[logic and narrative?]

I'm working on chapter three and I keep getting side-tracked by Cortazar and Borges. I'm meant to be concentrating on web fiction and temporality but all my theorising seems to lead back to these two. Maybe posting something here will encourage me to get back on track....(although off-track is such fun).

For some of his readers (and for himself) the intention to write a novel of sorts without the logical articulations of discourse seemed absurd. In the end, one could vaguely perceive something like a transaction, a procedure (although the absurdity of choosing narration for non-narrative ends remained.)*


* Why not? Morelli himself asked that question on a piece of graph paper in whose margin there was a list of vegetables, probably a memento buffandi). (Hopscotch, Chapter 95: 354-55).

A novel without a narrative and footnoes which refer to other footnoes. Hrm...without logical connections one might have only chaos and disintegration. The printed book, then, does not always guarantee narrative logic, sequence, or connectivity. Narrative here, as in certain web fictions, evolves with each reading.


For an interesting interview with Cortazar go here.