Are you the real deal?

dondomat said:

The child abuse gags in "Airplane!" are awesome, though. And the ones with Roseanne on her roast.

Click to expand...

I've been thinking about my aversion to this writer's joke about child abuse, partly in light of the current thread in P&CE about humor in the aftermath of atrocity.

Several points have occurred to me. One is, poking fun at the perpetrator is far different from making light of the suffering of the victim.

Second, atrocity humor is wonderful stuff when it serves to leach out some of the power of the evildoers (see point one) and reduce the anguish of witnesses and possibly also victims by relieving pressure. Using atrocity or abuse as an occasion of a supposedly humorous aside to make a fairly minor point is just not the same order of discourse.

Third, using such humor as a part of the kind of expression in the article under discussion simply comes across as so far out of proportion it causes me to want to distance myself from anything that person says, rather than supporting his points.

Fourth, it was a really lame joke, if joke it was meant to be. "I wish you had suffered more"? He could have done better than that. It was an egoic aside and he lost my respect right there.

rwm4768 said:

He should be more careful to state that these points refer to a specific type of writer, not all writers.

Click to expand...

But I think they do apply to all writers.

Okay, I'll agree with that. I definitely learned how I never want to write from The Scarlet Letter.

Click to expand...

You keep focusing on specific books you hated, as if the message was "You must love every single book ever assigned in high school English classes to be a serious writer."

How limited it is depends on what genres you're reading. I never feel much need to venture outside speculative fiction because there's so much variety in it. In essence, you can tell any kind of story you'd tell in any other genre, just with fantasy or science fiction elements.

Click to expand...

You can, but if you're saying that there is no great need for speculative fiction authors to read outside the speculative fiction genre, I will disagree very strongly, and express doubt that any speculative fiction author with any writing chops limits his or her reading to their own genre.

Amadan said:

You can, but if you're saying that there is no great need for speculative fiction authors to read outside the speculative fiction genre, I will disagree very strongly, and express doubt that any speculative fiction author with any writing chops limits his or her reading to their own genre.

Click to expand...

You sure you want to speak in absolutes like that?

Hapax Legomenon said:

You sure you want to speak in absolutes like that?

Click to expand...

"I doubt" != "I know." (Call it the weak atheist position on non-well-read authors who are any good.)

If you can produce a convincing counterexample, I'll revise my statement to something that only applies to 99% of speculative fiction authors.

The real deal?

Hell no, I'm just making this shit up as I go along

You can, but if you're saying that there is no great need for speculative fiction authors to read outside the speculative fiction genre, I will disagree very strongly, and express doubt that any speculative fiction author with any writing chops limits his or her reading to their own genre.

Click to expand...

I don;t know that I'd put it as strongly as that, but all the SFF writers I know absolutely read other genres too. If I only read and wrote SFF it'd start to feel incestuous after a while. You need to get some knew genes from somewhere...

Anyway, this guy is buying into how society as a whole has a real problem with anyone who dares to show any kind of self-doubt or dares to have any kind of self-esteem issues. I think that shows a lack of critical thinking skills on his part.

Hapax Legomenon said:

Anyway, this guy is buying into how society as a whole has a real problem with anyone who dares to show any kind of self-doubt or dares to have any kind of self-esteem issues. I think that shows a lack of critical thinking skills on his part.

Click to expand...

Not sure about that, but one way to read his statement is certainly that if you doubt yourself, then you suck.

Maybe another way to read it is that the whole question of who is a "real writer" is pretty stupid, and the phrase is meaningless, and people should stop obsessing over whether they can call themselves "writers." With which I would agree.

But if he means, "If you doubt that you could ever possess the talent of Jonathan Franzen, then you're probably an untalented hack, so go away and let the rest of us supremely confident and talented writers write" -- well, nope. Self-doubt is kind of a recognized part of being a writer. There's even a hoity-toity phrase for it: the "anxiety of influence," or fear that you'll never live up to your literary inspirations.

Personally, as a teacher, I found no correlation between students' degree of self-doubt (as expressed to me) and their performance. Some confident students performed poorly, some well. Same went for insecure students. I think Wendig did a good job of showing how being told you have talent can actually breed insecurity.

