The narration of events in this hypertext is quite simple. The narrator is  established above the characters speaking in third person ; following the traditional paths of telling stories, that is: he  is omniscient, in the sense that he knows all about the characters, their inside and their outside, past, present and future; ubiquitous because he watches all actions, and this, from the outside. I mean he does not take place in the action but remains as a god who watches the creatures he  has given life to.
Nevertheless, the author is concerned about the newest literary techniques  since the first revolutionary masterworks in  XIX century (Joyce…) up to now (internet, hypertext literature), as he admits in his biography: “He tried to read Finnegan’s Wake, believing it the duty of every showoff. He also completed Hopscotch twice, using each of the two suggested orders of chapters.” This influence of the greatest literary figures of the century is felt on the chaotic structure of this hypertext. Hopscotch, for example, is a model of narrative freedom. Julio Cortázar wrote this novel breaking all traditional rules of narration. The order of chapters was altered. The result was a mix of past, present and future events. The reader is invited to play and recreate them as different orders are suggested. He also included excerpts from other novels, newspapers, literary reviews and all kind of publications. This  influence can be observed in the overlapping of different stories which are connected by different links. The reader is invited to chose his/her way of putting them in the “correct” order. By recreating the story in his mind while reading: relating characters and  scenes,  parallel situations in time,  etc. The fact is that all characters are bound in either a direct or indirect way. This random narration creates disconnection and confusion claiming the reader to take part in the fiction. As it seems, Mr.Gillespie is highly concerned about the style of their writings. “ He read Suttree straight through three times in two months and wrote his final paper for his degree about its narrative structure and why it made him cry.”
I also would like to highlight the fact that the text lacks descriptions. Characters are identified by their job and status, but there is neither psychological, nor physical descriptions. The writer uses labels to define his characters. This implies that people tend to end up by being no more than who they work for, how much they earn, whether they have a family or not. “Young-Li Kim was a very successful Korean businessman”,
“Silam Paley was a successful entrepreneur” “ Darren made a living through the rental of property”
 One curious aspect about “chicken soup for your corporate ass” is that it has not a conclusion  as a whole. The different disconnected stories have, each character has, but the final meaning.  As in Hopscotch, where  the reader stays imprisoned between the last to pages which refer one to another in the chapter order.

In his last work, a palindrome story, Mr. Gillespie goes further in his challenges. This story is excellent as a game, though it is difficult to find any sense to a hypertext which  can be read from beginning to end and from the end to the beginning in the same way.  Even though he is not the first one to have this idea.
 

back to firstpaper
to time
to space
to conclusion
to personal opinion
to introduction

Academic year 2001/2002
© a.r.e.a./Dr.Vicente Forés López
©Elena Martínez Fernandez
Universitat de València Press
emarfer@alumni.uv.es