The previous section, written by Virginia Woolf, contains a suggestion that I find attractive. "The reader it is to be hoped will not give a thought to the book's method or to the book's lack of method. He is concerned only with the the effect of the book as a whole on his mind." [p. 12]

This reminds me of a similar point made by Tim Winton while discussing his novel Cloudstreet. The study of Literature has turned into an exercise in analysis rather than the enjoyment of a story and its effect on the reader.

I agree with the last sentence. It is the same with a school classroom. There are many, often too many, individual minds in the room, each with its own history and personality. Each moment has a myriad of different perceptions with both a cognitive and an affective component.

This reminds me very much of Proust and his novel that reflects on the effect the aroma of a madeleine has on his memory. I also recall reading somewhere that Woolf was impressed with Proust's writing.

Making these notes makes me wonder if I will ever finish this book. The book becomes a catalyst for making notes and soon recedes into the background. How to find the balance. I think the problem has been that we put too high a premium on remaining focused, that we must finish the book and not be distracted by other thoughts. I think a case can be made for letting a book act as a catalyst for other thoughts. This would not be analysis, but personal reaction. There is a tendency to think that such an activity might be more authentic, but that is a delusion. One can just as easily 'play the game' with this as with analysis.

I love this. There have been many occassions in my university life where I have listened to a colleague and wondered how one might deflate the ego of the speaker. This may have been the appropriate comment to make in Mrs. Dalloway's time, but I doubt that many would get its significance today. Sad.

I have now read this little story 3 times, and each time I notice something new. Of course.

The mark of a "good" story, for me, is how often it makes me think. Thus it is an interaction of the book with me. And this is all that is relevant for me to make that judgement. And if a similar judgement is made by many others, then that same label may become attached to the writer. Or I may attach the label to the writer as well. Thus, for me, Virginia Woolf is a good writer, although as soon as I write this I realize that "good" is far too weak an adjective. But I am not making the judgement because of a careful analysis of the structure of the story or of the crafting of the language. I am making the judgement because of its impact on me.

The above paragraph is the direct result of creating this web page. It is by allowing, no, by encouraging, myself to key on a few points that catch my attention, and to then let the commentary flow, that the paragraph emerged. And I like what I said. And I am grateful to Virginia Woolf for having triggered it.