For me, insecurity is a motivator: it makes me work hard and try new things. For others, it might be an inhibitor. But I refuse to believe it is evidence of low potential.

I also don't think it's a teacher's job to decide whether students have potential for all time. The MFA's admissions committee should be choosing students who show potential in the first place. (If they lower their standards, and use the program as a cash cow, that is unfortunate. But not the students' fault for applying.) The teacher should evaluate the students' actual work -- mercilessly, if need be.

But deciding who has talent isn't really the teacher's business, IMHO. I don't see J.K. Simmons' character in Whiplash as a good model. (That movie, and the different ways people respond to it, is very germane to this discussion.)

I get the classics thing. Painters study Picasso. Sculpturors study Ancient Greek statues. It's good to understand the foundations here, even if much of it is not useful for practical purposes today. (No fantasy writer who wants to be taken seriously will try to write exactly like Tolkien, for example, but they can appreciate the unfolding of the story and its place in the genre's history.)

But the idea that "the real deal" writer craves difficult material is hogwash. Consuming "Finegan's Wake" and proudly proclaiming that you've unlocked its literary secrets only shows that you understand how to read it. It doesn't at all signify that you would have the first idea what to do with that experience in regard to your own craft.

I think most of us also realize that this is a literary MFA professor, though one working at a low residency Program (which is a far different structure than in-person programs).

I actually agree with a lot of what he writes, but disagree with some. No, you don't have to be super serious about writing as a teen to be successful. Having worked in literacy for many years (with teens) the biggest achievement is sparking the prolific writer within, regardless of whether or not you take yourself with the seriousness of a published writer. Writing leads to more writing. Some of my adult writers never wrote as teens and uncover that talent--one that's been hidden away. Some had traumatic experiences in school as a kid and are struck frozen by a fear of "the red pen." With the adults I've taught, much of the instruction goes toward undoing damage done by previous instructors--many of whom sound a lot like this guy. I'm sad about that. As a writer, couldn't he have found a more constructive way to get these points across? Or maybe this was just meant to be click-bait for his blog? It's hard to say.

People just need to remember that this is an opinion piece. Written by someone who seems highly jaded. Whether or not some of his arguments hold water is a bit overshadowed by his tone--which is thoughtless. I don't think he's trying to lay out the map to success; he's bitching about his bitterness because he can.

Hapax Legomenon said:

Anyway, this guy is buying into how society as a whole has a real problem with anyone who dares to show any kind of self-doubt or dares to have any kind of self-esteem issues.

Click to expand...

Hence generations maintaining artificial manic self-confidence with booze, then with booze and prescription pharmaceutics; with subcultures going further with mild uppers, then with crack, then with PCP, then with meth.

If you lose that cracked glint in your eye and the twitchy jerky confident lunges as you pick up a coffee mug and the relentless chatter, people gonna think you're some kind of introverted loser, or something. Bad for business.

Overall, I'm pretty meh about the article.

Anyone who talks in absolutes is someone I side-eye pretty hard. Especially in regards to something as subjective as writing.

Is what he said in regards to a MFA student and program true? Probably. Just like all things, there are certain standards someone needs to achieve to be accepted in any sort of program, be it MFA or Mathematics or Psychology or Basket Weaving. And sure, not everyone is 'blessed' with the talent or the affinity or whatever magical juice is needed to be a natural and rise to the top of the field. What is it that is said that we will rise to the level of our incompetence?

Musicians who have a natural ability, coupled with intense training may be lucky enough to achieve the Golden Ring of being a musician (being accepted in a cracking good orchestra, get their own featured show at Carnegie, getting into Juliard, etc). Writers who have the natural gift of words get shortlisted for the biggie prizes (Pulitzer, Booker, Hugo, etc).

I'm sure even Basket Weavers have that upper echelon of Basket Weaving that separates the genius from the pedestrian efforts.

But that doesn't mean that even though we are not born with this magical gene that catapults us to the tops of our fields that we still can't achieve some measure of success through our own blood, sweat and tears.

That's where I stumble in the article. Because he makes it sound like that if you don't have this magical juice flowing through your veins, that you haven't jumped through the hoops as a child and been deemed a prodigy from an early age, you might as well give it up and go home. That your work will automatically be inferior.

