So with the conclusion of November comes reflection, as well as the pleasure of saying that the full piece is now up online: “The Faun of Rome: A Romance”, by Oscar Wilde edited by Nate Maturin.
This November has been one of the most productive #AcWriMo/#NaNoWriMo’s I’ve had, I think in part because it was a combination of the two. Having those two styles of work to complete, when I got tired of plotting or figuring out what people were going to say, I could turn to finding references and connections. I always work best when I have multiple projects on the go, so this was a good combination for me.
The last few days were a little bit of a rush because, after finishing the novel itself, there were all of that paratextual elements to put together, and then of course all of the mark-up for putting each page on Scalar. I didn’t regret reverting back to Scalar 1 for a second. In fact, I’m really glad that I did. Still, though, publishing each page was a laborious process, and if I were to do a similar project again for web, I would probably write in a different application, rather than Scrivener, which is better suited to producing PDFs or the research stages of a project.
One of the things that I didn’t get time to do during November itself was produce a map of Rome, and Tuscany, based on the trips, meeting places, and homes that are mentioned in the novel. I think it would be an interesting visualisation, particularly within the city itself, to show where characters are pushed together and where they are able to find free space for themselves. I’m looking forward to doing this when I get a chance, as I’d like to keep improving the piece.
Finally, although I had some good fun producing matching Voyant visualisations for the two corpuses, they actually threw up some points that I would address if I were to redraft the novel. There wasn’t enough clear water between the two text’s use of proper names, for example. Any updating or editing will probably include addressing some of these points.
This experience threw up for me the question of how conscious authors are of the interpretive mechanisms that are going to be brought to bear on their works. When writing this piece, I had half an eye to the question, “What would an educated reader be excited by here?” Some of the answers were, “Echoes of later works”, and “Stylistic tics”, and I am curious about how much that sort of thinking affects writers more broadly. Although of course a writer is always thinking of the reader and how they might respond to the words on the page, never before when I’ve been writing have I been so conscious at a micro level of how each decision, semi-colon or period, alliteration, chiasmus, etc., etc., might be interpreted.
I’m going to give myself a few weeks now, and then I plan to re-read everything with only my academic head on!