Fwd: Author of My Brilliant Friend explains her anonymity in Paris Review

[Paul Mackin]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: Author of My Brilliant Friend explains her anonymity in Paris
Review
To: John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com>


I sure agree.

I'm most of the way through volume 2 of the tetralogy and it seems like the
whole of the two girls' Naples' neighborhood is writing the book.

Highly recommended.

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 6:16 PM, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:

> It does tie into the death of the author but I've never heard an
> actual author protest that their work is a product of "a collective
> intelligence" rather than their own. That's fascinating and seems
> genuinely self-effacing, rather than using the whole anonymity thing
> as just another brand hook.
>
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 5:56 AM, ish mailian <ishmailian at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  Isn't the complaint about the media yet another clever spin on the
> death or
> > disappearance of the author? One that, in protesting preserves the author
> > privilege while suppressing the real meaning of his death or
> disappearance?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I like all this and think TRP might agree. look what publicity has
> >> done for-to-Franzen, just for one example.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > "Elena Ferrante" is more Pynchonian than Pynchon.  Now considered
> >> > leading
> >> > Italian novelist of her era.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > INTERVIEWER
> >> >
> >> > Many American reviews seem to make a direct connection between the
> work
> >> > you
> >> > do writing—its sincerity, its honesty—and your keeping out of the
> public
> >> > eye. As if to say, the less one appears, the better one writes.
> >> >
> >> > FERRANTE
> >> >
> >> > Two decades are a long time, and the reasons for the decisions I made
> in
> >> > 1990, when we first considered my need to avoid the rituals of
> >> > publication,
> >> > have changed. Back then, I was frightened at the thought of having to
> >> > come
> >> > out of my shell. Timidity prevailed. Later, I came to feel hostility
> >> > toward
> >> > the media, which doesn’t pay attention to books themselves and values
> a
> >> > work
> >> > according to the author’s reputation. It’s surprising, for example,
> how
> >> > the
> >> > most widely admired Italian writers and poets are also known as
> scholars
> >> > or
> >> > are employed in high-level editorial jobs or in other prestigious
> >> > fields.
> >> > It’s as if literature were not capable of demonstrating its
> seriousness
> >> > simply through texts, but required “external” credentials. In a
> similar
> >> > category—if we leave the university or the publisher’s office—are the
> >> > literary contributions of politicians, journalists, singers, actors,
> >> > directors, television ­producers, et cetera. Here, too, the works do
> not
> >> > find in themselves authorization for their existence but need a pass
> >> > that
> >> > comes from work done in other fields. “I’m a success in this or that
> >> > field,
> >> > I’ve acquired an audience, and therefore I wrote and published a
> novel.”
> >> > It’s not the book that counts, but the aura of its author. If the aura
> >> > is
> >> > already there, and the media reinforces it, the publishing world is
> >> > happy to
> >> > open its doors and the market is very happy to welcome you. If it’s
> not
> >> > there but the book miraculously sells, the media invents the author,
> so
> >> > the
> >> > writer ends up selling not only his work but also himself, his image.
> >> >
> >> > INTERVIEWER
> >> >
> >> > You were saying that the reasons for staying in the shadows have
> changed
> >> > a
> >> > bit.
> >> >
> >> > FERRANTE
> >> >
> >> > I’m still very interested in testifying against the self-promotion
> >> > ­obsessively ­imposed by the media. This demand for self-promotion
> >> > diminishes the ­actual work of art, whatever that art may be, and it
> has
> >> > become universal. The media simply can’t discuss a work of literature
> >> > without pointing to some writer-hero. And yet there is no work of
> >> > literature
> >> > that is not the fruit of tradition, of many skills, of a sort of
> >> > collective
> >> > intelligence. We wrongfully diminish this collective intelligence when
> >> > we
> >> > insist on there being a single protagonist ­behind every work of art.
> >> > The
> >> > individual person is, of course, necessary, but I’m not talking about
> >> > the
> >> > individual—I’m talking about a manufactured image.
> >> >
> >> > What has never lost importance for me, over these two and a half
> >> > ­decades,
> >> > is the creative space that absence opened up for me. Once I knew that
> >> > the
> >> > completed book would make its way in the world without me, once I knew
> >> > that
> >> > nothing of the concrete, physical me would ever appear beside the
> >> > volume—as
> >> > if the book were a little dog and I were its master—it made me see
> >> > something
> >> > new about writing. I felt as though I had released the words from
> >> > myself.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/6370/art-of-fiction-no-228-elena-ferrante
> >> >
> >> >
> >> -
> >> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
> >
> >
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20160114/8d6853ad/attachment.html>