J. S. {*********@yahoo.com}
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 12:12:59 -0800 (PST)
From: J. S.
Subject: Re: class today
To: t. p. n. (professor)
wrote:
With regards to Steven's story. Didn't he create a preasant tense story in the truest sense of the word...a real time story that was taking place on the page while simulatneously taking place in real life. Talk about creative non-fiction. The first part of his story where "Steven" is sitting at his desk smirking, while the rest of the class realizes they have been had. It was happening on paper and in reality. This story was written for a specific audience and could only have it's effect on this audience at this time. It was meant for the workshop. It is a totally different form of writing or entertainment or art. It makes me wonder about the goal of stories or art in general. Is it to get published as R. said today? Yes, that's part of it. But the real goal is to move people right? To make people feel something or see something. Steven's story created all the stuff we love about movie! s and stories(art)... anger, frustration, humiliation,confusion, humor, etc. The difference is we couldn't experience these emotions from the somewhat detached perspective of reader/observer...a rubber necker watching the carnage of an auto wreck from the safety of our car. We were the carnage. It created these feelings in us and totally involved us in the most personal way didn't it? I think so...at least right now. Am I giving him too much credit? I don't think so. As his title implies "Man these Stories Write Themselves" this story was writing itself today in class as we were experiencing it. Our initial reading of the story before class was only the start, we had to get to the work shop for it to really climax and reveal itself. It was written specifically for us not for some publisher. Again, I don't mean to say that I beleive it is wrong to want to get published at all, that's ! how you get your story out there...I want my stories published! It is a huge goal and completely necessary...but that is only a small part of the larger goal one has as writer. Right? I am going to bet that other people besides me were moved enough to email you about today. Am I totally ridiculous? Maybe he didn't intend any of this and I am just playing right into his hands...trying to be a deep thinker, expertly reading between the lines while he sits there laughing at me.
sorry this is so long,
J.
t. p. n. {**********@yahoo.com}
wrote:
Yes, the goal is to move people, but generally we want the words themselves, our stories, to do the moving, but all the things you said are sound and interesting. Can I share it with the class using the class list? I think your comments would be interesting to them. t.
J. S. {*********@yahoo.com}
wrote:
Sure, that would be okay with me.
-J.
j. l. r. {******@u.washington.edu}
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 13:19:11 -0800 (PST)
From: j. l. r.
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: Re: steven's story
I can respect experimentation. If not for experimentation, art might
become fairly stagnant. BUT. An artist, when he or she is experimenting,
should not be laughing AT his or her audience. They should be laughing
with them, if they are laughing at all. Otherwise that person is no artist
at all, but a prankster.
J.
J. L. R.
J. L. W. {********@u.washington.edu}
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 13:26:24 -0800 (PST)
From: J. L. W.
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: response to J.L.R.'s question
Dear all,
Just a brief response: I believe we asked Stephen what his goal was, and he
shrugged his shoulders. T.P.N. outright asked that question and the response from
the author was agreement that not a whole lot of thought went into the goal
except chaos. I think that this particular story failed to achieve anything more
than annoyance on part of the class. If the point of discussing this further is
to find some value in Stephen's story, the discussion is pointless. To call
Stephen's story 'art' is wrong. Most artists will agree that simple vandalism or
name-calling, or any other tactic to incite anger or an emotional response isn't
art, not even performance art. It doesn't require much thought or originality to
pull a silly prank, not matter how much time was spent to write all the various
stories (which I believe T. even pointed out, weren't that well written). If
we want to discuss how a story could accomplish the goals that J.L.R. is
suggesting, I'd only be interested in doing th!
at.
Thanks,
J.
J. L. R. {******@u.washington.edu}
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 14:44:50 -0800 (PST)
From: J. L. R.
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: Re: steven's story
Hi Everyone,
So I've been thinking about Steven's story (stories) quite a bit the last couple
of days. I'd like to throw some more thoughts out, in case anyone has their own
thoughts to add.
Mainly, it has got me to thinking about what our obligations are as writers.
Especially when that concerns any obligation we have to readers. It could very
well be the case that Steven's intention with the story was for us all to have a
laugh. Of course we know it wasn't recieved that way. I think for most of us, we
felt like our time and energy had been wasted.
