THE HANDBOOK OF Creative Writing Edited฀by฀Steven฀Earnshaw The Handbook of Creative Writing The Handbook of Creative Writing Edited by Steven Earnshaw Edinburgh University Press © in this edition, Edinburgh University Press, 2007. Copyright in the individual contributions is retained by the authors. Edinburgh University Press Ltd 22 George Square, Edinburgh Typeset in 10/12pt Adobe Goudy by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Manchester, and printed and bound in Great Britain by Antony Rowe Ltd, Chippenham, Wilts A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978 0 7486 2135 4 (hardback) ISBN 978 0 7486 2136 1 (paperback) The right of the contributors to be identified as authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Published with the support of the Edinburgh University Scholarly Publishing Initiatives Fund. Contents Acknowledgements ix Introduction Steven Earnshaw 1 Section One. Writing: Theories and Contexts 1. Theories of Creativity and Creative Writing Pedagogy Mary Swander, Anna Leahy, and Mary Cantrell 11 2. The Evaluation of Creative Writing at MA Level (UK) Jenny Newman 24 3. The Creative Writing MFA Stephanie Vanderslice 37 4. Creative Writing and Critical Theory Lauri Ramey 42 5. Literary Genres David Rain 54 6. The Writer as Artist Steven Earnshaw 65 7. The Future of Creative Writing Paul Dawson 78 Section Two. The Craft of Writing Prose 8. Reading, Writing and Teaching The Short Story E. A. Markham 9. Writing the Memoir Judith Barrington 95 109 vi Contents 10. Introduction to the Novel Jane Rogers 116 11. Crime Fiction John Dale 126 12. Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy Crawford Kilian 134 13. How Language Lives Us: Reading and Writing Historical Fiction Brian Kiteley 146 14. Writing Humorous Fiction Susan Hubbard 154 15. Writing for Children Alan Brown 162 16. Writing for Teenagers Linda Newbery 169 17. The ‘Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Creative Nonfiction, But were too Naïve or Uninformed to Ask’ Workshop Simulation Lee Gutkind 176 Poetry 18. Introduction to Poetry Sean O’Brien 183 19. What is Form? W. N. Herbert 199 20. New Poetries Aaron Kunin 211 21. The Poet in the Theatre: Verse Drama Sean O’Brien 229 22. The Sequence and the Long Poem George Szirtes 236 Scriptwriting 23. Introduction to Scriptwriting Mike Harris 251 24. Writing for the Stage Brighde Mullins 263 25. Writing for Radio Mike Harris 273 26. Writing for Television Stephen V. Duncan 282 vii Contents 27. Writing for Television – UK Differences John Milne 291 28. Writing for Film Bonnie O’Neill 293 Other Writing 29. Writing as Experimental Practice Thalia Field 305 30. Writing as ‘Therapy’ Fiona Sampson 312 31. Writing in the Community Linda Sargent 320 32. Writing for the Web James Sheard 327 33. The Role of the Critical Essay Scott McCracken 332 34. Translation Susan Bassnett 338 35. Creative Writing Doctorates Graeme Harper 345 36. How to Start a Literary Magazine Rebecca Wolff 353 Section Three. The Writer’s Life 37. How to be a Writer John Milne 363 38. How to Present Yourself as a Writer Alison Baverstock 369 39. Publishing Fiction Mary Mount 376 40. American PoBiz Chase Twichell 384 41. Publishing Poetry in Britain Sean O’Brien 391 42. The Literary Agent (Novel) David Smith 398 43. The Film Agent Julian Friedmann 405 viii Contents 44. The Literary Agent: Television, Theatre and Radio Alan Brodie 412 45. Copyright Shay Humphrey, with Lee Penhaligan 422 46. Literary Life: Prizes, Anthologies, Festivals, Reviewing, Grants Tom Shapcott 436 47. The Writer as Teacher Gareth Creer 445 48. Making a Living as a Writer Livi Michael 452 Glossary Useful Websites Contributors Index 459 465 467 474 Acknowledgements I would like to thank Sean O’Brien, Jane Rogers and Mike Harris for their help in constructing the sections on poetry, prose and script. Lauri Ramey has been an invaluable bridge across the Atlantic throughout, answering my queries on American matters. I would also like to thank the contributors, many of whom I know only through the marvellous if precarious medium of email. I have found generosity everywhere, and it has made the book a pleasure to edit. Finally, I would like to thank Jackie Jones at EUP, whose idea this book was. Introduction Steven Earnshaw As a handbook this guide is intended not just to help and inform, but also to provoke and inspire. The contributors are professionals within their fields of expertise and apart from being asked to cover the necessary topic have been free to deal with their subject how they see fit – there has been no attempt to produce regulation and uniform chapters. The book is aimed primarily at the student embarking on a creative writing programme in Higher Education, with many of the writers here also teaching on creative writing MAs or MFAs, and to that end many of the chapters reflect the different teaching styles on offer. This book, therefore, is also intended for tutors. The aim throughout has been to have within the pages of a single book all that you might need as a writer or tutor to further your writing and teaching, and to further your writing career. It explores a number of different contexts within which the student-writer and teacher of creative writing work: literary tradition and genre, the postgraduate degree, the academy, literary culture, literary theory, the world of publishing and production, the world of being a writer and writing. How to read this book I don’t for a second imagine that anybody will read this book from cover to cover; it is not that type of book. Rather, it is the virtue of a handbook that readers can jump immediately to what they need to know: I want to write a novel (Rogers); teach creative writing in the community (Sargent); introduce literary theory into my workshops (Ramey); publish poetry (Twichell; O’Brien); get an agent (Smith; Friedmann; Brodie), choose a degree (Newman; Vanderslice) and so on. Conversely, if you have no interest in cultural, academic or theoretical contexts you will quickly see that you should avoid Section One, and if you have no interest in knowing how to get your writing out into the ‘real’ world and make a splash as a writer, you will turn a blind eye to Section Three (although I gather that this rather unlikely). But if you were, indeed, to be the ‘ideal reader’ and read the book from one end to the other, you might make a number of surprising connections. For instance, Brian Kiteley’s ‘Reading and Writing Historical Fiction’ and David Rain’s ‘Literary Genres’ include digressions into different aspects of the history of the novel, and might be read in conjunction with Jane Rogers’s ‘Introduction to the Novel’. Aaron Kunin’s ‘New Poetries’ is packed full of references to experiments with writing and concepts and takes the reader well beyond the realms of poetry. It could be read alongside 2 Introduction Thalia Field’s chapter on ‘Experimental Writing’, after which there would be the surprise of a different kind of experimental writing to be found in Linda Sargent’s ‘Writing in the Community’. You certainly might expect to find mention of the experimental French group of writers known as Oulipo in ‘New Poetries’, but you will also find an Oulipo exercise in the chapter on historical fiction. Both Alan Brown’s ‘Writing for Children’ and Linda Newbery’s ‘Writing for Teenagers’ might open your eyes to ways of thinking about writing which draw on creative processes you might not otherwise encounter, even if you only intend to write for ‘grown-ups’. The chapter on ‘Writing as “Therapy”’ might be a long way down the list of chapters to read if your first interest is ‘Form in Poetry’, but in Fiona Sampson’s piece you will find a section on how text affects audience, spurred on by the poet John Kinsella, and discussing Keats, Kathleen Jamie, Celan, Pound, Eliot, amongst others, along the way. In passing you would note that there are some common reference points: Aristotle’s Poetics recurs time and again; T. S. Eliot’s ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’ is surprisingly popular, and William Goldman’s dictum, ‘get in late, get out early’ is commandeered by novel, short story and script. Also remember that many of the contributors are both writers and teachers. All the pieces have a great enthusiasm. You have only to read Lauri Ramey’s piece on ‘Creative Writing and Critical Theory’ to know that to be involved in her class would treat you to a full-on immersion in both criticism and creativity, alongside the broadest of historical sweeps, and would instil a sense of just how exciting and potent these activities can be for your own writing. And Gareth Creer’s plea for the teaching of writing as something that is much, much more than a means of supplementing an income that is always widely variable shows that creative writing teaching, in and out of the academy, can be a necessary part of the writer’s writing life. You will frequently encounter ideas you will want to introduce into your own practice. The different approaches offer different models of teaching and reflect the success, or otherwise, of different kinds of writing within contemporary culture. Lee Gutkind’s chapter is a replication of teaching ‘creative nonfiction’ via seminars and workshops, as is E. A. Markham’s chapter on the short story. Sean O’Brien’s ‘Introduction to Poetry’ gives practical advice on the use of a workshop, and what should constitute a good one. Some chapters stand as polemic and some as defences for types of writing regarded as ‘lesser’ in the context of creative writing (for example, Susan Bassnett’s chapter on ‘Translation’ and also James Sheard’s ‘Writing for the Web’), or little considered (‘Writing for Radio’ in Mike Harris’s chapter, and also in Alan Brodie’s ‘The Literary Agent: Television, Radio and Theatre’). Sean O’Brien’s attack on the dominance of prose over poetry in his essay on ‘Verse Drama’ has a corollary in Susan Bassnett’s note on the 1940s Penguin Classics translations of Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey into prose form rather than a poetic equivalent. O’Brien’s chapter highlights verse drama’s current near-invisibility and decline and amounts to a virtual ‘recovery’ of its possibilities and models. Similarly, George Szirtes’ chapter champions other poetic art forms that struggle for a good hearing, the long poem and the sequence, and Alan Brodie makes a heartfelt plea for Radio Drama as the purest medium for the scriptwriter. But a book such as this also gives you the opportunity to think about trying out writing you might not normally have considered. Judith Barrington’s chapter on ‘Writing the Memoir’ begins by dispelling the belief that it is a form available only to ‘the famous’. Any prose writer would benefit from this chapter as it works through the shaping of narrative. I hope that one of the joys of this book is that, in addition to its primary functions, it has chapters that will reward those curious about all aspects of literary culture and writing. Introduction 3 The book also includes insights into areas of writing and writing contexts that will hopefully be new or unusual. For instance, a continuing assumption by some is that the activities of literary criticism and creative writing make unhappy bedfellows within the academy, with criticism the established forum for literature and creative writing an unwelcome johnny-come-lately. Lauri Ramey’s chapter here not only demonstrates the shared heritage for both but the ways in which critical studies from Longinus onwards can be used to engage with creativity, the role of the writer and writing. Similarly, thinking about ‘genre’ may not immediately spring to mind as a way in to creativity, but its importance is here shown in David Rain’s chapter as another feature of contemporary literary culture which has its roots in the Classical age and which can inform the practice of writing and our reflection upon it. But genre isn’t just about what we are writing, it is about how we are reading and what we are expecting when we do pick up a poem or novel, or sit down to watch a film or play. And, with the history of the novel as a model, Rain shows how new genres and new literature comes into being. Genre is one of the broadest contexts within which a writer can work, yet the student writer is rarely called upon to explore it unless perhaps asked to define the difference between ‘literary’ and ‘genre’ fiction (also discussed in Rain’s chapter; and you will find an exercise to understand genre in Mike Harris’s ‘Introduction to Scriptwriting’ and discussion of ‘genre’ in ‘Science Fiction and Fantasy’ by Crawford Kilian and ‘Writing Crime Fiction’ by John Dale). Exploration of genre inevitably takes us into questions of originality and levels of artistic ambition (also addressed by Lauri Ramey in the context of literary criticism, and in my chapter on ‘The Role of the Artist’), what kind of writing ‘enables’ others to write, and what can only be admired as one-off performances. Thus Rain asserts: ‘Genre is the most important decision a writer makes’. It is a rare starting point for creative writing, but a fruitful one. As Swander, Leahy and Cantrell point out in their chapter on ‘Theories of Creativity and Creative Writing Pedagogy’, creative writing within the academy has had a rather difficult time compared to other arts. Artists and composers predated the arrival of writers into academe, where it was not until the 1920s that writing started to lay down roots at the University of Iowa, the institution usually credited with being the first university to embrace creative writing. Elsewhere in the chapter the authors note that the writing programme there has to good effect been underpinned by the Romantic myth that writers are born, not created in the workshop, and that the academy can at best provide an environment for talent to develop. Nevertheless, the danger of this approach for the academy is clear: ‘To state openly and confidently that creative writing cannot be taught, however, puts the field at risk as a serious academic pursuit’. Its staple method of teaching, the workshop, is ‘non-traditional’, and, it is often argued, creative writing cannot be assessed and evaluated in the same manner as other academic subjects. At the same time as creative writing is firmly within the academy in the US, the UK and elsewhere, some of these issues remain (see Jenny Newman’s essay on ‘Evaluation and Assessment’). The tension is not always generated by the literary critics either: it is not unusual for writers themselves to have mixed feelings about their place within the academy, especially those who have not gone through a creative writing programme. The growth of creative writing within the academy, its emphasis on process rather than product through the workshop event and its ways of assessment, has meant that it has developed what Swander, Leahy and Cantrell here identify as a ‘signature pedagogy’: a way of teaching, learning and assessment specific to creative writing. As Paul Dawson points out, creative writing programmes cannot just claim to be about the passing down of craft, since they ‘exist in an intellectual environment of interdisciplinarity, critical 4 Introduction self-reflection and oppositional politics on the one hand, and in an institutional environment of learning outcomes, transferable skills and competitive research funding on the other’ (‘The Future of Creative Writing’). In America, creative writing has often been seen in opposition to theory, whereas in Australia and the UK it emerged in the last two decades alongside theory to challenge what was regarded as a literary studies status quo. Dawson warns that to continue to begin discussions with the opposition between literary theory and creative writing will lead to a stasis. After all, he claims, Creative Writing in the academy is hardly a subject in crisis; instead it flourishes in a ‘post-theory’ environment. To nail an old problem in relation to creative writing in academia, he states: ‘If the question which once dominated discussions of Creative Writing was, “Can or should writing be taught?”, it is now, “What should we be teaching students?”’ This book shows just what is being taught, and also, I think, what might be taught. The one thing needful: reading What may come as a surprise to some is that time and again authors in this book recommend reading first and foremost. I remember a student presenting to the class a scene from a novel he was working on which concerned two children on holiday. One of the children becomes trapped as the sea is coming in while the other looks on helplessly, and the description of the drowning was cool and unnerving, capped by a very affecting finale. The writer later told me that some of his fellow students would ask him how he had achieved such an accomplished piece of writing, such an effect. This puzzled (and annoyed) him: you simply read how others did it and moved on from there. How else would you go about it? It was obvious. The fact that this was something of a revelation to other students no doubt gives some credence to the charge from tutors that students don’t read enough, and John Milne in ‘How to be a Writer’ couldn’t state it more clearly: ‘To write you need to read’. Tutors will also say that the best readers make the best writers. This book is full of references to other works of literature, film, and criticism, and thus gives a generous and exciting reading list. It is not uncommon for courses to begin by asking each student to suggest one or two books that everybody might read, and in that way create a common fund of reading which is specific to that group. E. A. Markham’s chapter here begins by setting out what he expects the student to read if he or she is to grasp the complexities of the short story form and gain an understanding of its history; Brighde Mullins’ piece on writing for theatre advises: ‘It is important that you are able to locate the sources of your connection to the theatre, and to read and see as many plays as you can before you start writing for the stage’; and Susan Hubbard writes ‘There’s no better way to learn to write humour than to read it’. John Milne gives a host of other reasons why reading will help you as a writer, and Mary Mount puts it just as clearly from the editor’s point of view: ‘Do read, read, read’. Being a better writer is also about becoming a better reader, as John Dale says: ‘Reading good fiction is not passive like watching bad TV, it requires engagement, concentration to enter the fictional world’. Writing and re-writing Authors have also been generous in giving away their exercises. In his essay on ‘Form’ in poetry, W. N. Herbert remarks: ‘In the same way as a musician or dancer must repeat an action enough times for the neural pathways to be established, for the body to learn 5 Introduction what is required of it, so too rhythmic awareness needs time to accommodate itself to verbal dexterity’. The same could be said of writing in general – the necessity to keep on writing is rather like exercises in other art forms. I had one tutor who used to start each workshop with a writing task as a means of ‘warming up’. Although I am used to this when playing a musical instrument, it never occurred to me that you would do the same for writing, since, no doubt like many others on the course, I always thought that writing ‘just happened’ – more or less – if you wanted it to happen. You will see throughout this book exercises for you to try out, for easing into writing, or as a means of getting out of a writing rut. The poet Ian Duhig once gave a Masterclass at which he read a number of poems that had started out as exercises. He noted that other poets were often quite sniffy about such pieces, but couldn’t see how the objection could be sustained when it produced such results: hang on to your exercises. I have already intimated that there may be a belief that writing just ‘happens’, that writers are simply inspired one way or another and that’s the end of it. Such a view does have the tendency to elide the graft that is everywhere evident and necessary. Bonnie O’Neill in her chapter on ‘Writing for Film’ declares: ‘Re-write, re-write, re-write’, and E. A. Markham begins with revision. Any practising writer will tell you that re-writing or redrafting is the hardest thing. After all, inspiration is easy: you just have to be there. John Dale serves up the following advice: ‘Thomas Mann said that a writer is somebody for whom writing is more difficult than it is for other people. And it’s true. Good writing is hard work and looks easy. It has energy yet never appears rushed’. So just as you will be urged to read, you will be urged to re-write, to revise, to redraft. Be your ‘inner editor’, as Crawford Kilian puts it. The Masters experience There’s nothing quite like taking a creative-writing postgraduate degree, nor, for that matter, teaching on one. Here is an absolute community of writers whose whole activity is to talk about writing, share writing, and see how it might be improved. Although degrees may be structured differently from country to country, the sense of excitement, ambition and challenge is familiar across countries and continents (for comparisons of degree structures see Jenny Newman’s chapter [UK] and Stephanie Vanderslice’s [US], and look at Graeme Harper’s, which compares different formats for creative-writing higher degrees in the US, UK, Australia and Canada). A number of the chapters touch on the tension that creative writing within the academy creates and undergoes, including modules where creative-writing students are expected to engage with academic, theoretical and critical work (Lauri Ramey; Scott McCracken). As McCracken notes: ‘Ideas such as the “death of the author”, which can seem fresh and exciting in a third year undergraduate seminar on a traditional English degree, can appear absurd in a room full of struggling novelists; and their derision is hardly likely to be contradicted by a creative writing tutor who writes to live’. Nevertheless, the experience of doing a creativewriting Masters is something quite unique, as Sean O’Brien states in his ‘Introduction to Poetry’: ‘The poet studying on a Writing course should feel free – no, should feel obliged – to be imaginatively and intellectually gluttonous. You may never have a better opportunity. Enjoy it!’ The input from tutors and other writers is a constant incentive to read more and to improve your writing. It is very difficult to discover the same weekby-week intensity and sense of belonging to the writing community outside of this environment, and it can take some students a while to adjust to the essentially ‘lonely’ 6 Introduction occupation that writing is once the class has been left behind, although it is not unusual for a group to continue to meet after formal sessions have ended. I have even seen one group which rotated the ‘role of tutor’ so that it replicated the workshop situation the students had been used to. As Jenny Newman points out, you should make the most of all the feedback that you get while it is there. It is not so easy to come by once the degree is over. The writer’s life For most students (not all), one of the reasons for taking a creative-writing Masters is that it is a route to publication. Not only will you be improving your writing and be immersed in a hot-bed of intellectual endeavour, you will expect to see a procession of famous writers, top agents and classy publishers throw themselves at your feet. Undoubtedly MA/MFA programmes are important in giving the opportunities for student-writers to come into contact with the ‘business end’ of writing. One of the advantages of such contacts is that the world of publishing and production and agenting is seen to consist of people who have as much interest in providing good literature as you have. Agents often get a bad press, somehow stuck in the middle between publishers and writers, harder to get than a publisher if you’re not already known and simply creaming off unearned percentages of those who probably don’t need an agent. The chapters on publishers and agents in this book should deliver quite a different message, with both practical advice and a wider sense of the contexts within which they are working. Equally, if you are looking at what life as a writer might be, you will no doubt be drawn to John Milne’s ‘How to be a Writer’, Livi Michael’s ‘Making a Living as a Writer’ and Tom Shapcott’s chapter on ‘Literary Life: Prizes, Anthologies, Festivals, Reviewing, Grants’. In addition, you should look at Gareth Creer’s ‘The Writer as Teacher’, which shows the benefits of expanding your repertoire as writer and teacher, and the mutually beneficial rewards of both activities. The latter piece also takes in life as a student of creative writing, and in Sean O’Brien’s ‘Introduction to Poetry’ you will find advice on the pressures of combining a commitment to writing with life elsewhere. The word here is ‘vocation’, and although aimed specifically at poets it could be taken as referring to all those serious about writing. Mary Mount’s ‘The World of Publishing’ will give you insights into how the world looks like from that end of fiction, and Alison Baverstock’s ‘How to Get Published’ will give you a measure of how professional you need to be beyond the writing (as will Livi Michael’s chapter). Students often believe that things will take care of themselves based on the merit of their writing, but as all these pieces will indicate, this is very far from the truth, even for those writers who gain a relatively easy path to publishing. Writers require robustness and a thick skin. Mary Mount warns: ‘Don’t expect fame and money! There are easier and quicker ways to get rich and famous’, and Sean O’Brien suggests that anyone wanting to be a poet who expects to make money is either a fool or a charlatan. ‘Don’t despair!’ is thus another theme running through the book. Writing is hard work, and sometimes the writing has to be its own reward: ‘Most published writers have experienced the torturous path that got us to where we wanted to be . . . And what probably kept us motivated throughout this was our sense of ourselves as writers’ (Alison Baverstock); or John Dale: ‘Above all, a writer needs persistence’. But of course some writers have ‘excess’ energy, a desire to be active in the culture of writing and publication beyond their own immediate writing: 7 Introduction for these I would suggest taking a look at Rebecca Wolff’s chapter ‘How to Start a Literary Magazine’ (a chapter which includes a fair amount of advice on being an editor, and through which I winced in agreement). National differences The contributors to this book come from the UK, America, Canada and Australia, and naturally are drawn to examples from the cultures they are more familiar with, although when it comes to literary references these show an international understanding. On a couple of occasions it was felt that the differences warranted separate chapters: the systems of evaluation (if not necessarily delivery) of creative-writing Masters in the UK and America are quite different, and publishing poetry in the UK and publishing in the US are treated separately. There are also differences in relation to the creative-writing PhD, but these are dealt with specifically in Graeme Harper’s essay on that topic, and the reader will also find useful comments on Masters and Doctoral degrees across all four countries in Paul Dawson’s chapter. The chapter on ‘Copyright’ takes into account copyright law in all four countries mentioned. Stephen V. Duncan’s chapter on ‘Writing for Television’ is geared towards the American system, but most of the points made apply equally to such writing elsewhere, and any writer would always be advised to research the policies of television companies and agents in their own country before attempting approaches, even if not specifically covered in this part. The differences between the UK and US are dealt with in John Milne’s following piece, written as a complement to Duncan’s. Fiona Sampson’s chapter on ‘Writing as “Therapy”’ and Linda Sargent’s on ‘Writing in the Community’ are drawn very much from local experience, as you might expect, but have general application, both theoretically and practically. Enjoy the book These chapters open up worlds of writing and worlds of imagination, ways of thinking about form, structure, plot, language, character, genre, creativity, reading, teaching, audience . . . and being a writer. I hope you enjoy it. Steven Earnshaw Section One Writing: Theories and Contexts 1 Theories of Creativity and Creative Writing Pedagogy Mary Swander, Anna Leahy, and Mary Cantrell Creative writing as a distinct academic field – one with dedicated courses and programmes, with professors whose scholarship is entirely or primarily original creative work, and with professional journals and books devoted to reflections upon the field – is relatively new but has been rapidly expanding in the US, the UK, and elsewhere. As such, we are just beginning to amass articulated theories about the creative process and how we might best teach creative writing as an academic discipline. Joseph Moxley (1989), Wendy Bishop and Hans Ostrom (1994), and D. G. Meyers (1996) documented the emergence of creative writing as an academic pursuit in the US. To grasp the current state of the field, it is important to consider its overall and recent history, the dominant approaches to creativity and to creative writing pedagogy, and the application of theories and approaches to classrooms. The history of creative writing as an academic pursuit Today, in virtually every college and university across the US, students busily workshop, as we say, each other’s poems and short stories. These students roam the hallways with stacks of copied poems, stories, and essays. They enter their creative writing classrooms, pull out their marginal notes, and prepare to discuss and offer formative criticism of each other’s work. Creative writing is now an established part of the curriculum in higher education, and most English departments have a poet, fiction writer, or playwright on their rosters. According to Gradschools.com, a comprehensive site on graduate programmes worldwide, the UK, Australia, Ireland, and Canada all have universities offering university and graduate programmes leading to degrees with an emphasis in creative writing. Korea, Mexico, Spain, Norway, and the Philippines also support such programmes. Even high school students in both the US and the UK are often offered the opportunity for creative writing as part of their English studies. Yet the inclusion of creative writing in academe in the US is a relatively recent phenomenon. As late as 1965, few four-year colleges had resident writers, much less an emphasis in creative writing. While it had become more common for writers to accept university teaching positions, most writers supported their early efforts as they always had: as cabdrivers and carpenters, as postmasters (William Faulkner), journalists (Willa Cather), librarians (Marianne Moore), insurance executives (Wallace Stevens), and doctors 12 The Handbook of Creative Writing (William Carlos Williams). Visual artists and composers had long before found a home in academe, but writers were still viewed with suspicion. Writing was a craft that one was supposed to pick up by osmosis through a study of literature. If a young writer wanted a mentor, he or she could move to either coast or, better yet, to Paris, buy a cigarette holder and beret, hang out in the coffeehouses and bars, and hope for the best. The University of Iowa changed the literary landscape in the US. During the 1920s, along the banks of the Iowa River where the summer heat and humidity create a natural greenhouse for the surrounding agricultural fields of corn and beans, the fine arts flourished. When F. Scott Fitzgerald and Zelda were dancing and drinking their way through Europe, when Gertrude Stein and Alice B. Toklas were entertaining Pablo Picasso and Ernest Hemingway with marijuana-laced brownies in Paris, when Ezra Pound was immersing himself in the study of Japanese and Chinese poetry and Fascist ideology in Italy, the University of Iowa fostered young artists in a state known for its conservative, rural values. Painting, sculpture, theatre, dance, and imaginative writing prospered in Iowa City during the roaring twenties. Then, just as a decade of severe economic depression hit the world, Iowa’s creative writing programme began to gain in status and prestige. In 1931, Mary Hoover Roberts’s collection of poetry, Paisley Shawl, was the first creative writing master’s thesis approved by the university. Other theses soon followed by such writers as Wallace Stegner and Paul Engle. Engle’s thesis, Worn Earth, the 1932 winner of the Yale Younger Poets Award, became the first poetry thesis at the University of Iowa to be published (Wilbers 1980: 39). Norman Foerster, director of the School of Letters, pushed forward with the creative writing programme throughout the 1930s. But when Engle joined the faculty in 1937, he jump-started the Iowa Writers Workshop and became its official director in 1943. He laid the foundation for an institution that would make its mark on the worldwide writing community. Engle, a hard-driving, egocentric genius, possessed the early vision of both the Writers Workshop and the International Writing Program. He foresaw first-rate programmes where young writers could come to receive criticism of their work. A native Iowan who had studied in England on a Rhodes Scholarship and travelled widely throughout Europe, Engle was dissatisfied with merely a regional approach. He defined his ambition in a 1963 letter to his university president as a desire ‘to run the future of American literature, and a great deal of European and Asian, through Iowa City’ (Wilbers 1980: 85–6). During his twenty-four years as director, Engle took a group of fewer than a dozen students and transformed it into a high-profile programme of 250 graduate students at its peak in 1965 (Wilbers 1980: 83). More importantly, he made decisions about creative writing that still define the academic field. For instance, he divided the Workshop into genres – poetry and fiction – to make classes easier to teach, took a personal interest in each student, and functioned as both mentor and godfather. In an essay entitled ‘A Miranda’s World’ in Robert Dana’s A Community of Writers: Paul Engle and the Iowa Writers’ Workshop (1999), Donald Justice describes how Engle picked his wife and himself up from the Iowa City bus station on a cold January day, found them an apartment, and then gave the young poet one of his own wool suits to see him through the bitter winter. Throughout the years, Engle brought to campus the hottest literary names of the time including Dylan Thomas, W. H. Auden, and Robert Frost. Engle then went on to found the International Writing Program where he poured this same kind of energy into spreading his literary enthusiasm around the globe. Engle’s model of rigorous, genre-based workshops, close-knit communities formed around mentors, and highly respected visiting writers became the standard in the field. Theories of Creativity and Creative Writing Pedagogy 13 The Iowa Writers’ Workshop MFA graduates fanned out across the US, and many entered the ranks of academe. English departments, experiencing dwindling numbers of majors, began to open up their doors to creative writers whose classes quickly filled. The black berets and cigarette holders of a previous era were traded in for the tweed jackets and pipes of faculty life. The turbulent late 1960s and early 1970s saw a growth spurt for creative writers in academe, as students not only demanded the end of the Vietnam War and greater civil rights, but more seemingly relevant course work. Iowa Workshop graduates, in turn, set up their own writing programmes at other universities and produced their own graduate students, who once again set up more programmes. In the UK, creative writing in academe began to take hold as well. In 1969, the University of Lancaster was the first to offer an MA in creative writing. Even when the US academic job market inevitably tightened, academically-trained writers found their way into teaching in high schools, in state-run writers-in-the-schools programmes, in the prisons, in youth shelters, retirement homes, elder hostels, and short, focused summer workshops and conferences. From the fall of 1996 to 2001, according to Andrea Quarracino’s report in the AWP Job List (2005), the number of tenure-track academic job openings listed with the Association of Writers and Writing Programs (AWP) ranged from forty-six to seventy-two but later jumped to more than 100 twice, in 2002 and 2004. In 2005, AWP listed over 300 graduate and 400 undergraduate programmes. The literary community at large has grown to the point that it touches almost every city in the States. In 2005 in the UK, creative writing has become the fastest growing and most popular field in higher education, with nearly every college and university offering creative writing courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels (Beck 2005). With this growth, new kinds of MFA programmes surfaced. In 1976, Goddard College in Plainfield, Vermont, was one of the first institutions to offer a high-profile but lowresidency graduate MFA programme in creative writing. Students and faculty came together for two intense on-campus weeks twice a year, then conducted their courses through one-on-one correspondence. Students and faculty could then retain their existing jobs while taking part in the programme. There was no need for relocation nor for financial aid in the form of teaching assistantships. Since the early 1970s, low-residency programmes have proliferated in the US. Low-residency programmes now exist at such diverse institutions as Antioch University in California, Lesley University in Massachusetts, Spalding University in Kentucky, Naropa University in Colorado, the University of British Columbia, and Lancaster University in the UK with a two-week residency in Ireland. With the turn of the twenty-first century came specialisation within MFA creative writing programmes. In 2004, Seattle Pacific University launched an MFA programme highlighting writing about spirituality. The programme’s website describes its mission: The low-residency MFA at SPU is a creative writing program for apprentice writers – both Christians and those of other traditions – who not only want to pursue excellence in the craft of writing but also place their work within the larger context of the Judeo–Christian tradition of faith. In 2006, both Chatham College and Iowa State University planned to offer MFA degrees in creative writing and the environment. Iowa State’s creative writing programme has defined its mission this way: 14 The Handbook of Creative Writing Under the broad rubric of ‘environment’, our MFA program in Creative Writing and the Environment would offer an original and intensive opportunity for gifted students of nonfiction, fiction, poetry, and drama to document, meditate on, celebrate, and mourn the reciprocal transformation of humanity and our world/s. (Iowa State University 2005: 2) Likewise, in the UK, students can now earn MAs, MPhils, and PhDs with an emphasis in creative writing in the traditional categories of poetry, fiction, and playwriting but can also link creative writing with science, critical theory, journalism or the teaching of creative writing (Beck 2005). As writing programmes mature and develop, the field is also re-thinking its pedagogy. Until around 1990, most creative writing faculty followed the Engle teaching model without much reflection. A workshop teacher led small groups – The AWP Directors’ Handbook (2003: 5) recommends no more than fifteen, with twelve as ideal, but recognises that most workshop groups now are between eleven and twenty – through peer oral critiques of completed poems, stories, chapters of novels, or plays. In the Engle model, the criticism was meant to be tough and could save the writer years of individual trial and error. But the criticism could also become personality-driven or downright nasty. Little emphasis was placed on structure, work in process, or revision. Currently, many workshop faculty across the US and UK have adapted Engle’s model and are experimenting with creating new approaches to teaching creative writing. Some teach from assignments on technique and structure, whereas others initiate a process of constant revision. Some lecture to huge rooms of students on technique, then break into smaller workshops. Others emphasise working exclusively in even smaller groups of four or five students. Texts such as Power and Identity in the Creative Writing Classroom are articulating current practices and are suggesting new possibilities, in this case offering: various ways to configure authority: as the expertise of the teacher or of the students, as agency or action for accomplishing things, as a set of mutually beneficial or agreed-upon guidelines for fostering success, as a set of evaluation criteria, as seemingly inherent forces in writing and teaching, and even as authorship itself. (Leahy 2005: i) In 2004 in the UK, New Writing: the International Journal for the Practice and Theory of Creative Writing was launched under the editorship of Graeme Harper. This journal, published by Multilingual Matters, includes peer-reviewed pedagogy articles as well as shorter creative work. Can It Really Be Taught?: Resisting Lore in Creative Writing Pedagogy (Ritter and Vanderslice 2007) is a collection asserting that creative writing has too long been a separatist pedagogy based on undocumented and uncritical lore. The editors and authors examine this lore and argue for reframing the discipline and most importantly its pedagogy in relation to intellect rather than ego. Some of these same faculty members on both continents who have helped to restructure writing workshops have also made an effort to provide their own students with pedagogical training. Many MFA programmes, such as Cardiff University, Antioch University of Los Angeles, and Indiana University, offer internships, courses or postgraduate certificates in ‘Teaching Creative Writing’. Writing workshops abroad, too, are now commonplace. A budding writer can go off for a summer to study creative writing in a number of international cities including Dublin, Paris, and Prague. The University of Iowa’s Nonfiction Writing Program now offers its writers study abroad trips to the Philippines. In 2005, Iowa State University set up the first international writers-in-the-schools programme – a form of service learning – in Trinidad Theories of Creativity and Creative Writing Pedagogy 15 and Tobago, where Iowa State graduate students taught creative writing in K-12 schools in a Caribbean country with virtually no creative writing curriculum. Now that creative writing has established itself as an academic pursuit, its programmes are expanding, especially as academic options expand more generally. Approaches to creativity and pedagogy The Iowa Writers’ Workshop declares on its website: ‘Though we agree in part with the popular insistence that writing cannot be taught, we exist and proceed on the assumption that talent can be developed, and we see our possibilities and limitations as a school in that light’. The ‘model for contemporary writing programs’, by its own accounts, bases itself in part upon the most widely influential theory underpinning creativity and creative writing: the Romantic myth. The premises of this approach to creativity include that talent is inherent and essential, that creative writing is largely or even solely an individual pursuit, and that inspiration not education drives creativity. For the Iowa Writers’ Workshop, that means, ‘the fact that the Workshop can claim as alumni nationally and internationally prominent poets, novelists, and short story writers is, we believe, more the result of what they brought here than of what they gained from us’. The Romantic myth is a positive influence on creative writing in a variety of ways. This approach values the very act of creation that is difficult for writers themselves to articulate and values the relative isolation that, even in academe, seems necessary to write. In addition, it links writing with concepts of beauty and originality. To state openly and confidently that creative writing cannot be taught, however, puts the field at risk as a serious academic pursuit. If little is gained through completion of an academic programme, why does it exist within increasingly corporate educational models? If creative writing cannot be taught, then it might also follow that student work cannot be evaluated and programmes cannot be assessed; creative writing does not, then, fit easily academic contexts. Brent Royster in ‘Inspiration, creativity, and crisis: the Romantic myth of the writer meets the postmodern classroom’ (2005) points to many aspects of the Romantic myth as problematic for the field. He demonstrates the dominance of Romantic ideology in popular culture as well as in the field’s own venues such as the AWP Writer’s Chronicle and Poets & Writers. Royster turns to the work of Csikszentmihalyi: Csikszentmihalyi’s model, simply put, refutes the idea that solely the individual generates a creative work. On the contrary, though his dynamic model of creativity still illustrates the individual’s role in the creative process, equal agency is distributed among the social and cultural systems influencing that individual. (2005: 32) What feels like inspiration to the isolated writer can be articulated instead as a dynamic set of forces coming together: Rather than claiming that this inspiration came from somewhere beyond the writer, it seems more apt to suggest that the mind of the artist has reached an opportune moment in which rhythms, sounds, and connotations seem to arise unbidden from memory. (Royster 2005: 34) This approach allows the writer to define him- or herself as an active participant in a larger, dynamic process. This view of creativity values both individual writer and culture or community and supports the concept of the multi-vocal workshop-based classroom. 16 The Handbook of Creative Writing The University of Cardiff offers a graduate degree in the ‘Teaching and Practice of Creative Writing’, according to its website, thereby claiming that creative writing can be taught and that the combination of creativity and pedagogy is an important emerging area: ‘With increased interest in the relevance of creativity to current educational practices, this degree will place students advantageously for many types of teaching opportunities’. Programmes like this one and the graduate programme at Antioch University of Los Angeles reconfigure the field to include teaching. As a whole, the tension between the Romantic myth and various responses to it seems productive, allowing for a variety of approaches and debates that recognise the seriousness and rigor of the pursuit and the field’s distinct pedagogical theories and practices. Those who teach writing are very often situated in academe just down the hall from literary scholars, and most writing instructors would agree that good writers read a lot and that understanding written texts offers models, tools, and ideas for one’s own writing. Elaine Scarry argues that beauty begets itself, that to read a beautiful sonnet urges one to reproduce that beauty, and that ‘this willingness continually to revise one’s own location in order to place oneself in the path of beauty is the basic impulse underlying education’ (Scarry 1999: 7). Madison Smartt Bell implies that grasping form through reading is foundational for writers: ‘The reader who wants to write as well has got to go beyond the intuitive grasp of form to the deliberate construction of form’ (1997: 22). In other words, teaching writing depends upon the study of existing texts in order that students comprehend how to construct texts of their own. Kim Addonizio and Dorianne Laux (1997: 105) offer a similar stance for poets: Poets need to tune their ears as finely as musicians; that’s why reading poems aloud is a good idea . . . You need not be familiar with meter to gain an appreciation for the rhythms of writers’ lines, and to begin to work with this principle yourself. Moreover, Addonizio and Laux put the necessity of studying literature bluntly: ‘To write without any awareness of a tradition you are trying to become part of would be self-defeating’ (1997: 13). Reading literature and understanding it is part of being a writer. Some recent literary theory, however, asserts that the author is dead, which creates natural resistance from living, working, teaching writers. Even those literary critics, like Harold Bloom, who value authorship, do so in ways that may present obstacles for writers. Alice W. Flaherty, who documents her own hypergraphia, notes: ‘The theories of Bloom and Bate, that great precursors are barriers to a writer’s aspiration to originality, predict an inevitable decline in literature as the sheer mass of predecessors increases over time’ (2004: 106). Some recent literary criticism and theory tells creative writers that we do not exist at all or that our task is now too great for any reasonable chance of accomplishment because so much precedes us. Flaherty contradicts this sort of literary theory: ‘writer’s block is not an inevitable response to masterpieces. They can inspire’ (2004: 106). Indeed, creative writers can use literature and literary theory to help them understand and respond to the tradition (see Lauri Ramey’s chapter, ‘Creative Writing and Critical Theory’, in this section). Literary criticism and theory, though, place the reader – not the writer – at the centre. The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Criticism and Theory asserts that literary theory ‘aspires, from Aristotle to Hans-Georg Gadamer to Jacques Derrida, toward a systematic statement of the principles and methods governing interpretation and evaluation’ (Groden and Kreiswirth 1994: v). This lack of focus on the writer and the writing process is reinforced Theories of Creativity and Creative Writing Pedagogy 17 by the guide’s ‘inventory of basic critical questions’ (Groden and Kreiswirth 1994: vi), for only one of these thirteen questions addresses the ‘genesis’ of literary texts. So, literary theory is well and good but does not suffice entirely for the field of creative writing. Our other colleagues down the hall, at least in the US, are compositionists, who have been variously at odds with and in league with creative writers. Composition and creative writing share a common, lower position in the academic hierarchy than literary studies, often with composition perceived as the department’s curricular service to the university and creative writing perceived as the frivolous pursuit of eccentrics. Many creative writing teachers in the US today have drawn from graduate-school training in teaching composition and from composition theorists. Wendy Bishop is the lead example of a theorist who straddled the fence between composition and creative writing, who attempted to bring the theories underpinning the two disciplines together, and who brought not only composition approaches to creative writing but also vice versa. One of the important arguments that Bishop (2003: xi) and other compositionists have made to counter the assertion that writing is less rigorous than literary study is that writing courses have content and that writing is ‘important work’. Bishop (2003: 234) argues that students ‘should approach composition classes and creative writing classes in pretty similar ways. Overall, both types of classrooms need to encourage and reward risk taking and experimentation as you learn to conform to and break genre conventions’. Here, then, is the possibility that composition and creative writing are versions of the same field. Yet, creative writing is also a distinct field building its own theories and approaches. Linguists like George Lakoff have been studying metaphor, cognition, and the arts for decades. Cognitive scientists, too, have been defining creativity and its processes, but cognitive science has been largely ignored by creative writing teachers. Cognitive science and creative writing share some history, in that both fields made great gains as academic pursuits only in the last half-century. Bell (1997), in the first section of Narrative Design entitled ‘Unconscious mind’, discusses the cognitive processes of creative writers, though he does not use terminology or specific theories of cognitive science. Likewise, Addonizio and Laux claim: ‘We continually make comparisons and connections, often without realizing that we are doing so, so comfortable are we with seeing in this way’ (1997: 94). These comparisons and connections that become images and metaphors in our poems are results of cognition and are of primary concern to Lakoff and others. Not only might creative writing contribute to and reshape current discussions about creativity, we might also recognise how existing theories of cognition underpin current pedagogical practices such as the workshop-based classroom and the battle against cliché as well as how the theories might improve our teaching. John T. Bruer notes: Instruction based on cognitive theory envisions learning as an active, strategic process . . . It recognizes that learning is guided by the learners’ introspective awareness and control of their mental processes. It emphasizes that learning is facilitated by social, collaborative settings that value self-directed student dialogue. (1999: 681) The workshop-based creative writing classroom – a nontraditional academic approach – presents writing as this sort of active, strategic process: all students must actively engage, student-writers become increasingly aware of how their own and others’ decision-making affects written work, and the writing process is situated within an interactive, dynamic classroom where students share informed criticism. We are already using a pedagogy that is supported by findings in cognitive science. 18 The Handbook of Creative Writing Studies show, too, that students’ embedded knowledge structures and prevalent misconceptions are resistant to traditional instruction. As Bruer (1999: 682) states: ‘The result is that students encode, or learn, schemata that are very different from those which teachers are attempting to impart’. To apply this problem to creative writing, we might consider, for instance, how schemata of narrative are embedded in our students’ brains through interaction with television and video games. Or, we might consider students’ relative unfamiliarity with poetry, or their deeply embedded schemata of poetry based on nursery rhymes, as an opportunity to build new schemata or build upon existing schemata of language’s rhythm. Cognitive science, too, offers ways to categorise learning and memory. Henry L. Roediger III and Lyn M. Goff offer an overview: ‘Procedural memory refers to the knowledge of how to do things such as walking, talking, riding a bicycle, tying shoelaces. Often the knowledge represented is difficult to verbalize, and the procedures are often acquired slowly and only after much practice’ (1999: 250). Procedural memory is a way to understand learning in creative writing classrooms as slowly accumulated knowledge deeply internalised through practice that emerges as if known all along. Flaherty (2004: 242) offers a similar take: ‘on its own the sensation of inspiration is not enough . . . Perhaps the feeling of inspiration is merely a pleasure by which your brain lures you into working harder’. If we think of inspiration as a cognitive event, how can creative writing courses best create the conditions for it and foster the work of writing? With its workshop model, creative writing is a field with what Lee Shulman has termed – though for professions like law and medicine – ‘signature pedagogies’, which are distinct and commonly recognizable types of teaching that organize the fundamental ways in which future practitioners are educated in their new professions. In these signature pedagogies, the novices are instructed in critical aspects of the three fundamental dimensions of professional work – to think, to perform, and to act with integrity. (2005: 52) We must continue to define, support, and improve upon our signature pedagogy. Ultimately, of course, the burden and the opportunity for both teacher and student is to write. Applying theory to practice in creative writing courses Creative writing has defined itself in opposition to established practices in higher education, and this stance as much as any theory has contributed to classroom practices. David Radavich (1999: 108) writes that the ‘first wave’ of creative writers in the academy had a political agenda that sought to include formerly marginalised groups. ‘Such writers frequently and vociferously attacked established hierarchies’, he explains, including academic institutions, which were seen as part of those hierarchies. The rebel attitude resulted in an approach to teaching markedly different from other disciplines: no lectures, no exams, decentralised authority, and student ownership of the learning process. Before composition theory touted the importance of audience and process, creative writing professors recognised that writers benefit from an immediate and worthy audience for their emerging work. The workshop, therefore, attempts to create a sort of literary café in which students earnestly analyse a classmate’s poem or story, pointing out how it succeeds and what the writer might do to improve it and offering perspective that enables the writer to re-envision and revise, often for a portfolio of polished work. Theories of Creativity and Creative Writing Pedagogy 19 Although different professors and tutor-writers implement the workshop – the signature pedagogy – differently, common practices exist. Most often, before coming to class, students receive printed copies of each other’s works to read and annotate with thoughtful, formative criticism. To minimise attempts to justify the work under discussion and to maximise introspection, the writer remains silent while the class discusses his or her draft. The professor leads the discussion by asking questions, keeps the comments grounded in relevant and meaningful criteria, and maintains civility and respect among all students. Along with students, professors offer suggestions for improving not just the piece under discussion but also the approach to and understanding of craft and of the creative process. Professors also work individually with students during conferences, lecture on specific techniques, and assign practice writing exercises. By reserving official, final, or summative evaluation – the grade – of the work for the end of the academic term, the workshop approach privileges process over product and emphasises the complexity and time-consuming nature of the creative arts. While student works comprise the major texts for the course, most professors assign reading from literature anthologies as well but approach and discuss these texts with a writerly slant. Pulitzer Prize-winning author Jane Smiley (1999: 250) maintains that, for writers, the study of literature provides distance from the ego and allows students to see the connections their work has to other literature. In On Becoming a Novelist, John Gardner notes that the writer ‘reads other writers to see how they do it (how they avoid overt manipulation)’ (1983: 45–6). He advises writers to read to see how effects are achieved, to question whether they would have approached the situation in the same way and to consider whether their way ‘would have been better or worse, and why’. Similarly, R. V. Cassill, in Writing Fiction, explains that ‘what the writer wants to note . . . is how the story, its language and all its parts have been joined together’ (1975: 6). Great literature, therefore, models technique for writers. As the popularity of creative writing classes has increased, more textbooks focusing on technique have emerged for use alongside student work and published literature. The AWP Directors’ Handbook suggests that undergraduate creative writing courses ‘include craft texts and literary texts (anthologies, books by individual authors, literary periodicals) that offer appropriate models for student writing’ (2003: 17). Most creative writing textbooks present chapters discussing specific elements of various genres and offer exercises to help students master these techniques. While textbooks acknowledge the difficulty of articulating foolproof guidelines, the authors assume would-be writers benefit from instruction on craft. In her introduction to Write Away: One Novelist’s Approach to Fiction and the Writing Life, for example, Elizabeth George explains that for those who teach creative writing, ‘craft is the point’; it is ‘the soil in which a budding writer can plant the seed of her idea in order to nurture it into a story’ (2005: x). Similarly, Addonizio and Laux state that ‘Craft provides the tools: knowing how to make a successful metaphor, when to break a line, how to revise and rewriting – these are some of the techniques the aspiring poet must master’ (1997: 11). Unlike texts for other disciplines, creative writing texts seldom provide instructor’s editions or supplements that ground the instructions and exercises in theories about learning to write. As Bishop and Ostrom explain in their introduction to Colors of a Different Horse: Rethinking Creative Writing, Theory and Practice, because creative writing professors see themselves as writers more than as teachers, they ‘may well make up a disproportionate share of those who retreat from theory’ (1994: xii). Indeed, the hallmarks for successful undergraduate and graduate creative writing programmes in The AWP Directors’ Handbook state that creative writing faculty consist of ‘writers whose work has been published by 20 The Handbook of Creative Writing nationally known, professional journals and presses respected by other writers, editors, and publishers’ (2003: 15). These hallmarks stipulate, ‘the criteria for promotion, assignment of classes, and tenure of creative writing faculty focus on publication of creative work, demonstrated ability as teachers of creative writing, and contributions to the university and greater literary community’ (2003: 15). In other words, the leading organisation that promotes creative writing as a discipline values writers who teach more than teachers who write. More so than other disciplines, creative writing must contend with questions of validity and scholarship. Flannery O’Connor’s now famous remark that universities ‘don’t stifle enough’ writers still holds sway, and pejorative labels such as workshop story or McPoem reflect the disdain many feel for the writing that emerges from creative writing programmes. Even some who teach creative writing question its existence as an academic subject. For example, Lynn Freed in her memoir ‘Doing time’ (2005) confesses that she does not know ‘how to pretend to unravel the mystery’ (68) of what makes a good story and admits that she sometimes feels as if, by attempting to teach creative writing, she is participating in ‘a sham’ (72). Most professors of creative writing do not share Freed’s opinion, but they share her despair at the prospect of articulating clearly and accurately what they do. As Richard Cohen states in Writer’s Mind: Crafting Fiction, ‘Technique is what can most efficiently be taught in classrooms, but technique is not the essence of writing’ (1995: xvi). George Garrett makes a similar point in ‘Going to see the elephant: our duty as storytellers’ by claiming that the creative process is magic and mysterious: ‘It breaks all the rules as fast as we can make them. Every generalization about it turns out to be at best incomplete or inadequate’ (1999: 2). Nonetheless, creative writing professors do and must make generalisations. ‘If the teacher has no basic standards’, Gardner writes, ‘his class is likely to develop none, and their comments can only be matters of preference or opinion. Writers will have nothing to strive toward or resist, nothing solid to judge by’ (1983: 84). Bishop and Ostrom’s challenge to ‘reexamine what takes place in creative-writing classrooms’ (1994: xxii), has resulted not in a uniformity of standards and common learning objectives but in a meaningful dialogue by which professors can make clear what they expect students to learn. The AWP annual conference, for example, features panels on pedagogy and publishes a collection of short papers on best teaching practices. Books such as What If? (1990) and The Practice of Poetry (1992) compile exercises and advice from published authors with extensive classroom experiences. Julie Checkoway, former President of the AWP Board of Directors, writes that the successful writers and teachers who contributed to Creating Fiction ‘have staked their reputations on the notions that when it comes to writing, teaching is at least as important as talent, nurture at least as important as nature’ (1999: ix). How best to teach and nurture writers changes as the population of students and the venues for creative writing classes change. Like professors in other disciplines, creative writing professors have responded to the influx of students whose different assumptions, expectations, and life experiences necessitate a change in pedagogy. Mark L. Taylor, in ‘Generation NeXt: today’s postmodern student – meeting, teaching, and serving’ points to research suggesting: ‘In our postmodern culture, the traditional models of premodern religion and modern science/reason must compete with postmodern consumerism/entertainment and hedonism/immediate needs gratification on a playing field that is level at best’ (2005: 104). Current undergraduates, he contends, tend to be accepting of ‘everything except people who believe in the hegemony of their chosen model’. Recognising that a student does not enter the classroom a tabula rasa and that the aesthetic values inherent in great works of literature may appear arbitrary, exclusive, or contrary to publishing trends or Theories of Creativity and Creative Writing Pedagogy 21 to students’ embedded cognitive schemata, creative writing professors have developed strategies for identifying assumptions about literature and reconciling these with other notions of how a text communicates. In his essay, ‘On not being nice: sentimentality and the creative writing class’, for example, Arthur Saltzman (2003: 324) laments the sentimentality that students bring to the classroom – their tendency ‘to be passionate according to formula’ – and he strives to ‘expose the evaluative criteria that they invariably bring to the discussion’ of poetry. Discussing both his and his students’ assumptions about poetry allows Saltzman to help students develop ‘more specific and involved responses’ with the hope that they ‘become more demanding of the poems they encounter and produce’ (2003: 325). Being explicit about evaluative standards is in the interest of students, but articulating learning objectives also helps legitimise the difficult work students and teachers do in creative writing classrooms. Although institutional assessments may have limited value in determining whether students will be successful writers, six regional accrediting bodies in the US require institutions to develop, articulate, and assess standards and to improve student learning. The UK has the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education as its regulating body, which requires module-by-module assessment and external examiners to a greater extent than is required in the US. More importantly, creative writing professors and tutor-writers have taken ownership of the ways in which creative writing is evaluated. In a creative writing class, marks or grades reflect comprehension and application of specific writing strategies as well as prolific writing. Many professors provide numerous and varied opportunities to demonstrate competency, including exercises, analyses of published work, and even quizzes or exams along with the portfolio of creative work. As creative writing continues to define itself as a rigorous, academic discipline, professors will need to take into account the technological and demographic changes taking place. Online courses and programmes as well as online magazines, hypertexts, and blogs offer the prospect of reaching specific audiences and challenging assumptions about what constitutes publication. How might professors address these new venues and texts? How might professors develop teaching strategies to accommodate diverse groups of distance learners and to maintain the high standards for which college-level courses in creative writing are known? To what extent can the workshop environment be translated to the Internet? What are the standards by which such texts are judged? At the same time, changes in the publishing industry limit opportunities for novice writers. Despite the number of writing courses and programmes, according to the National Endowment for the Arts’ Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America (2004), the percentage of book readers at all ages has declined significantly over the past two decades. One of the few increases in literary activity was in creative writing. These trends raise questions regarding who reads the works produced by writers from now more numerous creative writing programmes. Such changes offer the field opportunities to continue to refine curricula, to explore the theoretical foundations on which the curricula are based, and to contribute to literary excellence within and outside of the academy. Conclusion Creative writing is now an academic pursuit with a documented history that shapes its current theories and practices. The field has become increasingly varied in its curricula, moving away from foundations of literary scholarship to the signature pedagogy based on the workshop model and, more recently, to manifestations in low-residency, servicelearning, and web-based iterations so that creative writers in academe – both professors and 22 The Handbook of Creative Writing students – not only develop talent and craft but also bear witness to contemporary culture and develop marketable cognitive and communicative skills. Creative writing has borrowed and reshaped theoretical approaches from literary criticism, composition studies, linguistics, and even cognitive science. These foundations underpin a rigorous, rewarding academic experience in creative writing classrooms in the US, the UK, and increasingly around the globe. Though Dorothea Brande found the way creative writing was taught to be problematic seventy years ago, her claim in Becoming a Writer about our endeavour holds true today: ‘there is no field where one who is in earnest about learning to do good work can make such enormous strides in so short a time’ (1934: 27). Though challenges in the field still exist – perhaps because they exist – creative writing has come into its own within academe over the last three decades. References Addonizio, Kim and Dorianne Laux (1997), The Poet’s Companion: A Guide to the Pleasures of Writing Poetry, New York: W. W. Norton. The Association of Writers and Writing Programs homepage, www.awpwriter.org (accessed October 2005). The AWP Directors’ Handbook (2003), Fairfax, VA: Association of Writers and Writing Programs. Beck, Heather (2005), email to Mary Swander. Behn, Robin and Chase Twitchell (1992), eds, The Practice of Poetry: Writing Exercises from Poets Who Teach, New York: HarperCollins. Bell, Madison Smartt (1997), Narrative Design: Working with Imagination, Craft, and Form, New York: W. W. Norton. Bernays, Anne and Pamela Painter (1990), What If? Writing Exercises for Fiction Writers, New York: HarperCollins. Bishop, Wendy (2003), ed., The Subject Is Writing: Essays by Teachers and Students, Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook. Bishop, Wendy and Hans Ostrom (1994), eds, Colors of a Different Horse: Rethinking Creative Writing Theory and Pedagogy, Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Brande, Dorothea ([1934] 1981), Becoming a Writer, New York: Tarcher/Penguin. Bruer, John T. (1999), ‘Education’, in William Bechtel and George Graham (eds), A Companion to Cognitive Science, Mallden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 681–90. Cassill, R.V. (1975), Writing Fiction, New York: Prentice Hall Press. Cohen, Richard (1995), Writer’s Mind: Crafting Fiction, Lincolnwood, IL: NTC/Contemporary Publishing Group. Dana, Robert (1999), ed., A Community of Writers: Paul Engle and the Iowa Writers’ Workshop, Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press. Flaherty, Alice W. (2004), The Midnight Disease, New York: Houghton Mifflin. Freed, Lynn (2005), ‘Doing Time’, Harper’s Magazine, (July) 311: 65–72. Gardner, John (1983), On Becoming a Novelist, New York: W. W. Norton. Garrett, George (1999), ‘Going to see the elephant: our duty as storytellers’, in Julie Checkoway (ed.), Creating Fiction: Instruction and Insights from the Teachers of the Associated Writing Programs, Cincinnati, OH: Story Press, pp. 2–12. George, Elizabeth (2005), Write Away One Novelist’s Approach to Fiction and the Writing Life, New York: HarperCollins. Gradschools.com, http://gradschools.com/listings/out/creative_write_out.html (accessed October 2005). Theories of Creativity and Creative Writing Pedagogy 23 Groden, Michael and Martin Kreiswirth (1994), The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory, Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Iowa Writers’ Workshop www.uiowa.edu/~iww/about.htm (accessed October 2005). Leahy, Anna (2005), ed., Power and Identity in the Creative Writing Classroom: The Authority Project, Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Meyers, D. G. (1996), The Elephants Teach: Creative Writing Since 1880, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Moxley, Joseph (1989), Creative Writing in America: Theory and Pedagogy, Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. National Endowment for the Arts (2004), Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America, www.nea.gov/pub/ReadingAtRisk.pdf (accessed November 2005). New Writing: the International Journal for the Practice and Theory of Creative Writing, www.multilingualmatters.net/nw/default.htm (accessed November 2005). Proposal for MFA in Creative Writing and Environment (2005), Iowa State University English Department. Quarracino, Andrea (2005), ‘Annual Report on the Academic Job List’, AWP Job List: October 2005. Radavich, David (1999), ‘Creative writing in the Academy’, Profession, 106–12. Ritter, Kelly, and Stephanie Vanderslice (2007), Can It Really Be Taught? Resisting Lore in Creative Writing Pedagogy, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Roediger III, Henry L. and Lyn M. Goff (1999), ‘Memory’, in William Bechtel and George Graham (eds), A Companion to Cognitive Science, Mallden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 250–64. Royster, Brent (2005), ‘Inspiration, creativity, and crisis: the Romantic myth of the writer meets the postmodern classroom’, in Anna Leahy (ed.), Power and Identity in the Creative Writing Classroom: The Authority Project, Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, pp. 26–38. Saltzman, Arthur (2003), ‘On not being nice: sentimentality and the creative writing class’, Midwest Quarterly, 44:3, 322–35. Scarry, Elaine (1999), On Beauty and Being Just, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Seattle Pacific University website, www.spu.edu/prospects/grad/academics/mfa/index.asp (accessed October 2005). Shulman, Lee (p), ‘Signature pedagogies’, Daedalus, 134:3, 52–9. Smiley, Jane (1999), ‘What stories teach their writers: the purpose and practice of revision’, in Julie Checkoway (ed.), Creative Fiction: Instruction and Insights from the Teachers of the Associated Writing Programs, Cincinnati, OH: Story Press, pp. 244–55. Taylor, Mark (2005), ‘Generation NeXt: today’s postmodern student – meeting, teaching, and serving’ in The Higher Learning Commission (ed.), A Collection of Papers on Self-Study and Institutional Improvement, Chicago, IL: The Higher Learning Commission, pp. 99–107. Wilbers, Stephen (1980), The Iowa Writers’ Workshop, Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press. 2 The Evaluation of Creative Writing at MA Level (UK) Jenny Newman Can creative writing be assessed? When the first creative writing MAs in the UK were founded in the late 1960s and early 70s, many traditional scholars and academics argued that no one could teach the mysterious and fascinating process of literary creativity, and that such courses had no place in a university. Their objections have been overturned, partly, it must be said, because of student demand for accredited creative writing courses from under-funded and money-hungry universities. A few literature dons, however, still follow the critic John Carey in maintaining that the evaluation of works of art is purely subjective and thus cannot be codified (Carey 2005: 52). Others say, with the novelist and former lecturer David Lodge, that no one can teach you ‘how to produce a text other people will willingly give up their time – and perhaps their money – to read, although it has no utilitarian purpose or value’ – and that the more advanced the course, the more heartbreak is likely to be associated with it (Lodge 1996: 176). Other lecturers and writers feel that good art overturns the rules, and that subjecting potential poets, playwrights and novelists to a series of tasks for assessment stifles genuine creativity. Most tutor-writers would agree that they cannot impart originality or perseverance. But they do claim that they know how to foster talent in an academic environment where students can learn through workshops with fellow writers, and have access to libraries, conferences and electronic resources. Also, like university painters and musicians, tutorwriters know how to teach tradition and technique. Nor need they find it impossible to tell good writing from bad. Generations of critics and lecturers (including John Carey) have written books assessing writers past and sometimes even present. Although pundits fall out over individual cases, societies as a whole seem able to form a consensus even about what has only just been written. The Pulitzer, the Man Booker, the Palme d’Or, the Whitbread, the Prix Goncourt, the Orange and the International Man Booker: major prizes – and hundreds of minor ones – proliferate. Judging panels proclaim their manifestos, and their long lists and shortlists spark passionate and often knowledgeable debate on review pages, television and radio arts programmes, and among panels of experts and celebrities. New films, fiction, poetry and plays are judged good or bad by critics who offer their reasons at length. Fortified by generations of successful graduates, and by having road tested their grounds for awarding high and low marks, many tutors now assert that ‘criteria for creative writing The Evaluation of Creative Writing at MA Level (UK) 25 should be no more difficult to ascertain than for any other subject area, creative or not’ (Atkinson 2000/2001: 26). This chapter is intended to explore the evaluation of creative writing at postgraduate level, to help you choose the MA with the ‘assessment pattern’ best suited to your needs, and to enable you to avoid some of the pitfalls awaiting postgraduate writers. Choosing a course There is no standard curriculum for Creative Writing MAs, and they vary dramatically in their approach to writing, their teaching methods, their links with theatres, screenwriters, agents, publishers and production companies, and in their graduates’ success rate. Some courses allow you to choose between poetry, fiction, screenwriting or scriptwriting, and to study full-time (typically a year) or part-time (typically two years). Though most Creative Writing degrees are not, strictly speaking, professional qualifications, many have ‘modules’ or ‘pathways’ which enable you to learn how to run a writers’ workshop in a school, hospital, prison or hospice, or to edit a magazine, or to sample jobs in publishing, or film, or in the growing field of writing and mental health. Not all university websites are user-friendly, but it is worth taking the time to search them for inspiration. Even if you are confined for personal reasons to a specific locality, you may have more choice than you think. As a subject, Creative Writing is booming, and more MAs are being offered every year, even by highly traditional universities. Do not be deterred if you do not have a first degree, or are older than the traditional student. Many institutions value life experience, and consider a promising portfolio and a strong commitment to writing, to be more important than formal qualifications. Students’ ages range from twentyone to sixty or even seventy, and some courses have a median age of thirty-eight or higher. No website can tell you all you need to know, so you will need a brochure, or ideally a range (most websites allow you to request one online). Find out the names of the tutors, and read their plays, novels or poems; but remember that, though likelier to attract the attention of agents and publishers, a prestigious course may not best suit your needs. The ways in which an MA will develop and evaluate your writing are more important than its reputation in the national press, so ask yourself which one will best foster in you what Graeme Harper describes as ‘creative practice and an understanding of creative practice’ (Harper 2003: 1). If those courses near you seem unsuitable, or if you live in a remote spot, you could consider enrolling on an online or distance learning MA. Make a shortlist of those that interest you, and if you still cannot choose, email your queries to the admissions tutors, or ask for a telephone discussion, or a preliminary and informal interview. What follows are some typical enquiries from potential MA students about the way their writing will be assessed: • Do I have to submit an entrance portfolio? If so, how long should it be and what are the criteria? When is the deadline for submission and when will I be told the result? • Will I be interviewed? Are you willing to interview over the telephone? What sort of students are • • • • you looking for? Do you accept students writing in their second language? Will I be able to switch from full-time to part-time if my financial circumstances change? Does the group size vary between lectures and workshops? As the course is by correspondence, does it include residentials or summer schools, locally run workshops, or online chatrooms in ‘real’ time? 26 The Handbook of Creative Writing • I think I might be dyslexic and I’ve been out of education for years. Do you offer study skills support? • How many contact hours can I expect, and is there an attendance requirement? • Will I be made to submit work in more than one genre (for example, scriptwriting, fiction, or poetry)? • Does the MA have a critical or academic component, or will it focus exclusively on my writing? • How much feedback will I be given and in what form? Will I get one-to-one tutorials from real writers? Can I choose my tutor? • What are the course’s links to publishers, agents and screenwriters? • How successful are its graduates? Do you provide a list of former students whom I can contact to ask about the course? • Who teaches the course, and how many visiting writers and publishers are invited? The Assessment Pattern An ‘assessment pattern’ is a list of the written, practical (if any), oral (if any) and online (if any) assignments you will be required to submit in order to graduate. Under regulations formulated by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education in England and Wales (QAA), tutors can only assess what they have formally taught. The assessment pattern can therefore be seen as a more accurate guide to the course itself than what tutors may maintain is important. Although no student can fully understand its rationale before completing it, it is well worth knowing its requirements in advance, and in written form. According to QAA guidelines, an assessment pattern should include a semester-by-semester schedule, a credit rating for each module (and a total of 180) which enables you to gauge the importance the course team attaches to each assignment, and information about word lengths. The submission dates will be carefully timed and posted well in advance. Creative writing courses do not have as yet the explicit national standards or ‘benchmarks’ for assessment that have been compiled for many other longer established subjects. Most Creative Writing MAs teach more than creative writing (see the range of assessment tasks, below) and have several methods of assessment. The majority of courses have an academic or critical component. In some universities the latter is as high as 40 or 50 per cent, and courses are taught mainly by academics, not writers. But assessment isn’t only a test or a barrier. It is intended to motivate you to acquire and practise new techniques, to read widely, to analyse what you have written and read, and to reflect on your creative processes. Your assignments should also allow your tutor to gauge your progress, to diagnose errors and enable you to rectify them, and to offer you expert feedback and advice. A good assessment pattern can add variety to your experience of being a student and will also allow you to recognise your achievements, and monitor your development as a writer. What follows are some popular examples of MA assessment tasks, plus a brief rationale of each. Analytical essay Good writers are avid viewers or readers, and all postgraduate courses encourage their students to become aware of the tradition in which they work, and of contemporary fiction, poetry or scripts. This process is often assessed through an analytical essay on significant The Evaluation of Creative Writing at MA Level (UK) 27 work already published or produced, in which the student demonstrates his or her power to read or view for technique. Critical commentary This typically accompanies a piece of the student’s creative writing. Its purpose differs slightly from course to course, but it is often used to place student work in a tradition, and in relation to recent or contemporary performances, films or publications. Rather than interpreting their writing, students can describe their intentions, their creative processes, the methods they used to resolve any challenges to technique, and the extent to which they felt they were successful. By identifying and analysing problems, a Critical Commentary can allow the tutor to reward ambitious creative writing which did not fully succeed. In some institutions the Critical Commentary is called a Supplementary Discourse, involving the separate discipline of poetics. Though most courses do not award the Commentary a specific proportion of the overall mark, it is often graded out of a notional 20 per cent, and the piece of creative work it accompanies out of a notional 80 per cent. Oral presentation or pitch to the student group This assesses the student’s ability to talk about his or her work as if to agents, publishers, producers or readers, or to an interviewer on television or radio. Website Increasingly agents and publishers scout for talent on the web. At least one British MA programme teaches students to build their own writer’s website, and to showcase their work, make links to other relevant sites, and present themselves as writers. Précis or synopsis Such material can help students to clarify their aims, understand their future market, and consider some of the writing or publishing industry’s social, geographical or economic determinants. Little magazine Many courses ask students to learn editorial and group skills by collaborating over a platform for their work. This is often accompanied by research into other outlets, national, international or online. Drafting and notebook-keeping While these activities cannot – and perhaps should not – be formally assessed, some MAs require evidence of both. Workshops Sessions in groups of preferably no more than eight enable students to present their work to their tutors and peers (see ‘Types and processes of assessment: Workshops’, below). 28 The Handbook of Creative Writing Though verbal contributions should probably not be measured formally, the experience can feed into students’ writing, as well as into their Commentaries or Supplementary Discourses. Editing or proofreading exercise This tests students’ ability to identify and correct errors of punctuation, typography and spelling on a piece of published or unpublished work. Analytical essay on a piece of original work by a fellow student This assignment requires wide reading and research, and hones ideas about technique, and critical skills. It is particularly useful for those who will later earn their living as publishers or editors. Creative writing The portfolio that you build up during your course is likely to have the highest credit rating in the assessment pattern, and will be your ‘calling card’ when you contact agents or publishers. Find out the overall word length in advance. Some courses demand a whole novel, for example, or a collection of poetry, or two full-length scripts, and may allow you a year or more after the end of the taught component in which to complete your manuscript, supported by timed tutorials. Others ask for only twelve to fifteen thousand words or equivalent, and will expect you to submit them within the one- or two-year span of the course. How your writing will be assessed Criteria Clear and thoughtful criteria ‘owned’ by all your tutors can be seen as a manifesto of the departmental spirit and of what it seeks to develop and impart. They may also endorse a university’s ‘mission’, and play to the tutors’ expertise and areas of research. Though students often ignore them until an assignment is due, assessment criteria should be consulted in advance. They explain what tutors reward and penalise when they mark your work, and will be referred to in your written and oral feedback. The criteria will also inform workshop discussions, and both written and oral self and peer appraisal, and any Critical Commentaries you write to accompany your original work. Criteria form the grounds for the discussions between your tutors about the marks they award you, and the annual exercises in which they grade anonymous scripts, then compare and discuss their verdicts. Criteria also form the basis of any appeal against a tutor’s decision (see ‘Appeals procedures’, below). On some courses creative writing criteria vary from genre to genre, in others not. Either way, subsidiary sets of criteria are usually applied when the course includes diverse assessment tasks. All criteria should be readily available in student handbooks and on the university website. The Evaluation of Creative Writing at MA Level (UK) 29 Grading Most MAs are Pass/Fail degrees with the possibility of a Distinction. Your work, however, is usually awarded a percentage, and criteria are subdivided according to the standard BA degree classification system (1st, II.i, etc.). What follows is a set of typical creative writing criteria, which has been adapted and amalgamated from those of five well-established MA creative writing programmes, most of which had poetry, prose and script components. Its categories are intended to give helpful and detailed feedback, but not to be prescriptive or exhaustive, or to reduce your tutors’ thoughts to a simple grid. The divisions can better be seen as overlapping sets of guidelines rather than watertight compartments. 70 per cent + (Distinction) Impressionistically, work in this range can be said to delight and excite through its ability to engage the reader or viewer or listener at a sophisticated level. More formally, it demonstrates an overall coherence of tone, control of narrative strategies, an inventive use of language and a distinctive ‘voice’. It displays evidence of original observation, of a knowledge – if only implied – of varieties of structure, and of the tradition(s) in which the student is working, or choosing to subvert. Dialogue and idiom, if used, are effective, and spelling, grammar, punctuation, syntax and editing are impeccable. Presentation is to the standard normally required by agents and publishers when considering work for publication. 60–9 per cent (Pass) Work in this category could be described as ambitious, with a clearly discernible narrative voice, though not as assured or coherent as that of work in the highest category. Nevertheless, the writing will show a strong understanding of its chosen form or genre, and of its artistic or literary context and tradition. The subject matter will be freshly approached, dialogue and idiom well handled, and the use of description and detail effective. The presentation will be almost of the standard required for submission to agents and publishers. 50–9 per cent (Pass) Work awarded a mark in this band will generally have reached a satisfactory standard of invention and proficiency, with a clearly discernible narrative or theme, though there may inconsistencies of characterisation or plot. The conception may not be as fresh or striking as that of work in the higher categories, and tend towards the derivative or ‘safe’. Though there will be evidence of redrafting, the use of technique might at points be limited or clumsy, with a sometimes indiscriminate choice of language or a reliance on cliché. N. B.: Even in these days of what some see as ‘grade inflation’, the work of half or more of a new MA group may fall into this band, and a mark at the upper end, in particular, should be seen not as grounds for discouragement, but as no mean achievement. 40–9 per cent (Pass) This is the lowest bracket of work deemed worthy of a pass. Although it may show some understanding of the potential of its form, writing in this category is usually limited in conception and approach. It may demonstrate some fluency and technical competence, but lack coherence and clarity. It may also be structurally weak, with a patchy control of style and tone, stereotypical situations or characters, and hackneyed details. The layout may be confusing, and spelling, syntax and punctuation will probably be erratic. 30 The Handbook of Creative Writing Below 40 per cent (Fail) Work in this category is deemed unworthy of a pass at postgraduate level, and will generally be poorly conceived and clumsily written. Though it may show some grasp of what is required, it may be rambling, difficult to follow or just plain boring. It may show little evidence of observation and descriptive skills, and lack a coherent tone, or knowledge of tradition, and be substantially under or over the required word length. The writer’s purpose may remain unclear, and presentation will typically be careless, with repeated mistakes of spelling, syntax, layout and punctuation. Types and processes of assessment Formative and summative Your coursework will be assessed in ways that are known as ‘formative’ and ‘summative’. Formative assessment is not linked to a mark, and focuses on strengths and points for improvement. Summative assessment often involves an element of the formative (such as a feedback sheet or a tutorial), but crucially awards a mark to a piece of work that counts towards your final result. What follows are the main forms of each activity. Formative assessment by a tutor No tutor, no matter how good a writer, can tell you what to write; but he or she will understand the creative process, be aware of your aims and ambitions, and help to guide and inspire. His or her formative role is to read and analyse your writing, to help you identify strengths and weaknesses, to answer your questions about technique, to recommend suitable reading and to prompt revision, in a workshop or one-to-one tutorial, or on a feedback sheet. In this kind of feedback a diligent and knowledgeable tutor can resemble the best professional editor imaginable. Summative assessment by a tutor When they award marks which contribute to your degree, tutors formally represent the institution, and are responsible for maintaining academic standards (see ‘Marking procedures’, below). This is the course’s most official aspect and the most likely to be contested (see ‘Appeals procedures’, below). Formative assessment by students Learning how to evaluate and comment on your fellow students’ writing most often occurs in workshops, and in the preliminary reading for workshops, and is a highly valued aspect of the course (see ‘Workshops’, below). Summative assessment by students Although peer assessment is usually formative it sometimes, as the course progresses, becomes summative: that is, a student may award a percentage to a peer’s workshop submission which will contribute to the peer’s final award, though usually to a very limited The Evaluation of Creative Writing at MA Level (UK) 31 extent; and, like all marks, that percentage will be subject to moderation. A detailed comment sheet written in accordance with the assessment criteria usually accompanies and justifies summative peer assessment. Self-assessment This formative skill is more demanding than peer assessment, and probably the most important aspect of the course, which will stand you in good stead throughout your writing life. Self-assessment involves learning how to gauge your intentions, to be a responsible parent to your work, and to deepen, revise and edit it. It can be most clearly demonstrated in the Critical Commentary which in many courses accompanies each piece of original work. Here the student reflects on his or her creative practice, the challenges overcome or the flaws which might remain. A student can also anticipate tutor feedback, or invite it on a particular point, so that work in progress resembles a dialogue or a practice space. Written self-assessment is often subject in its turn to formative or summative tutor assessment. Workshops Though the work is usually assessed formatively rather than summatively, most students see the creative writing workshop as the heart of the course, and its most beneficial and memorable component. Ground rules are best agreed by students and tutors in advance, and in accordance with their university’s Equal Opportunities policy (see ‘Equal opportunities’, below), so that everyone feels they are being treated fairly and with respect. Material for discussion should be photocopied and distributed at least a week in advance. To be just to your fellow students, you may need to familiarise yourself with the tradition in which they are writing, read their work several times, and allow yourself time to reflect. All work submitted is work in progress, and part of your fellow students’ development as writers, so never be destructive, or fail to offer a creative solution. Feedback which describes and analyses developments of, for example, character, plot or tone, is more helpful than that which simply reaches a verdict, or describes a piece of work as ‘boring’ or ‘not my thing’. When it is your writing’s turn to be considered, remember that readers’ impressions are valuable, and may be in short supply when the course is over. Listen to the views of your tutors and fellow students rather than debating them, or defending your work. Although concurring opinions deserve serious consideration, you need to take time to consider them rather than agreeing straightaway. Though no one will oblige you to implement all – or any – suggestions, workshops can contribute substantially to the redrafting process, and to the Critical Commentary which accompanies a piece of creative writing (see ‘The assessment pattern’, above). Because a range of spoken opinions on one’s writing can be hard to assimilate, each contributor should compile a sheet of written feedback for the student whose work they assessed. The scripts themselves should be annotated and returned, with attention paid to matters such as style, punctuation and layout. Marking procedures University marking procedures are monitored by a national body linked to the Higher Education Funding Council (HEFCE) and known as the Quality Assurance Agency for 32 The Handbook of Creative Writing Higher Education (QAA). The QAA requires that procedures should be ‘transparent’ to you as a student and made explicit through your handbooks. Grading should follow the established criteria, and work should be marked anonymously where possible. Major pieces of work should be second marked, and the run of all marks (of tutors, and of students, where submitted) should be moderated by the course or module leader. In British Universities, these processes are scrutinised by an External Examiner who is usually an experienced tutor from a parallel institution, and whose role is to ensure that Quality Assurance Procedures are followed, and that standards tally with those of similar courses. Marks are ratified by a University Examination Board of which the External Examiner, the programme leader or head of department, the course team and a senior administrator are members. Benefits of assessment While writing this chapter I distributed a questionnaire to a sample of twenty-five students from three courses. The range was almost evenly balanced in terms of gender, and its median age was twenty-nine. All had at least two part-time years’ experience of postgraduate creative writing. The first question was: ‘What benefits (if any) have you derived from the assessment of your writing?’ (For the second question, see ‘Troubleshooting’, below). No student was totally negative, and over half listed four or more benefits. What follows is a sample of their replies: • It gave me a goal and made me organise my time. I’d never have finished my work without the deadlines. • [Assessment] made us really think about what the tutors were trying to put across. • The written feedback from students and tutors definitely helped me improve my writing. • The wide range of things we had to do made us experiment and extend ourselves. Without it, I would never have written a radio play. • The course took off with the workshops – they were wonderful. My group continued to meet right through the summer, and we’ll keep on getting together after the course is over. • The workshops helped us monitor our progress, and let us know where we stood in relation to other young writers. • My tutor was a brilliant writer, and my one-to-one tutorials were like a master class. Troubleshooting Many tutor-writers value their role in developing and cherishing new writing, including – or sometimes especially – experimental or even quirky writing of high literary merit that may not be market-driven, or readily find a publisher. But not all budding writers thrive on university courses, and not all students are as happy about assessment as those quoted above. Course duration is not organic but artificial, governed by university schedules rather than by writers’ growth. Some students feel they are not allowed enough time to assimilate knowledge and develop their techniques. Others feel that their course has let them down when their marks fail to improve – or even grow worse. A few clash with their tutors or fellow students; or find the process of being assessed – or, as one student expressed it, of ‘putting myself and my writing on the line’ – more challenging than anticipated, and believe that it fosters unhealthy competition. Some tutors, likewise, have reservations about contemporary aspects of assessment. Writing is not a career path, and even great talent can be erratic or sometimes wane, as can be seen from the output of lifelong writers such as Wordsworth, Tolstoy and Hemingway. The Evaluation of Creative Writing at MA Level (UK) 33 Yet universities are required to provide HEFCE, their funding body, with assessment data, and to undergo QAA inspections, which means that matters such as admissions, failure rates or student withdrawal from courses are subject to government strategies and sometimes even directives. Furthermore, as British university professor Frank Furedi points out, ‘lecturers certainly do not have the right to lecture material for which the learning outcome cannot be demonstrated in advance’ (Furedi 2004: 76). If, as he and others believe, assessment changes the nature of what is assessed, then student writing might at points become instrumental and even ‘bite-sized’ to fit cost-cutting timetables, and corporate agendas. As Graeme Harper puts it, ‘Both order and disorder produce results for creative writers, yet the University has increasingly become a place of ordered existence’ (Harper 2003: 8). The following comments are culled from the questionnaires from which I quoted in ‘Benefits of assessment’, above, and were made in response to the question: ‘What, if anything, have you found difficult or problematic about the assessment process?’ • I felt I was being judged, and not just like on a normal course. I’d handed over something of myself and it damaged my self-esteem. • My workshop tutor was an academic not a poet, and she didn’t know anything about the creative process or how to help me shape a poem. • I was the only Black woman on the course and I was writing out of a different tradition to the rest. Sometimes they just didn’t get it. • Having my work scrutinised and graded made me very self-conscious. For the first time in my life I got writer’s block. We should have been taught how to give and take criticism before the course started. • I’d never felt competitive about my writing before but I became very aware of what the tutor’s favourites were doing and started comparing myself with them. • Some of the others didn’t seem very committed and their work was quite weak. I was surprised that none of them failed. The tutors seemed to be protecting their [the students’] self-esteem instead of grading them as they deserved. • There was a tension between the creative and the critical parts of the course, which didn’t interest me. I felt I was being turned into an academic – and only because they didn’t have enough writers on the staff. • I didn’t like my tutor’s novels and felt that he didn’t understand what I was trying to write. Appeals procedures If you have met all your deadlines and obligations, and have taken into account the assessment criteria, yet feel an assignment has been unfairly graded, you have the right to ask for it to be remarked. But before you begin, do some simple arithmetic: a few marks either way in one module will seldom make a significant difference to your overall result. Remember also that the world beyond the course of agents, producers, publishers, editors and (if you are both lucky and successful) critics and reviewers can be far harsher, more discouraging, more public and more arbitrary-seeming than being assessed in the microcosm of a university, where you will at least receive thoughtful feedback, and will have the support of your peers. If, however, you remain dissatisfied, or continue to feel demoralised by your mark, ask first for an informal consultation with your tutor, and find out how his or her decision relates to the assessment criteria. If his or her reasons still remain unclear to you, and if your work has not been second-marked, you may be able to ask your tutor to pass it to a colleague, remembering that your work might be marked down as well as up. Even if your 34 The Handbook of Creative Writing original mark is confirmed, you nevertheless may be able to ask for your work to be referred to the External Examiner, beyond whom there is no further court of appeal (and remember that he or she might also mark your work down). All final, heavily credit-weighted pieces of writing such as portfolios are invariably second- or even third-marked within the department, and a sample (including all Distinctions, Fails and Borderlines) is sent to the External Examiner, then ratified at a University Examination Board. After that you will have no grounds for appeal against its decision unless you can prove a serious injustice or procedural irregularity. Equal opportunities All universities have an Equal Opportunities policy which is promulgated in student handbooks and on the university website. Such policies are designed to enable all students and staff to achieve their full potential unhindered by prejudices relating to race, gender, age, disability, religion and sexual orientation. For writers, however, such matters are not always clear-cut, as can be seen from the threats and debates that raged around Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses (1988). Each student brings a different life experience to the course and, especially when submitting work in progress, may wish to test boundaries or even defy censorship. Such challenges need a sensitive and well-informed response from tutors and peers alike, and are best seen in the context of a national and international debate about contemporary writing. Parallel issues, such as the (sometimes necessary) use of character stereotypes, and the representation of those perceived as members of minorities, might be usefully discussed in early workshops, along with related matters such as the use of dialect and idiolect, non-standard speech patterns, and writing in a second language. Study skills If you have been out of education for some time, or have a disability (such as dyslexia) which might affect the way you are assessed, inform the admissions tutor before you start the course. If you wish, he or she will treat the information as confidential; or else notify appropriate members of staff, and arrange for you to receive the support you require (for example, study skills workshops, financial benefits such as the disabled student’s allowance, access to photocopies and websites suitable for partially-sighted students, or extended deadline dates). Plagiarism As will be made clear in your student handbook, the term ‘plagiarism’ (sometimes known as ‘academic impropriety’) generally covers cheating, collusion or any other attempt to gain an unfair advantage in the way you are assessed. It includes not only verbatim copying (of the work of a peer or of a published author, online or in print, without acknowledgement), but also the close paraphrasing of another’s work without acknowledgement, or passing off someone else’s writing as your own, or appropriating another author’s language or ideas. Fortunately, most MA students are too busy finding and developing their individual ‘voice’ to copy the work of their fellow students, or of a published writer. Also, many courses require you to submit draft material with your creative writing, or to discuss your work in progress with their tutors, or in a workshop group – processes which make plagiarism almost impossible. But all good writers assimilate what they read or view, and the line between cribbing and what film buffs call an ‘homage’ (or deliberate and respectful quotation from a work which has influenced your own) is sometimes wavy. The Evaluation of Creative Writing at MA Level (UK) 35 You can see your course is a chance to learn about: • The liberties the law allows you to take. For example, there is no copyright on titles or ideas. Furthermore, books are born out of other books, and many acclaimed novels, such as Jean Rhys’s Wide Sargasso Sea (1966) and Valerie Martin’s Mary Reilly (1990) ‘write back’ to earlier work, out of copyright. Kathy Acker’s Great Expectations (1982) quotes tracts of Dickens’ novel of the same name. • Straightforward ways of avoiding illegality in critical books and articles through the use of quotation marks, footnotes, endnotes and bibliographies. • Intellectual copyright, and the (sometimes protracted and expensive) ways in which you can assert ownership of work you have published in book or magazine form, and even online, or that you have had screened or performed. Assessing the assessors Universities are obliged by HEFCE to monitor both tutors and students, and university methods and practices of assessment must conform to a nationwide Code of Practice for the assurance of what is called academic quality and standards. This code has been devised by the QAA, and QAA-trained teams of academics visit universities on a rota to review, among other procedures, how tutors design their courses and have them ‘validated’ or approved by university committees, the documentation available to students, the quality of feedback to students on their work, the principles, timing and range of assessment tasks, marking procedures, and assessment panels and boards. The QAA also monitors student performance and charts their progress during their course, and ensures that their work is on a par with that submitted on similar programmes of study. As a twenty-first century student you will have more say in how your courses are run than students have ever had before – if only because in part you are perceived (by university managers and accountants, not by tutors) as a client and consumer. At the end of every module you will be given (or sent online) an evaluation form. Be altruistic, and fill it in: it will help your tutors to identify points of good and bad practice, and to amend and streamline the MA. The results will be collated and included in an annual report which will be forwarded to a monitoring committee and made available to QAA assessors. You will also have elected student representatives with whom you can raise matters of concern informally during the semester, or in special end-of-semester sessions where no tutor is present. Or perhaps you are a representative yourself, and required to pass on student opinion to the course team, and then to a committee that monitors MA programmes and whose minutes are available for inspection by assessors. Assessment criteria are not a gold standard but are – and should be – influenced by changes in the culture at large. Although, as a postgraduate, you might not have been directly involved in establishing them, you could, in the light of your experience of the MA, help to modify or expand them. By doing so, you will help to update and improve the course for students of the future, by which time you will be testing what you learnt against the judgement not of the university but of the world at large. Good luck. References Atkinson, Ann, Liz Cashdan, Livi Michael and Ian Pople (2000/2001), ‘Analysing the Aesthetic: a new approach to developing criteria for the assessment of creative writing in Higher Education’, Writing in Education 21 (Winter): 26–8. 36 The Handbook of Creative Writing Carey, John (2005), What Good Are the Arts? London: Faber & Faber. Furedi, Frank (2004), Where Have All the Intellectuals Gone? Confronting 21st Century Philistinism, London: Continuum. Harper, Graeme (2003), ‘Creative writing at university: key pointers’, New Writing: The International Journal for the Practice and Theory of Creative Writing 13777: 1–8. Lodge, David (1996), The Practice of Writing, London: Secker & Warburg. 3 The Creative Writing MFA Stephanie Vanderslice The Creative Writing Master’s of Fine Arts or MFA is an American phenomenon that originated at the University of Iowa in the 1930s, in part as an answer to the problem of geographic isolation that confronted writers working in the US, especially those without access to large cities. Still one of the country’s most august graduate writing programs, the Iowa MFA has graduated a long list of luminary writers, including Flannery O’Connor, Philip Roth, Jane Smiley, and Richard Bausch, to name a few. Not surprisingly, many of these graduates fanned out across the country and formed their own programs in the image of their Alma Mater. As a result, today there are 109 MFA programs in the United States (Association of Writers and Writing Programs), a number which does not include the growing number of PhD programs, MA programs with a creative writing emphasis, and undergraduate writing programs. The MFA emerged from two distinct traditions, the studio arts tradition from which it borrowed its moniker, and the English literature tradition, that is, it is usually (but not always) the English department that houses the program. Consequently, most programs reflect one or another tradition in their philosophies or are often an amalgam of both. The MFA degree is distinguished by being longer than the MA, with expanded credit hour requirements, such as a thesis, or substantial body of creative work and special coursework. Like its counterparts in the applied arts, then, the MFA is technically a terminal degree, requiring no other degree to qualify its holder to teach at the university level. However, in the US the terminal nature of this degree has been challenged by the rising number of doctoral programs in creative writing in the past two decades. Understanding and evaluating MFA programs in the US is a recursive process, one that involves surveying the field, understanding the role that the MFA serves in literary culture, examining specific programs that interest you in great detail, as an educated consumer, if you will, and returning again and again to these important issues as you consider your options. But the first thing you must be educated about is yourself, that is, who you are as a writer. What are your writing needs? What kind of creative writing MFA program can best meet these needs? Fortunately, in terms of the information available to you, there is no better time to be educating yourself. In fact, a great deal has changed since I meekly declared my interest in pursuing an MFA degree in the office of my undergraduate writing professor almost two decades ago. At her suggestion, I checked out the books of professors at several programs, 38 The Handbook of Creative Writing sent for a handful of brochures, worked hard on my portfolio, and hoped for the best. Largely thanks to the web, today’s MFA aspirant has any number of information portals literally at her fingertips in divining the right program for her, portals we will discuss in detail as we examine the pursuit of the MFA in America. But first thing’s first. You, the writer As I mentioned earlier, before you begin to consider an MFA in creative writing, you must first look deeply at who you are as a writer. Where do you see yourself going? How will an MFA help you move toward these goals? Are you currently frustrated at trying to fit writing in at the thin edges of your life and hoping that an MFA will finally give you a few years time to concentrate on your writing and a supportive culture to do it in? Do you currently have an unwieldy writing project you’ve been working on that you want to bring into a community of expert and dedicated writers, in the hopes of shaping it into something publishable? Do you feel – or have you been told by those who ought to know – that your writing potential is right on the cusp and a few years among like-minded souls, under the tutelage of experienced wordsmiths, may be what you need to hasten its development, not to mention perhaps giving you a few publishing and academic contacts? Do you hope to earn your living as a writer, journalist, or as a teacher of writing, or as a mix of the three, or do you consider yourself, like insurance executive Wallace Stevens, librarian Marianne Moore or physician William Carlos Williams, a writer who happens to pursue other professions to pay the bills? Do you see yourself spending one to three years focusing on writing and obtaining this degree in residency, or do you think a low residency MFA, which you work on throughout the year with a faculty tutor but which only requires intense ten-day to two-week campus residencies annually or semi-annually, might fit better with your current situation? Understanding your answers to these questions will help you to determine, whether, how, and what type of MFA program may be useful for you. What’s more, as if repeatedly holding garments up to your body in a dressing room, these are answers you will need to return to again and again in determining the right MFA fit for you. Assessment Before we go on to look in depth at how to analyse and evaluate the dizzying number of types of MFA programs that exist today, it will be helpful to get a general sense of how programs assess their own effectiveness as well as how student work, within these programs, is assessed. Programs in general Unlike in the UK, American MFA programs have no assessment organisations, like the Quality Assessment Association (QAA), to which they must answer. Although the Association of Writers and Writing Programs (AWP) is the primary literary arts advocacy organisation in higher education, it is neither a governing body nor an accrediting agency. As a result, MFA programs in the US have emerged quite independently, a state of affairs that has a long list of pros and cons which we don’t have the time or space to devote to here. Nonetheless, the AWP does make advisory statements towards making MFA programs more universally useful to their participants, suggestions readily available in the 39 The Creative Writing MFA AWP Director’s Guide, online at www.awpwriter.org One of these statements is the idea that MFA programs should participate in some form of self-assessment, although this assessment can be as varied as listing alumni publications, analysing retention rates or employing an exit survey and analysing – and ideally acting upon – the results. A sample exit survey is also available in the Director’s Guide at awpwriter.org and can not only shed light on the aims and effectiveness of an MFA program (Do they give such a poll? How do they use the results?) but also on the kinds of considerations one should take into account in exploring any program. Questions about quality of teaching and relevance of courses are all beneficial to ask of a program at the outset. We’ll get to other pertinent questions later in this essay. Student work in particular In general, it is safe to say that in most US graduate writing programs, grades are not as important as the student work itself and how the professor’s response, both formative and summative, can enhance improvement in the student’s writing, the objective of any workshop. Moreover, entrance into most MFA programs is highly competitive; the student’s motivation and dedication to success is usually a given in most courses. Consequently, then, neither the students nor the professors tend to pay much attention to grades; rather, the focus remains on the student’s work, often intensely so. Assessment, then, may come more frequently in the form of extended oral or written response to the work at hand, usually in the workshop. With the exception of the final thesis, moreover, there are no second readers or external examiners involved. However, the workshop and the writing assessed within it often isn’t the only work required of students in a graduate creative writing program. Indeed, assignments and coursework can vary as much as the programs themselves and are an important factor for prospective students to investigate. Some programs include traditional literature courses in the degree, taught by literature faculty and assessed by traditional means – analytical papers, essay exams and so forth (also read by one reader – the professor – unlike in the UK). Other programs offer reading courses in which students are taught to read literary models as writers, and are often led in this endeavour by creative writing faculty who may ask them to write critical analyses about how a particular author or literary work informs their own. Still others offer editing courses or internships at publishing houses or literary journals that also include reflective analyses of the student’s experience. Finally, some programs require students to read self-directed reading lists of relevant authors and most require a thesis of some sort, a lengthy capstone creative work. Students work closely with faculty advisors on their theses in the production of a work of publishable quality. Usually, they also write a critical introduction to the work, bringing to bear what they have learned about literary history and culture to locate their work in a contemporary context. Such an introduction is also known more commonly in the rest of the English-speaking world as the exegesis. In exploring MFA programs, then, it is important that you try to find out about courses, typical assignments and how they are assessed, in determining those most suited to you. Evaluation Throughout this chapter it has been impossible not to touch on areas a student might consider in evaluating and selecting a prospective MFA program. In light of the current abundance of information available, moreover, such areas warrant further consideration. Once 40 The Handbook of Creative Writing you’ve thought hard about where you are in your development as a writer and how and what kind of MFA might help you, the first place you should turn is your local resources. If you are a current or recent undergraduate, most likely the creative writing faculty at your institution will be able to shed considerable light on different programs, since many of them will have experienced them first-hand. Meeting with these faculty members is a good place to begin, although keep in mind that they will have individual biases based on their own experiences. Another resource worth checking into at the outset is the AWP Official Guide to Writing Programs, a detailed guide to creative writing programs that has long been considered a touchstone in the field. Recently, however, two additional books have been published which stand to add considerably to the discipline: Amy Holman’s An Insider’s Guide to Creative Writing Programs: Choosing the Right MFA or MA Program, Colony, Residency, Grant or Fellowship and Tom Kealey’s The Creative Writing MFA Handbook: A Guide for Prospective Graduate Students. Both are seasoned writers and MFA alums and have spent considerable energy educating writers on professional issues; both have a web presence and Tom Kealy even has a blog (see Online resources) that discusses MFA programs extensively and even offers an advice column for prospective students. Reading the archived questions and answers for this column is an education in itself. At any rate, both books provide detailed, long-overdue guides to graduate study in creative writing. Talking with mentors and arming yourself with information from available guides should help you to begin to narrow your choices to the MFA programs that will best suit you. Once you’re ready to focus your search, it’s time to begin using the internet to its fullest advantage. Most if not all MFA programs have websites that provide a window into their institutions and you should mine these sites as much as possible. While the majority of programs offer basic information on faculty and coursework as well as program philosophy, some also offer course syllabi, information on student and alumni publications and even online student newsletters and discussion boards. All of these can be enlightening for prospective students. In fact, the more information a program provides on its website, the more that you can infer that it is an open, student-centered place. In addition to formal websites, the web also has much to offer prospective creative writing graduate students in terms of unofficial information. In addition to Tom Kealey’s blog, many current MFA students have blogs that can shed some – albeit highly subjective – light on the student experience at various programs. Moreover, simply searching the names of faculty on the program and learning about their work and their philosophies on writing and teaching, through lists of publications you can pursue, and interviews you can read, will add to the arsenal of information that can help you decide on the suitability of a program. Much has been made of the global changes in publishing that have made it increasingly difficult for most writers to make a living solely via their writing. If you are looking at the MFA as a career step, then, it is important to consider the extent to which the program is realistic about what it can offer students. Is it a program that purports to offer only space and time to write as well as expert teaching, without raising student expectations about publishing or landing a plum job in academia without significant book publication? Or is it one designed to provide students with experiences which can render them better qualified to take on other jobs in teaching, publishing or arts administration in order to support their writing? In addition, you might consider the size of the program (an entering class of five versus twenty-five), and the character of the students (traditional-aged, residing near campus, commuting students who have other jobs or careers) when examining a particu- 41 The Creative Writing MFA lar program. For example, a program admitting a small number of students, though perhaps more competitive, might be more committed to mentoring those students and providing individual attention than one with a significantly larger student body. Moreover, a program that caters to commuting students who often work in other careers may be less focused on job opportunities for students and more intensely focused on the literary work alone. In making such an important decision, it is also wise to look at available funding for graduate study. In the US, there are often many scholarship options available for qualified students. In addition to the small number of fellowships (no-strings attached scholarships) available which are often intensely competitive, many programs often offer teaching assistantships in which students either team-teach large courses with mentoring faculty or solely teach the first-year composition course common in American universities. Not only do these assistantships offer a stipend and tuition remission, they also provide students with an opportunity to pick up important teaching skills that can help them support their writing with part-time, adjunct positions. Finally, in researching an MFA, it is also important to try to gauge the program’s commitment to mentoring students and helping them to navigate the publishing world and to maintain a sustainable writing practice after the program is over. This can be accomplished through interviews with program faculty and administrators as well as students, whose contact information may be available via the website or contacting the program itself. Armed with this array of information, as well as with a clear understanding of how an MFA program can meet your needs as a writer, you will be able to make a highly-informed decision on the program that is right for you, a decision that is the first step in successful MFA – and, subsequently, writing – careers. Online resources www.awpwriter.org The website for the Association of Writers and Writing Programs, which offers abundance of information on writing and MFA programs, including discussion boards and information on the annual conference. http://creative-writing-mfa-handbook.blogspot.com Tom Kealey’s blogsite. www.pw.org The website for Poet’s and Writer’s magazine, an excellent source of information on the writing scene in America, which includes MFA programs. www.amyspublishingnotebook.blogspot.com, www.amyholman.com, Amy Holman’s website and blog. References Fenza, D. W. (2004), ed., AWP Official Guide to Writing Programs, Paradise, CA: Dustbooks. Holman, Amy (2006), An Insider’s Guide to Creative Writing Programs: Choosing the Right MFA or MA Program, Colony, Residency, Grant or Fellowship, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Kealey, Tom (2006), The Creative Writing MFA Handbook: A Guide for Prospective Graduate Students, New York: Continuum. 