Reading Sarraute this evening, and nodding vigorously in agreement, I find myself wondering what it is I'm agreeing with.
Do I respond to Sarraute's ideas because they echo my own hazy convictions as a reader and a writer? Or is it her response to writing that seems to echo my own, and convinces me to accept her her ideas?
Is there a difference? How can one tell?
And if there is a difference, and one can tell, which is the greater achievement?