Finnegans Wake

[Bonnie Surfus (ENG)]

> Hmmm.  Just to make things more complicated, why does it seem that 
> these "circular" fictions, which in theory could, I suppose, consist 
> of no more than one or two sentences (or fragments, or words), tend 
> to be so bloody long (vis. Finnegans Wake, GR, Powers' Goldbug 
> Variations).  Is it just that we muscular pynchon-l subscribers favor 
> the extended (or, selon Medelson, "encyclopedic") text? (If I don't 
> need a forklift, it ain't worth pickin' up.)  Borges' "Circular 
> Ruins" is effectively circular, but not in sense that we seem to be 
> requiring. (//)
> 
I don't think it's necessary to make a long text in order to effectively 
generate a "circular" fiction.  but I do think you'd have to be pretty 
clever to create one in short fiction.  I think here of BArth.

I kind of hate to refer you to my own work (eh-hooew!), but in an earlier 
(and, by chance, a lengthier) post, I spoke of the notion of entropy and 
the possibilities expressed in the work of Prigogine and Stengers.  They 
suggest that in systems not in equilibrium, entropy is high, but that 
certain local decreases in entropy allow something like an "escape 
clause," generating new possiblities for growth and renewal of the 
system.  It seems logical to say, then, that the longer the text, the 
more opportunity for the production of entropy and thus the equally 
increasing chance for exemptions from the 2nd law of thermodynamics.  

Bonnie