4 Creative Writing and Critical Theory Lauri Ramey Background on the ‘creative’ versus ‘critical’ opposition Slightly more than one hundred years ago, it was arguable that there was such a field as literary study. Language was a proper field of study, but some late nineteenth-century figures including James Russell Lowell, Thomas H. Hunt and Calvin Thomas began to argue that if philology were to be made practical, it could be applied usefully to literature. The most frequent rationales for the academic study of literature were that poems, novels, essays and plays often showed the greatest skill in the use of language; their mastery was a valuable intellectual and moral exercise in putting one’s knowledge of languages to work; and properly chosen texts could exemplify the most admirable human traits and aspirations. Lowell provided this metaphor in 1889: instead of teaching ‘purely the linguistic side of things’, language study should lead to something better. And that something better is Literature. The blossoms of language have certainly as much value as its roots, for if the roots secrete food and thereby transmit life to the plant, yet the joyous consummation of that life is in the blossoms, which alone bear the seeds that distribute and renew it in other growths. Exercise is good for the muscles of the mind and to keep it well in hand for work, but the true end of Culture is to give it play, a thing quite as needful. (Lowell 1889: 1737) The two aspects of literary study are harmoniously connected in Lowell’s vision of roots representing the literary and linguistic past and blossoms as the creation of new writing. But his metaphor points ahead to precisely the pedagogical and intellectual schism that later arose in the post-philology development of literature and creative writing in the drive for connoisseurship combined with the pragmatics of inspiring new literature. The bifurcation of the field of literary studies was inherent from its inception. For example, when Stanford University was founded in the 1890s, two pre-eminent scholars were hired for its newly-formed department of English: Ewald Flugel, trained as a philologist in Leipzig in the scientific study of language; and Melville Best Anderson from Iowa, a poetry specialist who viewed literature as a source of moral uplift (Carnochan 2000: 1958–9). Creative writing as an academic subject developed at approximately the same time as English, and out of the same desire, which was to rectify the ‘impracticality’ of philology. Creative Writing and Critical Theory 43 In the US, the first classes in creative writing were taught at Harvard College by Barrett Wendell in the 1880s, whose English 12 class was designed ‘to turn out men with something like a professional command of the art in which to practice’ (Adams 1993: 52, quoted by Lim 2003: 154). The class stressed ‘practice, aesthetics, personal observation and creativity’ as opposed to the ‘theory, history, tradition and literary conservation’ taken as the concerns of newly developing departments of English (Fenza 2000: 15). Creative writing had become institutionalised within the academy by the 1920s (Lim 2003: 155). By the 1940s, postgraduate degrees in creative writing were offered by a number of American universities, including Johns Hopkins University, University of Denver, University of Iowa and Stanford University. Several recent studies of the growth and development of creative writing and its pedagogy (see Lim, Myers, Dawson and Fenza 2000 and 2002) offer varying perspectives on whether the field was intended more as a subjective and personal corrective to the rigid linguistic and historical orientation of philology (Myers 1996: 3), or a means of ‘giving play’ to Culture by developing professional writers. Some critics suggest a correlation between the development of creative writing and intellectual movements such as New Humanism, Progressive Education and New Criticism, and later the Sputnik-era concern with educational reform, including widespread views by the mid-to late-twentieth century that ‘the teaching of English was “a disaster area”’ (Lopate 1979: 15; see also Kohl 1976). Views that literary studies had experienced a loss of identity were exacerbated by the growing dominance of critical theory, seen by many as shifting the field’s focus on literature as an inherently valuable object of attention to literature as a means of gaining insight into other academic fields such as psychology, sociology, history and cultural studies.1 Others have suggested that part of creative writing’s attraction and popularity was precisely its lack of reliance on theory and pragmatic focus on the production of new literature. Robie Macauley, a visiting lecturer at the University of Iowa in the 1940s, dismisses suggestions that theory exerted any kind of influence on the Iowa Writers’ Workshop and Paul Engle, who became its director in 1941: The idea of Paul, like some grand Teutonic professor, initiating anybody into the grand theory is ludicrous. Paul was a practical critic pure and simple . . . Andrew Lytle, of course, knew all the N.C. [New Critical] writing, but it didn’t affect him a great deal – and he certainly didn’t propound it in teaching during his short stint in Iowa . . . Of course the New Criticism was talked about some (as the reigning critical theory) and most people had read Brooks and Warren but (as far as I can remember) none of us tried to apply it – the N.C. – to writing fiction in any specific way. (Correspondence to Sarah Fodor, 22 May 1991, used by the recipient’s permission) Other programs saw creative writing as a valuable adjunct to literary studies so long as the field incorporated historical knowledge and critical rigour into the practice of generating new writing. Jean McGarry’s ‘A brief history of the writing seminars at Johns Hopkins University’ explains that in 1947, the poet Elliott Coleman ‘was assigned the task of founding a department, within the humanities, to train young poets and fiction writers in a context of academic rigour appropriate to Hopkins. How the study and craft of writing could be blended into a traditional liberal-arts program was part of Coleman’s experiment’. Coleman created a program which produced early graduates (including poet Karl Shapiro and novelist John Barth) who would ‘do honor, nonetheless, to their strong studies in English and French literature, aesthetics, linguistics, history’. Stress on interdisciplinarity, 44 The Handbook of Creative Writing practicality and scholarship has continued as the hallmark of Johns Hopkins’s program. McGarry describes John Irwin, who became director in 1977, as ‘the very fulfilment of the Coleman mandate, combining, in his work, meticulous scholarship, heady criticism and (on the side) the practice of poetry’, as he hired other ‘scholar-writers’ to maintain ‘the intellectual and aesthetic rigor of the program’ which encourages experimentalism, innovation, varied styles and ‘brainy ferment about traditions and genres’ (McGarry 2005). Critical theory and creative writing in higher education today As D. G. Myers points out, the teaching of writing at mid-twentieth century – whether creative or academic – was still ‘an experiment in education’ (Myers 1996: 3), a concept which continues to figure importantly in the description of Johns Hopkins’s Writing Seminars and some other creative writing programs, whilst the term ‘experimentalism’ rarely appears in descriptions of English programs. This pivotal word’s absence and presence in these two contexts suggests that the qualities entailed in experimentation – such as exploration, unpredictability, uncertainty of outcome, and innovation – which still characterise selfdescriptions of many creative writing programs may partly explain the split between these two approaches to literature if they are considered to be mutually exclusive. For example, on the website of the MFA program in creative writing at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, Alex Shakar offers his thoughts on teaching, specifically the benefits of the writers’ workshop as the central creative writing pedagogical tool: What must be avoided is an atmosphere in which the out-of-the ordinary is castigated while the reflexive and habitual go unquestioned. I try to make the writing workshop a place where aspiring artists feel safe taking risks, both stylistic and emotional, with their works-in-progress. If this kind of freedom is encouraged, the workshop can really be a workshop in the best sense of the word: a smithy of techniques, a laboratory of experimentation, and a forum of ideas. (Shakar 2005) In contrast, the MA program in English at the same university stresses research, theoretical fields in which to specialise, interdisciplinary study, teaching experience, financial support and affordability, as well as the professional benefit – whether in English or another field – of obtaining this degree. Foremost, the MA in English ‘is designed to provide students with the training in research and teaching that they need to obtain academic jobs’ (University of Illinois 2006). In addition to what is stated in Illinois’s English program description, words are absent of the type used by Shakar which suggest poesis in the classical sense of doing or making, such as ‘smithy’ and ‘laboratory’. Processual terms referring to uncertain outcomes such as ‘risks’, ‘freedom’ and ‘experimentation’ have been replaced by references to concrete fields of knowledge and employability. Rhetoric similar to Shakar’s is characteristic of many postgraduate creative writing programs, although goals and methods discussed in these terms would be highly unconventional for English programs. Equally noteworthy is Shakar’s omission of techniques other than the workshop or mention of critical skills, precise informational content and literary history. This case in point highlights the differing opinions on the identities of literary studies and creative writing, as well as the relationship between these fields. Consider Green’s description of creative writing as ‘literary study’s wayward cousin’ (Green 2003: 47), Marcelle Freiman’s use of postcolonial theory to frame creative writing as a marginalised subject in relation to the dominant discourse of English (Freiman 2001: 1), Fenza’s con- Creative Writing and Critical Theory 45 tention that the role of creative writers is to rescue literature from critical theorists and English departments (Fenza 2002: 53) or Radavich’s statements that creative writing is a source of trouble and contention within English departments (Radavich 1999: 106–12). As these examples suggest, most of what has been written on the subject of ‘creative writing and critical theory’ addresses the historical antipathy between these two approaches to literature, instead of discussing their shared roots (to re-invoke Lowell), the long tradition of combining critical thought with the production of new writing, or how critical theory could be incorporated practically as a valuable element in the teaching of creative writing. Unlike English, creative writing has not been amenable to the development of its own body of theory (although many argue that the critical theory of English does not belong to English at all, but has come from other disciplines including psychology, philosophy and sociology). A comparison often is made to the field of studio art in contrast with art history. If the goal is to make new art rather than analyse art which already exists, theory has tended to be perceived as antithetical to creative writing’s fundamental stress on freedom, receptivity to the new and unfamiliar, and experimentation. These assumptions – which have generated lively debate as to whether or not creative writing as an academic subject has or should have specific content – explains why theories from other areas of the humanities and social sciences have not routinely been grafted on to creative writing similarly to their adoption by English. Critical theory is not widely applied in the teaching of creative writing, although a small number of programs exist where the separation between the two is viewed as artificial and unconstructive.2 The new MA in Creative and Critical Writing at the University of Sussex announces itself as the first of its kind, and is designed to enable students to combine an interest in intellectually challenging critical and theoretical ideas with an interest in creative writing. The new MA is based on the supposition that ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ are not opposites, though the relations between them may entail productive tensions and paradoxes. It is impelled rather by the sense that the critical and the creative are necessarily intertwined. Many great writers in English, at least since Milton, have also written important criticism. Good writers are invariably also good readers. The MA in Creative and Critical Writing offers students courses that combine ‘theory’ and ‘practice’, focusing on critical writings, for example, specifically with a view to encouraging and clarifying a sense of how to write creatively and well, and how to think creatively and differently about the possibilities of writing. (University of Sussex 2006) Although they remain the exception, some other programs throughout the world routinely incorporate critical theory into creative writing. The MFA program in Creative Writing at the University of Maryland states: The general objective of the MFA in Creative Writing is to provide a professional course of study for graduate students seeking to perfect their ability to compose poems, stories, and novels. While primarily affording students intensive studio or practical work in their chosen genre, the MFA in Creative Writing requires that students incorporate such work with a traditional study of literature. Therefore the objective of the MFA in Creative Writing is not only to provide an atmosphere in which students can perfect their skills as writers, but also to give students a theoretical and historical understanding of their craft. (University of Maryland 2006) 46 The Handbook of Creative Writing At the University of British Columbia Okanagan, there is a newly formed Faculty of Creative and Critical Studies (FCCS) where the Faculty of Creative and Critical Studies (FCCS) plays a central role in the cultural education of students at UBC Okanagan by mobilising immense creative expertise and critical acumen to help students to balance their study across subject boundaries. FCCS strives to produce students who are not only great performers or artists, but who also understand the academic and philosophical connection that the creative and performing arts and their related academic and theoretical disciplines have to the other endeavours of the University. (University of British Columbia Okanagan 2005) At California State University, Los Angeles, MA students in the Creative Writing Option are required to enrol in classes in Historical Criticism and Contemporary Critical Approaches and take classes in a variety of periods and genres of English, American and world literature. Daniel Green expresses a perspective shared by other critically educated creative writers that creative writing may even be the answer to the problems in the field of English by serving as the primary lens through which literature may be viewed and considered, and suggests the development of hypothetical Departments of Creative Writing and Literary Criticism (Green 2003: 50). The University of Luton proposed the actualisation of such a course in 1998 by offering the majority of its literary theory in modules in creative writing and media rather than English, formally discontinuing its Department of Literary Studies whilst preserving its creative writing program. Examples of using critical theory in creative writing classes For many creative writers who are open to such possibilities, the philosophical, social, historical, cultural and psychological apparatus of critical theory has helped them to discover their central literary purposes and goals, whilst also enabling them to recognise antecedents, connections and methods that can powerfully generate new ideas and practices for the benefit of their writing. Critical theory enables writers to learn to write not by following prescribed external critical dictates, but by seeking principles to use selectively and thoughtfully as a guide to reveal the values that are important to them as individuals and members of a community, partly by forming a more precise awareness of audiences and reading practices. Postgraduates in creative writing often approach their work without a clear goal in mind but with the primary motive of desiring to write. Wishing to write and enjoying writing are fine reasons for becoming a creative writer – even necessary. But they may not be sufficient over time to facilitate the greatest literary development in their essential self-reflexivity which often fails to engage large and compelling ideas. One of the most powerful results of using critical theory in creative writing is that it deepens and enhances a sense of what one wishes to write and why. In my own practice, some of the first questions that I ask creative writing students are ‘What are a writer’s responsibilities? Why do you write? Whom do you write for?’ The most common responses are ‘I’ve never thought about that’, even amongst students who have studied creative writing extensively and may hold degrees in the subject. These are questions to contemplate over a lifetime, where answers may change, but it is difficult to imagine producing writing of substance and lasting value where the writer has not at least contemplated philosophical questions of purpose. A common reaction to the idea of introducing critical theory in creative writing is ‘It will take away my cre- Creative Writing and Critical Theory 47 ativity’ or ‘If I know too much, I won’t be able to write “naturally”’. I have not encountered any other academic discipline where students view the acquisition of new knowledge as anything other than precisely the point, or as potentially detrimental. Far from disempowering writers through rules, the opposite often takes place. Ideally, critical theory is the adoption or recognition of a personal ethos – the discovery of what we most value as writers. Once such realisations are made, how can they fail to infuse the act of writing and the resulting work of literature with even greater senses of clarity, passion and purpose? Connecting critical thinking and creative writing provides mutually energising ways of approaching literary production and reception that writers prior to the twentieth century would not have seen as separate, as the Sussex program description suggests. When teaching critical theory in creative writing classes, I often begin with the classical roots of critical thought. Starting with foundational texts helps dislodge students’ prejudices about critical theory by embarking from an unfamiliar vantage point (few creative writing students either in the UK or US, in my experience, have a strong background in history and theory of criticism). This is helpful insofar as it breaks through some conventional, and often negative, notions about critical theory as didactic, political, polemical, rigid and impenetrably jargon-laden. Using extracts from Horace, Dante, Lucretius, Quintilian, Tertullian, Plotinus, Longinus, Plato and Aristotle makes it possible to show that many contemporary critical debates have ancient foundations and relevance across borders of time and culture. As a case study, here is one unit from an MA class that I teach called Critical Theory for Creative Writers, to serve as a template which may suggest a variety of other combinations of creative and critical readings and corollary writing exercises. The template reflects the standard structure of my teaching, which includes a mini craft lecture, writing assignment, discussion and workshop. The reading list of this unit includes Longinus, Sappho, Aristotle, Joyce, Edward Young, Marx and Edward Bond, progressing chronologically from the first century AD to the late twentieth century. We start with this extract from Longinus’s ‘On Sublimity’ (first century AD): Real sublimity contains much food for reflection, is difficult or rather impossible to resist, and makes a strong and ineffaceable impression on the memory. In a word, reckon those things which please everybody all the time as genuinely and finely sublime. When people of different trainings, ways of life, tastes, ages, and manners all agree about something, the judgement and assent of so many distinct voices lends strength and irrefutability to the conviction that their admiration is rightly directed. (Longinus 2001: 139–40) As a starting point for discussion, I provide a list of what Longinus considered to be the five sources of sublimity: The power to conceive great thoughts. Strong and inspired emotion. Figures of thought and figures of speech. Noble diction which includes choice of words and the use of metaphorical language. Dignified and elevated word arrangement. To link Longinus’s critical thinking to a practical application in creative writing, the class next addresses Sappho’s Fragment 31 and Longinus’s discussion of the fragment in relation 48 The Handbook of Creative Writing to his theory of the sublime, which is a piece of critical writing as subtle and sensitive as the poem itself: Do you not admire the way in which she brings everything together – mind and body, hearing and tongue, eyes and skin? She seems to have lost them all, and to be looking for them as though they were external to her. She is cold and hot, mad and sane, frightened and near death, all by turns. The result is that we see in her not a single emotion, but a complex of emotions. Lovers experience all this; Sappho’s excellence, as I have said, lies in her adoption and combination of the most striking details. (Longinus 2001: 140–1) After discussion, the students receive this exercise based on Longinus’s explanation of the sublime, its five major sources, the Sapphic fragment and Longinus’s commentary on the sublimity of Sappho’s poem: Create a fragment using the techniques that Sappho uses – metaphor, emotions connected to physical responses; attention to detail; form and structure intended to reflect the physical and emotional state as it is being experienced; direct first person address of the person who is both subject and object of the poem; and measured pacing to focus with great intensity on the experience being described simultaneous with the persona’s experience of it. Employ these specific features, and heighten them even further by using Longinus’s five sources of the sublime as much as possible to create your own sublime fragment on a subject of your choosing. The students share the poems they have produced, which consistently result in works of impressively multi-layered complexity that often surprise the writers themselves. Certainly these works would not have been possible without encountering the intersection of the creative and critical through the ‘dialogue’ between Longinus and Sappho. Aristotle in Poetics (fourth century BC) identified one of the central dilemmas faced by creative writers: the wish both to be original and understood. Section 22 of Poetics is the next reading that I provide, where Aristotle argues that diction’s perfection lies in using clear and ordinary words which make writing comprehensible, balanced with metaphors and strange words which make the writing distinguished (Aristotle 1998: 109–10). According to Aristotle, a writer must use both forms of diction to keep the ordinary words from becoming prosaic and the deviant words from becoming a riddle or a barbarism. I ask the class to put Aristotle’s theory into practice by reading the first twenty-four lines of the Anna Livia Plurabelle section of James Joyce’s Finnegans Wake (Joyce [1939] 1967: 196). Once again, the purpose is to illuminate critical theory’s utility in a creative context, tie the literary past to more familiar modern texts, serve as a useful spur to creative inspiration, expand processes of cognition, connect cultures and texts in fresh ways to stimulate creative thinking, and show how critical ideas often lie hidden in creative endeavours. Here is the exercise based on Aristotle and Joyce: How does this extract relate to Aristotle’s view of literary quality in terms of perfection in diction? How many different techniques can you identify in Joyce’s passage relating to the ordinary and the strange? Produce your own creative work in any genre where you employ Joycean techniques and produce a work which follows Aristotle’s dictum regarding balance in diction. In introducing Aristotle and Joyce, I explain that we are so accustomed to holding originality in creative writing as a positive and reasonable goal that we may not realise that it Creative Writing and Critical Theory 49 is a relatively recent literary concept. For Aristotle, originality meant harmony between the conventional and the conventional modified in surprising and unexpected ways but following particular prescribed patterns. The dilemma of originality in its modern sense is first articulated by Edward Young in ‘Conjectures on Original Composition’ (1759): how is it possible to learn from past writers but not be intimidated into thinking that everything worth writing has already been written? It is difficult to imagine many creative writing textbooks that offer more practical and empowering advice than Young, who encourages his readers to establish meaningful relationships with the past, and learn from their precursors whilst making their own unique and meaningful contemporary mark. The class next receives extracts from Young’s ‘Conjectures’ with discussion concentrating on whether true originality is a possible aspiration, and what that concept might mean to a writer who also hopes to be seen as part of a literary tradition. To bring varying critical perspectives in dialogue with one another and connect Young more directly with modern theoretical touchstones, next I have the class read an extract from Marx’s Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (1859), which asks whether individuals’ own consciousnesses determine their being or their social being determines their consciousness (Marx 1978: 4). Are writers primarily autonomous individuals or part of a social order? The ensuing discussion typically links Young to Marx, as well as Aristotle, Joyce, Sappho and Longinus, asking to what extent any writer could wish to communicate in a fashion that is wholly unique and individualistic, including the implications for reaching a particular audience. (I find that this latter goal remains an abstraction for many creative writing students, who benefit from confronting it directly.) Marx is followed by an extract from the play Lear (1971) by Edward Bond, a Marxist retelling of Shakespeare’s King Lear (c. 1605). In my combined teaching of creative writing and critical theory, theory also becomes an effective avenue to encourage students to think about their writing in a fundamentally conceptual way unconfined to the strict (and often artificial) boundaries of genre that generally drive creative writing pedagogy, so my teaching sequences typically draw on multiple genres. Lear offers an excellent model for how writers can be influenced productively by predecessors (including one as potentially intimidating as Shakespeare) by applying a personal and ideological perspective to their reading of that predecessor, as Bond does with his explicitly Socialist identification. Lear demonstrates the generative malleability of great past literature: rather than being immobilised by Shakespeare, Bond has learned from the dialogue with his predecessor to create something reflecting his own aesthetics, era and theoretical stance. This is precisely what Young instructs a writer to do in his ‘Conjectures’. When teaching creative writing and critical theory, I interweave mini craft lectures to show how theory in this context differs from its use in English classes by focusing on issues relevant to writers’ purposes. Here is a sample extract from a mini craft lecture on issues relevant to this lesson: Shakespeare himself stole the basic plot of King Lear from other versions that already existed. This shocks us today, where we view ‘originality’ as the hallmark of literary creativity. But Young himself wrote as late as 1759 that he had seen nothing previously written on the concept of literary originality. Shakespeare did something quite traditional by stealing the Cinderella myth and shocked his audience by giving it a tragic ending, which presumably he believed reflected his era. When Bond wrote Lear in 1971, he was performing the same traditional literary operation as Shakespeare. The plays of Bond and Shakespeare are part of a tradition of 50 The Handbook of Creative Writing authors and texts speaking to each other through allusion, one of the most ancient literary tropes. T. S. Eliot wrote in ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’ (1919) (another excellent text for creative writing and critical theory) that a new literary work enhances the present but also the past because literary history is read differently in light of this new contribution (38). Writers speak to their own times and places, and also to earlier and contemporary writers who, in turn, struggle to reflect their own identities and cultures. As writers aiming to use knowledge of literary history and critical thought to our advantage, we must recognise literature as a network of conversations. The operation of allusion invites us to decipher the relationship between new literary works and pre-existing pieces of writing to which they refer. We also need to decide what the earlier writer and literary work signify to the alluding writer. This is the lesson gained from the chain of communication that we have constructed linking Aristotle, Longinus, Sappho, Young, Joyce and Bond across periods and cultures, which serves as a model for you to enter the process. It is impossible for good writers to be devoid of beliefs. Theory is the awareness and expression of beliefs in our writing. It does not imply that we always know precisely what we think, that our beliefs are static or that we are fully aware of all of our creative goals for a work in process, especially if we are attempting something new. But if we take ourselves seriously as writers, we are at least asking these questions and seeking answers as to what we value and why we write. Sometimes we will figure it out in advance and deliberately use those ideas in our writing. Sometimes we will not be fully conscious of our views and discover them through the process of writing itself, or even through the responses of readers. But we each have an ethos and so do our readers. If those can mesh and meld through conscious effort, we have formed a connection. Critical theory for creative writers reflects who we are as individuals in relation to the literary examples of the past. It is a way of entering into tradition in order to express our unique voices and visions in the present. The extract from Lear read by the class in conjunction with this mini craft lecture (which in its full version includes instruction in Marxist theory to show Bond’s use of social theory in creative form) is a parable. Its inclusion exposes students to the use of a genre within a genre as a double framing device. In this parable within the play delivered to the audience by King Lear (III, ii), a bird steals a man’s voice – something of a trickster myth – resulting in a conflation where the bird possesses the man’s voice whilst the man becomes caged and is able to feel the bird’s pain in a poetic and evocative philosophical interlude within the play. Close focus on the passage offers a rich example of the postmodern imagination through non-genre bound uses of form, technique, allusion and ideology. This linked pedagogical sequence closes by connecting the parable of the bird to Young and Marx, whilst inviting a summary engagement with all of the readings in a critical and creative culminating task: Can you identify your own theoretical perspective in terms of your most important values, beliefs or ideology? Forming into small groups, explain and discuss what you consider to be your ethos as a writer. Using Bond as a stimulus, write a parable which exemplifies those ideas or ideals. It may take the form of a soliloquy, dialogue, prose poem, poem or chorus, and may be written individually or collaboratively. I have used this curriculum, or the same structure with varying texts, with undergraduates and postgraduates in the US and the UK. The students consistently handle the material adeptly, resulting in fine writing that reflects some remarkable ways in which the students 51 Creative Writing and Critical Theory have been stretched in craft and cognition through the cross-mappings of theoretical and creative domains. Benefits of combining critical theory and creative writing Literary studies – where critical theory has played a major role for at least two decades – and creative writing have a history of being in tension to varying degrees; but this situation reflects educational structures and not literary thinking itself, as we are reminded by Lowell’s metaphor of roots and blossoms. Historically, critical and creative ideas and their expression have been fruitfully and necessarily interconnected. There is an illustrious lineage of writers whose creative and critical thought is mutually enriching, including William Blake, Alexander Pope, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Henry James, Gertrude Stein, Ezra Pound, T. S. Eliot, Charles Olson, Langston Hughes, Charles Bernstein, Susan Howe, Adrienne Rich, Kamau Brathwaite, Italo Calvino, Umberto Eco and other equally distinguished examples whose critical and creative writing may be fruitfully paired in teaching creative writing. Many modern and contemporary writers interested in the relationship between creative and critical writing produce essays and use techniques such as self-reflexivity, pastiche, parody, irony and other frame-breaking operations to explore metaphorically the creative process itself. Other writers intentionally blur distinctions between genres, and between the creative and critical, so their work enacts both purposes simultaneously. Writers associated with Dada, Futurism, Negritude, L⫽A⫽N⫽G⫽U⫽A⫽G⫽E Poetry, Beat Movement, Black Arts Movement, Caribbean Arts Movement and Black Mountain School have continued the tradition of putting their critical knowledge to inventive uses, or using their creative practice as a means of articulating the underlying theoretical stances which generated it. In fact, it is difficult to imagine many of our finest writers achieving their level of literary greatness without the philosophical underpinnings that informed their work. Critical theory for creative writers is intended to encourage students to think more deeply about the process, goals, style, content and reception of writing – issues that should be paramount to any creative writer. For our most important writers, a critical ethos is present to be articulated. That is what is meant by incorporating critical theory in creative writing, if we think of critical theory in the open, interrogative and generative senses of encouraging writers to think about their authorial identities, audiences, purposes for writing and ways of best achieving their literary aims with direction and self-awareness. Most practitioners in the field today would agree that the purpose of creative writing is to guide, nurture, educate and support developing writers for the purpose of producing fine new literature. The role of the critical theorist is to decipher the meaning of works of literature in social, philosophical, psychological, cognitive, historical and cultural contexts. Literature is the focal point of both disciplines. The analytical study of literature by means of critical theory provides historical background, philosophical rigour, a sociological framework and formalist knowledge that would benefit any creative writer, which brings us full circle to the original intent of both fields: to preserve the past ‘to give it play’ by creating new writing in the present. Notes 1. Since the 1990s, issues of major scholarly journals including PMLA and Profession have been devoted to the topic of ‘What is our subject and where are we going?’ The English Subject Centre 52 The Handbook of Creative Writing sponsored a conference in 2003 called ‘English: The Condition of the Subject’ which aimed to ‘reflect upon how English has been constituted in the classroom through the changes of the last ten years . . . and what the future of English might be’ (Council for College and University English News 2003: 19). Craig Hamilton was blunt about the outcome: ‘Most of us would fail an exam that tested our ability to define “English Studies” accurately. Those who went to this year’s “Condition of the Subject” conference looking for such a definition no doubt returned home empty-handed’ (Hamilton 2004: 12). In ‘Imagining the coherence of the English Major’, Jonathan Culler contrasts the current uncertainties of English with Northrop Frye’s past sense of cohesion: ‘I suspect that many of us do not know or no longer know this sense of the unity of the subject and have to posit it by an act of imagination’ (Culler 2003: 86). For other perspectives on what the ‘problem’ is with English, see Dasenbrock, Lewalski, Krieger, Motion, Fenza and Levine, including critics writing on the posttheory era or the death of theory, such as Tikhanov. 2. I have restricted my examples to MA and MFA programs in creative writing, where the greatest diversity of opinion exists regarding the intersection of creative writing and critical theory. At the BA and PhD levels, creative writing and critical theory are more often joined in the same program (though typically in separate modules, not actually brought into direct relation in the same class), but for antithetical reasons. Creative writing for undergraduates generally is not regarded as career preparation, but as a means of encouraging self-discovery and self-expression in a humanities or liberal arts education. At the doctoral level, degrees in creative writing generally are viewed as career preparation because the majority of students earning PhDs in the humanities are interested in pursuing academic careers. It is a common perspective that creative writers hoping for careers in the academy will be more attractive job candidates if they also are prepared to teach in other areas, with composition and rhetoric, critical theory and English literature as the most likely cognate subjects. References Aristotle (1998), Poetics, in David H. Richter (ed.), The Critical Tradition: Classical Texts and Contemporary Trends, Second Edition, Boston: Bedford Books. Bond, Edward [1971] (1993), Lear, in Plays: Two, London: Methuen. Carnochan, W. B. (December 2000), ‘The English curriculum: past and present’, PMLA, 115:7, 1958–60. Culler, Jonathan (2003), ‘Imagining the coherence of the English Major’, Profession, New York: Modern Language Association, 85–93. Dasenbrock, Reed Way (2004), ‘Toward a Common Market: arenas of cooperation in literary study’, Profession, New York: Modern Language Association, 63–73. Dawson, Paul (2003), ‘Towards a new poetics in creative writing pedagogy’, TEXT, 7:1 (April), www.gu.edu.au/text/school/art/text/april03/dawson.htm Eliot, T. S. (1919) ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’ in Frank Kermode (ed.), Selected Prose of T. S. Eliot, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Fenza, David (2000), ‘Creative writing and its discontents’, Writing in Education, 22 (Spring), 8–18. Fenza, David (2002), ‘Annual report to the members of AWP’, The Writer’s Chronicle, 50–5. Freiman, Marcelle (2001), ‘Crossing the boundaries of the discipline: a post-colonial approach to the teaching of creative writing’, TEXT, 5:2 (October), www.gu.au/school/art/text/oct01/freiman.htm Green, Daniel (2003), ‘Not merely academic; creative writing and literary study’, REAL: The Journal of Liberal Arts, Nacogdoches, Texas, 28:2: 43–62. Hamilton, Craig (2004), ‘Anglo-America IV: Nottingham and Maryland’, Council for College and University English News, 18 (Winter): 12–13. Joyce, James (1967), Finnegans Wake, New York: Viking. Creative Writing and Critical Theory 53 Kohl, Herbert (1979), ‘Interview with Herbert Kohl’, in Phillip Lopate (ed.), Journal of a Living Experiment: A Documentary History of the First Ten Years of Teachers & Writers Collaborative, New York: Teachers & Writers. Krieger, Murray (2000), Letter, PMLA, 115:7 (December), 2008–9. Levine, George (1993), ‘The real trouble’, Profession, New York: Modern Language Association of America, 43–5. Lewalski, Barbara (1993), ‘Critical issues in literary studies’, Profession, New York: Modern Language Association of America, 41–2. Lim, Shirley Geok-lin (2003), ‘The strangeness of creative writing: an institutional query’, Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition and Culture, 3:2, Duke University Press, 151–69. Longinus (2001), ‘On sublimity’, in Vincent B. Leitch et al. (eds), The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, New York and London: W. W. Norton & Co. Lopate, Phillip (1979), ‘Roots and origins’, in Phillip Lopate (ed.), Journal of a Living Experiment: A Documentary History of the First Ten Years of Teachers & Writers Collaborative, New York: Teachers & Writers. Lowell, James Russell [1889] (2000), ‘Presidential address’, PMLA, 115:7, 1734–8. Marx, Karl [1859] (1978), ‘Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy’, in Robert C. Tucker (ed.), The Marx-Engels Reader, 2nd ed., New York: W. W. Norton. McGarry, Jean (2005), ‘A brief history of the writing seminars at Johns Hopkins University’, www.jhu/~writsem/history02.html (accessed July 2005). Motion, Andrew (2001), ‘Creative writing’, English Subject Centre Newsletter, 1 (February), 17–18. Myers, D. G. (1996), The Elephants Teach, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Radavich, David (1999), ‘Creative writing in the academy’, Profession, New York: Modern Language Association of America, 106–12. Shakar, Alex (2005), www.english/uiuc.edu/mfa/content/faculty/ashakar.shtml Tikhanov, Galin (2004), ‘Why did modern literary theory originate in Central and Eastern Europe: why is it now dead?’ Common Knowledge 10:1 (Winter), Duke University Press, 61–81. University of British Columbia Okanagan (2005), http://web.ubc.ca/okanagan/creativeandcritical/welcome.html (accessed 2005) University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2006), English website www.english.uiuc.edu/-graduate-/english/general.html (accessed 14 July, 2006). University of Maryland (2006), English website www.english.umd.edu/programs/CreateWriting (accessed 14 July, 2006). University of Sussex (2006), English website www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/publications/pgrad2006/programmes/English+literature/12647 (accessed 2005). Young, Edward [1759] (1967), Conjectures on Original Composition, In a Letter to the Author of ‘Sir Charles Grandison’, in James Harry Smith and Edd Winfield Parks (eds), The Great Critics: An Anthology of Literary Criticism, New York: W. W. Norton. 5 Literary Genres David Rain There’s an anecdote about a board meeting at Desilu Studios in Hollywood, circa 1964, where Lucille Ball presided over the TV production empire she had set up with one-time husband Desi Arnaz. According to Desilu vice-president Herbert F. Solow, Lucy seldom said much during meetings. But one day, as Solow was about to update the board on series in development, network deals and the like, Lucy said suddenly: ‘Herb, what’s happening with that South Seas series?’ Solow was perplexed. There was no South Seas series. Lucy said, ‘You know, Herb, that South Seas series you mentioned last time’. Solow, Lucy insisted, was producing a show about USO performers entertaining the troops in the South Seas during the war. Solow did not know what she was talking about. He said he had never mentioned a USO show. ‘Oh yes you did,’ cried Lucy. ‘Oh, yes, you did, Herb. You called it Star Trek!’ (Solow and Justman 1996: 21–2). What had happened? When writers pitch ideas for film, television, even books, it is often thought a good idea to describe the proposed work in terms of another. A film, for example, might be Moby-Dick meets The Terminator, or Macbeth among the gangs of East LA. Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry had pitched the series to Desilu as ‘Wagon Train to the stars’ – after a Western series, top-rated in its day, in which a party of pioneers travel intrepidly, and interminably, across the not-quite final frontier of the Old West (Solow and Justman 1996: 15). Lucy, evidently, was thinking about a wagon train of the stars. What could a show called Star Trek be about, after all, but stars on a trek? The USO business was her own invention. What Lucy had failed to grasp was the genre of the show. The anecdote not only answers the much-debated conundrum, ‘What was Lucy’s contribution to Star Trek?’, it also illustrates that we understand stories and story-ideas on the basis of our previous assumptions. Give us just a little, and we take a lot. We never begin with a blank slate. This is what genre is all about. In this chapter, we will look at what genre means, in practical terms; at how genres develop, using the novel as an example; at the notion of ‘literary’ versus ‘genre’ fiction; and at ways in which we, as writers, may work with genre – or, to put it another way, with our awareness of the past, of everything that has already been written, and not by us. Genre, form and mode To define genre is not as simple as it looks. At a basic level, it’s easy. A French word denoting ‘kind’, related etymologically both to ‘gender’ and ‘genus’, ‘genre’ has been used in Literary Genres 55 English since at least the early nineteenth century to refer to a form, a type, a variety of literature or art. But how specific a kind? Old-style English exams often carried rubrics warning, ‘Students must show competence in the three main genres’ – in other words, answer on poetry, drama and fiction. By these lights, a literary genre is defined by whether it is written in verse, dramatic form, or narrative prose. This is a simplified, modern version of an older three-way definition, dating back to classical times. Aristotle and Horace weren’t much concerned with prose versus poetry. Literature was poetry, but there were three types of it: lyric, where the poet speaks to us directly; drama, where the characters do the talking; and epic, where the poet appears as narrator, and the characters speak as well (Wellek and Warren 1976: 227–8). It may seem contrary to common usage to talk about poetry or drama or fiction as a ‘genre’. A better word perhaps is ‘form’, or ‘medium’, suggesting the essential containers in which writing comes, irrespective of subject matter or style. But things are not immediately clear if we assume that genre is only concerned with these finer distinctions. Take tragedy. In classical terms, a tragedy is a work written in dramatic form and encompassing a specific action: the noble protagonist, the tragic flaw, the catastrophic fall. Tragedy emerges in ancient Greece, and Aristotle’s Poetics (fourth century BC) is its howto-write manual. Famously, Aristotle insists on the primacy of plot, on the point-by-point structuring of events and revelations to achieve the maximum emotional impact on the audience: the celebrated catharsis, or purging of pity and fear. It’s not a question of shocks and surprises. Greek audiences didn’t want to be told a story they’d never heard before. Everybody knew already what happened to Oedipus: Sophocles’ skill lay in how he put the story across. But even if we don’t know the story of a tragedy, we know what kind of story to expect – and what kind of ending. Drama has its origins in ritual. This is a key insight not only in the understanding of drama, but of the whole concept of genre. Genre is, in a real sense, the enactment of ritual. Both tragedy and comedy are basic literary ‘kinds’ which can be associated with specific structural features and methods of presentation. They also represent deeper, more fundamental literary impulses. Northrop Frye’s schema in the influential study Anatomy of Criticism (1957) sets forth four archetypal literary kinds – comedy, romance, tragedy, satire – which persist across human history and correspond to the four seasons: respectively, spring, summer, autumn, winter. Another classic critical study, William Empson’s Some Versions of Pastoral (1935), takes what might have been thought a distinct, easy-torecognise genre, and expands its meaning. Originally, pastoral was a form of poetry – the Idylls of Theocritus, the Eclogues of Virgil – in which the city-dwelling poet longs for an idealised notion of simple, rural life. To Empson, ‘pastoral’ is any work which, even implicitly, contrasts simple and complicated ways of life, favouring the former; his ‘versions of pastoral’ therefore include Shakespeare’s Sonnet 94 (‘They that have power to hurt, and will do none’), ‘The Garden’ by Andrew Marvell, John Gay’s eighteenth-century satirical play The Beggar’s Opera, and Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. We could add more: A. E. Housman’s poem-sequence A Shropshire Lad, The Waltons and Little House on the Prairie, The Lord of the Rings, ‘Rocky Mountain High’ by John Denver. If genre is to mean anything, it has to mean something more specific than this. In Frye’s archetypes and Empson’s ‘versions’, we are dealing not with genres, as commonly understood, but ‘modes’. Satire is a mode, and can appear in many forms: Pope’s mock-epic poem The Rape of the Lock (1714), Voltaire’s scathing parable Candide (1759), Orwell’s Animal Farm (1945) and Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), Kubrick’s film Dr 56 The Handbook of Creative Writing Strangelove (1963). All are satires; all, in the classical definition, ‘expose folly and vice’; but the means by which this is done, and the form, tone and style employed is different in each case. A mode, therefore, is a way of approaching material. Where it gets complicated is when a mode is also, in a more limited sense, a genre. Often what begins as a genre – tragedy, pastoral – expands over time into a mode. Conversely, a mode or other broad literary effect – fantasy, suspense – may come to characterise a genre. What most people mean by genre – as applied to literature, film and the like – is a particular type of subject matter. A Western is a Western whether it is a novel by Zane Grey or a film starring John Wayne. Rebecca (1938), the novel by Daphne du Maurier, and Rebecca (1940), Alfred Hitchcock’s film version of the book, are both romantic suspense stories. But it isn’t always so easy. Is the sonnet a genre? It is certainly also a form in any sense of the word, defined by the number of lines and the rhyme scheme, as opposed to what it is about. The ode, on the other hand, is an ode because of its subject (serious) and its style (elevated) and its form (elaborately arranged stanzas). Our distinctions can seldom be hard and fast. If ‘genre’ means a fundamental, essentially permanent type of writing – say, comedy – it has also come to suggest a rapid, more or less ephemeral succession of styles: bodice-rippers, sex-and-shopping novels, cyberpunk. Taxonomic critics such as Wellek and Warren in their Theory of Literature worry about this. Are we to have an endless line of genres, based solely upon subject matter? ‘Our conception of genre should lean to the formalistic side’, they sternly advise (Wellek and Warren 1976: 233). Biology might be helpful: if poetry is the genus, the sonnet is the species. Alastair Fowler in Kinds of Literature (1982) analyses genre theory in exhaustive detail, but in the end offers no simple system to make all clear. It cannot be: genre is not a precise business, and any attempt to divide genres definitively from sub-genres, or to keep them distinct from form and mode, is doomed to failure. Theory gets us only so far. History is more instructive. Genre in the novel: a case study What is a novel? The word has come to suggest any fictional narrative, on any subject, so long as it is written in prose (usually) and is of some length – say, 40,000 words at a minimum. The definition was once stricter. Prose fiction can be found far back in history, and all around the world. In a remarkable book, The True Story of the Novel (1997), Margaret Anne Doody argues for a ‘history of the novel’ spanning numerous cultures and thousands of years; but this, perhaps, is to stretch to breaking point the notion of ‘the novel’. When we talk about the novel, we usually mean a form of fiction that developed in Europe. Familiar literary history goes like this: once, the dominant form of narrative fiction was ‘romance’ (a word originally meaning ‘in the Roman language’). Written in prose from the fifteenth century onwards, romances in the original sense were elaborate tales of chivalric deeds, courtly love, and pastoral enchantments, flagrantly ‘unrealistic’, frequently invoking magic. In English, Sir Philip Sidney’s Arcadia (1581–93) is the dominant example of the form; Shakespeare’s As You Like It (c.1600) is an adaptation of a once-celebrated prose romance, Thomas Lodge’s Rosalynde (1590). Already, Boccaccio’s Decameron (1349–51) in prose and Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales (c.1387) in verse had suggested the possibilities of realism. The sixteenth century brought the Spanish ‘picaresque’ – episodic, low-life comic stories about a pícaro, a rogue or trickster – exemplified in the anonymous Lazarillo de Tormes (1554). The same realistic, comic Literary Genres 57 impulse infuses Cervantes’ Don Quixote (1604–14), which subjects the romance to the withering barbs of parody. Driven mad by the reading of romances, Quixote sets out on a life of adventure, not realising that, far from being a valiant knight on a noble steed, he is really just a silly old man on a broken-down nag. In exploring illusion, reality, and the gap between them, Cervantes discovers the quintessential theme of the classic novel, one we can trace through works as diverse as Austen’s Pride and Prejudice (1813), Dickens’ Great Expectations (1860–1), Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment (1866), and Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby (1925). In eighteenth-century England, realistic narratives come dramatically into vogue. At first, such books purported not to be fictional at all. Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719) was apparently the autobiography of a real shipwrecked sailor. Richardson’s Pamela (1741) was presented as an authentic collection of letters from an unusually literate servant girl, telling how she married her master after first fending off his attempts on her ‘virtue’. The pretence of authenticity didn’t last long: the point was, the story could have been real, happening in the real world to believable characters. Books of this sort came to be called ‘novels’ because the stories they told were new. As Ian Watt remarks in The Rise of the Novel, ‘Defoe and Richardson are the first great writers in our literature who did not take their plots from mythology, history, legend or previous literature. In this they differ from Chaucer, Spenser, Shakespeare and Milton’ (Watt 1963: 14). In contrast to Defoe’s mock-autobiographies or Richardson’s collections of letters, Fielding’s bawdy comic adventure story Tom Jones (1749) is delivered to us in elaborately artful third-person narrative, complete with direct addresses to the reader. But all the time, Fielding makes his claim on truth. Watt usefully distinguishes ‘realism of presentation’, the novel’s illusion of reality, and ‘realism of assessment’, its depiction of the realities of human nature (Watt 1963: 300–1). It is because of its truthfulness, Fielding declares, that the novel is superior to the romance: ‘Truth distinguishes our writings from those idle romances which are filled with monsters, the productions, not of nature, but of distempered brains’ (Fielding 1966: 151). The distinction between novel and romance soon became commonplace. In her critical study The Progress of Romance (1785), Clara Reeve puts it like this: The Romance is an heroic fable, which treats of fabulous persons and things. – The Novel is a picture of real life and manners, and of the time in which it is written. The Romance in lofty and elevated language, describes what never happened nor is likely to happen. – The Novel gives a familiar relation of such things, as pass every day before our eyes, such as may happen to our friend, or to ourselves; and the perfection of it, is to represent every scene, in so easy and natural a manner, and to make them appear so probable, as to deceive us into a persuasion (at least while we are reading) that all is real, until we are affected by the joys or distresses, of the persons in the story, as if they were our own. (cited in Allott 1959: 47) As it happened, Reeve was also the author of a book called The Old English Baron (1778), an early example of the ‘gothic’ vogue which established itself in the wake of Horace Walpole’s The Castle of Otranto (1764). Walpole’s absurd ghost story is a famously bad piece of writing, and its historical significance is far in excess of its merits. Almost as soon as the realistic novel had established itself, the romance, in effect, broke back through, with its ‘fabulous persons and things’. But it was not a simple reversion: in the preface to the second edition, Walpole claimed that his book ‘was an attempt to blend the two kinds of romance, the ancient and the modern’ – the old romance, in other words, and the novel. The 58 The Handbook of Creative Writing limitations of the novel were clear: ‘the great resources of fancy have been dammed up, by a strict adherence to common life’. Invoking Shakespeare as his model, Walpole claimed that he wrote about realistic characters, but placed them in ‘realms of invention’ (Walpole 1969: 7). The stage was set for the first great flowering of the ‘gothic novel’, which peaked in Ann Radcliffe’s curiously hypnotic saga of a girl imprisoned in a mysterious castle, The Mysteries of Udolpho (1794). Not the least aspect of Radcliffe’s importance is her unprecedented development of descriptive writing. Previous novelists had spent little time showing what the world of their characters looked like; Radcliffe, eager to arouse wonder and awe, immerses her reader in a rapturous dream-world of exotic, wild scenery. The gothic marks the first great schism in the English novel. Walpole used the term ‘romance’ as a catch-all for ‘prose fiction’ (‘the two kinds of romance, the ancient and the modern’), but later commentators increasingly used ‘novel’ as the default term, the novel being the form of which ‘romance’ was a genre. Often it was a dubious one. ‘Romance’ suggested something less serious than the novel proper, an unlikely adventure story, perhaps a book for children: Dumas’ The Three Musketeers (1844–5), Ballantyne’s The Coral Island (1857), Haggard’s King Solomon’s Mines (1886), Baroness Orczy’s The Scarlet Pimpernel (1905). Only in the twentieth century did ‘romance’ come to mean simply a love story. Today’s major varieties of popular fiction can all be traced back to the gothic. In 1794, anarchist philosopher William Godwin publishes Caleb Williams, a tale of flight and pursuit about a man unjustly accused of a crime, struggling vainly to evade capture. The story is set in the England of Godwin’s day. There are no castles, no clanking chains; there is evil, crime, darkness, but no ghosts, no demons. In Caleb Williams, the crime thriller is born. When Edgar Allan Poe writes the short stories ‘The Murders in the Rue Morgue’ (1841) and ‘The Purloined Letter’ (1845), the gothic obsession with crime and darkness turns into one of its most productive pathways: the detective story. Poe, like Matthew Lewis in The Monk (1796), a festering tale of depravity that allegedly shocked even the famously dissolute Lord Byron, also pushes the gothic towards its most intense form – horror – in stories such as ‘The Fall of the House of Usher’ (1839). Later American literature offers further permutations of gothic, in the nineteenth-century novel of symbolism and psychological allegory – Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter (1850), Melville’s Moby-Dick (1851) – and the twentieth-century ‘Southern gothic’ of novels such as Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury (1929). Meanwhile, Jane Austen’s celebrated satire of gothic, Northanger Abbey (1818), does for Radcliffe and her imitators much the same as Cervantes had done for the old romance. Sir Walter Scott draws on the gothic in a different way. Radcliffe had presented a world of the mysterious past, steeped in an atmosphere of stagy medievalism. Scott shared Radcliffe’s feeling for history, adopting her elaborate, evocative scene-setting, but drawing on an altogether more credible past. Waverley (1814) lays out the classic formula for the historical novel. In Edward Waverley, Scott presents a fictional hero caught up in real-life events – in this case, the Jacobite rising of 1745 – with historical figures in supporting roles. Shakespeare’s history plays had concentrated on the main players: Julius Caesar, Henry V. In writing Waverley, rather than, say, Bonnie Prince Charlie, Scott achieves greater imaginative flexibility in terms of plot, and allows the reader a more compelling sense of identification through the device of the ordinary person caught up in extraordinary events. Scott was by far the most influential British novelist of the nineteenth century. Both Hugo’s Les Misérables (1862) and Tolstoy’s War and Peace (1863–9), are working, if more brilliantly, in Scott’s vein, as are twentieth-century popular novels such as Margaret Mitchell’s Gone With the Wind (1936) or Herman Wouk’s Second World War saga The 59 Literary Genres Winds of War (1971). Not until Robert Graves’ I, Claudius (1934), purportedly the memoirs of the Roman emperor, did a rival conception of the historical novel come to the fore. It remains less widely imitated. The most celebrated take on the gothic is Mary Shelley’s. The story behind the writing of Frankenstein (1818) is legendary: the ghost-story competition one wet summer on Lake Geneva where the young Mary and Percy Bysshe Shelley were staying with Byron, inspiring a dream from which Mary woke in terror. Mary Shelley was William Godwin’s daughter, and her novel partakes of the claustrophobic atmosphere of her father’s Caleb Williams, complete with elaborate details of flight and pursuit. Where it differs is in its treatment of the monstrous. In Caleb Williams, the monster is a metaphor: the novel is a story of human beings, and the monsters they make of themselves through pride, envy, and lust for vengeance. In Frankenstein, metaphor is reality. But what is most important is the reason why: Frankenstein’s creature is not the product of magic, but of science. As Brian W. Aldiss argues in Billion Year Spree (1973), Frankenstein – more than any rival precursor – marks the beginnings of science fiction. How genre works In the movement from romance to novel, to gothic novel and beyond, we see that genres develop not through one process but several. The predominance of one type of work (romance) calls forth another (realism) that seems quite unlike it, as if to illustrate the law that for every action there’s an equal and opposite reaction. But it’s not quite the tug-ofwar it seems. Richardson’s Pamela purports to be a realistic novel. The setting is not Arcadia, but contemporary England; the heroine is a defiantly ‘low’ character, a servantgirl, not a princess or noble lady. But the story – rags to riches, basically – is just fantasy in another key. This is inevitable: all storytelling depends for its effect upon the creation for the reader of a desirable fantasy, and this is as true of Irvine Welsh’s squalid story of drug addiction, Trainspotting (1993), as it is of C. S. Lewis’s children’s fantasies, The Chronicles of Narnia (1950–6). The reader is invited to participate vicariously in a world that may or may not be attractive, but is – to the right reader – exciting, offering an imaginary but powerfully satisfying extension of experience. New movements in literature and art frequently purport to be more realistic, closer to the truth of life, than what has come before. Wordsworth, announcing a poetic revolution in his preface to Lyrical Ballads (1798), rejects the paraphernalia of eighteenth-century verse, with its elevated style, its classical allusions and forms. By contrast, he claims, he will write about ‘ordinary life’ in ‘the language really spoken by men’ (Wordsworth 1969: 164). Wordsworth’s influence on nineteenth-century poetry was immense, but by the early twentieth century the mournful evocations of landscape, rural life, and the passing of time which followed in his wake had become the merest convention, and the language of poetry again seemed remote from the language of life. In 1913, the American poet Ezra Pound announced a new revolution. ‘Imagism’ would be a hard, unsentimental poetry with no superfluous words, no abstractions, no meaningless ornamentation. Poetry would evoke, not explain. And of course there would be none of the clutter of rhyme, scansion, and other features of traditional form (Pound 1972: 130–4). We could put it like this: yesterday’s realism is today’s romance. The novels of Jane Austen are realism’s response to the romances of Ann Radcliffe. But Austen herself is now read largely as a species of romance, and modern novels which draw on Austen are romantic, as in the ‘Regency romances’ of Georgette Heyer, such as The Grand Sophy (1950), or 60 The Handbook of Creative Writing the fantastical reconfiguration of Regency England in Susannah Clarke’s fantasy Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell (2004). Realism and romance are the fundamental poles of literature, and the history of literature is of an oscillation between them. Literature wants both to escape and to confront reality. Realism is waking and romance is dream, and we desire both equally. But if genre develops through a process of rebellion, it also involves a tree-like branching. We see this in the case of the gothic, in which the implications of a style or subject are progressively explored, with different writers making different emphases. In the modern era, new genres are identified rapidly. This has not always been the case. When Aldiss calls Mary Shelley a science fiction writer, he is not using a term she would have recognised. H. G. Wells saw his novels such as The Time Machine (1895) or The War of the Worlds (1898) as ‘scientific romances’. It was only with Hugo Gernsback’s magazine Amazing Stories, launched in the US in 1926, that the world began to speak of ‘science fiction’ – and then only slowly: a 1928 Gernsback editorial boasts of ‘The Rise of Scientifiction’ (Frewin 1975: 56). Literary versus genre In any gathering of science fiction writers, one theme soon emerges: the unending clash between ‘genre’ and ‘mainstream’ or ‘literary’ fiction. Science fiction writers are used to being dismissed by the literary establishment, and resent it. The use of ‘genre’ as a term of disparagement is a recent phenomenon historically, reflecting the rise of branded ‘category fiction’ in the twentieth century. The delineation of genre in this sense is far more of a problem in literature than it is in cinema, where the Westerns of John Ford are considered classics, and Hitchcock’s status as ‘master of suspense’ does not prevent him also being regarded as perhaps the finest of cinema’s auteurs. But there is a paradox here: in so far as Hitchcock’s Vertigo (1958) is seen as a masterpiece, it is, of necessity, elevated above the merely generic. Vertigo is no ordinary crime thriller. Used negatively, ‘genre’ suggests not the basic properties of a work in terms of content or form – a level on which, say, Dostoyevsky might be considered a crime writer – but an implication of formula, of joining the dots. Nor is the charge unjust: the strict guidelines issued by publishers of ‘category romance’, such as Harlequin or Mills and Boon, are notorious. Writers of ambition are repelled by such rules, which seem to militate against creativity itself, making blatant the writer’s role not as self-directed creative person but mere servant of editors and marketing departments, dutifully fulfilling the apparent expectations of an audience pictured as inattentive, easily bored, and petulantly impatient with the unexpected or the difficult. ‘Genre fiction’ by definition is like something else – fiction that resembles other fiction. It is for this reason that ‘serious’ fiction is assumed to be nongeneric, the product of a unique imaginative act. It need hardly be said that this is seldom the case. A cursory analysis of literary or ‘mainstream’ fiction reveals a series of genres or sub-genres which are not branded as such: the novel of middle-class marriage, the sensitive study of adolescence, the upmarket romance, the upmarket historical, the literary fantasy or magical realist novel, the feminist novel, the multicultural or ‘minority’ novel, the experimental novel, the cultish youth novel. Literary fiction includes a great deal of genre fiction, more or less successfully disguised: for example, Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go (2005), in which cloned children are reared as organ donors in an alternative version of contemporary England, is a science fiction novel in all but name. A work like this is generally felt by critics to ‘transcend’ the genre it resembles. One might 61 Literary Genres say it transcends it in so far as it is published in a non-genre jacket. Yet this is not quite fair. Science fiction stories tend to fail artistically to the extent that the author is seriously interested in science or technology or predicting the future. Ishiguro cares about none of this, presenting his story as a metaphor of human destiny rather than as a commentary on biotechnology, to be praised or blamed for its success or failure as scientific extrapolation. Genre transcendence is a real phenomenon. The ‘revenge tragedy’ was a recognised genre in Shakespeare’s time. But when we have said that Hamlet (c.1601) is a revenge tragedy, we have not said much. A celebrated African–American novel, Toni Morrison’s Beloved (1987), is a ghost story – a murdered child comes back from the dead. But to say this is to say nothing. In any literary work that aspires to art, basic features of content are never ends in themselves. They are a vehicle: in Morrison’s case, for what she wants to say about motherhood, race, slavery, time and death. The critic Harold Bloom has written compellingly of the ‘strangeness’ that marks out those writers we think of as great (Bloom 1995: 4). Writers are considered ‘great’ in the proportion to which we view them as original. The great writer is felt to be sui generis (one of a kind, unique – literally, outside of genre). We value Shakespeare to the extent that he is ‘Shakespearean’; Dickens is ‘Dickensian’. In the later eighteenth century, there was a vogue of ‘Shandean’ texts, inspired by Laurence Sterne’s bizarrely digressive comic novel, or anti-novel, The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy (1759–67). The sub-genre has sunk almost entirely into oblivion, and it is not difficult to see why. Sterne’s eccentricity is the whole point: he cannot be systematised. The same is true of twentieth-century experimental writers such as James Joyce or Virginia Woolf. There are incidental features one can take from Joyce’s Ulysses (1922), but the performance as a whole is unrepeatable – indeed, there would be no point in doing it more than once. We might feel that Joyce, like Sterne or Woolf, is an influence of far less immediate value to other writers than, say, Shakespeare or Austen or Hemingway, who, for all their individual brilliance, are enabling to other writers in a way that Joyce is not. The word ‘experimental’, as applied to art, is misleading, implying a scientific or technological notion of progress which can hardly describe the movement from Homer to Dante, from Shakespeare to Milton, from Dickens to Joyce to Stephen King. It is perhaps inevitable, however, that literary historians see a writer’s supposed ‘innovations’ as the benchmark of literary value, akin to a scholar’s contributions to scholarship – as if literature were a science and the duty of each writer were to carry out experiments that would bring it, in due course, to a final perfection. This is not how writing works. It is not a competition to get the right answer. Writing is a matrix of possibilities, a vast interconnected web, and Ulysses and Pride and Prejudice, Superman comics and the Bhagavad-Gita and the fairy tales collected by the Brothers Grimm, Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Tarzan of the Apes (1914) and William Burroughs’ The Naked Lunch (1959) are all part of that matrix. This awareness can help us as we consider how to work with genre. Working with genre Genre is the most important decision a writer makes. It’s not always an easy one. Beginning writers are often uncertain even about whether to write poetry or drama, fiction or screenplays. Of course we need not choose one form, and one only; but the writer who excels in multiple forms is rare. One of the most successful writers of the twentieth century, W. Somerset Maugham, triumphed first as a playwright, then as a novelist, a short story writer, and an essayist. George Bernard Shaw, by contrast, wrote five unsuccessful novels before 62 The Handbook of Creative Writing discovering his true calling as a dramatist. Most writers find themselves only through much trial and error. In the meantime, each work has to be written in one form or another, and the writer needs to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the given form. What works in one form doesn’t always work, or work well, in another. Moody, unresolved first-person introspection of the sort suitable in lyric poetry rapidly becomes tedious in prose fiction. Fiction is narrative: it has to move. Drama is characters interacting. Every creative writing teacher has read more than enough go-nowhere stories which are all description and memory, or screenplays drowned in narrative voice-over, with nothing happening on the screen. An opposite problem is the ‘television novel’ filled with thinlydescribed characters flitting back and forth in a succession of brief, insignificant scenes, or the ‘blockbuster movie’ novel stuffed with rapid-fire special effects which can hardly have the impact on the page that they will be presumed to have in the cinema. But form is just the beginning of our problems with genre. Genre is about all that has gone before, the heritage of writing that lies behind us. And by now, this is a long heritage. Belatedness is our fate. This is a burden, and it is pointless to deny it. In The Anxiety of Influence (1973), Harold Bloom sets out a theory of poetic influence not as a matter of casual borrowings but of deathly struggles, in which the ‘belated’ poet must battle against the ‘precursor’ – the ‘father’ whose work must be distorted, deliberately ‘misread’, by the poetic ‘son’, in order that he may claim his own imaginative space. As Terry Eagleton observes, ‘What Bloom does, in effect, is to rewrite literary history in terms of the Oedipus complex’ (Eagleton 1983: 183). Bloom’s theory remains controversial, but the ‘anxiety of influence’ is a felt reality to any writer who has looked at a previous writer’s work and felt, despairingly, that it has all been done – and so much better than one could do it oneself. The ‘postmodernism’ associated with American writers such as John Barth, Donald Barthelme or Thomas Pynchon, built on the parody and subversion of previous literary forms, is one way of approaching belatedness. The self-conscious dialogue with the classics in novels such as Jean Rhys’s Wide Sargasso Sea (1966) – the story of the ‘mad wife’ from Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre (1847) – or Geoff Ryman’s Was (1992), a latterday take on L. Frank Baum’s The Wizard of Oz (1900), is another. John Barth expresses two views of contemporary literature in an illuminating pair of essays, ‘The literature of exhaustion’ (1967) and ‘The literature of replenishment’ (1980). The past, he suggests, is an opportunity as much as a burden. We do not choose what we write as if from a smorgasbord of every available possibility. In the end, we write what we can write – to advance in writing is to become aware of limitations as much as of new horizons. As writers, it is the mission of each of us to find the material, the form and the style that best expresses our particular talents. Inevitably, this involves negotiation with literary history. Look at any work that is successful – in any sense – and what you find is the transfigured past. This is as true of T. S. Eliot’s great poetic echo chamber of quotations and allusions, The Waste Land (1922), as it is of the Harry Potter books. J. K. Rowling’s borrowings are obvious: Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (1997) and its sequels combine the English boarding school story – a genre seemingly dead by the 1990s – with the ‘magic portal’ story of the Narnia kind, Enid Blyton’s ‘holiday adventures’ such as the Famous Five series, and the weird grotesquerie of Roald Dahl. The US television series Lost, which premiered to much acclaim in 2005, is an inventive update of a very old standby, the ‘Robinsonade’, or story about being marooned on a desert island: Lord of the Flies meets The Twilight Zone, in this case. Often there is a standard way in which a particular genre is treated. A productive approach is therefore to treat it differently. The reputation of Ray Bradbury rests largely on 63 Literary Genres his use of a poetic, ‘literary’ style to render the sort of material which had hitherto formed the basis of pulp science fiction. In a classic Bradbury story such as his vision of nuclear holocaust, ‘And There Will Come Soft Rains’, from The Martian Chronicles (1950), Bradbury brings out the poetry and mystery and sadness and longing which had always implicitly inhered in the science fiction genre. Stephen King transforms pulp fiction in a different way. His basic plots are standard horror-fantasy material, not remotely original. What King does is to develop this material in a context of domestic fiction, the novel of character and relationships. A traditional horror writer would have written The Shining (1977) as a short story and sold it to the magazine Weird Tales. In what is probably the finest twentieth-century novel of the supernatural, Interview With the Vampire (1976), Anne Rice took an obvious, indeed hackneyed theme, and turned it on its head, presenting the onetime villain as hero, and showing us the world from his point of view. Two much-admired American novels of the late twentieth century, Larry McMurtry’s Lonesome Dove (1985) and Cormac McCarthy’s All the Pretty Horses (1992), are strikingly literary versions of another old pulp staple – the Western. No literary property is inherently good or bad. Harriet Hawkins’ critical study Classics and Trash (1990) is a good sourcebook for those wanting to see how elements of junk culture, so-called, circulate productively with high art – the hidden links between Shakespeare and Disney and George Eliot, Andrew Lloyd Webber and Gone With the Wind. Screenwriting students are likely to be familiar with the ‘hero’s journey’ laid out by Joseph Campbell in The Hero With a Thousand Faces (1949). Campbell, not a literary critic but a folklorist, claimed to have found a master-story which underlies the classic stories of mythology, a deep structure applicable to stories of all kinds. Filmmaker George Lucas famously used Campbell’s model in writing the original Star Wars (1977), and the approach has since been popularised in screenwriting handbooks such as Christopher Vogler’s The Writer’s Journey (1992). The point of the ‘hero’s journey’ is that it is an archetypal pattern, and appeals – and keeps on appealing – because it addresses basic human needs. Genres are repeating patterns of the same kind. To work with genre, the writer must understand not only how a given genre is structured, but what it means – what desires and fears we confront and perhaps allay in contemplating this quest, this crime, this tale of the Old West, this satisfying completion of fourteen iambic lines. To consider this is the beginning of at least one kind – one genre – of writer’s wisdom. References Aldiss, Brian (1973), Billion Year Spree: The True History of Science Fiction, New York: Doubleday. Allott, Miriam (1959), Novelists on the Novel, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Aristotle (1970), Poetics, trans. Gerald F. Else, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Barth, John (1984), ‘The literature of exhaustion’ and ‘The literature of replenishment’, in John Barth, The Friday Book: Essays and Other Nonfiction, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 62–76, 193–206. Bloom, Harold (1973), The Anxiety of Influence, New York: Oxford University Press. Bloom, Harold (1995), The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages, London: Macmillan. Campbell, Joseph [1949] (1993), The Hero With a Thousand Faces, London: Fontana. Doody, Margaret Anne (1997), The True Story of the Novel, London: HarperCollins. Eagleton, Terry (1983), Literary Theory: An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell. Empson, William (1935), Some Versions of Pastoral, London: Chatto and Windus. Fielding, Henry [1749] (1966), The History of Tom Jones, Harmondsworth: Penguin. 64 The Handbook of Creative Writing Fowler, Alastair (1982), Kinds of Literature: An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Frewin, Anthony (1975), One Hundred Years of Science Fiction Illustration, New York: Pyramid Books. Frye, Northrop (1957), Anatomy of Criticism, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Hawkins, Harriet (1990), Classics and Trash: Traditions and Taboos in High Literature and Popular Modern Genres, Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Pound, Ezra (1972), ‘A few don’ts by an imagiste’, in Peter Jones (ed.), Imagist Poetry, Harmondsworth: Penguin, pp. 130–4. Solow, Herbert F. and Robert H. Justman (1996), Inside Star Trek: The Real Story, New York: Pocket Books. Vogler, Christopher [1992] (1998), The Writer’s Journey, 2nd edn, London: Pan. Walpole, Horace [1764] (1969), The Castle of Otranto, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Watt, Ian (1963), The Rise of the Novel, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Wellek, René, and Austin Warren (1976), Theory of Literature, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Wordsworth, William, ‘Preface to Lyrical Ballads’, in William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge [1798] (1969), Lyrical Ballads, ed. W. J. B. Owen, 2nd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 153–79. 6 The Writer as Artist Steven Earnshaw For I know very well what the temptations of the Devil are, and that one of his greatest is to put it into a man’s head that he can write and print a book, and gain both money and fame by it . . . (Cervantes 1986: 468) It’s 1940 and Gomez is visiting the Museum of Modern Art in New York. His life as a revolutionary in the Spanish Civil War has been overtaken by global events, and his wife and daughter remain in France, fleeing a Paris that is now ablaze. Gomez is given a job as an art critic and his first assignment is to write a piece on Mondrian, who is all the rage. But Gomez can see no point to Abstract Expressionism – it does not ask ‘awkward questions’, the kind of questions that a Europe coping with the rise of Fascism has to ask itself, the kind of questions Rouault, Picasso and Klee ask. His guide at MOMA is Ritchie, an American who counters that art is a chance to rise above these horrors – Ritchie goes to MOMA to escape the world (Sartre 2002: 26–32). What, exactly, are the motivations for making art? The quotation from Don Quixote ironically suggests fame and fortune, but by its own artistic endeavour the novel hints that the real reason is elsewhere, whilst the scenario from Sartre’s novel Iron in the Soul prods the reader in the direction of political seriousness over and above mere entertainment. There are assumptions in both which inform an understanding of the making of art. For one kind of artist, art has something to say about the world in order that it might be changed. Simultaneously, and sometimes in opposition, art is a means of transcending or removing oneself from reality, as if the world as we comprehend it is too much: Cervantes’ novel plays on a confusion between the two as it lays before us his knight’s attempt to transport chivalric texts into real life and thereby transform life itself. Whether as critique, mirror or escape, art exists within culture at the most profound levels. Which would seem to suggest that the artist, too, is a significant being. Yet it is more often the case than not that artists struggle to make a living out of their art. Is it only bad artists who suffer? A market interpretation would suggest so, but few, I suspect, would subscribe wholeheartedly to that. How do and should artists view themselves, and what language best describes what an artist does, the process of creativity the artist is engaged in, the role the artist finds him- or herself in? Or is it wrong to see the artist as engaged in a tussle with art and life; should we instead see the artist as a worker no different from any other who must find his or her way in the world, as a plumber, nurse or stockbroker has to do? Is being 66 The Handbook of Creative Writing an ‘artist’ a vocation? Is being a ‘stockbroker’? Is the artist simply another member of the audience? You may have noticed that I have been talking of ‘artists’ rather than ‘writers’. Are writers artists? Or has the notion of ‘artist’ been narrowed to the field of fine arts, leaving writers to assign to themselves the moniker of ‘poet’, ‘novelist’ or ‘screenwriter’? For writers to call themselves ‘artists’ these days might seem pretentious, or foolhardy given the criticism modern art attracts (see below), or pointless since being a ‘poet’ or ‘novelist’ speaks to all these concerns in any case. However, part of the idea behind this chapter is that writers might think of their roles as working within the broader field of art, and that they are ‘artists’ whose concerns are broader than those of ‘writing’ only. Such a distinction between ‘writers’ and ‘artists’ would certainly not have been a point of dispute in the first half of the twentieth century, as the title of Joyce’s novel about the growth of a writer, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (1916), indicates. The hero of the title, Stephen Dedalus, is steeped in aesthetics and couches his future life in terms of vocation and ambition from within the domain of art, not just writing. When Virginia Woolf advises readers how to approach the strange new works we now term ‘modernist’, she writes: ‘You must be capable not only of great fineness of perception, but of great boldness of imagination if you are going to make use of all that the novelist – the great artist – gives you’ (Woolf 1966: 3). Modernist writers assumed that they were part of a general artistic endeavour – to contribute to the possibilities of art in the making of art, to take it upon themselves to challenge themselves and the world. Joyce’s novel ends on a note of high artistic seriousness: ‘Welcome, O life! I go to encounter for the millionth time the reality of experience and to forge in the smithy of my soul the uncreated conscience of my race’ (Joyce 1993: 218). However, a grand statement like this is likely to make today’s writer unhappy, even though we know that it comes from the mouth of a self-consciously callow youth who might conceivably be forgiven for so blatantly reaching so high. Why write? The Romantics Even though Joyce’s work is from the age of Modernism, Stephen is declaiming in the language of the Romantics. It is them we have to thank for the notion that the writer or artist is a different type of being from the rest of the world, someone who has a privileged vision and to whom the nature of the world is revealed: it is the artist who is inspired and has the ability to pass on such insights to mere mortals. There is no question here of not writing – the artist only has to be inspired, touched by the muse, to create. For Shelley, writing in 1821, the artist is an exceptional being, uniting the characters of legislator and prophet: ‘For he not only beholds intensely the present as it is, and discovers those laws according to which present things ought to be ordered, but he beholds the future in the present, and his thoughts are the germs of the flower and the fruit of the latest time’ (Shelley 1995: 958). But not only is the poet exceptional, the effects and scope of his work on society are virtually incalculable: ‘Poetry is indeed something divine. It is at once the centre and the circumference of knowledge; it is that which comprehends all science, and that to which all science must be referred’ (965). An artist making such claims now would be regarded as a deluded egomaniac, deluded about his or her own abilities and (possibly) about the power of art. Nevertheless, the language of the Romantics has continued to dominate ideas about the artist. In the twentieth century the sculptor Jacob Epstein said: ‘A wife, a lover, can perhaps never see what the artist sees. They rarely ever do. Perhaps a really mediocre artist 67 The Writer as Artist has more chance of success’ (Epstein, quoted in Simpson 1988). Epstein’s view is a direct descendant of the Romantics’ view, and echoes the idea that because the (better) artist has a special insight, it may be that the general audience will have difficulty understanding the art on offer: art that is rejected or misunderstood may simply be an art that is beyond its audience. And so with the notion of inspiration inevitably comes a notion of hierarchy – the artist’s heightened perceptivity places him or her not just outside the audience, but above it. No wonder then that many artists can be uncomfortable with the language of art when it is phrased in Romantic terms; they may want to use the term ‘inspired’ to indicate a very real, bodily feeling in the process of creation, yet will not want to lay claim to any special powers. Yet, rather oddly, the Romantic notion, at the same time as it appears to make the individual something of a unique case, denies the notion of the artist as the origin of his or her creation, since the artist is merely the medium through which the work of art comes. It places artists in a paradoxical position: wanting to lay claim to possession of the fruits of their labour, yet avowing that the driving force is not theirs at all. Whilst the Romantic notion of the artist continues to permeate contemporary culture, eighty or so years later a new grouping of artists advanced the idea that the artist was an irrelevance and that the work of art itself was what was most important. This too has had a forceful legacy in our understanding of the role of the artist. Why write?: the modernist aesthetic Modern artists do not necessarily want to be identified too closely with the ‘content’ of their work when it comes to interpretation and appreciation, certainly not so closely that the work is seen to wholly embody who they are; they would mostly want to reject the idea that artists and the work they produce are interchangeable. There is a horror that an audience (or interviewer) will crudely assume that the central character, theme or emotion is the pure expression of the life experience of the artist. This contemporary separation of the work of art from the artist derives mainly from the modernists. The modernists saw a different world from their immediate forebears, one that placed greater emphasis on subjective experience, on the workings of the mind, and on the building blocks of art itself: language, narrative, form, colour, sound. To get at the newly perceived reality demanded attention to inner worlds and the artistic tools at hand to represent those worlds. One consequence was that art from the modernists moved away from an art that always had its audience in mind. Joseph Conrad wanted to make the reader ‘see’ (Conrad [1897] 1997: 128–31), but not in the same way as Dickens had wanted to open his readers’ eyes to the appalling social conditions of the day which they lived next door to but could not ‘see’, or chose to ignore; Conrad’s understanding of ‘seeing’ is that it is constructed through language, narrative, and cultural and social convention, not simply revealed or obscured by social upbringing or status. The emphasis is on the work of art itself. The modernist aesthetic is determined to make the work of art stand alone, to be autonomous. The young man in Joyce’s novel argues that the artist should remain incognito: ‘The artist, like the God of the creation, remains within or behind or beyond or above his handiwork, invisible, refined out of existence, indifferent, paring his fingernails’ (Joyce 1993: 187). The work of art remains a law unto itself, each piece unique and with it its own set of rules, completely independent of the writer and its audience, self-directed, ‘autotelic’. Another famous declaration from the modernist period is T. S. Eliot’s essay ‘Tradition and the individual talent’ (1922), which also wishes to remove the writer from the equation by calling for an ‘impersonality’ of 68 The Handbook of Creative Writing art, where the writer has to somehow be capable of excising what is personal from his or her artistic endeavour: There are many people who appreciate the expression of sincere emotion in verse, and there is a smaller number of people who can appreciate technical excellence. But very few know when there is expression of significant emotion, emotion which has its life in the poem and not in the history of the poet. The emotion of art is impersonal. And the poet cannot reach this impersonality without surrendering himself wholly to the work to be done. (Eliot 2005: 18) This is both a theory of how art should be appreciated (non-biographically) and how it should be written (objectively). The artist is removed both from the process of creativity and from the creation. It is possible then to see that one of the modern difficulties for the artist is that there is a strong aesthetic derived from modernism, from modernist artists themselves, which demands a sidelining of the artist as important. We can have the art, but not the artist. This may explain the diffidence of many contemporary artists in talking about themselves and their works – although not all, of course. Why write?: truth, politics, art While modern artists might wish to distance themselves from the Romantic notion of the artist as hierophant, and also remain distanced from their work after the modernist fashion, it is also the case that it is rare for contemporary artists to assert that their work is primarily about raising social awareness in the manner that the novels of the nineteenth century did, in the way that the work of Dickens and Gaskell, for instance, did. Documentaries and investigative journalism would appear to be much better situated for this kind of work. It is not that modern artists refuse to comment on the modern world, it is that openly ‘social’ art – where the drive is primarily ‘political’ rather than ‘artistic’ – is categorised as ‘propaganda’ and therefore not good art. It is not always the case. George Orwell gave four reasons for writing: ‘Sheer Egoism’, ‘Aesthetic Enthusiasm’, ‘Historical Impulse’ (the desire to see things as they are and record them) and ‘Political Purpose’ (‘desire to push the world in a certain direction’) (Orwell 1968: 3–4). Initially mainly motivated by the first three reasons, the Spanish Civil War ‘and other events in 1936–7 turned the scale and thereafter I knew where I stood. Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it’ (5). Dorothy Allison in a piece entitled ‘Believing in literature’ says that the reason for her writing is the desire to tell the truth in a publishing world which has difficulty appreciating her particular social, sexual and political context: poor, lesbian and Southern. She aims to tell the truth because mainstream publishing only reflects its own prejudices (Allison 1995: 178–93). On the other hand, we have a writer like John Banville who sees no overt moral or social intent in art. If there is anything moral to emerge it is just that ‘the work of art represents the absolute best that a particular human being could do – perhaps even a little more than he could do’ (Banville 2005: 51). E. A. Markham has this to say: Once, when asked why he wrote, John La Rose said: ‘Because they lie about you. They pretend to speak for you and they lie about you.’ I was encouraged by this, for I thought if anyone should The Writer as Artist 69 lie about me, I should be accorded that privilege. Though I would aim, naturally, to tell the truth. (Markham 2002: 94) The problem is that ‘truth’ is not what it used to be (as Markham recognises), and again, from the modernists onwards, it has been difficult to lay claim to ‘truth’ in the way that the Victorians, for instance, did, or to share the kind of absolute political faith Orwell evinces at a time of political crisis. And the ‘truth’ about what? Subjective, experiential truth, vouchsafed for by artists themselves, is one thing; social or political truths are another. It is a commonplace that bringing politics into art is the quickest way to bad writing. It will replace any artistry with vulgar preaching, replace entertainment with the didactic. Yet, if politics is taken in the broader sense of wanting to make some kind of intervention in the order of things, as Orwell takes it, in what sense could any serious work of art not be political? The Banville quotation might be the counter-argument, an argument that rests on aesthetics, a version of art-for-art’s sake. But even here, surely, the intervention is in the possibilities of art, that the best art will expand art’s horizons, and as such have significance in that way. But is that politics? Isn’t that precisely the retreat from politics, the visit to MOMA to escape the world. Turning to John Burnside, here talking about his volume The Asylum Dance and its interest in ‘dwelling’, suggests that there is simply a reluctance for the writer to say what he is writing ‘about’, as if this is to betray oneself as unsophisticated, or not an ‘artist’, underlying which is no doubt a sense that what the writer does is work on his or her materials in order to create something that is not reducible to paraphrase: I have no desire – and do not presume – to write openly polemical poetry ‘about’ the environment, first because I tend to dislike, as a matter of personal taste, poetry that is ‘about’ anything (no matter how worthwhile the subject matter); second, because the poetry I most value tells, as it were, in an oblique way, rather than directly. Yet he concludes: ‘Nevertheless, I do consider the poetry in this book meaningfully political (amongst other things), in that it tells – obliquely – some stories about dwelling, and about estrangement – which are, I believe, vital questions with regard to our participation in the life-world as a whole’ (Burnside 2003: 24). Burnside’s predicament would seem typical of the contemporary artist: he wants to validate the importance of the artist whilst at the same time subscribing to the modernist aesthetic, Joyce’s artist ‘paring his fingernails’ or T. S. Eliot’s ‘impersonality’. He wants to say something but not be caught doing it; he doesn’t want to say anything but wants to say it well, since anybody can ‘say’ something, since anybody can have an opinion. It is the artist’s ‘purist’ dream, perhaps, the novel that is all blank pages, the piece of music that is silence, the film that is one long unedited shot, the show that is a ‘show about nothing’. Ian McEwan, in conversation with Zadie Smith, puts it like this: ‘The dream surely, Zadie, that we all have, is to write this beautiful paragraph that actually is describing something but at the same time in another voice is writing a commentary on its own creation, without having to be a story about a writer’ (Vida 2005: 225). The desire to say things in such a way that they are not reducible to paraphrase, courting the charge of ‘difficulty’, ‘inaccessibility’ and ‘elitism’, is the modernist attitude of the artist, and, like the Romantic stance, can appear arrogant and anti-democratic. On the other hand, a modern artist who gives interviews, who is accessible to the public through readings, is faced, as we have seen, with the conflation of themselves with their works of art in a way which detracts from the art. Here is an example of a writer experiencing this 70 The Handbook of Creative Writing very difficulty, of trying to be open to an audience yet struggling with its ‘misapprehension’, its desire to ascribe both a biographical connection and a social imperative: I did a reading a couple of months ago that was opened for questions from the audience at the end. One man asked if I’d had a particular set of tower blocks in mind when writing a poem that talks about tower blocks. I said yes, and explained which ones. He then asked me if I had been trying to ‘draw our attention to something’ by writing the poem, and burbled something about social problems. It wasn’t so much steely incomprehension as cheerful misapprehension. I didn’t really know how to respond, so I just laughed and said that if you’re trying to draw attention to something then a poem probably isn’t the best way to go about it. But it was disheartening to be confronted with the idea that people might read this particular poem and try and ascribe some kind of crude sociological agenda to it – ‘Look at these poor people, look at how they live’ – rather than the slightly subtler, less dogmatic treatment I had deluded myself into thinking I’d achieved. (Leviston 2006) The public perception of modern art Modern art itself is open to charges of elitism that brings it, and by natural association, artists, into disrepute. ‘Is modern art off its head?’ is a typical headline (Lawson 2006: 30), but this particular debate and perception about ‘modern’ art is at least a century old. Tolstoy in What is Art? (1898) fumed against the new art of his time – particularly the decadents and aesthetes – and the argument that it takes a cultured person to understand this kind of art, an art which is inaccessible to the majority of the population: Nothing is more common than to hear said of alleged works of art that they are very good but very difficult to understand. We are used to the assertion, and yet to say that a work of art is good but incomprehensible is the same as saying of some kind of food that it is very good but people cannot eat it. (Tolstoy 1995: 80) More recently, John Carey’s What Good are the Arts?, from which the Lawson commentary takes its cue, detects a similar disaffection amongst ‘the masses’ for various kinds of conceptual art, performance art, body art, installations, happenings, videos and computer programmes. They arouse fury in many because they seem . . . to be deliberate insults to people of conventional taste (as, indeed, they often are). By implication such artworks categorize those who fail to appreciate them as a lesser kind of human being, lacking the special faculties that art requires and fosters in its adherents. In retaliation, those who dislike the new art forms denounce them as not just inauthentic but dishonest, false claimants seeking to enter the sacred portals of true art. (Carey 2005: x) Carey locates the decline in the appreciation of ‘new’ art in the 1960s, with the demise of painting, rather than with the emergent modernism so detested by Tolstoy. He identifies the role of the artist to be a fairly useless one, since art in itself is relatively useless. Many of the claims of importance that art often makes for itself are thoroughly demolished in his book: art does not represent a unique realm of culture; there is no work of art which can be said to have universal greatness; it does not make you a better person; there is no objective distinction between ‘high’ art and ‘low’ art – it is simply a matter of cultural construc- 71 The Writer as Artist tion; art’s value in education is unprovable; experiencing art may lead to feelings of ecstasy, but then so might football violence. He comes to a conclusion at the end of the first section that rather than being an activity confined to social or class elites, art needs to be democratised: Perhaps if more money had been spent on, more imagination and effort devoted to, more government initiative directed towards art in schools and art in the community, Britain’s prisons would not now be so overcrowded . . . It is time we gave active art a chance to make us better. (Carey 2005:167) It may seem that what we are talking about here has no relation to writing, it is about the use of art as a social panacea in opposition to the kind of modern art that is ‘off its head’. However, it is related in two ways. First, writing falls within the realm of art, even if it is not (on the face of it) the kind of ‘expensive’ art Carey is discussing (paintings and sculptures, for instance). Secondly, the arguments in defence of modern art that he trashes are precisely the same arguments that are often used in defence of ‘literary fiction’, poetry and theatre. Interestingly, and bizarrely, in the second half of the book Carey advances writing and literature as the very cure-all for the ills of contemporary society he says is needed, whilst acknowledging he has no basis for his argument other than his own subjective taste and the benefits he has seen of introducing writing programmes into prisons, and the (unsupported) argument that providing an accessible, social art in schools will prevent the need for prisons in any case. The stakes for valuing art would appear to be extremely high, whilst at the same time there would appear to be no basis for identifying what counts as art, and if we were to know it when we saw it, it would have to be readily accessible to a general public in the manner that Tolstoy once argued. The modern-day writer wishing to take his or her art seriously does not have an easy time of it with a general audience or with certain critics. It should also be noted that Carey talks of ‘the arts’ and not of artists, again accentuating a modernist aesthetic that validates the work of art (after a fashion) but not its creator. The Author in criticism and literary theory Scott McCracken (in this book) remarks that when student writers are presented with literary theory and criticism they can often seem hostile to it: Ideas such as the ‘death of the author’, which can seem fresh and exciting in a third year undergraduate seminar on a traditional English degree, can appear absurd in a room full of struggling novelists; and their derision is hardly likely to be contradicted by a creative writing tutor who writes to live. The response is not surprising, either from student writers or, indeed, from published authors. The history of twentieth-century literary criticism is one where the text itself has become all-important (mirroring the importance of the work of art at the expense of the artist), and the writer as an existing or once existing living person disappears from critical or theoretical attention. This is broadly the case throughout the twentieth century, although from about the 1960s onwards the reasons for dismissing the author change from those reasons advanced earlier in the century. More recently there has been work to reintegrate the author into literary theory and thus critical practice, complicated 72 The Handbook of Creative Writing or smoothed by the increasing amount of interest in creative writing as an activity within the academy, from writers themselves and from academics. There is now a body of writers within the academy which is itself cognisant of what literary critics and theorists do and say about them, although this in itself does not necessarily negate what hostility there may be. We have already seen that the separation of the work of art from the artist is initiated by writers and artists themselves at the beginning of the twentieth century. Once the work of art is finished and in the public domain the artist is no longer required either by the work of art, the artist or its audience. Following on from this, literary criticism from the 1920s onwards appeared to take the writers at their own words and argued that yes, indeed, writers were of no importance when it came to evaluating or interpreting literature. In practice ‘Practical Criticism’ in the UK and ‘New Criticism’ in the US became an ideal model for teaching and scholarship – the critic approaches the text as a verbal construct full of ambiguity, linguistic balance, and nuanced meaning organically organised, which then requires the wit of a trained academic to uncover and explicate. Students are given texts with no contextual information – everything they need is present in the ‘well-wrought urn’. The killer blow to the writer came with Wimsatt and Beardsley’s essay ‘The Intentional Fallacy’ (1946) in which they claimed that the reader can never know what the author’s intentions were, and in fact, the authors themselves might have difficulty telling you. The intentional fallacy still holds strong today in theory and criticism, as Carey illustrates: ‘Literary theorists effectively disposed of intentionalism as an evaluative procedure in the mid-twentieth century’ (Carey 2005: 22). What people are no doubt most familiar with, however, is the phrase ‘the death of the author’. Rather than just an extension of what has already been said about the modernist aesthetic and the intentional fallacy, the arguments for killing off the author in literary theory and practice change in the second half of the twentieth century. ‘The death of the author’ derives from a Roland Barthes essay of that name (1968). Here is a passage from its opening. In his story Sarrasine Balzac, describing a castrato disguised as a woman, writes the following sentence: ‘This was woman herself, with her sudden fears, her irrational whims, her instinctive worries, her impetuous boldness, her fussings, and her delicious sensibility.’ Who is speaking thus? Is it the hero of the story bent on remaining ignorant of the castrato hidden beneath the woman? Is it Balzac the individual, furnished by his personal experience with a philosophy of Woman? Is it Balzac the author professing ‘literary’ ideas on femininity? Is it universal wisdom? Romantic psychology? We shall never know, for the good reason that writing is the destruction of every voice, of every point of origin. Writing is that neutral, composite, oblique space where our subject slips away, the negative where all identity is lost, starting with the very identity of the body writing. (Barthes 1994: 114) We cannot know ‘who is speaking’, or, put another way, we cannot identify ‘an author’, because writing itself, or text, or textuality, has a certain characteristic which removes ‘voice’ and ‘origin’. This is a poststructural viewpoint, that everything exists as an interrelated text, unpickable, everything is text, including the world (pretty much). There is no such thing as individual identity, either for writers or for texts. In the poststructural view we, you and I, are ‘subjects’, constructed out of a myriad of historical and cultural forces. There is nothing unique about any of us, therefore there can be no unique individual called ‘an author’ to which or to whom we can refer if we want to understand what a text is saying. All of these notions – Romantic inspiration, the modernist aesthetic, the intentional The Writer as Artist 73 fallacy, and the death of the author – remain potent forces in contemporary culture, and certainly do contribute to an overriding feeling that the artist has little to offer in terms of insight with respect to their own work. Comments they might make have no greater weight than comments by any other member of the public. To take the opposite point of view – that the artist naturally has the greatest insight into his or her work – has the tendency to move the discussion back onto the grounds of biographical understanding, towards which, as we have seen, artists themselves often have a great antipathy. ‘The death of the author’ view was in the ascendancy until the 1990s. In theory and criticism it probably still is the norm – somebody would have to do a lot of special pleading for proposing or assuming that his or her critical work could be based on something like authorial intention. However, there has been some renewed interest in the role of the author, although with certain caveats. The main proponent of returning attention back to the author is Seán Burke: When one also takes into account the sheer incomprehensibility of ‘the death of the author’ to even the finest minds outside the institution, it is clear that the concept functioned to keep the non-academic at bay: thereby, one more obstacle to the re-emergence of a culture of letters was put in place. (Burke 1998: ix) Burke wants to return the author to theory using a language that does not have the difficulty of much of literary theory. However, the book is subtitled Criticism and Subjectivity in Barthes, Foucault and Derrida and so most of the book is engaged with close readings of these theorists. If ever you wanted to maintain the barrier between a culture of letters and a rarefied academic environment this is surely the way to do it. Undoubtedly there is something odd about telling a world of writers that ‘the author is dead’, but having to return the author to the living via Derrida is equally alienating, and it may be some time yet before the author is restored to both theory and a culture of letters. The (self)-manipulating author: the writing ‘I’ Nevertheless, Burke’s path to the return of the author more generally might be quite helpful: ‘This issue . . . is the need to arrive at a model of situated subjectivity. We are a long way off any such model, but the spectre of the inconceivable should not deter us from its adventure’ (Burke 1998: ix). The problem then, as Burke sees it, is that the postmodern notion of subjectivity predominates and that any new theory would have to take this into account. (It could be argued that ‘postmodern subjectivity’ – the concept that we are not autonomous beings at all, but are merely the sum total of our historical and genetic circumstances – may appear just as counter-intuitive to ‘the finest minds outside the institution’ as does the argument about ‘the death of the author’, and therefore just as jargon-ridden.) There are a number of authors who have agreed with the postmodern view of subjectivity, or pretended to agree, so that just as there was a meshing of modernist aesthetics and the critical and theoretical work that followed, there has been a similar meshing in postmodern art and postmodern criticism and theory. Not only have they agreed with it, but used it to their advantage in creating art and a complex authorial persona that infects and informs the art itself. For example, here is Jorge Luis Borges toying with our view of ‘him’: The other one, the one called Borges, is the one things happen to. I walk through the streets of Buenos Aires and stop for a moment, perhaps mechanically now, to look at the arch of an 74 The Handbook of Creative Writing entrance hall and the grillwork on the gate; I know of Borges from the mail and see his name on a list of professors or in a biographical dictionary. I like hourglasses, maps, eighteenthcentury typography, the taste of coffee and the prose of Stevenson; he shares these preferences, but in a vain way that turns them into the attributes of an actor. (Borges 1964: 282) Borges is making capital out of the distance between the author in the public domain and the living, psychological entity, the writer writing. The writer only recognises his existence as a definable author in an amused, affected manner. The public can only know the writer as a public construct, an ‘author’, which the writer himself may have had a hand in manipulating. The situation is further complicated because the status of the piece ‘Borges and I’ is unclear: is it an autobiographical note or a short story (in my copy it is actually in a section headed ‘Parables’, which creates further difficulties)? ‘Borges and I’ ends: ‘I do not know which of us has written this page’ (283). Roy Fisher’s poem ‘Of the Empirical Self and for Me’ begins: ‘In my poems there’s seldom / any I or you –’ followed by an indented ‘you know me, Mary; / you wouldn’t expect it of me –’ only for the remainder of the poem to veer off into a landscape which appears impersonal and disconnected from the opening gambit, disappointing the reader who has been led to believe that there will either be some kind of ‘I’ revelation, or at least a further disquisition on this very subject matter. The poem itself is dedicated ‘for M.E.’, which could either be Mary or a split self, m/e (Fisher 2005: 239). Without actually delving into Roy Fisher’s life, or phoning him up, I have no way of knowing, and even then both interpretations might remain open. This kind of writing foregrounds the issue of authorship and subjectivity: the gaps between writer (the living, psychological and physical human being), the author (public perception and construct attached to the name of the writer), the artist (the wider, public role). The very fact that we have the works of the writer/author/artist before us as an index of these three elements makes the network virtually intractable in terms of understanding it (and see Aaron Kunin’s chapter in this book for more discussion on the ‘I’ in literature). Alice Munro’s collection The Moons of Jupiter has a number of writers as narrators, and in the story ‘The Moons of Jupiter’ we are presented with this interesting scenario: I was tired from the drive – all the way up to Dalgleish, to get him, and back to Toronto since noon – and worried about getting the rented car back on time, and irritated by an article I had been reading in a magazine in the waiting room. It was about another writer, a woman younger, better-looking, probably more talented than I am. I had been in England for two months and so I had not seen this article before, but it crossed my mind while I was reading that my father would have. I could hear him saying, Well, I didn’t see anything about you in Maclean’s. And if he read something about me he would say, Well, I didn’t think too much of that writeup. His tone would be humorous and indulgent but would produce in me a familiar dreariness of spirit. The message I got from him was simple: Fame must be striven for, then apologized for. Getting or not getting it, you will be to blame. (Munro 2004: 218–19) Within the passage many of the concerns of a contemporary writer are apparent: other writers, the public perception, the writer’s own status, the double-edged sword of fame, the varying degrees of ‘recognition’, of being validated as a ‘writer’. But at the same time the reader cannot but help wonder about ‘Alice Munro’, the writer behind the author of a piece of writing concerned about being a writer/author. Is the writer in the story like Alice Munro in any way? But the writer in the story feels second-rate to another author. Does Alice Munro seriously suffer such an inferiority complex? Given her reputation that would seem 75 The Writer as Artist unlikely? But then I check the date of publication – 1978 – when I suspect Alice Munro didn’t then quite have the reputation as one of the world’s greatest short story writers (but I may be wrong – how will I find out?). Or perhaps the joke is that it is the other writer – the more talented one – who is closer to the real Alice Munro? All futile speculation, of course, cleverly set off by the story’s craft, but again, like the Borges and the Fisher, exploiting to the full the contemporary cultural position of the writer/author/artist. There is nothing new about writers appearing as characters in writing – Cervantes ‘the author’ appears in Don Quixote – but the relation between the work of art and its creator would seem more complicated than ever within this ‘crisis of subjectivity’. If there is nothing ‘centred’ or ‘autonomous’ about individuals, it makes it doubly difficult to discuss ‘the author’ or ‘the writer’ as something or someone singly identifiable within contemporary culture. Timothy Clark’s The Theory of Inspiration (1997) quotes from a number of writers showing how the very act of writing is itself a split in subjectivity, with at least two ‘I’s involved: ‘Derrida quotes Merleau-Ponty: “My own words take me by surprise and teach me what I think”’ (18), and Brewster Ghiselin on the process of writing: ‘“Now I began to see more clearly and fully what I was trying to say”’, with Clark noting ‘an unacknowledged disjunction here between the first and second “I,” (Compare Virginia Woolf’s diary entry: “I begin to see what I had in my mind”)’ (19). It is as if in the process of writing, it is what is written which doubles back on writers to confirm them and clarify what it is they are really thinking: there is a writing ‘I’ and a writer ‘I’ who, through the writing, comes to understand what the writing ‘I’ was doing all along. Clark takes this even further by showing how some times what we might call the writer-I only emerges at the time when writing occurs, and that calling up this writer-I can be a surprise to the everyday-I. That might account for the disjunction between the public’s awareness and expectations of an author, and the ability of the author in the public arena to fulfil those expectations. Although ‘inspiration’ is a somewhat discredited term in literary theory and criticism, it is clearly of interest to writers themselves, and in the way it is framed by Clark perhaps offers some kind of rapprochement between contemporary ideas of subjectivity and writing. Along the same lines, ‘creativity’ might be of interest as a subject for artists, and there is a lot of research ranging from the cultural to the neuroscientific (Sternberg 1999; Pfenninger and Shubik 2001; Pope 2005), but it remains outside the remit of much work in literary theory. Nevertheless, a book like Celia Hunt and Fiona Sampson’s Writing: Self and Reflexivity (2006) is a sustained attempt to integrate awareness of these theoretical issues with advice about creative writing for the writer (and see Sampson’s chapter in this volume), and Lauri Ramey (this volume) shows how literary theory can be positively used in the teaching of creative writing. Perhaps one should bear in mind the dangers of not being able to articulate the disjunctions apparent between the everyday ‘I’, the writing ‘I’ and the writer ‘I’. In Muriel Spark’s first novel The Comforters (1957), the central character ‘hears’ the tapping out of the novel she is writing, literally, leading her to wonder about her own sanity. It parodies Romantic theories of inspiration, conflated with the religious ‘hearing’ the voice of God, and yet at the same time provides an accommodation of the modernist distancing of the work from the artist producing it which itself seems open to question. The role of the artist The language of the artist is not often that of literary criticism or literary theory. Nor, as we have seen, is it often the language of its audience, an audience that wants to identify the 76 The Handbook of Creative Writing writer with the works as closely as possible in terms of biography. When nineteenth-century writers addressed their ‘dear reader’ there was a context of intimacy, of an author speaking to his or her public, even if the possibility of there ever being such a direct, uncomplicated connection is now disputed. A ‘dear reader’ address now might have the appearance of unadorned communication, but it would be difficult to take at face value. The contemporary artist wants a knowing public, wants an audience that is aware of the sophistication of his or her art, a sophistication that is obviously felt to be lacking when the art is understood biographically. It is not easy to navigate through the demands of self, writing, being ‘an author’, the desire for a public that wants the art and not the artist (well, not all the artist), indeed the artist’s desire for a public that wants ‘art’ rather than ‘comfort’, and the artist’s desire for a critical acclaim that is not necessarily written in the language of criticism. References Allison, Dorothy (1995), ‘Believing in literature’, from ‘Skin: talking about sex, class and literature’, in Jack Heffron (ed.), The Best of Writing on Writing, vol. 2, Cincinnati, OH: Story Press, pp. 178–93. Banville, John (2005), in conversation with Ben Ehrenreich, in Vendela Vida (ed.), Believer Book of Writers Talking to Writers, San Francisco: Believer Books, pp. 43–58. Barthes, Roland (1994), ‘The death of the author’, in Philip Rice and Patricia Waugh (eds), Modern Literary Theory: A Reader, 2nd edn, London: Edward Arnold, pp. 114–18. Borges, Jorge Luis (1964), Labyrinths, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Burke, Seán (1998), The Death and Return of the Author: Criticism and Subjectivity in Barthes, Foucault and Derrida, 2nd edn, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Burnside, John (2003), in Clare Brown and Don Paterson (eds), Don’t Ask Me What I Mean, London: Picador, pp. 23–4. Carey, John (2005), What Good are the Arts? London: Faber. Cervantes (1986), Don Quixote, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Clark, Timothy (1997), The Theory of Inspiration, Manchester: Manchester University Press. Conrad, Joseph [1897] (1997), ‘Author’s note’ to The Nigger of the ‘Narcissus’, London: Everyman. Eliot, T. S. (1922), ‘Tradition and the individual talent’, www.bartleby.com/200/sw4.html (accessed 12 July, 2006). Epstein, Jacob, in Simpson’s Contemporary Quotations (1988), www.bartleby.com/63/11/5711.html (accessed 12 July, 2006). Fisher, Roy (2005), The Long and the Short of It. Poems 1955–2005, Tarset: Bloodaxe. Hunt, Celia and Fiona Sampson (2006), Writing: Self and Reflexivity, 3rd edn, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Joyce, James (1993), A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, R. B. Kershner (ed.), Boston: Bedford Books. Lawson, Mark (2006), ‘Is modern art off its head?’, The Guardian 16 June, p. 30. Leviston, Frances (2006), post to Hallam Poets Forum, www.poetburo.org, 10 June. Markham, E. A. (2002), A Rough Climate, London: Anvil Press. McCracken, Scott (2007), ‘The role of the critical essay’, this volume. Munro, Alice (2004), The Moons of Jupiter, London: Vintage. Orwell, George (1968), ‘Why I write’ in The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell. Volume 1. An Age Like This 1920–40. London: Secker and Warburg, pp. 1–6. Pfenninger, Karl H. and Valerie R. Shubik (2001), eds, The Origins of Creativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press The Writer as Artist 77 Pope, Rob (2005), Creativity. Theory, History, Practice. London: Routledge. Ramey, Lauri (2007), ‘Creative writing and critical theory’, this volume. Sampson, Fiona (2007), ‘Writing as “therapy”’, this volume. Sartre, Jean-Paul (2002), Iron in the Soul, London: Penguin. Shelley, Percy Bysshe (1995), ‘A defence of poetry’ in Duncan Wu (ed.), Romanticism: An Anthology, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 956–69. Spark, Muriel (1963), The Comforters, London: Penguin. Sternberg, Robert J. (1999), ed., Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tolstoy, Leo [1898] (1995), What is Art?, London: Penguin. Vida, Vendela (2005), ed., Believer Book of Writers Talking to Writers, San Francisco: Believer Books. Wimsatt, W. K. R., Jr, and M. Beardsley (1954), The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry, Kentucky: University of Kentucky Press. Woolf, Virginia (1966), ‘How should one read a book?’ in Virginia Woolf. Collected Essays, Vol. 2, London: The Hogarth Press. 