the empty plenum. david markson's 'wittgenstein's mistress

217

But w h at oth e r ph ilosoph e r h as found th e antidote to illus ion in th e particular and repeated h um ility of rem em be ring and track ing th e us e s of h um ble w ords , look ing ph ilosoph ically as it w e re beneath our fe e t rath e r th an ove r our h e ads?

— S. Cavell

Th ere is nobody at th e w indow in th e painting of th e h ous e , by th e w ay.

I h ave now concluded th at w h at I believed to be a person is a s h adow .

If it is not a s h adow , it is perh aps a curtain.As a m atter of fact it could actually be noth ing

m ore th an an attem pt to im ply depth s , w ith in th e room .

Alth ough in a m anner of speak ing all th at is really in th e w indow is burnt s ienna pigm ent. And som e yellow och re .

In fact th e re is no w indow e ith e r, in th at sam e m anner of speak ing, but only s h ape .

So th at any few s peculations I m ay h ave m ade about th e pe rs on at th e w indow w ould th erefore now appear to be rendered m eaningles s , obviously.

Unles s of cours e I subs e q uently becom e con- vinced th at th e re is som ebody at th e w indow all over again.

I h ave put th at badly.— W ittge ns te in's M is tre s s (54- 55 )

Tell th e m I h ave h ad a w onde rful life .— W ittge ns te in on de ath be d, '51

Th e Em pty Ple num :D avid M ark s on's W ittge ns te in's M is tre s s

CERTAIN NO VELS NO T O NLY cry out for critical inte rpretations but actually try to direct th em . Th is is probably analogous to a piece of m us ic th at both dem ands and define s th e listene r's m ovem ents , s ay lik e a w altz. Fre q uently, too, th os e novels th at direct th e ir ow n critical reading conce rn th em s elve s th em atically w ith w h at w e m igh t cons ider h igh brow or intellectual is sue s —

David Foste r W allace

218 Re vie w of Conte m porary Fiction

s tuff prope r to art, engine e ring, antiq ue lit., ph ilosoph y, etc. Th e s e novels carve out for th em s elve s an inte rstice betw e en flat-out fiction and a sort of w e ird cerebral rom an à cle f. W h en th ey fail, as m y ow n first long th ing did, th e y're pretty dreadful. But w h en th e y succe ed, as I claim David M ark son's W ittge nste in's M istre s s doe s , th e y s e rve th e vital & vanis h ing function of rem inding us of fiction's lim itles s pos s ibilitie s for reach & grasp, for m ak ing h eads th rob h eartlik e , & for sanctifying th e m arriage s of cerebration & em o- tion, abstraction & lived life , transcendent truth -s e e k ing & daily sch lepping, m arriage s th at in our h appy epoch of tech nical occlus ion & ente rtainm ent-m ark eting s e em increas ing consum m atable only in th e im agination. Book s I tend to as s ociate w ith th is INTERPRET-M E ph e nom enon include s tuff lik e Candide , W itold Gom brow icz's Cosm os , H e s s e 's Th e Glas s Be ad Gam e , Sartre 's Naus e a, Cam us 's Strange r. Th e s e five are w ork s of genius of a particular k ind: th e y s h out th e ir genius . M ark son, in W ittge nste in's M istre s s , tends rath e r to w h is pe r, but h is w .o.g.'s no le s s s ucce s s ful; nor— particularly given th e rabid anti- intellectualism of th e contem porary fiction scene — s e em s it any le s s im portant. It's becom e an im portant book to m e , anyw ay. I'd never h eard of th is guy M ark son, before , in '88. And h ave, still, read noth ing els e by h im . I orde re d th e book m ostly becaus e of its epony- m ous title; I lik e to fancy m ys elf a fan of th e w ork of its nam e sak e . Clearly th e book w as/is in som e w ay 'about' W ittgenste in, given th e title . Th is is one of th e w ays an INTERPRET-M E fiction clue s th e critical reade r in on w h at th e book 's to be s e en as on a te rtiary level 'about': th e title : Ulys s e s ' title , its s tructure as O dys s ean/Telem ach ean m ap (succe eds); R . Gold-ste in's Th e M ind-Body Proble m (really te rrible); Cortázar's H opscotch (s ucce eds exactly to th e extent one ignore s th e invitation to h op around in it); Burrough s 's Que e r & Junk ie (fail succe s s fully (?)). W /r/t novels lik e th e s e it's often h ard to s e e th e diffe rence betw e en a title and an epigraph , except for q uotidian facts lik e th e latter's longer, overte r, & attributed. Anoth er w ay to invite a k ind of corre spondence -interpretation is to drop th e nam e of a real person lik e brick s th rough out th e text, as Bruce Duffy doe s in h is so-called fictional biograph y of W ittgenste in, th e execrable 19 88 Th e World as I Found It, in w h ich , de spite loud 'th is - is -m ade -up' dis claim e rs , Duffy brings to bear such an ars enal of h is torical fact and allus ion th at th e critical reade r can't h elp but confus e th e h om os exuality-crazed fictional 'W ittgenste in' w ith th e real and w ay m ore com plex & inte re sting W ittgen- s te in. Anoth e r w ay for a novel to linearize its reading is to m ak e an intellectual s h ibboleth s e rve a repetitive narrative function: eg, in Candide , Panglos s 's continual 'All for th e be st in th e be st of all pos s ible w orlds ' is a neon s ign out front of w h at is , except for its end, little m ore th an a poison- ously funny parody of th e m etaph ys ics of Le ibniz.1

1. . . one th at succum bs to th e h azard of m ost parody and gets th e point of Leibniz's be st-of-all-pos s ible -w orlds stuff w rong, by th e w ay.

219David Foste r Wallace

Kate, th e m onadic narrator of W ittge nste in's M istre s s , gets a lot of h e r m aster's rem ark s w rong, too— th e ph ilosoph er's better-k now n w ords and ideas are sprayed, s k ew ed, all over th e book , from its epigraph about sand to th e Tractatus 's 'Th e w orld is everyth ing th at is th e cas e ' to Inve stigationary speculations on adh e s ive vs . m agnetic 'tape ' th at une q uivocally sum m on th e later W ittgenste in's concerns over w ords ' 'fam ily re s em blance s ' to one anoth er. Contra Voltaire , th ough , w h en M ark son's Kate recalls line s & concepts incorrectly h e r e rrors s e rve th e ends not of funny propaganda but of both original art and original interpretation. Becaus e W ittge nste in's M istre s s ,2 w /r/t its eponym ous m aster, doe s m ore th an just q uote W ittgenste in in w e ird w ays , or allude to h is w ork , or attem pt to be som e sort of dram atization of th e intellectual problem s th at occupie d and oppre s s e d h im . M ark son's book renders , im aginatively & concretely, th e very bleak m ath e m atical w orld W ittgens te in's Tractatus revolutionize d ph ilosoph y by sum m oning via abstract argum ent. W M is , in a w e ird w ay, th e coloriza- tion of a very old film . Th ough W ittgenste in's ph ilosoph ical stuff is far from dead or arid, W M neverth ele s s succe eds at transpos ing W 's intellectual conundra into th e piq uant q ualia of lived— albe it bizarrely lived— experience . Th e novel q uick ens W 's early w ork , give s it a face, for th e reader, th at th e ph ilosoph y doe s not & cannot convey . . . m ostly becaus e W ittgenste in's w ork is so h ard and tak e s so long just to figure out on a literal level th at th e m igranous m ental gym nastics re q uired of h is reader all but q uas h th e dire em otional im plications of W 's early m etaph ys ics . H is m is tre s s , th ough , as k s th e q ue stion h e r m aster in print doe s not: W h at if som ebody really h ad to live in a Tractatus ized w orld?

I don't m ean to sugge st th at M ark son's ach ievem ent h e re cons ists just in m ak ing abstract ph ilosoph y 'acce s s ible ' to an extram ural reade r, or th at W M is in its elf s im ple. Actually, th ough its pros e & m onotone are h aunt- ingly pede strian, th e novel's diffracted system of allus ions to everyth ing from antiq uity to Astroturf are a bitch to trace out; and th e concentric circularity th at re place s linear developm ent as its plot's 'progre s s ion' m ak e s a dige stive reading of W M a ch allenging & protracted affair. M ark -son's is not a pop book , and it's not decocted ph ilosoph y or a Duffy-e s q ue docudram a-of-th e -w e e k . Rath e r, for m e , th e novel doe s artistic & em otional justice to th e politico-eth ical im plications of Ludw ig W ittgenste in's abstract m ath em atical m etaph ys ics , m ak e s w h at is de s igned to be a m ech anism pulse , breath e , suffer, live, etc. In so doing, it pays em otional tribute to a ph ilosoph er w h o by all evidence lived in personal torm ent over th e q ue stions too m any of h is academ ic follow ers h ave m ade into elaborate

2H e reafter abbreviated W M .


em pty exercis e . Th at is , M ark son's W M succe eds in doing w h at few ph ilosoph e rs glean & w h at ne ith e r m yriad biograph ical s k etch e s nor Duffy's lurid revis ionism succe eds in com m unicating: th e cons e q uence s , for persons , of th e practice of th e ory; th e difference , say, betw e en e spous ing 'solips ism ' as a m etaph ys ical 'pos ition' & w ak ing up one fine m orning afte r a personal los s to find your grief apocalyptic, literally m illennial, leaving you th e last and only living th ing on earth , w ith only your h ead, now , for not only com pany but environm ent & w orld, an inclined beach sliding tow ard a dreadful s ea. Put oth erw is e , M ark son's book transcends , for m e , its review -enforced status of 'intellectual tour de force ' or 'experim ental ach ievem ent': w h at it lim ns , as an im m ediate study of depre s s ion & loneline s s , is far too m oving to be th e object of e ith e r exercis e or exorcism . Th e w ays in w h ich th e book is m oving, and th e form al ingenuity by w h ich it transform s m etaph ys ics into angst and so reveals ph ilosoph y as be ing first and last about spirit— th e s e are enough for m e, righ t now , to th ink of th e novel as one of th e U.S. decade 's be st, to deplore its relative neglect & its cons ignm ent by journals lik e th e NYTBR to sm arm y review by a young Carverian.3 But add to th e novel's credits a dark ly pyrotech nic ach ievem ent in th e anim ation of intellectual h istory— th e w ay W M so com pletely dem onstrate s h ow one of th e sm arte st & m ost im portant contributors to m odem th ough t could h ave be en such a personally unh appy son of a bitch — & th e book becom e s , if you're th e im potent unluck y sort w h os e beliefs inform h is stom ach 's daily state, a special k ind of great book , literally profound, and probably de stined, in its & tim e 's fullnes s , to be a q uiet clas s ic.

