I'm not going to talk about the workshop. Though, this is related. There's a fear of danger or risk in writing (And in the workshop). People are afraid of the familiar, the known, and the "been-done." But on the same token people are afraid of the unknown, the risky, the non-literary. I've heard "That would never happen" and "This seems too familiar" in the same workshop, talking about the same story. So, what is it people are a afraid of? I don't know and I don't care. What I want to say is that no one should ever not write something because its familiar, and no one should ever not write something because it's too crazy. Murakami wouldn't be around, and neither would Chabon. Both for both reasons. We're reading Beloved by Toni Morrison, and she says something about how your job as a writer is to familiarize the strange and mystify the familiar. So true. I think you can apply that to everything. If you've got two hit men in a diner talking about a kill, how can you make that unfamiliar? If you've got a guy whose are are stalks of corn, how can you make it familiar. That goes for genre: How to do bend noir to give it implications on the human condition? how do make an action story literature?
What I want to say, is yes there is a danger in things: Like writer mirror scenes or putting letters in a text that reveal things about a character/the story, or following a genre convention. But that should be a minor issue. The question should be how are you de-familarizing those conventions and familiar scenes/tropes/etc.
My friend Ian has a young-adult-ish post-apocalyptic novel based in the NW. It's really good and I can't wait till he finishes it. But all the things that are familiar about it, he places in a world will all that's left are children, and what makes the novel fresh is that what normal kids do become what those in charge do, so their logic is not adult, but child like. It's really cool. The difference between the logic a man in the aftermath and of children and similar in their need to survive, but very different in terms of how they get there. Does that make sense? And the landscape itself, the NW offers something else to the story, the landmarks, they become minor characters within. So, if you look at all those novels in the vein of Post. Ap, then young adult novels, then survival stories, then NW books, you find all these recognizable things, but mashed together and mystifying through the characters and narrative, offer the reading something new, yet strangely familiar. BTW Ian. I better be writing your blurb.
I just want people to stop turning their noses up at genre and at the familiar, and instead of saying this doesn't work, saying, how can this work. Yes, we should say: This isn't working at is because...but it should be followed with, here's an idea on how to... Also, IF something is just implausible, do the writer of fucking favor and tell them why, and tell them how to familiarize it. Ian's last comment about people walking around the issue, is so true, about euphemising the workshop. Just say it! And also, boxing things up into compartments. Either familiar or too unbelievable or this just spins its wheels or this is scaffolding. This harms the writer, by offering a genre of problems, rather than a suggestion out of it. Strive to find that suggestion. If you don't have one you're not doing your job as a reader. That simple. Do your job, that's what you're there for. Not to fucking become a better writer on your own, if that was the case you wouldn't be in grad school. You're there to get better through the help of a community and to build that community so that a year after you're done you can all meet at AWP and hang out and talk about all this, and to one day teach your friend's work and write and talk about them. And form a network of friends, writers, teachers, all on the same page.
Anyway.
I've got some work to do, but this has been drifting around in my head for a few days, so I figured I'd blog it.
Love to the tenth power
Joshua
4 comments:
Let's beat this dead horse together. My program is so fucking broken when it comes to genre. We read a Stephen King short story for my form and technique class the other day, one that I thought was pretty good, but not great ("Everything you love will be Carried Away." worth a read.). It's kind of a psychological suspense piece about a traveling salesmen in a Motel 6 trying to decide if he's going to kill himself or not. The only thing keeping him tied to life is his journal full of bathroom graffiti from interstate restrooms--he thinks he might compile them into a book, but he's weighing whether or not that's enough to live for. The story ends ambiguously. I thought that the main character was a stock trope, pretty cardboard, but that the story coasted by on its cleverness, the bathroom graffiti, and the suspense--not a masterpiece, sure, but it was alright. The consensus of the rest of the class was that this story failed as a piece of writing because it showed us a character who was too "familiar." They just couldn't get invested emotionally, they said. Somebody pointed out that in a lot of genre work, stock characters are fine--they're a necessary stepping stone on the way to the aliens or the monster or what have you. I agree with this, to a point (they're definitely a staple of BAD genre fiction), and Stephen King seemed to be trying and failing to give his character a little more depth and nuance.
But my problem is that this all comes down to audience expectations. People picking up a suspense magazine or Fantasy and Science Fiction don't give a shit about emotional truth or the kind of natural realism literary fiction prefers (right now). They want to see something new and exciting, and they want to be fucking entertained. This King story did both of those things.
Sorry for the long rant, I'm just frustrated that many MFAs beat into their students heads that there is ONE way that a story can succeed, and it's through subtle, non-derivative emotional nuance. Forget entertainment, forget an exploration of ideas or philosophy, forget situational plot, forget the simple pleasure of reading a good page turner. Literary fiction apparently has a different rubric for success than every other genre. ARGH. Okay, I'm getting over it.
Don't get over it! It's a problem. There's NOT one way to write literary fiction. Look at Chabon and Murakami and Gaiman. I don't care what people say they are literary! And look how they take "realist fiction" stock characters and put them in un-ordinary situations to pull out emotional and psychological depth. Sure they write in a genre, and they might operate with a genre expectation, and people are like "these characters are so fresh!" Bullshit (Ok, yes some are very fresh), but most of these guys are broken men (and women) at a crossroads...(sounds like every realist fiction main character?) and they have to change. OK. This is fiction. Right? Then they're put in a landscape that doesn't quite fit, and their normalcy has to change. Am I making sense? People can't look past this, they get stuck on the fact that its genre...when in fact, they're all writing genre. And nine times out of ten, by page three I can pretty much guess what's gonna happen in the these writer's stories. Anyway. It's a fucking stigma/narrow-minded outlook that needs to go. yes there is bad fiction. But there's also really good fiction disguised in genre.
And I think I've read that King story. it sounds familiar (laughs). But seriously. He's a fine writer, and just because he falls into the genre pitfalls, doesn't mean there's not something to learn from him. In my opinion, he's written some bad shit. But, hey, I've learned a lot just from reading his writer. Sometimes, what not to do, and other times how to condense action and dialogue or how to write a scene. It can't be denied, that guys can really write a scene.
Anyway. I've been thinking a lot about workshops and literary expectations. And I get the sense it's changing, but it's a slow process. We have to learn to be filters, but not merely robots set to REJECT THIS BASED ON GENRE.
There are thousands of ways a story can succeed. you're right. And sometimes, it's the fucked up way that does it.
Dude, after we publish some books and shit, we should totally publish these convos!
Later,
Joshua
BTW. 98 percent on AWP. I have two very possible rides. Each one is sounds very promising. I'll be there, however, on tuesday night. So i may be crashing in one of my NMSU friends' bathroom.
I should know if its 100 by tonight, and no later than sunday!
I bet at the very least we could wring a pretty kick-ass AWP panel out of it. Something to think about.
Yeah dude, we should do a panel. Next AWP! Me, you, and (Kenny? Chas? Whoever?). Call it THE NEW WORKSHOP: Out with the Old, In with the New. Just kidding, but something like that.
So, you saw that I for sure have a ride to AWP, I'm just looking for a ride back, but I think I found one, I just have to get to OK from the driver, all the passengers said they would make room...so...booyah!
Also, I just finished a new draft of The Story Thief, well, I'm now going through with edits to The Dave Bazan parts, some dialogue, and keeping the twins at home, then I'll have a new draft (377 pages now, thanks to your suggestions the things just blew up, and I think you'll like the additions on the road).
So, I have to thank you again. Really good stuff.
Later,
Joshua
Post a Comment