I’m deep in page proofs at the moment. Carefully reading a typeset version of my book line by line, sometimes reading whole chapters aloud, never quite going as fast I would like, and always fearing that I’m not moving slow enough. It’s the contradictory nature of proofs, and you want to make sure that you find this sort of thing
I was going to put up a post on pop-culture references, but I think I’ll leave that until next week. Instead, and briefly, I thought I’d write something about not being sensible. Sometimes when you teach writing, what you are really teaching is the middle ground. The things to be aware of, the things to cut from your writing, bad habits etc. What’s harder to teach is how to let go. How to go OTT.
Because sometimes you have to.
Now you might not agree with me, because as with every writing rule, concept, manifesto whatever, it’s both right and wrong because everyone’s different. (And it’s not really a rule, it’s just me trying to avoid my proofs, I suspect)
I’m excited by prose that is controlled and reckless, dark and light, and sometimes it’s not about having a sensible amount of recklessness, or a reasonable amount of experiment, it’s about letting go entirely.
We (that’s a generalised we, and possibly a meaningless one generated to produce this argument – shoot yourself in the foot much, trent?) sometimes have an image of writing as being only one true thing: disciplined, functional, a carriage for the story, which is all well and good. But why shouldn’t it be something else too, why can’t it be like lightning on occasion, random, shocking and powerful?
William Burroughs comes to mind for me, and William Faulkner, and Emily Brontë too. Let me stress that I’m not talking about the process of the writing, or the polishing of the prose, but the writing itself. Come to think of it it’s there in all the writers I love. Now, I know I’m being a bit vague (more than a bit) and trying to describe the intangible. But I think I’m on to something – or maybe I’m just tired.
Whose prose does this to you? Whose stories have gone totally OTT and carried you along with them?
I better get back to my proofs.
I think you’re absolutely right. One of the reasons I quit teaching Creative Writing was that I had got myself utterly stagnated in teaching the ‘safe’ ways of writing. For my own work, I needed to be able to go out on a limb and take some risks, and being constantly surrounded by such ‘writing 101′ concepts was starting to infiltrate my brain.
Sometimes you have to just say, screw it, I WILL have 15 different POV characters, or I WILL sacrifice consistency for energy, in order to reach the next level.
I do think it is possible to teach a far less safe version of Creative Writing 101 to students, focusing on experimentation rather than perfection of form, but I wasn’t that teacher. I really would like to be that writer, though.
One work which comes to mind was an Australian YA novel, Gracie Faltrain Gets It Right. On the surface a fairly ordinary story about girl-meets-soccer-ball, what made this book special was, well, having about 15 different POV voices. The story is told not only through Gracie’s eyes, but those of her friends, ex boyfriend, new love interest, parents, teachers, etc. The really crazy part is when the voices turn into a kind of conversation or email exchange, bouncing off each other, though the conversation itself is not actually happening. Like if all their inner thoughts got together to have a party and observe the story.
It’s nuts, it should never work, but it did.
As far as OTT stories go… I can’t go past Gail Carriger’s Soulless. It’s a funny, frothy, snarky paranormal romance set in an AU Victorian England, in which the heroine slays at least one vampire with a parasol, and yet the humour is matched with deadly seriousness. Awesome stuff.
Thanks, Tansy. It’s hard to mark “dangerous” writing too. Soulless is on top of my to be read list. Love her blog too. And, hey, I’ve only got fifty pages of page proofs to read (and I resolved the final plot problem that my copy editor had, so I’m feeling very virtuous this afternoon).
Dougalas Adams must go into this category. You don’t care if sometimes he doesn’t make sense, it sounds so good.
Jeff Noon too, leaves no stone unturned in Vurt, Pollen and Nymphomation. Once he sinks his teeth into something, he won’t let go until it’s well and truely dead.
Both excellent examples, Chris.
Trent, I’m loving reading your articles. Now get back to work!
Louise
Thanks, Louise.
I have been working hard, I promise. Just sent off my proofs!
Trent