7 The Future of Creative Writing Paul Dawson Originating in American universities in the early part of the twentieth century, Creative Writing has undergone an international expansion since the 1990s. Creative Writing programmes continue to grow in popularity despite perennial scepticism about their pedagogical value and their academic rigour, and despite their seemingly anomalous position within the modern research university. Perhaps an inevitable corollary of this expansion is the fact that Creative Writing has now become an object of scholarly enquiry, emerging in the new millennium as a distinct field of academic research. It is no longer possible for Creative Writing to maintain its romantic ideal of a garret in the ivory tower, a community of writers made possible by the patronage of the university. And it is not sufficient to define Creative Writing pedagogy as the passing down of a guild craft from established practitioners to a new generation of writers. Writing programmes now exist in an intellectual environment of interdisciplinarity, critical self-reflection and oppositional politics on the one hand, and in an institutional environment of learning outcomes, transferable skills and competitive research funding on the other. What effects will this academic environment have on how the subject is taught, and on the creative work produced? This is the crucial question confronting teachers of writing in the New Humanities. An object of study For much of its history, formal reflection on Creative Writing has been largely restricted to writing handbooks which recast the evaluative and taxonomic language of formalist criticism in the ‘practical’ language of craft and technique, backed up by dilettantish musing on the creative process and the question of whether writing can be taught. Some critical commentary on the subject emerged in the 1980s, but this tended to be hostile rather than investigative, bemoaning the absorption of mainstream literary culture into the academy, and blaming writing programmes for the mediocre state of contemporary American literature. While anxieties about the effects of Creative Writing on literary culture still exist, from the 1990s there has been a massive increase in scholarly material written about the pedagogical strategies and institutional location of writing programmes. Commentary on Creative Writing has become much more sophisticated and academic in focus, animated 79 The Future of Creative Writing by self-reflexive theoretical and historical enquiry into the discipline and focusing on how to understand its place within the modern university. Handbooks continue to flourish, but the refereed journal article, the academic conference paper, even the scholarly book, now accompany creative work as regular publications produced by Creative Writing departments. The discipline of Creative Writing has become a growth area of academic research in America, and even more so in Australia and the UK where writing programmes proliferated in the last decade of the twentieth century. TEXT, the electronic journal for the Australian Association of Writing Programs (AAWP), has published refereed articles about Creative Writing since its establishment in 1997. New Writing: The International Journal for the Theory and Practice of Creative Writing was launched in 2004 through the UK Centre for Creative Writing Research Through Practice. American scholarly journals such as College English and Pedagogy continue to publish articles on Creative Writing. There are several international conferences on Creative Writing held annually, including AAWP conferences in Australia, and Great Writing conferences in the UK. And the discipline now has its own institutional histories to accompany those of English and Composition which proliferated in the 1980s. D. G. Myers’ The Elephants Teach: Creative Writing Since 1880 appeared in 1996, providing a comprehensive historical account of the emergence of Creative Writing in American universities. My own book, Creative Writing and the New Humanities, was published in 2005 and provides an international account of the disciplinary history, theoretical underpinnings and pedagogical future of Creative Writing. There are now sufficient key texts and identifiable debates, with specific national differences, to justify the existence of a field of ‘Creative Writing Studies’ within which academics can establish a research profile, and which can be packaged and taught to students. What happened in the 1990s to promote the emergence of this field? By this stage in history the intellectual paradigm shift of knowledge in the humanities produced by the rise of Theory had effected permanent disciplinary changes within English studies. In his 1993 book, Cultural Capital, John Guillory pointed out that the word ‘theory’, while most commonly associated with deconstruction, is a ‘unifying name of manifestly heterogenous critical practices’, but the name of theory is ‘a sign both defining and defined by a syllabus of texts’ (Guillory 1993: 177). This ‘canon of theory’, comprising ‘master theorists’ such as Derrida and Foucault, now supplements the traditional literary canon in graduate school curricula, as both an area of specialisation and a way to provide new methods for reading literary works. Guillory’s argument is that Theory represents the technobureacratic knowledge of a new professional-managerial class, replacing literature as the cultural capital of the old bourgeoisie. Conflict over ‘opening up’ the literary canon, which Guillory argues wrongly conflates literary representation with political representation, is merely symptomatic of this crisis in the cultural capital of literature itself. Whether or not one agrees with this assessment, the very existence of Guillory’s argument demonstrates the extent to which Theory had flourished in the academy. In other words, by the 1990s it could not be ignored. The challenge of theory By the time Guillory’s book had been published it is noticeable that discussions about Creative Writing in America had shifted from concerns about the effects of writing programmes on literary culture to concerns about the division between Creative Writing and Theory within the academy, and this is precisely because of the influence of the Theory 80 The Handbook of Creative Writing canon on graduate school education. In a 1986 review article Marjorie Perloff argued that conflict in American poetry between the conservative mainstream and a postmodern avant-garde is one that takes place ‘largely within the academy’, a battle ‘between the Creative Writing Workshop and the Graduate Seminar in Theory’ (Perloff 1986: 45). The fact that Perloff’s characterisation of the ‘A Team’ workshop versus the ‘B Team’ seminar is one of the most-quoted lines in Creative Writing criticism demonstrates the extent to which a recognition of this institutional division set the tone for subsequent analyses of the relationship between the emerging discipline of Creative Writing and the increasingly dominant influence of critical Theory. There was good reason for Perloff’s characterisation of this divide. The classic critique of Creative Writing from the position of critical Theory is Donald Morton and Mas’ud Zavarzadeh’s notorious 1989 article, ‘The cultural politics of the fiction writing workshop’. In this tiresome rehashing of theoretical dogma, the authors criticise writing programmes for their outmoded neo-romantic belief in authorial ‘voice’ as the unmediated expression of selfhood, and the complicity of this belief with the ideology of the capitalist state. What is at stake in this caricature of the writing workshop is, as Guillory might say, the cultural capital of literature versus that of Theory. The article can be seen as a justification for setting the ‘canon of Theory’ on reading lists in the writing workshop as well as the graduate seminar, implying that writers are themselves unequipped to understand how literature really works, and that their craft requires explication by master theorists: The creative writing student who knows theory and who has read Marx, Lacan, Foucault, Lenin, Kristeva, Derrida, Gramsci, Heidegger, Cixous, Deleuze, Althusser, Luxemburg, Adorno will not approach the workshop with the same naïveté or accept its orthodoxies as will the student who has read the traditional syllabus of the literature department, which is entirely composed of poems, novels and stories. (Morton and Zavarzadeh 1988–9: 169–70) By and large, the industry of critical Theory has not been concerned with Creative Writing, and it would be easy to dismiss Morton and Zavarzadeh’s critique as an exercise in professional aggrandisement were it not for the fact that their basic criticisms of the workshop have been shared by many teachers of Creative Writing themselves. In the 1989 anthology, Creative Writing in America: Theory and Pedagogy, Eve Shelnutt articulated a frustration with the culture of anti-intellectualism within writing programmes, and this chapter has been regularly cited as a clarion call for a productive dialogue with Theory. The subsequent increase of interest in Creative Writing as an international field of academic research has largely come from within, and has resulted precisely from the discipline’s formal engagement with Theory. This engagement has tended to see Creative Writing and Theory as incommensurable discourses, dramatising the professional divisions between these two areas as a series of intellectual binary oppositions (between practice and theory, creativity and criticism, writing and reading) which need to be negotiated. For instance, in the 1992 British anthology, Teaching Creative Writing: Theory and Practice, Robert Miles wrote: ‘I believe that at bottom there is an irreducible tension between the manoeuvres of contemporary theory and the practice of teaching writing’ (Miles 1992: 36). In responding to this ‘irreducible tension’, some commentators have provided staunch resistance to the intellectual challenges and aggrandising critiques of literature offered by the ‘fashions’ of Theory, even positing Creative Writing as an antidote to the disciplinary malaise wrought by Theory, the last place for the art of literature to be appreciated as English departments are absorbed by Cultural Studies (see Fenza 2000; Green 2003). Many The Future of Creative Writing 81 teachers argue, however, that drawing upon the insights of Theory is necessary to ‘demystify’ the Creative Writing workshop, not simply as an exercise in criticism (such as Morton and Zavarzadeh’s essay which approaches the workshop as a ‘text’ to be read against the grain) but as part of a genuine desire to reform the pedagogical practices of Creative Writing. Here the oppositional politics of Theory and the discourse of critical pedagogy are employed to challenge the commitment of writing programmes to a middle-class reading culture and a literary marketplace dominated by multinational publishers; and to uncover the ‘false consciousness’ of students, empowering them to develop a critically engaged and socially responsible awareness of their own work (see Amato and Fleisher 2001; Green 2001). Then there are those who argue that the writing workshop can establish a mutually profitable dialogue between literary practice and literary theory, introducing theoretical debates to workshop discussions which, in turn, offers a practical interrogation of Theory, thus establishing a formal pedagogical link between the two (see Cooley 2003; Newlyn and Lewis 2003). These approaches rely on a rhetoric of opposition between Creative Writing and critical Theory, perpetuating this opposition as the very premise of their argument even as they seek to negotiate or collapse it. This rhetoric has been a necessary part of disciplinary selfexploration, but it will quickly become tiresome if taken as the basis for ‘reforming’ Creative Writing or ‘integrating’ the subject with literary studies. There are only so many times a teacher can use the workshop to stage debates about the ‘death of the author’, intertextuality, reader-response theory, identity politics, canonicity, etc. This is similar to the difficulties associated with Gerald Graff’s suggestion, in Beyond the Culture Wars (1992), of ‘teaching the conflicts’ in relation to disciplinary debates within English studies: teachers find themselves compelled constantly to revisit the canon debate each time they teach the classics, maintaining a kind of polemical stasis. As a response to the culture wars, Creative Writing studies has reconfigured literature from an artistic tradition which students enter by producing their own writing, to a contested epistemological category within the modern academy which can be investigated by the pedagogy of Creative Writing itself. However, Creative Writing is not a subject in ‘crisis’, the solution to which is to ‘teach the conflicts’ between literary practice and critical Theory; it is a subject which has gained disciplinary identity precisely because a new generation of teachers who perceive themselves as writers and critics have engaged with Theory to reassert the cultural capital of literature as intellectual work in the New Humanities. Creative Writing is thus an exemplary discipline of the post-Theory academy. The post-theory academy The concept of an age of post-Theory does not imply that the intellectual fashion of postmodernism has passed through humanities departments and that we can now return to the traditional goal of upholding Western humanist culture. Theory has irrevocably changed the way in which research and teaching is conducted in the field of literary studies. To say that contemporary critical thought is post-Theory is to recognise that the age of Grand Theory or High Theory in the 1970s and 1980s has effected disciplinary changes which are now being worked through. One of the promises of Theory, particularly that offered by structuralism, was the possibility of a unifying methodological approach to the study of literature which could address foundational questions about what constitutes an object of study within the discipline, and which could provide a rigorous method for reading texts of all descriptions, manifested in 82 The Handbook of Creative Writing exemplary fashion by the project of ‘re-reading’ canonical works. In the 1990s, this grand enterprise of Theory fragmented and dispersed into diverse fields of enquiry: race studies, gender studies, postcolonial studies, media studies, etc. This is the result of both professional specialisation in an increasingly broad disciplinary field, and the pragmatic, localised and eclectic deployment of Theory within specific critical practices. Furthermore, a number of critics on the academic left have taken stock of the legacy of Theory, mindful that its radical promise can be dulled by institutional entrenchment. Post-Theory criticism in this sense is concerned with how politically-engaged criticism can operate in the modern university as well as agitate for social change. And it can be argued that the interdisciplinary enterprise of Cultural Studies has emerged as the post-Theory heir to English Studies. Indeed the slogan of the journal Cultural Studies, established in 1987, is ‘Theorising politics, politicising theory’. For me, the most significant and productive discussion of the post-Theory phenomenon is provided by Jeffrey Williams’ ‘The posttheory generation’ ([1995] 2000). Williams’ focus in this article is not on abstract debates but on the institutional conditions of criticism after the age of what he calls ‘big theory’. For Williams the realities of ‘a drastically reconfigured job market, pinched in the vice of a restructured and downsizing university’ (25) are as important as the dispersion of Theory into various specialised studies, for this has influenced the orientation towards more modest and publicly accountable criticism which is being produced by ‘the generation of intellectual workers who have entered the literary field and attained professional positions in the late 1980s and through the 1990s’ (25). This posttheory generation, Williams asserts, has been educated in an academic climate governed by Theory and its ‘hermeneutics of suspicion’, but nonetheless possesses a sense of belatedness, of appearing after the revolutionary polemics of poststructuralism, Marxism and feminism became institutionally sanctioned as part of graduate school training and as a mark of professional attainment. ‘In short, the posttheory generation was taught to take theory – not traditional scholarly methods, not normal practical criticism – for granted, and theory in turn provided a threshold stamp of professional value’ (29). Much of the research into Creative Writing as an academic discipline has been undertaken by members of this posttheory generation. According to Kelly Ritter: ‘there is most certainly a generational divide between the pre-1980s hires in creative writing, most of whom hold the MA or MFA, and the current crop of new hires, many of whom will hold the MA or MFA and PhD’ (2001: 216). In other words, Creative Writing students who have been exposed to the canon of Theory in the graduate school curriculum are now theorising their own discipline. According to Patrick Bizarro, there are several stages which Creative Writing has gone through in its emergence as an academic discipline in America: investigation into how the subject is taught; contextualisation of the subject in relation to other subjects in English studies, particularly composition; then, ‘once it became economically feasible and desirable to do so, a new advanced degree in creative writing, the PhD, was established’ (2004: 308). Bizarro points out that the research conducted by graduates of PhD Creative Writing programmes has been the next stage in defining for Creative Writing its ‘epistemological difference from other subjects’ (308). As I pointed out earlier, a major reason for the emergence of an international body of research into the discipline of Creative Writing is the development of writing programmes in Australian and English universities. Creative Writing shares a remarkably similar institutional trajectory in these two countries. Courses in Creative Writing were first taught in vocational institutions in the tertiary sector: Colleges of Advanced Education in Australia; and polytechnics in England. When these institutions entered the university system in the The Future of Creative Writing 83 early 1990s Creative Writing developed a large-scale presence, particularly at the postgraduate level. What is significant about this history is that Creative Writing developed in both these countries alongside Theory and Cultural Studies as part of a challenge to traditional literary education. There is no long-standing tradition of Creative Writing in these countries which needed to be ‘reformed’, and no perceived contribution to an impoverishment or standardisation of literary culture. For instance, at the same time that Marjorie Perloff characterised an institutional divide between the A Team and the B Team in American graduate education, Ian Reid’s ‘The crisis in English Studies’ (1982) and Colin McCabe’s ‘Broken English’ (1986) argued that creative writing pedagogy could be enlisted in the service of Theory to interrogate the assumptions of traditional English studies. By the time Creative Writing had attained a strong institutional presence and professional identity, the discourses of critical Theory had become embedded in university curricula and research output. And by making Creative Writing an object of critical scrutiny in order to establish its professional integrity as a new academic discipline, scholars in the field have been compelled to engage with prevailing modes of contemporary criticism. In other words, Creative Writing in Australia has developed its disciplinary identity through an engagement with Theory, rather than changing in response to it. In 2005, Jeri Kroll and Steve Evans commented that: anyone engaged in criticism nowadays, in fact anyone contemplating a higher degree in creative writing, has to be aware of theory, even if they are not converts to a particular tribe such as the poststructuralists or the new historicists. In Australia our discipline has been theorising its practice and its brand of research for more than ten years. (16) A whole generation of graduates in Creative Writing who have gone on to teach in universities now takes Theory for granted, and this will continue. The post-Theory generation in Australia is also composed of established academics in literary and cultural studies who also publish creative work, and for whom the recent development of Creative Writing has offered the opportunity to combine their two interests. More and more teachers of Creative Writing across the world will thus be comfortable shifting between academic and literary modes of writing, and with combining the two, as well as investigating links with contemporary theory. For instance, in a 1999 essay about the hybrid mode of writing known in Australia as fictocriticism, Helen Flavell describes the eclectic interests of a typical student in the New Humanities: Anna is 24 and a postgraduate student. Her university doesn’t have sandstone arches and ivy creeping; she’s been brought up on a transdisciplinary diet of various subjects levelled under the umbrella of ‘communications’. She’s studied creative writing, journalism, won a prize for an essay in cultural studies, and thrives on reading contemporary theory. (105) Creative Writing ‘studies’ will continue to grow, partly as a means for teachers to be considered ‘research active’ in a bureaucracy where research funding formluae do not acknowledge creative work, but mainly because it is inevitable that the proximity of writing programmes to other disciplines within the academy will facilitate a cross-pollination of ideas. Negotiating Theory for most teachers has involved finding ways to address productively critiques of authorship, representation and aesthetic autonomy; to challenge the hegemony of formalist and New Critical concepts of literature; to develop in students an 84 The Handbook of Creative Writing awareness of the critical and social context of the work they are producing; and to encourage experimental writing rather than mainstream literary genres. If post-Theory criticism relies on what individual theorists or critical insights offer as the best help for the project at hand, then the same applies to post-Theory Creative Writing pedagogy. The usefulness of Theory to the teaching of Creative Writing (as opposed to the study of the discipline) relies largely upon the idiosyncracies of teachers and their academic research interests. As Siobhan Holland says in her 2002 report to the English Subject Centre in the UK: ‘Lecturers in Creative Writing differ in their views on the value of critical theory as a tool in the development of students’ writing and such diversity in approaches to teaching Creative Writing is to be welcomed’ (4). Teaching the craft In practice, the goal of the writing workshop and of postgraduate supervision will always be the same: to improve the student manuscript. What remains at stake is just what criteria are employed to guide and judge the success of this goal. I think a new aesthetic has emerged in Creative Writing in the New Humanities. There has been a shift from the ‘sublime’ (operationalised in the workshop by praising the well-wrought line, the striking metaphor, the finely constructed scene, the authentic ‘voice’) to the ‘avant-garde’, the goal of which, in Peter Burger’s well-know formulation, is ‘to reintegrate art into the praxis of life’ (1984: 22). This avant-garde aesthetic encourages and rewards formal experimentation, subversion and renovation of genre, dialogic engagement with non-literary discourses, intellectual curiosity, political awareness and social responsibility. In a 2001 article, ‘Materializing the sublime reader’, Chris Green argued that ‘before asking how students can better write “good” poems, I propose we look beyond the gaze of the sublime reader and ask how students can write useful poems’ (159). By useful he means ‘a workshop where the class readership acts to represent the rhetorical circumstances of interpretive communities outside the university’ (154). Green acknowledges that he is drawing upon the established discourses of Cultural Studies and reader-response theory to reorient the workshop towards a concept of community service. So the ‘usefulness’ of a manuscript comes down to the reading practices employed in the workshop. I have written elsewhere that in the workshop ‘how a work is composed by the student is not as important as how it can be read in terms of the critical approach of Creative Writing’ (Dawson 2005: 88). This means a student manuscript ‘is evaluated according to its potential to sustain critical scrutiny, to be approved by specific practices of reading’ (2005: 117). These reading practices have shifted in the post-Theory academy from a New Critical focus on unity and aesthetic autonomy, to a poststructuralist focus on open-ended play (see Freiman 2005) and a Cultural Studies emphasis on social context. It would be instructive here to compare two handbooks on writing published in Australia by Allen & Unwin during the period which I have been discussing: Kate Grenville’s The Writing Book: A Workbook for Fiction Writers (1990) and Hazel Smith’s The Writing Experiment: Strategies for Innovative Creative Writing (2005). In a sense the difference between these two books is simply a product of the different aesthetic sensibilities of their writers: Grenville is a writer of realist fiction, while Smith is a writer of experimental poetry with a particular interest in multimedia and hypermedia technologies. Smith is also an academic with research interests in contemporary theory and poetics. In a broader historical sense, however, these two books demonstrate the difference between Creative Writing before and after its engagement with Theory. The Future of Creative Writing 85 There are many generic similarities between the two. According to Grenville, ‘writing is one human activity that seems to respond better to well-developed intuition than welldeveloped logic. What this book tries to do is give those under-developed areas a chance to practise’ (xi). Smith claims that her book is based on ‘incremental strategies which recuperate, at a conscious level, the less accessible or unconscious aspects of the writing process’ (vii). Both writers also rely on the standard handbook practice of exercises and examples. However, Grenville is concerned with helping writers gradually build up a coherent manuscript, while Smith is more concerned with suggesting open-ended ‘strategies’ for writing. And Grenville’s examples are from the modern canon of Australian fiction, while Smith draws on not only a wider international and generic range of literature, but examples of student writing from her previous classes. This approach indicates that there is a crucial difference in audience. Grenville’s book has been on many recommended reading lists in writing classes since its publication, but it is designed for anyone who is interested in writing. Smith’s book on the other hand is ‘designed for university students enrolled in creative writing courses and for their teachers. Its aims are to suggest systematic strategies for creative writing, and to theorise the process of writing by relating it to the literary and cultural concepts which students encounter on other university courses’ (vii). Smith realises that the presence of these concepts means a contemporary handbook needs to do more than simply duplicate the standard devices/taxonomies of fiction, which is what Grenville’s book does with titles such as ‘Point of View’, ‘Voice’, ‘Dialogue’ and ‘Description’. Smith’s book, on the other hand, has chapter titles such as ‘Genre as moveable feast’, ‘Writing as recycling’; and ‘Postmodern f(r)ictions’. Grenville’s book suggests drawing upon observations of life and is implicitly geared towards realist fiction. Smith claims that her book ‘makes a connection between the analytical ideas of some major literary theorists and the process of writing, and puts theory into practice’ (xii). In other words, it is an aesthetic engagement with Theory in order to generate innovative approaches to writing, not an attempt to educate students about the canon of Theory, or to establish an inter-disciplinary rapprochement. The writing workshop is not simply a place for writers to pass on practical knowledge about their craft, but a site of contestation over various theories of literature, and a site for the exchange of pedagogical links with other disciplines. If the question which once dominated discussions of Creative Writing was, ‘Can or should writing be taught?’, it is now, ‘What should we be teaching students?’ This question typically means ‘Should we be teaching students Theory?’, and ‘What sort of Theory will be useful to them as writers?’ An equally important question is ‘What sort of writing should we be encouraging students to produce?’ The aesthetic of post-Theory Creative Writing pedagogy is clearly geared towards experimental modes (anti-linear, discontinuous, multi-generic, self-reflexive, and so on) because these are more amenable to contemporary criticism. There is a danger here of promoting certain types of writing over others, rather than promoting a spirit of experimentation in all genres, ‘conservative’ or otherwise. It also begs the question of an ideal audience, and hence the way Creative Writing positions itself in relation to the literary marketplace. The corporate university The most pressing concern for the discipline of Creative Writing is not how to accommodate Theory in a traditionally anti-intellectual subject, but how Theory might help situate the discipline in what Richard Kerridge, in his editorial for the inaugural issue of New Writing, calls the ‘audit culture’ of the modern corporatised university, a culture which 86 The Handbook of Creative Writing assumes that ‘the main purpose of all subjects in higher education is the provision of transferable skills for employment’ (2004: 3). This is an institutional environment in which ‘generic definitions have confronted teachers in all subjects with the disconcerting new language of key skills, programme specifications, level descriptors and learning outcomes, terms that imperiously take from teachers the prerogative of identifying values’ (3). Kerridge’s argument is that Creative Writing ‘lives in the borderland between the academic and the vocational’ (4) and thus is well-poised to counter this audit culture. There is in fact an uneasy synergy between the corporate language of this audit culture and the critical discourse of Cultural Studies which now dominates the New Humanities. They are both utilitarian, but one emphasises vocationalism and profit, while the other emphasises activism and critical consciousness. In his 2005 article, ‘Cultural Studies in the corporate university’, Jonathan Rutherford posits an historical link between the two, suggesting that the success of Cultural Studies ‘as a multidisciplinary field of study that crosses the boundaries of economic, social and cultural life was both enabled by and also helped to legitimise the modularisation and marketisation of Higher Education’ (309). And Simon During argues that Cultural Studies has replaced English in the corporate university because it has responded to both student demand for training in the culture industries, and the demands of a global economy for national competitiveness (During 1997). The debate between literary practice and critical Theory in Creative Writing Studies is, ultimately, not one over types of cultural capital represented by competing ‘canons’, but part of a wider debate about what transferable skills graduates need in the new economy. For instance, in the pages of TEXT, Jen Webb posed the question, ‘What do writing students need?’ My response to this question – a response predicated on my other-other identity as a cultural theorist – is that one of the skills writing students need is in understanding the politics of identity and representation; and that the active incorporation of cultural studies methodologies within the creative writing program is a good starting point for its provision. (2000: 1) Webb justifies this in professional terms rather than in terms of overcoming intellectual naivety, ‘on the grounds that it broadens students’ skill bases’ (2). While in America much is written about how outmoded assumptions of Creative Writing need to be reformed (or about how it can resist these reforms for the sake of literature), in Australia and the UK Creative Writing claims the post-Theoretical dynamism of the new, drawing on the rhetoric of praxis to distinguish it from traditional English studies and position it within the new economy of the Creative Industries. In describing a power shift within the university system which Creative Writing is poised to benefit from, Nigel Krauth writes: English and Humanities Departments, that once held sway in terms of offering studies for generic and analytical interpretative language skills, are now facing notions of ‘productivityvalue’ not previously encountered. Reading and criticising texts, as opposed to producing them, doesn’t cut so much ice with the clientele anymore. In the 1990s, the ‘real world’ focus of university training has added a practical ‘can do’ aspect to the receptive ‘will do’ orientation of English departments and traditional arts degrees. (2000: 5) In other words, the response to a perceived decline in the cultural capital of literature has not been to set up a rearguard action or to embrace the canon of Theory; it has been to recognise ‘creativity’ as the cultural capital of the new Creative Class, which Richard The Future of Creative Writing 87 Florida defines as ‘people in science and engineering, architecture and design, education, arts, music and entertainment, whose economic function is to create new ideas, new technology and/or new creative content’ (Florida 2003: 8). The term ‘creative writing’ has traditionally operated as a synonym for literature, and one which emphasises literature as a process rather than a product, but the fact that the word creative now refers in common parlance to any form of human endeavour, and the fact that the word writing is itself genreless, means that Creative Writing is almost by definition limitless in its disciplinary application. This is why the subject is taught in a range of disciplines in Australian universities, alongside literary and cultural criticism, the visual and performing arts, journalism, advertising and public relations, and new media technologies. The PhD in Creative Writing The growth of the PhD as a degree option in the subject is the most salient feature of Creative Writing in the post-Theory academy. It is important because the sort of doctoral education provided to a new generation of teachers will not only define Creative Writing as a research-based discipline, but also determine the future direction of the way the subject is taught at all levels. As writing programmes proliferated in American universities after the Second World War, the Master of Fine Arts (MFA) became the most common degree in Creative Writing, and is still recommended by the AWP as the ‘terminal’ degree in the discipline, and as the equivalent of the PhD in literature. The MFA is conceived as a practical studio training for aspiring artists rather than a research oriented education for future intellectuals and teachers, and this system has taken the brunt of criticism about the role of Creative Writing in the academy and its impact on literary culture. The small but growing number of PhDs in Creative Writing are now being offered as a solution to some of the intractable problems associated with the discipline, particularly in relation to its intellectual narrowness. In 2001 Kelly Ritter pointed out the declining value of the MFA, suggesting the degree is no longer considered a sufficient qualification for a university teaching position unless the candidate has several books published. Hence the PhD has become an important additional degree for MFA graduates who hope to teach in the academy. However, for this doctoral degree to justify its existence, Ritter argues, it needs to be marked as professionally distinct from the MFA. Her suggestion is that the PhD in Creative Writing be reconfigured towards teacher training, specifically ‘the ability to teach undergraduates in the field’ (208). Patrick Bizarro makes a similar point in his 2004 article, arguing that if Creative Writing is to operate as a discipline in its own right it must offer a distinct doctoral degree. For Bizarro this would involve the systematic teaching of skills employed by writers which are equivalent or analogous to those of scholarly research, and it would involve the teaching of skills required by writing teachers. Both Ritter and Bizarro emphasise the need to provide PhD candidates with discipline specific skills rather than those offered by standard doctoral courses in literary research and composition teaching. In neglecting to discuss the creative dissertation itself, they demonstrate a belief that what defines Creative Writing as an academic discipline (rather than the master-apprentice system offered by the MFA) is its ability to be taught in a scholarly selfreflexive fashion, as opposed to its ability to produce new writing. In other words the creative dissertation is still conceived as a literary work to be circulated outside the academy instead of a contribution to disciplinary knowledge. 88 The Handbook of Creative Writing The PhD is a more widespread option in Australian universities, which Nigel Krauth claims are ‘international pioneers in developing the creative writing doctorate’ (2001:). The reason for the growth of this option throughout the 1990s is again largely economic: in the modern research university the PhD is now an essential academic qualification for aspiring teachers; and universities are keen to enrol large numbers of students because they attract research funding from the federal government. Many established teachers of Creative Writing who were initially hired on the strength of their creative publications have undertaken doctoral study for professional reasons: in order to achieve promotion, or to meet standard requirements that supervisors of doctoral candidates should themselves possess a PhD. And a growing trend has been for PhD programmes to accept for candidature wellestablished writers with national and international literary reputations, many without strong academic backgrounds or any aspirations to work in the academy. For these writers the three-year federal scholarship for doctoral study offers a substantial alternative to grants from government arts bodies such as the Literature Board for the Australia Council. The debates over the PhD in Australia and the UK have differed from those in America because the degree structure itself is different. Whereas in America doctoral students must complete substantial coursework and language requirements as well as sitting for comprehensive examinations before submitting their dissertation, in these countries there is no formal coursework and the degree is assessable by thesis only. The thesis consists of a creative dissertation and a substantial critical essay, often referred to as the ‘exegesis’, of up to 50 per cent of the word limit. This model comes from research degrees in the visual and performing arts, where a formal reflection on the creative process provides an interpretive guide to examiners for ephemeral performances or non-verbal artefacts. Whereas in America debate exists over how coursework requirements can encourage reflection on Creative Writing as a teachable subject, in Australia debate exists over how the exegesis can encourage reflection on the creative dissertation as an intellectually rigorous enterprise. In the exegesis students will typically theorise their own creative process, reflect on the theoretical underpinnings of the creative work and its dialogic engagement with non-literary discourses, or contextualise the creative work in relation to specific genres, critical movements, etc. Hence requirements for some sort of relationship between the exegesis and the creative dissertation provide a formal opportunity for students to explore intellectual links between literature and critical Theory as modes of writing (as opposed to links between the teaching of writing and the study of Theory). The dilemma over how the relationship between the two components of this hybrid thesis is to be assessed has generated many articles by both students and academics in the pages of TEXT, providing a fundamental focal point for disciplinary investigation. The debates I have outlined demonstrate a marked shift away from a conception of Creative Writing as formal training for new writers, and towards a conception of it as practice-oriented research. They are debates not just about doctoral education, but about how Creative Writing defines itself as an academic discipline in the New Humanities. The future of the discipline hence resides in how it theorises and manages the traditional nexus between research and teaching in the modern university. References Amato, Joe and Kassia Fleisher (2001), ‘Reforming creative writing pedagogy: history as knowledge, knowledge as activism’, Electronic Book Review, 12, www.altx.com/ebr/riposte/rip2/rip2ped/amato.htm (accessed 9 February, 2004). The Future of Creative Writing 89 Bizzaro, Patrick (2004), ‘Research and reflection in English Studies: the special case of creative writing’, College English, 66:3, 294–309. Burger, Peter (1984), Theory of the Avant-garde, trans. Michael Shaw, Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press. Cooley, Nicole (2003), ‘Literary legacies and critical transformations: teaching creative writing in the public urban university’, Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture, 3:1, 99–103. Dawson, Paul (2005), Creative Writing and the New Humanities, London/New York: Routledge. During, Simon (1997), ‘Teaching culture’, Australian Humanities Review, 7. www.lib.latrobe.edu.au/AHR/archive/Issue-August-1997/during.html (accessed 9 February, 2004). Fenza, David (2000), ‘Creative writing and its discontents’, The Writer’s Chronicle, 32:5, http://awpwriter.org/magazine/writers/fenza1.htm (accessed 12 February, 2003). Flavell, Helen (1999), ‘The investigation: Australian and Canadian fictocriticism’, Antithesis, 10, 104–16. Florida, Richard (2003), The Rise of the Creative Class, Melbourne: Pluto Press. Freiman, Marcelle (2005), ‘Writing/reading: renegotiating criticism’, TEXT, 9:1, www.gu.edu.au/ school/art/text/april05/freiman.htm (accessed 13 August, 2005). Graff, Gerald (1992), Beyond the Culture Wars: How Teaching the Conflicts Can Revitalize American Education, New York: Norton. Green, Chris (2001), ‘Materializing the sublime reader: cultural studies, reader response, and community service in the creative writing workshop’, College English, 64:2, 153–74. Green, Daniel (2003), ‘Not merely academic: creative writing and literary study’, RE:AL: The Journal of Liberal Arts, 28:2, http://libweb.sfasu.edu/real/vol28-2/notmerelyacad.htm (accessed 8 July, 2005). Grenville, Kate (1990), The Writing Book: A Workbook for Fiction Writers, Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Guillory, John (1993), Cultural Capital: The Problem of Literary Canon Formation, Chicago: Chicago University Press. Holland, Siobhan (2002), Creative Writing: A Good Practice Guide – A Report to the Learning and Teaching Support Network (LTSN), English Subject Centre, London: English Subject Centre. Kerridge, Richard (2004), ‘Creative writing and academic accountability’, New Writing: International Journal for the Practice and Theory of Creative Writing, 1, 3–5. Krauth, Nigel (2000), ‘Where is writing now?: Australian university creative writing programs at the end of the Millennium’, TEXT, 4:1, www.gu.edu.au/school/art/text/april00/krauth.htm (10 February, 2004). Krauth, Nigel (2001), ‘The creative writing doctorate in Australia: an initial survey’, TEXT, 5:1, www.griffith.edu.au/school/art/text/april01/krauth.htm (accessed 10 February, 2005). Kroll, Jeri, and Steve Evans (2005), ‘How to write a “How to Write” book: the writer as entrepreneur’, TEXT, 9:1, www.gu.edu.au/school/art/text/april05/krollevans.htm (accessed 13 August, 2005). MacCabe, Colin (1986), ‘Broken English’, Critical Quarterly, 28, 1, 2, 3–14. Miles, Robert (1992), ‘Creative writing, contemporary theory and the English curriculum’, in Moira Monteith and Robert Miles (eds), Teaching Creative Writing: Theory and Practice, Buckingham: Open University Press, pp. 34–44. Morton, Donald and Mas’ud Zavarzadeh (1988–9), ‘The cultural politics of the fiction workshop’, Cultural Critique, 11, 155–73. Myers, D. G. (1996), The Elephants Teach: Creative Writing since 1880, Prentice Hall Studies in Writing and Culture, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Newlyn, Lucy and Jenny Lewis (2003), eds, Synergies: Creative Writing in Academic Practice, St Edmund Hall: Chough Publications. 90 The Handbook of Creative Writing Perloff, Marjorie (1986), ‘“Homeward Ho!”: Silicon Valley Pushkin’, American Poetry Review, 15, 37–46. Reid, Ian (1982), ‘The crisis in English Studies’, English in Australia, 60, 8–18. Ritter, Kelly (2001), ‘Professional writers/writing professionals: revamping teacher training in creative writing PhD Programs’, College English, 64:2, 205–27. Rutherford, Jonathan (2005), ‘Cultural studies in the corporate university’, Cultural Studies, 19:3, 297–317. Shelnutt, Eve (1989), ‘Notes from a cell: creative writing programs in isolation’, in Joseph M. Moxley (ed.), Creative Writing in America: Theory and Pedagogy, Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English, pp. 3–24. Smith, Hazel (2005), The Writing Experiment: Strategies for Innovative Creative Writing, Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Webb, Jen (2000), ‘Individual enunciations and social frames’, TEXT, 4:2 www.gu.edu.au/school/art/ text/oct00/webb.htm (accessed 9 February, 2004). Williams, Jeffrey [1995] (2000), ‘The posttheory generation’, in Peter C. Herman (ed.), Day Late, Dollar Short: The Next Generation and the New Academy, Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 25–43. Section Two The Craft of Writing PROSE 8 Reading, Writing and Teaching the Short Story E. A. Markham 1. Preparing for the short story Reference Of the couple of dozen names of writers you might be expected to encounter during the exploration of the short story, special attention should be given to the following: Anton Chekhov (1860–1904, Russia); James Joyce (1882–1941, Ireland); Guy de Maupassant (1850–93, France); Katherine Mansfield (1888–1923, New Zealand); Jorge Luis Borges (1899–1986, Argentina); Ernest Hemingway (1889–1961, USA); Jean Rhys (1894–1979, West Indies); J. D. Salinger (b. 1919, USA); Alice Munro (b. 1931, Canada); Donald Barthelme (1931–89); Raymond Carver (1938–88); Angela Carter (1940–92, Britain); T. Coreghassen Boyle (b. 1948, USA); Haruki Murakami (b. 1949, Japan); Mia Couto (b. 1955, Mozambique). We can narrow this down to an arbitrary dozen or so stories to start with: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. ‘Lady with a Lapdog’ (Chekhov) ‘The Dead’ (Joyce) ‘Bliss’ (Mansfield) ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ (Hemingway) ‘Funes the Memorious’ (Borges) ‘Mannequin’ (Rhys) ‘A Perfect Day for Bananafish’ (Salinger) The ‘Juliet’ stories (Munro) ‘The Flight of Pigeons From the Palace’ (Barthelme) ‘The Company of Wolves’ (Carter) ‘Neighbours’ (Carver) ‘The Elephant Vanishes’ (Murakami) How to read the short story – an overview Most critics agree that the history of the short story can be made sense of by seeing its trajectory from the nineteenth century (Gogol, Turgenev, Chekhov . . .) to the contemporary (Barthelme, Boyle . . .) as a move from naturalism (or, perhaps it’s better to call it social 96 The Handbook of Creative Writing realism) to formal experimentation and forms of surrealism. Though the most challenging figures defy this easy categorisation, the familiar names from the past – for example Chekhov, Joyce, Mansfield – seem to have a great deal in common with, say, Raymond Carver and his ‘dirty realist’ colleagues such as Richard Ford, Tobias Wolff, Andre Dubus – who seem to practise a pared down form of naturalism. Nevertheless, everyone can agree that Borges (with a trail of magical realists in South and Central America behind him), challenged Aristotle’s beginning, middle and end ‘wellmade’ story concept, set in a world conforming to traditional logic. That is to say, a world view which assumes that if you accurately depict what’s on the surface, you might usefully suggest or reveal what’s under that surface. Some people would claim the experience of the Second World War as ushering in a change of sensibility (see the rise of the Theatre of the Absurd in France). Others, like C. L. R. James, the West Indian Marxist historian and critic, would date the concept at the First World War, with the millions killed in the trenches having a coarsening effect on those who survived at home – ‘barbarism’ he called it. The theory is that at some point in the twentieth century something (Freud? World Wars? Concentration camps? Repressive regimes?) caused us to break faith with Aristotelian verities of the golden mean and an assumption of rationality and the claims of naturalism. The result? Psychological instability (Pirandello – his stories, his plays) and Symbolism in Italy – particularly in the fables of Italo Calvino (1923–85); magical realism in central and South America, the ‘pop sociology’ of Barthelme and the ‘epic realism’ of T. C. Boyle, and others. 2. Revision We assume that by now you have written something. So, to start with, have you: • properly identified the setting for your story • established a character: who is s/he and what is s/he doing here • actually told a story? Now: if you were to change the setting, what else would need to change? • Is the character or the setting more important to the telling of this story? • Are there people, not shown, affected by the actions of characters in the story? • How will you communicate this? This brings us to the question of how the story relates to the world of the story. The world of the story is usually larger than the story which is set in that world. The trick of the story that has resonance is to suggest that larger world without having to flesh it out. So, to start with Revision, means that the emphasis is going to be on the writing of the short story, and to do that successfully (consistently, as opposed to a lucky one-off), you need to read and you need to revise. Revision is important as it concentrates the mind on the practice rather than the theory of story writing. The notion of revising is useful to the writer as it implies that whatever is written can usually be improved upon; and it helps that mental transition from being a consumer of texts (the casual, even the critical reader) to being a practitioner. Being a practitioner not only helps you to focus on the art (craft) of making, but it informs your reading of published work, and invites you to ask new questions of it. Reading, Writing and Teaching the Short Story 97 Plucking a story almost at random from those above, let’s consider for a moment Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’. Nothing is spelt out in this excellent ‘minimalist’ story. It is cryptic, elliptical and, indeed, ‘Hemingwayesque’ to a degree. Briefly, a young man and woman are at a small railway station in Spain (they are not Spanish) waiting for a train. We pick up from their conversation at the bar/café that she is distressed and he is, in a sense, reassuring her. She is distressed because he wants her to do something that she doesn’t particularly want to do (we think it’s to have an abortion); she is asking (obliquely – or openly, according to your interpretation) for reassurance but he is emotionally incapable of providing it; and in the end she becomes hysterical and asks him to shut up. Now, he is not only emotionally immature (or cruel) he is off-hand and impolite (to the waitress) and we begin to wonder why someone who comes across as unattractive to the reader still manages to hold on to the affections of the young woman. We want to have a view of them beyond and outside this sketch. Has the man’s behaviour always been like this? If so, we must form a view of the young woman’s judgement, and perhaps modify our impression that she is purely a victim. (Reread Chekhov’s ‘Lady with a Lapdog’ with this in mind. Why does Anna, in that story, so seemingly privileged and not under threat choose unsuitable men as her husband and lover?) We might begin to ask ourselves why the lady in the Hemingway story willingly goes along with what seems like emotional abuse. But does she willingly go along with it? We don’t know for sure, because there is no ‘back’ story; there is no hint that the man has been different at different times in the past or in different circumstances. Is it merely the pressure of the situation that makes him odd? We can go on speculating but, after a while, this is what we are doing: we are no longer reading the text. It is at this point that we might ask of this (excellent) piece of writing, if some slivers of ‘back’ story might not have clarified (rather than explained) it, might not have made it an even better story. This is an example, then, of how we might approach revision without prejudice to the excellence of the draft in front of us. 3. The opening paragraph It doesn’t do any harm to ask where stories come from and whether they need to grow out of your personal experience because we all, presumably, know things about ourselves that others don’t, and we find some of these things interesting, or hilarious or painful enough to want to share them with others. (We do this all the time, in conversation, and are puzzled if our listeners don’t react with interest or concern.) So one thing that drives the story might be the conviction that your experience is unique. Or it may be the opposite impulse, that what has happened to you is something shared by others. Either way, a narrative will, hopefully, bring the experience to the engaged attention of others. (Of course, if the writing is successful, you are likely to discover new things about yourself that you didn’t quite ‘know’ – or want to acknowledge – at the start). As you write you’ll be pleased (or alarmed) to discover that there are no rules about where to start. Anything – a memory, a smell, a sound and, of course, an incident – might trigger a story. (A writer once said to me, ‘I write because I want to answer back. They tell lies about me, about us; and I want to put the record straight’. Nothing much wrong with that, and the energy in wanting to put the record straight could usually be relied on to keep a narrative buoyant. But a writer of fiction – as opposed to one of 98 The Handbook of Creative Writing journalism, say, or documentary – must be careful to ‘answer back’ in ways that are not predictable.) So to the mechanics of starting. Some writers – and the American Bernard Malamud comes to mind – present us with a mass of clues in the opening paragraph, each of which suggests a separate storyline. The effect of this being that we, the readers, are forewarned of the possible developments of the story almost before we get going, and this primes us as we read along. We won’t, of course, make the same connections as the writer does, but the consciousness of hints being realised or not as we read, adds to the richness of experience for the reader (and to the text). Talking of the opening paragraph, how about being playful and start your story where someone else’s story ends? Not in the conventional way of adding to the previous writer’s narrative but by working backwards. Take a short story collection down from your shelf, turn to the end of a story and read the final paragraph. Then reconstruct the story (a story) from that final paragraph. The aim isn’t to second-guess the author, but to show how a narrative can be teased out by working back from a given ending. How will you know if you have succeeded? Having constructed your story by working backwards from another’s ending, then – and only then – read the original story. Is it richer than your own reconstruction? If it is, revise. Or start again with another story. And again. Finally, in talking about starting your story, I am attracted to something that the American dramatist, David Mamet once said in connection with putting a script together. ‘Get in late, get out early’. The first part, ‘Get in late’, seems very useful advice for the short story. Assume that things have happened before your story opens. Then you have the option, during the writing of the story, to refer back to some of those things. Before we illustrate let me stress that of course we can start, like many traditional novels start, with the birth of the hero and continue with a strict chronology of events (I’m thinking of, say, Robinson Crusoe here: ‘I was born in the year 1632, in the city of York . . .’); but often we need a novel’s length to do justice to that approach. So, granted that we don’t have 70,000- plus words at our disposal in a short story, it is good to start farther on in the story and leave room for the ‘back story’ that can be dipped into at will. Consider this opening: Mary lived in Manchester. She was a student. . . This might be acceptable, because then we could be made interested in Mary, in her being a student; and in Manchester. But wouldn’t it give us a greater sense of lift-off if we assumed more of the story before we started? For example: Mary was late for College again today. It took two buses from Openshaw . . . Here, we add another storyline (the lateness) but more importantly we give the opening greater force, greater sense of buoyancy, by making Mary habitually late for College. (Is the – presumably – difficult journey from Openshaw a reason or excuse for lateness: how organised is Mary in other areas of her life?) How does Mary deal with being late? Do we need to know what she is studying? Is she living away from home? Is she an influence on or more influenced by her friends? (How much of her world are we minded to bring in?) Reading, Writing and Teaching the Short Story 99 Doesn’t the specificity of Openshaw suggest the writer’s greater intimacy (knowing something more about it) with the tale about to be told? So, here are more ‘getting in late’ lines, at random, that might open up space (rather than shutting it down) for the story: On her first day/last day at university . . . She didn’t want to go back to Huddersfield. She was looking forward to going back to Huddersfield. Her sister visited that weekend. (A sister, another story line; a lot of ‘back story’ to be dipped into . . .) She dreaded what would happen this weekend. She was packing to go home. The first time it happened she didn’t know what to do. Michael saw her first. In the first sentence she can contrast her first day at university with the time before university. Better still, if it were the last day she’d have not just her time before university to draw on and the prospect of what happens after university to speculate about, but she would have the university experience to explore (to look back on with relief or regret) to work into the narrative. Similarly, there is Huddersfield and there is time away from Huddersfield. You can compare/contrast, etc. Look at the last example, ‘Michael saw her first’. What are the possibilities for the narrative? Already there are three possible storylines. Michael’s, the woman’s, and the person who didn’t see her first. If this was a question of a woman and two men, we might be talking of a tale of rivalry. Even if – though this is less likely – there are only two people involved, Michael and the woman, and that Michael saw her before she saw him, there are two storylines; and the decision to point out who sees whom first almost suggests parallel narratives (or levels of perception). Another question here is ‘Who is to tell the story?’ It is sometimes useful to write the narrative from one person’s point of view and, in revision, give the story (or bits of the story) to someone else, and in further revision, see which angle of telling is the more effective. You might push this technique to the limit and attempt multiple narration! Exercise Look at an opening paragraph of a typical Bernard Malamud story (where many story lines are introduced), and try that approach for yourself: that is, hinting at many storylines that might be woven into the story – or at least be seen, in retrospect, to frame or establish the larger world of the story. By the time you have worked through these various challenges you will have a substantial amount of the story written down – enough to read over, reassess and revise. 4. Revision: 2 – paying attention to detail Sometimes your prose isn’t convincing because the scenes you try to invoke come over as being generalised, not specific. It is best to assume at this stage that a person is not like another person. See your character as an individual. Only when you’ve successfully done 100 The Handbook of Creative Writing that do the similarities with others reveal themselves. So, in revision, write some descriptions – as if you’re doing a documentary – of some of the following. These needn’t lead to stories, they are your equivalent to the pianist’s five finger exercises. Waking up (time, where, with/without whom?) Using the bathroom (Sharing? Are things in the right place? What’s your gaze like first thing in the morning?) Breakfast (How is it organised?) Starting the day (getting ready for school, college, office, shop, factory, etc.) Lunch with a friend. (Describe the friend. Then imagine the friend describing you.) Now, can you imagine someone who doesn’t have access to most of the above? Is there a narrative to be teased out there? We’re moving from observation to the use of the imagination. 5. Shape: structure and form Structure If structure is something to do with the chronology of events, then the idea of a journey or of a quest would seem a natural shape for a story. The story of a life is one we can all attempt. But this might consume too many words (a novel). So, how about: going to the supermarket/ hairdresser’s/ train station and coming back (either immediately or after a gap in time). Think of one unusual thing that happens on the journey. How did you (the character) deal/fail to deal with it? Many stories are about a quest, sometimes external, sometimes internal. That gives a shape or direction to the narrative: Will the character accomplish the quest? Who will frustrate or facilitate the exercise? And why? When you re-read published stories are you impressed by those where the quest is more or less overt? Building the story around an incident An incident, for example, such as an encounter with a pickpocket or a burglar (in the house)? A potential rapist? But it needn’t be grim: how about: an encounter with a future husband/wife/partner? If art is a marriage of content and form, the art is the more sophisticated when content and form would seem to fit in a way that excites interest in its aliveness – the opposite of being mechanically correct. Some traditional forms, following the Aristotelian principle of beginning, middle and end work well (hunt out new examples). Some modern writers shuffle this order – end, beginning, middle; middle, end, beginning – or dispense with some elements of it. (Think of Borges, Calvino, Barthelme, Boyle, etc. Or even, nearer home, J. G. Ballard in The Atrocity Exhibition.) They delight in creating new and unfamiliar structures. These shapes/structures range from the muted, for example the diary form (Jean Rhys, ‘Fishy Waters’), the exchange of letters (Alecia McKenzie, ‘Full Stop’) to the more overtly daring: the Review, the Report, the Lecture, the rewrite of a non-existent classic characteristic of Borges (‘Pierre Menard, Reading, Writing and Teaching the Short Story 101 Author of the Quixote’), Barthelme (‘The Flight of Pigeons from the Palace’), and others. Fiction versus essay It’s often a good idea to try to enlarge the space where fiction happens. We’ve hinted that ‘getting into the scene late’ might be one way of doing it. Another way would be to introduce the second character (we should have been practising this by now) bringing with her or him a new storyline (or set of storylines) to wrench the narrative away from the ‘essay’ structure, and make it easier to give your narrative ‘social depth’. The dynamic between characters usually (though not inevitably) helps to enlarge the space for your fiction. For not only does each character have her own story, back story, life experience to date, and fantasies of the future, but some aspects of this are likely to conflict with the other character(s). The fictional world thus becomes more socially complex. If the world created isn’t large enough to live in, that in itself is a theme of the story – whether stated or not. Study the plays of Samuel Beckett to see how a space seemingly large enough to live in can be conjured from the most cramped – physical and emotional – circumstances. 