Cult of Personality

Yes. an emphatic yes. i know absolutely nothing about Hemingway, except for having read some of his stories.

The writer

oswann said:

How important is the writer as hero? With the death of Hunter S. Thompson it is undeniable that the world has lost a great writer but he was also a larger than life character.

I'm wondering if this contributes to the reader's experience. I think that it shouldn't in principle but is it possible to read any of these writers works without thinking of the writers themselves?
Hemmingway
Kerouac
Bukowski
Burroughs
etc.


Os.

Click to expand...

I don't know about the writer as hero. I very seldom, if ever, think of writers in that role. On the other hand, when I find writing I enjoy, I do want to know all I can learn about the writer. I want to know how that book came to be, and what it is/was about the writer that allowed this particular book to be written.

Now, I always thought Thompson was a great writer, but I also thought he was crazy as a bedbug, completely looney in most of his views, and at times a candidate for a padded cell. I'd never cast him in the role of hero, but there's no doubt that what he was made his books what they were.

And aren't we all really larger than life? I've never cared much for that term. Most often it just means more people know what kind of nut you are, but I suspect we all fall into the larger than life category in one way or another. It's just that most of us don't have our lives splattered across the headlines.

I think that some writers, like the ones you mentioned, bleed through their books - in some respects they're always writing about themselves. I think there's an analogy in acting. Jimmy Stewart and John Wayne, no matter their characters in a particular film, were always Jimmy Stewart and John Wayne.

I think your list of writers is very much in the minority. Most of us, like, I think, most actors, prefer to disappear into our book/character and become something/someone different in the next one.

Just scanned back and realize my post has little or nothing to do with your questions.

Well, if it weren't for tangents I'd have nowhere to go.

I think some writers are highly personal in their writing and you just can't help but see them in their work. And some write auto-biographical fiction so you know it has a lot to do with who they are and what their lives are like: Hemingway, Kerouac, Isherwood, etc. and to a lesser degree someone like Amy Tan, Michael Chabon or HST. They personalify their own work with their distinct styles, unique backgrounds and world views.

And if their styles, backgrounds and world views touch you and open your eyes to something profound, it's difficult not to see them as heroes. Writers might not be activists like MLJ, but they do change lives.

Writers

maestrowork said:

And if their styles, backgrounds and world views touch you and open your eyes to something profound, it's difficult not to see them as heroes. Writers might not be activists like MLJ, but they do change lives.

Click to expand...

I guess we just have a different definition of "hero." For me, it takes something a lot more daring than writing a book to make someone a hero. I think we all change lives, and some of the people I've known who changed thousands of lives never wrote a book, and never became famous enough for anyone to write a book about.

I don't think of writers in that light at all. I want to know about a writer as well if I like his/her work, but don't put them on a pedestal.

I guess. To me heroes are not only the ones who sacrifice their lives in Iraq for our freedom, or leap off buildings to save a child, or perish with the World Trade Center trying to save others.

Heroes, to me, also include people whose words and actions and life's work help change the world in a profound way. From Einstein to Martin Luther King, Jr. to Shakespeare to Mother Teresa to the mother who raises five wonderful children who one day may become the President, a scientist, a doctor, a writer, and (gasp!) a wonderful mother.

I guess I do have a romanticized view of the word 'hero.'

I just read in Uncle Jim's writing lessons that, technically, or perhaps originally, a hero was one who had ventured to the Land of the Dead and returned. I think that, metaphorically, there are a lot of ways to do that. It can certainly happen to an author in the course of writing a book.

On the other hand, I also think that the character Jack Nicholson played in "As Good As It Gets" is a fairly likely depiction of an author. Being able to write blisteringly, poignantly, accurately, endearingly about life doesn't mean you're not a weak, vindictive, crazy ***hole.

-paprikapink

Given the five-pack used as examples, aren't we discussing the tragic hero? You've got the gay romantic, the creator of the beats, king of the beats, the hotel nomad and the angry sports writer.

I'll put those guys on a pedestal. I read Burroughs and I feel something I'll never get from a homogenized Grisham tale of who cares.

Is there anyone in modern American literature who compares to the flare that was Thompson? Sure, he was crazy, big deal. Maybe Vonnegut, in an obscure way. Bukowski's dead. These are all writers who lived life their own way. They're artists of twisted logic and personal truth as a means of attempting to deconstruct the monster that we're stuck living in. I would always deem people of this nature as heroes.

Give me a laugh and a dissenting view anyday.

.

the 20th century was the century of the celebrity (with no signs of sloing down in the 21st). look at the superstar that picasso became.

i would agree with the "bleeding through into their work" statement above.

-william

If the story is good enough, I don't think of or look for the author in it at all. I am immersed in the story, and all that matters are the characters and what happens to them. Only afterward do I give any conscious thought to who actually wrote it.

If it's bad, on the other hand, I can't help but think of the author while I'm reading it, usually just before I heave it against the wall.

To me, any hero worship for an author is borne from my admiration for their skill as a writer, not for their ability to generate gossip about their personal lives.

yes, but...

writers of the modern age write much autobiographically (henry miller, hemingway) or philosophically (rand, camus). i find a satisying synthesis in reconciling a work with its author.

How important is the author to their work?

I've had a bad case of author hero-worship before. Several bad cases, actually, although whether or not it was actually "bad", as in "bad for me", is really a matter of opinion.

What it can be is painful when you realise your idol has feet o' clay. Take Orson Scott Card, for example. Love the man as an author. Have even met him quite a few times in person, and he is a nice guy. He has some views that I can really respect...and then he has other views where I think he is totally out-to-lunch.

Take also Teresa Nielsen Hayden. At an earlier point in my life, I would have disagreed with her vociferously on many things but now there are many things that I can really respect.

Both Teresa and Orson have a handful of things in common with me which make it immediately easier for me to relate to them on some things: we were all raised Mormon, for example, (albeit in different states and eras) and whether or not we still believe or don't believe the tenets of that religion, that background certainly has strong influence on how we write and perhaps more importantly, what we choose to write about. While knowing that background doesn't make a difference to the casual reader, to someone who shares that background, that's kind of like lighting a flare, saying, "Look, people like you." Thus I think it's easier for me to annoint them with hero-hood, and harder to separate the work from the person.

I don't think it's necessary to know about the author to idolise them or to enjoy their work (and in fact, it's usually EASIER to idolise people when you don't know them). But knowing more about the author undoubtedly will reveal unexpected facets of their work.

Look at the life of any soldier or fireman whose saved a life and I'm sure you can root out some crazy viewpoints, or some character flaws. I do think you should figure those things into the "hero" equation, but only to show that they are normal humans, which makes their acts of self sacrifice that more meaningful.

The thing about a soldier or a fireman is that they've chosen jobs that they know could require the laying down of their own lives to save others. That's a pretty tall order, and the virtue & courage of it is obvious.

We don't normally think of writers as being "heros" in this sense, but then again, there are plenty of writers throughout history who, living under dictators, had enough courage to speak freely, and I'm sure many have lost their lives in the name of intellectual liberty.

maestrowork said:

They personalify their own work with their distinct styles, unique backgrounds and world views.

Click to expand...

This is so true. I've read certain books knowing it was written by Steel, King, Patterson, Grisham, Rice, etc. Those qualities are just THERE whether the authors intend for them to be or not.

Still, I don't view authors or writers as a "hero." Sure I'm glad to have the chance to read their work and I'm grateful they're sharing their flair/gift/knack for words with the world, but I don't drop to my knees when/if I meet them. They're not my heroes but they are people whose talent I admire and appreciate.