O ne reason W M w h ispers , as both a k ind of clas s ic & an interpretation-director, is th at its ch arm s & strategem s are very indirect. It's not only a sustained m onologue by a person of gender oppos ite th e auth or's , it is structured h alfw ay betw e en s h aggy-dog jok e and deadly s e rious allegory. A concrete exam ple of h ow th e pros e h e re w ork s appears as th e s econd epigraph s upra. Device s lik e repetition, obs e s s ive return, fre e -/unfre e as sociation sw irl in an uneasy suspens ion th rough out. Yet th ey com m unicate . Th is studied indirection, a sustained error th at practically com pels m ispris ion, is h ow Kate convince s us th at, if s h e is forcene , so m ust w e be : th e subtextual em otive agenda under th e fre ew h e eling disorder of s h ort isolated paragraph s , under th e flit of th ough t, under th e continual struggle against th e slipping sand of Englis h & th e drow ning-pool of s elf-conscious - ne s s — a s eductive order not only in but via ch aos — com pels com plete & uneasy acq uie scence , h e re . Th e tech niq ue rings as true as a song w e can't q uite place . You could call th is tech niq ue 'de ep nons ens e ,' m eaning I gue s s a linguistic flow of strings , strands , loops and q uiffs th at th rough th e very m anner of its form al construction flouts th e ordinary cingula of 's ens e ' and

3viz. Am y H em pel in th e R e vie w 's 22 M ay I9 88 encyclical.


th rough its defiance of s ens e 's lim its m anage s som e h ow to 's h ow ' w h at cannot ordinarily be 'expre s s ed.' Good com edy often functions th e sam e w ay.4 So doe s good advertis ing, today.5 So doe s a surpris ing am ount of good ph ilosoph y. So, usually on a far le s s explicit level th an W M 's , can great fiction.

Th e start of W M h as Kate painting m e s sage s on em pty roads : 'Som ebody is living in th e Louvre,' etc. Th e m e s sage s are for anyone w h o m igh t com e along to s e e . 'Nobody cam e, of cours e . Eventually I stopped leaving th e m e s sage s .' Th e novel's end involves th e us e , not th e m ention,6 of such a m e s sage : 'Som ebody is living on th is beach .' Except us e on w h at & /or w h om ? It's probably not righ t, as I th ink I did s upra, to call th is novel's form a m onologue .7 Kate is typing it. It's w ritten & not spok en. Except it's not lik e a diary or journal. Nor is it a 'letter.' Becaus e of cours e a letter to w h om , if th e re 's no one else at all? Anyw ay, it's s elf-consciously w ritten. I personally h ave grow n w eary of m ost texts th at are narrated s elf-consciously as w ritte n, as 'te xte s .' But W M is different from th e Barth ian/post-Derridean s elf-referential h osts . H e re th e conscious rendition of inditem ent not only rings true but s e rve s e s s ential functions . Kate is not a 'w riter.' By vocation a painter, h e r tim e at th e typew riter is th orough ly & terribly avocational. Sh e is s h outing into h e r typing paper's blank ne s s . H e r m is s ive is a function of ne ed, not art— a k ind of long m e s sage in a big bottle. I ne ed to adm it h e re th at I h ave a w e ird specular stance w ith re spect to th is novel's form as w ritte n. I am som eone w h o trie s to w rite, w h o righ t now m ore & m ore s e em s to ne ed to w rite , daily; and w h o h ope s le s s th at th e products of th at ne ed are lucrative or even lik e d th an s im ply rece ived, read, s e en. And W M , in a de ep-nons ens ical w ay th at's m uch m ore effective th an argum ent or allegory'd be , speak s to w h y I'm starting to th ink m ost people w h o som e - h ow m ust w rite m ust w rite . Th e ne ed to indite , inscribe — be its fulfillm ent exh ilarating or palliative or, as is m ore usual, ne ith e r— springs from th e doubly-bound panic felt by m ost persons w h o spend a lot of tim e up in th e ir ow n personal h eads . O n one s ide — th e s ide a ph ilosoph er'd call 'radically s k eptical' or 'solips istic'— th ere 's th e fe eling th at one 's h ead is , in som e s ens e , th e w h ole w orld, w h en th e im agination becom e s not just a m ore

4cf 'W h o's on First?'5cf Audi's '89 slogan for print adverts : 'It s ets th e standard by ignoring it.'6A distinction of Frege , a W ittgenste in-e ra titan: to m ention a w ord or ph ras e is to

speak about it, w / at least im plicit q uotation m ark s : eg 'Kate' is a four-letter nam e; to us e a w ord or ph ras e is to m ention its referent: eg Kate is , by default, th e m ain ch aracter of W ittge nste in's M istre s s . . .

7Unles s you can em pty your h ead of connotation and translate th e w ord literally from th e Attic Gre e k — th e n it probably h as a M ark s onian poignancy no oth e r term 'd h ave . . .


congenial but a realer environm ent th an th e Big Exterior of life on earth . M ark son's book 's first epigraph , from Kierk egaard's Concluding Unsci- e ntific Postscript, invite s & im pos e s th is first inte rpretation of Kate 's bind & its relation to h e r 'typing.'8 Th e ne ed to get th e w ords & voice s not only out— outs ide th e 16-inch diam eter of bone th at both birth s & im prisons th em — but also dow n, trusting th em ne ith e r to th e insubstantial country of th e m ind nor to th e trans ient venue of cords & air & ear, s e em s for Kate — as for anyone from a Flaubert to a diarist to a letter-fiend— a nece s sary affirm ation of an O uts ide , som e Exterior one 's w ritten record can not only com m unicate w ith but inh abit. Picas so, h ark ing to Velasq uez as doe s M ark son to Kierk egaard & W ittgenste in, did big th ings for th e idea of visual artw ork s as not just 'repre s entations ' but also th ings , objects . . . but I can th ink of no lit.-practitioner (as oppos ed to New -Critical or poststructural th eorist) w h o's captured th e textual urge , th e em otional urgency of text as both s ign and th ing, as perfectly as h as M ark son h e re .9 Th e oth er s ide of th e prenom inate 2-bind— th e s ide rendered explicitly by W M 's opening and close — involves w h y people w h o w rite ne ed to do as a m ode of com m unication. It's w h at an abstractor lik e Laing calls 'ontological ins ecurity'— w h y w e s ign our stuff, im pos e it on friends , m ail it out in brow n m anila trying to get it printed. 'I EXIST,' is th e im pulse th at th robs under m ost voluntary w riting— & all good w riting. And 'I EXIST' w ould h ave be en, in m y ungraceful editorial h ands , th e title of M ark son's novel. But M ark son's final ch oice , far better th an h is w ork ing Ke e pe r of th e Gh osts (de ep but not nons ens ical), is probably bette r th an m ine . Kate 's text, one big m e s s age th at som eone is living on th is beach , is its elf obs e s s ed & alm ost defined by th e pos s ibility th at it doe s not exist, th at Kate doe s not exist. And th e novel's title, if w e reflect a m om ent, s e rve s ends as m uch th em atic as allus ive . W ittgenste in w as gay. H e never h ad a m istre s s .10 H e did, th ough , h ave a teach er and friend, one Bertrand Rus s ell, w h o, w ith h is student's encouragem ent, before th e '20s tras h ed th e Cogito-tautology by w h ich De scarte s h ad relieved 300 years ' w orth of neurotic intellectuals of th e w orrisom e doubt th at th ey existed. Rus s ell pointed out th at th e Cogito's 'I th ink and th erefore am ' is in fact invalid: th e truth of 'I th ink ' entails only th e exis tence of th ink ing, as th e truth of 'I w rite ' yields only th e exis tence of

8Th e ep. is 'W h at an extraordinary ch ange tak e s place . . . w h en for th e first tim e th e fact th at everyth ing depends upon h ow a th ing is th ough t first enters th e consciousne s s , w h en, in cons e q uence , th ough t in its absolutene s s replace s an apparent reality.' . . . from 'Th e Tas k of Becom ing Subjective' in th e Postscript— m aybe w orth noting th at th e form of 'ch ange' in th e Danis h is accusative rath er th an nom inative, & th at w h at M ark son renders as 'extraordinary' appears in som e oth er translations as 'terrible' or 'fearful.'

