more real people

[davemarc]

At 10:17 AM 2/16/96 -0500, Terry Caesar wrote:
>
>[snip]
>       The interesting thing about this episode is that it exhibits a further
>stage to Andrew's point about how Gaddis "conflates" our real world of reading
>with the fictional world of his novel when he represents himself as Willie. 
>Mailer acted to pull the conflation apart once more--and it seems to me any
>conflation between the real and the fictional (or virtual) is always
susceptable
>to such an action. The connection between the two realms is elusive, unstable,
>troublesome and troubling.
>
>[snip]
>
>        A final thought: I'm still not sure I understand why one one writer
>(Gaddis or anybody else) is moved to include a self-representation within a
>narrative. I mean, why in the first place, and no matter than it can be done,
>done well, and done to subtle effect (as is certainly the case with Gaddis). 
>Worse, now I'm not even sure whether this question is related to the one of
>why real people get included in narratives, or whether it's a separate ques-
>tion. 
>
>[snip]
>
Self-representation was used by the Surrealists (among others) precisely
because they were attracted to its potentially disturbing titillating blend
of the seemingly incompatible (the real and the unreal).  

The oddness associated with references to "real people" and, to a lesser
extend, "real products" contrasts sharply with the widespread acceptance of
other references to the "real."  Imagine if allusions to real places (or
even real objects, like trees) were invested with the same mystique.

davemarc