Il resto di niente (The remains of nothing)	1	2	3	4	5

The technique chosen is “accumulation” mixed with consciousness flow and with appendix novel techniques as the author explains on “Uomini e libri”) . This mixture has made it possible to overcome even language difficulty. In the novel Italian, French, Portuguese, Neapolitan languages intersect in order to mark the diversity of thinking modes, of situations, of moments. The indefinite context of narrative language afford the coexistence of many possibilities. In an interview released in occasion of the presentation of the novel in Naples . December 1986, Striano focuses his attention on this issue: The write must use all of them, making them the most understandable. How could I make the lazzaroni of the Seventeenth century speak? In Italian or using that ridiculous dialect-like italian used by Serao and still used by many followers of “verism”? How could I make the Neapolitan noblemen and women in love with Eighteen century France speak ?How could I have made Lenòr -who was Portuguese- speak in some moments in her life? It is important, but, that all these languages are used so that each reader could understand. Only when I had to use a very specific language (a Neapolitan underworld slang of the Eighteen century) I have chosen to give the translation in footnote.
To expressive accumulation the author mixes the impressionistic accumulation of images, to be developed on movie-like narration. He explains in « Uomini e libri » : I am convinced that literature, in nowadays image civilization, is subordinated to visual media. But literature can regain an autonomous function using imaging representation, tempting the boundary of both expressive means and trying to find a connection which can keep them together in harmony in a sound way.
In this perspective transferring into the future the centre of the activity which interprets and justifies past has a connecting function: History becomes thus so close to present times, so contemporary, heritage to everybody.
And this is the implicit answer:for Eleonora by now disilluded, who tries to find out, in a diacronic perspective, what will remain of her experience

But what mind to her? All her life, and the whole universe, ended with her. What could remain of her? The poetry? Even if not bad, as Primicerio said, it was nothing compared to Metastasio, Rolli, Parini' poetry. Something will remain of these people, maybe. In one hundred years, in two hundred years in 1983, meu Deus! But what about me? Nada de Nada. The remains of nothing. >>>>>>>>