Is that true?

Maybe. Maybe not. It's still an asshole thing to say to anyone who's trying their level best to do what they're capable of at their level of ability.

You shouldn't listen to me, anyway. I didn't start writing until I was an adult, although I was reading as a teen. Usually fluff books. Therefore I don't have the proper foundation to write good fiction that will be accepted for awards.

Which is a good thing, because that's not my goal. So maybe I'm chafing a little at being forced into a comparison contest with genius level ability and natural talent that I have no interest in being in. And then, being told I'm coming up embarrassingly short.

Hah. Guess I'm not as meh as I though.

There were kernels of truth in the article...too bad he wrote like such an a**hole.

What this article made me think about:

1. If you've never even heard of the "expert" before, think before taking them seriously.

2. In any job, it's generally a good idea to pick something you have an aptitude for and apply yourself.

jjdebenedictis said:

He's not all wrong. He's not all right. But he does strike me as someone who is certain he knows so much more than he actually does. A lot of his wisest points are things you'd hear the average writer on AW say too.

Click to expand...

Exactly!

The thing about his being an "asshole" is... he made it pretty clear these were his thoughts upon leaving the gig, things he thought but would not and did not say to his students. People are acting like he actually told his students this - "Sorry, you suck. You will never be a writer."

Now, maybe you're thinking "Well, if you think that way about your students, even if you never say it, you shouldn't be a teacher." To that, I can only say that you have never been a teacher.

Every teacher has hopeless students. Students they know are never going to make it, whether it's passing algebra or becoming a published writer. It's the teacher's job to encourage and support every student as best they can, because sometimes those "hopeless" cases can surprise you. But anyone who's ever taught anything knows that you're going to have people who just can't hack it, whether it's laziness, insufficient background, or a lack of ability that no amount of dedication and perseverance can overcome.

And if you think that doesn't describe the great majority of people who want to become published writers, you're kidding yourself.

His article touched a nerve because he bruised the feelings of so many aspiring writers who don't want to be told that maybe they really aren't good enough. We all think we're the exception, even though most of us realize that the majority of us cannot be. He was speaking a harsh truth after the fact, but as far as we know he wasn't being an asshole to any actual students.

As for his speaking only for a particular brand of literary writing, I think that's somewhat true, but if you're tempted to dismiss his words as "Well, I'm not trying to win literary accolades, I just wanna write genre fic that sells," I think you are both missing the point and probably not really taking your writing seriously. Would he consider trashy popular fiction that sells despite being considered crap by most serious readers to be beneath his level and not what he was trying to teach people to write? Yeah, probably. I don't think that's a basis for assuming that he simply hates genre fiction or thinks everyone has to be striving for a Pulitzer, though.

Amadan said:

The thing about his being an "asshole" is... he made it pretty clear these were his thoughts upon leaving the gig, things he thought but would not and did not say to his students. People are acting like he actually told his students this - "Sorry, you suck. You will never be a writer."

Now, maybe you're thinking "Well, if you think that way about your students, even if you never say it, you shouldn't be a teacher." To that, I can only say that you have never been a teacher.

Every teacher has hopeless students. Students they know are never going to make it, whether it's passing algebra or becoming a published writer. It's the teacher's job to encourage and support every student as best they can, because sometimes those "hopeless" cases can surprise you. But anyone who's ever taught anything knows that you're going to have people who just can't hack it, whether it's laziness, insufficient background, or a lack of ability that no amount of dedication and perseverance can overcome.

And if you think that doesn't describe the great majority of people who want to become published writers, you're kidding yourself.

His article touched a nerve because he bruised the feelings of so many aspiring writers who don't want to be told that maybe they really aren't good enough. We all think we're the exception, even though most of us realize that the majority of us cannot be. He was speaking a harsh truth after the fact, but as far as we know he wasn't being an asshole to any actual students.

