an email exchange with anne-laure tissut, the french translator of another bullshit night in suck city, 2008. anne-laure tissut—How to determine the value of a contemporary text, without any critical analysis on it, and without the trial of time ? nick flynn—We all get caught up in certain texts that speak to the zeitgeist but perhaps wonʼt speak to eternity—it seems the bestseller lists are crowded with such books. I think if a work of art somehow snags on oneʼs (un) consciousness, if it keeps rising up unbidden after it has been put down, then there is a chance that it will last, at least for a while. alt—Does continuity stand as a valuable criterion for judging the quality of a literary work – continuity in the structures of the work, its style, imagery, voices …? nf—I think it depends upon the writer—some are more protean than others, while some find a style and return to it, hopefully each time unearthing something new, in order to deepen the work. As for my work, I feel like I continually circle a handful of images, though each time approach them from a different perspective or style. alt—Which qualities do you expect from a literary work? To which do you give the privilege in your own work? nf—It seems the work of an artist is to push into the unknowm, the unrealised, the unformed, and bring some piece, some shard of what is found there back to the visible world. This is a difficult proposition, for it requires one to hover in an uncomfortable place, that of bewilderment, but I donʼt understand merely recounting what is apparently known. By this I donʼt mean what exists in the world around us, which, if we stand before us, if full of mystery. alt—What does “literary” mean? Which are the necessary components of a literary work?

nf—It does seem that literary suggest writing that speaks outside of its moment in time, that has a chance of moving both forward in backwards in time in surprising ways.