Rough and ready writers (only slightly a gender rant)
My attention has been drawn by the Twitterverse to an article the thesis of which is that men don't read because authors are too — well, the writer doesn't use the word "effeminate," but that's clearly what's implied. The writers whom the author yearns for are those hard-drinking, hard-riding, hard-shooting, hard-loving men — men — of literary legend: Hemingway, Byron, Thomas (as in Dylan), Vonnegut, even Christopher Marlowe (killed in a bar fight and maybe was a spy). There's no denying that these writers have their appeal as writers, and perhaps even as role models (God help us).
There's also no denying that men as a rule are very, very, very unlikely to read women authors if they can tell from the cover that the authors are, in fact, women (or even remind them of women). And there's no denying that this is a gender-based issue that comes from the systemic and systematic devaluing of women's voices and perspectives, no matter what they are saying or how they are saying it. And I deeply and emotionally agree with all those who say that all people should be at least given a truly fair hearing, and that currently that's impossible, but we need to take whatever steps we can to make it so.
But there's another point that can be drawn here (perhaps less important, but still interesting): is it that we writers have lost the knack of exuberant, robust, extravagant living? Do we travel with not quite enough money in our pockets? Do we march through the streets shouting protest slogans? Have we ever hit something as hard as we could? Slid along a rope down a 50-meter cliff? Gone camping in freezing weather? Clung desperately to a runaway horse? Pulled an airplane out of an incipient, and possibly lethal, spin? Engaged with the world in all our — and its — physicality and boldness?
I know a number of writers who do (and I will admit to having done all the things in that list). But I also know a lot of writers who don't. I'm not saying it makes their writing any less gorgeous and skillful. But can any writer afford to spurn out of hand any experience that might make their writing braver and more immediate? Would Jack London, say, have been as good a writer if he hadn't lived the intense life that he did? Can getting out there and letting yourself be more than a little bit physically uncomfortable deepen your writing — no matter what gender you are?
No, really. Start planning that camping trip right now. Just one night. Not too far from home. Go, rain or shine. Bring a notebook. See what happens.
posted by Laura E. Goodin @ 12:00 PM (permalink)
8 comment(s)
8 Comments:
I have a small confession to make. I rarely read male authors. I find them less able to describe the intricacies of emotions and more likely simply to describe a series of events. Also modern male authors invariably fixate on the penis. But that is just my opinion.
I'll provide a balancing comment.
I find a certain class of female writing completely dull. I am bored shitless by the intricacies of emotion, and if there are no events in the story, I really don't want to know about it.
However, I'm far less fixated on the penis than on attractive parts of the female anatomy. And at the same time, there are plenty of female writers whose work I enjoy; the author of this blog included (as she well knows.)
There is a gender divide, yes. Novels about endless talk and angst are what I take to the toilet when I find myself unfortunately constipated. Happily, the novels then serve a double purpose.
It isn't black and white. There are women who write rousing, engaging, active fiction. There are men who write dull, talky, angsty pap. Personally, I'm more interested in the central thesis of this post: the need for a life of engagement and experience.
And yes: I think some of that is missing. Try reading anything in the capital-ell Literature genre at the moment. Chronicling and exploring the lives of early 21st century city/suburb dwellers is a dull, annoying waste of time.
Life ought to be a challenge. If it isn't, how the hell are you going to write fiction that challenges?
PS - haven't clung to a runaway horse since I was a kid, but that list fits me, yep. And I could add a few things to it. Lately, the challenge of raising three very bright kids in a rural environment is proving a handful too...
...Except the airplane spin. I can't fly a plane. Yet.
And re-reading Elen's comment... I'm gonna smile, and chalk it up to the same old same old.
It's just fine for a woman to say that 'modern male authors 'invariably' fixate on the penis'. And even though I'd count myself a modern male author whose work appears to be surprisingly lacking in penis-fixation... I guess I just have to sit back and let her have her say, eh?
Because, you know. It's not sexist if a woman says it about men, is it? Even if it does come with a tag as blatantly stupid as "invariably". (Doubly stupid for someone who 'rarely reads' male authors... guess it must be easier to make a blanket stereotype if you only have to draw on a limited range of subjects, eh?)
Chin-chin.
