2. One way to understand the complexities of this novel is to begin by simply describing some of its features. First the layers of narrative:

[Kristel]

Navidson: (forms of representation: film, photography, video, etc.)

Zampanò: (forms of representation: typewriter, handwriting, photography?)

Johnny Truant: (forms of representation: typewriter, handwriting, sketch, tattoo)

Editors: (forms of representation: typewriter, computer, print, photography)

Consider some of the parallels between the layers. While they might not offer complete understanding, they will at least begin to yield thematic repetitions. For example, Navidson’s relationship with his brother Tom offers some parallels to Johnny Truant’s relationship with Lude. Karen and Thumper, as different as they are, provide views of women, while Holloway and others, offer us different constructions of masculinity. Part of the process of reading, then, requires us to understand each layer separately, that is, the form it takes and the narrative it constructs, but, more importantly, this process (aided by the footnotes and other apparatus) requires us to find connections among the layers.

One thing we can conclude is that the novel foregrounds the epistemological problem of what is known as remediation. “Remediation” is the term critics use to describe how older media, such as books, "refashion themselves to answer the challenges of new media." But remediation is also a strategy of representation that foregrounds how it becomes nearly impossible to get at the truth of some event or experience in our world as it get represented through different media (an experience is filmed, then represented in language, then edited, then typeset, then reedited, etc.). Against the distancing features of remediation, we also have the reproduction of the material conditions of the medium. The “body” of the text becomes something that we can attempt to “read,” much as Johnny Truant’s tattoos become bodily markers. (Professor Mark Patterson of the University of Washington)

Not really a question, but feel free to comment.

[[deleted user]]

Not sure about this, for me there were 2 central storylines which could be class as layers the Navidsons and Johnny Truant these were linked by Zampano and his collection.

[Patrick]

I suppose that's why it's called House of Leaves (rather: Layers)... The influence of Derrida and its deconstruction technique of semiotic analysis is constant in this book.

[Jen]

Patrick wrote: "I suppose that's why it's called House of Leaves (rather: Layers)... The influence of Derrida and its deconstruction technique of semiotic analysis is constant in this book."

I agree. Derrida is a clear influence on this book. I very much enjoyed the multiple layers. As an academic, I found the citations hilarious and sadly quite accurate as a satire. I enjoyed trying to make connections between the various layers.

[Pip]

I am not familiar with Derrida, so cannot comment there. But I also found the citations funny and satirical and sometimes laugh out loud funny. The footnote 103, for example which "examines the meaning of 'study' when juxtaposed with the ritual of territory, sleep and memory" is really taking the piss out of academia.