From a New Yorker interview with the writer Lorrie Moore.
The last question in the interview is about something Moore wrote in the New Yorker last month about finding Trump's voice "reassuring." I blogged about that here. The interviewer, the New Yorker fiction editor Deborah Treisman, informs her that "The response on Twitter was censorious" and asks her if she felt "misunderstood." She says she felt "misread" and, in fact, "Not really read at all."
I only meant to present some self-mocking, cock-eyed optimism.... I was a little rambling and wrote past the assigned word count, so things had to be removed from every paragraph. But the point at the beginning is that, if you are in the next room, feeling mildly deranged, and can’t hear the words, the potus can sometimes sound like Merv Griffin or Mel Tormé: one hears a crooner’s croon. This is not praise. This is noting a sound... Twitter’s feeding frenzies seem a display of people with obscene amounts of time on their hands, yet a disinclination to read in any real way. And it seems possible that this one was triggered by the right to get the left to eat its own....ADDED: The 7th comment at my blog post about Moore's meditation on Trump's voice — from commenter eric — was "She's about to be cancelled and will soon apologize."
AND: If you write about politics and don't say predictable things in an obvious way, you will be misread and read in a way that's well described as not really read at all. But that makes it even more important to keep writing where you don't belong, in that world that is simultaneously beautiful and unwelcoming.
पोस्ट्स
६१ टिप्पण्या:
Twitter’s feeding frenzies seem a display of people with obscene amounts of time on their hands, yet a disinclination to read in any real way.
Pure gold.
The credentialed elite find solace in the masses contempt for the elite. This seems contradictory, but ignorance finds a way.
* Best German accent *
No deviance will be tolerated. No misunderstandings will be allowed. No excuses will be accepted.
My Lord, these people are evil.
"Twitter’s feeding frenzies seem a display of people with obscene amounts of time on their hands, yet a disinclination to read in any real way."
Twitter is populated by the insane Left.
Do not cross the hivemind- mind-crime speech-crime left.
I still get FB feeds from very old friends that are on the left side of the political spectrum. The amount of energy they spend seeking out Orange Man Bad memes is astonishing. And the non-stop RAGE! It must be exhausting.
Drowning in their own bile.
"Twitter’s feeding frenzies seem a display of people with obscene amounts of time on their hands, yet a disinclination to read in any real way."
Much of the interview -- the part I didn't quote -- is about how she hasn't had the time she needs to do her writing. She's been teaching creative writing all these years (mostly at the University of Wisconsin but more recently at Vanderbilt) and she's needed to do this to make money. And she was preoccupied raising a child. Asked to explain why she's written so few novels, she said that with short stories you get paid twice -- once when it goes in a magazine and later when you have a book of collected stories. Why can't she live off her writing alone? She's such a highly admired writer!
I can't imagine having that level of success as a writer and also going on and on with creative writing classes — reading all that amateur writing instead of the very best writing.
“Possibly triggered by the right”, but probably not.
I find it somewhat ironic, Ann, that you don't understand why an artist has to teach to support herself.
Since RH Hardin isn't here I'll say it. she is just expressing every woman's desire to be reassured by the Deep comforting tones of a man.
"The response on Twitter was censorious" and asks her if she felt "misunderstood." She says she felt "misread" and, in fact, "Not really read at all."
As if the Twitter mob actually reads the magazine. One millimeter of sanity is too much for that crowd.
"people with obscene amounts of time on their hands"
I think that social media would be a lot better if some sort of payment were required. Ten cents to start a thread, a penny per comment.
the Important Thing to REMEMBER IS:
ANYTHING TRUMP DOES; IS, BY DEFINITION: BAD!!!!
If President Trump bans flights from China... That is BAD!
Unless, it turns out, that it saved people's lives;
in which case... It Was BAD!! That he waited SO LONG to do it!!
If Trump says Stay at Home orders won't be needed... That is BAD!
Unless, it turns out, that they weren't doing anything;
in which case... It Was BAD!! That they were EVER inacted
{there's lots more, but you get the idea}
@AnnAlthouse "Why can't she live off her writing alone? She's such a highly admired writer!"
My daughter and I were walking the dog (again) last night, trying to get our steps in and were talking about musicians (Talking Heads, Velvet Undergrond, etc) who were VERY popular with the press but not so much with the public.
I told her the old "the dogs don't like it joke" which was new to her.
