The Unknown: The Orange Line.
  November, 1996

Dave,

Class last week brought up a number of interesting questions. Questions like: what the hell am I doing with my life? I seem to have written myself back into a corner of my own brain so remote that not even you and Jason and a team of English graduate students working together with searchlights, helicopters, and bloodhounds, can find me. My writing has improved so much since I entered graduate school that there is no longer anyone qualified to read it. In class for the first time I received more sadness than hostility: a room full of blank faces, letters which read like page-long apologies, and meanwhile Jason accusing me of misrepresenting theories I wasn’t, in many cases, even trying to represent. I’ve seldom gone to so much trouble to do such a small segment of a possible readership so little good. This is quite a way to end nearly a decade of intermittent college writing workshops, and quite a way to say goodbye to the only readers I will ever be guaranteed.

Well, that was how this letter began. After working on the paper it occurred to me that I actually know what the hell I’m doing. I know exactly what I’m doing. I’m going broke and insane trying to teach the English language to dance. It’s a good life. And you needn’t worry that I am going to turn around and try to write like Carver or Updike.

The sort of bad ideas you’ve seen me try—a story with one form of punctuation per page, a story where the number of words per sentence decreases by two every paragraph, a story where every two adjacent words have at least one letter in common—have taken years to contrive. (But I didn’t do anything like that in this story and I feel kind of bad to see that you started counting the number of words in each sentence, apparently out of sheer desperation.) Though there is not yet a place for these ideas in literature (nothing ending with -ism) they are easy to understand and explain (the ideas, not the writing) and part of a world of writing practices useful in that they can force inspiration in blocked writers and constrain the impassioned diuretic flow of clichés in confident writers. In a workshop I am both. I started writing like this, in fact, because of a workshop. I needed decision-making criteria so that, when I received a flood of individually contradictory but collectively discouraging instructions about what to change, I would have the original structure as a guide to know which advice I could use and which I couldn’t. I don’t like the fact that I now write stories with Roland Barthes jokes which perhaps one percent of English speaking people know aren’t funny. This is not my new direction. What I want to do for my thesis is carry the unnameable formal ideas I referred to above to their unnatural conclusions. I want use biology, economics, the contemporary theory of metaphor, and Dr. Seuss. At the same time, unless my writing is (if not emotionally rich) readable and relevant to people, I am not doing what I want yet. Intellectual masturbation is an interesting metaphor. Only according to a conventional metaphor system which posits mind and body as opposites can it even be a metaphor. Masturbation is literally an intellectual experience. I am into formal stunt-pilotry for its own sake: not because I want to be remembered for breaking the text barrier, but because I like being high, fast, and upside down. Structures precede stories. I know when the structures work but I don’t know when the stories “work.” When you suggest that the formal structure must be relevant to the story, well, I agree, but what the hell are we each talking about? That’s a huge conversation and an interesting one. Let’s have it. Until then I’ll be in my room reading Life: a User’s Manual and trying to move as little as possible to conserve calories.
William

P. S. Please stop calling me “Bill.”
 

MAP BOOKSTORES PEOPLE
sickening decadent hypertext novel META fiction al bull shit sort of a doc ument ary corr e spond ence art is cool look at art live read ings
CONTACT PRESS ANTHOLOGY