Reading between the lines certainly has a flavor that lingers, but to write for an exclusive audience that has that ability would restrict readership. That would take away from 'reading', the purpose of which is to spread the message far and wide, regardless of what the reader takes or doesn't take away from it. Would you agree...
I agree. I like the arrogance of Gide's statement: it has that aestheric defiance of Wilde. But like you say, it does make for a limited, er, readership.
Eshu... thanks for dropping by @ my blog. I'm doing great... been real busy with rewrites on nbr 3 [working with a new British editor] as well as preparing for the Oxford Lit. Fest. and other speaking engagements back home.I also liked the arrogance of Gide's statement, limiting as it is or not...How are you?
Hello, JD. I am fine, thanks. Glad to know you are okay and busy! Your post must have sneaked in: I kept looking--no post. Then, noticed this today. Best wishes.
The statement also ensure the inexhaustibility of meaning. The spaces between the lines seem less stable and therefore far more productive of meaning than the lines themselves. Nice blog by the way!
Hello, Lost at the End. You have hit the nail on the head indeed. And Gide's lines are very wide apart. :-)Thanks for reading. Your blog is intriguing too.
Post a Comment