But a very quick and dirty answer to the questions posed by cathexys and astolat about why the footnotes:
I see the footnotes as John's more honest voice. The whole story is in John's voice, but with John I find it really difficult to get right up close, there's something about his character that prevents that, especially when disclosing painfully personal narratives. By putting some of the more intense emotional truth moments in footnotes, I was trying to give it the distance it felt like it needed. There are some footnotes that are just straight up factual, but here's the thing about that: you know when you're telling a story, and you're like, "Oh, this car was blue - navy actually - and it went down the street?" The footnote was the 'navy actually', part. It's the part of John that has to be honest, even when he really doesn't like the idea of putting himself out there, and open to things.
Again, though, you're both totally right in that this was an experiment -- I was trying something new, and I knew it probably wasn't going to work for everybody. And since it was an experiment, I am happy to hear the questions people had, so thank you for taking the time to let me know, and I swear I will give you a more eloquent and definitive answer when I get back from school because right now I'm all bleary eyed and -- oh, God, I think I'm only wearing one sock, and I didn't even notice until right now. Yikes. Okay, more later!
ETA: Because I am a tool I totally posted this to SGA noticeboard first - I'm sorry anyone who saw it there and got irate, because Lord knows I would have had it not been me making the accident!!! I'm late! I'm late! For a very important...class!