-XC
"Why can't she live off her writing alone? She's such a highly admired writer!"
That's the reality of writing as a career, and is why so many writers must also teach. "Highly admired" does not equate with "widely read" or "big seller." Lorrie Moore may be successful within her area of the literary world--respected, admired, a good writer of good novels and stories--but she is no Stephen King or James Patterson.
Only a minority of writers can live entirely on the proceeds of their writing, and I doubt very few, if any "literary" writers can even hope for that.
The amount of energy they spend seeking out Orange Man Bad memes is astonishing
I've had numerous facebook friends (mostly relatives); that have unfriended me, because i did not support their anti-Trumpism
A cousin would post anti-Trump comments, On MY page. When I replied to her comments...
She didn't just unfriend me;
she wrote a LONG tirade (On MY PAGE), about how INTOLERANT, and HATEFUL (and STUPID!) i was
Then Unfriended me
The left needs no triggering to get them to eat their own. They are unreasoning, ridiculous people waiting to be offended or to spontaneously generate it where none is given or intended.
The leftist compulsion to apologize or backpedal in the face of such absurdity is a consequence of godlessness and the need to be approved by people who are like “thinkers” even where, as here, they are found to be contemptible.
talking about musicians (Talking Heads, Velvet Undergrond, etc)
Remember! there are Two Basic Types of Music
Pop(ular) And UnPopular
"I find it somewhat ironic, Ann, that you don't understand why an artist has to teach to support herself."
She's not "an artist." She is one of the most highly regarded writers of the last 50 years! She is a *very successful* artist.
She is one of the most highly regarded writers of the last 50 years!
Had NEVER heard of her before your post about Trump's voice
And it seems possible that this one was triggered by the right to get the left to eat its own....
Am I reading that right as another invocation of: "It's just this war... And that lying son of a bitch Johnson!"
Except not so much out of a need to defend what she did, writing about Trump's calming voice, but to defend those on the left attacking her for having written it?
With respect to her talents at as writer, she's not really a celebrity. In order to be properly cancelled you have to have a contract with the public. This too will pass. She has expressed her disdain for Trump. All's well....If Katy Perry said she found something reassuring in Trump's voice, her career would be irrevocably damaged.....Symbiotics: Trump says things that absolutely infuriate celebs and the media. Then he runs against the deformities of their anger. It has worked for him. They still haven't caught on....I'm not absolutely supportive of everything Trump says, but when I compare it to the hypocrisy and unreasoning bigotry of the people who oppose him, then I choose Trump.
"My daughter and I were walking the dog (again) last night, trying to get our steps in and were talking about musicians (Talking Heads, Velvet Undergrond, etc) who were VERY popular with the press but not so much with the public."
Actually, Talking Heads did become pretty popular with the public, helped along by MTV's airing of their creative and loopy videos, and they had several big hits. David Byrne has continued with a solo career in the decades since he stopped working with Talking Heads (thereby ending the band), and he has not come close to the success enjoyed by the Heads.
But...point well taken. "Critics' bands" typically are not widely popular with the public, and the same is broadly true with the arts in general.
JAORE: “Drowning in their own bile.”
Apt and quotable - without attribution, of course. 😊 Thank you.
So she is very successful financially as an artist? Or artistically as an artist?
Money doesn't always flow towards talent.
Orson Scott Card, a much more financially successful author, still teaches. Some do it because they enjoy it.
"Lorrie Moore may be successful within her area of the literary world--respected, admired, a good writer of good novels and stories--but she is no Stephen King or James Patterson. Only a minority of writers can live entirely on the proceeds of their writing, and I doubt very few, if any "literary" writers can even hope for that."
Obviously, I know that writers of popular fiction make a lot more money, but I think it's terrible that the very best writers of literary fiction must lose so much of their time just to generate a living, and it's especially bad to have to teach creative writing, because it's not a real-life experience that's going to give you something to write about and it's tainting your feeling for language with the reading of inferior work.
Moore complains over and over in that interview that she hasn't had the time to write because she's had to work (and to take care of a child). Imagine having all that recognition and the capacity to write and not being able to use it!
Now, writers doing the Stephen King/James Patterson kind of thing are pleasing a huge audience and they're actually rich. A serious literary writer has a much smaller audience but she doesn't need to be rich. You're talking about someone who seems to want just a lot of time to sit around writing. How much income do you need to have that? One way to live is to bring your expenses into line with your income. There's nothing more important than your time, and she is — unless she's lying — suffering from time constraint.