Ah. Because you don't know Elen, you don't know that she often uses absurd exaggeration as a joke. I'm pretty sure the "invariably" was one such occasion.
Goodness please don't over analyse my glib comment!
Hmm. I apologise, Elen.
You touched a sore point. As Laura can tell you, I'm pretty solidly *not* in the dinosaur camp. When editing, for example, I have always utterly disregarded gender of writer and picked stories I like. And it seems I pick about 50/50 - which hopefully lifts me out of the group who use the 'story over gender' line to defend picking all-male lineups.
Whether or not I qualify as one of the white hats, I admit I'm increasingly angry with those women who have happily accepted the fruits of feminism-driven social change, but have not considered their own part in it.
I don't suggest you're one such. Nor do I suggest they're a majority. But I note that your throwaway comment is just that - a throwaway, to you. But to someone on the wrong end of it?
Consider this: would you write, even as a throwaway, something like this: "I rarely read Jewish writers... they invariably fixate on money"?
I also note that I've seen many, many occasions where male folks I know have made just such a throwaway comment as yours, in jest, with all best intention. And I have seen those men subjected to the most intense and unpleasant 're-education' from offended women that I have made it my personal policy NEVER to make a mistake like that. Watching the poor bastards retreat into a corner muttering "It was just a joke!" is no fun. (And yet I've never seen it happen to a woman, no matter how belittling the remarks may have been.)
So... I do indeed apologise. For my tone. But I hope you'll look back at your 'glib comment', and recognise that 'glib comments' from women which target men have as much potential for harm as the reverse.
This isn't about PC. This is a straight-up statement from a male writer who is getting tired of being classified as a second-class citizen because nobody seems to consider men anything but a force for ill, and a reasonable target for blame.
It would seem that we're blaming men for having male personality traits and women for having female ones. Let's not forget that there are lots of people who thoroughly enjoy such traits in their respective (or prospective) partners. But just to celebrate the subject while we're onto it, I'd like to quote one Professor Higgins:
Why can't a woman be more like a man?
Men are so honest, so thoroughly square;
Eternally noble, historically fair.
Who, when you win, will always give your back a pat.
Why can't a woman be like that?
Why does every one do what the others do?
Can't a woman learn to use her head?
Why do they do everything their mothers do?
Why don't they grow up, well, like their father instead?
Why can't a woman take after a man?
Men are so pleasant, so easy to please.
Whenever you're with them, you're always at ease.
Would you be slighted if I didn't speak for hours?
COLONEL PICKERING:
Of course not.
PROFESSOR HIGGINS:
Would you be livid if I had a drink or two?
COLONEL PICKERING:
Nonsense.
PROFESSOR HIGGINS:
Would you be wounded if I never sent you flowers?
COLONEL PICKERING:
Never.
PROFESSOR HIGGINS:
Well, why can't a woman be like you?
One man in a million may shout a bit.
Now and then, there's one with slight defects.
One perhaps whose truthfulness you doubt a bit,
But by and large we are a marvelous sex!
Why can't a woman take after a man?
'Cause men are so friendly, good-natured and kind.
A better companion you never will find.
If I were hours late for dinner would you bellow?
COLONEL PICKERING:
Of course not.
PROFESSOR HIGGINS:
If I forgot your silly birthday, would you fuss?
COLONEL PICKERING:
Nonsense.
PROFESSOR HIGGINS:
Would you complain if I took out another fellow?
Pickering
Never.
PROFESSOR HIGGINS:
Why can't a woman be like us?
[dialog]
PROFESSOR HIGGINS:
Why can't a woman be more like a man?
Men are so decent, such regular chaps;
Ready to help you through any mishaps;
Ready to buck you up whenever you're glum.
Why can't a woman be a chum?
Why is thinking something women never do?
And why is logic never even tried?
Straightening up their hair is all they ever do.
Why don't they straighten up the mess that's inside?
Why can't a woman behave like a man?
If I was a woman who'd been to a ball,
Been hailed as a princess by one and by all;
Would I start weeping like a bathtub overflowing,
Or carry on as if my home were in a tree?
Would I run off and never tell me where I'm going?
Why can't a woman be like me?
end quote.
Best,
Robert
I have been reading this blog for ages. Keep up the amazing work you are doing here.
Post a Comment
<< Home