what was I going to write about WATT by mr beckett?

because I was, it was fixed in my mind, what to write about Watt. I even have some notes, but they don't seem to pertain to anything in particular.

Firstly I had recommended to someone, if they needed some immediate laughter, read this part of Watt, what part, it is near the end, I'll try to be more specific. . . it's a broad spectrum really, anywhere from the page starting, let's say page one hundred and seventy-three, in the calder edition, I am sure editions don't differ all that much. What is the font in the calder edition? It doesn't say. Sometimes, in a book, somewhere near the start, it mentions what font it has been printed in. Oh well.

it is a readable font.

I was out and about for a while before the my fall and to go with me I took in my plastic bag because somehow I lack a proper bag, the book Watt, to read while sitting outside the station, for example.

I thought I would read the "Alphonse monologue" I don't know if that is the technical term for it. There are no technical terms for these things, don't worry about it so much.

it's a good monologue. I think it should be famous. Perhaps it is? There's a bit of it on youtube. It's excellent, but actually the continuation if it continued to the next bit, would be even better. Shall I find it for you?(on the youtube) and I can give you the pg numbers (strictly from the calder edition, mind) i.e, between pages 44 and 45 -- (and in fact it does continue, thank goodness, I was wrong):

on the occasions I read the "Alphonse monologue" outside, mainly, as we have established, stations, I made some notes, and these notes are on a piece of paper that lies (not lies) it is folded from pg 36/37 to pg 78/79 and has a summit or something oh I don't know. I shalln't know, how to describe it. A photo!

now all that remains is to transcribe the notes! Now I have noted the pages above, it is easy to replace them, I mean, place them, where there were, are still? as though supposed to be thus located, for ever and ever? that become become quote annoying... What am I saying?

I attach a photo of the notes, necessarily two photos, one inverted naturally, because . . . no never mind. Attach the photo please:

photo attached (that may not particularly be the correct word). Now let us simply transcribe what is written (note it is a paltry note) I feel ashamed.

I shall transcribe, plus offer explanations per each transcriptions, as to why I possibly had cause to transcribe what I did.
Question of where to start. I'll be quick as can. From the middle down, then vice versa.

Start from the left:

p42 (i.e. "How it is") -- explanation, it is my idea one day to compile a list of all things mentioned in "How It Is"
that refer to the "real" "our" world, and thought also here I could do a bit.
historic ref. "Lisbon's great day"
"ladder" -- thinking of the ladders in "The Lost Ones" perhaps?

"the very latest garden"
- - -

now invert, start from the right:
p38"Then at night not in the quiet houses there are no roads" -- explanation, this book was written apparently while the
author slept in ditches and whatever "refuge" provided
. . . -- empty houses perhaps -- "refuge" an important word in

"you lie down by a window opening on refuge -- the little sounds come that demand nothing . . ."

"a face offered" / ^^ a little explanation, "you lie down" echoes "company"
obviously . . .

exitus and redditus" ||
"watt" echoes "what where" the final play. Enough with echoes.

Other things (more general) I had say about Watt:

my theory: (utterly unproven, without proof looked for etc, so sorry) a novel to be written in circumstances involving fleeing from nazis etc, and entails a certain ridiculousness . . . the sections, it is not repetition, there's a better word, procedural, wherein most possiblities are considered, in (necessarily) repetitive fashion. I imagine a placeholder process, i.e., that section shall be a procedural repetition, that should fill some pages, until there's what amounts to a "novel". That's a theory I'll stick to til thoroughly disproven.

Also, the humour of the book is not just located where I recommended it to an acquantince, but it is very throughout. The Alphonse monologue for example, I laughed aloud outside the station. On my first reading I suppose I didn't notice all of this. Humour in Beckett may not be well understood. There are paid Guardian newspaper journalists still unaware he wrote any fiction at all. And "booker" judges &c . . .

One more maybe thing, the idea of humour in the Beckett, fading around "ping" -- I thought there was a www.pseudopodium.org lamenting this but I can't find it know, I'm sorry? (but here's best take on my complaint about "fail better":
http://www.pseudopodium.org/ht-20110710.html#2011-07-27) I shalln't dispute it. If it exists. But I am not necessarily in agreement neither. Whether or not it exists. I am in quandry.

A certain humour is an overwhelming sort, and that is what is in Watt, I think. It requires pressure. Trouble and bad places to sleep, remedied now and then by a refuge, a chance-find. After a while your legs go bad, and/or your eyes, and being funny's a far thing from your mind.

That'll have to do for now?

No comments:

Post a Comment