Week 2

Gordo: This was bad….

Me: What? Why?

Gordo: You cannot seriously be suggesting that it is either intellectually or morally appropriate to close what purports to be a serious review of a film with a mock interview with its maker enabling you to put words into his mouth so as to reinforce the critique in your own review with an imagined version of its context?

Me: Well look I think it’s fair to say that any reader with a brain would be fully capable of being able to distinguish my review of the film from the satire of American attitudes which follows and which has quite obviously been deliberately exaggerated in order to bring into focus the very limitations of the functionality of that satire.

Gordo: And so what’s this bit supposed to be?

Me: What do you mean?

Gordo: I mean this bit now. Between you and me.

Me: Well this is a satire of that satire and of the satirist who produced it.

Gordo: You mean the smugly self-satisfied and sneering but fundamentally self-hating British Brazilian alcoholic intellectual?

Me: Exactly.

Gordo: And will there be another level where you satirise yourself satirising your own satire?

Me: That is not an easy question to answer. There are simply too many variables.

Gordo: Such as?

Me: I still haven’t got around to watching Game of Thrones yet.

Gordo: What would you say to those who argue that what you are doing here on this website is an oddly insular and therefore meaningless way to engage with art?

Me: Well firstly I would say that it's a lot better than the stuff kids are really into these days. Like Rizzlekicks and...Ace of Base. Secondly this website only showcases one side of my writing.

Gordo: The bit that only 2 people read.

Me: Yes. But it does not speak anything about the other side.

Gordo: The bit that nobody reads.

Me: Exactly. I think much of this side of my writing is actually deceptively ambitious. What I am attempting to achieve defies easy explanation. By using self-referentiality and self-parody in layer upon metafictional layer of context, I am deconstructing the experience of art from both the perspectives of its creator and its consumer in a way which plays like a game of cat and mouse to figure out what I really think.

Gordo: But do you not think that someone who writes a satire of the satire of their own satire is leaving himself open to the allegation that this strand of his work is all essentially a riddle which only he can unlock which renders it somehow pointless?

Me: I think any such allegation would be a lazy one. If anything a satire of your own satire of your own satire would be pointedly pointlessly pointed. Like Loose Women. Look in essence what I am doing with this site is creating another level of reality in my criticism by creating these huge cavernous gaps in the reliability of its narrative. The amount of intellectual work and thought that goes into doing this is massive. This is a difficult undertaking. It is like building a huge hanging bridge without supporting pillars.

Gordo: And what would be your ultimate aim? You talk about these “big gaps” in the narrative reality of your work. Presumably you are trying to make these gaps bigger and bigger….

Me: Exactly. Until the reader is quite simply left with only a blank page.

Gordo: And how do you think that blank page would be received by your two readers? Do you worry that it could quite possibly be misunderstood?

Me: Oh of course. I worry about that all of the time. I can only hope that even though they might not immediately think that a blank page amounts to much, ultimately upon repeated reading they will begin to understand the sheer depth, invention and sophistication that is really involved in my work.

Gordo: Good Luck.

Gordo: Hey, I said. Good Luck….