To write, you just need a room to live in and some food.
Now, it's possible that the teaching is intrinsically rewarding for her, but read the interview. I don't think it is. I think she plainly says she's had to do it for the money.
And it seems possible that this one was triggered by the right
Wreckers and foreign agents have always bedeviled the left.
Image how bad it would be if she’d heard Secretary Clinton’s voice from the next room and said “Who’s ex-wife is that?”
It's a more lucrative form of procrastination than sharpening the pencils.
Well, the New Yorker. Committed New Yorker readers are so "stuck up" and desperate to count themselves among the good people that they daren't open their minds even a crack to any other tone or point of view than theirs. (We subscribe and I page through it, read an occasional article, and skim a few others. The cartoons used to be funny.)
"Twitter’s feeding frenzies seem a display of people with obscene amounts of time on their hands, yet a disinclination to read in any real way."
That describes Bill Kristol, David French, Baseball Crank, Jonah Goldberg, and 90% of the writers at the National review, the Dispatch and the Bulwark.
The supply of creative writing vastly outstrips the demand. Many are called but few are chosen.
There are 320 million Americans, if only 1 person in 1,000 wants to be a "professional writer" - that's 320,000 people. How many writers can produce a novel, poem, or play that most people want to read?
1,000 tops.
Even Twitter finally understands what 'going viral' means.
"How many writers can produce a novel, poem, or play that most people want to read?"
There are so many people who don't have the time to work on writing projects. Moore complains that (unlike some other people she seems to know) she does not have money from her family. But she struggled to find the time and put many years into working herself up to being able to publish her first book when she was 27.
I infer that there are many other writers who could, if they were funded by parents or other benefactors for a decade of adult life, produce an excellent book, but they don't have the funding and they decide to make a life for themselves in some other way. You don't know when you're in your 20s and writing whether it's going to work out at all, whether you will even get published, so struggling and taking all that time is a big crapshoot.
Moore took the shot, and she won. She's been lauded since the publication of her first book. Her view of it all is from the perspective of a big winner. But she still didn't get enough money, and she's spent decades teaching "creative writing" to college students.
I think it's terrible that the very best writers of literary fiction must lose so much of their time just to generate a living
Why? What's so special about being a writer? Hell, I've written several novels, but I've never had any illusions about making money off them.
America needs financial planners/tax experts (which is what I do for a living) a lot more than it needs writers. Them's the breaks.
"highly regarded"
You keep saying that. By whom? Like a number of deplorables here, I had never heard of her until you mentioned her.
"one hears a crooner’s croon"
Maybe a certain kind of woman does. Has any man ever responded to DJT in the way described by Lorrie M?
"reading all that amateur writing instead of the very best writing"
The horror. Better to read and "grade" exams by people who don't even care about writing, on fancy hypotheticals supposed to teach and test "law."
Better to read and "grade" exams by people who don't even care about writing, on fancy hypotheticals supposed to teach and test "law."
Yeah, apparently our hostess looks down on those "professors" who teach things other than law. (Because if there's one thing this country needs, it's more lawyers, right, Ann...?!)
The non-literary day jobs of famous authors
read in a way that's well described as not really read at all.
Yes, that describes a lot of political commenting. In fact, it's a good way to look at all sorts of political phenomenon (in the broad sense), especially on social media, where there is much social capital to be amassed by being outraged by anything that even flirts with straying from approved thought.
Nowadays everything has to be filtered through polarizing political lenses to come out in line with ideological orthodoxies.
Damn you, Edwin Land!
It could be worse for literary author Lorrie Moore.
I always wondered if Bobbie Ann Mason ever got over being made into a country song.
Ann Althouse said:
"...Now, it's possible that the teaching is intrinsically rewarding for her, but read the interview. I don't think it is. I think she plainly says she's had to do it for the money."
In that case, I despair for her students.
Do writers really like teaching? Do most college teachers really like teaching? Many of them don't. I'd imagine it's the same for writers who have to teach. Even if she "likes" teaching, she may feel like it's not what she'd like to do most.
