Splinters

In the mute darkness of our forum, a correspondent, Cherie Federico, tells us of a new arts magazine called Aesthetica, which she describes as "a forum for people to unite creative energy within a contemporary textual space." She asks for interest and submissions of "poetry, prose, articles, reviews, drama, interviews, photography, and artwork".

Rather than reply to her long explanation there, I thought I'd give it an airing in the bright lights of Splinters.

I was interested when Cherie said "there always seems to be some kind of aura around literature that intimidates if not closes doors to people". Yes, I think we've all noticed that. What is this aura? But rather than being the problem, could it be that this is precisely what attracts people to literature in the first place?

I have published a few reviews in newspapers and magazines. They have all received disproportionate attention in social terms (money, social esteem ? i.e. something for one's CV) than anything I have written online, even if they are indistinguishable. Why is that? The aura of authority, I suspect; in other words: intimidation.

So isn't it problematic, if not disingenuous, to claim to be resisting it, breaking its barrier down, making literature "accessible", while at the same time appealing to contributors to partake of literature's unique gift ? namely, the aura? Dispensing with the aura, dispenses with literature. Maybe that's a good thing. But this is not Aesthetica's project it seems.

I see that the Editor-in-Chief "is currently looking for PhD programmes in Postcolonial Literature". One interesting thing about literature is that the aura colonises us all. We'll never be post-that.