Anti-Gone was a pretty confusing and frustrating read for me, as it seemed to be for a lot of other people in the class, but I appreciate that it sort of mimicked a drug trip in really inventive, albeit wacky, ways. Something that struck me from class conversation, though, was the notion that Willumsen didn’t fully know (or understand) what he was making when he was constructing the book. On a certain level, I can relate to this — as a creative writer, my thesis turned into much more than I could have expected. And it’s hard to analyze, and sometimes even fully understand, something that you become so close to (in the process of constructing it). People in workshops glean messages from my stories that I may not have initially intended to include or convey. And sometimes people point out themes that I hadn’t fully recognized. This brings me to the question, then — does there have to be, or should we expect there to be, some sort of clear intent from the author/creator to further validate a piece of work?
