I AM AT UNI. ST. ANDREW.
I AM WRITING A NOVEL.
NO ONE ELSE IS WRITING A NOVEL.
EVERYONE IS ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT THESES AND FILM-SCRIPTS, PARTICULARIZING ON WHAT IS MORE TRULY THEIR PET PROJECT,
OFTEN SOMEONE ELSE TO BE IN TUNE WITH.
I HAVE VERY SELDOM ANYTHING TO CONTRIBUTE TO WHAT I SHALL TERM
SEMINARS WITH GEOFFREY.
VERY LITTLE GETS SO GENERAL THAT YOU GET TO CONTRIBUTE SOMETHING
FROM THE WRITING A NOVEL PERSPECTIVE.
I AM PLEASED THAT WHEN I WENT TO SEE GEOFFREY, MY TUTOR, OUR TUTOR,
IF YOU WANT TERRITORIALTY…WHEN I DID GO TO SEE GEOFFREY AT
HIS OFFICE, I COULD NOT STOP TALKING. I WONDER IF THAT IS
ACCOUNTED AS CONTRIBUTION?
ALL I HAVE SAID, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, DEMONSTRATED WRITING A NOVEL,
WHICH CAN BEGIN ANYWHERE, BECOME PERTINENT AS THE
PERIPHERIES OF THE NOVEL INSINUATE DEMARCATION. EACH TIME RE
SUGGESTING THAT THE NOVEL LIKE THE FOOD COOKS ITSELF, THE
WRITER OFTEN MORE AMAZED THAN THE READER BY WHAT MADE
ITSELF UPON THE PAGE.
THIS IS VERY LIKELY WHY THE EARLY WRITERS CLAIMED THE INFLUENCE OF
THE MUSES: A HAREM OF NINE, AFTER ALL.
THAT WAS ALSO THE TIME THAT YOUNG WOMEN USED TO GO LIE ON THE
MOUNTAINS BY THE GOATS HOPING A VISITATION FROM ZEUS, EVEN IF
ONLY –– WHAT D’YOU MEAN IF ONLY!!!? –– WITH THE MANIFESTATIONS
OF A SWAN.
HUNG IN MY KITCHEN WAS “COOKING IS A DIFFERENT WAY OF WRITING
POETRY”: TRY GETTING AWAY WITH VERSIFYING! ‘WAS’, BECAUSE THAT
WAS A FEW ADDRESSES AGO.
ONE DAY I WILL FIND THE SHEET IN ONE OF THE BOXES OF PAPERS AND
CUTTINGS AND WRITING AND THINGS.
ANY NUMBER OF SUCH KEPT THINGS PICKED UP TOGETHER ALREADY HAVE
THE GERM OF A STORY AMONG THEM.
I HAVE MANY BOXES OF SUCH COLLECTIONS AND BOOKS, ALL RIFE WITH.
. THEIR CODES AND MEANINGS AND CHRONOLOGY; SEVERAL, THE
DENOTATIONS; PLENTY THE CONNOTATIONS. PARTICULARLY, THE
WHOLE IS AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL IN THAT EACH IS ASSOCIATED WITH WHY
THAT CUTTING, THAT BOOK, THAT WRITING, EVEN THAT PIECE OF
AT ONE TIME I OFTEN CAME UPON A TWIG IN THIS COLLECTION WHICH I
PICKED UP IN KARRAKATA WHEN WORKING THERE. I KEPT THE TWIG
INSTEAD OF THROW IT AWAY, BECAUSE IT SUDDENLY MADE ME THINK OF
A JACK THE RIPPER VICTIM, SOMEHOW; I DON’T KNOW WHY, NOT HAVING
SEEN ANY PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE UNTIL MANY YEARS LATER… I
WANTED THAT THIS TWIG NOW TWIG MY MEMORY EACH TIME I COME
ACROSS IT. COME ACROSS MEANING LITERALLY! EVERYTHING HAS TO
CHANCE UPON ME. MY ONLY INTEREST IN JACK THE RIPPER WAS TO #
RECALL MY THINKING THAT JACK’S MOTIVE COULD BE AS UNINTERESTING
TO PSYCHOLOGY AS THAT HE WAS LOOKING FOR THE DIAMOND HE HAD
DEPOSITED IN THE JUG OF WATER.