9 . . . m aybe Beck ett in M olloy. . . .10Too, 'm istre s s ' conveys th e exq uis ite loneline s s of be ing th e linguistic beloved

of a m an w h o could not, in em otional practice , confer identity on a w om an via 'love.'


text. To pos it an 'I' th at's doing th e th ink ing/w riting is to beg th e very q ue stion De scarte s h ad started out im paled on. . . . But so anyw ay, Kate's s ituation in W M is doubly lonely. After h aving spent years 'look ing' for people,11 s h e h as literally w as h ed up on s h ore , now s its nak ed & in m ens e s before a m anual typew riter, producing w ords th at, for h e r & us , render only th e w ords th em s elves 'ontologically s ecure '; th e belief in e ith e r a reader for th em or a (m eta)ph ys ical pre s ence producing th em w ould re q uire a k ind of q uixoticism Kate's long s ince lost or re s igned.

W h at k e eps th e title from be ing cute or overh eavy is th at Kate really is W ittgenste in's m is tre s s , th e gh ostly curator of a w orld of h is tory, artifacts , & m e m orie s — w h ich m em orie s , lik e TV im age s , one can acce s s but never really ow n— and of facts , facts about both th e (form er) w orld and h e r ow n m ental h abits . H e rs is th e affectles s language of fact, and it s e em s le s s lik e by s k ill th an by th e inevitable m iracle of som eth ing th at h ad to be w ritten th at M ark son directs our m ispris ion in orde r to infus e s tatem ents th at all tak e th e form of raw data-transfer12 w ith true & de ep em otional im port.

Kate 's s pare , aph oris tic style , h e r direct & correct q uotation of 'Th e w orld is everyth ing th at is th e cas e ,' and h e r obs e s s ive ne ed to get control of th e facts th at h ave becom e h e r interior & exterior life — all th is stuff directs th e reader to run, not w alk , to Ludw ig W ittgenste in's 19 21 Tractatus Logico-Ph ilosoph icus .13 Th e reason w h y I, w h o am no critic & tend to approach book s I adm ire w ith all th e h e s itancy of th e blind before w alls, fe el I get to as s e rt all th e flat indicative s about Kate 's pligh t above is th at so m uch of W M s o clearly s ends one to th e Tractatus for critical 'clarification.' Th is isn't a w eak ne s s of th e novel. Th ough it's k ind of m iraculous th at it's not. And it doe sn't m ean th at W M is just w ritten 'in th e m argins of' th e Tractatus in th e w ay Candide m arginalize s Th e M onadology or Naus e a s im ply 'dram atize s ' part th re e of L'Être e t le néant. Rath e r W M , if it is any one th ing for m e , is a k ind of ph ilosoph ical sci-fi. Ie , it's an im aginative portrait of w h at it w ould be lik e actually to live in th e sort of w orld th e logic & m eta-ph ys ics of W ittgenste in's Tractatus pos its . Th is s ort of w orld started out, for W ittgenste in, to be logical h eaven. It ends up be ing (I opine) a m eta-ph ys ical h ell; and th e w ay its ph ilosoph ic picture rasped against th e sort of life and w orldview W ittgenste in th e m an th ough t w orth w h ile w as (I claim ) a

11. . . th ough s h e never says w h at's true : th at it w as at first for a particular person, h e r h usband, th en only eventually for just anyone at all. . .

12(data transferred to h e rs elf, or h e r s elf-consciousne s s , or to w h oever m ay com e dow n th e pik e , or to both h e rs elf and som eone else , or to ne ith e r, or m aybe all th at's suppos ed to be left th e re is th e sand of Englis h , aw aiting tide s)

13h e reafter abbreviated Tractatus , and th e e q ually fam ous 19 53 Ph ilosoph ical Inve stigations PI or just th e Inve stigations , as it's k now n in th e industry.


big m otivation for th e disavow al of th e Tractatus repre s ented by h is m aster-w ork , 19 53 's Ph ilosoph ical Inve stigations .14

Bas ically th e Tractatus is th e first real attem pt at exploring th e now trendy relation betw e en language and th e 'reality' it is language's putative function to capture , m ap & repre s ent. Th e Tractatus 's project is Kantian: w h at m ust th e w orld be lik e if language is even to be pos s ible? Th e early W ittgenste in,15 m uch under th e spell of Rus s ell and th e Principia M ath e m atica th at revolu-tionized m odern logic, saw language, lik e m ath , as logic-bas ed; and h e view ed th e paradigm atic function of language as m irroring or 'picturing' th e w orld. From th is latter belief everyth ing in th e Tractatus follow s , just as Kate's ow n fetis h for paintings , m irrors , & th e status of m ental repre s enta-tions lik e m em orie s & as s ociations & pe rceptions form s th e canvas on w h ich h e r m em oir m ust be s k etch e d. Th e W ittgenste in of th e Tractatus ch os e as th e paradigm of language th e truth -functional logic of Rus s ell & W h ite h ead's Principia. H is ch oice m ade practical s ens e , project-w is e : if you're going to try to construe th e w orld from h um an language , you'll be be st off ch oos ing th e m ost perspicuous , precis e type of language available — one faith ful to W ittgenste in's belief th at th e bus ine s s of language is to state facts — as w ell as s electing th e m ost direct & uncontrovers ial relation betw e en a language and its w orld of refe rents . Th e latter, I ite rate & s tre s s , is s im ply th e relation of m irror to m irrored; and th e criterion by w h ich to judge th e perspicuity of a statem ent is entirely & only its fidelity to th at feature of th e w orld it denote s : cf W 's 'Th e statem ent is a picture of th e fact.'16 Now , tech nically, th e Rus s ellian logic th at com pris e s language's Big Picture cons ists all & only of 3 th ings : s im ple logical connective s lik e 'and,' 'or' & 'not'; propos itions or 'statem ents ': & a view of th e s e statem ents as 'atom ic,' m eaning th at th e truth or fals ity of a com plex statem ent lik e 'Ludw ig is affable and Bertrand is w ell-dre s s e d' depends entirely on th e truth value of its constituent atom ic propos itions — th e prenom inate m olecular propos ition is true if & only if it is true th at Ludw ig is friendly and it is true th at Bertrand is dapper. Th e atom ic propos itions th at are language's building block s are , for both Rus s ell and W ittgenste in, 'logically independent' of one anoth er: th ey do not affect one anoth er's truth value s ,

14Eg 'W h at is th e us e of studying ph ilosoph y,' W ittgenste in w rote to a U.S. student w h ile w ork ing on th e Inve stigations in 19 46, 'if all th at it doe s for you is to enable you to talk w ith som e plaus ibility about som e abstrus e q ue stions of logic, etc., and if it doe s not im prove your th ink ing about th e im portant q ue s tions of eve ry-day life?'

15Sch olars tend to sch izofy W ittgenste in, counterpos ing th e 'early' W of th e Tractatus and th e 'late' W of th e Inve stigations , Blue and Brow n Book s , & Ph ilosoph ical Gram m ar.

16See th e Tractatus 2.1512 & .3 & .4; em ph as is supplied.


only th e value s of th os e logical m olecule s in w h ich th e y're conjoined— eg, 'L is ch e e rful or B is w ell-h e eled,' It is not th e cas e th at if B is w ealth y th en L is ch e e rful,' etc. Except h e re 's th e k ick e r: s ince language is th e w orld's 'm irror,' th e w orld is m etaph ys ically com pos ed only & entirely of th os e 'facts ' th at statem ents in th e language stand for. In oth e r w ords — th e w ords of th e Tractatus 's first & forem ost line — th e w orld is everyth ing th at is th e cas e; th e w orld is noth ing but a h uge m as s of data, of logically discrete facts th at h ave no intrins ic connection to one anoth er. Cf th e Tractatus 1.2: 'Th e w orld falls apart into facts . . .' 1.2.1 'Any one [fact] can e ith e r be th e cas e , or not be th e cas e , and everyth ing else rem ains th e sam e .'

T. Pynch on, w h o h as done in lite rature for paranoia w h at Säch e r-M asoch did for w h ips , argue s in h is Gravity's Rainbow for w h y th e paranoid delus ion of com plete & m alevolent connection, w h ack o & unpleasant th ough it be , is prefe rable at least to its oppos ite — th e conviction th at noth ing is connected to anyth ing else & th at noth ing h as anyth ing intrin-s ically to do w ith you. Pleas e s e e th at th is Pynch onian contraparanoia w ould be th e appropriate m etaph ys ic for any re s ident of th e sort of w orld th e Tractatus de scribe s . And M ark son's Kate live s in just such a w orld, w h ile h e r objectles s epistle 'm irrors ' it perfectly, m anage s to capture th e psych ic flavor both of solips ism and of W ittgenste in in th e s im ple & affectles s but surreal pros e & s h ort aph oristic paragraph s th at are also so distinctive of th e Tractatus . Kate's textual obs e s s ion is s im ply to find connections betw e en th ings ,17 any strands th at bind th e h istorical facts & em pirical data th at are all h er w orld com pris e s . And alw ays — nece s sarily— genuine connections elude h e r. All s h e can find is an occas ional synch ronicity: th e fact th at certain nam e s are s im ilar enough to be rich ly confus ing— W illiam Gaddis and Taddeo Gaddi, for exam ple — or th at certain live s & events h appened to overlap in space & tim e . And even th e s e fairly th in connections turn out not to be 'real,' feature s only of h e r im agination; and even th e s e are noneth ele s s is olate , lock ed into th em s elve s by th e ir s tatus as fact. W h en Kate recalls, for exam ple, th at Rem brandt suffered bank ruptcy & Spinoza excom -m unication, & th at, given biograph ical data, th e ir path s m ay w ell h ave inters ected at som e point in th e Am sterdam of th e 1650s , th e only encounter s h e can even im agine betw e en th em is :

'I'm sorry about your bank ruptcy, Rem brandt.''I'm sorry about your excom m unication, Spinoza.'

