Give me more of that "white gang" "black gang" thang. Please expound.

~rave!

--- In SciFiNoir_Lit@yahoogroups.com, "Carole McDonnell" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Literary deconstruction is pretty fun though. Often it's about the 
> reviewer's insight. I agree that writers often aren't consciously 
> aware of what "The Black Gang"/The Muse/The subconscious is 
writing. 
> But sometimes when I read a review by a particularly insightful 
> reviewer I am amazed at how much they have my emotions pegged, how 
> many lovely things in my story I get to "take credit for," how they 
> can pretty much guess what books or kind of books I've read. The 
only 
> time they miss the point is when, because they don't know the facts 
> of my life, they belittle something I consider important. 
> 
> In my opinion most really great stories can be deconstructed 
> endlessly because there is always something lovely and deep in it 
for 
> anyone in any century to find. It's the really bad stories that 
seem 
> to have only one point. 
> 
> For all I know The Wizard of Oz was the Golden Compass of its time.
> 
> As for taking sides, my opinion is: if an author says he meant to 
put 
> something in the book, don't always believe him. Sometimes he was 
> consciously aware (The white gang) and sometimes the black gang 
might 
> have put it in the book. If an authors says he didn't mean to put 
> something in a book and we are misreading his work, the same 
applies. 
> Believe him or not. If the subtext is especially heinous, 
definitely 
> don't believe the author. The typical author is not going to admit 
he 
> is racist, sexist, a closet rap*st or whatever.  
> 
> -C 
> 
> --- In SciFiNoir_Lit@yahoogroups.com, "ravenadal" <ravenadal@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > What is fascinating to me about the whole "allegory thang" is how 
> > authors, readers and critics take sides on whether not that is 
what 
> > the author meant.  Which is ridiculous.  Literary deconstruction 
is 
> > totally not dependent on what was the writer's intent.  This is 
> true 
> > because often the writer, him or herself, is unaware of the 
alchemy 
> > happening as they take pen to paper or fingers to keypad.
> >
>


Reply via email to