It becomes tricky though. I think as writers we have to be very aware of the
effect our writing will have on others. John Gardner says (in The Art of
Fiction) something to the effect of, when we write, we should write as if
someone on the verge of suicide will be reading our work. It could potentially
have very drastic consequences. That may be a little egotistical, but it's a
good point. Fiction can have a big effect on people, as we experienced the other
day. I think it's our job as writers to keep this in mind. It doesn't mean we
should change anything to accomodate our readers, necessarily. I think it means
that we have the very tricky job of trying to foresee the effect our writing
will have. What happened the other day pissed a lot of us off. But it shows that
we have an obligation to readers, to write the best fiction we can and not play
tricks on people.
This is a long one, and I'm sorry if I've rambled a bit. But I would like to see
what other people's thoughts are on all of this.
See you all monday,
J.
J. L. R.
From: d. v. k. {*******@u.washington.edu}
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: Re: steven's story
hELLO,
My thoughts on this one are that, yes, we do have an obligation to readers to write the best fiction we can, but as writers, I believe that is a given. I think that, first and foremost, we write for ourselves, with (hopefully) the intention of creating something meaningful that will touch other people. I think Steven's intention was to create an extravagant prank, it was something he obviously spent some amount of time on with writing several different versions of the story. I'm not so sure he deserves as much credit as he's starting to be given for creating a real-time story, however. The audience = us, and we're an audience that is going to give this story thorough thought and energy as the course format demands. Therefore, I can't help but see this as an unfair satire because most people in this class are (and I'm sure did, as they've done on every story) going to give their best effort to offer their time and thoughts on a story, then to show up, and find that their efforts were for nothing other than someone's idea of a joke--which I will hold was the primary motivation of this since Steven didn't make any validation for why he did this, and therefore I don't think he deserves this much pondering over what the supreme artistic statement is, because I don't think there is one.
**************************
D. K.
University of Washington
J. H. C. {******@u.washington.edu}
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 15:21:30 -0800
From: J. H. C.
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: new subject: what we owe the reader
I think that, if we are going to have this discussion, we should take what happened on Wed. out of the equation. Which is why I changed the subject line on this e-mail.
That said, here's my 2 cents:
1) Stories that play a trick on the reader never serve the reader, they just
serve the writer.
2) Bad writing serves the writer.
Good writing entertains the reader. GREAT writing elevates the reader.
Great writing lets us experience the world in a whole new way - good or bad.
It widens our focus. It also probably entertains us - in some way - along
the way.
R. M. {******@u.washington.edu}
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 16:22:58 -0800 (PST)
From: R. M.
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: Re: new subject: what we owe the reader
I really do feel that there is a certain level of not just quality we are expected to produce in this class, but also a level of professionalism. I don't think Wednesday reflected that, and I agree with what J.H.C. has stated. I don't think tricks are ever truly designed to serve the reader because there is a profound difference between a plot twist and a plain old trick. Additionally, I think what J.L.R. said was very true. Writing should have some kind of importance that goes along with it, otherwise it's just stuff taking up space. There are many, many people in the world who can write nice stuff, or tricky stuff, but it takes something bigger, more important, to write great stuff. I thought we were striving to reach some of that great stuff over everything else. To throw out another agreement, D.K. is right. Wednesday's story wasn't designed as some deep metaphysical dissection of the modern fiction, it was a joke. I think that's all that can be said about it.!
Rachael
P. L. G. {******@u.washington.edu}
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 17:47:22 -0800 (PST)
From: P. L. G.
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: Re: steven's story
484 Comrades:
In general response to the e-mail class discussion of Steven's workshop, I think
that J.L.R., bless your heart, *is* giving far too much credit to this event as a
literary/social experiment. I thought that Steven's story was an expertly
executed prank, and a much more original way to avoid criticism in a workshop
than by simply not showing up for class. I personally did not feel that my time
had been "wasted" in critiquing his work, because I had to write a critique for
that day regardless, and I mainly felt disappointment that I could not praise
the sentence-level writing of the story I read in a workshop setting. I do not
know what the two other stories he wrote were like, but the one I read - while
slight in tone for its number of pages - held a great deal of potential as a
quirky story that with some revision could have had an amount of depth. There
was much to appreciate in the story I read, and it is a shame that that was not
able to be discussed on Wednesday, I thin!
k the author could have received some valuable feedback.