Th e bas ic argum ent-th rust h e re is th at M ark son, by draw ing on a definitive atom istic m etaph ys ics & transfiguring it into art, h as ach ieved som eth ing

17th is connection-urge m ore fundam ental and scary th an th e h um anistic syrup of H ow ards End's 'Only conne ct': th e latter refers to relations betw e en persons , th e form er to th e pos s ibility of any extracranial univers e at all. . .


lik e th e definitive anti-m elodram a. H e h as m ade facts sad. For Kate's existence its elf is th at of an atom ic fact, h e r loneline s s m etaph ys ically ultim ate . H e r w orld is 'em pty' of all but data th at are lik e th e h ole s in a reticular pattern, both defined & im prisoned by th e epistem ic strands s h e k now s only s h e can w eave . And w eave s h e doe s , constantly, unable to stop, s elf-consciously m im ick ing Penelope of th e Attic antiq uity th at obs e s s e s h e r. But Kate — unlik e Ulys s e s ' legit m istre s s — is pow erle s s e ith e r to k nit intrins ic pattern into or to dism antle w h at h e r m ind h as fabricated. Sh e ends up, in th is re spect, not Penelope but both Clytem ne stra & Agam em non; th e Clytem ne stra w h om Kate de scribe s as k illing Agam em non 'after h e r ow n grief,' th e Agam em non 'at h is bath , ensnared in th at net and be ing stabbed th rough it.' And s ince no th ings pre s e nt connect e ith e r w ith each oth er or w ith h e r, Kate's m em orial project in W M is s ens ible & inevitable even as it re inforce s th e occluded solips is m th at is h e r pligh t. Via h e r m em orial project, Kate m ak e s 'exte rnal' h is tory h e r ow n. Ie rew rite s it as pe rsonal. Eats it, as m ad van Gogh 'tried to eat h is ow n pigm ents .' It is not accidental th at M ark son's novel opens w ith th e Genetic prepos itional 'In th e beginning. . . .' It is ne ith e r colorful tic nor auth orial pretens ion th at th e narrator's 'irreverent m editations ' range from clas s ical prosody to Dutch oils to Baroq ue q uartets to 19 th -century French Realism to post-Astroturf bas eball. It is not an accident (th ough it is an allus ion) th at Kate h as a fetis h for fe eding th e w arp & w oof of tragic h istory into fire s — s h e is th e final h is torian, its tragedian and de structor, crem ating each page of H e rodotus (th e 1st h istorian!) as s h e reads it. Nor is it cute or casual th at s h e fe els 'as if I h ave be en appointed th e curator of all th e w orld...,' living in m us eum s and placing h e r ow n paintings next to m aste rw ork s . Th e curator's job— to recall, ch oos e , arrange : to im pos e order & only so com m unicate m eaning— is m arvelously synecdoch ic of th e life of th e solips ist, of th e survival strat-egie s appos ite one 's existence as m onad in a w orld of diffracted fact.

Except a big q ue stion: w h e nce facts , if th e w orld is em pty?

Dalk ey Arch ive Pre s s 's jack et copy for W M de scribe s th e solips ism of th e M istre s s as 'obviously a m etaph or for ultim ate loneline s s .' And Kate is inde ed aw fully lonely, th ough h e r ingenuous announcem ents — 'Generally, even th en, I w as lonely'— are le s s effective by far th an th e de ep-nons ens ical facts via w h ich s h e com m unicate s is olation's m eaning— 'O ne of th os e th ings people generally adm ired about Rubens , even if th ey w ere not alw ays aw are of it, w as th e w ay everybody in h is paintings w as alw ays touch ing everybody els e '; 'Later today I w ill pos s ibly m asturbate '; 'Pascal . . . refus -ing to s it on a ch air w ith out an additional ch air at e ith e r s ide of h im , so as not to fall into space .' Th ough for m e th e m ost affecting rendition of h e r s ituation is Kate's funnysad de scriptions of trying to play tennis w ith out a


partner,18 probably th e m ost fecund sym bols of Kate's dam nation to a w orld logically atom ized in its reflective relation to language as bare data-transfer concern th e narrator's obs e s s ion, m arvelously Am erican, w ith property & eas em ents & h ous e s . Th e follow ing excerpt is condens ed:

I do not believe I h ave ever m entioned th e oth er h ous e .W h at I m ay h ave m entioned are h ous e s in general, along th e beach , but such a

generalization w ould not h ave included th is h ous e , th is h ous e [unlik e Kate's ow n] be ing now h ere near th e w ater.

All one can s e e of it from [m y] upper rear w indow is a corner of its roof. . . . O nce I did becom e aw are of it, I unde rstood th at th e re w ould also h ave to be a

road leading to it from som ew h e re , of cours e .Yet for th e life of m e I w as not able to locate th e road, and for th e longe st tim e . . . .In any cas e m y failure to locate th e road eventually began to becom e a w h olly new

sort of perplexity in m y existence . (88-89 )

It's of cours e tem pting, given th e book 's critical im pos ition of W ittgenste in as referent & m odel & lover, to read Kate's loneline s s as its elf an intellectual m etaph or, as just a function of th e radical s k epticism th e Tractatus 's logical atom ism its elf im agine s . Becaus e , again, w h ence and w h e refore th e all-im portant 'facts ' w h ich , for both W ittgenste in & Kate, th e w orld 'falls apart into'19 but doe s not com pris e? Are facts — genuine existents — intrins ic to th e Exterior? adm itting of countenance only via th e frailtie s of s ens e -data & in-duction? O r, w ay w ors e , are th ey not perh aps pervers ely deductive, products of th e very h ead th at countenances th em as Exterior facts & as such genuinely ontic? Th is latter pos s ibility— if internalized, really believed— is a track th at m ak e s stops at s k epticism & th en solips ism before h eading straigh t into in-sanity. It's th e latter pos s ibility th at inform s th e neurasth enia of De scarte s 's M e ditations & so birth s m odern ph ilosoph y (and w ith it th e distinctively m odern 'alienation' of th e individual from all w h oles both natural & social). Kate flirts w ith th is Carte s ian nigh tm are repeatedly, as in:

W h at h appened afte r I started to w rite about Ach ille s w as th at h alfw ay th rough th e s entence I began to th ink about a cat, instead.20

Th e cat I began to th ink about instead w as th e cat outs ide of th e brok en w indow in

18plus continual reference to bunch e s of tennis balls bouncing all over th e place m ade m e realize tennis balls are about th e be st m acroscopic sym bol th ere is for th e flux of atom istic fact. . .

19 Tractatus 1.220Since I can't find any m ore graceful place to stick it in, let m e invite you, w ith

th is line as exem plar, to s e e anoth er cool form al h orizon-expans ion M ark son effects in W M — th e m ode of pre s entation is le s s 'stream of consciousne s s ' th an 'stream of conscious utte rance '; M ark son's tech niq ue h e re s h are s th e as sociative q ualitie s of Joycean s .o.c. but differs in be ing 'dire cte d'; at w h at or w h om it's directed becom e s th e novel's im plicit, or anti-, plot, & accounts for a 'narrative m ovem ent' th at's le s s linear or even circular th an spiral.


th e room next to th is one , at w h ich th e tape fre q uently scratch e s w h en th e re is a bre eze .

W h ich is to say th at I w as not actually th ink ing about a cat e ith e r, th e re be ing no cat except insofar as th e sound of scratch ing rem inds m e of one .

As th e re w ere no coins on th e floor of Rem brandt's studio, except insofar as th e configuration of th e pigm ent rem inded Rem brandt of th em . (62)

Th e th ing is th at th e painted coins th at fooled Rem brandt, & R em brandt, & Ach ille s , too, are all just lik e 'th e cat' h e re : M ark son's narrator h as noth ing left e xce pt 'sounds of scratch ing'— ie m em ory & im agination & th e Englis h language — w ith w h ich to construct any sort of Exterior. Its flux is th at of Kate's ow n h ead; w h y it re s ists order or population is attributable to th e very de speration w ith w h ich Kate trie s to order & populate it: h e r s earch 's fevered path os ensure s dis satisfaction. Note th at by page 63, after th e s h ine of m etaph ys ical scrupulousne s s h as faded, Kate goe s back to talk -ing about th e unreal cat as 'real.' Th e big em otional th ing is th at, w h eth e r h e r treatm ent of linguistic constructs as existents is out of touch w ith reality or s im ply an inevitable re spons e to th e novel's reality, th e solips istic nature of th at reality, as far as Kate 's conce rne d, rem ains unch anged. A double -bind to m ak e Kierk egaard, Sh ak e speare & W ittgenste in all proud.

