Tuesday I posted about which books I’m currently soaking up – one of which was Alan Moore’s Writing for Comics. I personally found it to be one of the most holistic guides on the how to craft a satisfying story.
With that being my introduction (I’ve never actually read Watchmen) my interest was piqued enough to look for any and all interviews with Alan Moore.
Turns out he refers to himself a Magician.
Sure, ok, it sounds peak crunchy, but he actually unpacks that term in such an unexpectedly nuanced way! It really reframed a couple of my perceptions about the arts in a manner I found incredibly helpful. I actually got quite a bit from this podcast interview (continued here).
Clarice Lispector, man… Moore defines magic as the manipulation of consciousness, and well, that quite neatly explains the mystical-ghost-in-the-spooky-machine-feeling Lispector conjures up, man. Just – wow.
She’s creating a hallucination in my head where I’m suddenly aware 1) that I have no way of proving (for certain) other people are conscious (solipsism); and 2) I think it’s because she’s transcribing thoughts in a way that is simultaneous familiar (hey! that’s how I sound!) and so goddamn new to me – because I’ve never read someone’s experience of consciousness in this type of stream-of-consciousness style.
Reading her first book Near to the Wild Heart has set several events into motion:
- About a third of the way into the book, I’m beyond curious about her work – to the point that I’m very seriously thinking about learning to read in Brazilian Portuguese so I can get more direct, unfiltered access to her writing. (But first, I need to finish German to decent level lol!)
- This is the first writer I’ve encountered who maps out her experience of consciousness in a way that makes me reflect on my own experience of consciousness – it’s almost like, when thinking about AI you have to reflect and compare it to human intelligence to get a handleon the subject? With Lispector she’s presenting consciousness in a way that makes the reader reflect on their own, which I’m not sure Joyce or Woolf achieved? Right?
- These concepts of consciousness can’t yet be proven by science, and therefore feels HUGELY mystical. Basically, it’s Arthur C. Clarks third law:
Garland really got my attention with Ex Machina – which again, deals with tech that we have a hard time keeping separate from magic. It’s just sci-fi at this point, right?
That’s about as much as I’ll say without spoiling anything. I had to rewatch it, because when I binged it earlier in 2020 it was a bit too overwhelming considering the uncertainty around COVID. A global pandemic combined with this (soundscape; performances by Nick Offerman and Alison Pill!; but also, the actual content) was INTENSELY unnerving. Great thinky-thriller for Halloween 2020!
Again, if y’all are keen on the weekly newsletter (3 Drawings Walk into an Email) sign up below: