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.)

critical interview in this regards provides an exciting opportunity for the reader to expand his/her scope of literary works and artists, quite similar to reading an autobiography, like in this case Vonnegut's Fates Worse Than Death: An Autobiographical Collage of the 1980s (1991). As for another approach, Abádi-Nagy addresses critical points of investigation related to some fictional characters in the given novelist's texts in a way that the writer's own view and motivations in the creation of a certain protagonist enrich the range of possible interpretations that might have been previously hidden from the reader's eyes, as the example of the Vonnegut interview presents. All the six interviews present some significant similarities. Firstly, the novelists share more or less the belief that the text stands on its own feet, i.e. there is no need to keep adding explanatory remarks to enable the reader to appreciate them, to enjoy the process of reading that all of them consider as an essential part of the creative process (e.g. 121). Secondly, they are largely disinterested in traditional contextual critical approaches and evaluations, such as reader response and reception theory (e.g. 122-3) or 'cerebral criticism' (188) and populist criticism (200). They are reluctant to give utmost relevance to the impact of the critical environment of their works, or at least tend to differentiate between relevant and irrelevant ideas. Moreover, they seem to dislike being pigeon-holed, for instance the interviewer's tricky reoccurring question, i.e. how would the novelist label his own writing, occasionally stimulates equally tricky answers like that of Gaddis: ask the same question ten years from today (154). Furthermore, they are even less interested in the extent their texts are reader friendly, easy to digest intellectually (Gaddis interview 155). All of the interviewed novelists restrict themselves in order to avoid the pitfalls of philosophical/ moral/ critical overkill (e.g. Doctorow interview 178). Thirdly, they are all often presented as nonmainstream, experimental and elitist but in fact they demand an active role of the reader "creative reading" (Gaddis interview 154), therefore they are non-populists but rather look forward to the birth of a new consciously critical reading public, as stated by Sukenick (192). Another shared feature is their dislike of pretence of any sorts, for instance Sukenick admits the lack of a systematic knowledge working behind his texts (208) as well as the preference of leaving the analytical intellectual discourse behind for the sake of focusing on the 214