Still, as I read & appreciate W M , m ore is at stak e for Kate in countenancing th e pos s ibility th at h e r ow n 'errors ' are all th at k e ep th e w orld extant th an q ue stions of m etaph ys ics or even of m adne s s . Kate's pretty sanguine about th e pos s ibility of insanity— jok e s about h aving be en m ad, before , at tim e s , 'tim e s out of m ind.' Actually, w h at are finally at stak e h e re s e em to be is sue s of eth ics , of guilt & re spons ibility. O ne of th e th ings th at putatively so tortured W ittgenste in in th e tw enty years betw e en th e Tractatus and th e Inve stigations w as th at a logically atom istic m etaph ys ics adm its exactly noth ing of eth ics or m oral value or q ue stions about w h at it is to be h um an. It's h istory th at W ittgenste in th e person cared about w h at m ade th ings good or righ t or w orth w h ile . H e did th ings lik e volunteer for th e Austrian infantry in 19 18 w h en h e could & s h ould h ave 4F'd out, lik e give h is h uge personal inh e ritance aw ay to people (R ilk e am ong th em ). A deadly s e rious ascetic, W ittgenste in lived h is adult life in bare room s devoid of even a lam p or coccyx-neutral ch air. But it w as no accident th at th e Tractatus , very m uch th e product of th e s am e Vienna th at birth e d '. . .tw o of th e m ost pow e rful and sym ptom atic m ovem ents of m odern culture : psych oanalys is and atonal m us ic, both voice s th at speak of th e h om ele s sne s s of m odern m an,'21 never-th ele s s its elf birth e d th e Vienna Circle & th e ph ilosoph ical sch ool of Logical Pos itivism th e Circle prom ulgated: a central tenet of Pos itivism be ing th at th e only utterances th at m ade any s ens e at all w ere th e w ell-form ed

21See W illiam Barrett, 'W ittgenste in th e Pilgrim ,' in Th e Illus ion of Te ch nique , Doubleday '78.


data-transferring propos itions of science , th us th at cons iderations of 'value' such as th os e of eth ics or ae sth etics or norm ative pre scription w ere really just a confus ed m is h m as h of scientific obs e rvation & em otive utterance, such th at saying 'Killing is not righ t' really am ounts just to saying 'Killing: YUCK!' Th e fact th at th e m etaph ys ics of th e Tractatus not only couldn't tak e account of but pretty m uch denied th e coh erent pos s ibility of th ings lik e eth ics , value s , spirituality & re spons ibility h ad th e re sult th at 'W ittgenste in, th is clear-h eaded & intellectually h one st m an, w as h opele s sly at odds w ith h im s elf.'22 For W ittgenste in w as a q ue er sort of ascetic. H e did deny h is body & starve h is s ens e s — except not, as w ith m ost m onk is h personalitie s , s im ply to enjoy a cons e q uent nouris h m ent of th e spirit. H is big th ing s e em s to h ave be en denying h is s e lf by denying, th rough h is e s says at ph ilo-soph ical truth , th e th ings m ost im portant to h im . H e never actually w rote anyth ing about th e exq uis ite tens ions betw een atom ism & attendant solips ism on th e one h and & distinctively h um an value s & q ualitie s on th e oth er. But, s e e , th is is e xactly w h at M ark son doe s in W M ; and in th is w ay M ark son's novel succeeds in speak ing w h e re W ittgenste in is m ute , w eaving Kate's obs e s s ion w ith re s pons ibility (for th e w orld's em ptine s s ) gorgeously into th e ch aracter's m andala of cerebral conundrum & spiritual poverty.

O f th e m any specular vantage s W M dem ands , Kate's central identification w ith th e 'fact' of h istorical personage is w ith H elen of Troy/H isarlik — th e Face Th at Launch ed 1000 Sh ips & th e body th at lay be h ind th e Trojan War's im pre s s ive casualty-count.23 And th e ve h icle for th is identification w ith H elen is a distinctively fem ale s ens e of 're spons ibility': lik e th e Iliad's H elen, Kate is h aunted by th e pas s ive s ens e th at 'everyth ing is h e r fault.' And Kate's repeated attem pts at defending H elen against th e ch arge of instigating exactly w h at em ptied Ionia of m en h ave a com puls ive & s h rill ins istence about th em th at be speak too m uch prote sting:

I h ave alw ays h arbored s ince re doubts th at H elen w as th e caus e of th at w ar, by th e w ay.

A s ingle Spartan girl, after all.As a m atte r of fact th e w h ole th ing w as undeniably a m e rcantile propos ition. All

ten years of it,24 just to s e e w h o w ould pay tariff to w h om , so as to be able to m ak e use

22Dr. Jam e s D. Wallace, unpublis h ed re spons e to h is son's crie s for h elp w ith W ittge nste in's M istre s s & Tractatus Logico-Ph ilosoph icus .

23Also true th at Kate identifie s clos ely w ith Penelope, Clytem ne stra, Eve, Agem em non, & particularly Cas sandra, th e m ad proph ete s s w h o w arned about arm ed m en ins ide em pty gifts . But I'm th ink ing Cas sandra's im portance is m ore a function of Kate's s e lf-consciousne s s about h e r ow n identification w ith H elen and fem inine culpability, about w h ich m ore below .

24(th e sam e period of tim e Kate spent travers ing th e ancient & m odern em pty w orlds , flopping in m us eum s and 'look ing' for people)


of a ch annel of w ater. . . .Still, I find it extraordinary th at young m en died th e re in a w ar th at long ago, and

th en died in th e sam e place th re e th ousand years after th at. (59 , cf 8-9 , 22)

Is sue s orbiting H elen & fem ininity & guilt m ark a sort of trans ition in th is novel & its reading. H ave I yet m entioned th at a notable feature of W ittge n-ste in's M istre s s , m ale -w ritten, is th at th e novel's com pos ed entirely of th e w ords of a fem ale ch aracter? And it is in term s of gender & auth enticity, I th ink , th at M ark son's book becom e s at once least perfect & m ost intere sting. M ost 19 88is h . M ost im portant as not just a literary transpos ition of a ph ilosoph ic pos ition but also a transcendence of rece ived doctrine . H e re D e scarte s & Kant & W ittgenste in ceas e be ing overt critical touch stone s and becom e springboards for a flaw ed, m oving m editation on loneline s s , language & gender.

Se e , H om e r's H elen is 'guilty' finally not becaus e of anyth ing s h e 's done but becaus e of w h o s h e is , h ow s h e appears , w h at s h e look s lik e; becaus e of th e effect s h e h as , h orm onally/em otionally, on m en w h o're ready to k ill & die over w h at th ey're m ade to fe el. Kate, lik e H elen, is h aunted by an unspok en but oppre s s ive s ens e th at '. . .everyth ing is h e r [ow n] fault.' W h at everyth ing? H ow close is s h e to th e H elen s h e invok e s?25 W ell, first off, it's easy to s e e h ow radical s k epticism — Descarte s 's h ell & Kate's ve stibule — yields at once om nipotence & m oral oppre s s ion. If Th e World is entirely a function of Facts th at not only re s ide in but h ail from one 's ow n h ead, one is just as Re spons ible for th at w orld as is a m oth er for h e r ch ild, or h e rs elf. Th is s e em s straigh tforw ard. But w h at's le s s clear & w ay rich e r is th e peculiar slant th is om nire spons ibility tak e s w h en th e re s pons ible m onad in q ue stion is h istorically pas s ive , per- & conce ived as an object and not a subject— ie w h en one is a w om an, one w h o can effect ch ange & cataclysm not as an agent but m erely as a perce ived entity . . . perce ived by h istorically active te stosteroids w h os e glands pos itively gus h w ith agency. To be an object of de s ire (by h irsute ch aracters), speculation (by h irsute auth or), one s elf th e 'product' of m ale h eads & s h afts is to be alm ost Clas s ically fem inized, le s s Eve th an H elen, 're spons ible' w ith out fre edom to ch oos e , act, or forebear. Th e [m y] te rribly blank et as sum ption is th at rece ived W e ste rn pe rceptions of w om en as m oral agents divide into th os e of H ellenic & th os e of Evian (Eve -is h ) re spons ibility; th e claim I can support is th at M ark son, de spite h is w orst intentions , m anage s to trium ph over 400 years of post-M iltonic tradi-tion and to pre s ent th e H ellenic as th e m ore poignant— certainly m ore appos ite — s ituation of w om en in any system w h e re appearance rem ains a 'picture ' or 'm ap' of ontology. Th is pre s e ntation s e e m s ne ith e r pre - nor

25Evidently pretty close for readers : over h alf th e review ers of W M m isnam ed th e narrator H elen.


post-fem inist: it's just darned im aginative, ingenious even; and as such — de spite som e failure s of auth orial vis ion & nerve — flie s or falls on its ow n m erits .

Th e degre e of succe s s w ith w h ich M ark son h as h e re rendered th e voice & psych e & predicam ent of a fem ale, post-Pos itivist or oth erw is e , is a vexed is sue . Som e of th e fiction I try to w rite is in fem inine voice , and I cons ider m ys elf s ens itive to th e tech nical/political problem s involved in 'cros s -w riting,' and I found th e fem ale persona h e re com pelling & real. Som e fem ale readers on w h om I've foisted W M report finding it le s s so. Th ey objected not so m uch to th e voice & s yntax (both of w h ich are great in W M in a w ay I can't dem onstrate except by q uoting lik e 20 page s verbatim ) as to som e of th e balder w ays M ark son goe s about continually re m inding th e reader th at Kate is a w om an. Th e constant reference s to Kate's m ens e s , for exam ple, w ere cited as clunk y. M enstruation doe s com e up a lot, & for reasons th at rem ain narratively obscure; and if it isn't a clunk y allus ion to Pas s ion or m artyrdom th en it's an e q ually clunk y (becaus e both unsubtle & otios e) rem inder of gender: ye s , w om en are persons w h os e vaginas regu-larly bleed, but repeating & dw elling on it rem inds one of bad science fiction w h e re aliens are m ak ing continual reference to cranial antennae th at, w ere th ey & th e narrative voice truly alien/alien-em path ic, w ould be as unq ue s -tioned & q uotidian a fact of life as ears or nos e s or h air.26 Personally I'm neutral on th e m enstruation point. W h at I'm negative on is th e particular strategy M ark son som etim e s em ploys to try to explain Kate's 'fem ale' fe el-ings both of ultim ate guilt & of ultim ate loneline s s . Th e re alistic or ch aracte r-bas e d explanation is not, th ank God, just th at Kate 's be en left in th e em otional lurch by all sorts of objectifying m en, ps ych ic abandone rs w h o range from h e r h us band (variously nam ed by h e r Sim on or Terry or som etim e s Adam ) to h e r final lover, univocally called Lucien. Th e proffered explanation is rath er th at, back in th e h alcyon pre -Fall days w h en th e w orld w as h um anly populated, Kate betrayed h e r h usband w ith oth er m en, & th at subs e q uently h e r little boy (variously Sim on or, gulp, again Adam ) died, in M exico, pos s ibly of m eningitis , & th at th en h e r h usband left h e r, about ten years ago, 'tim e out of m ind,' at th e sam e psych oh istorical point at w h ich Kate's w orld em ptied and th e diasporic q ue st for anyone else

