Hello!
This picture has nothing to do with my post, but it's a water tower a mile or so from our apartment. Sometimes, we walk by it. Look at it. Take it in...
I graded papers and wrote all day. Papers: There's never enough time to really give the students the kind of feedback they need. So, you find a few specific examples from their paper and talk to them about how to make those things that aren't working work. What's fucked up about teaching/workshopping/etc is that we have been trained to look for what's wrong. I try, as a teacher, to find what's working, and only address what's not working through what is working. I also believe that good writing is born out of practice. Sure there are people who are just naturally really good at laying down a sentence or two. But good writers are ones who keep writing, who keep putting stuff out, and keep giving to the community of writers by producing work, by growing. Sure, writing a brilliant story is great, but it's better to keep writing those stories. I know a handful of people who just float through their writing. They turn stuff in because it's due, rather than writing because that's what they want to do. I've been discussing the problems with my program (and posting some of it on here) with some of my close friends. I wrote this on my friend's facebook: Yeah, that's the trouble with workshops, people don't ever want to let the suspension of disbelief enter their reading, because they're too busy looking for what doesn't work, rather than what works and why. It's fucking backwards. That's one thing that's good about the poetry workshop, people have to find what's working in order to comment, in fiction it's like, "that unrealistic," followed by "that's too familiar." apparently boring, familiar/but not too familiar characters, arcs, and actions must be a part of every piece of fiction. God forbid you write something that takes a chance! Believe in the story, ask questions later! The second and third time you read it. The key word: QUESTIONS. Not problems. I know I might be getting off track here, but this post is organic. I just want to change the way we look at writing. Maybe it's not a change, but it's happening and there are some stragglers. But I'm not sure. I know one thing, though. It seems like people don't want to put in their time (Read the stories more than once, hell you should read each workshop piece at least (At the very least) three times to get a proper read on it. Some require less, but those are the ones that don't really need the workshop and those are few and far between. There was someone in one of my classes that admitted they only read everyone once (unless they have to). I was appalled. This is graduate school. Some people don't even read the books because they know they probably won't get called on. But reading isn't about finishing an assignment, it's about becoming a better writer. But there's a lot of "Oh, I'm in a program, so I've made it." Like when bands get signed and sort of mail it in from there on out. MFA programs is where you have to distinguish yourself, where you have to get ahead. Yeah, you're there to form communities and make friends, but you're there to put yourself ahead of the pack. Competition is necessary and healthy. Though it shouldn't be there to cut everyone else down. You want your peers to get better so that you will perform better. Right? Give as much as you want. If you're in a program just because that's what you need for a paper chase or this is something you feel you should do. Get the fuck out. Unless you want to give. A community is only as strong as its weakest, and a community isn't just a bunch of people who get drunk together and talk about TV, a community is about a bunch of writers who challenge and support each other.
I graded papers and wrote all day. Papers: There's never enough time to really give the students the kind of feedback they need. So, you find a few specific examples from their paper and talk to them about how to make those things that aren't working work. What's fucked up about teaching/workshopping/etc is that we have been trained to look for what's wrong. I try, as a teacher, to find what's working, and only address what's not working through what is working. I also believe that good writing is born out of practice. Sure there are people who are just naturally really good at laying down a sentence or two. But good writers are ones who keep writing, who keep putting stuff out, and keep giving to the community of writers by producing work, by growing. Sure, writing a brilliant story is great, but it's better to keep writing those stories. I know a handful of people who just float through their writing. They turn stuff in because it's due, rather than writing because that's what they want to do. I've been discussing the problems with my program (and posting some of it on here) with some of my close friends. I wrote this on my friend's facebook: Yeah, that's the trouble with workshops, people don't ever want to let the suspension of disbelief enter their reading, because they're too busy looking for what doesn't work, rather than what works and why. It's fucking backwards. That's one thing that's good about the poetry workshop, people have to find what's working in order to comment, in fiction it's like, "that unrealistic," followed by "that's too familiar." apparently boring, familiar/but not too familiar characters, arcs, and actions must be a part of every piece of fiction. God forbid you write something that takes a chance! Believe in the story, ask questions later! The second and third time you read it. The key word: QUESTIONS. Not problems. I know I might be getting off track here, but this post is organic. I just want to change the way we look at writing. Maybe it's not a change, but it's happening and there are some stragglers. But I'm not sure. I know one thing, though. It seems like people don't want to put in their time (Read the stories more than once, hell you should read each workshop piece at least (At the very least) three times to get a proper read on it. Some require less, but those are the ones that don't really need the workshop and those are few and far between. There was someone in one of my classes that admitted they only read everyone once (unless they have to). I was appalled. This is graduate school. Some people don't even read the books because they know they probably won't get called on. But reading isn't about finishing an assignment, it's about becoming a better writer. But there's a lot of "Oh, I'm in a program, so I've made it." Like when bands get signed and sort of mail it in from there on out. MFA programs is where you have to distinguish yourself, where you have to get ahead. Yeah, you're there to form communities and make friends, but you're there to put yourself ahead of the pack. Competition is necessary and healthy. Though it shouldn't be there to cut everyone else down. You want your peers to get better so that you will perform better. Right? Give as much as you want. If you're in a program just because that's what you need for a paper chase or this is something you feel you should do. Get the fuck out. Unless you want to give. A community is only as strong as its weakest, and a community isn't just a bunch of people who get drunk together and talk about TV, a community is about a bunch of writers who challenge and support each other.
