Comments on: Some Non-Novels (1)

By: georgyriecke

georgyriecke — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:34:04 +0000

I think that ‘new’ was part of it, on which basis you (I use ‘you’ in the broadest sense, naturally, though feel welcome to take it personally) might consider exchanging the word for a perverted form of ‘old’ instead. I put forward something in the region of ‘viexial’ – as in ‘Ciambhal O’Droningham’s latest viexial will be published later this month’

By: Andrew

Andrew — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:37:46 +0000

So summing up, the novel is no longer novel.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:37:06 +0000

The very word ‘novel’ should maybe be looked at more closely by those of us who use the word- which is quite a few of us- though ‘us’ here may be open to question- I mean it in the broadest sense of humanity.
Was a novel first called a novel because it was a new- ‘novel’ form? Now, strangely, the truly novel form needs a word other than ‘novel’ in which to enclose itself. But once other forms began to duplicate the new novel form, the ‘novel’ replacement would no longer be novel.