I find that Aimee Bender has this almost silly, breezy style with dark, dark topics. The contrast is really refreshing to me.
I love the themes in this, the way these strange hotel ballrooms mirror the way we try to possess the natural world in a way that ultimately makes it the opposite of natural. The janitor's wife's perfume is the perfect illustration of this.
We could talk about this as a story alone, but I wonder what you all think of the multi-media design of this. I am so interested in multi-media (perhaps my Laurie Anderson/Negativland influences showing again) as anyone who has seen my former band play knows. I find it interesting when art forms combine to create something new. In this case we have the fiction, the drawings which are then animated, and the design of the whole.
David Lynch made a short film called "Six Men Getting Sick" which he really intended to be a sort of moving painting more than a film. The question is when art forms combine, can the pieces sustain independently or are they reliant on each other to be considered art. In other words, am I only enamored with this story because of the flashy pictures?
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Monday, January 28, 2008
Gaston
I guess I will comment on Gaston now as well. I was most impressed by the way William Saroyan was able to pack so much characterization into his dialogue, and in so few pages! I kept wondering if we workshopped his story, would we be annoyed that he doesn't reveal the narrator's age until the second paragraph? After you realize she's 6, you look back at the first paragraph and realize only a 6-year-old could see things in that way, or describe them in that way; really, you were completely prepared for her to be six, without him having to say it.
Tea
I loved this story, Chris. Thanks for offering it up. My one question was: Why this guy? Why did Lillian latch onto this guy and not all the others who came before him? Initially this troubled me a little, but the more I think about it I wonder if this wasn't left somewhat open on purpose. Maybe Lillian was just at a point in her life where she was looking for something different from men than she had before, or perhaps he treated her differently than the others had. His wife's illness and subsequent death might have also created an opportunity for Lillian to get more attached than she had previously. All in all, I thought this beautifully captured a specific time and place. You could turn this story into a movie starring Juliet Binoche or Julianne Moore. Maybe we should write the screenplay.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
"Tea" by Nancy Reisman
Hello everyone in 666-land! This is so exciting ... my very first blog entry, ever! I'd like to start by thanking the Academy ...
Anyway, regarding my choice for "story of the week." This piece was included in the 2005 O Henry collection, and in my opinion it is the best story in the book. The sexual content was a little shocking to me at first (especially as it appears "right out of the gate" in the first paragraph), not because I'm prudish, but because it seems that there's not as much of this type stuff in literary anthologies and such, at least the ones I've read. Reading beyond that, this story is so beautifully written and realized, with a devestating ending that broke my heart, and with one of the best last-sentences I've ever read. There's also something about the way that Reisman crafts her sentences and conveys Lillian's feelings that really appeals to me; her overall command of the language in this piece is incredible. I hope ya'll enjoy it, and look forward to any other opinions - assenting, dissenting, whatever.
Ever Higher,
Chris
Anyway, regarding my choice for "story of the week." This piece was included in the 2005 O Henry collection, and in my opinion it is the best story in the book. The sexual content was a little shocking to me at first (especially as it appears "right out of the gate" in the first paragraph), not because I'm prudish, but because it seems that there's not as much of this type stuff in literary anthologies and such, at least the ones I've read. Reading beyond that, this story is so beautifully written and realized, with a devestating ending that broke my heart, and with one of the best last-sentences I've ever read. There's also something about the way that Reisman crafts her sentences and conveys Lillian's feelings that really appeals to me; her overall command of the language in this piece is incredible. I hope ya'll enjoy it, and look forward to any other opinions - assenting, dissenting, whatever.
Ever Higher,
Chris
Friday, January 11, 2008
(*Disdainfully*) James Wood
I'm going to reserve full expression of my judgement of James Wood till other people weigh in, but suffice it to say that he writes for a daily newspaper, and it sounds like it. Not to mention he writes for the Guardian, which makes me roll my eyes. As annoyed as I can get with (for instance) the New York Times, the Guardian is like the NYT, only without the responsibility or the tact.
I do acknowledge though, that the literary reviewers for the Economist (my newspaper of choice) aren't much better, even if the writing is better.
The "currents" and "patterns" he writes about I can't help but think are myopic and almost coincidental to the books he chooses to review. More to the point, I don't find that what he describes comes close to accurately depicting the kind of work we typically deal with in workshop - either in a good or bad way.
To me it all just seems like a lot of tsuris about who cares. There's a fantastically broader view that this doesn't even begin to understand. I can find myself critiquing a generalised movement or failed theme in writing as often as the next person, but I'd like to think that I've progressed towards this realization: it's not what's being done, it's who's doing it.
Just as only Nixon can go to China, only Dickens can write Great Expectations, or Borges be Borges.
I also have no problem with people wanting to start a discussion, but I get pissed off easily. It's not difficult to get pissed off at this guy.
Oh, and he writes for the Guardian.
I do acknowledge though, that the literary reviewers for the Economist (my newspaper of choice) aren't much better, even if the writing is better.
The "currents" and "patterns" he writes about I can't help but think are myopic and almost coincidental to the books he chooses to review. More to the point, I don't find that what he describes comes close to accurately depicting the kind of work we typically deal with in workshop - either in a good or bad way.
To me it all just seems like a lot of tsuris about who cares. There's a fantastically broader view that this doesn't even begin to understand. I can find myself critiquing a generalised movement or failed theme in writing as often as the next person, but I'd like to think that I've progressed towards this realization: it's not what's being done, it's who's doing it.
