I think, Kent, and I'm very tentative on formulating this, that it's
something to do with knowing who to blame afterwards. That is to say, a
matter of owning up and responsibility. I find, too, that the personae can
run loose quite well enough without me giving them their own keys to the
house. It's not that I 'outlaw' a free rein to multiplicities, I just don't
feel the need myself.
It would be like, for instance, contributing to this list under a pseudonym.
I couldn't do that, even tho' my surname minds me of a fungus.
Hope this makes some sense.
Best
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "kent johnson" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 3:07 PM
Subject: personae/ hyperauthorship
> David,
>
> That's fine, of course, to not let the personae "run loose." Fine poetry
can
> certainly come of such bondage (a tether ball going round and round,
faster
> and faster toward its pole can be beautiful)! And the usual form of
> authorial presentation ("This poem is written by me, my name is ###")is
> fine, too--it will always be with us, and should. I try to write them
> myself, with no great success.
>
> But *why not* let some of those personae go, to live their own lives,
pursue
> their own callings, encounter others? To stick with that "muddy, half-wit"
> for no particular reason seems a bit like the father who christens all his
> progeny with his own given name and then never lets them leave the
> apartment. He has his nose in the Bible, and doesn't see, somehow, that in
> their freedom they will be no less his, and that everything they "render
in
> their wanderings shall extend his seed and honor his memory." (Dead Sea
> Scrolls)
>
> Personae, in other words, are one thing; hyperauthorship is another. The
> latter is about the *creation of authorships*.
>
> Such creation and proliferation does not replace anything, it simply adds,
> like a bit of weather, to the climate. And given this (that it does not
take
> away) it is interesting how the cloud-break of apocrypha causes discomfort
> for so many?
>
> Kent
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> David Bircumshaw said,
>
> "and this not at all an attempt of a critique, or an 'authorative' (ha ha)
> answer, but what I'm really intrigued with on this identity question is
why
> you seem to use a theoretical scaffold for it.
>
> I use at times various personae, but they all end with the muddy tag of
> 'David Bircumshaw' underneath. I have lots of problems with that guy, btw,
> but I stick with him, possibly from a sense of sympathy. I certainly do at
> times want to be somebody else, for instance one richer, better looking,
> younger, miore talented, etc etc, but I stick with that half-wit, maybe if
> just for old times' sake, rather than let the personae run loose."
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
|