6. Revision 3 There have to be some rules by which you revise, by which you decide that some stories are better than others, and it’s useful to share those rules with others with a professional interest in fiction. Would you agree, broadly, with the consensus, that, say, Chekhov might not be a great stylist and there are loose ends in some of his stories, and sometimes there might be less narrative tension than a contemporary writer might employ but that his tone is humane, his approach is non-judgemental (which is, in a way, a form of respect for his characters); that in his tendency to understatement he doesn’t bully the reader; that his characterisation is acute – and that these last are some of the qualities that make him special and attractive to the reader? Assessment is often contentious. I would suggest three very simple rules as a guide to this. The ‘rules’ were formulated by the Council for the Encouragement of Music and the Arts (CEMA) established in London after the Second World War to encourage appreciation of the arts in Britain. The guidelines for assessing literature were: • linguistic vitality • formal innovation • emotional truth. Do these need explaining? ‘Linguistic vitality’ means freshness of language and the absence of cliché. You will not be willingly read if your language seems borrowed or second-hand, if the imagery is stale (‘Football is a game of two halves’) or if it is weighed down by unnecessary adjectives and adverbs. Remember, in imaginative writing, effectiveness is not communicated only by the grammar of what is said. To say ‘She goes quickly’ to the door, or ‘She goes slowly’ to the door does, of course, communicate something of the sense of anticipation or reluctance with which the person in question goes to the door. But it might be useful to ask yourself whether ‘quickly or ‘slowly’ communicates enough of the ‘colour’ or ‘buried drama’ contained in those particular actions. 102 The Handbook of Creative Writing Similarly, to write ‘This is a sad moment’ or ‘This is a happy moment’ very soon has diminishing results. How does this particular person demonstrate or communicate sadness or happiness at this moment? That’s what you want to show. It is your ability to convey that, not the idea of it, that helps to create convincing fiction. With ‘formal innovation’ (innovation of form), we mean that it is important to have a knowledge of (or a feel for) the genre in which you’re working. Your reader is likely to have certain expectations (from prior reading, from films, from television) of how other writers have treated it. And you can’t afford to be less sophisticated than your reader. ‘Emotional truth’ is difficult to describe. But if you are urging writers to avoid cliché in language, in form – and also in thought – it is important not to cheat where the feelings or emotions are concerned. Do not confuse sensibility with sentimentality. One way of distinguishing between empathy (something to strive for if the situation warrants) and sentimentality (to be avoided at all costs) is to subject the relationship of author and character to the ‘empathy with’ or ‘sympathy for’ test. Avoid ‘sympathy for’ (it’s ‘undemocratic’, it makes the emotional relationship between writer and character unequal). Encourage ‘empathy with’. In attempting to avoid sentimentality do not go too far the other way and brutalise feeling. Remember that the object of the exercise of writing is not to show off, not to demonstrate how clever or knowing you are, but to present something effectively and convincingly true to your reader. Don’t make your characters do things merely because those things are unusual or bizarre. Think of your characters as having their human rights, so that anything they do must be in response to their situation, and stem from their personality. 7. Character We have more or less said something about character. There are lots of books on this by David Lodge and others. It might be useful, too, to read how people from the theatre – for instance, Stanislavsky, the first director of Chekhov’s plays – write about this. You might have a look at Julian Barnes’ essay, ‘Justin: a small major character’, collected in Something to Declare (Barnes 2002). Remember the same care must be taken over the minor character as over the major one. A waiter in a restaurant who comes to your fictional table might have only a few lines, but get the vocabulary, the idiom, the tone of address right so that we know not just where he’s from but from his tone what sort of time he’s having in the kitchen. Always give the impression that the character is living a life which the story just happens to shed light on (to break into), and that that life will continue to be lived (unless the person dies in the story) after the story’s end. So it’s useful for the writer to know – though not necessarily for the reader to be told – what the character was doing five minutes before that character was introduced into the story. But what is character? A woman in an early John Updike novel has a stroke. Her speech patterns change. What else has changed: is she the same ‘character’ as before? If you were to change the character’s name a couple of times during the course of the story for no dramatic reason, just to show that what unites the figure is more than a name, would the confusion caused be tolerated as more than a gimmick? What about fraught relations between the character and the author? Reading, Writing and Teaching the Short Story 103 There is a character in a Pirandello story who is in revolt against the author. In ‘A Character in Distress’ we have the author (Pirandello) one night reading a manuscript of someone else’s rather dull novel. The only lively character in the book is a Doctor Fileno. Next morning, which is Pirandello’s time of day to meet his characters (that is, to write, to think about writing, to engage with writing), at the place and time where his characters jostle for his attention, Doctor Fileno turns up, and battles his way to the fore of Pirandello’s characters, protesting to the new author first of all about his name, which he does not like. Furthermore, in the original novel Fileno has himself authored a work entitled The Philosophy of Distance. Fileno is proud of that but insists the way he is used in the plot of the novel demeans an author (himself) so elevated. He complains that instead of Fileno, another character, a solicitor, should have been made to take on a foolish woman as her second husband, and so on. Is this a joke too far? Or is this a useful way in which an author might (in revision) think about character before releasing the work to the public. (It might be instructive that this story is called, ‘A Character in Distress’, not ‘A Character in Revolt’). 8. Dialogue The old image of the iceberg is a good one when considering dialogue. Let the visible dialogue communicate a sense that two-thirds of the action is hidden underneath. To spell it out, to over-write is to lose credibility, is to risk self-parody. It is useful to remember, also, that the application of dialogue must not give the appearance of conveying information, it must be to characterise. Of course it must convey information, but it must not give the appearance of doing so. (For examples of excellent dialogue, look again at those early dramas of Harold Pinter, those collected in A Slight Ache and Other Plays.) The Methuen series of monologues, dialogues and scenes from popular dramas are worth looking at here. They would be useful, also, for your study of character. 9. Literary conceits and extended metaphors Writing involves discipline and hard work, but that doesn’t preclude having fun. There is a sort of intellectual conceit, hinted at already – often a play with form – which, when it works, gives both author and reader tremendous fun. And you don’t have to push it through to 70,000 words! To the experiments with form already mentioned, have a look at Donald Barthelme’s one sentence story, ‘Sentence’. Or read again ‘The Flight of Pigeons from the Palace’, the story where the print has to jostle for position with graphics for space on the page. Or look at J. G. Ballard’s story, ‘Index’, which is nearly all index. (If it were all index it would not be particularly interesting as a story, but as a clever puzzle.) That it is not all index (see the first page) makes it an effective, experimental story. 10. Advanced exercises Read a classic Read a ‘classic’ story and see if there is a minor character in it who deserves her or his story to be more fully told (for example, Lily the caretaker’s daughter in James Joyce’s ‘The Dead’ from Dubliners). Seek out other examples and write the ‘unwritten’ stories. 104 The Handbook of Creative Writing Why limit it to the short story? How about doing something similar for Lucy in Virginia Woolf’s Mrs Dalloway? Non-human consciousness Try composing a narrative where the mode of consciousness might not be human. For example, how do you capture the aliveness of a tree in leaf in its own terms; the riverness of river, the stoneness of stone? This is perhaps the most difficult of all exercises. We might want to seek the assistance of the poets as we wrestle with this one. Research Of course everyone who writes does ‘research’. If you are writing a story set in the 1960s, and the main character (or any character) is partial to popular music, you would inevitably check to see what was on the hit parade at the time the story was set. But most research is more than ‘checking’. It is to familiarise yourself with subject and setting (often remote from your own) so that you can then present both without making either exotic. You might look to the contemporary historian, the best of whom, in their narratives, manage to convince us that the lives and thought processes of people who lived in the past are very much like our own. Short shorts The production of the mini-short story is now suddenly made popular by Dave Eggers. But, as a feature of the genre, it has always been with us (not counting the fables of Aesop, etc.) from Kafka through Saki, Kelman to Frederic Raphael (Sleeps Six and Other Stories), etc. An issue of the Translantic Review was devoted to short shorts. The test of the successful short short is no different from that of any other story: is it more than a sketch or a fragment? The special effect that the best short shorts have is the quality of parable. An exercise for male writers Try writing a mini-biography of a woman – or a series of women. Now revise. Delete those bits of the writing that are about yourself. Revise again. Delete those other (less obvious) bits of the writing that are about yourself. Start again. 11. Revision 4 Revision for an ‘advanced’ exercise is no different from revision at an earlier stage of the writing process; that’s the important thing: the story, the scene, the character must convey the same degree of credibility as if you were writing about someone you know sitting down to breakfast and being casual about the brand names of the things on offer. So, with an exercise that is particularly challenging, don’t forget that your story is like a picture in a frame, and that there is something happening (or at least, existing) outside Reading, Writing and Teaching the Short Story 105 that frame: it helps to animate, or to read better what’s inside the frame. So, in revision, ask yourself the usual range of questions. If your character is in a room, mentally sketch the rest of the house, furnish it (though don’t necessarily tell us that you’ve done that) so you know where the bathroom is, and if there is a fixed-line telephone; if there are other people in close proximity: this visual map, among other things, will help to particularise that person’s way of inhabiting her space. Then there is the revision that comes about when you shift position from writer to reader, when you become your own critic: is the sensibility of the tree the same as that of the river? And is that what the author intended? Or again, having seen that film, read that book - since having produced the last draft of your own - or having had a strange parting with a friend, do you now feel that the texture of your piece no longer feels quite right. Revision ideally continues until the work is abandoned (ideally, because it has been published) and you’re now working on the next piece. 12. Pace and tone One of the organisations that gives prizes for stories, and hence must assess them, distributes a list to its judges of categories to be ticked off in pursuit of the winner. The categories include: Characterisation, Dialogue, Narrative, Voice, etc. But also Pace and Tone. Pace Lack of pace is perhaps easier to detect and put right than tone. For when the interest begins to flag, when you find yourself, as a reader, struggling to continue – even though the story is well-written, is free of cliché, is well-characterized and there is precision in the writing – chances are that the problem is lack of pace. If it seems flat or static or bogged down, you’re likely to tick the box: ‘loss of pace’. Better still, think of having a conversation with your friends, recounting a story of something that happened to you. You are not managing to hold the attention of your audience: your story is losing pace. You try embarrassingly to recapture their attention – you cut things out, you bring the end forward . . . Employ this method when you write. Tone With the problem of tone, what it means is that the author is getting in the way of her character. The child narrating has been given the experience – the sensibility and vocabulary of the adult author. That violates the tone. Remember that the author is at the service of her characters, not the other way around. On another level, think again of the work of Katherine Mansfield. The great short story, ‘Prelude’, has a nervy, restless, anxious, impressionistic feel that makes the reader unsurprised to learn, in retrospect, that the story was written in a mood of anxiety and grief following Mansfield’s brother’s death on the Western Front in 1915. The impression we get from reading the stories, though, is one of vitality, youthfulness, the joy of discovery. Even in ‘Bliss’, where we learn at the end that the husband is having an affair, this febrile quality is maintained. And remember for much of this time Mansfield knew she was dying of TB. The shadow is present behind the glow, but 106 The Handbook of Creative Writing doesn’t overwhelm it. Mansfield has complete control of tone. She doesn’t confuse seriousness with solemnity. Questions 1. Talking about pace, does Chekhov’s ‘A Dreary Story’ avoid being boring? 2. Talking of tone does Katherine Mansfield’s ‘The Garden Party’ avoid sentimentality? 13. Sharing the ‘back’ story The collection We move on now from the individual story to the collection – the book of stories. Naturally, for a first book, it makes sense to put together a selection of ‘best pieces’. But publishers will tell you – rightly – that it is difficult to market a book of stories. Unless they are genre stories. Our favourite detectives – from Sherlock Holmes through Pierrot to Inspector Rankin – hold their respective collections together. Alternatively, we can build up a world from the individual story, by setting other stories in the same place, and be loyal to the ‘facts’ established at the beginning. The most spectacular instance of this is that of R. K. Narayan’s imaginary ‘Malgudi’, now a ‘village’ on the map of India. Others have used the combination of the same setting and characters popping in and out of that setting, to create a larger world of the story. Sandra Cisneros’ The House on Mango Street is an example of this. The device of creating the storyworld goes back to Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales. The simplicity and effectiveness of getting each pilgrim to tell a story on their way to Canterbury is exemplary. Behind Chaucer, of course, was the inexhaustible Bocaccio of The Decameron. My own experiment here, presenting a literary canvas larger than your conventional story can manage, but without the tight formal disciplines of the novel, is represented in Meet Me in Mozambique (2005), where one character, Pewter Stapleton, appears (or is referred to) in all fifteen of the stories, and where the same scene is sometimes animated by different characters in different stories. The trick is to try to be loyal from one story to the next to the details established (as in Narayan’s ‘Malgudi’, the characters might display new facets of their personality in the new story, but they shouldn’t change character). The process is perhaps taken a bit further in At Home with Miss Vanesa, the 2006 companion volume to Meet Me in Mozambique. Of course we’ve had hints of this from many writers. F. Scott Fitzgerald’s Pat Hobby, Hemingway’s ‘surrogate’, Nick Adams, etc. Cross-story revision When you look back over the collection you’ll need to adjust names, professions, places where people went on holiday, who they were with at the time, and so on to make the collection consistent. For example, in one story your character is called Marcus but in another Michael. Which name will you settle for? Would you have to alter his nickname in another story? Why is there no reference to a character’s children in one story when in another she seems attached to them? Is this character’s hobby (prominent in a Reading, Writing and Teaching the Short Story 107 later story) recently-enough acquired not to have been mentioned in the earlier one? And so on. 14. Additional reading This is not less important than the list at the start of this study. Suggestions here would include Colette (1873–1954, France); Joyce Carol Oates, among the American ‘dirty realists’. Also from the US: Eudora Welty, Flannery O’Connor and Jamaica Kincaid (Antigua/US). All the writers mentioned in this chapter are worth dipping into. In addition, a good English dictionary (as much for browsing as for checking spellings); ‘Why I Write’ (essays by various authors: George Orwell [1968], David Lodge [1988]); Good Fiction Guide, Jane Rogers ed., (2001); Thinking About Texts, Chris Hopkins (2001); Reading Groups, Jenny Hartley (2001); Assorted Literary magazines such as: Ambit, Granta, London Magazine, Paris Review, Wasafiri. References Ballard, J. G. (2001), The Atrocity Exhibition, London: Flamingo. Barnes, Julian (2002), ‘Justin: a small major character’, Something to Declare, London: Picador. Bartheleme, Donald (1987), ‘The Flight of Pigeons From the Palace’ in Forty Stories by Donald Barthelme, New York: Putnams. Borges, Jorge Luis (1974), ‘Funes the Memorious’ and ‘Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote’ in Labyrinths, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Carter, Angela (1986), ‘The Company of Wolves’ in The Bloody Chamber, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Carver, Raymond (1995), ‘Neighbours’ in Where I’m Calling From, London: Harvill. Chekhov, Anton (1970), ‘A Dreary Story’ in Stories 1889–91, London: Oxford University Press. Chekhov, Anton (1975), ‘Lady with a lap dog’ in Stories 1898–1904, London: Oxford University Press. Cisneros, Sandra (1992), The House on Mango Street, London: Bloomsbury. Hartley, Jenny (2001), Reading Groups, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hemingway, Ernest (1968), ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ in The First Forty-Nine Stories, London: Jonathan Cape. Hopkins, Chris (2001), Thinking About Texts, Basingstoke: Palgrave. Joyce, James (1972), ‘The Dead’ in Dubliners, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Lodge, David (1988), Write On: Occasional Essays 1965–85, London: Penguin. Mansfield, Katherine (2002), ‘Bliss’, ‘Prelude’ and ‘The Garden Party’ in Katherine Mansfield. Selected Stories, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Markham, E. A. (2005), Meet Me in Mozambique, Birmingham: Tindal Street Press. Markham, E. A. (2006), At Home with Miss Vanesa, Birmingham: Tindal Street Press. McKenzie, Alecia (1992), ‘Full Stop’ in Satellite City and Other Stories, London: Longman. Munro, Alice (2006), The ‘Juliet’ Stories in Runaway, London: Vintage. Murakami, Haruki (1994), ‘The Elephant Vanishes’ in The Elephant Vanishes, London: Vintage. Narayan, R. K. (1995), Malgudi Days, London: Penguin. Orwell, George (1968), ‘Why I write’ in The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell. Volume 1. An Age Like This 1920–40, pp. 1–6, London: Secker and Warburg. Pinter, Harold (1961), A Slight Ache and Other Plays, London: Methuen. Raphael, Frederic (1979), Sleeps Six and Other Stories, London: Cape. Rhys, Jean (1976), ‘Fishy Waters’ in Sleep it off, Lady, London: André Deutsch. 108 The Handbook of Creative Writing Rhys, Jean (1976), ‘Mannequin’ in Tigers are Better-Looking, London: André Deutsch. Rogers, Jane (2001), ed., Good Fiction Guide, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Salinger, J. D. (1948), ‘A Perfect Day for Bananafish’, The New Yorker, 31 January 1948, pp. 22–5. Woolf, Virginia (1976), Mrs Dalloway, London: Grafton Books. 9 Writing the Memoir Judith Barrington What is memoir? This chapter is about literary memoir. If that sounds a little pretentious, I use the word ‘literary’ because, although all memoirs recount life experiences, the kind of book I’m describing here aspires to affect its readers through the quality of its writing rather than through the scandalous or gossipy nature of its subject. In order to write this kind of memoir, you don’t have to be famous but, rather, to want to turn your life experiences into well-honed sentences and paragraphs. The literary memoir has recently surged in popularity, but it has been around for a long time. In 1920, Virginia Woolf was part of ‘The Memoir Club’, a group convened by Molly McCarthy with many of the writers and artists we know of as ‘The Bloomsbury Group’. Before that, the groundwork for the memoir was laid by many of the great essayists. In trying to define the modern memoir, it is important to understand that it is a different genre from autobiography. A quick key to understanding the difference between the two lies in the choice of a preposition: autobiography is a story of a life; memoir is a story from a life. The latter makes no pretense of capturing the whole span from birth to the time of writing; in fact, one of the important skills of memoir writing is the selection of the theme that will bind the work together and set boundaries around it. Thus you will discover, if you read Vivian Gornick’s Fierce Attachments (1987), that her chosen theme is her relationship with her mother, described in the context of their walks together in New York City. The author resists the temptation to digress into stories that have no immediate bearing on the subject, and indeed Gornick’s book tells nothing about many other aspects of her life. By setting boundaries such as these, whether the memoir is book-length or just a few pages, the writer keeps the focus on one aspect of a life and offers the reader an indepth exploration. Of course memoirs can be about any kind of life experience. Some are lighthearted and in places laugh-out-loud funny like Gerald Durrell’s My Family and Other Animals (1956). Others, like Survival in Auschwitz by Primo Levi (1996), blend a personal story into an important historical record. J. R. Ackerley’s My Dog Tulip (1956) is a small gem rooted in domestic life while Ernest Shackleton’s South: A Memoir of the Endurance Voyage (1998) embraces huge frozen tracts of an unfamiliar world. 110 The Handbook of Creative Writing It may seem obvious that memoir is also different from fiction; after all, one is ‘true’ and the other imaginary. But the line between these two genres is not always clear. Not everything in a memoir is factually accurate: who can remember the exact dialogue that took place at breakfast forty years ago? And if you can make up dialogue, change the name of a character to protect his privacy, or reorder events to make the story work better, then how is it different from fiction? One way that memoir is different is that it prompts readers to approach it differently. When you name your work ‘memoir’ or ‘fiction’, you are entering into a kind of contract with your reader. You are saying ‘this really happened’, or ‘this is imaginary’. And if you are going to honour that contract, your raw material as a memoirist can only be what you have actually experienced. It is up to you to decide how imaginatively you transform the facts – exactly how far you allow yourself to go to fill in memory gaps and make a good story out of it. But whatever you decide, your reader expects you to remain limited by your experience, unless you turn to fiction, in which you can, of course, embrace people, places, and events you have never personally known. While imagination plays a role in both fiction and memoir, the application of it in memoir is circumscribed by the facts of your life experience, while in fiction it is circumscribed by what the reader will believe. Writers of memoir vary in how much they feel free to reorganise their experience. One thing to bear in mind, though, is that you will gain little of value if you end up abusing the reader’s trust. Making up a ‘better ending’ to your story, while presenting it as true, or, worse still, inventing a whole piece of your life because it makes a good memoir, will often backfire. Even if no one ever finds out that you tampered with the facts, your memoir will suffer if you are dishonest. It is very difficult to be both candid and deceptive at the same time, and a memoir does need to be candid. Tampering with the truth will lead you to writing a bit too carefully – which in turn will rob your style of the ease that goes with honesty. Dishonest writing is very often mediocre writing; it has a faint odour of prevarication about it. None of this should prevent you from speculating. Your readers will appreciate an honest desire to make sense of the facts, however few you may have. Musing on what might have been the tale behind that old photograph of your grandmother, or telling the reader how you’ve always imagined your parents’ early lives, is not the same as presenting your speculations as fact. Mary Gordon, for example, in The Shadow Man (1996), speculates about her father who died when she was seven, using imaginary conversations and, at one point, actually writing in his voice. But none of this is presented as anything other than her search for the real man behind the idealised figure she had preserved over the years. Retrospection or musing What I call ‘musing’ is an important ingredient of literary memoir. You try to tell a good story, as you would if writing a novel or short story, using the fictional techniques of scene and summary to move through time. But unlike the fiction writer, you can also reflect out loud on your own story, bringing retrospection to bear on the events. In this respect memoir is similar to personal essay. As Montaigne said, ‘in an essay, the track of a person’s thoughts struggling to achieve some understanding of a problem is the plot, is the adventure’. When you write memoir, like the essayist, you invite the reader into your thinking process, going beyond the telling of a good story to reveal how, looking back on it, you now understand that story, perhaps asking questions like, ‘How did it affect my later life?’ or ‘What was the full significance of these events?’ 111 Writing the Memoir This brings up one of memoir’s unique challenges. When you write in this genre, you have to wear at least three different hats: that of the narrator who tells the story, that of the interpreter who tries to make sense of the story, and that of the protagonist or hero of the story. Often the musing is buried inside the narration, and the reader merely gets the sense that the memoirist has done a lot of thinking about his or her experience. But sometimes it stands out separately, as an interruption of the narrative thread. This example may help make clear what I mean by musing. My book, Lifesaving: A Memoir (2000) begins like this: I must have been twelve when my father, my mother, and I participated in the Shoreham to Littlehampton yacht race. Actually, I did that race more than once, but I’m talking about the only time my mother came along – the time that turned into full-blown family story. The way I see it, the story is about my mother’s lifelong terror of the sea and my father’s pigheadedness. Or perhaps it is about the absurd pretenses of the British middle-class, particularly the male of that species, whose dignity must be preserved at all costs . . . (Barrington 2000: 13) This speculation about the underlying meaning of the story continues for another four sentences. Then the third paragraph picks up the narrative again with the words, ‘It should have been an easy day’s sail: straight down the river from the yacht club’. If you interject this kind of speculation into the narrative, it is important how you transition in and out of it. In the above example, I introduced the musing with the phrase, ‘The way I see it’. It is clear at that point that I, who have begun as the storyteller, am about to become the interpreter, using retrospective wisdom, to shed some light on the meaning of the story. When transitioning back into the narrative, the reference to sailing is enough to cue the reader back to the yacht race that was introduced in the first paragraph. The nuts and bolts of memoir In many ways, memoir calls upon your narrative skills much as fiction does. You need to understand how to handle the passage of time, using summary techniques to cover a long period in a few pages or sentences, and breaking this up with scenes that slow down the action and move in close to your characters. One way of understanding scene and summary is to think of them in cinematic terms: the summary is the long shot – the one that pulls back to a great distance, embracing first the whole house, then the street, then the neighbourhood, and then, becoming an aerial shot, it takes in the whole city. This view can include a lot of details, but they are all seen from the same distance, none apparently more important than another. A scene, on the other hand, is the close-up, the camera zooming in through the kitchen window, picking out the two figures talking at the table and going up close to the face of first one speaker then the other. Many details of the kitchen are lost with this shot: maybe a blurry blue pitcher on a sideboard can be discerned; perhaps there is a vague impression of yellow walls and an open door. But in this scene it is the speakers’ mannerisms and what they say that matter. A summary uses verbs that don’t refer to what happens on any particular day. If it were written in French or Spanish, it would use the imperfect tense to indicate the ongoing nature of what is being described. But we don’t have that tense in English. Thus, Esmeralda Santiago, in her memoir, When I Was Puerto Rican (1993), begins a section with the words, 112 The Handbook of Creative Writing ‘I started school in the middle of hurricane season’. Never focusing on a particular day or week, she captures a whole chunk of time with her verbs: ‘I loved the neat rows of desks lined up’, ‘I walked home from school full of importance’, ‘I learned that there were children whose fathers were drunks’ (Santiago 1993: 30). This is very different from a scene. Here is the opening of a scene taken from the same memoir: Sunday morning before breakfast Abuela handed me my piqué dress, washed and ironed. ‘We’re going to Mass,’ she said, pulling out a small white mantilla, which I was to wear during the service. ‘Can we have breakfast first, Abuela. I’m hungry’. ‘No. We have to fast before church. Don’t ask why. It’s too complicated to explain’. (Santiago 1993: 96) As you can see, this pinpoints the exact time (‘Sunday morning before breakfast’). When you read a past tense verb such as ‘handed’ or ‘said’, you know it happened on a particular occasion, just that one time. It’s not ongoing like the summary. Many scenes, like this one, contain dialogue. To do this well, you must not only listen carefully to how people actually speak, but you must also select judiciously from all the things they might say. It’s no good protesting, ‘but that is exactly what she said’, even if it is. A transcript of real life does not make for an engaging story. Your job is to shape, to select, and to add focus. Some of the most common mistakes in writing dialogue involve the attributions (the ‘he saids’ and ‘she saids’). These are needed much less than you might think, since the usual practice is to use a new line for each new speaker. If the conversation only involves two speakers, you’ll hardly need any attributions. It is also unwise to shore up the dialogue with descriptive verbs such as ‘he snapped’ or ‘she mused’, or to qualify the verbs with phrases like ‘in an endearing tone’, or ‘with a sarcastic edge to her voice’. If you pick the right words within the dialogue itself, you won’t need this kind of clarification. These techniques are common to most narrative prose. What is more specifically related to memoir is the question of retrospection. You can use scene and summary to narrate your way through the many different time periods. But in memoir there is another time that is always present, either explicitly or implicitly, and that time is now. The reader must have a sense that the narrator is rooted in a particular moment from which he or she may look back, may speak in present tense, or may even look forward to the future. It doesn’t matter what the exact date, or even the decade, of the ‘now’ is: all that matters is that the reader senses that it exists and that it anchors a logical time span. It is from this ‘now’ that the memoirist muses on the story being told. Because there is always an implied now, difficulties sometimes arise if you choose to narrate the events themselves in present tense, which has become a somewhat popular narrative style in recent times. Here is an example of past-tense narration, which, in turn, moves further back in time using the past perfect tense: ‘When I turned fourteen, I decided to sell my pony. Several years earlier, I had sworn I would keep him for his whole life’. Here is that narrative in the present tense: ‘When I turn fourteen, I decide to sell my pony’. All right so far, but what comes next? ‘Several years earlier, I had sworn . . . ’? Or is it, ‘Several years earlier, I have sworn . . . ’? Or perhaps, ‘Several years earlier, I swore . . . ’? None of these sounds perfect to my ear, but we do somehow manage to land on a tense that conveys the meaning adequately. 113 Writing the Memoir The real problem arises if we want to add a piece of musing: perhaps a sentence like, ‘I feel ashamed of being so fickle in the face of teenage temptations’. If this sentence is inserted into the past tense narration, it is perfectly clear that it is a piece of retrospection on the part of the adult speaking now. On the other hand, if it is inserted into the present tense narration, it becomes ambiguous: ‘When I turn fourteen, I decide to sell my pony. Several years earlier, I had sworn I would keep him for his whole life. I feel ashamed of being so fickle in the face of teenage temptations’. The third sentence here might be a continuation of the narrative, describing how the narrator felt at the time, or, equally, it might be retrospection from much later – from now. You will have to juggle your words to make clear which it is. Writing about living people There are sticky ethical questions that may come up when you set out to write a personal story. It might involve less-than-flattering portrayals of family members, friends, associates, or simply those who crossed your path and left you with an unfavourable impression of them. Sometimes, when you set out to write a memoir, your anxiety about these issues becomes a concern about legal matters: you worry that someone will sue you. But in almost every case, this is a misplaced anxiety. People are not at all inclined to sue, since it is expensive and will bring more attention to whatever they don’t want made public. In any case, although the law varies in different countries, generally anyone upset by your work would have to prove both that it is untrue and that it causes them actual harm, rather than simply hurt feelings. Your anxiety is much more likely to stem from your own fears of dealing with the person concerned, or your own difficulties in reliving the story. This is not to say you should disregard the consequences to others. You must weigh up your need to write a story that is true to how you experienced it, with the harm that might be done to others. You might be writing about a failed relationship; perhaps your memoir involves your closeted gay brother, your teenage daughter’s first period, or a close friend’s mental breakdown. There are often solutions to these problems that go beyond the simple choice of telling or not telling. You can be selective about what to include. You can show the person concerned what you’ve written and find out how he or she feels about it. You can change names, disguise places, and so on. But if you decide to make some of these adjustments, you should leave them until you have finished writing the memoir. It’s only when your work is published that these things matter. Aim for absolute honesty while you are generating it. Believe it or not, we often overestimate the power of our words. In interviewing memoirists, I discovered that several writers who had feared the reaction of family members or friends, actually had good experiences as a result of their writing. People were sometimes able to talk about something that had previously kept them apart. On the other hand, we must not underestimate the consequences our words could have in some situations. I have a friend, for example, who wrote about her time as a teacher in China. Describing her relationships with friends she made there was not likely to be solved by changing names. At the time, associating with someone from the West was frowned upon in China and making those friendships public could have resulted in people losing jobs, or losing their right to leave the country. Similarly, publishing true stories about illegal immigrants or doctors who assist in a suicide, can bring trouble to those we depict. As writers, it is our business both to think about and to understand fully what can happen to people when we reveal what we know about them. If you want to write about someone who severely hurt you, it is particularly difficult to tread a path to good writing, which is always the ultimate goal. You may find yourself not 114 The Handbook of Creative Writing caring, or even delighting in, the consequences to family members, medical professionals, teachers, or others who abused their power over you in the past. But be aware of revenge as a motive for the writing. Your readers will be uncomfortable if they sense that you are retaliating. It may be anger that gets you started, but your writing will not flourish until you give your full allegiance to the story itself, letting go of any desire on your part to gain sympathy from readers or to punish the wrongdoer. Two memoirs that in my view tread this difficult path successfully are: Lorna Sage’s Bad Blood (2000) and Alexandra Fuller‘s Don’t Let’s Go to the Dogs Tonight: An African Childhood (2001). Pitfalls There are many hazards in writing a memoir. Tone, for example, is important. Since you are writing about yourself, it is important not to strike your reader as self-aggrandising. You can be funny or serious, but whatever your choice, you should aim for being self-revealing without seeming self-obsessed. Work hard on not beginning paragraphs with ‘I’; vary your sentence structure to bury the first person inside it; and check for all those unnecessary phrases like ‘I thought’, ‘I looked’, or ‘I heard’. Just give the thought, the sight or the sound without inserting yourself between it and the reader. Another possible pitfall is that your memoir will become too internal. By this I mean that it will become a story entirely about your psyche or your emotional development. Readers don’t want to feel as if they’re eavesdropping on a therapy session, but, perversely, they do want to understand how you were affected by your story and what you learned. These things can become apparent through the storytelling, without inserting lengthy passages about your personal growth, your dreams, or your journal writings. Follow the old, but good, advice: show it, don’t tell it. An engaging memoir is set in a real world. It conveys a sense of period by including details from the culture, from public events, or from the history within which your personal story took place. Don’t get so absorbed in your own life that you forget to include the music that played on the radio or the war that broke out while you were coming of age. One last challenge is the difficulty of working with a writing group or with an editor on your manuscript. By the time you show the work to someone else, you should be ready to look at it and to discuss it as a piece of writing. This is why, when I teach memoir, I suggest that anyone giving feedback be scrupulous about his or her language. They should not refer to the narrator as ‘you’, but as ‘the narrator’, even though they know perfectly well that the narrator is, in fact, you. Surprisingly, this will help you to separate criticism of the writing from what you might perceive as criticism of your life. Imagine an editor saying, ‘Well, on page 76, when you lose your temper with your frail old mother’, as opposed to, ‘Well, on page 76, when the narrator loses her temper with her frail old mother’. I set out a more detailed blueprint for such critique sessions in my book, Writing the Memoir: From Truth to Art (Barrington 1997: 167). Exercises Here are a few exercises to get you started. 1. Think of an incident in your life that one or more people see very differently than you. Tell the story beginning with the words, ‘This is how I see what happened’. Do not reveal how anyone else sees it. 115 Writing the Memoir 2. Pick a season from your childhood and write an account of it all in summary. From that summary, write two full scenes with dialogue. 3. If you wrote the story in exercise 2 in a past tense, re-write it narrating in the present. If you wrote it in present, switch to the past. Note what works better and what is difficult in each rendition. 4. Choose a house you once lived in and remember well. Draw a plan of one floor, showing rooms, doors, windows, pieces of furniture, etc. Ask someone else to randomly mark an ‘X’ in one room (or if necessary, close your eyes and do it yourself). Write a detailed description of that room, paying attention to all five senses. Then write something that happened, or didn’t happen, in that room. References Ackerley, J. R. (1956), My Dog Tulip, London: Secker and Warburg. Barrington, Judith (1997), Writing the Memoir: From Truth to Art, Portland, Or: The Eighth Mountain Press. Barrington, Judith (2000), Lifesaving: A Memoir, Portland, Or: The Eighth Mountain Press. Durrell, Gerald (1956), My Family and Other Animals, London: Hart-Davis. Fuller, Alexandra (2001), Don’t Let’s Go to the Dogs Tonight, New York: Random House. Gordon, Mary (1996), The Shadow Man, New York: Random House. Gornick, Vivian (1987), Fierce Attachments, New York: Farrar Straus Giroux. Levi, Primo (1996), Survival in Auschwitz, New York: Simon & Schuster. Sage, Lorna (2000), Bad Blood, London: Fourth Estate. Santiago, Esmeralda (1993), When I Was Puerto Rican, New York: Addison-Wesley. Shackleton, Ernest (1998), South: A Memoir of the Endurance Voyage, New York: Carroll & Graf. 10 Introduction to the Novel Jane Rogers ‘How do you begin to write a novel?’ There are two answers to this question, and the first is, ‘I don’t know’. I’ve written seven and I still don’t really know. Ask a number of novelists where their novels begin and you will get some of the following replies: they begin with an idea, a feeling, an image, a mood, a face, a place, a plot, a dream, an autobiographical experience, an item in the news, a story from history, family, friends, Shakespeare, the bible, myth or fairytale; or more probably, a mixture of several of these. What this adds up to is that anything can be the starting point for a novel. My favourite answer of this type comes from Virginia Woolf: To the Lighthouse is going to be fairly short; to have father’s character done complete in it; and mother’s; and St. Ives; and childhood; and all the usual things I try to put in – life, death, etc. But the centre is father’s character, sitting in a boat, reciting. We perished, each alone, while he crushes a dying mackerel. (Woolf 1953: 76) It is daunting, the notion of finding this beginning, because by its very vagueness it might not be a beginning of a novel. It might be a great baggy mess of life love the universe and everything, the literary equivalent of a drunk at a party. Or it might simply be the beginning of a short story. The second answer to ‘How do you begin to write a novel?’ is much simpler, ‘Start writing words on a page’. I am always reassured by this. No matter how complex or ethereal the inspiration for a novel is, what it boils down to, is writing words on a page. Which pulls the whole thing back into the realm of the practical and possible. Woolf goes on to say, ‘I must write a few little stories first and let the Lighthouse simmer, adding to it between tea and dinner till it is complete for writing out’. So it seems that the way to begin writing a novel is to ring-fence a time to do it in – I prefer morning to ‘between tea and dinner’ myself, but that may be because I don’t have a cook – and to begin putting words on paper. What you begin by writing may not figure at all in the finished novel; and indeed, it is easier to begin writing if you have told yourself that what you’re writing is provisional and can easily be thrown away. But what you are doing is writing yourself into it, you are finding out what it is, you are edging your way into defining the book’s territory. And best of all, by writing something down, you are providing yourself with something concrete to work on, even if it is only to cross out. 117 Introduction to the Novel There is another breed of writers, who work out whole novels – plotting, chronology, even precise sentences – in their heads before putting pen to paper; my guess is they may not need to read about beginning to write a novel, so I won’t address myself to them. For the rest of us, the early stages of a novel are a period of exploration. Whatever the story, there will be lots of different possible ways of telling it. Sometimes, instinctively, one hits on the right way from the start; sometimes it takes a lot of playing around and trial and error to discover the right way. What follows in this chapter are a number of thoughts and suggestions for what to do in the early stages, to encourage wider exploration of the material, and to help with structuring it. Given that, as a writer, you are choosing every twist and turn of the plot, every detail of characterisation, every sentence structure, every single word you write, it is important to make the best choices possible – and to be able to do this, it’s important to have some sense of the range of options open to you. The exercises are about playing with the way you write, and trying out different techniques. Obviously, there is interplay and overlap between the elements of the novel which I have here crudely singled out. Subject matter and theme No one can tell you what to write about: it must be your own obsession. And if you don’t have an idea for a novel, please don’t write one, it will be better for everyone if you don’t. It is also worth bearing in mind that there are some subjects which people may not much want to read about; these change according to fashion but may currently include wretched childhoods of abused children, and the amusing plight of thirty-something single women. What is important to remember is that a good novel usually contains more than one theme. Anita Desai’s Clear Light of Day (1980) is about a rift between a brother and sister, but it is also centrally about the passage of time, about childhood and age, love (both familial and romantic), and about the wounds inflicted upon individual lives by the partition of India and Pakistan. Its themes are both personal and public; it is this range and complexity which make it so satisfying. If you have written a few thousand words of your novel and can only find one theme in it, it may be happier as a short story. Narrative voice Narrative voice is the most important single choice I make about the novel I am working on. Finding the right voice makes the writing of the book possible; the narrative voice or voices tell the story, their vocabulary and style and tense determine the texture and mood of the novel. There are a number of options, and I find it useful to play with them and try them all, before settling upon one. First person (‘I’) This is preferred by many first-time novelists because of its immediacy. It draws the reader straight into the narrator’s head, it is easy to write in the sense that it is a limited, circumscribed point of view; it is fun to write, because it is circumscribed. A first person narrator cannot know everything, and therefore will sometimes misinterpret information or other characters; so they can be exposed to the reader as unreliable, providing a detective role for the reader. The first person voice is dramatic – indeed, it is a monologue. And the character of the narrator is revealed in the most direct way possible, by the language he uses. 118 The Handbook of Creative Writing Consider how much we learn about Mark Haddon’s narrator from this sentence, with its pedantic, logical thinking, its simple vocabulary and inadequate punctuation, and the odd formality of the narrator not using contractions: I decided that the dog was probably killed with the fork because I could not see any other wounds in the dog and I do not think you would stick a garden fork into a dog after it had died for some other reason, like cancer for example, or a road accident. (Haddon 2003: 1) There are conventions of first person storytelling which you can adopt and which readers accept without question; the diary, letters, a confession, a ‘I have decided to write my story in an attempt to understand what happened’ or simply, an internal monologue. The chief disadvantages of first person are that a single voice can become rather relentless, particularly if it has a limited vocabulary, and that it is sometimes difficult to find ways of conveying essential information to the reader, if that information is unknown to the narrator. Both difficulties can be overcome using such means as more than one narrator, or including information via a medium like newspaper articles. Look at Peter Carey’s True History of the Kelly Gang (2001) to see how he frames a first person narrative with an informational third person account of the shoot-out which finished off the gang, and of Ned’s death – information the reader needs to know, but which the narrator, Ned, cannot furnish for obvious reasons. Exercise Your character, writing as ‘I’, takes a walk down the street. What does she see? Is it external? Internal? Is she looking at other people, cars, flowers, litter, sunshine, dogshit, or is she oblivious to it all, and if so, what is she seeing in her mind’s eye? Think about the language you are using, which is defining your character. Second person (‘you’) This is rarely chosen, and can feel rather contrived. But in the hands of some writers it is even more compelling than the first person, leading the reader to identify strongly with the protagonist. B. S. Johnson’s Albert Angelo (1964) has a section in the second person from the point of view of a supply teacher who has found some boys messing about in a painting class: You walk slowly up and demand the painting. In the foreground are hardly identifiable animals with television aerials on their heads, yoked to a sleigh. Underneath each is a series of brown splodges, and, leaving no room for dubiety as to what was represented, an arrow and the word shit. You conceal your amusement with difficulty, confiscate the drawing for your collection, and stand the boys out in the front facing the board. (Johnson 1964: 27) Second person is often used for short passages within a first or third person narrative, when a character is (schizophrenically) talking to herself as ‘you’. Some writers, like James Kelman, have their protagonist move fluidly between all three voices within one novel, and this is an interesting exercise to try. Exercise Transpose a paragraph you have previously written in the first person, into the second person. You may find it necessary to change more of the language than simply the I/you and 119 Introduction to the Novel the verbs. (Note how Johnson generates humour, above, by the contrast between the formality of the language, and the intimacy of the narrator’s inwardly childish response.) Compare your two versions, considering how different an impact the second person makes. Third person (‘he’ or ‘she’) This breaks down into two further choices. The first of these is the God-like third person voice of many nineteenth-century novels, the authorial voice who has created the world of the novel and who knows the thoughts and feelings of every character in it. In contemporary writing it is uncommon, but Annie Proulx’s The Shipping News (1993) is a fine example. It opens ‘Here is an account of a few years in the life of Quoyle, born in Brooklyn and raised in a shuffle of dreary upstate towns. Hive spangled, gut roaring with gas and cramp, he survived childhood . . .’ and moves effortlessly through the thoughts and feelings of all its characters, revealing and commenting upon them. Note how elegantly this third person voice allows her to leap over swathes of time. Exercise Try the all-knowing third person. Describe the scene in a courtroom where a woman is awaiting sentence for infanticide. Her husband and parents are present, as the jury files in. The second choice, for third person, is use of restricted point of view. A novel may be restricted to the point of view of one character, as in J. M. Coetzee’s Disgrace (1999). This has many of the advantages of first person, in terms of intensity and leading the reader fully into the protagonist’s head, but it makes the summarising of information easier, as can be seen in these thoughts of David, the central character in Disgrace: He has not taken to Bev Shaw, a dumpy, bustling little woman with black freckles, closecropped, wiry hair, and no neck. He does not like women who make no effort to be attractive. It is a resistance he has had to Lucy’s friends before. (Coetzee 2000: 72) Imagine how informational this would feel, transposed to the first person. Coetzee creates an added sense of alienation by presenting his protagonist’s story in the third person, as if David himself is at a slight remove from his own experiences; the first person would make him more intimate with the reader, which would work against the grain of this chilly, deeply disturbing novel. The lack of any other point of view reinforces the sense of David’s isolation, his inability to understand those around him. A third-person novel can also range through the restricted points of view of a number of characters, moving from one to another within the course of a page, or separating them out into distinct chapters. John Updike’s Rabbit Run (1960) is centrally the point of view of Rabbit Angstrom, but also contains sections from the point of view of his wife and his mistress and a handful of minor characters, which reveal to us, almost shockingly, that Rabbit is not actually the centre of the universe. This is used to brilliant effect after Rabbit’s wife (whom he has walked out on) accidentally drowns their baby, and the point of view shifts to Lucy, a woman who dislikes Rabbit and is simply concerned about how his behaviour impinges on the life of her Rector husband (Updike 1964: 215). 120 The Handbook of Creative Writing Exercise Select a day of crisis in your protagonist’s life, and write in the third person about an action he performs from the point of view of someone with different values or concerns. It could be a pet, a door-to-door salesman, a plumber, an airline hostess, a child. Use the new point of view to attempt to find meaning in the protagonist’s action, and to reveal how it affects the character whose point of view you are using. The storyteller This is really a subsection of ‘first person’, but the effect is so entirely different that it deserves considering on its own. The storyteller is a device occasionally employed by novelists ranging from Dostoevsky to Conrad to F. Scott Fitzgerald. Storytellers are not players; they simply observe and record, and occasionally, pass judgement. They put a frame around the story. In Dostoevsky’s work, look at the difference between the in-your-face unreliable first-person narrator of Notes from Underground (1864), and the shadowy storyteller who is not even a character in the novel, in The Brothers Karamazov (1880). The storyteller is not the authorial voice, but is privileged to an overview and a wide-ranging knowledge of events, which characters in the thick of the action cannot have. Philip Roth in American Pastoral (1997) gives this device an extra tweak by having his storyteller, Zuckerman, admit that he is making up those parts of the story of which he could not realistically have knowledge: I dreamed a realistic chronicle. I began gazing into his (Swede Levov’s) life – not his life as a god or a demigod in whose triumphs one could exult as a boy but his life as another assailable man – and inexplicably, which is to say lo and behold, I found him in Deal, New Jersey, at the seaside cottage, the summer his daughter was eleven . . . (Roth 1998: 89) From here the story homes in on Swede and his daughter, leaving Zuckerman’s life behind. A storyteller uses her own language to present the story, and thus interesting contrasts can be generated, for example between emotional subject matter and a distanced, measured narrative voice; irony and humour can arise from the gap between the protagonist’s feelings and the storyteller’s attitude. Exercise Use the voice of a cynical and weary journalist to narrate the story of a joyful incident in your protagonist’s life, for example winning a prize. The journalist is a neighbour of your protagonist, but is not a close friend. Characterisation Fictional characters are often partly based on real people known to the writer, or on aspects of several different people, run together into one fictional character. But creating a character in fiction is rather like acting. The writer needs to enter, imaginatively, into that character’s head; see as he sees, think as he thinks, feel as he feels. Creating a convincing character is often about pushing one aspect of your own personality to an extreme. Most writers are not murderers, but, to write about a murderer, you need to be able to imagine inhabiting a murderer’s skull, understanding and believing in the motives that prompt him, 121 Introduction to the Novel embracing the contradictions and confusions he feels. You need to know your characters well enough to sympathise with them. A writer who sets out to present the murderer as bad will write a two-dimensional character. It is worth drawing up a list of the ways in which writers can reveal character, and then testing your own writing against the list – to see how many of the available techniques you have used, and to consider whether trying some that you have not used, might be a way into more interesting or complex characterisation. Some ‘ways of revealing character’ are listed below. Physical description For example ‘the babysitter came to loll in front of the television set – Mrs Moosup with arms too fat for sleeves’ (Proulx [1993] 1994: 14). Note here that one telling detail can be more effective than a page of photographically accurate description. Be wary of overdescription, and cut down on your use of adjectives. Action This example is from True History of the Kelly Gang, and follows a scene in which Ned has just shot two men: ‘we knocked up an old man in a nightgown Coulson were his name. I counted out the price for what we took telling him my name so he could tell Ned Kelly were no thief’ (Carey 2001: 246). Quite apart from the curious revelation that he is anxious not to be thought a thief, after admitting to being a murderer, note how Kelly’s language reveals his lack of formal education. Speech This outburst is from David Lurie in Disgrace: ‘I have not sought counselling nor do I intend to seek it. I am a grown man. I am not receptive to being counselled. I am beyond the reach of counselling’ (Coetzee [1999] 2000: 49). Possessions or setting This example is a description of the London room furnished by Nazneen’s husband Chanu, in Brick Lane: The carpet was yellow with a green leaf design. One hundred per cent nylon and, Chanu said, very hard-wearing. The sofa and chairs were the colour of dried cow dung, which was a practical colour. They had little sheaths of plastic on the headrests to protect them from Chanu’s hair oil. (Ali 2003: 15) Note the economy here; the room is described from Nazneen’s point of view and we can see that it is hideous, but she does not pass this judgement herself. Her description tells us as much about her as it does about Chanu. Thoughts In Valerie Martin’s Property, the protagonist watches her husband’s sadistic sexual exploits with young black boys, and reports, ‘Often, as I look through the glass, I hear in my head 122 The Handbook of Creative Writing an incredulous refrain: This is my husband, this is my husband’ (Martin [2003] 2004: 5). The character’s extreme self-control and her powerlessness to change her situation are succinctly revealed by this thought. Speech or thoughts of other characters Other characters may give their view of this particular character, as in Clear Light of Day: ‘Bim watched her sister in surprise and amusement. Was Tara, grown woman, mother of grown daughters, still child enough to play with a snail?’ (Desai [1988] 2001: 2). Language and style In the first person, the language is the character; but also consider the choice of language you are using about the character in the third person, whether it is colloquial or formal, direct or circumlocutory, etc. Exercise Try any of these ways of revealing character which you have not already used, for example, through describing possessions. Describe your character’s bedroom. How have they personalised the room? Setting Setting in a novel is not background; it is a key, vital element. In the best novels it permeates and determines the characters’ behaviour; it thwarts or facilitates their actions. It may echo their moods or present an ironic contrast. Consider the role of contemporary South Africa in Disgrace, Delhi and Partition in Clear Light of Day, nineteenth-century Louisiana in Property, and London in Brick Lane. Setting may be simply geographical; but more often it is also politics, class, public events, all of which impinge upon the lives of your characters. Setting needs thorough research and convincing writing, even if it is a fantasy setting. (See Peter Carey’s The Unusual Life of Tristran Smith [1994] for a meticulously imagined alternative world, complete with footnotes detailing its history.) When researching historical setting, first-hand accounts are always the most useful. Look at diaries, letters, and travellers’ accounts. When researching Promised Lands (1995), I was able to build up for myself a very real sense of Australia in 1788 through reading four journals by different members of the First Fleet. Diaries give the kind of specific detail (what they ate for breakfast, how clothes were washed, the weather on a certain day) which history books omit. Exercise Write a scene where the external world impinges on your character’s life and changes it. For example, a storm, a riot, threat of a terrorist bomb, a fire. Or it could be something as simple as being stung by a bee. Plotting and structure Plot and structure often change as a novel grows. But it is still necessary to know what they are from the beginning: if writing the novel is a journey of exploration, then the plot and Introduction to the Novel 123 structure you have in your head at the beginning is the map. The map may turn out in the end to be wrong in some respects, or even entirely useless. It will need redrawing numerous times along the way; but still, it’s no good setting off without one. And in fact the maps of plots are all very well known. People will argue about exactly how many plots there are in the world, but it is generally agreed to be a limited number (somewhere between seven and eleven). The bones of one of these key plots can be found in all novels, and most of the best novels contain at least four. This is my list of the basic plots; your own list might vary. 1. Rags to riches – the Cinderella plot. For this plot reversed, see Disgrace. 