I like English Departments. I’m a member of one, in fact.
But English Departments, English classes, and English teachers pose a particular danger for inexperienced writers.
Principally this is because the study of literature—at least, in high school and at the undergraduate college level, when writers are in their formative years—can conceal, minimize, or warp an understanding of the creative process that produced the works under consideration.
This isn’t true in all cases. Generally, however, inexperienced writers may be taught to worship established writers instead of seeing their work in context.
I’m a product of such experience.
My English teachers always seemed to talk about Great Books as though their authors created the work out of whole cloth without help from anyone—not friends, not editors, not other writers.
The image of the author alone in his or her study created a gap that seemed unbridgeable, and I found myself lionizing this vision without realizing that advice, input, and personal connection with other artists was the overwhelming rule of literary production rather than the exception.
How many aspiring poets study “The Waste Land” by T.S. Eliot without learning that Ezra Pound played a significant role in its development, and that the poem might be better conceptualized as a collaborative work as I described in a prior post?
How many students read Romeo and Juliet without realizing that it’s basically a rip-off of the ancient story of Pyramus and Thisbe, set down by Ovid in The Metamorphoses in 8 CE?
Maybe things are different these days, with the rise of easy-to-reference Web sites such as Wikipedia. When I was going through high school and college, however, we didn’t have so many online resources. Connections and relationships were not apparent on first glance, and my teachers didn’t bother to provide them.
If I’m ever a professor of English, I will endeavor to teach a class that covers all the things I had to learn on my own, a class entitled something like “Dirty Secrets: The History of Literature for Creative Writers.”
I would cover all of the above, including the whole Raymond Carver-Gordon Lish affair; Yates and his Celtic Twilight buddies; Samuel Beckett and the fact that he was James Joyce’s personal secretary for Finnegan’s Wake (many people don’t know this!); the rise of MFA programs and their impact on literature, etc., etc., etc.
So true! The most influential writing class I took at my university was Creative Non-Fiction Writing. We had to write our own personal experiences in creative, introspective voices. It was then that I realized how much I was dependent upon my influences such as the professor and my peers to create a well-written piece.
Sounds like a great experience. Yeah, all creative writers should get some workshop experience at one point, if only through a community library group or association. Gives me a good idea for a new blog post
This is so true! No one tells you these things; you have to eventually figure it out for yourself. May I share/reblog this with your permission?
Certainly share/reblog and or respond as you will
Glad you liked it
Yes, I liked it a lot. Thanks for allowing me to reblog.
C’mon, don’t wait to dish on the good stuff until you’re a full professor: please, deal out the dirt now (maybe 1 post a week on “Dirty Secrets,” is that too much to ask? It doesn’t have to be long, it can even be short, as long as it’s factually accurate). I can’t wait (one of the most interesting things about James Joyce–and I hope I’m remembering this accurately from his bio–is that while he lived in Trieste especially, he wrote on the backs of his laundry lists, etc. Kudos go to Nora–and the friends who allowed him to sponge off them–for putting up with him).
Hehehe, you can take a look at some of those links above to get a few ideas. The Raymond Carver-Gordon Lish affair is especially interesting. But I will try to make some posts on this in the future for sure
I can give you a hint for research on one affair. The poet Louise Bogan apparently had an affair with the poet Theodore Roethke, and supposedly made some remark about how she hoped it led to some good poetry, or etc. How pragmatic and unromantic, if so!
I hope you can teach such a class some day. I agree as an English we were often taught to study works in isolation of each other. Understanding how they came to be would shed a whole new light.
Yeah, I feel like I wasted a lot of time as a writer thinking I had to work in isolation and not share my stuff with anyone. Only recently have I come to see differently…!
“If I’m ever a professor of English, I will endeavor to teach a class that covers all the things I had to learn on my own, a class entitled something like “Dirty Secrets: The History of Literature for Creative Writers.”
Please do! I took four classes (Shakespeare x 2, The Poetry of Love and Seduction, and Literary Automata) with one of my favorite professors of all time. She always presented the works we studied with context, letters and essays that showed the beginnings of a theory or idea, greek myths that were the backbone of plays, snippet’s from an author’s contemporary etc. But, I would say she was often the anomaly, that, yes, most teachers I’ve had act as how you described. So, we hold up the works from THE CANON (he bellowed) as completely separate and singular from anything else.
Sounds like a great experience! Thanks for sharing
I think this “Ask the Paris Review” letter captures the potential limitations that an MFA can put on a writer’s perspective.
Oops:
http://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2012/07/20/dear-paris-review-where-do-i-publish/
Great piece! Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
I liek the idea of the “Dirty Secrets: The History of Literature for Creative Writers” course. However, why would it only be for creative writers? I think a lot of regular English majors could benefit from this course, as well.
I guess my English education was provided by renegades. One of my professors early in my undergraduate course work introduced us to Alison Lurie’s Don’t Tell the Grown Ups. Most of the rest did delve into some of the “dirty secrets;” although, I did have quite a few who did not want to discuss the “dirty secrets.”
Thanks for the book idea, I’ll have to check it out! No, a class like that wouldn’t be limited to others… but I feel it would be especially beneficial to aspiring writers to realize that literature is often a collaborative enterprise.
True, it would be very beneficial to aspiring writers. A lot of writers forget or do not know that Tolkien, Heinlein, and Kerovac wrote works that resulted from collaborative efforts. My view of collaboration is slanted by the MAED program. Since collaborative approaches are pushed in education now, I mistakenly assume it is applied in other aspects as well.
Reblogged this on whatevertheyaint and commented:
It is important for beginning writers (and seasoned ones too) to remember that the magic of books don’t happen overnight. What we see on our e-readers and bookstore shelves is a process of labor, not “voila, I created a masterpiece in one draft. ” Most authors get rejected more times than they’ll admit before becoming household names; most also have editors and a team of early readers. Not to mention nerve problems, insecurities, bills… You get the point, right? If not, read The Living Notebook’s post, “How Studying English Let Me Down as a Creative Writer–reblogged with his permission of course. (optional)
Very interesting. As one who hates English with a purple passion (can never figure it out) I am intrigued. I have not read any of the great works, although I did try, it amuses me that there are dirty little secrets to be found there. Maybe you should put together a juicy little ‘tell all’ yourself? I’d have a peek
While I understand your frustration, I have to say that “stealing” content from other works is a very important part of creating original works. I agree though that this “stealing” process should be made public and not be hidden.
Pingback: More Thoughts on Writers and Identity Pressure | the living notebook