While the idea of "present-tense" literature is intriguing, I feel that Steven's stories can only be discussed in the context of performance art or social experiment. This prank used literature as its medium but gave the same immediate and transitory effect as wrapping a bridge in plastic under cover of night - it's interesting, and causes people to look at the commonplace in a new light, but its true "meaning" is always going to be open to interpretation. At heart, it has nothing to do with plastic, or bridges, or writing, but uses these things to make a completely removed statement. The fact that we are in a writing class, prepared to analyze writing, leaves us at a loss as to what to make of this trick, which uses writing to examine something else. It was different, it gives us all a good story to tell people about writing workshops, and it's over. I suppose we can all muse over what lasting significance this event has, but as of now I'm clueless.
I am, however, very interested in J.L.R.'s question on the obligation of writers to their readers. We seemed to have trouble in class Wednesday putting our fingers on what exactly a single-question topic on the subject of morality in writing would be, but what I "heard" in our efforts was the question of responsibility - do we have any as writers? J.L.R. included in his e-mail a quote about how one should assume their writing is being read by someone on the verge of suicide, which seems a vivid example of this question.
Personally, I feel that the writer has no moral responsibility to the reader besides providing a work that is spelled correctly and has its pages in the correct order. I say this because I assume that the definition of "morality" in fiction is a directive to provide values and hope in all works of writing, which I can safely say is not the case in many of the pieces of literature we have read throughout our lives. If the writer has any responsibility, it is to convey their meaning clearly and powerfully. The writer should have enough respect for the reader to assume that his/her words are not going to be treated as Gospel.
This reminds me of last year's fracas with author Jonathan Franzan and his novel "The Corrections". His novel was chosen for Oprah's Book Club, and he publicly disdained her reading audience, resulting in him not appearing on her show. Regardless of how you may feel about Oprah and her Book Club, this act struck me as supremely arrogant, the thought that a writer should be able to "choose" his/her audience. To me, it seemed he was saying, "You live in the city, so you can read my book; you all are in the suburbs, so you wouldn't understand it". This illustrates why I think that the writer really has no responsibility to the reader. The writer should write what he wants to say in the best way he can say it, and hope that his work falls into the hands of someone who identifies with it. Who is to say who will be affected by one's work? One can only make sure that what is on the page reflects what one wants to say, and hope that it benefits someone, somewhere.
In conclusion, and to tie this back to Steven's story, I think that it is a personal judgment call as to how much time one spends on any given piece of writing. Many years ago I was of the mind, "I likes what I likes and I dismiss what I don't". I have lately gone somewhat far in the other direction to examine those works I don't immediately have an affinity for, say, oh, Lorrie Moore's stories. I now have an almost masochistic compulsion to examine what in a piece offended me, and try to see what the author was trying to convey, and try to figure out why it affected me negatively. Did it challenge my long-held vision of the world? Did it make me, for a half-hour, part of a world I find distasteful? Is there *anything* I can appreciate in a story I dislike, and can I see how maybe it might have value for someone else?
These questions are difficult to pose for Steven's workshop since it was such a small, immediate event. The notions of poking fun at the "seriousness" of literary criticism are interesting, but I wonder how much of that was the intent of this prank. I think that in writing, one should reflect one's own vision and leave it up to the reader to either identify with that or put the book down. You can only control yourself, and as unfortunate as that is for potential suicides around the world, they are not your responsibility. Every piece of writing is one person's attempt to evoke universal truths, it is up to you as a reader to either agree or disagree.
Sorry this is so long and yes, I *do* have a Chaucer final paper to write that I'm procrastinating on.
See you all Monday,
-P.
J. L. R. {******@u.washington.edu}
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 02:50:41 -0800 (PST)
From: J. L. R.
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: Re: steven's story
I would just like to say that, Steven, if you have anything to add--in your
defense or even against yourself--I hope that you would add it. We are all
talking about you in the 3rd person. It's sounds kind of funny actually.
I have nothing new to add. This has actually turned out to be a great discussion
list. Whether we want to talk about the story from wednesday, or ignore it, we
all seem to have quite a lot to talk about. I know I do. And I find it fairly
comical.
