Man-t-t-t-tisssa

Although I am still working through Mantissa, I must say that I find it very confusing, entertaining, and fruit salad of critical theory. I mean maybe I am just stupid, but when people mention theories from months ago, I am lost and am not sure I could even define Liberal Humanism without referencing notes or having to reread a chapter or two of Barry. My brain is complete mush by now; I have blinders on and the only thing I see is my senior seminar paper staring me in the face; well, I see the 40+ pages I have to collectively write before the end of November. Oh Joy!!Okay, it is a known fact that Mantissa is an allegory of the creative process and within the novel there are many references to critical theory. However, the part I grapple with most is authorship.

Although Foucault, Bathes, and many others believe the author is dead, he is very much alive in Mantissa. I am having a hard time separating the idea of the author being dead when he is staring straight back at in Mantissa. I mean really, there he is, living, breathing, and fornicating on practically every page.

Mantissa calls into question authorship and inspiration in many ways. Derrida, Barthes, and Foucault believe that the author is completely separate from his/her text. However, I feel as though Mantissa offers a different perspective. The premise of the novel is to release Miles from his writers block through divine inspiration. However, I find it quite clever Erato’s play on authorship starting on page 170.

Erato begins to tell Miles about a book she wrote under a pseudonym. The book was entitled “Men, Will They Ever Grow Up?” However, the book’s real title is revealed as Homer’s Odyssey. Now we all know that Erato did not write the novel, since Erato is a muse (a fictional character in this book and probably a fictional thing in real life) we know that she had nothing to do with it.

Erato said, “Darling, you mustn’t feel jealous just because my one clumsy little attempt at writing has become a kind of a fluke best-seller” After Erato speaks, Miles continues to rant on about how the Odyssey could only have been written by a man because of its genius.
Now, I am not going to go through a quote about two pages of dialogue, you all can go read pages 170-174. However, I think that this passage is not only sexist, it is exemplary of the author function. Does it really matter who wrote the Odyssey?

Barthes said, “To give a text an Author is to impose a limit on that text, to finish it with a final
signified, to close the writing.” Miles implication that the author does matter really strays away from theory.

Maybe I have Mantissa all wrong. I know it incorporates all of these theories; however, I feel like the absurdity of this novel discredits theory and makes it post-theory. If the author is dead, why is Miles/Fowles such a prominent figure in this novel?

I think this is all I have for now. I know there are a million and one other theories present in Mantissa... I can't wait to read other thoughts and deconstructions!

Any comments?