This Wikipedia story description (from Birds of America) caught my eye:
Beautiful Grade: A middle aged Law professor begins dating a 24-year-old student (to the dismay of his friends and colleagues). He later begins to fall for a middle aged woman, until he learns she is having an affair with his best friend. Depressed and suicidal he begins to write an essay titled "The young were sent to earth to amuse the old. Why not be amused?".
Here is one observation Althouse quoted from what her former neighbor wrote in the original piece:
"Trump’s primitive syntax, imperfectly designed for the young foreign woman he married, always dismays."
That was referring to hearing Trump say "incredible" often.
Never mind that dismays is not an intransitive verb, thus is being misused by Lorrie Moore -- why would anyone imagine that Trump's diction was modified specifically for Melania? As though he hasn't always talked like that. To me, that is a strikingly misjudged assessment.
And the proper term would be diction, I am fairly sure, rather than the "syntax" Ms. Moore chose.
Maybe there are some reasons why she is not more widely read, Ann.
Lorrie Moore is a good writer who has written a handful of great short stories, I'm thinking for instance of People Like Thst Are The Only People Here, but whose limited range -- think Midwest professional class and the pitfalls of living in Mad Town-- and certain jokeyness of style will not make readers forget Chekhov or even Raymond Carver.
Maybe she's angling for a MacArthur grant.
Read one of the stories in the NYer. Last story she's published there, it's available on the NYer website. This one was called "Referential." It was a real NYer story. It had a couple clever lines, otherwise struck me as wispy. A few too many details did not ring true to me and, worse, the characters seemed false, or incompletely imagined. If there's a difference. I feel like I'm piling on, having already criticized, but I did take the trouble to read it!
I was somewhat sympathetic until the very clueless comment that is was possible that the backlash was "triggered by the right to get the left to eat its own." I also find the statement that she is "from provincial people" condescending than explanatory.
Condescending, like the reference to Melania as "the young foreign woman he married."
Yes, that poor little thing, the toy.... somehow I suspect Melania's sophistication and maybe her linquistic skills too could dance rings around Lorrie Moore.
I don't follow Rush Limbaugh but now and then I see something somewhere that makes me see what the man doomed by cancer has to say. This was an epic rant on the ungovernable rage of the left if there ever was one.
https://www.wnd.com/2020/05/limbaugh-makes-stunning-prediction-democratic-presidential-ticket/
This is why all of the Never Trump lifelong conservatives who work for Democrat controlled outlets like CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, etc, always start off their praise of Trump with a qualifier. Something along the lines of, "Look, I know that Trump is the Devil incarnate, but when I saw him petting that dog the other day my heart just melted. Sure, I quickly realized how revolting the whole manipulation was and threw up in my mouth a little at the realization my heart just completely melted at the beautiful sight."
I'm not writer, but it always goes something like that. The rule is, if you're going to say anything even remotely nice about Trump, you've got to surround it with fecal matter to make it more appetizing for Democrats.
"Blogger JAORE said...
* Best German accent *
No deviance will be tolerated. No misunderstandings will be allowed. No excuses will be accepted."
I think that is a quote from Major Hochscteder, SA, from Hogan's Heros. HA ha.
Orson Scott Card had a stroke and retired from teaching and maybe writing as well. His website is no longer updated.
ADDED: The 7th comment at my blog post about Moore's meditation on Trump's voice — from commenter eric — was "She's about to be cancelled and will soon apologize."
---------------================
so Moore feels it necessary to apologize to people who "have not really read what was written at all"
AND: If you write about politics and don't say predictable things in an obvious way, you will be misread and read in a way that's well described as not really read at all. But that makes it even more important to keep writing where you don't belong, in that world that is simultaneously beautiful and unwelcoming.
----------=============
world of things can be beautiful. it is the world of people that can be unwelcoming
is Moore able to tell the difference
The phrase "reading all that amateur writing instead of the very best writing" of course put me in mind of this:
“Everywhere I go I'm asked if I think the university stifles writers. My opinion is that they don't stifle enough of them. There's many a best-seller that could have been prevented by a good teacher.
And that goes double (if not more) for "literary" novels--I give you The Maytrees as the perfect example. I had received a copy as a gift, so I for some reason felt an obligation to stick with it till the end. Here's my take on it: Dillard had by then already said everything she had to say... but nevertheless she persisted.
Oops, that middle paragraph should end with a quotation mark. Only that part is from Flannery O'Connor; the rest is mine.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा