Towards a Theory of Eccentricity — Page 9:
41 All literary texts stand in certain relations to the world outside themselves, just as people do. They relate, for example, to other texts, synchronically as well as diachronically. From a synchronic perspective, a work is written in a specific time with specific literary standards concerning major topics and writing-styles. Literary texts also establish diachronic connections, for example by taking up and modifying an already existing story or by taking on certain traditions. Furthermore, and most crucially, a literary text has a relation to the reader; it usually wants to communicate in a manner that is meaningful, i.e. it wants to build up a communicative frame in which communication is purposefully directed at an interlocutor, here a reader, whose response is relevant within the frame of communication.
42 I suggest that we understand an eccentric text as standing in the same kind of relation to others – readers and other texts – as eccentrics do to the outside world:
(1) Eccentric texts have as their only valid point of reference themselves.
(2) They remain indifferent with regard to all kinds of relations to others; they do not adopt the topics and writing-styles which are considered to be of a certain value in their time.
(3) Although eccentric texts might allude to other texts, it remains – as a consequence of their indifference – impossible to tell for what purpose they do this.
(4) Eccentric texts also remain indifferent with regard to the reader: in this respect, they do not comply with basic rules of communication or the transmission of a message.
43 All of these four features remain quite general and it would need much more time to spell them out in more detail. However, this list results from our examination of the word “eccentric” used in everyday language and the way it has to do with our fundamental way of existence. Therefore the overall form of the features of eccentric texts should not come as a surprise. This list is in no way intended to give a full account of what constitutes an eccentric text. Rather, it is supposed to supply us with the relevant coordinates to help us further develop such a theory.
44 The fourth point seems to convey the fundamental feature of eccentric texts: they remain indifferent with regard to the reader and in this sense refuse to communicate in a manner that is “meaningful.” What I am concerned with here is the peculiarity of eccentric texts that they seem to refuse to give a definite – or even an indefinite – answer as to what the story is about. Their remaining indifferent towards the reader may evoke on the reader’s side the same kind of reactions as the eccentric person does in non-eccentrics: they may trouble the reader in a way that she distances herself from the text by labelling it “eccentric,” or they may exert an attraction on the reader which leads to further examination of the text (as, admittedly, is the case with myself).
45 This indifference towards the reader is what I take to be the explanation for the specific discomforting feeling we experience after having read an eccentric text because we cannot answer the question “what is this story all about?” Since this is a fundamental question we may want an answer to when reading any kind of literature, we are – at first – disappointed and regard the text as strange. However, if we want to appreciate the peculiarity of an eccentric text (which, of course, presupposes that we recognize it as such), we have to regard our dissatisfied response as an essential feature of such texts, rooted in their indifference towards anything apart from themselves.