Thursday, December 30, 2004

In the Club

Hey, I actually made it in time for the Thursday discussion. I'm "in the club" as OPTR would say. Anyone around for Gaddisy goodness?


Blogger Tito said...

(Here) I am I said.
I amenable to any kind of goodness. My reading for this section was done in two well separated stages thanks to some Christmas vacationing, so I may be stoopider than usual.

December 30, 2004 at 9:47 PM  
Blogger Scott Esposito said...

What do you make of Otto/Esme and Wyatt/Esme? That Esme sounds like one interesting woman.

December 30, 2004 at 9:52 PM  
Blogger Tito said...

Pardon me from going off topic, but I am curious to what response/reaction if any you have to this:

"As a writer, it is important to understand how critics look at fiction, what they look for, how they analyze structure, symbolism, plot, etc."

I put this here b/c I presume some of you are writers/crtics/both (I am neither a writer nor critic). To me this idea sees curious -- that you need to understand the critic to write ficion (as opposed to understanding say, more generally, "the reader" -- also a curious idea to me)

(I found this while goggling for "the medium of fiction" that mr. esposito had blogged about today.)

It also reminded me of the passage from T.Recs (pg 335)

"It's [criticism] the most important art now, it's the one we need most now. Criticism is the art we need most today. But not, don't you see? not the "if I'd done it myself..." Yes a, a disciplined nostalgia, disciplined recognitions but not, no,...."

I'm not sure I understood that passage clearly, so I'm curious for your takes on that as well. Why would critism be more important than "real" art? (real meaning orginal in my inarticulate head).

December 30, 2004 at 10:02 PM  
Blogger Tito said...

I agree that Esme is intriguing. Initially I didn't give her much thought when she was introduced as part of the party scene. (Most of my attention was on Otto at that point). Now, it looks like there really is a lot more to her and she may be the most intriguing to me along with Basil.

Also, the way Gaddis introduces the characters and then connects them later is amazing. I fear my disjointed reading habit may be doing a diservice to this, but at times I feel like I am reading a soap opera where references to past & future allow me to catch up in a short time after not watching for a while. Particularly, at the end of this section on the morning after the Saturnalia...also reminds me a bit of the adventures in Confederacy of Dunces -- (which I am reminded of often as of late). But what Gaddis is doing is truly remarkable.

December 30, 2004 at 10:07 PM  
Blogger Rake said...

I'm finally here. Considering points made above. More TK.

December 30, 2004 at 10:20 PM  
Blogger Rake said...

Re: criticism.

It's ("nameless") Wyatt who sez that about criticism, I believe. I'm guessing he desires a sort of corrective criticism that would act as a cure-all to the philistinism he sees around him, one that separates the wheat from the chaff. (And also one that helps place a work in its historical context, I'm guessing--perhaps that's what he's getting at with "disciplined nostalgia, disciplined recognitions").

I dunno; I could be way off. That's not a very comfortable idea of criticism for some people, but it would make sense for Wyatt to say it, especially given that he's surrounded with fakes, self-publishing poets, bad playwrights--with nauseating ad campaigns blaring from every radio.

December 30, 2004 at 10:44 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home