.
Yes, yes, I confess: I read the latest issue of the journal Chimera, 322 for the month of September from the first line to last, through 22 aliases and several real names have been left for me to usurp. Then tell you more about what, but I think we should start thinking about why I did it.
Why
What is the purpose, task, in order to be moved to a writer of our time? What should or-more-in which may consist of the literary work in our environment and yet at the dawn of a new century? To me that an author ask these questions or are not do is nuclear as a sign of artistic responsibility and, usually, their literature is often part of the implicit or explicit answer to both questions. Responses that can be diverse and even, and without leaving valuable works contradictory. An author has the right to say that the task of literature in our time must be deepening concern about the language, another that his mission is to account for the social problems that beset us and anxious and another, possibly the reason for be embodied in a pleasant work but do not dodge questions transcendental and reflective, and another may point to a further set of immutable esthetic values \u200b\u200bimmanent, and yet there may be authors who hold that art in general and literature in particular tend to be a question for the human condition or the search for meaning. In my case, by day or by the work, I believe that literature is or can be all those things. And I also believe that writing can also be presented as a way of intervening in reality, to question our world and our thinking writers or artists. Literature, like Arnold said speaking of poetry, can be a critical life , and also a criticism of criticism, and artistic experience of life. Between these two parameters, as a way to analyze our literary system and its forms reception and legitimation, but also and at the same time, as an active way to participate in the artistic process with a gesture that goes beyond the writing itself, there, swimming in two waters, is where the intention is to me led to write an entire magazine known and respected in our publishing world, with many years of experience behind him and work. Doing it in a small magazine size was not infringing, deliberating, questioning, which provides a magazine located in the center of a literary system. It responds to my old intention of making literature in all those places that are possible using the effect any existing formats. Damian
Tabarovsky wrote in the number of Chimera before my accident, "I know that the question of the mechanisms of legitimacy of literature should be the basis of all literature. It is a question that lies with the writers and not only to sociologists " [1] . Failed summer reading this issue until after the September released by living outside Spain, and I find meaningful and happy now that the purpose of fictitious numbers were contained in the above, especially considering that the very Tabarovsky was allowed to write for me and authorized to make me go through it, showing that when he thinks that one must ask the mechanisms of legitimacy in literature (and the author ', as he well knows, is one of the most powerful) is the question not only the theory but with practice, consistent and coherent approach.
The role of literature in our time is a difficult role, a role now in danger of collapsing even as paper, to encrypt your stay in signs converted into pixels. Literature, this has already been said, has endowed numerous competitors that leave more and more isolated in our leisure and thought and still think seriously, this has been the least if the blame for their postponement is due to external threat or internal weakness. Felix de Azua explains in his superb autobiography lifeless how literature of the nineteenth century is set in part as a reflection on itself after the romantic turmoil and how the novel of the twentieth century can be explained in his best part as the search through the prose of the power of words left for poetry. We can argue until the cows from the drying Azúa ideas, but not undeniable that underlies them: the great books of both eras were looking for something. What to look for literature 21, that is the question. The number 322, Chimera is my own answer to the question.
What
This is not the first time something like this is done, not even the first time that I do. While studying law in Cordoba, my friend Francisco and I elaborábamos completely or almost completely student magazine retaliation, inventing various characters and pseudonyms to fill each issue. Without knowing the above, before we had done something similar the critic José Luis García Martín in his college literary magazine, probably relying on literary Brochures Leopoldo Alas prepared entirely under their pseudonym usual, Clarín, since 1886 and for many years. Karl Kraus was also his personal publishing for years, though, I believe, signed on his behalf. In this case, the number 322, Chimera has the distinction of being a general review known national and international circulation, so that the dimensions of the "intervention" are different than in a university publication.
The idea came to me in October 2009 and moved with little hope of success, the supposed madness, to the then three directors of Chimera, who picked her up, to my surprise and enthusiasm. Following the departure of Jorge Carrion, Joan Trejo of the magazine two months later, continued the project with Jaime Rodriguez Z., the current director, a patient who has been complicit in all this huge deception, which we have kept secret until the end, even to close associates of the publication. I must say that whatever the value that this number is transgressive, it would have been impossible if the magazine and its directors had not supported the operation, so Chimera becomes, thanks to his gesture, the only critical review and also self of English literature.
