A story stencilized.

[Dave Monroe]

I don't think that it's Eigenvalue telling
"Mondaugen's Story," it's just being told in his
psychodontist's, "father-confessor"'s office.  "(Here
Eigenvlaue made his single interruption ...)" (p. 249)
 Ostensibly--ostencilly--at least, it's Stencil.  So,
first question (if one needs questions to be asked, if
one needs this question to be asked), why?  Why
Eigenvalue's office?  And how might that affect the
telling?  And so forth ...

But presumably--presumably--it's Stencil telling the
story, it's being "Stencilized" of course (rather than
"Eigenvalued").  I'm still curious about the question
of, by who's authority, by the auspices of whose
office, do we know even that it's been "changed" in
the "Stencilization," much less how?  How can we
discern the alleged "changes"?  If at all?  How do we
sort (shades of TCOL49) information (fact, fiction;
Mondaugen, Stencil; and just how factual, forthright
was M's story to begin with? which is to trouble those
binaries ...) here?  "'Stencil called it serendipity,
not he'" (p. 249), Stencil assuming the third person
(omniscient?) narrative voice ...

And I suppose this is obvious, but is there a sort of
Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness thing going on? 
Colonialism, the possibly "unreliable" narrator, and
so forth?  But, again, obvious questions, so ...

--- Michel Ryckx <michel.ryckx at freebel.net> wrote:
> 
> Mondaugen's story took 'half an hour' and then got
> 'Stencilized':
> (228.11)  But are we hearing Eigenvalue's account of
> a Stencil version
> of Mondaugen's story telling Stencil what happened,
> among other horrors,
> 18 years ago.  Would Eigenvalue use a word like
> 'boisterous' (230.36) or
> 'jolly' (231.1) -which both sound Brit (to me, it
> is)?
> 
> Michel.
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/