Cheers,
Have a good weekend y'all,
J.
J. L. R.
t. p. n. {**********@yahoo.com}
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 10:25:14 -0800 (PST)
From: t. p. n.
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: Re: steven's story
wrote:
Hi All,
Yes, it would be nice to hear from Steven. I want to thank both J.L.R. and Steven for getting this discussion started because it has been an opportunity for many people in the class to fortify and express their view of the writer's role and obligation, or lack there of, to his or her audience. (Perhaps this is the fiction and morality discussion requested by J.L.R.) The postings have been eloquent, and I found myself agreeing with much of what was said, especially those that saw Steven's story experiment as an elaborate prank. That being said, I want to say that I believe that Steven conducted this truly original prank in the spirit good fun and had no intention to harm or hurt. I want to acknowledge that he's in a bit of a difficult position now, perhaps more so than he might have anticipated, and I hope he will finish his last week in the class, knowing that he is welcome and knowing that he has ignited an interesting discussion in the class. Sometimes! , the repercussions of a story or an act become more interesting than the thing itself!
Because the only real loss was Steven's, who lost the opportunity to be workshopped, I must conclude that while I fail to see the experiment as a "real time" story, no harm has been done either.
Steven? Anything?
T.
Steven A. Taylor {[email protected]}
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 16:42:14 -0800 (PST)
From: Steven A. Taylor
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: An intention to respond to :::: RE: steven's story
Yes. I'll respond between tonight and Sunday evening, whenever I have the time to properly articulate a response.
I'll be in class this week, don't worry about me.
Thanks,
Steven
Steven A. Taylor {[email protected]}
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 18:54:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Steven A. Taylor {[email protected]}
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: Re: steven's story
To the class: (this is going to be a bit long; warning in advance)
I'd like to start this off with some written quotes that say a lot about me right now. I'm not going to include names, because these came from written responses and I don't know if the writers want their names shared.
"Do readers enjoy being tricked at the end of a story? Not especially."
"But then again, you probably don't care about the average reader, so whatever."
"There is more going on in the writer's mind than there is on the page."
"There is no reason to understand it as more than a literary exercise written to satisfy a whim or curiosity of the writer."
"What is the point? Why was it written?"
I commend you for your foresight. You didn't even have to attend the workshop to understand much of what I have to think.
After those first three emails, I was all ready to blast off on every minute point discussed. I was backed into a corner, what can I say? After the last seven or eight, though, I have been nothing but entertained. I love receiving my hate mail!
Let me just try to clarify some things, here. (While trying not to sound egotistical, though realizing that people will feel how they feel regardless) I ended up writing five stories. No, I don't think they're very great individually. If you read them all together, in order, it has the potential to work as a really long short story. The only problem: they all return to the same place to start each one. This is for two reasons: 1) to make the first pages on each story the same for the workshop; 2) to show that no matter how good we think we are, we can always fall into the same traps over and over in our writing. Think of the movie Groundhog Day. You strive to better yourselves in your writing, but inevitably, most of the time, you'll find yourself in the same spot, writing the same way, at the inception of every story.
There is a running theme throughout the stories, though it can be perceived as being hidden or non-existent, especially since you couldn't read them all. Besides, it's more of a personal theme that I don't know if I portrayed well enough for others to get if they don't know me. Mostly, it is about the writing process and how I let my imagination run wild (that's where I got the title from). Just taking a simple idea, something in real life, and imagining it happening to you. How would you react? How would you want yourself to react? Yes, very juvenile - I've been exercising this since my childhood, imagining running away or whatnot. In deeper, it's about some of my greatest fears, and it all comes back to writing badly/failing as a writer (which is probably working its way through me right now).
No, I don't usually consider the obligation to the reader. I write for myself. No, that may not pay the bills, but if I didn't write with myself as the target audience, then I wouldn't have the passion that I have for writing. If I wanted to be a mindless writing drone, I would be in journalism class right now learning how to fit as much information into as little space as possible while trying to appeal to the broadest audience I can muster, instead of a creative writing workshop - where the goal is to take a chance. To create something unique. If nothing else, you have to admit that I did both of those things, regardless of how successful you feel I was in my statement. Or how meaningless you feel that statement was.