The process has been slow: many years of data collection of cases and issues before, seven months after long and patient write the number, of all sections. Numerous style imitation exercises for the permanent sections of cooperation, signed also by names and established his own style: Sierra Germain, Germain Tabarovsky, Manuel Vilas, Agustín Fernández Mallo: thanks for all of them left voluntarily usurped by this document forger and ghost. Months to imagine collaborators, aliases, each with its characteristic style, each with their mini-biographies. Months of shooting equivocal or ambiguous. Months of inventing assumptions books, writing poems for realistic-looking poems of false sentences to novels have credibility, in a staggering process where I had to invent non-existent critical writing and also reviewed the fictional writer. Months to engineer dozens of arguments, frame, ideas and statements apocryphal, forgers translation of chimeric editorial, obituaries incredible. Months to embody philosophers, writers, aesthetes, specialized teachers such as strawberries or other entanglements Bellatin, biographers, critics venal. Months of counting characters and thinking about the phenomena of hoax and deception literary reading many authors, to justify the different ideas of different personae the Greek sense of the word, mask using. Months of learning. Months of fun. Months back to a sense of writing as vertigo, and jump without a net, as a way to empty without concern for the path back. Months of absolute creative freedom. Unforgettable months.
In the "Interview minimal" in the October issue will tell you more. Here conclude by saying that from this moment, a book entitled 322 Chimera will be added to my bibliographical note, because for me what is published is more than one copy or journal issue for me is an essay rather organic or inorganic on the literary forgery, done since publishing a falsehood, so that is configured as a metafalsificación. A half-year literary and performative means, is perhaps the only decent thing I've written in my life.
[If anyone is interested, you can request a copy from Chimera through its website, http://www.revistaquimera.com/detalleRevista.php?idRevista=49 ]
[1] Damian Tabarovsky, "Sociology of Literature," Chimera No. 320-21, July-August 2010, p. 10.
Yes, yes, I confess: I read the latest issue of the journal Chimera, 322 for the month of September from the first line to last, through 22 aliases and several real names have been left for me to usurp. Then tell you more about what, but I think we should start thinking about why I did it.
Why
What is the purpose, task, in order to be moved to a writer of our time? What should or-more-in which may consist of the literary work in our environment and yet at the dawn of a new century? To me that an author ask these questions or are not do is nuclear as a sign of artistic responsibility and, usually, their literature is often part of the implicit or explicit answer to both questions. Responses that can be diverse and even, and without leaving valuable works contradictory. An author has the right to say that the task of literature in our time must be deepening concern about the language, another that his mission is to account for the social problems that beset us and anxious and another, possibly the reason for be embodied in a pleasant work but do not dodge questions transcendental and reflective, and another may point to a further set of immutable esthetic values \u200b\u200bimmanent, and yet there may be authors who hold that art in general and literature in particular tend to be a question for the human condition or the search for meaning. In my case, by day or by the work, I believe that literature is or can be all those things. And I also believe that writing can also be presented as a way of intervening in reality, to question our world and our thinking writers or artists. Literature, like Arnold said speaking of poetry, can be a critical life , and also a criticism of criticism, and artistic experience of life. Between these two parameters, as a way to analyze our literary system and its forms reception and legitimation, but also and at the same time, as an active way to participate in the artistic process with a gesture that goes beyond the writing itself, there, swimming in two waters, is where the intention is to me led to write an entire magazine known and respected in our publishing world, with many years of experience behind him and work. Doing it in a small magazine size was not infringing, deliberating, questioning, which provides a magazine located in the center of a literary system. It responds to my old intention of making literature in all those places that are possible using the effect any existing formats. Damian
Tabarovsky wrote in the number of Chimera before my accident, "I know that the question of the mechanisms of legitimacy of literature should be the basis of all literature. It is a question that lies with the writers and not only to sociologists " [1] . Failed summer reading this issue until after the September released by living outside Spain, and I find meaningful and happy now that the purpose of fictitious numbers were contained in the above, especially considering that the very Tabarovsky was allowed to write for me and authorized to make me go through it, showing that when he thinks that one must ask the mechanisms of legitimacy in literature (and the author ', as he well knows, is one of the most powerful) is the question not only the theory but with practice, consistent and coherent approach.
The role of literature in our time is a difficult role, a role now in danger of collapsing even as paper, to encrypt your stay in signs converted into pixels. Literature, this has already been said, has endowed numerous competitors that leave more and more isolated in our leisure and thought and still think seriously, this has been the least if the blame for their postponement is due to external threat or internal weakness. Felix de Azua explains in his superb autobiography lifeless how literature of the nineteenth century is set in part as a reflection on itself after the romantic turmoil and how the novel of the twentieth century can be explained in his best part as the search through the prose of the power of words left for poetry. We can argue until the cows from the drying Azúa ideas, but not undeniable that underlies them: the great books of both eras were looking for something. What to look for literature 21, that is the question. The number 322, Chimera is my own answer to the question.
What
This is not the first time something like this is done, not even the first time that I do. While studying law in Cordoba, my friend Francisco and I elaborábamos completely or almost completely student magazine retaliation, inventing various characters and pseudonyms to fill each issue. Without knowing the above, before we had done something similar the critic José Luis García Martín in his college literary magazine, probably relying on literary Brochures Leopoldo Alas prepared entirely under their pseudonym usual, Clarín, since 1886 and for many years. Karl Kraus was also his personal publishing for years, though, I believe, signed on his behalf. In this case, the number 322, Chimera has the distinction of being a general review known national and international circulation, so that the dimensions of the "intervention" are different than in a university publication.
The idea came to me in October 2009 and moved with little hope of success, the supposed madness, to the then three directors of Chimera, who picked her up, to my surprise and enthusiasm. Following the departure of Jorge Carrion, Joan Trejo of the magazine two months later, continued the project with Jaime Rodriguez Z., the current director, a patient who has been complicit in all this huge deception, which we have kept secret until the end, even to close associates of the publication. I must say that whatever the value that this number is transgressive, it would have been impossible if the magazine and its directors had not supported the operation, so Chimera becomes, thanks to his gesture, the only critical review and also self of English literature.
The process has been slow: many years of data collection of cases and issues before, seven months after long and patient write the number, of all sections. Numerous style imitation exercises for the permanent sections of cooperation, signed also by names and established his own style: Sierra Germain, Germain Tabarovsky, Manuel Vilas, Agustín Fernández Mallo: thanks for all of them left voluntarily usurped by this document forger and ghost. Months to imagine collaborators, aliases, each with its characteristic style, each with their mini-biographies. Months of shooting equivocal or ambiguous. Months of inventing assumptions books, writing poems for realistic-looking poems of false sentences to novels have credibility, in a staggering process where I had to invent non-existent critical writing and also reviewed the fictional writer. Months to engineer dozens of arguments, frame, ideas and statements apocryphal, forgers translation of chimeric editorial, obituaries incredible. Months to embody philosophers, writers, aesthetes, specialized teachers such as strawberries or other entanglements Bellatin, biographers, critics venal. Months of counting characters and thinking about the phenomena of hoax and deception literary reading many authors, to justify the different ideas of different personae the Greek sense of the word, mask using. Months of learning. Months of fun. Months back to a sense of writing as vertigo, and jump without a net, as a way to empty without concern for the path back. Months of absolute creative freedom. Unforgettable months.
In the "Interview minimal" in the October issue will tell you more. Here conclude by saying that from this moment, a book entitled 322 Chimera will be added to my bibliographical note, because for me what is published is more than one copy or journal issue for me is an essay rather organic or inorganic on the literary forgery, done since publishing a falsehood, so that is configured as a metafalsificación. A half-year literary and performative means, is perhaps the only decent thing I've written in my life.
[If anyone is interested, you can request a copy from Chimera through its website, http://www.revistaquimera.com/detalleRevista.php?idRevista=49 ]
[1] Damian Tabarovsky, "Sociology of Literature," Chimera No. 320-21, July-August 2010, p. 10.
0 comments:
Post a Comment