THE NOV ELIST IS THE ANTITHESIS OF THE ABOVE. EVERYTHING COMES
THROUGH THE DECISION OF THE WRITER TO BECOME AT LEAST
DIFFERENT ENOUGH TO ATTRACT MORE READING: EVEN BETTER IF OF
THOSE THAT WOULD RATHER WRITE THEMSELVES, INSTEAD. .
YOU’VE HEARD THAT THE WRITER IS DEAD? THAT’S A WAY, HAVING
THEORIZED, THE REASONING OF THE THEORY THEN CLOAKS
WHATEVER ITS PERIPHERIES EDGE TO.
YOU WILL NOTICE THAT THE PERSON WHO SAID THAT THE WRITER IS DEAD IS
THE WRITER; THAT THOSE WHO AGREE/DISAGREE ARE AGAIN THE
WRITERS: SINCE INSCRIBING, OPINIONATING, AND
.ARE ALL PERFORMATIVE TEXTUAL REPRESENTATIONS TEXTUALLY
COMMENTING ON THE TEXT OF THE WRITER/AUTHOR, SAYING, MAYBE
PARAPHRASING AND DEMONSTRATING, THE PERFORMATIVE:
BECOMING A DEAD BURYING THE DEAD SCENARIO.
THAT THE WRITER IS DEAD IS SAYING IN THE WORDS OF THE DELIGHTFUL
WOMAN IN THE KITCHEN IN ‘’GUESS WHO’S COMING TO DINNER?’’,…NO
ONE’S DOING NOTHING NO MORE!
THE NOVEL IS A SELECTION OF EVENTS AND CHARACTER ARRANGED
PLAUSIBLY TO SAY SOMETHING \ENTERTAIN IN A WAY PARTICULAR TO
THE AUTHOR’S INTENTION FOR THE BOOK BEING WRITTEN.
ONE IS THE ONE TALKED ABOUT, IMAGINED; THE CHARACTERS ARE LIKE MANIFESTATIONS, AS THEY SAY OF INDIA’S THOUSAND GODS BEING MANIFESTATIONS OF ONE.
DOES EVERYTHING REINTERPRET ITS REPRESENTATIONS NOW AS OUR MANIFESTATIONS? ARE REPRESENTATIONS MANIFESTATIONS, OBJECTIFIED. I THINK THEY THINK THE WRITER NO MORE THAN A FILM EDITOR MAKING FREE WITH ANY NUMBER OF ACCESSIBLE REELS OF _____, SUBCONSCIOUSLY FILED.
Dr Geoffrey Reeves Essay on writing my novel
Initially research was questioned, since a novel was the dissertation project of the Honour’s degree. Also problematic was what should be presented as progress of the work, there being the contradicting Hemingway advise against talking about one’s novel until it is completed.
An initial, second-week seminar-presentation tabled the intention to write a dissertation novel. The presentation constituted most of what was in the letter to Dr Ron Blaber, (then: to the person in charge of Honours Studies: later, also my supervisor for my Honours Degree) asking for permission to enroll as an Honours student, because that letter had outlined the intended novel as then conceived.
Dr Geoffrey Reves, my tutor told me it was not known what was required of me during this research unit because I was the only one writing a novel for my Honour’s dissertation.
As in my letter to Dr Ron Blaber
I wrote out my intentions behind my novel, wrote what it was going to be about, wrote how I was going to write it: I even wrote down the structure of the novel, also divulging an original September 11th Ending, in a write-up to Dr Geoffrey Reeves (which, I also handed in as work in progress to Professor Brian Dibble, my other Supervisor.
In my appointments with Drs. Reeves and Blaber, separately, I discussed this problematic between research and writing a novel that is, amopng other things, apparently undergoing procrastination: my, also, having to talk about the novel (not that, inversely, it has not helped clarify things, instead), much against, as stated above, Hemingway’s advise to not talk about the book you are writing until it is finished: (maybe, a problem yet to come!).
