GRGR(4) - Surreality On Top

[Evan Abla]

It seems that TRP's text is too deliberate to conclude that it comes from transcribed surrealist techniques.  Even still, I'm not sure that I could differentiate between conscious intent and the creative process.  I know that one has to do with the other because of the other.  I think that the creative process is exactly that, a process.  It requires thoughtfullness and careful intent.  Perhaps?
evan

Evan M. Abla
eabla at nazarene.org

"Silence is a word which is not a word, 
and breath an object which is not an
object."
                              --G. Bataille

>>> s~Z <mcmullenm at vcss.k12.ca.us> 06/18 12:31 PM >>>
davemarc wrote:
> 
> It's beneficial to scrutinize GR for all sorts of intentional, conscious
> allusions, but I think it'd be doing a disservice to the book to disregard
> the possibility (in my mind, the probability) that portions of it might
> have been created through surrealist techniques like automatic writing,
> trance writing, and the transcription of dreams and hallucinations.
> 
> d.
S~z wrote:
Right on davemarc. When different artists (and cultures for that matter)
utilize these techniques, they are drawing water from the same sea.
Differentiating between conscious intent and the results of the creative
process is a bit slippery without the author's input. This phenomenon
(of uncanny similarity of word and image across cultures) was what led
Jung to postulate a collective unconscious. It all started when he
actually listened to the content of schizophrenics' verbalizations and
noticed the similarity of such with the content of various mythologies,
etc. The theory of the collective unconscious is a rather broad premise
which still leads to the necessity for further modifications ('Evelyn'),
but it does provide a helpful backdrop for looking at other premises
such as authorial intent, connectedness, paranoia, as above/so below
etc. etc., keeping in mind that it's all storytelling and telling
stories about stories.