2. Love – succeeding after being thwarted. See The Shipping News. Or, for an interesting inversion, Brick Lane. 3. Transformation – which may be literal, children growing into adults (Clear Light of Day) or psychological (Disgrace, Brick Lane). 4. Disaster – how does the protagonist cope under ever-increasing pressure? As in Yann Martel’s The Life of Pi (2001). This is a plot more commonly used in films than novels. 5. Good v. evil – for example True History of the Kelly Gang (with the twist that the outlaw Ned is good, and the police and society are evil). 6. The Outsider – someone strange comes to town. This is the central plot of much Science Fiction and many Westerns, but also literary fiction like The Curious Incident of the Dog in Night-time, Property and Brick Lane. 7. Quest or mission – the protagonist has to find or accomplish something. See American Pastoral, The Curious Incident of the Dog in Night-time. Most good novels contain elements of most of these plots. Crossing from one plot to another creates suspense; look at the structure of the great Victorian novels written for magazine serialisation, switching from one storyline to another, chapter by chapter. Or look indeed at soap opera, as we cut from one family’s story to the plot of another set of characters. Exercise This is a crude exercise, but can be helpful in exposing weaknesses in an idea. Check how many of these archetypal plots feature in your novel. A plot represents questions for the reader to ask, and assumptions the reader will make; questions you can avoid answering, by twists and turns, thereby creating suspense, and assumptions you can foil by taking off in another direction. Since the blueprint of these plots is already in all readers’ heads, you can play against it, you can do the unexpected. Structure is the shape of the book; baldly, it is the sections it is divided into (for example, four parts, thirty chapters). It is the order in which the plot is told, which may be chronologically, or backwards in flashbacks, or from the point of view of a minor player, or through conflicting points of view, or counterpointed with another story (or stories) altogether. It is composed of sequences of writing in which contrasts of pace and tension, comedy and tragedy, action and reflection, lead the reader through a range of emotions, always asking questions. It is something the writer needs to be aware of from the start, but it is infinitely open to change. It is perfectly possible to write a book and completely change its structure when it 124 The Handbook of Creative Writing is finished. For example a novel may consist of two characters’ contrasting views of a love affair; first one, then the other. It could be restructured by chopping them up, re-ordering, and intercutting the two voices, with an eye to varying pace and increasing suspense. For the novelist at the beginning of a novel, an idea of structure is vital because it breaks the novel into manageable chunks. It is difficult to sit down and write a novel. It is less difficult to sit down and write a ten-page chapter. Invent a structure to begin with, even if you need to change it as you go along. And once you have a draft, test it against received notions of what structure should be; not necessarily in order to change it to fall in line with these, but to see if they will help to reveal weaknesses. The five-point structure pattern for novel which is most frequently cited goes: (1) inciting incident, (2) major climax around page 80, (3) midpoint crisis where underlying motives are revealed, (4) climax, (5) resolution. I am not recommending anyone to set off writing a novel to this formula. But applying it to a first draft can help to diagnose problems. If I had known of it when I was writing my first novel, I may have been able to work out why the ending feels so abrupt: there is a climax but no resolution. Exercise Analyse the structure of your three favourite novels. Consider use (or non-use) of parts, chapters, divisions. Write a brief summary of what happens in each chapter or section, note crises, time gaps, changes of voice, etc. Now do the same for your own novel-in-progress. Although this will throw up problems, it usually makes the writing seem more manageable, and there may be aspects of the structure of the novels you have analysed which you decide to borrow. Bear in mind that there are no rules about writing. You don’t have to begin at the beginning. If there is a difficult section, leave it till later. Very often, the way to tackle it will emerge mysteriously, from somewhere in the back of your mind, while you work on other things. And allow yourself to work on from bad writing to good, don’t waste days repeatedly crossing out that awful first sentence. The most important preparation for writing a novel is to read. Look at how other writers have constructed novels, created characters, generated suspense, evoked powerful settings. Look at the voices they have invented, the language they use, the structures into which they have composed their work. The more you can read and gain understanding of how other novels are put together, the more tools you have at your disposal in the creation of your own novel. Once you have read, you can begin to write. References Ali, Monica (2003), Brick Lane, London: Doubleday. Carey, Peter (1994), The Unusual Life of Tristan Smith, London: Faber. Carey, Peter (2001), True History of the Kelly Gang, London: Faber. Coetzee, J. M. [1999] 2000, Disgrace, London: Vintage. Desai, Anita [1998] (2001), Clear Light of Day, London: Vintage. Dostoevsky, Fyodor [1864] (1972), Notes from Underground, London: Penguin. Dostoevsky, Fyodor [1880] (1992), The Brothers Karamazov, London: Vintage. Haddon, Mark (2003), The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time, Oxford: David Fickling Books. Johnson, B. S. (1964), Albert Angelo, New York: New Directions Books. Martin, Valerie [2003] (2004), Property, London: Abacus. Introduction to the Novel Proulx, E. Annie [1994] (1993), The Shipping News, London: Fourth Estate. Rogers, Jane (1995), Promised Lands, London: Faber. Roth, Philip (1998), American Pastoral, London: Vintage. Updike, John (1964), Rabbit, Run, London: Penguin. Woolf, Virginia (1953), A Writer’s Diary, London: The Hogarth Press. 125 11 Crime Fiction John Dale Over the past twenty years as a writer and teacher of creative writing I have read more than a hundred writing guidebooks and found that less than a third of these were of any value. Usually if a developing writer receives one solid piece of advice from a writing book then he or she is doing well. The worst how-to-write books eschew the practical in favour of the abstract, their authors speak in generalities and say things such as, ‘We read fiction to know what it is like to be human’. Well no, what attracts me above all else to fiction and non-fiction is story. A sense that the writer is taking me on a journey where I am not ahead of her, where the dialogue is not flat and predictable, where the prose is accomplished. As much as I admire Ulysses I now reach for The Odyssey. Great narratives survive for a reason and not solely because of Jung’s archetypes. All fiction needs movement, a sense that we are getting somewhere. Without forward movement a story feels slow. Without digression a story can be unsatisfying. Narrative drive is related to plot, to things happening. Digression is related to character, a revealing incident from a character’s past. In crime fiction with few exceptions plot is more important than in literary fiction. Crime fiction tells a story, and that is its great and lasting appeal. What follows in this chapter contains practical information for crime writers and teachers of crime fiction writing with the emphasis on narrative. If you can take away two useful pieces of advice from this chapter then I will have done my job. Crime fiction, and the thriller in particular, has its structural roots in the novella form: a short, sharp, tightly-written narrative consisting of a series of increasingly intense climaxes where something happens to the protagonist(s) who comes under increasing pressure. John Buchan’s The Thirty-Nine Steps is in many ways the perfect example of the thriller form except that it lacks the female element and so remains a boy’s own adventure; nonetheless it is an excellent example of a continuous stream of action moving through a series of rising climaxes and focused throughout on a single character. The thriller, and crime fiction generally, suits the novella, which covers a shorter time span than the novel; and this adds a sense of urgency to the story. Thrillers, whodunits, mysteries, police procedurals – all of these sub-genres come under the umbrella term of crime novel and many of them share similar features, but the crime novel has moved a long way from the traditional detective story. The constant dilemma for the crime writer is how to make the genre new, to take the old conventions and for- 127 Crime Fiction mulae and inject them with energy and innovation. Just as Hammett and Chandler took murder out of the English drawing rooms and dropped it back into the streets, so it is the emerging writer’s job to make crime writing relevant to today. Where to start? There is nothing more difficult to write than the beginning. It is the beginning passages of a story which tell us how to read it and also whether we want to read it. From the beginning we learn about content, tone, and subject matter. A good beginning must do many things and do them all at once. It should raise questions, set up character and situation and hook the reader in by suspense, atmosphere, and a promise of things to come. Sam Reaves’ A Long Cold Fall is a memorable example of a crime fiction beginning: ‘By the time he reached 26th Street, Cooper was hoping he hadn’t made a mistake. Things were too quiet in the back seat’ (Reaves 1991: 7). There are no preliminaries, no introductions. Reaves begins as near as possible to the action with his taxi-driver protagonist encountering a dangerous fare at night. What is set up from the outset is tension. Writers are often advised to start a crime story with a bang, but not too big a bang, because where do you go from there? Many crime novels employ a dual narrative, switching between the personal emotional story and the external action. This allows the writer somewhere to go when the narrative flags. The more different narratives there are and different points of view the easier it is to switch, but the disadvantages are a loss of identification and sometimes confusion for the reader. The best crime narratives contain both internal and external conflict. Generally, for the writer, internal conflict is more important than external conflict. Raymond Chandler believed that readers only thought they cared about nothing but action, but really what they cared about, and what he cared about, was the creation of emotion through dialogue and description. The emotional narrative is what counts. One of the most effective exercises to get any crime writer started is to describe in ten sentences a character in action who has just committed (or witnessed) a crime. Do not state what this crime is, but let the sentences raise questions in the reader’s mind. Describe the character in action. She can be running away, driving from the scene, but whatever role she plays in the narrative, use her thoughts, actions and dialogue with others to intrigue and capture the reader’s attention and above all, to raise questions. Character and dialogue When you think of crime fiction the first thing you think of is the protagonist: Marlowe, Robicheaux, Scarpetta, etc. It is not crucial to have an original protagonist, but it helps. Look for what hasn’t been done yet. As popular as crime novels with private investigators are, it is difficult to disagree with James Ellroy’s remark that the last time a PI investigated a real murder was never. A far more believable protagonist than the PI is the ordinary man or woman – the taxidriver, the house-breaker, the journalist, someone with a real job – who gets caught up in a crime or with the consequences of a crime. Whatever protagonist you choose it is advisable when introducing your main character to let the facts emerge gradually. Only let out as much as the readers need to know. As in real life we get to know a character by sight, smell and sound and a few snatches of dialogue, or more often by what is not said. There is nothing more boring in life or in fiction than a character who blurts out her personal 128 The Handbook of Creative Writing history at the first meeting. Do not under any circumstances use mirrors or shop windows to describe physically your main character. Much of the information about a protagonist does not surface in the narrative, but making a comprehensive profile allows a writer to know their main character intimately and how they will react. Ian Rankin never physically describes Inspector John Rebus in Set in Darkness, but from reading just one Rebus novel I learned the following details about the detective inspector: he drinks malt whisky and ale in Edinburgh’s ungentrified hotels; he drives a Saab; he is an expert on 1960s rock music; he is a loner, bad-tempered and divorced, yet older women appear to find him attractive. Such information will come out indirectly through dialogue and action, but the writer needs to know it first. It also helps to have some unspoken complication from your protagonist’s past as well as something from the present. Usually this is an emotional obstacle. Too often in crime fiction it is alcoholism or a murdered spouse, but an emotional wound is part of the territory. Whatever complications exist in your character’s past, don’t reveal them too early. Once you have your character, then you need to find that character’s voice. How do you reveal character through dialogue? What is dialogue’s main function? Dialogue moves a story forward, it communicates information to the reader, it reveals character and establishes relationships between characters. Dialogue should do many things all at once. It should never be predictable; it should rarely answer a question directly; it should be cryptic and build tension; it should keep the narrative on track; it should never tell the reader what they already know. Good dialogue is the hardest thing to write. Writers who have a brilliant ear for dialogue include George Higgins, Elmore Leonard and Cormac McCarthy. Elmore Leonard once said he learned everything about writing dialogue from reading Higgins’ The Friends of Eddie Coyle. And Higgins learned to write his dialogue from listening to Federal wire taps. Read The Friends of Eddie Coyle and then write four pages of razor-sharp dialogue between your main character and someone of the opposite sex. Put it away for twenty-four hours and then go through it thinking what you cut out, then revise until half the length. Spend as much time on your dialogue as you do on your prose. Leave out redundancies. Avoid tags wherever possible. Never use an adverb to modify the verb ‘said’. Nothing indicates the amateur or hack more than the habit of attaching an explanatory adverb to every line of dialogue, he said tediously. Use adverbs and exclamation points sparingly! Above all, good dialogue should be character-driven far more than plot-driven. Setting, atmosphere and the city G. K. Chesterton maintained that the reason for the detective story’s significance was its poetic treatment of the city. The detective story was the earliest form of popular literature to express a sense of the poetry of modern city life, the urban environment. The importance of the city as the milieu has been apparent since Edgar Allan Poe’s M. Dupin sallied forth into the streets. Setting not only determines atmosphere, mood, characters, plotline, the nature of the prose, setting is character. Think of Philip Marlowe, Sherlock Holmes, V. I. Warshawski, Dave Robicheaux, Cliff Hardy and the cities of LA, London, Chicago, New Orleans and Sydney spring to mind. Apart from the protagonist and antagonist, setting is your most important character. In his ten deadly sins of crime writing Elmore Leonard urges the writer never to open a book with the weather. What Leonard means by this, presumably, is not to go into great detail about the weather at the outset; however weaving the weather into the fabric of 129 Crime Fiction your narrative adds texture. Weather is connected to the senses. In a city like Sydney the weather affects everything: what your character is wearing, eating, doing and drinking, the type of pubs, the cafés, the water restrictions. For most readers what remains long after the plot has faded of a thriller like Peter Høeg’s Miss Smilla’s Feeling for Snow is the feel of wintry Copenhagen or icy Greenland. When describing weather or other aspects of setting and atmosphere be specific and concrete. Ideally the writer requires that readers fill in the gaps and pick up on the hints. Reading good fiction is not passive like watching bad TV, it requires engagement, concentration to enter the fictional world. Setting and atmosphere help to create and reinforce this relationship between writer and reader. Think of a city (or suburb) that your protagonist knows intimately. Don’t write this city down. Jot down twenty words, phrases, sentences that describe this place. Think of unusual details. Use the senses: sounds, smells, touch, sight, taste. Now show your writing partner. Don’t tell them the name of the city (suburb) but see if they can figure out where it is. Decide which phrases, details have evoked your setting most effectively and throw the rest away. Structure, plot and patterns of the generic formula It is said there are two kinds of writers, those who start from plot, an idea, and those who start from a character in a situation: a lonely woman needs a lover, a crim gets out of jail. Many new writers have a problem with plot and structure and confuse the two. However, structure is more than plot. Structure refers to the overall design of your piece of fiction. If you write a story using alternating points of view, with a male and female detective, or four contrasting characters, then this is part of the structure. Plot is also related to time. How long do you need to spend on a particular incident? Scene and summary set up a rhythm in your writing. Use scenes (dialogue, physical reaction, senses) for emotional highpoints. Use summary for the rest. Another way to think about plot is to decide what your character wants. In Christopher Cook’s Robbers, Ray Bob wants a pack of cigarettes, goes into a convenience store and shoots the clerk, which starts the narrative rolling. Elmore Leonard uses ‘wants’ in most of his books – someone wants to get into movies or record producing. The most common ‘want’ in crime fiction is money; others are revenge or sex. Once you have the ‘want’, then think of obstacles that stand in the way of your character achieving it. Crime fiction and most screenplays work with a want and obstacles. The detective wants to find a missing woman. Maybe she is not a woman, maybe she is not really missing. Reversals or turning points work well in crime fiction especially where the readers’ expectations are turned around. This is not to advocate using tricks. Stay true to the fictional terms of the piece. Don’t use surprise endings that come from nowhere. As a novel or story draws to a close, each word gains weight. Think carefully about the words you use to end a piece. Although ambiguity is closer to real life, closure in crime fiction is often believed to be more satisfying. But not closure that is rushed and contrived. Many detective novels end badly because the writer strives to tie everything up neatly. In many ways this is a weakness of the genre. Even Truman Capote’s classic non-fiction novel In Cold Blood is marred by its mawkish end, a corny scene at the cemetery, which clashes with the gritty realism of the rest of the book. It is difficult to think of many crime endings that have resonance: one memorable exception is Chandler’s Farewell, My Lovely where Marlowe rides the lift down and walks out onto 130 The Handbook of Creative Writing the steps of City Hall: ‘It was a cold day and very clear. You could see a long way – but not as far as Velma had gone’ (Chandler 1949: 253). Voice and point of view In contemporary fiction one may do anything one pleases with point of view as long as it works, but the writer should do it for a reason other than it seemed a good idea at the time to use twelve different characters. Elmore Leonard used an alligator’s point of view in Maximum Bob and Tolstoy used the point of view of a dog in Anna Karenina. First person, second and third person all have their advantages and disadvantages and there is not the space to go into them here other than to say that detective fiction has traditionally been written in first person; that second person is rare in crime fiction and works best when drawing the reader into the subworld of the mental institution, jail or detention centre; that third person objective, where the narrator refrains from entering any character’s mind, can be a strangely unsettling choice in crime fiction. There are no rules other than consistency. Point of view is merely a tool that a writer chooses in order to tell the story in the most effective manner. When we talk about voice there are two meanings: the author’s voice and the character’s voice. A writer like James Ellroy has an unique voice in crime writing, frenetic, flamboyant, explosive; his authorial voice is everywhere in his tightly-plotted novels, American Tabloid and LA Confidential. There are other crime writers, however, who can adapt their voice and command a variety of borrowed voices. Perhaps the most versatile technique for representing narrative voices is free indirect discourse (FID), a technique effectively employed by Elmore Leonard. FID is sometimes referred to as ‘coloured narration’ or ‘double-voiced discourse’ because it incorporates the voice of a character within the narration thereby colouring the prose rather than explicitly marking it out as separate speech or thoughts with attribution. FID has the capacity to reproduce the gangster’s speech, thoughts and perceptions within the narrator’s reporting language, thus contributing ‘to the semantic density within the text’ (Rimmon-Kenan 1983: 114). Leonard utilizes FID in all his later books narrating the story in third person limited, usually through the eyes of four, sometimes five contrasting characters each with their own distinctive and idiosyncratic voice: ‘Here was this dink talking right up to him. It took Elvin a moment to adjust, resetting his hat again where it would stick to his forehead’ (Leonard 1992: 102). What gets eliminated with FID are the ‘he thoughts’, the ‘she wondereds’, the unnecessary authorial interpositions. FID is particularly useful for a crime writer like Leonard who is more concerned with developing character than plot. Slipping in and out of FID is more difficult than it seems and many new writers struggle to make the transition smoothly. Very often these transitions to FID occur immediately after a sentence containing a verb of perception: ‘Elvin came out of the dark into the spotlight looking at the Volkswagen parked there by the open garage. She was here, no doubt about it, and that was too bad. Ms Touchy, she was a salty little thing for being as cute as she was. Spoke right up to you’ (Leonard 1992: 121). Suspense and tension Suspense is tied up with anxiety, and therefore is generally superior to surprise. The bomb that we know is about to go off in a crowded cinema is more effective in creating tension in an audience than the bomb that goes off without warning. Suspense and surprise, 131 Crime Fiction however, can work together in a complementary way. The role of suspense is crucial in any crime novel and in most fiction that strives for a wide readership. All narratives need to create some uncertainty. Questions are thrown up, secrets hinted at, information suppressed. As a reader you anticipate what these characters will do next, the choices they will have to make. These may involve life or death decisions or suspense may depend whether or not to open a door. With suspense you can never be too certain of the outcome. The writer presents the situation and then teases the reader with various possibilities and by delaying gratification rather than moving directly towards the solution. Delay makes the process more thrilling, even within minor scenes. There is a scene in one of Chandler’s novels when a crucial letter arrives. Marlowe leaves the letter on the desk toying with it while the reader is anxious to know the contents. A page or so later Marlowe opens the letter providing the vital information. Suspense is the way you make your audience worry and the more involved your readers become with your characters the more tension they will feel. The highest kind of suspense, according to John Gardner, ‘involves the Sartrean anguish of choice; that is, our suspenseful concern is not just with what will happen but with the moral implications of action’ (Gardner 1991: 162). Certainly suspense works best with highly-developed characters. With comic-book characters who tend to be either black or white there is little real suspense for we can easily predict what action they will choose. When characters are presented in shades of grey and are, therefore, more human, suspense is heightened as readers are uncertain about the outcome and worry over which choice the characters will make and ultimately what the results will be. Foreshadowing is an important part of creating suspense. Ideally in crime fiction every episode prefigures something to come. Every action has a consequence. Suspense is created by foreshadowing, by withholding the revelation. A good task is to devise two scenes, a foreshadowing scene and a realisation scene to create suspense. Think of something original or subtle. Don’t use a bomb or a gun. Then think of delays in between. When characters are going to decide something, there should always be friction, some uncertainty as to which way they’ll go. Will she go in the bedroom, will she stay out? This stay-go dilemma is used to create tension in all drama so that even the smallest scenes have inherent conflict and these in turn build to make up larger scenes. Tension on every page is perhaps the best piece of advice a teacher can give the writer of crime fiction, but it is easier said than done. This does not mean melodramatic conflict with characters screaming and throwing furniture at every opportunity; on the contrary, it means that lurking behind even casual conversations should be a sense of menace, that minor scenes should contain some kind of conflict either spoken or unspoken. The crime writer builds tension and does not release it until the end. If a scene does not have conflict then cut it out. Style Raymond Chandler maintained that the time comes when the writer has to choose between action and character, between menace and wit. There are a handful of crime writers who can do humour well: Carl Hiassen, Elmore Leonard, Shane Maloney to mention a few, yet even the wit of the best crime writers such as Chandler fades with the years. Generally, if you can write funny then write it; if you can’t – and most of us can’t – then choose menace and suspense. Promise your readers something and hold off supplying it until the end. Use internal monologue to heighten doubts, increase tension and make sure that your readers turn those pages. 132 The Handbook of Creative Writing The best style for a crime writer is the one that appears to be no style at all. Elmore Leonard tries to leave out the parts that readers skip. James Lee Burke evokes the landscape and weather of the bayou country yet he does it with a lyrical effortlessness. The crime writer must strive to find their natural voice, by avoiding overwritten prose and long slabs of beautiful but dull description. Try not to be too obviously literary. Or self-conscious. It is fair to say that most good writers care deeply about language, but that most readers don’t. People don’t go out and buy Dan Brown’s Angels and Demons for the language, they go out and buy it for the story. That is not to say crime writers can’t write a great story and do it with style. Thomas Mann said that a writer is somebody for whom writing is more difficult than it is for other people. And it’s true. Good writing is hard work and looks easy. It has energy yet never appears rushed. Avoid italics like the plague, especially long passages which readers are inclined to skip, and try to avoid the major fault of style connected with crime writing, namely sentimentality. Present your characters calmly and coolly and let the reader supply the emotion. Research and authenticity Unlike other genres, crime fiction is based firmly in real life. It’s no longer the case that a crime writer can make it up as she goes along. Research is an integral part of being a crime writer and unless you are successful enough to employ your own researcher then this involves going out into the world yourself and finding facts about the criminal justice system, about DNA evidence interpretation, or the best ways to pick a lock (never with a credit card). Research should not be viewed as a chore; it is the closest point that the crime writer comes to being a real detective. The most effective task I use with postgraduate writing students is to compile a list of places in the city for them to visit individually or in pairs — the City Detectives, Supreme Court, Long Bay Jail, the Wall in Darlinghurst (a pick-up place for gay prostitutes), the triage ward of a major public hospital, the city morgue – and for students to report back with details from their authentic research of how these places operate. The only proviso is that their research must be gathered first-hand and the information not widely known. This task always provides fascinating results. In a sense we are all detectives trying to make sense of our world and the crime writer’s job is to explore their city, to uncover the hidden connections that exist between criminals, police and powerful members of society. The detective is linked to the flâneur, the idler who travels through the city observing people and places and sometimes uncovering crimes by reading the signs. In the end, a crime writer needs to do a lot of things well: character, plot, dialogue, tension and suspense. Technique and theory, however, can only take you so far. Above all, a writer needs persistence. The ability to keep going through the bad times, when no one believes in your work, when everything you touch is leaden and lifeless. But the committed writer keeps going through the tunnel, for the day will come when your dialogue is sharp, when your prose is taut and your plot unfolds faster than your fingers can type. Only then will you know why it is you must write. References Buchan, John (2004), The Thirty-Nine Steps, London: Penguin. Capote, Truman (1967), In Cold Blood, London: Penguin. Chandler, Raymond (1949), Farewell, My Lovely, London: Penguin. Crime Fiction 133 Cook, Christopher (2002), Robbers, New York: Berkley Publishing Group. Gardner, John (1991), The Art of Fiction, New York: Vintage Books. Higgins, George V. (1972), The Friends of Eddie Coyle, New York: Knopf. Høeg, Peter (1994), Miss Smillas’ Feeling for Snow, London: Flamingo. Hiney, Tom, and Frank MacShane, (2001), eds, The Raymond Chandler Papers: Selected Letters and Non-Fiction 1909–59, London: Penguin. Leonard, Elmore (1992), Maximum Bob, London: Penguin. Reaves, Sam (1991), A Long Cold Fall, London: Serpent’s Tail. Rankin, Ian (2000), Set in Darkness (Inspector Rebus), London: Orion. Rimmon-Kenan, Shlomith (1983), Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics, London: Methuen. 12 Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy Crawford Kilian Science fiction and fantasy seem unlikely partners. SF, after all, is about what could happen, given what we currently know about the universe. Fantasy is about what could never happen, because science has shown it to be impossible. But science itself uses fantasy to make its points, and fantasy tries to work out its own implications in a consistent manner. Science imagines elevators that fall forever, and spaceships that display clocks running slower and slower as the ships near the speed of light. Fantasy imagines the logical consequences of a spell, and the ecological niche of dragons. These are all ‘thought experiments’, ways of using fantasy to look at the world and ourselves outside the limits of ordinary experience. Whether you write SF or fantasy, you are conducting such a thought experiment: could a human love a robot, and could the robot requite that love? If magic worked, what would it cost? In both genres, you are really exploring the human mind under conditions that reveal something new – or something old, familiar and ingrained that we have taken for granted until you make us look at it again. Just as some rocks and flowers reveal unexpected colours under ultraviolet light, human nature looks different in the light of a distant star, or of a sorcerer’s glowing staff. In this chapter I want to throw some light on the similarities of the two genres as well as their differences. This will involve their history, their conventions, and their future. But mine is just one writer’s view; I hope that your own vision of your genre will be far more imaginative and original than mine. Origins of Science Fiction and Fantasy Fantasy arises from myth, folk tale, and fairy story. It began as an effort to personify the mysterious forces that rule our world: lightning, rain, sunlight, ice, and earthquake. Sometimes those forces were seen as gods, or as ‘little people’, or as supernatural beings inhabiting trees or rivers. Obviously this view of the world is psychologically satisfying: the gods make us in their image, and we return the compliment. SF’s ancestry is almost as old, but distinctively more upper-class. It stems from ‘Menippean satire’, also called ‘anatomy’, which was written by scholars who enjoyed poking fun at one another. Fantasy personalises natural forces and human traits; anatomy personalises abstractions. The Canadian literary scholar Northrop Frye calls anatomy a Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy 135 vision of the world in the light of a single idea. Both genres, as we’ll see, share a fascination with language. Both genres also eventually crossbred with heroic romance, itself a descendant of myths about gods and their half-human, half-divine offspring. Folk tale offered simple advice (don’t talk to wolves you meet on your way to grandma’s), and anatomy parodied scholarship (here are the customs of the Utopians). But heroic romance actually turned both genres into narratives, stories that illustrated, glorified, or criticised a society’s values. This evolution occurred relatively recently. Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels is largely anatomy, but Gulliver is a typical quest hero out of romance. In fact, he is an ironic antihero, a variation on Don Quixote. Before we consider the modern genres, and where we might take them, we should look at some of their ancestral elements. They may still appear in your work, consciously or not, and you should be aware of them. Anatomy, for one, has several elements that have persisted since More’s Utopia in the sixteenth century: An isolated society A society which is distant from us in time or space. It may be an island (Utopia, Lilliput, Airstrip One), or in the future (The Time Machine), or in a self-contained spaceship like the Enterprise in Star Trek. A morally significant language Orwell’s Newspeak is a superb example, but so are Tolkien’s languages and the Utopians’ Greco-Latin patois . . . which implies that even a pagan society could do much better than Christians have done. An inquisitive outsider The outsider stands in for us; he or she has to learn what the society’s people all know from childhood. So Gulliver learns about Lilliput and Brobdingnag, and Genly Ai, in Ursula K. Le Guin’s The Left Hand of Darkness, learns about the strange world called Winter. The importance of documents Orwell gives us The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism, which describes the world of Oceania. The Lord of the Rings claims to be based on various written sources, and Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle keeps returning to the Book of Bokonon, a religious text. A ‘rational’ or ideological attitude toward sex In Zamyatin’s novel We (which influenced both Huxley and Orwell), any citizen can claim the sexual services of any other citizen. In Utopia, those engaged to be married can see each other naked before the ceremony, so they know what they’re getting. In The Left Hand of Darkness, people change gender every month, more or less at random. Fantasy has borrowed many of these elements, and its own elements show its descent from myth – which is about gods, beings who are superior to humans in every way. Frye argues that myth evolves into romance, whose characters are superhuman but not divine. So while anatomy shows people in conflict with their own minds (they know less than they think they do), fantasy shows people in conflict with enormously powerful beings. 136 The Handbook of Creative Writing The hero’s quest In western literature, myth is about tyrant fathers overthrown by rebel sons, and about the uneasy relations between gods and humans. Events are fated, but not always as we might suppose. Humans (including those with divine ancestors) can sometimes use magic as a kind of godlike power. So fantasy tends to deal with people, usually young, in conflict with enormously powerful beings who play a kind of parental or elder role: giants, dragons, sorcerers, witches, and even Tolkien’s Ents. From heroic romance, fantasy borrows the great themes of the quest and the social redeemer. Just as Zeus and Jesus escape the murderous intent of ruling fatherfigures, the quest hero survives childhood and survives to overthrow the old order. The quest hero is the central figure of both science fiction and fantasy, so it is worth revisiting that hero’s life stages: • an unusual birth, with a prophecy of a great future • menace from the father-figure, who tries to subvert the prophecy by killing the child • pastoral childhood, with the hero growing up in seclusion among simple rustics, close to nature • early signs of the hero’s special qualities • departure from the ‘paradise’ of childhood on a quest; the hero leaves reluctantly, and often only after three challenges • the quest itself, often with companions; the events of the quest are a sequential test of the hero’s skills and character • the confrontation, when the hero faces a major struggle with the evil adversary, armed with whatever skills and values he has demonstrated on the quest • the hero’s death, real or symbolic; in the latter case, a journey underground is a metaphor for death • the return to life, and the hero’s triumph and recognition as a social saviour; like his death, his resurrection may be merely symbolic, with a new society forming around the memory and achievements of the lost hero. I have not bothered to give examples, because you can supply them from your own reading. With countless variations, this is the basic plot of science fiction and fantasy. Implicit in the plot is the basic theme of both genres: power. What is it, who holds it, who should hold it, and with what results? Science fiction and fantasy enable us to imagine power as a fulfilment of our deepest desires and dreams, or as the nightmarish destruction of those desires. Like gamblers who hope to win the one big pot, to buy the winning lottery ticket, we keep returning to science fiction and fantasy to help us visualise the quest for power and its achievement. The writer’s challenge As a new writer of science fiction or fantasy, you are like a quest hero rusticating in Arcadia: you read of great deeds being done long ago, in galaxies far away, and you dream of doing some yourself. In some ways you have opportunities undreamed-of a generation ago. Readerships are large, and publishers must crank out more titles every month. But these advantages have their drawbacks. Most readers, unfortunately, tend to like the same kind of story, over and over again. Write such a story and editors will reject you as too Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy 137 derivative. Try for originality, and they’ll reject you as too far out for their readers. You are working as a craftsperson, even as an artist, but what you create is essentially a raw resource for an industry that tries to satisfy a market. I recommend that you go for originality. Science fiction and fantasy are now compartmentalised into subgenres: alternate history, military SF, epic fantasy, urban fantasy, and so on. Every one of those subgenres resulted from some author breaking into new territory. Robert Heinlein’s Starship Troopers launched military SF. Tolkien created epic fantasy with The Lord of the Rings. In the past half-century, no imitator has surpassed the originals. In effect, as such authors open our eyes to a new genre, they close the door to followers. Those followers form two tribes: the worshipful plagiarists, who change only names and details, and the parodists who put an ironic spin on their versions of old stories. Irony is often useful in science fiction and fantasy, but only when it is useful to you and your story – not when it simply reports your own dislike for some bogus classic. The blended future of Science Fiction and Fantasy I believe the two genres share a future that could take them in alternate directions. One is what I call ‘bottom-line’ fiction, where the focus (whether in SF or fantasy) is on the economy and technology of your imagined world. Walter Jon Williams has pointed the way to this in his fantasy novel Metropolitan, where a planet-covering city is run by ‘plasm’, a kind of supernatural source of energy. We still need science-fiction novels about the future economies that can make starships financially attractive projects, likely to return a profit to their investors. I would also love to read a novel about a US president in 2061 who has to talk the taxpayers into terraforming Mars for the sake of thirty-first-century America. The other direction is what I call ‘mythotropic’: we assume that science (or magic) has made economics irrelevant, and the people in our worlds are free to act out their own psychological desires in any way they choose. I tried to do this in my novel Gryphon, where interstellar contact with advanced civilisations has meant the reduction of humanity to a few million extremely powerful individuals; everyone else was killed in wars using alien technology. The survivors are not always very nice people, but they are free to do anything they like. So you might consider stories involving political intrigue over funding a new stardrive, or the stormy romance of two godlike individuals who quarrel by flinging asteroids at one another. However original you are, of course, you are still working within the conventions; originality means finding something new in what seems to be an exhausted genre. Can you tell a new story about time travel? A new kind of military SF story? Do it! Ernest Hemingway said that all American literature comes from one novel, Huckleberry Finn – because that novel established American vernacular speech as a literary language as expressive and powerful as any. In the same sense, all modern fantasy comes from The Lord of the Rings, which synthesised a range of literary styles and conventions into a form never seen before. If fantasy is your genre, then you should regard The Lord of the Rings as mainstream writers regard James Joyce’s Ulysses: a must-read that it is pointless to imitate. Introduce elves or dwarves or magic objects into your story, and you waste all your efforts and imagination. (The same is of course true of the Harry Potter books, which must have made many readers try their hands at writing Potteresque fantasy.) 138 The Handbook of Creative Writing If you must take something from Tolkien or Rowling, let it be inspiration – that you too can write a magnificent book, original and ambitious, in this genre. It may have a quest; it may rely, like anatomy, on strange languages and obscure documents. But it will still have something new and exciting to say. Research and soul search Where do you get your ideas? In a word, everywhere – except science fiction and fantasy. Of course you’ll read in your preferred genre, but authors in either genre should be polymaths, reading both broadly and narrowly in history, anthropology, the sciences, politics, the arts, and everything else. You should be reading journals of archaeology and psychology, not to mention popular magazines like Discover, New Scientist, and Scientific American (this applies to fantasy writers also). You’ll discover that scientists are often very imaginative, but they don’t, and won’t, take the three extra steps you can take with their findings and speculations. Think also about the stereotypical thinking behind many stories, like the barbarian nomads besieging the civilised world. It’s fun for the Conan fans, but go back to the history those stereotypes are based on. Genghis Khan, for example, was a politically advanced leader who created the concept of diplomatic immunity, built a meritocratic social system to replace the old Mongol aristocracy, recruited scholars to staff his empire, promoted free trade, and decreed absolute freedom of worship within his realm. So perhaps the barbarians in your fantasy world could be the progressives, battling to transform a decayed civilisation. You should consider the history and cultures of non-European societies: Arab, African, Asian, Polynesian, Native American. What are their political systems like? How does magic work in the Bolivian Andes, or among Montreal’s Haitians? Would a Jordanian community on the moon be different from one in suburban Amman? What would a Vietnamese space station sound like and smell like? That’s the research part of your writing. The soul search is just as important. You should brainstorm with friends (especially those who share your taste in fiction), kicking around ideas that you love or hate in other writers’ work. (Doing this over coffee with a friend one morning, I came up with an idea that turned into a radio drama produced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation – a very good return on the price of a pot of coffee.) The key to such brainstorming is to avoid being negative. Instead of saying, ‘No,’ participants should say: ‘Yeah, or . . .’ and ‘Yes, and how about . . .’ That’s how the creativity keeps flowing. You can even brainstorm by yourself. Start with the kind of letter that you’d send to an editor, pitching your story – but you’re writing this letter to yourself. It will force you to create details about the story and its characters, and about how it differs from earlier treatments of the same idea. Before you know it, you’ll have at least a rough outline of your story, and quite a few details about your characters. I have written such letters to myself for almost all my novels, and I still marvel at how well they help to clarify my thoughts about a story. But don’t stop there! Start keeping a journal or diary about your story. It’s not just a place to record how many words you’ve done today, but also a place to do some hard thinking about the story’s strengths and weaknesses. Chances are you’ve gone many pages into a story and then run out of steam. Something’s wrong with the story, but you can’t be more specific than to say, ‘This is awful’. The story goes in a drawer, or stays unprinted on your hard drive, and you repeat the same sorry process with the next story. Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy 139 But if you let your ‘inner editor’ criticise the story in progress, you’ll be amazed at the results. As soon as you start writing, ‘This is awful because . . .’ the reasons for the story problems become clear. As you’re stating those problems in clear, complete sentences, the solutions come to you, sometimes faster than you can type them down. You see where the plot needs patching, or the heroine’s character needs sharpening, or the dialogue could convey more than mere exposition. This kind of ‘metawriting’ can also help you put ideas together. A starfaring society must have more gadgets than just big rockets or warp drives. What other advances has it made, and what consequences have resulted? Suppose, for example, that we can simply teleport from Earth to other planets. No one bothers to use spacecraft any more, so interstellar space has been abandoned. Just as people still sail solo around the world when they could book airline flights, your characters might deliberately choose spaceflight as a form of recreation. One such hobbyist-astronaut might then discover something unexpected out there between the stars. Your sorcerers’ empire has a long history, even if your novel deals with only the three weeks before its cataclysmic collapse. What’s happened in the past century or two that could influence your characters and their destinies? (You don’t have to go to the lengths that Tolkien did, but even a few paragraphs about your world’s history may give you still more ideas.) What if and what’s more In other words, your story is not just ‘what if?’ It’s ‘what if, and what’s more!’ You are trying to evoke a world that is plausibly, vividly different from ours in at least a couple of important ways. Your interstellar empire is not just the nineteenth-century British empire with starships, but an empire of its own kind, with its own problems and successes, with people who may or may not like the empire they live in. Even some of the Golden Age greats could miss the ‘what’s more’ details. In ‘Delilah and the Spacerigger’, Robert A. Heinlein examines the problems of a construction foreman on a space station when a female worker shows up. Heinlein pokes some rather advanced women’s-lib fun at the outraged foreman. But it would have been a better story – a better science-fiction story – if he’d taken female astronauts for granted, and the conflict had arisen from something less obvious: What if a woman helped build the first space station . . . and what’s more, she was black, or lesbian, or a better engineer than the foreman? Anyone can predict the automobile, old SF writers used to say. The trick is predicting traffic jams and making out in the back seat. That’s the ‘what’s more’. This puts you in an interesting predicament. Stick to ‘what if’, and your story is dull and predictable. Explore ‘what if and what’s more’, and you find yourself satirising your genre’s basic theme – power and its proper use. For example, you may portray humans who are starfaring immortals, or ancient wizards, but they will still suffer from at least some of our own follies and vices. They may deal with a better class of problem than we do, but we can identify with the challenges they face. Otherwise, how would we understand them? When you consider ‘what if and what’s more’, don’t forget your critical element: the implications of some aspect of science, or the function of magic. Both grant us a power over the material world, but it’s a power that reflects our own psychology. So whether we’re dealing with a world where magic works, or an earthlike world orbiting a gas giant, it’s a world that reflects our fears and desires, and even personifies them. 140 The Handbook of Creative Writing Satire and irony are often present (hobbits, for example, are ironic treatments of standard quest heroes). But the science or magic really serves by helping to dramatise our personal struggles with love, sex, death, and social relationships. Satire and superpowers So on one hand you are portraying people with ‘superpowers’, people who fulfil our own desires to know more and do more. At the same time, you’re showing those people forced to fall back on the same resources we have: courage, patience, intelligence, loyalty, and so on. Satire implies irony, and in irony the reader knows more about your characters than the characters themselves do. In fact, the great target of Menippean satire is the educated ignoramus, the wizard without wisdom. A crude version of this character is the mad scientist of the comic books. A more sophisticated version is Saruman, the wizard who rationalises his alliance with Sauron. Dr Strangelove is another example, inspired by the much less funny scientists who designed the first nuclear weapons and then developed plans for fighting suicidal wars with them. The unwise wizard doesn’t have to be evil, and doesn’t even have to be a wizard. The villains in your SF or fantasy should never think of themselves as bad; they think of themselves as sadly misunderstood and hard done by. But they are also people who don’t care if they hurt others by exercising power. Saruman and Dr Strangelove alike think they’re being ‘realistic’ in pursuing their catastrophic policies. If people get hurt, well, it’s in the service of some higher good. By contrast, your hero understands very well that misusing power can be disastrous. That’s why Gandalf and other characters in The Lord of the Rings are terrified of the One Ring, and Frodo’s near-failure to destroy it shows how right they are to be terrified. Bear in mind that the best satire is the least obvious. When we satirise, we invite our readers to look down on our characters from some moral height; we and our readers should be detached enough to see the absurdity of the characters’ actions and values, but close enough to recognise how much like ourselves they are. Imagine a photo of yourself that makes you look the way you want the world to see you . . . but also makes you look a little silly. That’s the effect the satirist wants to create in the reader. Five modes of literature Satire in science fiction and fantasy is a bit more complex, however. Northrop Frye argues that literature has five modes that reflect the power of the characters. Myth Myth is stories about gods who are superior to us in power and in kind. The Roman, Greek and Norse myths are all examples. Romance Romance describes superhumans who are superior to us in power, but are still recognisably human. Hercules and Achilles and Superman are such superhumans. ‘High mimetic’ This portrays aristocrats who are superior to us in social status but otherwise ordinary humans. (‘Mimetic’ means ‘imitating reality’; the ‘high’ refers to class.) Hamlet and Julius Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy 141 Caesar are high mimetic. ‘Low mimetic’ is about people whose power and knowledge are equal to our own. This includes most mainstream fiction, whose middle-class characters are a lot like us. Irony According to Frye, irony portrays characters who are inferior to us in knowledge or power. We know more than they do, or we have more freedom of action than they do. Winston Smith in Nineteen Eighty-Four is a classic ironic character; we know him better than he knows himself, and we have more freedom. At least we hope we do! Satire makes us think again about ourselves and what we take for granted. You could read each mode of fiction as a satire on the one above it. A superhuman looks ironic compared to a real god; consider the fate of superhuman Icarus, who aspired to heaven and fell to his death. An aristocrat, for all his privileges, is a pretty sad excuse for a superhuman, and a middle-class hero imitating an aristocrat (like Leopold Bloom imitating Ulysses) is equally ironic. An ironic character like Winston Smith looks simply pathetic in his search for the kind of life we take for granted. So your hero may be a starfaring astronaut who reminds us of Ulysses, but the astronaut is likely to seem comparatively trivial compared to the larger-than-life Ulysses. I have discussed literary history and theory at considerable length because whatever you write will reflect everything you have read so far. If you had no idea what a quest hero is supposed to be, your stories would still have quest heroes – because all the stories you’ve read have had them, and your stories would subconsciously imitate what you’ve read. But if you consciously exploit literary theory, and you consciously know how the Greeks and Romans told stories, your stories will be far more effective. Twelve techniques for SF and Fantasy writers 1. Don’t be in a hurry Too many writers cram all the exposition into the first chapter. That’s like putting all your furniture just inside the front door. Even a short story has a lot of room, and a novel has even more. Give us background information when your readers need it – and in many cases they won’t need it at all. So if your story is set in Titanopolis, on Saturn’s largest moon, don’t feel you have to give us a potted history of the settling of Titan. Just establish the setting, maybe with a custom like no drinking until Saturn rises above the horizon. Much of the earlier material in your story will therefore be a bit confusing to your readers. That’s all right – they know you’ll get around to explaining things in good time. In the meantime, they’ll keep turning pages because they want to learn more about this weird world you’re giving them. 2. Make the setting a character In a novel set in Cornwall, the author is saying that only in Cornwall could such a story happen. Cornish culture will affect the events and the outcome, and in the process we’ll learn about Cornwall as well as about how Cornish girls catch their boys. Similarly, something about Titanopolis and its residents will influence the outcome of your story. 142 The Handbook of Creative Writing This is important, but exposition will only hurt matters. The culture of Titanopolis should emerge naturally as we watch its inhabitants go about their business. But your characters, especially if they’re visitors, may ‘naturally’ consult some tourist guide or history of Titanopolis. 3. Make the science or magic critical to the story Spaceships and magic spells are important for more than simply taking us to the setting of the story. The science or spells should advance the story at every point, creating both obstacles and solutions. In my fantasy novels Greenmagic and Redmagic, I assumed that using magic would exhaust the magician, so after a big spell he would be useless for days or weeks. I also assumed that magic had to be spoken. So my hero had an advantage (he didn’t get tired after casting spells), but when he lost his voice by another sorcerer’s spell, he was crippled; he would have to deal with life using brains and muscle, like everyone else. 4. Make your characters insecure When people do amazing things for stupid reasons, it’s melodrama. When they do amazing things for absolutely real reasons, it’s drama. So it’s not enough to have a brave hero or a hostile heroine. The hero should be scarred by some earlier failure to be brave, and the heroine should be nursing a broken heart. The talented young sorcerer wants to master magic to avenge his family, or to make life secure for his people. In other words, motivation is critical. Something awful has happened in every character’s life, in effect an expulsion from paradise. Now your characters are struggling in a harsh world, trying to regain paradise or to replace it with the Heavenly City. They will stop at nothing to achieve that goal. Here’s a way to get into a character’s soul: write a first-person account by that character, describing the worst thing that ever happened to them. It may not get into the story, but it will give you some surprising insights into the character. When I did this with the hero of the novel I’m now working on, I was astonished by his emotional flatness as he described the destruction of his company, his career, and his marriage. I realised he’s a very angry, very repressed man, so his anger may explode at some point in the story. 5. Make your characters concrete This doesn’t mean description of hair colour or height or clothing. Instead, write a résumé for each of your major characters. But don’t include just education and job history. What about sexual orientation, personal relationships, family, social status, income, taste in furniture, anxieties, philosophy of life, attitude toward death? Again, you may not use all the data you come up with, but it’s often helpful – and it can give you ideas for how your character might develop. 6. Experiment with ‘periscope writing’ I do this when I’m starting a novel and want to learn more about its world. So I write a scene or two, just to find out what my viewpoint character sees as he or she moves around. It can be amazing to see how much detail pops out at you: not just Saturn rising above the Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy 143 horizon, but the smell of recycled air in the Titanopolis Bar & Grill. In effect, you’re letting your ‘inner writer’ take over for a while, creating images and problems that may be useful in the story itself. 7. Build your ‘back’ story The story should begin at the moment when it becomes inevitable – when something happens to your protagonist that forces him or her out into a hostile world. But you should know what’s been going on in your characters’ lives for years or even decades before the start of the story. The Lord of the Rings takes place over a span of a few months, but the ‘back’ story covers thousands of years . . . and it affects the story again and again. 8. Foreshadow your ending The opening scenes of your story should describe some kind of appropriate stress – for example, your hero is tested under fire and fails the test. This humiliation will motivate him to redeem himself, and the climax will echo the opening scene in some way. The opening scenes will also tell us what is at stake in this story: the hero’s self-esteem? The fate of the sorcerers’ empire? The survival of humanity against the alien onslaught? Whatever it is, we should care about the outcome. 9. Keep style consistent with the point of view A blunt-spoken veteran warrior will notice almost everything around her, but she’ll think about it in short sentences with a simple vocabulary. A minstrel will pick up emotional moods that the warrior misses, and he’ll express his thoughts with more words (including quotes from appropriate songs and ballads). So when the minstrel is the POV character, you’ll write in a richer, more luxuriant style than when you’re showing us the world through the warrior’s eyes. If your point of view shifts regularly, your style should also shift. The veteran will view a sunrise in far different terms from the minstrel – and a vampire’s view of sunrise will be still more different. As the author you will sometimes have to tell us things that your characters can’t. Keep such interruptions as few and brief as possible, and avoid ‘fine writing’ – it will only distract readers from the story to you and your supposed talent. 10. Remember the moral importance of language Tyrannical bureaucracies will use euphemisms: ‘Human resource reallocation’ could be a term for ‘exile to the Titan Penal Colony’. In A Clockwork Orange, written during the Cold War, the British thug Alex uses Russian slang – hinting at some unfortunate future Soviet influence over Britain. People from different cultures in a fantasy novel may use brief expressions in their own languages, which should sound like the cultures: Elvish is lovely and musical, while the Orcs’ language is harsh and rasping. You will find it very helpful to develop vocabularies in various languages; these will give you the basis for names of characters and places. Be careful, though, about using a real-world language in a fantasy-world setting. Your readers will find it jarring if familiar words and names pop up in a world where they 144 The Handbook of Creative Writing shouldn’t. (I did this in my novels Greenmagic and Redmagic, but my premise was that ancient tribes on Earth had been mysteriously transported to a world where magic works . . . so one tribe spoke Proto-Indo-European and another spoke ancient Irish.) 