io9 Talks Casanova
GRAEME: Okay, so you say that the book’s the reality of your life and whatever you’re going through, which makes a lot of sense; reading the text pieces in the back of each issue, the reader gets the feeling that Casanova (the series) seems to be developing into some kind of allegorical almost-autobiography, with what happens to Casanova (the character) happening in some form to you, and vice versa – Is that why you decided to get rid of the character for the majority of the second volume, to give yourself a less dangerous life?
FRACTION: I think I can answer this question, and be somewhat disingenuous, as the answer would be predicated on what your personal perception of the second volume is, to date, which is — incomplete, or I can answer it and completely blow the ending and the resolution to the story and more than a couple fairly complicated reveals that I’ve worked really hard at not resolving prematurely. So I’m going to answer a question you didn’t exactly ask and hope that it suffices.
In a story about choice, responsibility, and identity, I thought it might be of some value — as a writer — and hopefully of some entertainment — to a reader — to completely disregard any and all assumptions we all might have and see where that leads us. The biggest assumption, the most basic assumption, being that this is a book starring Casanova Quinn. The first volume studies Casanova as a character in positive space; the second, in the negative space that surrounded him. When it’s done, both volumes form a kind of whole. For a book starring twins and drawn by twins, that felt kind of fitting. Then again, I’m easily entertained.
More in link.