As for his speaking only for a particular brand of literary writing, I think that's somewhat true, but if you're tempted to dismiss his words as "Well, I'm not trying to win literary accolades, I just wanna write genre fic that sells," I think you are both missing the point and probably not really taking your writing seriously. Would he consider trashy popular fiction that sells despite being considered crap by most serious readers to be beneath his level and not what he was trying to teach people to write? Yeah, probably. I don't think that's a basis for assuming that he simply hates genre fiction or thinks everyone has to be striving for a Pulitzer, though.

Click to expand...

Claiming that those who find fault in his post must have had a "nerve touched" in regard to their own insecurities is pretty crummy. Not sure if you meant it that way, but come on.

People can disagree with his execution and with content within his blog post and be extremely secure in their writing. This is nothing more than the, "well, you don't like it because you just don't GET it" response. Which is a bit elitist.

Trust me, most people here get it.

Amadan said:

As for his speaking only for a particular brand of literary writing, I think that's somewhat true, but if you're tempted to dismiss his words as "Well, I'm not trying to win literary accolades, I just wanna write genre fic that sells," I think you are both missing the point and probably not really taking your writing seriously. Would he consider trashy popular fiction that sells despite being considered crap by most serious readers to be beneath his level and not what he was trying to teach people to write? Yeah, probably. I don't think that's a basis for assuming that he simply hates genre fiction or thinks everyone has to be striving for a Pulitzer, though.

Click to expand...

You're making a lot of assumptions here. Many people say writers like Dan Brown, Stephenie Meyer, and James Patterson aren't very good writers. They just write stuff that sells. So does that mean they don't take their writing seriously? Or does it mean that they take it seriously, just not in the same way MFA programs are looking for?

And what exactly is a "serious" reader? Is there some set of books you have to like to be considered serious? In my book, if you read a lot, you're a serious reader. Regardless of what you're reading. Everyone has different tastes in reading and writing, and no one should denigrate people's tastes.

I've mentioned that I didn't care for The Scarlet Letter or the Great Gatsby. But I have no problem with people enjoying those books. They just have different tastes. What I took exception to was that this guy thinks you have to like more complex and difficult books to be a successful writer. Maybe in his program, but not in general.

Of course, I'm coming at this from a different angle than many writers. I wasn't an English or Creative Writing major. I've generally found those classes boring (in the case of English) and useless (in the case of Creative Writing). I'm not a writer because I deeply love language. I'm a writer because I want to tell all the exciting stories in my head.

If that means I'm not the "real deal," or that I'm not a "serious" writer, then I'm okay with that.

rwm4768 said:

Of course, I'm coming at this from a different angle than many writers. I wasn't an English or Creative Writing major. I've generally found those classes boring (in the case of English) and useless (in the case of Creative Writing). I'm not a writer because I deeply love language. I'm a writer because I want to tell all the exciting stories in my head.

If that means I'm not the "real deal," or that I'm not a "serious" writer, then I'm okay with that.

Click to expand...

I am an English major. I have an MFA. I was one of the more successful students in my program. Had the most publications. Received THE fellowship (two years in a row). Received praise left and right. And I'm no more "serious" or "legit" than you are. Period.

As a matter of fact, I think many MFA folks spend a some time trying to undo some of the damage from their programs. And once you find that balance and learn how to move ahead in your own way, sky's the limit.

gettingby said:

How could a writing program do damage? That really makes no sense to me. And to say that these programs do damage to "many" writers sounds pretty outlandish. MFA programs are there to allow writers the time to make reading and writing a central focus for a pretty short time. I don't see how any of that could cause any type of damage.

Click to expand...

I'd love to hear your personal MFA experiences. I've met more MFA'ers who have come out of a program feeling this way (for many reasons) than I have people who claim it's changed their lives for the better and turned them into massively-successful "serious" writers.

Again, if your experience was different, I'd be glad to read about it. Mine was (overall) a positive experience, but I did come out having to self-educate on many fronts. And had to remind myself that the MFA workshop is not the be-all of a writer's life. It's more than a gaining of knowledge in the traditional program. There is social interaction, professional interactions, departmental politics, academic politics, the list goes on.

When you get more out of a 3-hour writer's workshop on plot and structure than you did in 3+ years during an MFA program (yay for those 15 minutes of Freytag's pyramid), you realize what was missing and how much you actually learn in the writing community and through your own means.