26Th is is not m y analogy, but I can't th ink of a better one , even th ough th is isn't all th at good; but I s e e th e point & trust you do— it's one of th os e alarm -bell is sue s w h e re th e narrative voice is clearly com m unicating to a reader w h ile pretending not to, as in dialogue lik e 'Lord, Cragm ont, th e verm ilion of your M OTH ER tattoo is look ing even m ore lurid against th e dead-w h ite of your prison pallor now th at th e circulation's returned to th e legs you sm as h ed trying to outrun a 74-car grain train in Decatur IL th at balm y yet som e h ow also ch ill nigh t in 19 79 '— clunk y' is about th e be st analys is for stuff lik e th is .


alive in th e w orld at all com m enced, a s earch th at led Kate to th e em pty beach w h e re s h e now re s ide s & declaim s to no one . H e r betrayals & h e r son's death & h usband's departure — alluded to over & over, albe it coyly— are th e Evian diagnos is of h e r transgre s s ion & m etaph ys ical dam nation; th ey're pre s ented, w ith an ins istence im pos s ible to ignore , as Kate's Fall27 acros s gender, a Fall from th e grace s of a com m unity in w h ich s h e is both agent & object28 into a post-Rom antic, W ittgenste inian w orld of utter subjectivity & path ological re spons ibility, into th e particular intellectual/ em otional/m oral isolation a 19 88 U.S. reader as sociate s w ith m e n, m ales alienated via agency from an Exterior w e h ave to objectify, us e up, burn th e page s of in order to rem ain subjects , ontologically s ecure in s h ield & s h aft. All th is stuff I find fecund & com pelling, a pregnant m arriage of Attic & Ch ristian reductions of w om en. But th e death of h e r son & s eparation from h e r h usband are also in W M pre s ented as a very particular em otional 'explanation' of Kate 's ps ych ic 'condition,' a peculiar re duction of M ark -son's ow n to w h ich I k ind of object. Th e pre s entation of personal h story as pre s ent explanation, one th at th reatens to m ak e W M just anoth e r m adw om an m onologue in th e O ph elia– Rh ys tradition, is obliq ue & ever artful, but still prom inent & ins istent enough to m ak e it h ard [for m e] to blink its intent:

Pos s ibly [I w as not m ad] before th at. [W h en I w ent south ] To vis it at th e grave of a ch ild I h ad lost . . . nam ed Adam .

W h y h ave I w ritten th at h is nam e w as Adam ?Sim on is w h at m y little boy w as nam ed.Tim e out of m ind. M eaning th at one can even m om entarily forget th e nam e of

one 's only ch ild, w h o w ould be th irty by now ? (9 )

27cf in th is re spect:

After h e k new th at h e h ad fallen, outw ards and dow n, aw ay from th e Full- ne s s , h e tried to rem em ber w h at th e Fullnes s h ad be en. . . .

H e did rem em ber, but found h e w as s ile nt, and could not te ll oth e rs .H e w anted to tell oth ers th at s h e leapt farth e st forw ard and fell into a Pas s ion

apart from h is e m brace .Sh e w as in great agony, and w ould h ave be en sw allow ed up by th e sw e etne s s ,

h ad s h e not reach ed a lim it, and stopped.But th e Pas s ion w e nt on w ith out h e r, and pas s e d be yond th e lim it.Som etim e s h e th ough t h e w as about to speak , but th e s ile nce continue d.H e w is h ed to say: stre ngth le s s and fe m ale fruit.

— w /em ph as is s upplied, from Valentinus 's AD 19 9 Ple rom a, part of th e Neo-Platonic Gnosticism th at functions as a m etaph ys ical counterpoint to th e anti-idealism of th e Tractatus , & s ignals nicely M ark son's artistic am bivalence about w h eth e r Kate's bind is ultim ately H ellenic or Evian.

28th is com m unity be ing noth ing oth er th an s exual society as lim ned by th e m ales w h o w rote scripture & epic, th e s e m ales th em s elves interpreted & transfigured by M ark son. . .


As a m atter of fact I believe it w as w h en I w ent back to M exico, th at I [ge s soed a blank canvas & th en stared at it for a long tim e & th en burned it]. In th e h ous e w h e re I h ad once lived w ith Sim on, and w ith Adam .

I am bas ically pos itive th at m y h usband [Sim on/Terry] w as nam ed Adam . (24)

Th ere is no longer any problem in regard to m y h usband's nam e, by th e w ay. Even if I never saw h im again, once w e s eparated after Sim on died. (52)

Alth ough probably I did leave out th is part before , about h aving tak en lovers w h en I w as still Adam 's w ife . (225)

I'm told Sh iite w om en w alk sw addled & ve iled in deference to th e ir re spons ibility to be invis ible & so k e ep poor barely-k e eping-it-togeth e r m ales from be ing m addened by exposure to fair s exuality. I find in W M th e sam e com plex & scary blend of H ellenic & Evian m isogyny— H elen e s s entially guilty as object & Eve guilty as subject, tem ptre s s . Th ough I personally find th e H ellenic com ponent m ore intere sting & a better eas e -m ent into contem porary politics , I find M ark son's vacillation betw e en th e tw o m odels narratively justified & psych ologically neat. It is w h en, th ough , h e s e em s to s ettle on th e Evian as both ch aracter-arch etype & narrative explanation— as th e argum ent traced s upra & beyond indicate s — th at h is W ittge nste in's M istre s s becom e s m ost conventional as fiction. It is h e re , too, th at for m e th e novel falters tech nically by betraying its auth orial pre s ence as th orough ly m ale, outs ide Kate & /or w om anh ood gene rally. As in m ost cutting-edge experim ental fictions , too, th is tech nical flaw s e riously attenuate s th e th em atics . It s e em s very intere sting to m e th at M ark son h as created a Kate w h o dw ells so convincingly in a h ell of utter subjectivity, yet cannot, finally, h im s elf h elp but objectify h e r— ie by 'explaining' h e r m eta-ph ys ical condition as em otional/psych ical, reducing h e r bottled m is s ive to a m ad m onologue by a sm art w om an driven m ad by th e cons e q uence s of culpable s exual agency, M ark son is bas ically subsum ing Kate under one of th e com paratively stock rubrics via w h ich w e guys apparently m ust organize & proce s s fey m yste ry, fem inine path os , Strength le s s & Fem ale fruit. Kate's Fall, ostens ibly one into th e gh astly spiritual m anife station of a m asculinely logic-bound tw entieth -century m etaph ys ic, becom e s , under a h ars h reading, little m ore th an a(n inevitable?) stum ble into alienation from th e h e roine 's role — h e r s elf— as m oth er, w ife , lover, be love d. Under th is reading, Kate's em pty solips ism doe s not get to becom e a k ind of grim independence from objectification: Kate h as rath er s im ply exch anged th e role of real w ife of real m an for th e part of nonexistent m istre s s of an absolute genius of objectification29 indispos ed tow ard h eteros exual union. And I found it w e ird th at m any of th e fem ale reade rs w h o dis approved th ings lik e W M 's m enstruation-cue s as 'ringing false ' neverth ele s s approved

29 'Th e w orld is everyth ing th at is th e cas e . Th e w orld falls apart into facts .'


M ark son's provis ion of Kate's ostens ible 'm otivation,' h e re . Th ough I'm com ing to accept th at it's th e petrifiedly standard critical line w /r/t fiction th e s e U.S. days : reade rs w ant storie s about very particular pe rsons w ith very particular q ualitie s in very particular circum stance s w h os e gene s is m ust on som e level be personally-h istoric & psych ological as w ell as 'm erely' intellectual or political or spiritual, pan-h um an. Th e 'succe s sful' story 'transcends ' its th orough going individuality/idiosyncracy by subsum -ing th e peculiaritie s of ch aracter & circum stance to certain broad arch etype s & m yth ope iae inh e rited from Jung or Sh ak e speare or H om er or Freud or Sk inner or Te stam ent. Particularity birth s form ; fam iliarity bre eds content. Rarely is our uncritical inh e ritance of early W ittgenste inian & Logical Pos itivist m odels so obvious as in our academ ic & ae sth etic prejudice th at succe s sful fiction enclose s rath er th an opens up, organize s facts rath er th an underm ine s th em , diagnos e s rath er th an genuflects . Attic m yth s w ere , ye s , form s of 'explanation.' But it's no accident th at great m yth os w as m oth ered by th e sam e culture th at birth ed great h istory— or th at Kate divide s h e r reading- & burning-tim e betw e en clas s ical tragedie s & h istorie s . To th e extent th at m yth enrich e s facts & h istory, it s e rve s a Pos itivist & factual function. But th e U.S.'s ow n experience w ith m yth -m ak ing & m yth -w ors h ip — from Was h ington & ch e rrie s to Jack son & h ick ory to Lincoln & logs to dim e novels & W e st as w om b & s oul's th eatre to etc., etc. to Pre sley & Dean & M onroe & Wayne & Reagan— an experience th at inform s & infects th e very ph ys ics of reading, today— confirm s th at m yth is finally com pelling only in its oppos ition to h istory & data & th e cingulum of Just Th e Facts , M a'am . O nly in th at oppos ition can story enrich & transfigure & transcend explanation. Kate 's idios yncratic/form ulaic 'real' past in W M is n't w eak as an explanation; it is for m e w eak & disappointing be caus e it's an explana-tion. Just as it w ould h ave be en w eak & disappointing to h ave 'explained' & particularized Kate's fe elings of isolation & im prisonm ent, not via th e idea th at th e typing h ands s h e h olds out in s earch of com m union form th e very barrie r betw e en Self & World th ey're trying to puncture , but, say, by plunk -ing h e r dow n via s h ipw re ck on a de s e rte d island á la TV's Gilligan or Golding's flylord s ch oolboys or th e Police 's top-40 'M e s s age in a Bottle.'

