Re: RARA-AVIS: Archer/Ross Macdonald

From: Jacques Debierue (
Date: 21 Aug 2007

--- In, "Stephen Burridge"
<stephen.burridge@...> wrote:
> An eloquent post with which I agree almost entirely.
> I will note that I don't have a problem with people analyzing the
> "carpentry" of anyone's writing, and in fact I think such analysis
can be
> productive of more than just nice papers. It can help the reader
> what's going on in a book, and presumably can help other writers improve
> their craft as well.

Yes. I've bored people here with such analyses before... My point, to put it bluntly, is that having an orgasm and writing a treatise that analyzes the orgasm are entirely separate things. And we don't really know how reader and author get tangled during a reading. We know nuthin', even if we are the reader, ahem, syntax alert. With Ross Macdonald, why is sameoldsameold not so sameoldsameold while we are reading a novel of his? He's a pretty mysterious writer, and Archer gives you nuthin', you have no idea what he's thinking.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 21 Aug 2007 EDT