The writer, caught in the act, is always someone else, a creature
whose home is words. Does writer here mean, in the grovelling Anglo-Saxon phrase, ‘creative writer’? When analysed isn't 'creative writer' quite subservient.
Some esteemed thinkers, those experimenting with the intelligibilities of our time’. are too suspicious of character, and of big stories to be 'creative writers'. Language for them is neither pliant or porous.
For them language is problematic, they experience language's depth, however they are not so drawn by its usefulness or its beauty so that become 'creative writers'.
For these very select few, language becomes an evocation, an embodiment of concerns rather than a description which I am now going to set down on paper, in a 'creative' way, like some dark ages monk toiling away in his cell.
Writing’ names a zone of language which has neither the broadness of general usage nor the quirkiness of personal style. It involves the choice, not of what to say or how to say it, but of how to signal one’s relation to literature. Camus emptied out language into an affect-less neutrality, which unfortunately became just another literary gesture almost before you could say l’étranger.
For many creative writers their attempt to order words is a kind of murder with intent. Take the dutiful Philistinism which has characterised so much working and thinking on the left. More
creative types deems themselves to be flourishing in some aesthetic hothouse. For more airy
creative type they believe their flightiness to be a form of scruple.
whose home is words. Does writer here mean, in the grovelling Anglo-Saxon phrase, ‘creative writer’? When analysed isn't 'creative writer' quite subservient.
Some esteemed thinkers, those experimenting with the intelligibilities of our time’. are too suspicious of character, and of big stories to be 'creative writers'. Language for them is neither pliant or porous.
For them language is problematic, they experience language's depth, however they are not so drawn by its usefulness or its beauty so that become 'creative writers'.
For these very select few, language becomes an evocation, an embodiment of concerns rather than a description which I am now going to set down on paper, in a 'creative' way, like some dark ages monk toiling away in his cell.
Writing’ names a zone of language which has neither the broadness of general usage nor the quirkiness of personal style. It involves the choice, not of what to say or how to say it, but of how to signal one’s relation to literature. Camus emptied out language into an affect-less neutrality, which unfortunately became just another literary gesture almost before you could say l’étranger.
For many creative writers their attempt to order words is a kind of murder with intent. Take the dutiful Philistinism which has characterised so much working and thinking on the left. More
creative types deems themselves to be flourishing in some aesthetic hothouse. For more airy
creative type they believe their flightiness to be a form of scruple.
No comments:
Post a Comment