I'm struggling to m ak e clear, I th ink , th at it's its ow n m asculinely prejudiced im perfection th at illum inate s h ow im portant & am bitious W M is as an expe rim ental piece of late -'80s lite rature . As a w ould-be w rite r I lik e h ow th e novel inverts rece ived form ulae for succe s s ful fiction by succe eding least w h e re it conform s to th em m ost: to th e precis e extent th at Kate is pre s ented h e re as circum stantially & h is torically uniq ue , to just th at extent is th e novel's m onstrous pow er attenuated. It's w h en Kate is le ast particular, least 'm otivated' by som e artfully pre s ented but standardly dige stible Evian/Valentinian/post-Freudian traum a, th at h e r ch aracte r & pligh t are


m ost e - & affecting. For (obvious th o th is s e em s) to th e extent th at Kate is not m otivationally uniq ue , s h e can be all of us , and th e em pty diffraction of Kate 's w orld can m ap or picture th e de sacralized & paradoxical solips is m of U.S. pe rsons in a cattle -h e rd culture th at w ors h ips only th e Transparent I, of guiltily pas s ive solips ists & s k eptics trying to w arm soft h ands at th e com pute r-enh anced fire of data in an Inform ation Age w h e re rece ived im age & enforced e ros replace active countenance or sacral m yste ry as ends , value, m eaning. Etc. Th e fam iliar bitch & m oan th at M ark son's novel prom is e s & com e s clos e to transfiguring, dram atizing, m yth ologizing via bland bald fact.

I th ink finally th e reason I object to W M 's attem pt to give Kate 's loneline s s a particular 'm otivation' via rece ived fem inine traum a is th at it's just unnece s sary. For M ark son h as in th is book succe eded already on all th e really im portant levels of fictional conviction. H e h as fles h ed th e abstract s k etch e s of W ittgenste inian doctrine into th e concrete th eatre of h um an loneline s s . In so doing h e 's captured far better th an ps eudobiograph y w h at m ade W ittgenste in a tragic figure & a victim of th e very diffracted m odernity h e h elped inaugurate . M ark son h as w ritten an erudite , breath -tak ingly cerebral novel w h os e pros e is crystal & w h os e voice rivets & w h os e conclus ion defie s you not to cry. Plus h e 's also, in a w ay it'd s e em for all th e w orld h e doe sn't k now , produced a pow erfully critical m editation on lone -line s s 's relation to language its elf.

Th ough of cours e any w riter's real m otivations are forever occult & objects of at be st lucid im agining, it's safe to point out th at th e post-atom ist m eta-ph ys ical peripety th at is L. W ittgenste in's late Ph ilosoph ical Inve stigations articulate s ph ilosoph ical concerns & as sum ptions so different from th os e of th e early Tractatus th at th e PI am ounts to le s s a renunciation th an a k ind of infanticide -by-bludgeon. For M ark sonian purpos e s , th e th re e im portant blunt instrum ents , near-diurnal difference s betw e en 'early' & 'late' W itt-genste in, all concern W 's enduring obs e s s ion w ith language - & -reality q ue stions . O ne . PI now tak e s as paradigm atic of th e language w ith w h ich ph ilosoph ers ough t to be concerned not th e ideal abstraction of m ath -logic, rath er now just ordinary day-to-day language in all its general w ooline s s & ch arm .30 Tw o. Th e PI's W ittgenste in expends m uch energy & ink arguing against th e idea of w h at's be en called 'private language .' Th is term is th e Pragm atist W illiam Jam e s 's , w h om W ., not an enem y to w elcom e , accus e d of look ing forever 'for th e artich ok e am ongst its leaves .' But PI's concern to s h ow th e im pos s ibility of private language (w h ich it doe s , pretty m uch ) is also a terrible anxiety to avoid th e solips istic cons e q uence s of m ath em atical

30Very cool elaborations on th is sort of m ove are obs e rvable in J. L. Austin's H ow To Do Th ings w ith Words & Stanley Cavell's 'M ust W e M ean W h at W e Say?'


logic as language -paradigm . Recall th at th e truth -functional sch em ata of m ath -logic & th e discrete facts th e sch em ata picture exist independent of speak e rs , k now ers , & m ost of all liste ne rs . PI's ins istence — as part of th e book 's m ovem ent aw ay from w h at th e w orld m ust be lik e for language to be pos s ible & tow ard w h at language m ust be lik e given th e w ay th e w orld in all its babble & ch arm & de ep nons ens e actually is — th at th e existence , nay th e very ide a of language depends on som e sort of com m unicative com -m unity31 ... th is is about th e m ost pow erful ph ilosoph ical attack on s k eptic-/ solips ism 's bas ic coh erence s ince th e De scarte s w h os e Cogito W ittgenste in h ad h elped to s k ew er. Th re e . Th e final big difference is a new & clinical focus on th e near-Nixonian trick ine s s of ordinary language its elf. A tenet of th e PI is th at profound ph ilosoph ical stuff can be accom plis h ed via figuring out w h y linguistic constructions get us ed as th ey are , & th at m any/m ost e rrors of 'm etaph ys ics ' or 'e pis te m ology' de rive from academ ics ' & h um ans ' susceptibility to language's ph arm ak opia of trick s & deceptions & creations . Late W ittgenste in is full of great exam ples of h ow persons are constantly succum bing to th e m etaph ys ical 'bew itch m ent' of ordinary lan-guage . Getting lost in it. Eg, locutions lik e 'th e flow of tim e ' create a k ind of ontological UH F-gh ost, s educe us into som e h ow s e e ing tim e its elf as lik e a river, one not just 'flow ing' but doing so som e h ow external to us , outs ide th e th ings & ch ange s of w h ich tim e is really just th e m easure .32 O r th e ordinary predicate s gam e and rules , attach ed s im ultaneously to, eg, jack s & gin rum m y & softball & Olym piade , trick us into a specious Platonic universal-ism in w h ich th e re is som e transcendentally existent feature com m on to every m em ber of th e extens ions of 'gam e' or 'rule' in virtue of w h ich every m em ber is a 'gam e' or a 'rule,' rath er th an th e fluid w eb of 'fam ily re s em -blance s '33 th at, for W ittgenste in, perfectly justifie s th e attach m ent of apparently univocal predicate s as noth ing m ore or le s s th an a type of h um an be h avior— rath er, th at is , th an any sort of transcendental reality-m apping. W ittgenste in, by life 's end, conce ived m eaningful h um an brain-activity (ie ph ilosoph y) as exactly & noth ing m ore th an '. . a battle against th e bew itch m ent of our intelligence by m eans of language' (PI 1, 109 ). Th e PI h olds th at persons m ust or at any rate do live in a sort of linguistic dream , aw as h & enm e s h ed in ordinary language & th e deceptive 'm etaph ys ics ' linguistic usage & com m unication am ong persons im pos e s . . . or costs .

31cf PI I, 23. . .32Tach yons & causality violations & th e Supe rpos ition Principle all com plicate

W 's point q uite a bit, and actually th ere 's very intere sting stuff starting to appear in industry m ags about de ep affinitie s betw e en ordinary-language tem poral locutions & cutting-edge q uantum m odels . . . but anyw ay you get th e idea.

33th e fam ous & infam ous Fam ilie nah änlich k e ite n (no k idding)— cf Th e Blue Book 17 & 87 & 124 or Ph ilosoph ical Gram m ar 75 or PI I, 67. For e q ually fam ous stuff on gam e s & rules s e e PI I, 65-88.


Th e above sum m ary is pretty crude .

But, actually, so, on th e surface, is W ittge nste in's M istre s s 's us e & recon-stitution of th e PI's s em inal new perspective . M uch of th e overt m aster/ m istre s s relation h e re again involves re s em blance -as -allus ion [s ic]. Line s in th e novel lik e 'Upstairs , one can s e e th e ocean. Dow n h e re th e re are dune s , w h ich obstruct one 's view ' are conscious ech oe s of th e PI's 'A ph ilosoph ical problem h as th e form : "I don't k now m y w ay about."'34 Also h eavily allus ive (som etim e s just plain h eavy) are Kate's prolonged m us ings on th e ontological status of nam ed th ings : s h e (as w ould w e all) still refers to th e h ous e s h e burned dow n as a h ous e , but s h e k e eps w ondering in w h at w ay a de stroyed h ous e is still a 'h ous e ,' except in virtue of language -h abits from tim e out of m ind. O r, eg, s h e w onders about q ue stions lik e 'W h ere is th e painting w h en it is in m y h ead instead of on th e w all?' & w h eth e r, w ere let's say no copie s of Anna Kare nina still extant (unburned) anyw h ere , th e book w ould still be called Anna Kare nina. O r m arvels at facts lik e 'O ne can drive th rough any num ber of tow ns w ith out k now ing th e nam e s of th e tow ns .'