So, what was the point? I'm going to try to answer that, but most of you
already have your own conclusions. No matter what I say, once people have ideas
implanted into their minds, nothing I can say will change that. But, isn't that
really the point? For you to draw your own conclusions? More than anything, I
hate spelling things out for people. One of my biggest criticisms is that my
stories can be too confusing. I think that may, in part, be a result of my
inability to articulate everything that I have in my head onto the written page.
Maybe it's because I rushed through these, writing four stories in two days,
then spending another week and a half writing the last one and revising the
other four. However, I intend for a lot of my ambiguity that I create. I don't
really want you to understand what I have in my head, so you can draw your own
conclusions. I know that you all love to closely, critically analyze stories,
so it drives you crazy when the author doesn'!
t let you understand everything that's going on. For many of you, you like to
have everything wrapped up. You want to know what happened so you can wrap your
minds around it and provide a decent response. In all honesty, I don't want to
answer the question posed at the beginning of this paragraph, because I'd find
it much more entertaining to let you all ponder it.
My point: to write something bigger. I had the urge to write a lot at the beginning of this quarter. I wanted to do something different, to shake up the workshop process. I wanted to entertain myself. I wanted to mess with you so I could get a laugh. I hadn't anticipated the response I got, though I anticipated many, many others. In the end, I believe that any response is better than no response at all. When I told my friends and family what I was doing, I got such a positive response, I only assumed that I would get a similar response from the students of the class at least. I'm not too concerned, though. I find it all endlessly fascinating.
As I read through the emails, I wondered why people hadn't considered that maybe I was too afraid of criticism, so I decided to do this. Well, I'm not afraid of criticism. I'm my biggest critic and I feel that I have to be. We've already discussed this, not everything in workshops will work for the writer. Just "take it under advisement" and move on. So, I decided to take the entire workshop "under advisement," to see if I could survive on my own. I'll have to do this when I graduate anyway. I have to look at my work objectively and criticize accordingly. Last quarter, I sat and listened to the workshop, took thorough notes, pondered my story for two solid weeks, then ended up doing my own thing, scrapping much of my previous story and thus making the workshop useless. Maybe it made me think, but I'm under the opinion that my deadline makes me think harder.
In closing, I'd like to say that, in my story, I never called myself "brilliant," nor did I say that I was a better writer than any of you. If you're that insecure that you feel that the stories are talking to you and making fun of you, then I'm sorry. That's not my problem. I'd like to address one of you right here, though I won't mention your name. No, you shouldn't have to feel that your life is threatened, nor should you "call the cops." I can play Smart-Ass too, you see. If you do feel frightened by my story, then haven't I written one piece of vivid fiction? Believe me, other people have seen my writing as "a cry for help," and I'm still here. So there!
So, I don't exactly know how "welcome" I'm going to be, but I'm sure I'll be in class tomorrow. I'd like to thank those of you who have expressed support for me. It is much appreciated. To those of you who don't, well, then I leave you with this thought: you'll most-likely get a better grade than me in this class anyway. I know that's what's most important to some of you, just like those "royalties" right?
Steven
t. p. n. {**********@yahoo.com}
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 07:45:22 -0800 (PST)
From: t. p. n.
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: Class Discussion List {[email protected]}
Subject: Re: steven's story
Thanks for letting us in on some of what you were thinking on this, Steven. I'd like to make yours the last word on this, as I think we've heard a full spectrum of opinions now.
J. H. C. {******@u.washington.edu}
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 08:23:24 -0800
From: J. H. C.
To: [email protected]
Subject: not directly about your story
Hey, I was thinking of you this weekend. I'm reading a book I think you (might) enjoy, though I'm not to the end yet and I'm having to wade in places, so I can't give it my FULL endorsement. Still, where I am in it made me think it might be something you'd be interested in.
The book is called "The Magus" and is by John Fowles (wrote "French Lieutenant's Woman"). The entire thing is about this elaborate experiment a wealthy guy living on an island in Greece plays. He sort of casts these people in a real life play (without them knowing it) then keeps manipulating the world around them so as to keep changing the outcome, experiment, etc. It's kinda bizarre and I can't decide what the guy is trying to get out of it, but it's got me intrigued. If you pick it up commit to wading through about the first 1/3 - 1/2 of the book. It gets going after that.
Cheers.
J.