The necessity of 'meaning'

Most people always apply the questions of how and why. They just can't accept and leave something as it is. Most people can't accept the enigmatic, and most people shun the cryptic. I myself prefer it when art is more ambiguous, unclear and open to interpretation. I have a strong penchant for dreaming, and I always find a dream dreadfully boring when there is a reason behind it. I hate it when a dream is approved by the psychoanalyst, and I consequently disapprove of art being constantly analysed and dissected to death in classrooms.

As Bunuel himself said, the only meaning you can find in his film Un Chien Andalou would be psychoanalysis. Writing in itself is a form of psychoanalysis - a tool of exploration into the depths of the subconscious and the unconscious. The writer must plunge to whatever vision he is led to regardless of the outer 'clarity' and 'roughness' and 'correcteness' his work may exert. If he is led to the dark side of nature, he must follow that path no matter how offensive or repugnant the end result is. That's what happened with David Crapper and Mary Vagina's Love Affair -
I had and impulse to write and I followed my vision until reaching the revolting and repellent result in the same way that Ballard or Nabokov reached their answers in Crash and Lolita.

David Lynch, quite rightly, always refuses to explain the 'meaning' behind his movies. That's a positive attitude to have because it'd be dreadfully boring if there'd be a definite message involved in it. We are ultimately very complicated creatures and we don't know what the fuck is going on under our skin, and Lynch explicitly makes this clear in his films and imposes a stance to keep his secrets in interviews. He, in all likelihood, knows just as little about his movies as we viewers do.

The greatest work I've produced is Victoria Red. I have obtained everything I've wished to obtain with that story. It's the kind of standard which I attempt and aim to achieve. Some surreal work which is similar to my story is Julio Cortázar's Carta a Una Senorita en Paris, where the character vomits rabbits; I love this enigmatic style, and it probably inspired my own story. I aim to get to the 'other side of things' with my writing, and Cortázar does this really well specifically with his short story (which comes from the same collection as 'senorita en paris' - Bestiario) Lejana where he penetrates into an oneiric terrain in a manner I attempt to convey with my fiction. An another great person who gets into the 'other side of things' is Juan Carlos Onetti, and he superbly fulfills this vision with the creation of the fictional land 'Santa Maria'. 'Victoria Red', Cortázar and Onetti all succesfully eschew the necessity of 'meaning' and produce startling works which defy categorisation.

One of the things I love about dreams (and certain thoughts which are similar to dreams) is that it all makes sense to yourself and no-one else. All your experiences during your waking life are re-assembled into a collage/smogasboard of myriads. This is what one should attempt to achieve with fiction - rather than producing something filled with meanings which resonate with everyone. The writer should write for himself; the writer should reconstruct the past like dreams do in order to arrive to an art-form which makes a topsy-turvy logic and sense to himself.