Just as only Nixon can go to China, only Dickens can write Great Expectations, or Borges be Borges.
I also have no problem with people wanting to start a discussion, but I get pissed off easily. It's not difficult to get pissed off at this guy.
Oh, and he writes for the Guardian.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
A Beleaguered City
I assume I was right in saying I had a story for people to read this week, since it looked as if there weren't enough weeks for people to each suggest a story a week. Especially if we just started from next week.
Anyway, what's below is my suggestion, and perhaps my first blog post.
My suggestion is to read a chapter (the first chapter seems ideal) of a novella that I like, "A Beleaguered City." It's useful in a number of ways.
First for me is something we didn't get to discuss in class - that part of why there can appear to be such homogeneity in the stuff churned out of MFA programs is that they pay so much attention, and so often use as their models, contemporary works of fiction. I can understand the desire to present to people writing that they can more easily engage with, being more "relevant" to them, but it can lead to instructors presenting writing of really variable quality, especially in not being good enough on a fundamental level to overcome objections of "taste."
As often as not, people don't "like" the work they're being made to read, which seems contrary to their use as models. The models we use should be writing of such quality that it transcends boundaries of taste, so as to be able to engage a reader whether or not that particular genre/style of writing is what appeals to them. Works of proven literary and academic merit seem like a more reliable pool of writing to draw from, and so you are now reading a story by a Victorian writer. Margaret Oliphant is not a canonical presence, so I'd like to think that's not why I'm drawn to her writing - it's not like I'm saying we should be necessarily reading Shakespeare and Dickens (though it wouldn't be the worst idea).
Second, there's a trendiness about writing stories with multiple narrators, and this, for me, is an example I always point people towards. Each chapter (as you'll discover after the first two, if you choose to read on) is narrated by a different character. But already from the first chapter, we can see why the story would be told the way it is, with the kinds of social, religious, economic etc. tensions that are talked about. Yes, we find the best form to "tell the story," but at the same time we need to recognize that form is always related to purpose. That how a story is told has to be related to why it is being told. If there is no "why", then the "how" is just stylistics and vanity.
But aside from rhetorical intent, it seems to me that a useful term to steal from film criticism is this idea of a text having great "formal and structural rigour" - that at it's most basic level, the level of language, as well as on the level of story and structure, there is (if not necessarily a unity) a consistency of execution that for canny readers like us, should be unmistakable.
The novella is online because it's old, and so it's public domain. The home (and contents) page: http://gaslight.mtroyal.ca/blgctymn.htm
The page for the first chapter (which is the excerpt I'm suggesting): http://gaslight.mtroyal.ca/blgctyX1.htm
People who want to be able to view (and edit, I think) the Word 2007 file format, docx, should download this: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=941B3470-3AE9-4AEE-8F43-C6BB74CD1466&displaylang=en
Just click on the "download" button, and then install the file.
For convenience, the "Comments" RSS feed url is http://wmugradfiction.blogspot.com/feeds/comments/default
Anyway, what's below is my suggestion, and perhaps my first blog post.
My suggestion is to read a chapter (the first chapter seems ideal) of a novella that I like, "A Beleaguered City." It's useful in a number of ways.
First for me is something we didn't get to discuss in class - that part of why there can appear to be such homogeneity in the stuff churned out of MFA programs is that they pay so much attention, and so often use as their models, contemporary works of fiction. I can understand the desire to present to people writing that they can more easily engage with, being more "relevant" to them, but it can lead to instructors presenting writing of really variable quality, especially in not being good enough on a fundamental level to overcome objections of "taste."
As often as not, people don't "like" the work they're being made to read, which seems contrary to their use as models. The models we use should be writing of such quality that it transcends boundaries of taste, so as to be able to engage a reader whether or not that particular genre/style of writing is what appeals to them. Works of proven literary and academic merit seem like a more reliable pool of writing to draw from, and so you are now reading a story by a Victorian writer. Margaret Oliphant is not a canonical presence, so I'd like to think that's not why I'm drawn to her writing - it's not like I'm saying we should be necessarily reading Shakespeare and Dickens (though it wouldn't be the worst idea).
Second, there's a trendiness about writing stories with multiple narrators, and this, for me, is an example I always point people towards. Each chapter (as you'll discover after the first two, if you choose to read on) is narrated by a different character. But already from the first chapter, we can see why the story would be told the way it is, with the kinds of social, religious, economic etc. tensions that are talked about. Yes, we find the best form to "tell the story," but at the same time we need to recognize that form is always related to purpose. That how a story is told has to be related to why it is being told. If there is no "why", then the "how" is just stylistics and vanity.
But aside from rhetorical intent, it seems to me that a useful term to steal from film criticism is this idea of a text having great "formal and structural rigour" - that at it's most basic level, the level of language, as well as on the level of story and structure, there is (if not necessarily a unity) a consistency of execution that for canny readers like us, should be unmistakable.
The novella is online because it's old, and so it's public domain. The home (and contents) page: http://gaslight.mtroyal.ca/blgctymn.htm
The page for the first chapter (which is the excerpt I'm suggesting): http://gaslight.mtroyal.ca/blgctyX1.htm
People who want to be able to view (and edit, I think) the Word 2007 file format, docx, should download this: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=941B3470-3AE9-4AEE-8F43-C6BB74CD1466&displaylang=en
Just click on the "download" button, and then install the file.
For convenience, the "Comments" RSS feed url is http://wmugradfiction.blogspot.com/feeds/comments/default
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)