|
Word Clones / Word Clowns |
|
|
|
|
Written by df lewis
|
|
I mentioned en passant 'word clones' and 'word clowns' in my ON THE HOOF review of Ligotti's 'Conspiracy Against The Human Race' posted a few days ago. These sort of slid in unbidden and I've wondered ever since what on earth I had in mind!
Within the review, it is sort of hinted, I believe, that these represent the relative strengths of autonomous lettering, even to extent that the letters themselves perform like puppets or dolls or clowns before settling down within the pattern of semantic fields, graphologies, phonemes, morphemes, syntactical-formations-between-them etc, as sort of ... writing automata? The pre-performance is not controlled by the headlease writer or even by that writer's set of collusive or non-collusive narrators who develop within the texture of the text, but the actual settlement of the letters after the performance (when the letters' duty of 'meaning' is due within the ordinary work-a-day scenario of the written communication business) is controlled by the headlease writer and his amanuensis narrators. Dependent on the pre-performance of the letters, the actual end-message can be subsequently skewed or focussed accordingly. This does not absolve the headlease writer from responsibility for the end-message, but there are occasions where word clones or word clowns among the letters can be artful in themselves, even evil. (The word clones are rather sad creatures and will fall back flaccidly even at a suspicion of the headlease writer coming back to work into the 'garden of his literary cultivation' after lunch, whilst the word clowns have more bravura and will sit out their own existence as long as possible).
==========================
==========================
 Add Comments |
