Foreword, Churchill, Orwell, old hat and all that
Paul Nightingale
isread at btopenworld.com
Tue Apr 29 14:11:22 CDT 2003
Terrance:
>
> OK, call the culturally learned thingy a "narrative" . So, this is
what
> the reader contributes--his learned culturally consumed "narrative"--
to
> the activity. But reading is not an activity without a text. And a
> text, like _1984_ has an author. And the author makes choices. He
> decides that he will make his narrator a boy. A girl. An insane man.
> What is the tale told by the boy, the girl, the insane man, the idiot
> ... of the text to be called if not a narrative?
>
> Can't we come up with some other term for what you are now calling a
> narrative? I mean, it's kind of confusing to call the culturally
> consumed "narrative" a narrative when we are talking about novels.
Isn't
> it? Or is that the point?
The nominal author might make choices but, insofar as he (I assume
Orwell here) intends this or that, he is still only a reader of the text
he is himself producing. There is then the issue of unintentional stuff
(which P gets into in the SL Intro, of course). The author of the text
is not just Blair/Orwell but the society he lives in which writes, as it
were, through him. Any text is a social construct. And it is
reconstructed by its readers. You yourself referred to the contemporary
response to Orwell the penitent leftist.
Another term for narrative? You have to be joking - why complicate
matters? Orwell's narrative includes a conventional heterosexual couple.
Is this really a choice on his part? Or do we want another word for
'choice' here? The only point I'm making is that any text has a
narrative that can be read by the learned reader - that my definition of
the 'learned reader' is at odds with what Leavis or Orwell would have
understood by the phrase is, of course, the point.
More information about the Pynchon-l
mailing list