data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9fb09/9fb095d70142bdd2dfaf22b8cdaaab8dc7792c5e" alt=""
Gass' was an unusual one to write, mostly because I felt I had to explain what it was that defined his writing, and why a writer of such immense reputation was so little known among the wider public. I could not escape the sense that much of his writing was in a sense academic; written by a professor, though I really should have mentioned that he taught philosophy, not English or creative writing (he did offer seminars at various points), and it's important to note also how crucial his essays were considered.
Perhaps the fact that his major novel, The Tunnel, one of those big Great American Novels, was so difficult
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1a1e4/1a1e4beb366e55eb3622c7e186492fded710e9af" alt=""
He's often linked with John Barth, whom I both studied and read for pleasure in my college days. I have to confess I liked the 'post-modern' Barth, of The Sot Weed Factor and Giles Goat-Boy more than the increasingly dense 'metafictions' that followed them. Perhaps the deconstruction of language and the demands of narration are more exclusive than theorists suggest, perhaps the novel wants to extend beyond itself. Gass' special talent was in being able to do that while bringing his story out, so that the work became a metaphor of the story. "Form is never more than an extension of content", Robert Creeley said. Where many would reverse the aphorism for Gass, I think it rings true as it is.
No comments :
Post a Comment