Hi Literary Theorists,
I'm planning on doing English honours at the University of Sydney next year, for which I'll be required to write a thesis. (In Australia honours is an extra year you add to the end of your undergraduate degree, in which your mark is based 50% on coursework and 50% on a thesis).
Anyway, I haven't decided what I was going to do, but last night I had a dream, in which I was very certain of what I wanted to do. I was going to write about the way that many authors produce one work which is significantly different from the rest of their oeuvre. The example I was usin in the dream was Mansfield Park by Jane Austen, which is longer and more rambling than her other work. (In real life I haven't actually read Mansfield Park).
When I woke up I remembered having an amazing idea, but it took me a while to remember what it actually was. When I did remember I was highly nonplussed. I sat there frowning at the scrawled idea I had penned as soon as it returned to my consciousness. However, my housemate suggested that, actually, it's not that crazy and there is lots I could talk about: the nature of the author, originality and tradition, bodies of work... and so on.
Currently the idea is still so tinged with deliquescent dream-logic and ephemeral memories of intellectual triumph that I'm having a bit of trouble really evaluating the merit of the idea. So, I'd love any input that people might have.
Please be brutally honest. I didn't really come up with the idea consciously so I don't have any personal attatchment to it.