Chaosmos and axiomatic

I keep coming across the term axiomatic. I have come across it in Jen Webb's book on representation that I have already told you about. It suggests that representation is axiological in that it involves questions of ethics or 'the "right" way of seeing and knowing. As you know I have already been going round in circles considering the meaning of representation and how it fits with my thesis. Then last night another book was suggested to me - John Gardner's The Art of Fiction - where in his chapter on Aesthetic Law and Artistic Mystery he suggests that it is axiomatic that any piece of fiction should answer every question raised in the narrative. and that leaving questions unanswered is sloppy and leaves the reader irritated. But then argues against it by suggesting that some great writing doesn't answer question leaving some answers as a given. He cites Homer and Shakespeare. Just adding further to my confusion.

The novel I am writing for my PhD should be axiomatic in that it will be looking to encourage values and allowing the reader to experience making ethical decisions.But taking these two views I need to find a fine balance between wearing a strait jacket of axiomatology or being sloppy and irritating the reader by leaving too many questions unanswered.

See so many things to think about! A need to find this mythical 'great writing' and apply it to my work particularly as I am determined to make this PhD something special (doesn't everyone)means the pressure is on. Time to light one match at a time and keep the oxygen low so it burns slowly then I will be able to keep up and out of chaos will come order in my thesis.