literary exhaustion

[Bonnie Surfus (ENG)]

When your writer refers to "literary exhaustion," s/he misrepresents 
Barth himself, especially his 1967 essay "The Literature of Exhaustion."  
For an incredibly condensed reading, I offer that Barth spoke of the 
nature of content in postmodern fiction (yes, it's the larger context 
here), mainly that writers had exhausted their stock supply of epic 
convetions, manifestations of plot, etc.  So, the only thing left to 
write about was writing itself.  This is highly condensed, keep in mind.  
Actually, when Barth wrote about th LOE, he was speaking of postmodern 
fiction, so right off, your editor is perhaps confused.  OR, h/she may 
just feel that Barth and Pynchon, in this orientation, as writers of this 
"genre," are trifling, not "serious," etc.  Pynchon, if anyone, is HIGHLY 
serious in his writing about writing--especially in terms of historical 
narratives, as we've been discussing.  Barth's play has similarly 
critical posture.  Hearing Barth speak a while ago, I recall this one 
thing he said that has always stuck with me.  He says that "a good 
postmodern writer has the first half of the 20th Century under his belt, 
not on his back" --just an aside, but also relevant to the LOE issue.

Bonnie