This resulted in my introduction to two Lennard J. Davis books (Davis. 1983: 198 .) re the novel, including other books on the shelves of Robertson Library: I was under the direction to research the origins of, trekking, the novel, historically…
I was reading that, theoretically, the true origin of the novel ought to be evolutionary, the text of the scratches on the cave walls articulating/illustrating a communication; Davis (Davis 1983. p.11-24.) comprehensively compare Cervantes’ Don Quixote against that of Defore’s Roxana, discuss the various frames utilized, showing progressive steps at intentional or playful dissociation from the novel; the hindsight that after Cervantes, especially Roxana shows the English novel, collectively going a definitive way, defining the novel \English novel, so much that now, Cervantes compares as a precursor (Davis ‘83. p.11,12.),but not strictly speaking, a novelist; postmodernism pointing out that most windows actually open like doorways: deciding already it best that the basics be blatantly present as indicators of awareness. The work must be long, continuous, well-defined, have central heroes, have psychological depth, episodic plot and realistic details –– all well in mind; much: refreshed, during seminar attendance –– the novel I intend will comprise the Foucault discourse toward an ensemble (Davis 1983. p. 7.), heavily with Said’s discourse is not merely a collection of texts but is written and placed so as to say something (Davis 1983. p. 9.), with a novel, knowing the power of the position of the word in the book \of the writer writing the words in the book ––
opening the consciousness now as those mentioned, now proverbial, windows that postmodernism can define as compass point possibilities of progress at each step, as like-minds of seminar-siblings, verbalize.
a lengthy discussion as to why Roxanna (our beginning, of the English novel, with Fielding \often Cervantes’ Don Quixote is cited as a precursor, if not the first novel)
The unit questions how I approached researching the history of the novel so as to position my novel, within definition, background, genre and vision. My search the novel tracing background to the one I want to write.
2;3; out of 5 are chinese. democratically chinese people like labor often claims, reps the greatest no. with the least political pull, as though the said majority have less GLOBAL pull only because she is one among countries whose not so recent politics demarcated boundaries of established power which GLOBAL postmodernism \cynicism can hindsight as gerrymandering
politician’s stances: mediocrity, parading as big time: looking ridiculous
the subjective stance: the opposite, as easily the case
it, assumed you are talking about something else: comments \deconstruction?, on what one says (it, demeaning that it is assumed one would say something as is presumed in what one hears: different to what one did) p-r-o-c-e-e-d-i-n-g: the disability to interrupt to say one meant otherwise, not succeeding: the speaker uses tangents toward related topics, leaving you only rudeness \a subtle way to prod the bicycle pump into the bicycle racing next to one: one, already wondering if it really matters that one is taken wrongly in a seminar room that may grade all things: representation, is what cultural studies is all about: it click!; one remembers the question to write about is the effect of the seminars upon one’s cerebral development, always thinking re methodology, in seminars, one affected every which way including…: the ‘Aesop line’ would say watch that language use cannot be taken otherwise (as much as possible)
: the way Gs ans. Qs.
Aussie soldiers anzacs
old story into script then movie
enlightenment india groups
writing a novel me, can’t get in
others say what you say
nothing to say at the time
have Qs a wk ahead
notice: what novelist says not useful feedback as
empires must have had some good to have grown into empires
do they have electric?
see Jolley \see my mom. invasion of privacy: if aware would Jolley want to be seen in the state she is in?
reform sch. ophanages just past, historically, the ussr \cromwell, think it temporary,: they still should succeed ‘governorships’ than…repair to old folks homes… (they still think themselves maturing to fulfilling \replacing past , pre-democratic, monarchic appointments
writing filmscript from remembered episode >> y not write novel?
THE EFFECTS of these, designed possibility and potential; topics, targeted, focused always with ‘counterpart’ as the understatement reminding me to outline a clear topic to research
the various, showed the differences of emphasis
focus of the topic as mine
towards final key questions of exegesis titled
such suggesting the research that would be pertinent , the availability of material \corroboration re-deciding the title of the topic again and again until workably self-satisfying; mine
\methodology re research definitive
performativity is symbolized by the actor: each night defining between make \break more than the leg
women’s role in the padi field. check the traditional male/female roles. how, if, did economic, social, changes change the traditional male/female roles of work in the
the critic’s role. mention role of idealism, innovations during second presentation; of care of actors; types of presentations. Artuad?
how come chekov & figure in eng lit
y chromosome could be another X
with a dropped leg
Hereafter the problem was just turning reading to writing, ranging from general imprecise statements like novels are what people call novels ( ) to the Macquarie Dictionary going back to the origin of the word, linking it with law and informing ‘novel’ (also simply meaning ‘new’) as a word of various meanings marginally present even as we think literature. There are also interesting statements suggesting people were actually looking for the novel while it was taking shape. (Priestley. 229.) I therefore found research interesting.
