting way to think about the dichotomy. Though I must add that after reading (and liking very much) S/Z, I’m still not completely clear on what Barthes meant by “readerly” and “writerly”

Comment on Writers vs. Commentators by Matt Rowe

Matt Rowe — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:14:50 +0000

Lots to think about here! I wonder how (or whether) this could line up with Barthes’ distinction between “readerly” (lisible) and “writerly” (scriptible) texts—recently put to good use by Steven Moore, in The Novel: An Alternative History (at least the introductory chapter, which I picked up at MLA).