This page of audio changes with open-ended response embodies the “reader-response” method of criticism. The reader- response method is not as subjective as other forms of criticism, as this method focuses on the act of reading itself and examining the ways individual readers or communities of readers experience texts. Michael Delahoyde, a professor at Wisconisn State University, points out: “Reader-response theory recognizes the reader as an active agent who imparts "real existence" to the work and completes its meaning through interpretation” (Introduction to Literature, online, n. page). My remediation project involves a fresh look at Lish’s adaptations to Carver’s original text, so it only makes sense for my work to endorse a form of criticism that joins the reader and author to construct meaning and understanding. Since Carver’s original work and subsequent edits demonstrate contrasting literary values and styles, the viewer of this website can interpret, dissect, and question the choices and work of both Carver and Lish.
SUGGESTIONS FOR VIEWING THESE PAGES:
Start by picking one of the numbered tabs above to hear audio clips of Carver's original text and then the text with Lish's edits. Feel free to comment on these differences by responding to my posted guiding questions at the bottom of this main page (also at the bottom of each individual page for your reference).
- Introduction
- Removal of Descriptive Passages 1
- Changed, emotionless ending if the Gates story
- Removal of Descriptive Passages 2
- Increased paragraphing, punctuation and fragmentation
- Lexical changes 1
- Lexical Changes 2
- Changed endings
Thank you to Greg Cole and Mike Gagle for volunteering your voices as Raymond Carver and Gordon Lish, respectively.
Each of these sections has a discussion question with it. Please comment on them below!
DISCUSSION, PAGE 1(Refer to page 1 to view accompanying text and audio):
ReplyDeleteWhat is your initial impression of Gordon Lish’s editorial choices? Do Lish’s changes strike you as harmless/ normal, or excessive/ dominating?
DISCUSSION, PAGE 2(Refer to page 2 to view accompanying text and audio):
ReplyDeleteIn Carver’s original text, the Gateses were an elderly coupled. Though they were in a car accident, Carver told their story as an example of real, true love. What struck you the most while listening to the two parts of the Gatses’ story? Why do you suppose Lish took these large sections out of the published text?
DISCUSSION, PAGE 3(Refer to page 3 to view accompanying text and audio):
ReplyDeleteHow did Lish fundamentally change Carver’s original intent concerning the end of the Gates “story within a story?” What is your opinion on Lish’s technique? What do we (the reader audience) miss without this story, or what might it actually add to the overall style of the work?
DISCUSSION, PAGE 4(Refer to page 4 to view accompanying text and audio):
ReplyDeleteIn the final, published version of “What We Talk about When We Talk about Love,” Lish has completely removed the description of Mel’s internal struggle. Does Mel’s struggle matter and/or add depth to the overall theme and purpose of Carver’s work?
DISCUSSION, PAGE 5 (Refer to page 5 to view accompanying text and audio):
ReplyDeleteWhat struck you as you read and heard the two different versions of text? How are edits related to structural issues like paragraphing different from the other editorial moves that Lish makes?
DISCUSSION, PAGE 6 (Refer to page 6 to view accompanying text and audio):
ReplyDeleteWhat is the difference between Carver’s original work and Lish’s edits? Why might Lish choose to “dumb down” Carver’s original work?
DISCUSSION, PAGE 7 (Refer to page 7 to view accompanying text and audio):
ReplyDeleteWhile reading and listening to these two segments, it is important to ask: What is important to the writer/editor in each of these segments? Does Lish stress something more through his lexical changes and vocabulary choices?
DISCUSSION, PAGE 8 (Refer to page 8 to view accompanying text and audio):
ReplyDeleteHow do the endings of Carver and Lish differ? How does Lish’s alternate ending leave you, as a reader, feeling? Are you satisfied?