A little of th is narcis s istic ech oing goe s a long w ay, and M ark son is som e -tim e s tire s om e , allus ively, on th e s urface . Again, th ough , th e m is tre s s lik e th e m aste r invite s you/m e dow n: w h at's ponde rous on th e first pas s opens up later. It's tos s -offs lik e th e last just above th at are m ost intere sting as invitations , le s s allus ions to a genius th an gauzy prefigure s of M ark son's ow n m editations about & around som e of th e th em e s dom inant in PI. W h at first strik e s one as h eavy or ponderous refine s its elf after tim e into a fragile note of re s ignation— ie w eltsch m erz as oppos ed to naiveté or h ubris — in m ost of Kate's speculations on th e w ay a nam e tends to 'create ' an object or attribute35; albe it on th e oth er h and a tw inge of envy w h enever s h e counte -nance s th e pos s ibility of th ings existing w ith out be ing nam ed or subjected to predication. W h y th is battle occupie s Kate & engage s th e reade r h as partly to do w ith th e actual eth ical pain th at w e m ay as sum e filled th e long s ilence be tw e e n th e Tractatus & PI, but it's also attributable to an original &

34PI I, 123, a profound little offering m eaning rough ly to point out th at w e are now & forever 'dow n h e re ' in language, ins ide it, on ground-level, & th us h ave no better a view of th e Big Picture th an som eone earth bound in contrast to som eone aloft w h o can look dow n at th e earth bound guy & th e terrain around h im , discerning patterns against back drops of oth er bigger patterns , s e e ing th em as patte rns of som e th ing large r instead of as th e -bound m an's terrain, m aze , w orld, total. . .

35note in pas s ing th at th em e s of nom ination-as -enfranch is em ent, pre s ence -as -privilege , also run th rough m uch of th e fem inist th eory w ith w h ich th is novel's auth or reveals h im s elf fam iliar. . .


de eply sm art exploration by M ark son of som eth ing th at m igh t be called 'th e fem inization of s k epticism .'

W h ich is probably a bad term to start th row ing around in th is late inning, s ince it re q uire s definitions & so on; th is is already pretty long.

But recall to th is abstraction's am bit prenom inate stuff about H elen & Eve & Cas sandra & th e Tractatus , plus th e longly discus s ed s econd h alf of th e double bind th at cingulize s solips ism : radical doubt about not only th e existence of objects but of s ubje ct, s elf. Kate's text, ack now ledged w ith in its elf as w riting, is a de sperate attem pt to recreate & so anim ate a w orld by nam ing it. Th e attem pt's de speration underlie s h e r near-path ologic obs e s - s ion w ith nam e s — of persons , personage s , figure s , book s , s ym ph onie s , battle s , tow ns & roads — and it accounts for w h at M ark son com m unicate s so w ell via repetition & tone : Kate's extrem e ups et w h en s h e can't rem em -be r— 's um m on,' 'recall'— nam e s w ell enough to m ak e th em be h ave . And h e r attem pts at ontology-th ru-nom ination are a m oving s ynecdoch e of pretty m uch th e w h ole h istory of intellectual endeavor in th e w h itely m ale W e st. Sh e , no le s s th an w as W ittgenste in, or Kant, or De scarte s , or H e rodotus , is w riting a w orld. Th e ingenious poignancy of M ark son's ach ievem ent h e re is th at Kate 's m ode rnly fem ale vantage , in conspiracy w ith th e very de speration th at underlie s h e r attem pt at w orldm ak ing,36 renders h e r project doubly doom ed. Doom 1 is w h at's evok ed on surface : s k epticism & solips ism . Ie , th at th e re is no 'w orld' to s e e its elf m irrored in Kate 's text is unh appy enough ; but in W M , Kate 's m em oir its e lf is 'w ritten in sand,' its elf subject to th e 'deterioration'37 & dry rot th at is such a dom inant recurring im age in th e loops of recollection & as s em bly h e re .

I'm going to s h ut up righ t after I m ak e th is idea clear. I'm pretty sure W itt-ge nste in's M istre s s is an im perfect book . Que stions of voice , over-allus ion, & 'explanation' get to be pus h e d as ide , th ough , becaus e of th e novel's te rrific em otional & political/fictional & th eoretical ach ievem ent: it evok e s a truth a w h ole lot of book s & e s s ays be fore it h ave fum ble d around: (at least) for th e m odern fem ale — viz th e fem ale w h o understands h e rs elf as both fem ale & m odern— both s ide s of th e solips istic bind:

36ie , s h e 's doing it for m ental survival, not for intere st or acclaim or tenure . . .37I k e ep w aiting for fem inist th eorists to start talk ing about de te rioration as a

textual ph enom enon; it w ould be th e sort of w ry jok e th at capture s truth s : 'deteriora-tion' is e s s entially 'deconstruction' m ade pas s ive , obs e rved rath e r th an pe rform ed, th e reader th e ultim ate 'abs ente e ' in th e post-structural totem of abs ence : one of th e th ings Kate 's s tory unpack s is th e te rrific pow e r of w rite r-as -w itne s s , utte rly pas s ive, unh eard: it m igh t be th is , m ore th an w h at's argued in m y final paragraph , th at's s k epticism 's fem inist vis h na.


If I exist, noth ing exists outs ide m eBut

If som eth ing exists outs ide m e , I do not exist38

am ount to th e sam e th ing— dam nation to gh ostline s s am ong gh osts , curating a plenum of statue s , m istak ing ech oe s for voice s . And, too, h e re both binds force on th e subject just w h at h e r ow n dram atic predicam ent force s on Kate : a k ind of parodic m asculinization, one in w h ich th e Rom antic Que st for th e Abs ent O bject, a de s ire for attainm ent w /r/t w h ich unattainability is th at de s ire 's breath & bread, replace s an ability to be -in-th e -w orld as ne ith e r center nor ciph e r, ne ith e r all-re spons ible nor im potent, part of one great big Fam ily Lik ene s s . M ark son's Kate 's s udden los s of inte re st in roads once s h e 's found th em & in data once s h e 's 'm astered' (!!) it is just as clunk y & im perfect & h um an & real as , say, Stendh al's rus h to w ind up Ch arte rh ous e th e m inute Fabrizio finally nails Clelia. . . . And Kate's valuation, finally, only of w h at's unsaid, unread— burning page s once s h e 's read th em , jet-tisoning fam ily once s h e 's 're spons ible' for th em ; probably even fueling h e r epistle w ith th e doom ed/delicious k now ledge th at it's h eaded tow ard noth ing— sum m ons perfectly, again, th e terrible & m oving final pre scription of th e m aster's Tractatus . Th is , loos ely translated, is 'Anybody w h o understands w h at I'm saying eventually recognize s th at it's nons ens e , once h e 's us ed w h at I'm saying— rath er lik e steps — to clim b up past w h at I'm saying— h e m ust, th at is , th row aw ay th e ladder after h e 's us ed it.'39 Th is pas sage , lik e m ost of W, is only indirectly about w h at it's really about. It w h is pe rs & plays . It's really about th e plenitude of em ptine s s , th e im portance of s ilence in term s of spe ech . M ark son nails th is idea (from m y m ale p.o.v.); Kate 's m onograph h as th e q uality of spe ech le s sne s s in a dream , th e cold m utene s s urgency enforce s , a psych ic stutter. If it's true h e r ladde r goe s noplace , it's also true nobody's going to th row e ith e r book aw ay.

38I w on't w aste anybody's tim e s h outing about w h at a m arvelous invers ion of th e Cogito & O ntological Argum ent th is is .

39 Tractatus 6.54

Re vie w of Conte m porary Fiction29 4

CAROL BOOTH O LSON directs th e Univers ity of California-Irvine W riting Project. Sh e h as w ritten tw o book s on com pos ition and critical th ink ing.

SUSAN PO Z NAR is com pleting h e r Ph .D. in Englis h at North Carolina State Univers ity.

ILAN STAVANS is a M exican w rite r w h o teach e s at Colum bia Unive rs ity and at City Unive rs ity of New York . H e is th e auth or of th e novel Talia y e l cie lo and a collection of fictitious book review s , and is currently as s em bling an anth ology of Jew is h -Latin Am erican fiction.

EVELIN E. SULLIVAN publis h e d h e r first novel, Th e D e ad M agician, last year. Sh e teach e s tech nical w riting at Stanford Univers ity.

JO SEPH TABBI h as re cently publis h e d article s on W illiam Gaddis in M ode rn Fiction Studie s and Am e rican Note s & Que rie s . Th is fall h e joins th e faculty of M arq uette Univers ity.

DAVID FO STER W ALLACE is th e auth or of Th e Broom of th e Sys te m (a novel) and Girl w ith Curious H air (s h ort fiction).

STEVEN W EISENBURGER is th e auth or of A "Gravity's Rainbow " Com - panion and num erous articles on Am erican fiction, and h as recently com pleted a book on satire . H e teach e s at th e Univers ity of Kentuck y.

LESLIE H . W H ITTEN, JR ., a form er syndicated journalist, is th e auth or of s everal novels , m ost recently Th e Lost D isciple . H e h as also publis h e d poetry and translations of Baudelaire .

H EIDI Z IEGLER teach e s Am e rican lite rature at th e Univers ity of Stuttgart. Sh e is th e auth or of a m onograph on Joh n Barth and edited th e innovative anth ology Facing Te xts : Encounte rs be tw e e n Conte m porary W rite rs and Critics .

the empty plenum. david markson's 'wittgenstein's mistress

Documents