Sunday, June 22, 2014
June 23, 2014 Issue
Why read fiction? One reason, according to James Wood, in
his "The Punished Land," in this week’s issue, is that “We enjoy watching the
novelist play the game of truthtelling.” In so saying, Wood helps me understand
why I prefer reading factual writing. I enjoy it because I know it isn’t a
game; I can rely on it as a representation of real life. I like that phrase
“real life.” Wood uses it in his great "On Not Going Home" (“But real life is a
different matter”).
Some critics think that the representation of real life isn’t
really art [e.g., Arlene Croce – she once criticized the costumes (“cowboy hats
and splotched jeans”) in a ballet (American Ballet Theatre’s Rodeo) for being “too much like life”]. In
order for it to be art (they say), there has to be distortion, heightening, dramatization, fabrication, transformation. In other words, in order
to convert life to art, you have to fictionalize it. Wood holds this view. In
“The Punished Land,” he compares Zachary Lazar’s nonfictional Evening’s Empire: The Story of My Father’s
Murder with Lazar’s novel Sway,
and says, “Sway is the stronger for
Lazar’s confident but understated fictionalizing. The narrative doesn’t meekly
copy the silhouettes of its research; it draws new, emboldened versions.”
Meekly copy the
silhouettes of its research – is that what Wood thinks all factual writing
does? Or is the application of his remark confined to Lazar’s nonfiction work? A
writer’s research may disclose the outline (the silhouette) of the piece he or
she eventually writes. But it may not. Talking about the composition of his
classic The Pine Barrens (1967), John
McPhee, in his "Structure" (The New
Yorker, January 14, 2013), says,
I had done all the research I was going to do—had
interviewed woodlanders, fire watchers, forest rangers, botanists, cranberry
growers, blueberry pickers, keepers of a general store. I had read all the
books I was going to read, and scientific papers, and a doctoral dissertation.
I had assembled enough material to fill a silo, and now I had no idea what to
do with it. The piece would ultimately consist of some five thousand sentences,
but for those two weeks I couldn’t write even one. If I was blocked by fear, I
was also stymied by inexperience. I had never tried to put so many different
components—characters, description, dialogue, narrative, set pieces, humor,
history, science, and so forth—into a single package.
Making that single package involves more than just “meekly copying the silhouettes of its research.” It involves, at the very least, selecting
and shaping. “Art is selecting and shaping,” Wood says, in his How Fiction Works (2008). It’s time he
acknowledged that’s how factual writing works, too.
Labels:
Arlene Croce,
James Wood,
John McPhee,
The New Yorker,
Zachary Lazar
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment