(no subject)

[kradeelav]

[”EF: Could we talk about the direct address to the reader in the footnotes? As an example, in the foreword you write, “Even if I were saying—hypothetically speaking— that this is a code, they will never be able to read it. There are some things you can only see through tears.“ These moments felt like a space of cruising—like winks or nudges—where all these intimate meanings and feelings are subtly negotiated between the text and trans readers. Those parts of the book made us feel really held.

JR: Those lines were like rope ladders thrown into a void, hoping that someone would climb them. It was hard for me not to write a book that contained many kinds of codes or secret tunnels for people. So, direct address was one part of that, but then, also, I didn’t want to do too much of that kind of direct address, because the effect of intimacy was something I was in large part hoping to generate through the structure and movement of the narrative, so that a reader would keep reading and get caught up in plot. On that level I’m very traditional: I think the most libidinal, most intimate thing you can give to a reader is allowing them to get caught up in plot. Maybe this goes back to what I was saying about reading/being-read-to as an S-M dynamic. I’m just trying to be a good top.”]

— a conversation with jordy rosenberg