Critical Mass asks: “It seems like people constantly mistake your fictional voice from your real life identity. Has this chased you since The New York Trilogy?” Auster says, “I was fascinated with the idea that you have a book, and you have the name on the cover: it’s the author’s name. Now, who is it talking to you? Is it the person or is it an authorial voice?” Read on
In my experience, Auster is precisely right. Even when you write as yourself, you’re striking a pose, playing a role.
I read a piece recently where the author was condemning chaucer (of all people) for one of his tales. He attributed the opinions in the story with chaucer. (In my opinion completely confusing the author and the tale.)
Ah, but isn’t there a difference between acknowledging authors “play a role” when they compose and thinking they are not being themselves?
I understand not giving an author a hard time for, say, a plot point or some dialogue that could not reflect his or her own personal views, but barring a first person narration by an in-story character, don’t most third person perspectives in a book reflect the views of the author?
I mean, I understand striking a pose to do the writing thing — I do it too, it helps with confidence and consistency — but I tend to assume that narratives are genuine reflections of the author’s opinions. (Again, barring dialogue or obvious character narration.)
Not saying a book couldn’t be written otherwise, but how weird would it be for me to, say, write a novel as a Buddhist author or something?
—
Phil, as always, thanks for the Auster highlight!