18 Comments

Wonderfully done, Terry. I wasn't sure what I was in for with a "Special edition" of EoS, but this was a nice surprise. You've taken Silvio's meta post and meta'd the meta!

Expand full comment

😃 thanks very much, Nathan! Glad you enjoyed it. 🙂

Expand full comment

I recently commented on some discussion about how Literary Criticism helps us, the ignorant people, understand literature. Now, reading your brilliant piece, I understand how i am mistaken. I take off my hat to you, professor.

Expand full comment

LOL! Thanks, Larissa :-)

Expand full comment

Terry, this is brilliant. It could very well be a meta sequel to my meta piece. And the title of Jude's novel is intriguing (although I didn't mention one in the piece as I struggled to find a satisfactory one). So much to unpack here. First off, the closing of Yerrett's letter (together with his motto, aequitas super omnia), "the ennui that your no doubt mere handful of readers experience upon perusing each dismal edition cannot fail to be dissipated by my inspiring prose," is just so good. Second, "the text includes 777 lexies and two codes, the proairetic and, of greater importance for the present purpose, the hermeneutic," sounds very serious, almost like a coded sentence -- one of those where you have to put a cardboard stencil on it and read only the words visible in the cutout spaces. Finally, "Given that the structure of the book is reminiscent of that of Calvino’s Invisible Cities, some have accused Jude of plagiarism. However, Jude has successfully argued that, as a member of the Oulipo, it was, rather, Calvino who was at fault because of his anticipatory plagiarism," -- this is so clever! Funny enough (although I know about Oulipo and Calvino), I’ve never read Invisible Cities (it's been on my TBR list forever, though). Anyway, what you've done here is awesome. I really enjoyed it! Thank you, Sir, for constructing this out of my humble piece! :)

Expand full comment

Thanks, Silvio. I shall write a follow-up post explaining some things. For instance, I've planted some Easter eggs in the form of hidden references to a few books, stories and authors, just to prove that I can flannel along with the best of them. Challenge: can you, and other readers, unearth those refere? Also, lexies, and those codes, are real things. That's the art of bovine manure: there has to be enough real stuff to make it all sound plausible 🤣

Of course, the whole thing came about because of your beautifully-written story, so thank YOU.

Expand full comment

Indeed, you shall. As for those Easter eggs, I wish I had the time to unearth them -- I know I’d learn so much in the process. But I’m afraid I can barely keep up with the comments as it is. Thank you again! I’m really looking forward to that follow-up post.

Expand full comment

Tut tut

Expand full comment

within, how far do we go within the Withins?

Good question.

Expand full comment

I ask myself that question a lot 😁

Expand full comment

I suspect Edmund Wilson would have approved of that review- some of his read like that.

Expand full comment

LOL! Thanks, David.

Expand full comment

The Secret Miracle - without reading it ( YET ), I think that it would make a GREAT script / movie. GET CHRISTOPHER WALKEN. ASAP. Or perhaps Benedict Cumberbatch.

P.S. : NO MORE REBOOTS !

Expand full comment

🤣

Expand full comment

I WAS THINKING. IN CHRISTOPHER WALKEN'S. VOICE...... He's been in. So many good. MOVIES, y'know.

Expand full comment

Why are you thinking in someone else's voice?

Expand full comment

It's a weird ability that I have. I think that I sound like John Malkovich. God, he sweats talent !

Expand full comment

Of course! I can see that now. Chortle.

Expand full comment