Achei um artigo de 2005 onde ela conversa sobre trama (The plot doesn’t thicken: comparing J. M. Coetzee’s Slow Man and Denton Welch’s A Voice Through a Cloud). Dá uma olhada.
Basicamente ela questiona a nossa obsessão por trama. Um trecho que resume o argumento dela (o itálico é meu):
Style is not the surface, as might be assumed, but rather it’s plot and event that rest lightly on the surface, while style and language do the hard work of plumbing the depths. I suppose you could say that Coetzee’s artistic intention (cerebral metafiction on various large, extractable themes—age, suffering, compassion, art, and so forth) merits a more essayistic style. But again I find myself coming up against the deceptively simple fact that if we are not interested in the language a writer uses, we find it hard to stay interested in the book, regardless of the loftiness and intelligence of its intention.
Perhaps it seems a bit of a stretch, but reading the two books together reminded me of what I think is the most brilliant film about art that’s been made in a very long time. It’s the documentary The Aristocrats, in which several dozen comedians take turns telling the same lame dirty joke. As they proved, and as Coetzee’s and Welch’s novels attest, plot is really the least of it. Because as every jazz musician knows, it’s not the melody of “How High the Moon” that counts. It’s the way you play it.
Vou tentar pensar nisso na próxima vez que decidir basear minha escolha do próximo livro que vou ler naquela resenha que resume a trama toda em cinco frases.