This already started with professor Reeves stating that the kind of book I want to write \enjoy reading was very much in vogue earlier than the Victorian novel. That the modern novel, with what is now described as postmodernist and experimental, are in fact closer to the novel as it began.
Particularly, I am going to trace the novel as an epistle (St Paul, keeps being mentioned; I remember Dostoyevski’s ‘Friend Of The Family’ where the visitor slowly takes over the whole family, finally running it like a tyrant: I, ever since, associating Dostoyevski’s Friend Of The Family an ironical nickname for psychology. Later reading made me think Orwell thought of it, writing Animal Farm.
I am also tracing the novel as a journal. There was a Journal Of A Thief by Genet, but what kept the idea strong was more the many writer’s journals I saw, read of, then visualized. Immediately I thought a sea captain’s journal, a log, to be more interesting, imagining it having recorded, everything that occurred, was the case with that ship. I used to write with a pen to which different sized nibs could be attached to; used to write to candlelight, enjoying the smudges more than the writing sometimes: definitely the ink stains on my hands!
I started thinking of the novel as the record of the writer’s choice of manifestations, the characters no more than the novelist’s stance, then.I read Edmund Wilson trekking realism or naturalism through to Joyce , whose attempt covered the happenings of one entire day. I did not complete Ulysses. I had already realized that time was too short to read everything. I started reading books haphazardly from any page at all. It was a matter of desperation, this way of reading \of thinking of a novel. This must have come from reading the quotations from books instead of the books themselves (probably not immediately accessible, anyway!) in books of quotations. This probably also came from the early habit of looking for the sex scenes in the books. Then I came across a book called Mulligan’s Stew, which did have everything in it including bus tickets, grocery bills… all kinds of format. You associate thatmodern art form. ––Also Joyce: you start thinking that inclusions should have a precise significance: you take it you do not have to be aware that any inclusion (like that bus ticket in the text of the novel) has to be within your gasp. Roth’s attempt with The Great American Novel also covered sports, and therefore jam-packed, sardine-paragraphs with nothing but juxtaposed names, just as spectators are in stadiums. When I read Allan Ginsberg (Wolf… 311) say that On The Road was actually over 800 pages long, and had more than Joyce had; and Mulligan’s Stew: maybe that is where I read of the bus tickets as text of the book!
I followed a particular way of writing from Mailer to Vidal to Gunther grass (esp, From The Diary Of A Snail) to Rushdie’s Midnight Children, which Rushdie I have not found in his banned book or later writings, yet. It is possible I kept chasing my developing seen suggested by bits in now arbitrarily selected texts. I kept abandoning \returning to Ernest Hemingway very often; spending a lot of time with V.Nabakov and Lawrence Durrell; enjoying reading plays instead of watching them. I started with Tennessee Williams, still often thinking of SuddenlyLast Summer, still having as favourite, the very first I read, \he never had success with on stage of screen: The Milk Train Doesn’t Stop Here Anymore.
To locate my dissertation novel in the history of the novel I first encountered: The Novel To 1900, the Macmillan Press Ltd., 1980, located by following the catalogue’s panopticon and systematic classification to a prescribed book not, present: one copy available in the Reference Section on the 2nd Floor. It was among the books there also marked 809.3. This one had ‘NOV’ next to the book’s number. Having used Foucault’s ‘Panopticon’ as a qualifier above, I now encounter the latter of Barthes’ denotation/connotation’ terminology, and note the numbers on prisoners of houses of correction and detention and World War Two German concentration camps. I don’t know if the English concentration camps in the Boer War branded numbers on their prisoners. ‘NOV’ must have to do with the subject; the novel. The book had a general editor for the series of books denominated Great Writers Student Library. It also mentioned an associate editor and who wrote the introduction. At the back of the book, however, were six pages of notes on contributors.
