Pelton points out that in the case of Double or Nothing as well as other works, Federman “made the decision to rework his own manuscript precisely against marketplace feedback.” In this regard, Federman’s publishing career “serves as a unique measure of the nonparticipation of American publishing in innovative American fi ction.” Pelton maintains that the task of publishers should be to support the work of writers like Federman “whose texts bring us new understandings of what constitutes the art form”—not to dictate to them what they should write based on economic motives. Federman’s “refusal to write straight narrative,” suggests Pelton, against the wishes of major American publishers, provides us with “perhaps the most notable case in our time of the writer who growled at his purported master and, by doing so, became his own.”
_________________________
Emphasis mine. From "Other Voices: The Fiction of Raymond Federman," Jeffrey R. Di Leo's introduction (pdf) to Federman's Fictions: Innovation, Theory, and the Holocaust (SUNY UP, 2011).
Raymond Federman site.
3 comments:
Hey, thanks for taking note of this! Since this essay was published in a pricey University Press book, I wasn't sure who would see it in the place where people actually see things, on the internet. Cheers!
Hi Ted:
You're welcome -- it's my pleasure. I'm greatly looking forward to reading your essay and the whole book when I get the chance (I got a recall notice out for it at the library of the campus where my wife works -- otherwise it'd be too pricey for me, too!).
Thanks for writing!
Edmond
Ed, Ted, splendid cross-cultural reach. *Complimenti.
Post a Comment