Wednesday, 21 December 2005

NEXT POST
Reader-Response and the Editorial Experience; or, To Them? No. To Me. Are editors supposed to interpret the works they edit? The manuscript I said I'd be reading exceeds the high expectations I had for it . . . but I keep feeling myself interpreting what I read instead of editing it. Focusing on ideas instead of the rare infelicitous sentence puts me in a strange position vis-a-vis authorial intent. I suspect I can help shape the communication of intent . . . but that means I have privileged access to authorial intent when all I really have is privileged access to the author. I am an author of a reader or a reader of an author. Can't tell which. All of which brings to mind Octavia Butler's running commentary on the meaning of her short stories in Bloodchild. In the introduction she complains that Before now, other people have done all the print interpretations of my work: "Butler seems to be saying . . . " "Obviously, Butler believes . . . " "Butler makes it clear that she feels . . . " Actually, I feel that what people bring to my work is at least as important to them as what I put into it. But I'm still glad to be able to talk a little about what I do put into my work, and what it means to me. (x) Her "to them" trips me up. She acts imperially here without seeming to by declaring that what other people think "important to them" pales in comparison to what "[she does] put into [her] work." So when I read those commentaries I found myself disputing not with the text but Butler's authorial fiat of "what [she puts] into it." All of which points to my strange relation to the manuscript I'm reading: I am a reader who thinks certain things about the novel important to me but have the potential to be authorial in the sense that I can influence its author to put into the novel what is important to me. Where do I stand? I don't know . . . but from a theoretical perspective this editorial experience has been as exhilirating as reading the novel itself has been.
PREVIOUS POST
California is Like Sambas, D.C. Like a Pain All this talk of slippers reminds me of the importance of shoes. If Texas is slippers then California is a pair of classic black Adidas Samba . Adi Dassler first produced running and football (a.k.a. "soccer") shoes in 1925. They proved popular. Jesse Owens wore ancestral Sambas when he dominated Berlin's "Hitler Olympics" in 1936. Dassler first produced Sambas by name in 1950. The origin of that name is unclear. Did the German want his soccer shoe to appeal to legion South American soccer fans? Did he somehow anticipate the emergence of the then 10 year old Pelé into wordwide celebrity? Did he think a dance equal part imported African rhythms and native Brazilian beats a perfect inspiration for a footballer's fleet feet? The Internet refuses to reveal Dassler's reasoning. The point is that Jesse Owens laughed at Hitler in these shoes, Pelé tied legs in knots in them and I wear them everyday no matter what. I wear suit and Sambas. Pinstripes and Sambas. Tuxedo and Sambas. They bring a little class to jeans and a little déclassé to formal wear . . . just like I bring a little class to a crawfish boil and a little déclassé to Cotillion. What can be more déclassé than a samba at Cotillion? A pair of them. (ducks) As I prepare to attend the MLA by reading an enthusiastic but idiotic number of essays by scholars whose panels I will attend I must come to terms with the brute fact that Sambas may not fly at the MLA. I decided to buy some dress shoes. I purchased identical "Black Smooth" and "Cognac Smooth" Nunn Bush "Fielding" oxfords on clearance. I am breaking them in by having them gnaw though my ankles and saw through my Achilles tendon chafe by painful chafe. Blood is everywhere. Some guy in New Jersey screams about the humanity. As I crumble to the floor in flames little people jump from my cabins to their deaths. Others slip on the blood slick floor and are either engulfed by my hydrogen-enhanced conflagration or crushed to death beneath my white-hot hulk. Like I said: If Texas is slippers and California is Sambas then Washington D.C. is heels and ankles rubbed raw and badly bandaged while sporting patent leather oxfords only a masochist could love.

Become a Fan

Recent Comments