A Writer's Notebook, Day Seven-Hundred-And-Twenty-Four

 One of the things which always fascinates me as a writer is the question of the reader's experience with a text, and of how the phenomenology of reading can become a channel for added communication.  In considering this, I've become quite interested in the question of meta-fiction, and have very particularly found myself exploring the theatrical notions of Epic Theatre.  I am most familiar with the work of Brecht in this realm, and my reading is still beginning, but much of what I am considering is related to notions of those aspects of theater designed to break the fourth wall, and how that is not the same as what is often done in fiction, where what often occurs is the character experiencing their own existence as within a fictional work.  In the Brechtian usage, these techniques intend to break aspects of the theatrical experience, to deflate the works by revealing artificiality and illusion, but how does one emulate this in text?  The character who addresses the reader does not serve to render the work as less real in a text, and the character being aware of their artifice may not work to create the same dissonance.  This is not to say that works which have such elements are not valid and fascinating, but that the intent is quite different. 

For me, there is a great deal that resonates about the approaches I am discussing that goes beyond the actual technique, but instead relates to the intent and context of the work I have explored.  One of the essential questions that drove the theatrical innovations I am mentioning was about the key purpose of theater itself.  These questions had to do with the impact of commerce, with the pressure of business, and with questions of hierarchy developed by the stage.  If one reads discussions of these issues, it is clear that their was a notion that the theaters elevation above the audience, in a metaphorical sense, was a hindrance to the artistic impulse.  This is not dissimilar from the recognition that is growing in our literary communities about academic models and the impact of MFA's, editorial priorities, and other factors, including systemic and societal ones.  As well, we are at a time of change due to the altering of technology, and the changing of what literature means in the context of digital text.

I am, of course, making a quite sloppy argument here, and I acknowledge that much of this is just me considering these questions, not driving towards a central point yet.  It seems to me that we are at a time when it is worth deconstructing the relationship of reader and writer and of how the text functions to mediate that interaction.  That exploration, for me, drives me to consider how a text can be structured to alter the reading experience both on a line by line level and on the larger level of the work itself, and how the work can break the expectations, the contract, if you will, with the reader.  In some ways, this is an aggressive act, a violation of the reader, as it often seems this kind of shock is what is necessary to reveal the true nature of the reading experience, the access that we give others to our minds.  It is about pressing the work forward into a place that is intended to alter the act of reading itself in ways that the reader is not expecting, and through this opening a dialogue about deeper questions of communication and language.