{"id":2705,"date":"2007-09-01T23:24:00","date_gmt":"2007-09-02T07:24:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/?p=2705"},"modified":"2007-09-01T23:24:00","modified_gmt":"2007-09-02T07:24:00","slug":"2705","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/?p=2705","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"<p><font face=\"Verdana\" size=\"2\">I recently moved over to a different news aggregator, and I&#8217;ve been sifting through some of the old links I&#8217;ve accumulated over the months. (Yes, months. I have some from about a year ago, not yet read.) Here are a few.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.seedmagazine.com\/news\/2007\/03\/jonathan_lethem_janna_levin.php\" title=\"The novelist and the cosmologist meet up to talk about reality.\">Jonathan Lethem and Janna Levin<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><strong>Lethem<\/strong>: People take it as a given that the world is presented &#8220;as is&#8221; on film. When in fact, optically, it&#8217;s very unlike what our eyes, and our experiences, present us with. You might be interested in reading the essays of Stan Brakhage, a highly experimental filmmaker who tried to start at the beginning again and not take the narrative construction, the editing assumptions, and the camera-placement assumptions of traditional film for granted, but begin again at optics and ask how we can make film more like what it&#8217;s like to look around. His films have this constant movement. They&#8217;re almost &#8212;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Levin<\/strong>: Oh, interesting. Unbearable.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Lethem<\/strong>: &#8212; almost unbearable at times, but they&#8217;re abstract art. They&#8217;re like a Kandinsky painting. And in that sense, they seem to derive a connection to &#8212;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Levin<\/strong>: Actual experience. But there&#8217;s that irony again: The closer you try to get to the actual experience, the sort of more abstract and removed it becomes at the same time. <font size=\"1\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/backwardscity.blogspot.com\/\">via<\/a>]<\/font><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.avclub.com\/content\/interview\/michael_chabon\">Michael Chabon<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><strong>AVC: Do you use research to submerge yourself into the outlook of a particular place?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>MC<\/strong>: Research is part of it. I do a lot of research, reading, investigating, and talking to people, if that seems appropriate. But ultimately, it boils down to imagination. I&#8217;m afraid that sounds evasive or flip or insufficient or something. I always think of that famous story about Laurence Olivier and Dustin Hoffman working on <i>Marathon Man<\/i>. To prepare for the drilling scene, Dustin Hoffman starved himself for three days, didn&#8217;t shave, slept in his clothes, and arrived on set looking like a total wreck. Laurence Olivier said, &#8220;What on earth are you doing?&#8221; Dustin Hoffman said, &#8220;I&#8217;m preparing for the scene.&#8221; Olivier said, &#8220;Have you ever considered acting?&#8221; [Laughs.] All the preparation in the world doesn&#8217;t avail you if you can&#8217;t make that imaginative leap and put yourself in the position of the characters you&#8217;ve created, to imagine what it&#8217;s like to be somebody else.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>I also like his admonition that &#8220;it&#8217;s never your defense as a novelist to say, &#8216;But it&#8217;s true.'&#8221; It ties in nicely with some of what Lethem and Levin talk about, how art creates truth not simply by reproducing reality. The &#8220;but it really happened this way!&#8221; argument is something I heard more than once in my college writing workshops. Fine, but that doesn&#8217;t make it interesting or believable or real.<\/p>\n<p>It seems like <a href=\"http:\/\/www.collegecrier.com\/interviews\/int-0040.asp\" title=\"William Gibson: Sci-Fi Icon Becomes Prophet of the Present\">William Gibson<\/a> agrees:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><strong>TVP<\/strong>: Do you think that from your perspective, reality caught up to science fiction in certain ways? Just by creating so surreal a contemporary landscape that it parallels Sci-Fi?<\/p>\n<p><strong>WG<\/strong>: Well, in a sense, although I think when I started, one of the assumptions that I had was that science fiction is necessarily always about the day in which it was written. And that was my conviction from having read a lot of old science fiction. 19th century science fiction obviously expresses all of the concerns and the neuroses of the 19th century and science fiction from the 1940&#8217;s is the 1940&#8217;s. George Orwell&#8217;s <i>1984<\/i> is really 1948, the year in which he wrote it. It can&#8217;t be about the future. It&#8217;s about where the person who wrote it thought their present was, because you can&#8217;t envision a future without having some sort of conviction, whether you express it or not in the text, about where your present is.<\/p>\n<p>I also started with the assumption that all fiction is speculative. That all fiction is an attempt to make a model of reality and any model of reality is necessarily speculative because it&#8217;s generated by an individual writer. It can&#8217;t be absolute. Fiction is never reality. <font size=\"1\">[<a href=\"http:\/\/gwendabond.typepad.com\/bondgirl\/\" title=\"Gwenda Bond\">via<\/a>]<\/font><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>And now I really must collapse into bed.<\/font><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I recently moved over to a different news aggregator, and I&#8217;ve been sifting through some of the old links I&#8217;ve accumulated over the months. (Yes, months. I have some from about a year ago, not yet read.) Here are a few. Jonathan Lethem and Janna Levin: Lethem: People take it as a given that the &#8230; <a class=\"read-more\" href=\"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/?p=2705\">Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[238],"class_list":["post-2705","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2705"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2705"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2705\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2705"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2705"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.unreality.net\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2705"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}