The point of all of the above is to put into context Aristotle’s statement that it is vain to try for exact definitions of literary terms; which is the first line of the Introduction of the book, above. I can imagine pedants discussing the proverbial pudding so long that, finally, that it’s proof is in the eating is a week too late for a favourable response. The second line says novels are what people call novels. They are fiction, they are in prose, and they usually, but not quite always, have a degree of realism which is unequalled by any previous literary form. (Vinson,. 1). This book catalogues other writing as well as novels written up to 1900.
Perhaps, indicative of the beginning of the novel, the lists of writer’s output show much more ‘other’ writing; Fielding, e.g. listing already three times as many written plays as novels (other ‘other’ writing listing more again than the plays).
The novel is defined in the Macquarie Dictionary (‘novel’.) as the first meaning among three meanings, giving it perspective within the use of the word in the language.
I am not considering the social implication of the novel, like the church’s objections on the grounds precisely, of the novels treatment of the common person doting on his daily life: it a vanity: something stolen from what is due God and his church. I am centering my research on the various changes in the novel, pointing to the direction of my dissertation novel.
Vinson, J. ed. (1980). The novel to 1900. Melbourne: London and Basingstoke: The Macmillan Press Ltd.
‘novel.’ (2000). The macquarie dictionary on CD-ROM. Third Edition.
Kellman, S, G. (1980). The self-begetting novel. New York: Columbia University Press.
Davis, L, J. (1987). Resisting novels. New York and London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.
Grossvogel, D, I. (1971). Limits of the novel. Ithaca and London: Cornell University.
Auerbach, E. (1974). Mimesis. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Kershner, R, B. (1997). The twentieth-century novel. Boston and New York: Bedford Books.
Starke, R. (1998). Writers, readers & rebels. South Australia: Wakefield Press.
Priestley, J B. (1980). Literature and western man. London: Abacus: Sphere Books Ltd.
Wolf, D and Fancher, E. (1963). The village voice reader New York: Grove Press, Inc.: A Black Cat Book.
feels so good sleeping lying being next you naked juxtaosed
like at pose flmed couple coupled complete in all meanings esp
whole holy sacred adorably linked with who pictures best
who pictures best as well starring now in nonstop home feature
took directed by tardis name of the whole contraption of
wall mirrors also wall itself also photographing eke
achiving always rewindable for gawks sacred and yes
adorng / all perv simply melting burning obliterates
‘cause film used due to weird linkage prob incorrect at that with
watching improperly rhinking of wrong things / rights in wrong rites
for nakedness like love is to be adored/acredited
like defining appreciation like lips touchng your any two enclosements
one of which be mine anyway as any of my any
enclosements be yr flap upon mne so intimately they
made us it’s good we met to meet our jigsaw enclasp in our
many ways never thinking of sex just jigsawly akiss
juxtapositioning touchingly is everly akiss
kissing howeverly we do roll/connect together like
amoeba it just conrol and want to have to hold us as bods
that keeps us from absorbing each other, my love darling my
sweethert lover partner twin sister mother daughter neighbour
other constantly met one in the night under the lampost
in some building making a pass again attempt seduce
promising that something extra special will do thru’ the meal
the dance the drink the talk the looks the feel the how kiss narrates…
constantly reaching out to our distances drawing home to
cyber cottage now ‘cause soon we will meet even sitting next
there’ll be that rush to fit us in the same trousers our inner
hands wherever we want them to be gorgeous in feel and yea
arrogance to have them on each other’s genitals cause we
be walking our inner legs together naked to the bum
in the same trouser leg we walking as a three legger two
arms one shirt bum to foot contact and genitals in hand oft
kissing but not coming it is not sex just ‘stead of holding
hands but having the feeling of close intimacy always
not at all bothered because we know we can and want to at
the drop of a hat will even straightaway but we choose to
feel very intimately about/with each other’s bodies
we can stand lips/mouths connectng/kissing in nigh orgasm
built on everything we are ready / could do,; all there in our
lip eroticism, each touch signaling/narrating/ tells!