Going back to teaching, you're job is to give your student writers that sort of challenge and encouragement. Don't view them as students, but as writers. You job is like that in a workshop. Give them a valid read and point out their strong points, before you go into what's not working. Because what is working can always inform what's not, and the writing can get better. OK. enough of that.
While I wrote today, I watched Henry Fool. If you haven't seen this film, see it. It's about this garbage man who's kind of out of it, and this stranger shows up (Fool) and gives him a journal to write in. He starts writing this long poem, and over the course of the film, this poem makes him Noble-Prize famous. But the poet part is only the a thread. What matters are the friendships and family, the violence, the dirty and grit of Queens and these people, and how people react to each other. It's a masterpiece. The music in it is perfect and not manipulative. It's there. And there's a really cool scene about "There" "Their" and "They're." Henry Fool, well, it's hard to describe him, but he belongs in grad. school, and he talks like it. He's probably one of my favorite characters in literature. Yes, I said literature. This film is literary (many films are!), but this is especially so.
I'm rereading Beloved Tony Morrison and I'm reading A Member of the Wedding by Carson McCullers for school. Next is that Apathy book.
Those who are going to AWP. How do you choose which talks to go to. There are so many, and now that I'm pretty much 90 percent sure I'm going, I've been looking at that stuff and man, there's some good stuff.
I'll leave you with some pics...
Well, that's all I have to say tonight.
Love you
Joshua
2 comments:
I'm okay with the balance of support and criticism, as least in my workshop (probably about 25-75). What bugs the hell out of me is the way we fall into phrasing our quibbles. "I like x and y about your story, but I do have some questions..." is such a euphemistic way to segue into talking problems about the story. For me, that kind of language just doesn't help--if something is wrong with my story, I want to fucking know that it's a problem. Telling me you have a question about it doesn't help much, telling me that it sucks does.
I often wound up treating student papers quite differently because they don't have the (typically) thick skin creative writers develop in the workshop, and to much overt criticism can shut them down entirely. Euphemistic workshop language seems appropriate for college freshmen--they need the cushion--it doesn't seem appropriate for writers in their mid-twenties or later who have been doing this for years.
As for reading, I usually give it a quick "enjoyment" reading (also to get the threads of the story in place in my head before I start getting critical with it), then get into the nitty-gritty on my second reading. I usually only have time to give the really flawed or challenging drafts a third reading, unfortunately.
It is weird how people write because something is due, and it does seem counter-intuitive. I wonder how often it's a problem with time to write. Now that my semester is in full swing, I'm finding myself stupid busy--working 30 hours at two jobs and reading other students' work, mostly--and I'm ashamed to say I am in the process of writing a phoning-it-in short story. I haven't had time to do better, and that sucks. Hopefully something interesting comes out of it, but right now... ugh. Anyway, ending rant now. I hope you get that 90% sure about going to AWP up to 100%, so we can stalk Chabon.
Yeah, sometimes questions are passive aggressive ways of saying "I didn't like this." I agree. It's not about what you like, it's about whether it is working or not. If it is not, then say so, don't dance around your point. If the question leads to something valuable like. Why did you choose this one way, instead of this...I think might be helpful...does that make sense, Ian?
As far as reading, maybe I expect too much, but I feel as though people don't read enough and end up writing out of their ass rather than appreciating the story (I don't mean that we only need to praise, but to critique on specific things that will better a story). Basically, I story needs to be given paths not told that it doesn't work. IF it doesn't work, help the writer find ways to make it work. Here in Las Cruces, if you can't read each story/packet twice you're full of shit. YOu can read it more than that. There's not a lot of expectations for workshops. So, put in the work, I think. You seem to be at a much more intense program. So kudos to you!
And yes, time to write is an issue, but I feel like here we get plenty of time. SOme don't take advantage of it. I'ts at 92% right now!
Later
Joshua
Post a Comment