The adage is every reader reads himself into a work. If that is the case, I stand a good chance to win some laurels on that count. Of late, I am not much into reading. But when I read, it becomes somewhat of a pout-pourri: The first few chapters of book 'A' read alongside some randomly selected chapters of book 'B' finally mixed up with a couple of pages from a third book. The experience is heady!
It gives a terrific high to concoct a tale from a few disjointed narratives. There is scope for creation of new characters and incidents and maybe, a little far-fetched it is though, to find some interconnection, too. A twist in the tales!!
Thus you could have Anna Karenina chatting up Lady Chatterley or Lola and Ricardo Reis having a word with our own Billy Biswas. Maybe they could speak on something like Wong Kar Wai's movies or Nehru's politics. The next scene could have Gonzalez's daughter making some hard revelations under the pretext of reading some book.
Thus, you could summon umpteen characters who would mill about for precious territory in that chaotic mindscape of yours. How would it all be in the end; what is the theme; where’s the plot??? Let questions be asked and maybe they will give rise to many more subtexts (supertexts).
Is it mandatory that there be an order and that every tale is told in a particular fashion?
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
every tale is indeed told in a particular fashion.otherwise,a tale would cease to be one!However,disparate thoughts and images can also result in a readable story,provided there is a common thread strong enough stitching up the pictures.
ReplyDelete