Can't say James Joyce helped me much on that front, but it sure helped me understand how to read Joyce's work. Which comes in handy 0% of the time in my present writing life.

Amadan said:

As for his speaking only for a particular brand of literary writing, I think that's somewhat true, but if you're tempted to dismiss his words as "Well, I'm not trying to win literary accolades, I just wanna write genre fic that sells," I think you are both missing the point and probably not really taking your writing seriously. Would he consider trashy popular fiction that sells despite being considered crap by most serious readers to be beneath his level and not what he was trying to teach people to write? Yeah, probably. I don't think that's a basis for assuming that he simply hates genre fiction or thinks everyone has to be striving for a Pulitzer, though.

Click to expand...

Sure. Okay.

I've been told I'm "the real deal." What does that mean, though? The person who told me is a writer I respect, who has an MFA. She lamented that I wasn't in an MFA program. The thing is, though, that I would have to consider that college has value to me. I don't. So I don't have a BA that could become an MFA and will never do so because I don't consider it important.

What I do have is an intuitive understanding of language. Writing makes sense to me and has always been easy. Just like typing---which I do at about 90wpm. Putting together a novel isn't terribly difficult for me. Does that make me somehow a "better" writer than other writers? Good lord, no! I still have to sit down at the same computer screen that everyone else does and crank out words. I still have to slog through edits and copyedits. All it really means is I can write part time and accomplish the same product that others can produce writing full time.

I suppose that I really don't take writing all that seriously. It's a sideline for me, but I do enjoy it. I know that actually makes a lot of writers angry (I know this because they've told me so). For some reason, it's not okay that it's easy for me and I don't take it seriously enough. But I can't help that. I do what I do and they do what they do. It's not a competition. Or it's not supposed to be anyway.

Amadan said:

The thing about his being an "asshole" is... he made it pretty clear these were his thoughts upon leaving the gig, things he thought but would not and did not say to his students. People are acting like he actually told his students this - "Sorry, you suck. You will never be a writer."

Click to expand...

If you think the attitude reflected in this piece didn't come through in his interactions with certain of his students, I've got a bridge to sell. Kids in algebra know when the teacher is frustrated with them (mine certainly did), and adults paying to take an MFA can probably intuit the same. But let's say he was sweet as pie and supportive as a helicopter mom to everyone. It doesn't lessen the sting for those who paid for his teaching to read this after-the-fact. It wasn't necessary to wrap his students negatively into the points he's making. It was just cruel, in my opinion.

Amadan said:

His article touched a nerve because he bruised the feelings of so many aspiring writers who don't want to be told that maybe they really aren't good enough.

Click to expand...

Rather than have you speak for me, I think I'll speak for myself: Um..no. That's not what touched a nerve for me. I'm operating under the assumption I'm not good enough until my acceptance rate tells me otherwise.

Amadan said:

He was speaking a harsh truth after the fact, but as far as we know he wasn't being an asshole to any actual students.

Click to expand...

Really? I bet the woman he mocked for complaining about The Great Gatsby might feel a little different about that.

Amadan said:

if you're tempted to dismiss his words as "Well, I'm not trying to win literary accolades, I just wanna write genre fic that sells," I think you are both missing the point and probably not really taking your writing seriously.

Click to expand...

Adding my voice to the "Wow..." crowd. *tosses 35,000 words written in the last three weeks into the bin*

Look, this guy's free to express his feelings and experiences. But if it's done so in a tone that implies he has fecal matter smeared on his upper lip, he's gonna get blow-back. I'm sure he expects it.

If he's such a great master of the art of writing, I wager he could have communicated his experience--and his words of wisdom--in a more tactful way. At least one that wouldn't make his ex-students regret they'd paid their tens of thousands of dollars for his "teaching."

ElaineA said:

If he's such a great master of the art of writing, I wager he could have communicated his experience--and his words of wisdom--in a more tactful way. At least one that wouldn't make his ex-students regret they'd paid their tens of thousands of dollars for his "teaching."

Click to expand...

That would be an interesting question. Do his former students believe they got something out of his courses? Would reading this essay negate whatever they got out of his courses?

