By Jon José Engreido
If poor Natalie de Roquet had lived to explain the Implication of her Labours, what might she have said? The answer to this question will remain a Mystery Evermore; for though Miss de Roquet did manage to outlive her husband, it was not by much. Following Claude’s death, the door to her room was Unlocked. Natalie was allowed outside the bedroom door for the first time in twenty two years. In her excitement, she promptly Fell Down the Stairs and Died. An Ignoble end for a Noble Mind.
Yet the work lives on. Or at least, it does now, after an extended Hiatus during which the fruits of this Frenchwoman’s fertile mind were left out of the Gaze of anyone except a few Boorish Philistines. Breathe in, breathe out: everything is now All Right. Or is it? I’d be a fool to say that it was. We do have access to the de Roquet Rooms, but bend your shell-like ears a little closer and hear this: Access Is Restricted.
Ever since opening day, I have spent as much time as I could in the rooms. How could I not? But at Five O’Clock each day, I have been asked to leave. Suns above! Is this what they call Respect? I am an academic, not a Thief/Scoundrel/Ruffian. I have only a small time left on this earth: I cannot Shirk. I must work when I can – and when I can I must work. What is more, Timing has never been more Important. This is a Living Work of Art. It exists – it is – only in its Context. It not only requires Much Study, but Purposefully Timetabled Study.
You will need Clarification: it advances without delay. It may be known to you that Natalie de Roquet’s novels have been ‘Available’ for many years now, in ‘Regular Book Form’. It should also be known to you that this is, in short, a Travesty. She never wrote a Book Novel – so to speak. Her novels were written on Walls and Ceilings: in no other form do they make the Slightest-Bit-Of-Sense.
Furthermore, I argue: neither ‘Bedroom Wall’ nor ‘Bathroom Wall’ nor ‘Two Ceilings’ could be said to Make Sense when considered, as a whole, at a Single Point in Time, Even in Context. By this I mean, you cannot turn up to the de Roquet rooms every morning for a week, read the works and Seriously Pretend that you have even come close to Approaching The Concept. These three works are unerringly Complex: they demand the Full Attention of the Critic for the Greatest Amount of Time.
Clarification continues unabated. Firstly, the question of Narrative, of ‘The Story’. This, read as it is, in a line, from one sentence to another is, I argue, of No-Interest-Whatsoever. Only the Connections Matter. The Surface Pattern is Deceptively Conventional/Linear/Predictable. The Patterns below the surface, however, Dive and Swoop like Seagulls on Speed. These patterns are of Immense Interest. These patterns are, in fact, The Point of It All. It is from here, below the rime, beneath the ocean’s ceiling, that Meaning, like a great blue whale resides. The only question that you must ask – I hear you asking it already – is How Do We Get Below the Surface? To which the answer is: There are Many Ways, and you cannot Choose One, but you must Choose All, lest you wish to miss out on The Point of It All/The Meaning/Natalie de Roquet (which is to say: ‘It’).
This must be said: There are Three Novels. In my mind, however, ‘Bedroom Wall’, ‘Bathroom Wall’ and ‘Two Ceilings’ = One Single Project. Yes, I will verily acknowledge that they are Three Parts – that they have, within them, a notional Beginning and a notional Ending. But in the end, I can only say that they are Three Parts of One Machine. For they are tied together in relationships so intricate that they are So Much More than the strings which bind any works by the same author. This to say that they are Interdependent. One does not function fully without the other. Furthermore, this Interdependency is not purely textual and it Cannot Be Gauged through examination of the aforementioned ‘Regular Book Form’. This Interdependency is, primarily and absolutely, Architectural. It relies, in every conceivable way, upon the positioning of the words within this Single and Precise Architectural Setting. And it operates like so:
To begin with – and this can be verified without the need of singular research – it works through Lines. Lines between walls, from walls to ceilings and Within Walls Themselves. Lines build Connections: Connections between single words, between single themes and between subjects which, in different ways, dominate the General Scheme of Things. Sometimes this works on a simple level, sometimes a less simple one. To supply an example: If we were to cut through one of the four walls upon which ‘Bedroom Wall’ is written, at the point where we find the word ‘fenêtre’, we may – nay, will – discover The Same Word. And I do not mean to say that the word is Almost in the same position, but that it is in Exactly The Same Position. Elsewhere, we may find Entire Phrases repeated both behind walls and on walls facing each other. There can also be found words on the ceiling at exactly Ninety Degree Angles to the same word on the walls.
Connections, however, are not merely between the Same Words or Phrases. They form also between Ideas. These formations Strengthen Concepts, they Juxtapose Theories (through numerical emphasising and ironic gestures) and they use Exterior Forces to, almost literally, Throw New Light Upon Their Being. It is these latter connections that cannot be easily perceived by the Casual Viewer. For they do not rely on Stationary Angles. Certain links, as I have explained, can be realised at Any Time. Other links can only be realised at certain Specific Times. To understand these, the audience must be in a certain position at a certain time; or else the critic must communicate to the reader what it is about this time that is So Essential to The Project.
To expand/explicate/shed light upon the relevance of these times and their masters. The primary movers are the Sun and the Moon. This is to say that the manner in which Sunlight Plays On The Walls and ceilings of de Roquet rooms is of Great and Undeniable Significance, enlightening and illuminating a Multitude of Textual Issues. The movement of Sunlight around the room, from its first entry in the morning to its exit at night offers no less than an Alternative Path of Understanding, by no means unsupported by the Intentions of the Author. The same applies to the Progression of the Moon. Another Reading is created, which in turn elucidates Concerns arising from its Fellows/Rivals/Companions/Competitors. On top of these two, we cannot ignore the connotations recommended by the positions of the Stars. That is to say that they too have a bearing on these texts. Just as the architecture of ancient temples was Constructed to Mirror Patterns in the Stars, so too did Natalie de Roquet charge her prose with Cosmic References, all of which can only be understood by studying the precise relationship between the positioning of said stars and words on the walls and ceilings of the de Roquet rooms. To say that I have not managed to follow all of these patterns thus far is Not to Admit Defeat. On the contrary I have, under the present Conditions, no less than Excelled Myself. To say, however, that the present Conditions are anything more than Mediocre and Insulting would be A Lie of Some Vast Magnitude and Impudence. For the truth is, not until The Apes that run this set-up allow me to study the rooms twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, We Will Most Definitely Never Get to the Bottom of these Works. This = Tragedy, I do not hesitate to note.
My criticism is, therefore, Incomplete. But I am brave enough to Understand This; to confess that the Complexity of the Texts demands more time than I have been given. I am, furthermore, brave enough to declare that, if time should be supplied, I would be More Than Willing to complete the task that I have described: to plunge like some Deep Sea Diver into an Immense Ocean of Meaning, possibly never to resurface, but always likely to achieve So Much More than anyone could presently achieve, what with these Patronising Rules and Pointless Substitutes for Reality. For the bottom line is absolutely this: Natalie de Roquet Lived in these rooms as she wrote. A critic must, thus, also Live in these rooms to Understand fully the Enormity of her Achievement. He/She must dedicate as much time to the work as the author did; but not time with the words alone, time also with the Room. Time In Context, in situ, In Space and Across the Changing Spaces of a Single Space Through Time. Only in this way will the de Roquet Rooms come close to making sense in the manner in which they were Originally created. Otherwise, what are we looking at? Not so much a pale imitation of reality as a Blank-faced and Sickly Simulation: a Pointless Farce, a Cheap and Derivative Charade. De Roquet in book form? Ha! There is only one way that this work can be experienced: In the Form in Which it Was Created. There is only one other plausible option: that someone might construct an exact version of it and place it elsewhere, in a Museum or Art Gallery. Even then, however, we would sincerely miss the exact play of Light which I have claimed to be of Such Great Significance. We are confined therefore to the conclusion that unless we accept the Horrendous Complexity of the de Roquet Conundrum – and make immediate moves to Uncover aspects of It – we shall get no further than the most crude reading of a piece of art that Man or Woman Ever Imagined. And this – I would and Will Say – would be no less than a Desperate State of Affairs.
Further Reading:
[...] CRITICAL APPROACHES I – Jon José Engreido [...]