Johnny Truant and Ergodic Reading

I have mixed feeling about the multiple narrators in House of Leaves. There are Zampano, Johnny Truant, and the Editors. But then there is also Danielewski, and, although Will Navidson does not narrate, we also follow his story. By far, I think Truant is the most interesting narrator, because we can identify him. One Internet review of the book says, “Truant has more of an semi-autobiographical feel, or at least comes closest to being the kind of guy who might be found reading Danielewski's book on the subway” (http://www.themodernword.com/review_house_of_leaves.html). He writes in a very stream-of-consciousness style and often about things that are only minimally related to the line corresponding to his footnote. For example, one footnote following a Latin phrase goes on for almost three full pages, explaining to us how Truant has a hard time finding Latin translations, that the Latin phrase’s meaning was guessed at by a girl he met while researching Zampano’s manuscript; the majority of the footnote explains how he did drugs and had sex with that girl and her friend (34-37). It is very associative thinking, sort of resembling hyperlinks. The reader doesn’t necessarily have to read those footnotes to follow the story. But really, that is what makes a book meaningful—when we as readers interact with it by related it to our personal lives, and hopefully we come out of the reading understanding a little bit more about our own circumstances. In Truant’s case, he draws some chilling conclusions that bring out the worst in him and his perception of the world. However sad Danielewski’s message, I do think the book displays an example of ergodic, participatory reading, which, I think, is more often a positive experience than a negative one (depending of course on what types of books one reads.)