Breaking the fourth wall with Calvino
Hello everyone,
This week I'm breaking character because what is this book. I remember being so sad when I was reading blog guidelines at the start of term and seeing that Tumblr got a specific restriction (which of course is probably for good reason, but still) BUT this was such an interesting read that it makes up for the loss, even if it was a bit slow at times (I learned early on that it got very purple).
Admittedly it did trigger a certain feeling of rebellion (one that you'll be familiar with if you are also a fellow consumer of reader-insert content) that comes with works using the second perspective, like what do you mean I did this. No I didn't.
The biggest 'no I didn't' for me was probably the assumption that 'Reader' is male, like okay. I think the very beginning was just vague enough that I was nodding along, like yeah I can get with this. I believe that this is happening. Okay, I went to a bookstore and bought this book despite all these other very aptly labeled books vying for my attention.
But THEN Calvino, or 'I' goes like yeah. You meet this lady and you're obviously interested in her and all of a sudden the words feel like 'hey is it just me or is this a little bit male gaze coded'. If you're going to write a story where the reader is a character, and this mechanism is supposed to apply to EVERY reader, then I think it's fairly clear that the reader's identity should then be made ambiguous enough that anyone reading the book can go 'yeah omg I did do that' and not be caught off guard when we form a specific relationship--which leads me to another thing. Ludmilla is introduced as the 'Other Reader', which is confusing enough on its own, but it just feels like a sudden deviation, like no, I did not ask to be separated into Reader parts.
Which is honestly even more odd to think about when you consider the fact that Reader decides to marry Ludmilla (or Other Reader). It really gets you thinking about what 'reader' even means in the context of this story. That might be a decent discussion question for this week--fitting, if not anything else. What do you think that the word / title 'reader' means in this story? How did you interpret it?
I think it works as a decent question considering the main themes of this story concern the relationship between you as a reader and the story / novel / book. Though I do also want to know what your 'no I didn't' moments were throughout this story. What were some things that you disagreed with in the novel? When were your 'no I didn't's?
Excited to see what we'll talk about in class.
Your Other Local Woodland Witch,
June
"Tumblr got a specific restriction."
ReplyDeleteFYI this is because Tumblr doesn't play nice with the syndication system that relays your blog to the course website. :(
That makes sense, I initially thought maybe it was because Tumblr is so open that it would be hard to keep track of any blogs set up there! Thank you for clarifying :)
Delete"What do you think that the word / title 'reader' means in this story? How did you interpret it?" I must say I like this question... Is being a "reader" something you acquire? Because if so, I think you could also renounce it... and we have some examples of this in the novel. Having learned to read (something very difficult to resist in our social context), are we tainted by it, condemned to seek out stories with endings?
ReplyDeleteInteresting thoughts, and I do think that we all have that desire for resolution, kind of like how we get an uneasy feeling when we hear a dissonant or suspended note in music. I definitely see it in the people around me in my life as well, my mom can never let a book go unfinished even if she doesn't like the story. It's really interesting that Calvino captured something so specific yet understandable with this particular tale.
Deletetest
ReplyDeleteExcellent question about what a "reader" is, which we take for granted as what we are reading the book. Despite being a "Reader", a lot of the book is spent doing things that are very much not "reading a book". From the elaborate foreplay in the opening chapter of everything you do before reading, to the elaborate foreplay and metaphor comparing reading to het sex. And all the globetrotting adventures just to get the pieces to be unable to read. And yeah, I get that, not specifically second-person perspective but those works with reader-inserts, and being a Reader isn't necessarily identifying with the characters in the book, either.
DeleteAs the book shows, you definitely don't need a completed book, or to finish reading a book, to be considered a Reader. Or it's the opposite, a book doesn't need to be complete and it can still be read. In the end, despite the unsatisfying conclusion to the book quest; Calvino's image of the Reader seems closer to a treatise on life and how to engage with the world; and the happiest ending of those template works on life (comedies) is celebration and het marriage. Maybe you don't even need a book to be a Reader? But you do need other Readers to have adventures with, or to discuss Books and Life with. Like these blogs.
For sure! Being a Reader can be taken as literally 'someone who reads' without having to consider if what they're reading is long or short or disconnected or incomplete, kind of like how this story felt--which you pointed out :) I like what you said about Calvino's image of the Reader being a guide to engaging with the world, although the fact that his image seems to outline / highlight the classic 'first comes marriage, then comes baby' etc did sort of escape my expectation for the ambiguity that I felt should have come with a reader-insert. Thank you for being a fellow Reader as well!!
DeleteHi June! I agree with a lot of what you said, especially about the narration feeling so jarring sometimes. I also discussed the assumption that the reading is male on my blog.
ReplyDeleteHi Fiona! Thank you for stopping by to read and comment, I'll take a peek at what you had to say about the 'male Reader assumption' as well :)
DeleteHello, as a fellow tumblr user I related deeply to your post. I also agree I'm not used to reading 'reader' inserts from a male perspective lmaooo. For me being a reader in this context seemed more like the author in some ways was projecting his perspective of what being a reader is.
ReplyDeleteomg hello fellow Tumblr user <3 good note on Calvino's treatment of his Reader, it really did get me thinking about the control an author has over characters and what that meant for this specific book. I''m also unused to reading reader-inserts from a male pov LMAO which is why I think I was so taken off guard with this book. I also wasn't expecting the reader to be gendered at all initially, considering how vague their (or I guess OUR?) description was.
DeleteHi June!
ReplyDeleteI'm not a consumer of reader-insert content, but I have read a couple and I read fanfiction, and it definitely reminded me of that. If you are a writer or reader of such content you might know about Evil Author Day? This book reminded me so much of it because it is a day when authors post their drafts/snippets/incomplete work. Anyways to your questions. Whenever I read a reader-insert fic I tend to just imagine them as their own person. That Reader is not me, just someone with a weird name and that person (in this his) nickname is 'You'. I can never read it as myself because these are not things I would do. I'm not a man. I would not go to the publisher. I would honestly just ask for a refund or something. Even if that is not possible, I would just stop reading the book and pick up a new one. I've done it many times before, I can do it again. Also the sex scene in Chapter 7... I'm on the ace spectrum. I do not want to have sex. That was something I definitely wouldn't do. Now, it not applying to people that are ace, I could understand, but I think that the book could be written so that no pronouns are used and its all ambiguous to the gender of the Reader and the gender of the Other Reader.
- Jasleen
DeleteI totally get what you mean about the “no I didn’t” moments because second person narration can feel like the book is just deciding things for you. I also noticed how the “Reader” started to feel pretty specifically male once Ludmilla was introduced, which made it harder to feel like it could apply to everyone reading. I kind of thought of the word “reader” more as representing the general experience of chasing stories and meaning through books, rather than literally being every single person. But there were definitely points where I was like okay that was not something I did.
Delete