explanation

Scottie Bowman (bowman@mail.indigo.ie)
Thu, 02 Jul 1998 13:06:20 +0000

	`...Our interpretation is every bit as valid as his,' writes 
	Camille with breathtaking self-confidence, `... that's what 
	happens once you put text out into the world. Just because 
	he wrote it doesn't mean that his opinion on it is Correct...'

	I gather this conceit that a work of art is some kind of 
	co-operation between creator & audience derives originally from 
	Frog literary theory. It triggers a lot of delighted laughter 
	in England but is apparently still taken quite seriously in America 
	& some of the other colonies.

	It is, of course, utter drivel propogated by academics & critics 
	hoping to arrogate their humble function to the same level as 
	that of the artist.  But that's not how the thing works at all.  

	The artist or writer is the discoverer of a unique vision which 
	he tries - without ever wholly succeeding - to transmit across 
	all the static & bumph of interstellar space to whatever distant 
	planets may be trying to tune to his wavelength.  There IS an 
	authentic, central experience which the artist may not, himself, 
	wholly understand since much of it derives from his own unconscious. 
	But, believe me, he is in a much better position to speak for it 
	than anyone else who, by the very nature of things, is many light 
	years from its place of origin.

	I know about these things.  I'm a writer of novels both published 
	& acclaimed & have known quite a number of creative writers even 
	more distinguished than myself.  Every one of us share the same 
	attitude to the reading public. Let the bastards hand over their 
	money & feel grateful for the benefit of our labours.  And then let 
	them keep quiet.  The day Jack REALLY starts to believe he's as 
	good as his Master will be the day Western Civilisation starts 
	its final collapse.

	Scottie B.