A book as dogma

[shemthepenman]

It seems to me that James Joyce succeeded in what he set out to do, while some of the people I mentioned succeeded, if they did succeed, despite themselves. They were driven to what they accomplished after failing in the traditional modes. Or maybe it stopped being worth the effort, and they put the effort elsewhere. . . . Besides all that, I wonder about the writer without a book, without a book as the goal, nor other media. The writer as travelling oral salesman.

just to be sure, i used Joyce as a example of another place on the map. another way of going about things that is already a well eastablished route. although, it’s actually far more difficult for a writer to follow Joyce’s path than, say, shakespeare’s, it has to be said. people will let you write sonnets all day long, even bad ones... but try a bit of the old stream of consciousness and you’re already against the wall having to justify yourself; and not to mention being crushed under the weight of finnegans wake. it’s as if people only have the patience to give one or two people the benefit of the doubt in any given epoch. it’s the same with painting. photo realism “good”... cubism “bad”. and so on. but this is all waffle really. we write. sometimes we like it. sometimes other people do, too. there is a tendency, though, to hide the process and make everything “mystical”. Bacon used to employ a chap to destroy the paintings he never wanted anyone to see. etc.

about the book thing. back in the day, when the first printing presses were getting fired up, a lot of people worried it would be the death of culture. that memory would erode etc. in reality culture became richer, didn’t it?
i’m not sure what i think about the idea of the traveling troubadour. i like books. and i don’t really like the sound of people reciting poems. is the book the goal, though? i think having a book in mind, at least, tightens one’s focus.