In prep for my next book project, I’m reading some authors whose styles I want to understand better. The first author on my list was Alice Hoffman, and my second is Julio Cortázar.
I turned to Cortázar primarily because of one story I read many years ago. “Axolotl” was a story of such unusual structure and style that it has stuck with me for decades, after only a single reading. This alone is enough do draw me back to it, in this preliminary phase, but its structure also has something I’ve been thinking about for the structure of my next book: shifting POV.
Cortázar’s prose and style is impossible to nail down. Each story in this so different from the others. At times, I thought I found an overarching method, only to find something radically different in the next story. If there is anything that does pertain to all of Cortázar’s stories here, it is density. And by density, I don’t mean that his prose is opaque and hard to understand. To the contrary, his prose is clear, but full of detail, full of depth, and (harkening back to my one recent revelation) full of history and backstory. (more…)
I know you’re all anxiously awaiting the “big reveal” on my full rewrite of “Cast in Stone”–he said, his words dripping with sarcasm–but that’s still a couple of days away. Meanwhile, I’m still working on the analysis task I set for myself.
Now that I’ve finished my foray into Shakespearean biographies and Elizabethan conspiracy theories, it’s time to get back to work.
I’ve been reading about Gustave Flaubert and his writing method. “What a bitch of a thing prose is!” he wrote to his friend and lover, Louise Colet. “It’s never finished; there’s always something to redo.” And redo he did.
Kurt R.A. Giambastiani 