Az Eszterházy Károly Tanárképző Főiskola Tudományos Közleményei. 2000. [Vol. 6.] Eger Journal of American Studies. (Acta Academiae Paedagogicae Agriensis : Nova series ; Tom. 26)

Book reviews - Judit Ágnes Kádár: Zoltán Abádi-Nagy: Világregény— Regényvilág: Amerikai íróinterjúk (The Novel of the World—The World of the Novel: Conversations with American Writers.)

ami közbül esik. A folyamat. [I write not with the aim of truly reflecting reality. I am a lot more interested in the relationship between me and reality. I am excited about what is in between. The process itself. —Trans, mine] (236) Furthermore, discussion is devoted to the question how the novelist relates himself to the tradition of fiction writing, his forerunners and followers (e.g. 133-4 Gaddis interview, 191-3 Sukenick interview), postmodernism as such (e.g. interview 185 Sukenick) and its subdirections (e.g. surfiction in Federman's notion 215, 218). Abádi-Nagy tends to motivate or even provoke the novelist to make him reflect upon his own theoretical ideas, such as Vonnegut's "bacterium theory" (87), Gaddis's deep interest in alchemy (132-3) and his 'post-psychological novel' (149), Doctorow's cyclic notion of history (163) or his distinction of fact and fiction (167) in his mockdocumentary novels. Occasionally the interviewer facilitates the novelist to come to terms with seemingly controversial concepts (e.g. 91). Sometimes a virtual mirror seems to be held in front of the writers with the help of references to earlier utterances and/or the texts of the novels themselves. Their concepts about literature, philosophy and other fields of life are tested and analyzed thoroughly. The author's own critical views are also implied, for instance in the Percy interview (36-7), where Abádi-Nagy refuses to adopt the traditional periodical classifications of a writer's literary release. As a result, Percy seems to somewhat re-assess a few milestones in his own career (18). At other times there seems to be a minor clash of opinion between the novelist and the interviewer, for example in the Doctorow interview (165, 169). Surely it may derive from their different critical positions, nevertheless, the creative discussion seems to dissolve most of these disputes and both the questions and answers mutually enrich our comprehensive understanding of the novels and novelists, too. There are certain challenges that a literary critic/journalist faces by necessity because of the specific genre of his endeavor. On the one hand, various perspectives and interests are contrasted and claim for being kept in balance. On the other hand, the depth and spectrum of questions depend greatly on the level of knowledge of the anticipated reading public. A further question to consider is: what is the reasonable extent of sticking to pre-elaborated order and selection of questions versus the opportunity of letting some spontaneity work in 212