About: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
This piece comes to you in the form of a network of pages, held together by a series of weblinks. It is a piece of writing that throws you in at the [[Beach]] but then defines no strict timeline for you to follow. The site has become an exploration, something to be curious about, where through the clicks of a mouse more and more is uncovered. It lies about itself, setting itself up as a piece of writing made by a network of people, [[User:Wilhelm|users]], when in fact they are all personas, pseudonyms belonging to one writer (a fact that can be discovered by looking no further than the "about" page). | This piece comes to you in the form of a network of pages, held together by a series of weblinks. It is a piece of writing that throws you in at the [[Beach]] but then defines no strict timeline for you to follow. The site has become an exploration, something to be curious about, where through the clicks of a mouse more and more is uncovered. It lies about itself, setting itself up as a piece of writing made by a network of people, [[User:Wilhelm|users]], when in fact they are all personas, pseudonyms belonging to one writer (a fact that can be discovered by looking no further than the "about" page). | ||
I am trying to define here, in this writing, a "writerly text". A text that "is ourselves writing, before the infinite play of the world is traversed, intersected, stopped". This is an idea most explored in "S/Z", which follows his most well known essay, "The Death of the Author" | I am trying to define here, in this writing, a "writerly text". A text that "is ourselves writing, before the infinite play of the world is traversed, intersected, stopped". This is an idea most explored in "S/Z", which follows his most well known essay, "The Death of the Author", arguing that the authorial authrity exists only to provide ultimate meaning to a text, an excercise which is futile. "S/Z" says that without the author to provide textual meaning, it is up to the reader to divine significance through textual interpretation. I have obfuscated the author, I have shattered my form, I have set up walls between the reader and the object by never explicitly stating the form of the subject. I have, in these senses, allowed the writing to be investigated. | ||
I run the risk of appearing vapid, some have argued that post-modernist literary theory has been left in the 20th century. Some | I run the risk of appearing vapid, some have argued that post-modernist literary theory has been left in the 20th century. Some even reference this form, describing how it has taken previous lofty ideals and turned them into "the drivel found... on some wikipedia pages". Alan Kirby told me that now is an age of web surfing, "ignorance, fanatacism and anxiety". I have always loved Wikipedia pages, fandom sites, Fextralife; to argue that these offer no aesthetic value is obdurate, a point hammered home by the large net of contempt cast by Kirby around varied examples of seemingly no correlation. | ||
Revision as of 11:27, 9 February 2024
- Post Structuralist Literary Theory
- Metonomy
- Travel Theory
- Thacker
- Biopolitics (Sianne Ngai and Foucault)
- Cryptobibliographic references
Form
This piece comes to you in the form of a network of pages, held together by a series of weblinks. It is a piece of writing that throws you in at the Beach but then defines no strict timeline for you to follow. The site has become an exploration, something to be curious about, where through the clicks of a mouse more and more is uncovered. It lies about itself, setting itself up as a piece of writing made by a network of people, users, when in fact they are all personas, pseudonyms belonging to one writer (a fact that can be discovered by looking no further than the "about" page).
I am trying to define here, in this writing, a "writerly text". A text that "is ourselves writing, before the infinite play of the world is traversed, intersected, stopped". This is an idea most explored in "S/Z", which follows his most well known essay, "The Death of the Author", arguing that the authorial authrity exists only to provide ultimate meaning to a text, an excercise which is futile. "S/Z" says that without the author to provide textual meaning, it is up to the reader to divine significance through textual interpretation. I have obfuscated the author, I have shattered my form, I have set up walls between the reader and the object by never explicitly stating the form of the subject. I have, in these senses, allowed the writing to be investigated.
I run the risk of appearing vapid, some have argued that post-modernist literary theory has been left in the 20th century. Some even reference this form, describing how it has taken previous lofty ideals and turned them into "the drivel found... on some wikipedia pages". Alan Kirby told me that now is an age of web surfing, "ignorance, fanatacism and anxiety". I have always loved Wikipedia pages, fandom sites, Fextralife; to argue that these offer no aesthetic value is obdurate, a point hammered home by the large net of contempt cast by Kirby around varied examples of seemingly no correlation.
