I am not deliberately ignoring the Theory and Innovation module from this record. It’s just that it is so new to me and although I understand it perfectly when Sam is talking, I haven’t yet consolidated it for myself so that I can turn round and talk about it to someone else. I need to make more time to do a lot more background reading. I have also been a little taken aback by my utter lack of knowledge in this area. It’s not that I don’t understand it or don’t agree with it, it just hasn’t reached my radar until now. This last week I was rather bowled over by the amount of which I don’t know and the realisation that I read as reader, not a writer. Pass the gin….
This week Sam talked about metafictional devices. It was quite exciting to realise that I recognised a lot of them, but that only got me to wondering about whether writers actually sat down and thought:
“Now then. Which metafictional device do I fancy today…ah the old infinite regress. Yes that’s the one. Where’s my pipe?”
Surely most of these were a result of an idea, the offspring of pure creativity and necessity, not a decision to use a metafictional device? Almost at the exact moment I was thinking that, Sam said that we would recognise them all and indeed would probably have used some of them at one point, probably unconsciously. Hallelujah I thought! I am a genius! She then said that in her earlier life as a literary agent she would throw out most manuscripts that used metafictional devices unconsciously! Talk about a fast demotion. I could feel all that genius leaving me for the shops. I did put my hand up in class at that point to ask her to explain further but someone else got in their question first and the moment passed. I am making a note in my diary to bring that up again.