tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post3147696452512058196..comments2024-03-18T16:55:31.971+00:00Comments on This Space: The secret centre: Blanchot and The Turn of the ScrewStephen Mitchelmorehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01658772259307446873noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-39980242342281000262009-11-01T20:08:00.203+00:002009-11-01T20:08:00.203+00:00Nice commentary on Blanchot and very accurate to m...Nice commentary on Blanchot and very accurate to my (very engaged and long-standing) sense of both him and James. Thanks.Williamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12464822662572126018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-50507153887211556302009-10-29T21:50:22.863+00:002009-10-29T21:50:22.863+00:00Thanks for the first comment Meg. I didn't not...Thanks for the first comment Meg. I didn't notice any typos - and rather them than nothing.Stephen Mitchelmorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01658772259307446873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-31792621976817355012009-10-29T21:37:43.432+00:002009-10-29T21:37:43.432+00:00Sorry about the typos! I could stand to be a bit m...Sorry about the typos! I could stand to be a bit more painstaking with my posts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-15879371363875899162009-10-29T21:14:39.880+00:002009-10-29T21:14:39.880+00:00I thought James did keep notebooks - and it seems...I thought James did keep notebooks - and it seems also letters at the very least - but he kept the most painstaking notebooks about the intent and movement of his fiction. It was a way of planning, to be sure, but also a way of working out the movements of his characters through desired pcyhological states, with their corresponding afffecting plot points. <br /><br />In regard to "Turn of the Screw," I have recently read of another French critic who says James, by ending in this manner, mocks the reader who insists upon a psychological analysis as the "key" and is no better, really, than the hysterial governess who insists upon "answers." Blanchot's "metafictional" interpretation adds a wonderful layer. I look forward to going back and reading this essay.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-4459279465544011522009-10-14T23:00:59.462+01:002009-10-14T23:00:59.462+01:00"Oh yes, here we go, Blanchot is turning a fa..."Oh yes, here we go, Blanchot is turning a famous ghost story into metafiction."<br /><br />I wouldn't be worried: most great thinkers have about one great thought.<br /><br />Thanks for the post.graltesohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05770834108729719985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-37119313288610295552009-10-14T22:12:07.836+01:002009-10-14T22:12:07.836+01:00Thanks Edmond. For anyone interested and with an e...Thanks Edmond. For anyone interested and with an eReader: http://www.munseys.com/book/4300/Sacred_Fount,_TheStephen Mitchelmorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01658772259307446873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-85490427825248470412009-10-14T21:43:24.188+01:002009-10-14T21:43:24.188+01:00"The subject, Blanchot says, 'is – simply..."The subject, Blanchot says, 'is – simply – James's art, the way he has of always circling round a secret that, in so many of his books, some anecdote sets in operation, and that is not only a real secret – some fact, some thought or truth that can be revealed – that is not even a detour of the mind, but one that escapes all revelation, for it belongs to a region that is not that of light'."<br /><br />For me James's own distillation of this is The Sacred Fount, a novel I never hear discussed enough and which doesn't seem to be very highly rated by most of James's critics -- they seem to consider it an outlier, whereas this view of Blanchot's would suggest that it is central.Edmond Caldwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02651618912907453630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-78420187799094604662009-10-12T10:15:06.286+01:002009-10-12T10:15:06.286+01:00Oh, despite the quotations from James that shows B...Oh, despite the quotations from James that shows Blanchot has read through the material, the important thing is that James' wasn't prolific?<br /><br />What would be prolific then - 500 pages, 400, 300, 201? <br /><br />I suggest you leave your illogical nitpicking to your own website.Stephen Mitchelmorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01658772259307446873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8470094.post-5149151224839227872009-10-12T10:08:21.578+01:002009-10-12T10:08:21.578+01:00Hmm, it's interesting, but I think there's...Hmm, it's interesting, but I think there's a weakness in Blanchot's idea. Henry James was not a prolific notebook writer. He didn't keep a journal (not surprising for one who felt that private life should no invade the life of the artist), unlike many authors and other creators of his time. His notebooks - in their "complete" edition - take up about 200 pages (the remainder of the book being "pocket diaries", notes during his American visit late in life, and dictated notes at the end of his life. I would therefore suggest that Blanchot is somewhat mistaken.<br /><br />No, Henry did not write much in notebooks, but, however, he wrote some 15,000 letters, which are only finally beginning to be published (only selections were published in the past). <br /><br />As to "having read Blanchot with a patience one can gain only through reading Blanchot again and again", it's a shame, but he's poorly translated (though his French is not very easy to understand either). <br /><br />Kirk<br /><br />www.readinghenryjames.comkirkmchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17440232855814494434noreply@blogger.com