I can imagine some of his students being hurt by this, but I'd bet most of them assume either they were one of the "real deals," or they don't care, because like most people here, they aren't particularly concerned about an MFA instructor's judgment on the publishing industry, only with whether or not they can get published.

If my teacher were a crank, had opinions I didn't like, or even thought I was hopelessly inept, I wouldn't particularly care so long as (1) he was civil in my presence; (2) I got what I wanted to get out of his instruction.

This essay was a public reflection of the "confessional" variety, clearly written with an intentionally sardonic edge. People are making much too much out of it.

I still think his essential points were correct.

Apparently I am not the real deal. I didn't start writing until I was thirty-three and hadn't wanted to before then.

I've never taken my reading seriously as all I want is to be transported away and enjoy the magic. As a result I've read everything from James Joyce to Dan Brown. Writing is too much fun to be a serious endeavour and I've no desire to win a Pulitzer prize.

Anyone who trashes a writer who has sold millions of books is imo a tad ridiculous. If someone's writing is good enough to entrance and entertain that many people then they've got a lot more right than they have wrong. I don't like Stephen King but he knows what he's talking about because he has been there, done that and wore the t-shirt; he's probably influenced a lot more writers than most MFA teachers. Personally, I think creative writing courses have a lot to answer for in terms of the amount of cardboard voice we have in modern literary fiction. There are some exceptional writers but there are a lot who are sticking to what they have taught which is making for a lot of really dull books that have forgotten they were supposed to have a plot.

However, my writing is good enough for a couple of agents to ask to see my next work and to get a place on a prestigious scriptwriting gig. (with my first ever scripts) To be honest I'd rather have a big house with a swimming pool than the Booker Prize

I've seen too many "poor" students go on to great success after leaving the influence of teachers such as this to give him (or teachers like him) too much credence. I've also seen too many people without a college education of any kind do better than those with to believe it's necessary to success, or even "better" success.

Even though I agreed with some of what he thought, I'd tell him to 'get over yourself' and move on.

gettingby said:

I guess I am lucky to be in such a great program. My program is very funded and takes only a handful of students each year. I'm not sure if I'm the real deal, but I do think some of the people I go to school with will be. Any of my classmates could be, really. And each semester, my work and the work of my fellow students gets better. I see obvious improvement in all of us.

The reason I wanted to do an MFA was to have reading and writing be at the center of my life for a few years. I wanted to give myself the best shot I could when it comes to fiction writing. On my own, I don't think I could have improved as quickly and maybe not ever as much as I feel I already have. I feel bad for MFA candidates who are not getting as much out of their programs as I am. I don't think any MFA program is about learning to write. It is about making writing a priority.

Workshops have been amazing. At my school, I only workshop with other MFA fiction writers. This sets the bar pretty high. I was quite intimidated by the other writers in my program when I first started. But I am thrilled to be in such good company. I hostly wish that I could be in this program for longer.

But this article did make me wonder what my professors might really be thinking. My professors seem like they want us to succeed. But I'm sure students of this guy probably felt the same way.

Click to expand...

This is very much the positive side of mine as well, but much of my experience came from trying to squeeze every drop of knowledge out of my experience. I also think that being the older student, I knew how to let a lot of bullshit bounce right off. I did see a good number change for the worse. Some were genre writers who were humiliated unnecessarily. (They might not have submitted genre to class, but once it was known they preferred to write genre, they became targets in a very vicious manner. And because of that, it also divided the class in uncomfortable ways. Again, it can be a pack mentality.)

I think every once in a blue moon, an MFA group can really click. I hear this is happening now at my alma mater which is ironic because three of the faculty members who caused the most issues have retired since I graduated.

I would hold on to your experience and really enjoy it.

I did see many of my fellow classmates grow as writers. Some just blew my frackin' mind. Others phoned it in. A few who had amazing talent, frittered it away or are still trying to recover from some of the negativity they experienced within the program. I'm not saying they were delicate flowers who couldn't take critique, I'm saying they were treated in a very unprofessional way by faculty and students. (The faculty really "showing" how burnt out they were.) It's heart-breaking.

Thanks for sharing your experience. This makes me happy to hear. MFA programs seem to get a bad rap everywhere--especially within some writing communities.