11. Use symbols appropriately Seasons, times of day, youth, age, weapons and tools, gardens and wildernesses – these all have symbolic resonance going back thousands of years. If you use them in some reversed form (a sword that kills but never liberates, for example), you are using them ironically. That’s fine, but know what you’re doing. When your sorceress-heroine is a little girl, she might consider her mother’s herb garden a wonderful place; when she must flee for her life and the garden is destroyed, you’ve got a traditional expulsion from Eden. A memory of a poisonous plant in that garden might later help the sorceress to triumph over her enemies. But if Eden nurtured poisonous plants, just how innocent and happy was it? 12. Keep your characters in constant trouble Stress reveals character, but different challenges will reveal different aspects of that character. Each aspect is going to be needed to help get your characters from problem to problem, and finally to the climactic struggle. Until then, they live in either the frying pan or the fire. Even if you give your hero a chance to kick back and have a beer while en route to Titan, that peaceful moment should be a time for him to fret about how ill-prepared he is, how ferocious his enemies are, and how easily everything could go wrong. That in turn will show us that your hero is a worrier – and we’ll keep reading to see if that helps him anticipate trouble, or sink into indecision. Is it worth doing? Science fiction and fantasy are genres with mixed reputations. Millions of readers love them, and millions of other readers think they’re terrible. Even the publishers regard science fiction and fantasy in one of two ways: commercial, or unpublishable. I have argued here that you should try for the most original, unusual kind of fiction you can write, and not to worry about publishing. That’s because the first person to benefit from your writing is you . . . and if you write imitative, derivative stuff, you will not advance as a writer or as a person. Any kind of writing tends to rewire your brain, to make you more observant, more articulate about your own experience. This is especially true of science fiction and fantasy, which challenge us to look at our experience in a very different light. So both you and your writing will be better if you push for the strangest, most personal kind of writing you can produce – publishable or not. Think of Tolkien, spending the war in Oxford and slowly following the Fellowship of the Ring across a world that existed only in his imagination. Would his book ever be published? It didn’t matter – what mattered was the creation of a world like no other. I tell my own students that I enjoy walking my dogs three or four times a day. It’s good exercise, and it gives me time to think about my own imaginative worlds, while the dogs explore the woods. We both come back in better shape. Sometimes, I actually find a coin 145 Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy in the street, and that’s nice too. But if I come home without finding a coin, that doesn’t make me a failure as a dog-walker. By the same token, you are not a failure as a writer if you don’t publish. You are a success as a writer if you write what seems true to you, and what teaches you to go on to write still better work. Is writing science fiction and fantasy worth it? Yes! References Burgess, Anthony (2000), A Clockwork Orange, London: Penguin. Dr. Strangelove (1963), dir. Stanley Kubrick. Frye, Northrop, Anatomy of Criticism (1957), Princeton: Princeton University Press. Heinlein, Robert A. (2000), ‘Delilah and the Space Rigger’ in The Green Hills of Earth, New York: Baen Books. Heinlein, Robert A. (2005), Starship Troopers, London: Hodder & Stoughton. Kilian, Crawford (1992), Greenmagic, New York: Del Rey. Kilian, Crawford (1995), Redmagic, New York: Del Rey. Kilian, Crawford (2000), Gryphon, New York: toExcel. Le Guin, Ursula K. (1987), The Left Hand of Darkness, New York: Ace. More, Thomas (2003), Utopia, London: Penguin. Orwell, George (1981), Nineteen Eighty-Four, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Swift, Jonathan (1979), Gulliver’s Tales, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Tolkien, J. R. R. (1972), The Lord of the Rings, London: Allen and Unwin Ltd. Vonnegut, Kurt (1971), Cat’s Cradle, London: Victor Gollancz Ltd. Wells, H. G. (2005), The Time Machine, London: Penguin. Williams, Walter Jon (1996), Metropolitan, New York: Eos. Zamyatin, Yevgeny (1999), We, New York: Eos. 13 How Language Lives Us: Reading and Writing Historical Fiction Brian Kiteley Gained in the translation Oscar Wilde said, ‘The one duty we owe to history is to rewrite it’. Writers of contemporary historical fiction seem to say the one duty we owe to history is to reread it. The main character Omar Khayyam Shakil, in Salman Rushdie’s Shame, says his namesake, Omar Khayyam, the twelfth-century poet and astronomer, was never very popular in his native Persia; and he exists in the West in a translation that is really a complete reworking of his verses, in many cases very different from the spirit (to say nothing of the content) of the original. I, too, am a translated man. I have been borne across. It is generally believed that something is always lost in the translation; I cling to the notion – and use, in evidence, the success of Fitzgerald’s Khayyam – that something can also be gained. (Rushdie 1984: 24) Poetry is very difficult to translate – more like an idiolect or a personal language than the King’s English or a master code, although fiction is comparatively easy to translate. Historical fiction, a once undistinguished genre, fails the translatability test, as most poetry does. It is hard enough to write about the present. Even the recent past needs to be resuscitated. When writing about a more distant past, one is essentially translating from another language, losing great chunks of idiosyncratic detail, and worried that contemporary meanings will not correspond. But something can also be gained: prose styles erupting out of close readings of and interactions with secondary and primary texts and a healthy rethinking of the relationship between the past and the present. When a writer rewrites history, by taking over other texts and elaborating on them, the result is history reread and revised. Much contemporary historical fiction takes a simple idea – of reading the past – and elaborates on the process in surprising and imaginative ways. A kind of historical omniscience has developed in the past forty years that reads and rereads the past. The research is often exposed quite casually to its readers, fixing on the page a self-conscious method of understanding the past by inserting imaginative dreamscapes between the words and sentences of primary and secondary sources. Rushdie’s tongue-in-cheek theory that something can also be gained in translation is a useful metaphor for this new fictional historiographic thinking. How Language Lives Us: Reading and Writing Historical Fiction 147 Gandhi was asked what he thought of Western civilisation, and he is supposed to have said, ‘I think it would be a good idea’. So, too, historical fiction. Arguments against historical fiction have often been that it is impossible and simply a disguised comment on the present, rather than a recreation of the past. I think all fiction is historical fiction. Public vs. private Ian Watt in The Rise of the Novel traced the sources of the genre to the idea that truth can be discovered by the individual through his senses, which was at the heart of the Enlightenment. He felt the novel was concerned with the individual, not the group or the community. Early novels introduced first and last names: ‘Proper names have exactly the same function in social life: they are the verbal expression of the particular identity of each individual person’ (Watt 2001: 18). E. M. Forster saw the portrayal of ‘life by time’ as the distinctive role which the novel has added to literature’s more ancient preoccupation with portraying ‘life by values’. Time was abstract before the novel. After the novel, Watt said, ‘We have the sense of personal identity subsisting through duration and yet being changed by the flow of experience’ (Watt 2001: 24). There were historical novels before Walter Scott, but in the nineteenth century, historical material became a fairly standard subject matter for the form. The individual in War and Peace or The Tale of Two Cities is not much different than the individual in Moll Flanders or Don Quixote. Roland Barthes, in Writing Degree Zero, saw a parallel between the writing of the great spherical novels of the nineteenth century and the great histories of the same period, when some form of historiography in the modern sense was born (Barthes 1967: 29). During the period of high modernism, history and the epic treatment of the individual fell out of fashion. The early twentieth century saw an inward spiral toward ahistorical – or certainly unhistorical – subjects, although the tentacles of references crossed centuries of other literary works. Samuel Beckett took a long walk from Paris to south central France, during the Second World War, after he found the Gestapo in his apartment (he said to them, turning on his heels, ‘Sorry, wrong flat’). He and his girlfriend, both working for the underground and in grave danger, walked for many days, starved, frightened, but by all accounts philosophical about their chances for survival – they retold the story of this journey many times to friends. None of the actual history of this momentous walk made it – in biographical or even biological details – into the artistic form Beckett chose for it: Waiting for Godot. But Godot is nevertheless a record of that long walk, ripped from time and history (Knowlson 1996: 343). Lennard Davis, in a review of Martha Nussbaum’s Poetic Justice: the Literary Imagination and Public Life, talks of how the ‘two cosmopolitan entities, the “public” and the “novel”, made their joint appearance in Anglo-Europe during the eighteenth century, and throughout the nineteenth century, these two flâneurs strolled arm in arm down the pollarded boulevards of the social imagination’ (Davis 1996: 40). Contemporary forms of historical fiction have followed the path of other forms of modern and postmodern fiction, which is inward, toward more private methods of expression (or opposing private life and public life). Listen to the opening of Christa Wolf’s lovely novel, No Place on Earth, which is an exploration of a possible (but not probable) relationship between Kleist and a much less well-known female poet who died at sixteen, Karoline von Günderrode: 148 The Handbook of Creative Writing The wicked spoor left in time’s wake as it flees us. You precursors, feet bleeding. Gazes without eyes, words that stem from no mouth. Shapes without bodies. Descended heavenward, separated in remote graves, resurrected again from the dead, still forgiving those who trespass against us, the sorrowful patience of angels or of Job. And we, still greedy for the ashen taste of words. (Wolf 1982: 3) The intimacy of these lines and of this book is startling. Wolf did some research into the two subjects, and she appears in the telling of the story from time to time, but she also gives herself license to invade the minds and souls of these two writers, inventing (or ‘resurrecting’) where there is no other evidence to counter the inventions – and the big invention is in placing von Günderrode and Kleist in a romantic relationship. History and collage In the last third of the twentieth century, large numbers of fiction writers began exploring history again, with new methods and styles – Rushdie, Doctorow, Wolf, DeLillo, Byatt, Coover, Yourcenar, Galeano. The novelist Paul Horgan, who won both the Bancroft and Pulitzer Prizes for his 1954 book Great River: the Rio Grande in North American History, says in the preface: To do my subject anything like justice, I have hoped to produce a sense of historical experience rather than a bare record. This required me whenever possible to see events, societies, and movements through human character in action. While respecting the responsibilities of scholarship, I took every opportunity, when the factual record supported me, to stage a scene. (Horgan 1984: vii) Staging a scene and showing human character in action – usually methods of the novel – have fallen out of fashion in academic history writing (Horgan was not an academic until late in his writing career; he was primarily a novelist). When Roy Mottahedeh mingled a history of the Iranian revolution with a fictionalised portrait of a mullah who left Iran shortly after the revolution (fictionalised to protect his identity), in his 1985 book The Mantle of the Prophet, the community of historians generally condemned the experiment. Linda Hutcheon, in A Poetics of Postmodernism, comments on the recent desire to intermingle history and fiction: In the [nineteenth] century . . . historical writing and historical novel writing influenced each other mutually: Macauley’s debt to Scott was an overt one, as was Dickens’s to Carlyle, in A Tale of Two Cities. Today, the new skepticism or suspicion about the writing of history found in the work of Hayden White and Dominick LaCapra is mirrored in the internalized challenges to historiography in novels like Shame, A Public Burning, and A Maggot: they share the same questioning stance towards their common use of conventions of narrative, of reference, of the inscribing of subjectivity, of their identity as textuality, and even their implication in ideology. (Hutcheon 1988: 105, 106) Through a keyhole Henry James dismissed the historical novel, saying it was ‘condemned . . . to a fatal cheapness’. But James also famously used the example of Anne Thackeray, in his essay ‘The Art How Language Lives Us: Reading and Writing Historical Fiction 149 of Fiction’, to explain how a good writer finds the right details of a subject he or she is not intimately familiar with: ‘once, in Paris, [Thackeray] ascended a staircase, passed an open door where, in the household of a [Protestant minister], some of the young Protestants were seated at table round a finished meal. The glimpse made a picture; it lasted only a moment, but that moment was experience’ (James 1984: 52). James makes the point that genius finds a way to understand human nature, no matter how far afield from the home world of the genius, no matter how little information is available, which would seem to go against his distrust of historical fiction. Further back, Flaubert devoted a good deal of his writing career to historical subjects, and he chose to treat even his contemporary subjects the way an irritably objective historian might. About his novel Salammbô, he said, ‘Few will be able to guess how sad one had to be in order to resuscitate Carthage’. But Flaubert revelled in his depressions. He preferred his study, his books, and his upside down life (sleeping away the daylight and writing and reading all night) – he preferred to read about life. Life’s residues I started a book of historical fictions, The River Gods, in 1995 (and haven’t finished the book yet). I was sidetracked for a year trying to write another more intimate history, about my brother Geoffrey, who died of AIDS in 1993. I found that book difficult to write – it was sad; I had little real evidence about my brother’s life; and, aside from an almost inexpressible understanding of him, I discovered I did not know him – or large parts of his life – all that well. My brother Geoffrey offered me very few written clues about his life. When I wrote my first novel Still Life with Insects, I started with a bare-bones outline, in the laconic field notebooks my grandfather kept of his beetle-collecting. I used a handful of these locality notes as a springboard for the novel. I turned from my brother as subject to my home town because there was so little evidence to work with (the subject just kept slipping away). Still Life was a historical novel that advanced up to the present time in which I was writing it. The last scene took place a few years after I started the book, when I was aware I was writing a life and observing it – my grandfather visited me on Cape Cod for a long weekend in 1985. He understood the parallax and did not seem to mind the literary intrusion into his life. Most of the rest of the novel was true historical recreation, using his notes, but mostly taking oral family stories and fleshing them out. Like Flaubert, I prefer to read life and life’s residues: ‘To read what was never written. Such reading is the most ancient: reading before all languages, from the entrails, the stars, or dances’, Walter Benjamin says, in ‘On the Mimetic Faculty’ (Benjamin 1986: 336). I have always been partial to this other reading of the word read. In The River Gods, I’ve based an encounter between Wallace Stevens and William Carlos Williams in Northampton in 1944 on a sentence from the Paul Mariani biography of Williams: only Williams was in Northampton, overnight, for a visit to his publishers in Cummington. I read other biographies and letters. I devoured the poetry, finding myself siding with one, then the other poet, for long periods. Wallace Stevens and William Carlos Williams stand for something quite personal. For Still Life with Insects, I read biographies of both men as tangential research for my character, my grandfather, who was a chemist at a grain milling company all his working life but in his spare time – passionately so – a beetle collector. These two poets, who had full-time jobs (a small-town doctor and an insurance 150 The Handbook of Creative Writing executive) but did their poetry passionately in their free hours, were two important analogues for my grandfather’s story. I stepped into William Carlos Williams’ voice as easily as I stepped into my grandfather’s voice – they had, I noted, in the earlier research, the same kinds of sense of humour, the same wry sweet outlook, the same darkness at the edge of their sunny dispositions. Writers educate themselves to a large degree and the rest is often imagination, extrapolation, or hypothesis. Aristotle made the distinction between history and poetry: an account of what happened versus an account of what might have happened. I once caught my brother red-handed in an untruth (and I asked how he could have sounded so sure of himself when it turned out he was wrong) – it was a rare thing for me to be able to prove he was wrong about anything, because he seemed to know everything about everything. My brother said, ‘Brian, you must first of all act like you’re telling the truth. Usually, truth follows confidence in the truth’. Nietzsche said more or less the same thing: ‘what can be thought must certainly be a fiction’. The novel and research Historical fiction often inserts fictional moments into what is relatively accepted as factual events (which can be verified by first-hand accounts, but who’s to say how accurate first-hand accounts are?). Fiction slows history down and therefore it has to fictionalise events, because no matter how thorough a historian is, there are still yawning gaps between moments, multiple and contradictory explanations for causes and effects. William Vollmann says in the ‘Sources and a Few Notes’ at the end of his historical novel The Rifles that what he’s written is ‘often untrue based on the literal facts as we know them, but whose untruths further a deeper sense of truth. Here one walks the proverbial tightrope, on one side of which lies slavish literalism; on the other, self-indulgence’ (Vollmann 1994: 377). Vollmann’s method is scrupulously honest, despite this coy disclaimer, which introduces a long list of his sources. The Rifles reconstructs the last, fatal expedition John Franklin made in the mid-1800s to find the Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and Vollmann interlaces the historical fiction with descriptions of his research – the reading, the trips to some of the places Franklin visited. He claims that the narrator (whose name starts out as William or Bill [as in Vollmann], but settles into Captain Subzero) is a reincarnation of John Franklin. This sleight of hand allows Vollmann to erase the boundaries between this past and the present of the novel. It also makes his essentially research-oriented novel into a romantic quest for a past life, rather than merely a dry intellectual pursuit. Just the facts A few years ago there was an argument about fiction in biographies. A biographer of Ronald Reagan grew depressed by his subject and was unable to proceed with the process for almost a year. Edmund Morris overcame this block against telling the life of a man he could not relate to by inventing a fictional version of himself who knew Reagan in his youth when Reagan might have been a more likeable fellow. The reaction to this fictionalising, particularly in the political press, was amazing: he was just plain wrong to do this, and because he chose to fictionalise a small part of his biography, everything else in the book was tainted. There has also been a general distrust of How Language Lives Us: Reading and Writing Historical Fiction 151 contemporary memoirs, on somewhat the same grounds. I’m amused at the very notion that anything a biographer or a memoirist writes is not, essentially, fiction. In the end, the writer who claims historical subjects may have lived their lives the way the writer says they lived – this writer is doing the same thing a novelist who appears to make it all up is doing. In The River Gods I was very interested in how history works – or how individual characters (both my own fictional creations and historical figures) came alive against the grain of the events we often think of as historical events – and they came alive by means of what they said or wrote – or what I wrote for them. In my fiction generally, language is the key – language lives us. One translates the past, one fills in the many details that must be filled in between the great gaps, one finds appropriate language to bridge these gaps. When I have read the book to audiences, I’m often asked what is true and what fiction, and one person suggested I colour-code the fictional sections so readers would be able to distinguish between the two dangerously different types of narrative. I decided early on in writing The River Gods to use some of the historical documents I found either as direct inspiration or as a shadow thrown against the prose I was trying to compose. My colleague Jan Gorak suggested I’d stumbled onto a crisis between history as research or lumber and history as meaning or novel. He thought writers of historical fiction were now between times rather than above time. I believe in using the words of the past and inserting fictions – or like-minded prose – between them to create another version of both past and present, not necessarily interpretation of past, but illumination of the passage of time with language as its fuel. Palimpsest exercises Exercise I use an exercise in my History and Fiction class. I suggest students take ten sentences from the first paragraph of E. L. Doctorow’s novel Ragtime and add a sentence between each sentence – an explanation, a connective tissue, a reason for going from one sentence to the next (which is not always clear in Ragtime). As they’re doing this, I write on the blackboard: Associative prose. Associative means the process of forming mental connections between sensations, ideas, or memories. Psychoanalysts ask patients to free-associate from a word (‘bird’ causing a patient to think of his mother’s hawk-like nose and the habit she had of watching him sleep every night from his bedroom doorway, her hawk nose the only identifying characteristic in the dark). The opposite of this is cause and effect, which is how traditional narrative operates. What I’m getting at in this exercise is an understanding of how Doctorow’s sentences work – he lists things, presenting a collage of objects and ideas from the past, in an attempt to catalogue the dizzying multiplicity of past details. Here are the first ten sentences (more or less) of Ragtime: Teddy Roosevelt was President. The population customarily gathered in great numbers either out of doors for parades, public concerts, fish fries, political picnics, social outings, or indoors in meeting halls, vaudeville theaters, operas, ballrooms. There seemed to be no entertainment that did not involve great swarms of people . . . Women were stouter then. They visited the fleet carrying white parasols. Everyone wore white in summer. Tennis racquets were hefty and 152 The Handbook of Creative Writing the racquet faces were elliptical. There was a lot of sexual fainting. There were no Negroes. There were no immigrants. (Doctorow 1996: 3, 4) Notice, for instance, between the sentences about sexual fainting and Negroes the possible connection: women fainting at the mere sight of a Negro male. Exercise The following is a short piece from my historical novel The River Gods, an Oulipo-like exercise that takes two pieces of someone else’s writing and creates a bridge of prose between them: 1943 I don’t know much about gods, but I think the river is a brown god – sullen, untamed, untrustworthy, and, in the end, just a riddle for builders of bridges. My job was to hammer the hot rivets into the support beams of the new bridge, following the orders of men who were also following orders. We took our lunches on the I-beams, even when there was no platform under us. The Connecticut River in May is a syrup, sluggish and hypnotic. My mate Sabin, the one man who died while we made the bridge, often fell asleep at lunch, dangling fifty feet above water (not a fatal plunge), jerking awake with bad dreams about his sister and her boyfriend. He died on solid earth, when someone dropped a pail of box end wrenches on his head. I did not know I could get used to such dying. When we trained for our bombing runs in New Jersey and then in Hampshire, we lost four planes and all but three men of the crews. It was a relief to be in combat, in some ways. You knew you were going to die. Training missions wasted our anxiety muscles. There was a moment, before the shrapnel ripped me apart, when I thought I was on the nearly completed Coolidge Bridge. Gusts of sweet river air, unfastened from the dream of life. I awoke to black flak and Messerschmitt 109s. They washed me out of the turret with a hose. Oulipo is a group of writers and mathematicians in France who have since 1960 been dreaming up writing exercises (with sometimes severe restraints that distract writers while their creative unconscious does the interesting work). At the beginning of this piece of mine are some revised lines from T. S. Eliot’s Dry Salvages, and at the end, lines from Randall Jarrell’s ‘Death of the Ball Turret Gunner’. Here are the instructions for the Bridge exercise from above, which I wrote for my book, The 3 A.M. Epiphany: Choose two good, useful, and thrilling paragraphs from other writers of fiction, letters, or nonfiction. Then make a prose bridge between the paragraphs, although you don’t need to make the matter between the two paragraphs equal to the two bookend paragraphs. There are all sorts of ways of approaching this problem – you could choose two paragraphs that could not possibly fit together and somehow make them fit. Or you could choose two different voices that might, with a little sharpening, become one voice. (Kiteley 2005: 181) The difficult pleasure of writing this exercise was not only that I had to connect these dissimilar thoughts (from Eliot and Jarrell), but also that I had to make this fit into the scheme of the novel, which was, simply, about Northampton, Massachusetts. I had been reading on Calvin Coolidge, mayor of Northampton early in the twentieth century, but I had also How Language Lives Us: Reading and Writing Historical Fiction 153 been thinking of the depression era bridge that connects Northampton and Amherst. Having this other set of coordinates (Jarrell and Eliot) to worry about helped me discover this ghostly bridge builder and ball-turret gunner, who returned after his death to the site of his greatest pride. I used this exercise often when I was writing The River Gods, sometimes taking two pieces of first-hand historical material that shouldn’t fit together, sometimes going far afield from the subject of my study (because I got bored). It is telling that this exercise was so fruitful: history is made up of these layers upon layers of fact and opinion and stray thoughts, so that one cannot always decide if one is reading one layer or another – some details shine through more brightly than other details. A palimpsest is a piece of paper written on several times, with the earlier erased text barely visible. When we read anything, we see erasures from other reading and writings. History is the reading we make of this subjective, visually complex activity. References Barthes, Roland (1967), Writing Degree Zero, New York: Hill and Wang. Benjamin, Walter (1986), Reflections, New York: Shocken. Davis, Lennard (1996), Review of Poetic Justice: The Literary Imagination and Public Life, by Martha Nussbaum, The Nation, 18/22 July, 1996. Doctorow, E. L. (1996), Ragtime, New York: Plume. Horgan, Paul (1984), Great River: The Rio Grande in North American History, Middletown, CT: Wesleyan. Hutcheon, Linda (1988), A Poetics of Postmodernism: History, Theory, Fiction, New York: Routledge. James, Henry (1984), Henry James: Literary Criticism, New York: The Library of America. Kiteley, Brian (1989), Still Life with Insects, Boston: Ticknor & Fields. Kiteley, Brian (2005), The 3 A.M. Epiphany, Cincinnati, OH: Writer’s Digest Books. Knowlson, James (1996), Damned to Fame: The Life of Samuel Beckett, New York: Grove Press. Rushdie, Salman (1984), Shame, New York: Aventura. Vollmann, William (1994), The Rifles, New York: Penguin. Watt, Ian (2001), The Rise of the Novel: Studies in Defoe, Richardson and Fielding, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Wolf, Christa (1982), No Place on Earth, New York: Farrar Straus Giroux. 14 Writing Humorous Fiction Susan Hubbard1 Let other pens dwell on guilt and misery. Jane Austen, Mansfield Park (Austen [1814] 1983: 375) The best humorous writing, like the best magic act, appears to be almost effortless. The audience becomes so engrossed in the story unfolding that no one notices the sleights of hand until the unexpected happens, provoking the magic of laughter. Paradoxically, it’s the effort, or craft, behind the writing that produces the illusion and the laughter. Humour results from incongruous juxtapositions (Paulos 1977: 113). We read or listen to humour in expectation that we will be entertained in surprising ways. The simplest form of humour – the joke – aims to elicit laughter through an unexpected punch line; literary short stories and novels use humour to provoke insight, as well. Most jokes are expository, but they have a structure similar to that of a story (and to that of a magic trick). We meet the principal characters and conflict is introduced; tension is generated and builds; then comes crisis/revelation/punch line/surprise. Each of these elements is developed briefly, if at all. A joke or a comic sketch doesn’t aspire to the complexity of a humorous story or novel. As American fiction writer John Dufresne notes, ‘Jokes and anecdotes don’t make good stories, though good stories can be inspired by them. Anecdotes do not explore or reveal character. Stories do’ (Dufresne 2003: 162). Vladimir Nabokov’s interpretation of the purposes of writing is worth repeating here: the writer may be considered a storyteller, teacher, and/or enchanter (Nabokov 1980: 5). By orchestrating the classic aspects of fictional craft (characterisation, setting, plot, theme, and style), the writer of humorous fiction can simultaneously entertain, enlighten, and enchant. So we begin our explorations in conjuring laughter. After a brief review of some theories of humour, we’ll consider aspects of its fictional craft, focusing in particular on those related to creating character, setting, and plot. Each section on craft includes examples and exercises designed to help writers incorporate humour into their work. Books and stories are cited as examples in hope that you may be enticed to read the unfamiliar ones. In the end, there’s no better way to learn to write humour than to read it. Writing Humorous Fiction 155 Some general principles and theories In medieval times, a humour was thought to be a fluid – blood, phlegm, choler, or bile – coursing through the human body, capable of influencing one’s disposition. A person behaving oddly was suspected to have an imbalance or dominance of a particular fluid and was called a ‘humourist’ – a term later extended to those who wrote about odd behaviour. Writing about oddities, or incongruities, seems a natural tendency. Unless you have a very fancy prose style, writing about the commonplace tends to be dull. But why do we want to be funny? From a vast number of serious books addressing that question, I culled a list of reasons: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. To keep the devils at bay To commune with the gods To celebrate the joy of existence To lighten the burden of reality To change the world. Humour may seem benign or malicious. Theorists tend to find its origins in the darker sides of human nature. In the Bible, in Homer, and in many medieval tales, laughter often is associated with scorn and mockery. Aristotle found comedy far inferior to tragedy, and he considered laughter base and ignoble (O’Neill 1990: 34–5). In Sudden Glory, Barry Sanders traces the history of laughter and deems it essentially ambiguous: ‘Throughout time, laughter never shakes its dual character; it is always associated with both the devilish and the angelic, with both the positive and the negative’ (Sanders 1996: 69). Sanders, along with Kant and Kierkegaard, finds laughter a basic, universal response to an incongruous situation that surprises us, jars us out of the rut of civilised behaviour. Plato and Aristotle thought laughter stemmed from feelings of superiority over others. In The Republic, Plato expressed concern about the power of laughter to disrupt order even as he noted its usefulness as a means of moral reform. Herbert Spencer and Sigmund Freud considered laughter a release of pent-up energy. In his early twentieth-century writings on creative writing, as well as those on humour, Freud stressed repressed instincts and emotions as the wellspring of the creative process. Sanders notes the power of the derisive laugh as a means of social subversion: I call Freud the father of stand-up comedy because, through jokes, he articulated an acceptable way for the discontent, or marginal malcontent, to break the law, to upset the status quo, with impunity . . . Every comic is a social scofflaw who could be charged with breaking and entering – with breaking society’s rules and restrictions, and with entering people’s psyches. (Sanders 1996: 252–3) In Writing Humor: Creativity and the Comic Mind, Mary Ann Rishel defines humour as ‘playful incongruity’, and says humour depends on departures from the logical and normal. But she notes that humour can go too far – beyond absurdity, nonsense, and silliness – to confusion and meaninglessness (Rishel 2002: 34–6). Satire has classically been associated with using humour for a moral purpose. A great deal of literary fiction that attempts humour is satiric. ‘Black humour’, a term widely used to describe the work of writers as varied as Kurt Vonnegut and John Hawkes, goes beyond classical satire’s penchant for moralising. It 156 The Handbook of Creative Writing focuses on a kind of cosmic irony by creating surreal worlds inhabited by one-dimensional characters. In 1939 André Breton used the term humour noir to describe the subversive power of writers (such as Poe, Nietzsche, Kafka, and Lewis Carroll) who take on subjects considered taboo in polite society (O’Neill 1990: 28). No matter how subversive or moralistic your writing aims to be, it will usually be more effective if it incorporates humour. Humourless writing, like a humourless person, is difficult to tolerate for long. Some elements of craft Character Historically, humorous characters have often enjoyed a shady reputation. Even when they embody moral principles, they’ve been dismissed as mere plot vehicles. The difference between a comic sketch and a humorous story often lies in the degree of complexity of the characters. E. M. Forster wrote in Aspects of the Novel: ‘Flat characters were called “humorous” in the seventeenth century, and are sometimes called types, and sometimes caricatures. In their purest form, they are constructed around a single idea or quality: when there is more than one factor in them, we get the beginning of the curve towards the round’ (Forster [1927] 1995: 41). Built around a single idea or quality (which often is exaggerated), flat characters don’t change and never surprise us in realistic ways, as round (complex) characters do. Flat characters are a staple of satire and of black humour. As Forster notes, flat characters have one great advantage: they tend to be memorable by virtue of their very flatness. Daniel Defoe’s Moll Flanders (1722), for instance, features an unforgettable protagonist who manages her life like a balance sheet, calculating the cost of every trick she plays and ultimately trumping the conventional morality she pretends to espouse. And Charles Dickens’ schoolmaster Thomas Gradgrind, in the novel Hard Times (1854), will forever remind us of the folly of equating fact with wisdom. More modern fiction uses humorous characters in more complicated ways, making us sometimes question Forster’s notion of flatness and roundness. American novelist Joseph Heller’s protagonist Yossarian, in Catch-22 (1951), is flat in the sense that he doesn’t change in the course of the novel – his circumstances are altered, but he remains essentially the same sceptical anti-hero, bent on surviving an absurd war and an absurd world. Yet Yossarian is capable of surprising us, often humorously. When he has an uncharacteristically sincere, romantic encounter with an Italian woman named Luciana, he professes love and proposes marriage (a surprise); Luciana offers him a slip of paper with her name and address on it, then retracts it, saying Yossarian will ‘tear it up into little pieces the minute I’m gone and go walking away like a big shot because a tall, young, beautiful girl like me, Luciana, let you sleep with her and did not ask you for money’. Yossarian protests; she relents and gives him the paper. Yossarian seems to have matured, from a callous young man who patronises prostitutes to someone embarking on a relationship that truly matters to him. Then she smiled at him serenely, squeezed his hand and, with a whispered regretful ‘Addio,’ pressed herself against him for a moment and then straightened and walked away with unconscious dignity and grace. Writing Humorous Fiction 157 The minute she was gone, Yossarian tore the slip of paper up and walked away in the other direction, feeling very much like a big shot because a beautiful young girl like Luciana had slept with him and did not ask for money. (Heller 1971: 167) The double surprise, like so many in Catch-22, seems to put the reader and Yossarian right back where they started. Yet both are a little wiser as a result of this scene. In Money: A Suicide Note (1986), British novelist Martin Amis uses his characters and his style as Heller does: to continually set up and dispel readers’ logical and sentimental expectations. Amis’s protagonist, John Self, often engages in dialogue with the reader. ‘Memory is a funny thing, isn’t it. You don’t agree? I don’t agree either. Memory has never amused me much, and I find its tricks more and more wearisome as I grow older’ (Amis 1986: 30). Self is a consummate unreliable narrator; even he can’t trust himself. One of the essential traits of humorous literary fiction is a compelling protagonist. Both Yossarian and Self are highly effective protagonists, given their novels’ grand designs. Yossarian, an Air Force bombardier, and Self, a commercial director and aspiring movie producer, defy the stereotypes associated with their respective professions. Yossarian is no typical war hero; he is selfishly and solely determined to prolong his own existence (arguably an act of heroism in itself), yet he commands the respect of his fellow soldiers. Self is not the slick, confident con-artist he imagines himself; rather, he’s a dupe of others, constantly being conned, and he’s at least partially aware of the con as it happens. Both of these characters have oddly endearing flaws: Yossarian’s propensity to sit naked in trees, for instance, and Self’s unceasing appetite for exaggerated quantities of junk food and alcohol, both of which habits he continually pledges to kick. By existing somewhere between flatness and roundness, these characters are sufficiently complex to haunt us long after we’ve finished their books. Exercise: moving beyond the flat humorous character Begin constructing a protagonist by listing characteristics associated with his or her professional stereotype. Say your character is a funeral director. You might list such adjectives as these: sombre, tall, gaunt, dark, bespectacled, plain-dressed and plain-spoken, brooding about eternity, given to playing classical music and driving black automobiles. Now consider a character in a very different sort of profession: a disk jockey who spins records at a club. A list of this character’s stereotypical aspects might include these: muscular, self-assured, shaven head, earrings, piercings, trendy clothing, fond of fast cars and fast relationships, living for the moment. Blending the stereotypes is the first step in creating a more compelling protagonist: a muscular funeral director fond of piercings and fast cars, say, or a sombre disk jockey who broods about eternity. The second step is to introduce traits that blur the stereotypes further; let the funeral director be a gourmet vegetarian chef, say, and make the disc jockey addicted to watching TV shows about fishing or golf. Creating tension among your protagonist’s passions is a useful way to build a humorous character. Exercise: what’s in a name? The easiest way to make a humorous character fatally flat is give that character a too-cute name. The card game ‘Happy Families’ is rife with such names: Mr Snip the Barber, Mrs Bun the Baker’s Wife. Names that seem incongruous with the character’s profession tend to be funnier: in real life I’ve encountered a realtor named Pirate and a doctor named Risk, not to mention a fund-raiser named Death. 158 The Handbook of Creative Writing Other names may strike you as funny for no reason in particular. It’s not a bad idea to begin keeping a list of names with humorous potential. Daily newspapers and telephone directories are good sources. In a quick scan of my local directory, the following names caught my eye: Wayne Spelk, Damon Stankie, Betty Almond, Melanie Gooch, and J. P. Pronto. (I cheated and put different first names with last names, and so should you, to avoid unduly embarrassing anyone.) Setting Sometimes setting is so important to a story that it acts as a character does: as an agent of action that advances the plot. In humorous fiction, setting is also used as a means of displacement. A character at odds with a particular world tends to be either tragic or comic. When Adolf Hitler is a character in a novel set in Liverpool (Beryl Bainbridge’s Young Adolf, 1978) he manages to be both. Cold Comfort Farm (1932) is a good example of using setting both as character and as plot catalyst. The Sussex countryside entraps and manipulates the Starkadder family; when the sukebind weed is in bloom, some characters are helplessly driven to fornicate. Author Stella Gibbons used a florid prose style to great advantage, and even went to the trouble of putting stars next to her most overwrought passages to help readers and reviewers tell ‘whether a sentence is Literature or whether it is just sheer flapdoodle’ (Gibbons 1978: 8–9). The following excerpt rated two stars: **Dawn crept over the Downs like a sinister white animal, followed by the snarling cries of a wind eating its way between the black boughs of the thorns. The wind was the furious voice of this sluggish animal light that was baring the dormers and mullions and scullions of Cold Comfort Farm. (32) The farm and its environs provide a challenge for protagonist Flora Poste, a model of commonsensical English gentlewomanliness, who goes to battle with gothic nature itself in her efforts to reform the Starkadders. In Scoop (1938), Evelyn Waugh contrives to put his protagonist, John Boot, in a setting entirely at odds with his sensibility. Boot, self-professed Countryman and nature columnist, given to writing sentences such as ‘Feather-footed through the plashy fen passes the questing vole’ (Waugh 1999: 25), is mistakenly sent to Ishmaelia in Northern Africa to serve as war correspondent for the Daily Beast. Utterly the wrong man for the job, Boot’s bumblings bring him improbable success – of a sort – and allow Waugh to satirise war coverage in general and the English press in particular. Other writers of humorous fiction opt to use setting as definition and reinforcement for their characters. In the 1980s and 1990s, Lewis Nordan and James Wilcox each published several novels set in the American South in which setting is depicted sensually and sincerely (albeit humorously) as a formative force in characters’ lives. During the same period, John Irving and Richard Russo were writing fiction set in the American Northeast. My first satiric novel, Lisa Maria’s Guide for the Perplexed, was set in a fictionalised version of my hometown. These works all use a sense of place in humorous ways to evoke characters’ moral, social, ethnic, and political identities and conflicts. Whether you choose to use setting as contrast or complement to character, remember that specific sensory details are critically important in creating a vivid fictional world. 159 Writing Humorous Fiction Exercise: our house, in the middle of our street Choose the place you lived longest while you were coming of age. Draw a map of the house and make a list of rooms. List the objects, colours, sounds, textures, and smells that you associate with each room. Finally, write a scene set in one of the rooms, featuring a character or two very unlike the actual people who lived there. Putting unfamiliar characters in familiar places is an effective way to generate humorous tension. Exercise: products of one’s environment Create a setting whose nature embodies some of the important traits of your protagonist. Make a list of your character’s principal descriptors, and then try to list an element of setting that conveys each one. Showing your character through setting reduces the need for exposition, and it’s far more interesting to the reader to be shown, not told, the nature of your protagonist. Plot Humorous plots often involve exaggeration, mistaken identity, reversal of fortune, and the meeting of opposites. Odd characters in strange situations and settings tend to generate plots – sequences of actions – all by themselves. Avoid planning your story’s plot too far in advance of writing. One student of mine liked to outline his short fiction, much as he did his essays; the results were wooden. It’s fine to have a destination in mind for your characters, but don’t be surprised if they change their minds along the way and never reach it. To consider the range of possibilities with plot, let’s look at three classic stories involving dogs: Mark Twain’s ‘The Grateful Poodle’ (1878), Dorothy Parker’s ‘Mr. Durant’ (1944), and Anton Chekhov’s ‘Kashtanka’ (1887). Twain’s story is the simplest of the three: a kind of parable about a physician who one day treats a stray poodle’s broken leg. Next day the poodle returns with another stray dog with a broken leg; the physician mends it. In ensuing days the physician treats an exponentially growing number of dogs with broken legs. Finally, when the mass of needy dogs far exceeds his (and his newly-hired assistants’) abilities, he decides to shoot them. But as he goes forth with his gun, he happens to step on the tail of the original poodle, who bites him. A month later, the physician, on his deathbed as a result of the bite, proclaims to his friends: ‘Beware of books. They tell but half of the story. Whenever a poor wretch asks you for help, and you feel a doubt as to what result may flow from your benevolence, give yourself the benefit of the doubt and kill the applicant’ (Twain 2002: 714). Then the physician dies. (Are you laughing yet?) Like many moral tales, this one is largely expository, with its satiric moral neatly spelled out at its end. Development of character and setting are sketchy at best. Dorothy Parker’s ‘Mr. Durant’ also has a moral, but it’s slightly more embedded in the story’s plot. The title character is a chronic womaniser, a married family man who recently impregnated one of his secretaries. After paying for her abortion, he goes home, ogling fresh possibilities on his way, to find that his children have taken in a stray dog. They beg him to be allowed to keep it, and in a benign mood engendered by his skilful dispatch of his secretary, he promises to let it stay. But soon afterward he is disgusted to discover that the dog is female. He tells his wife, ‘You have a female around, and you know what happens. All the males in the neighborhood will be running after her’ (Parker 1973: 46). Durant reassures his wife that his children won’t think he’s broken his word; he’ll simply get rid of the dog while they’re sleeping. 160 The Handbook of Creative Writing The parallels between Durant’s treatment of his secretary and his dog give this satirical story a rather rigid structure, relieved only by Parker’s authoritatively detailed depiction of her protagonist’s thoughts and actions. The Chekhov story has the same ingredients of the first two: characters, a moral message, and a dog. But here we find more complex development of our protagonist, a mongrel who resembles a fox. Kashtanka, lost by her abusive owner, is found by an animal trainer and transported to a world of relative luxury. She consorts with a trained gander and a clever pig, as well as a snob of a cat, and has a nice dinner every evening. But when Kashtanka herself is taught to do tricks, performs in public, and is reclaimed by her original owner (a drunken carpenter), she readily leaves her exciting new life to resume the derisive neglect of her original owner. And her time away seems to her only a dream. Without humour, all of these stories would be unbearably bleak. With humour, their serious themes gain significant dramatic power. Defining the theme of a work of fiction is a task some authors avoid completely. But, if pressed, many writers of contemporary humorous fiction would admit that their themes involve some sort of alienation. A writer pal of mine says all of his stories have the same theme: ‘Us versus death’. Whatever notion of theme you may have, let it inform your writing style. Martin Amis’s and Joseph Heller’s depictions of absurd, even surreal, worlds are reinforced by their use of consecutive contradictory sentences and scenes. Lewis Nordan’s celebration of the pervasive power of the Mississippi Delta on its inhabitants is lyrically conveyed through his lush, idiosyncratic prose style. Exercise: seeing the forest as well as the trees You’ve finished writing a first draft of a story or novel and are ready to revise. Writing a synopsis of the work will help you see its plot in clear relief. List the key fictional events on index cards, one per card. Tape the cards to a flat surface, arranging their respective heights to reflect rising or diminishing dramatic tension. Do you see anything resembling a dramatic arc? If not, move the cards around. If no arc emerges, consider rewriting or reordering scenes. Consider opposites: what might happen, for instance, if your character stayed home instead of running away? What if, instead of heartbreak, the protagonist found requited love – but with the wrong person? A final exercise A challenge for aspiring writers of humour is to keep a diary, over a period of three or four days, listing every incident that makes them laugh. (Good luck.) Such a list may provide inspiration for one’s fiction – or, at the very least, some insights into one’s own warped psyche. Be forewarned that the act of keeping the list may inhibit laughter. For most of us, laughter is a necessary part of our daily conversations with the world – a physiological response to situations that may be social, political, or downright silly. If you ever meet someone who never laughs, keep a close eye on that person; at the very least, he or she might be worth writing about. Note 1. The author gratefully acknowledges the research assistance of Elizabeth Hastings, graduate student in Creative Writing at the University of Central Florida. 161 Writing Humorous Fiction References Amis, Martin (1986), Money: A Suicide Note, New York: Penguin. Austen, Jane [1814] (1983), Mansfield Park, New York: Bantam Books. Bainbridge, Beryl (1978), Young Adolf, London: Duckworth. Berger, Arthur Asa (1977), The Art of Comedy Writing, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Chekov, Anton (1986), ‘Kashtanka’, in The Tales of Chekhov, Vol. 12: The Cook’s Wife and Other Stories, New York: Ecco. Critchley, Simon (2002), On Humour, London: Routledge. Defoe, Daniel [1722] (2004), Moll Flanders, New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Dickens, Charles [1854] (1981), Hard Times, New York: Bantam Classics. Dufresne, John (2003), The Lie That Tells a Truth, New York: W. W. Norton & Co. Forster, E. M. [1927] (1995), ‘Flat and round characters’, in Michael J. Hoffman and Patrick D. Murphy (eds), Fundamentals of the Theory of Fiction, Durham: Duke University Press. Freud, Sigmund (1963), Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious, trans. James Strachey, New York: W.W. Norton. Galef, David (1993), The Supporting Cast: A Study of Flat and Minor Characters, University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Gibbons, Stella [1932] (1978), Cold Comfort Farm, New York: Penguin. Heller, Joseph [1951] (1971), Catch-22, New York: Dell Publishing Co. Inc. McManus, Patrick F. (2000), The Deer on a Bicycle: Excursions into the Writing of Humor, Spokane, WA: Eastern Washington University Press. Nabokov, Vladimir (1980), ‘Good readers and good writers’, in Lectures on Literature, New York: Harcourt Brace. Nash, Walter (1985), The Language of Humour, London: Longman. O’Neill, Patrick (1990), The Comedy of Entropy, Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Parker, Dorothy (1973), ‘Mr Durant’, in The Portable Dorothy Parker, New York: The Viking Press. Paulos, John (1977), ‘The logic of humour and the humour of logic’, in Antony J. Chapman and Hugh C. Foot (eds), It’s a Funny Thing, Humour, Oxford: Pergamon Press. Rishel, Mary Ann (2002), Writing Humor: Creativity and the Comic Mind, Detroit: Wayne State University Press. Sanders, Barry (1996), Sudeen Glory: Laughter as Subversive History, Boston: Beacon Press. Twain, Mark (2002), ‘The grateful poodle and sequel’, in Joe Queenan, ed., The Malcontents: the Best Bitter, Cynical and Satirical Writing in the World, Philadelphia: Running Press. Waugh, Evelyn [1938] (1999), Scoop, New York: Back Bay Books. 15 Writing for Children Alan Brown I believe that writing for children is the most important writing of all. It helps establish reading (or non-reading) patterns that last for life. It helps children grow intellectually and emotionally by giving them vicarious experience. But children’s literature is never pretentious. It is always entertainment, always fun. In this short chapter, I intend to focus on what I see as particular about writing prose fiction for children (hereafter called WFC). I will leave aside writing for teenagers which is the subject of another chapter, along with non-fiction, drama and poetry in their specialist aspects. Much of what has been written elsewhere about the craft of writing applies to WFC. The market is equally demanding as regards quality, although what this means may vary. When children are bored they stop reading. Successful WFC will be, by and large, fast paced with at least some humour. A few words of caution about such statements. Rules are notoriously made to be broken. In the 1990s, writers were being advised by their agents that the supernatural would not sell (to publishers). So no witches or wizards, please. Joanne Rowling seems not to have had the benefit of this well-meaning advice. Along comes Harry Potter and the rest is history. This example brings us to another important aspect of WFC. Success can be huge. Writers such as Rowling and Philip Pullman earn more than most if not all other living writers. Part of their success is that their work is also read by adults (so-called ‘crossover’ books). However, Theodore Geisel’s sales as Dr Seuss make him one of the most successful writers of all time and his work is probably read only by or to children. Children read more than adults, and the generations are quickly replaced. WFC is as diverse as all adult writing put together, and then some. It has the genres of adventure, romance, comedy, horror, animal, sci-fi/fantasy, biography and history and no doubt more I haven’t thought of. Booksellers look for marketing categories, and mainstream ‘literature’ is much less important than for adults. There are also the different formats of board books (and others such as so-called ‘mechanicals’), picture books, illustrated stories, comics, longer stories, and short novels. Each of these can be defined by interest age, but reading age may be different, which will influence length, vocabulary and grammatical structure. Material for reluctant readers must have an interest level several years older than its reading level. This is a relatively specialist schools market where National Curriculum and 163 Writing for Children National Reading Strategy are important considerations. Work is invariably commissioned from known authors. The short story does not have the same meaning in WFC as it has in adult writing. A short story becomes a book for the younger reader. Short stories may be linked by their characters to form longer books. Anthologies are found mainly in the schools market, or as tasters of longer work published for marketing reasons or for charity. Adult-style short stories tend to be aimed at an older readership by established novelists (Almond 2000). WFC is special in other respects. Many books are bought not by child readers but by parents, teachers and librarians. Publishers have to guess what these other adults will choose. Most of the decision-making adults in this industry are women, though the consequences of this are a matter of debate. Initial publication may be something of a lottery. There is an inevitable degree of censorship. Children are given what is thought to be appropriate to their age and development. Some ‘unsuitable’ books do get published, but who knows how many fall by the wayside. This goes hand in hand with the popularity of ‘issue’ books. The limits of acceptability are constantly being revised, sometimes becoming more liberal, at other times more restrictive. Broken homes seem now to be the norm in modern writing for young children. As soon as topics such as asylum seekers and terrorism enter the news they become the themes of older children’s books. The work of Robert Swindells shows how these large-scale matters can become fine storytelling on the individual level. A frequent theme in children’s books is, of course, growing up. Keen child readers are eager to read up the age-range. They often like a central character who is older than they are. The later Harry Potter books about the pubescent problems of a teenage wizard are devoured by the pre-teen audience as soon as they have finished his younger adventures. The fantastic is a common element in children’s books. There are a number of possible reasons for this. It is often said that the child’s imagination has not yet been blunted by the transition to adulthood and that they are more willing to suspend disbelief. Fantasy worlds or magic realism are ways of delivering the fast paced action that children demand in a real world where they are increasingly protected and restricted. All this may seem a long preamble to practical writing advice, but studying the field and understanding what WFC is and is not can help you. WFC is not simply writing about children. For example, a book such as Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things (Roy 1997) is about children but it is an adult book in its sophisticated style, sexual content and tragic ending. Some teenagers and young adults might love it, but younger children would probably find it boring. Stories for younger children are almost always fully resolved by a happy ending. This is one of the things that make them fun to write. Finding the young voice – a writing exercise The right voice will vary according to target age and format, but is likely to be younger than the one you use with other adults. This applies to the narrative voice as well as to dialogue. You really do have to know how children speak and be able to adopt a young voice for your written words. Does this mean that you must have children of your own? Well, it helps, just as it helps to work with children. Or have done these things and have a good memory. 164 The Handbook of Creative Writing Knowing the latest slang is not required. The latest today may be ridiculed as oldfashioned by the time your work is published. It is more a matter of point of view, in the broadest sense. The best children’s books might just conceivably have been written by a child. Their authors know what is important to children and how children would see these things. Their writing style does not use long words where short ones will do. Their sentence structure and grammar is not needlessly complex. Writers for children have adult skills but have not lost touch with the child they once were, the child within. I suspect that each of us has a particular voice with which they are most comfortable. I think mine is about nine years of age. I can remember what it felt like to be nine better in many ways than at any other time of my childhood. Specific memories of that time seem to glow, though not all were happy. Those memories and feelings have become important parts of what I see as my personal ‘mythology’ – the ‘dreamtime’ of my life. This is the source or inspiration for many of my stories. Try this as a writing exercise. Think of an episode from your childhood that you remember at least in outline. Write as much as you can about it, in the third person. Elaborate patchy areas creatively. Introduce fictional characters if necessary to generate some kind of storyline. Give people words to speak. Try for the language and style of a child one or two years younger than your remembered self. The reason I suggest that you use the third person is to encourage you to go beyond what you can strictly remember, into remembered remembering and imagination. I suggest that you try in the first instance for a younger voice than your subject to counter any adult tendency to overestimate children’s reading ability. Does it work for you? I hope so. The early years – baby books to picture books The earliest years are a very specialist area. Board books, waterproof bath books, word games of many kinds are as much works of design as authorship. Artist and author is often the same person, perhaps having child development experience or training. The ‘books’ use all of the senses – smell, touch and sound as well as visual stimuli. In picture books the design element continues to be strong. There are mechanicals such as ‘pop-up’ books, books with sliders to push or pull, boxes and letters to open (see Alan Ahlberg’s Jolly Postman books). There may be windows or holes in the pages that allow one page to be temporarily superimposed on another, as in Eric Carle’s classic The Very Hungry Caterpillar (Carle 2002). It is generally recognised that it is the look and feel of even the most straightforward picture book that primarily determines its success. No coincidence then that some of the most successful authors illustrate their own books (for example, Albrough, Sendak), sometimes as a series featuring the same character(s) such as Butterworth’s Percy the Park Keeper. Nevertheless, picture books are the first format where a writer can independently create a stand-alone storyline and sell it to a publisher who then commissions someone else as illustrator. Guess How Much I Love You (McBratney 1997) was written by Sam McBratney and illustrated by Anita Jeram and is perhaps the single most successful picture book of all time, selling many millions of copies. A picture book is radically different to an illustrated story, in that the illustrations carry their share of the storyline. The text should give the artist opportunities and not duplicate 165 Writing for Children what is obvious from their pictures. An intending author has to study the way the format works. The story is usually spread over twelve double pages, and sometimes uses the single page at front and back. There may be one illustration on a page, or a number of linked pictures, but the writer can consider each page or double page as like a miniature scene in a film. Each time the child opens the book at a new place, what they read and see has a unity of meaning, whilst also leading on to the next scene. The ultimate scene is of course the dramatic highpoint, with some revelation, surprise or joke. I do not mean to suggest that the picture book story hops about in time and place. On the contrary, it is commonly set in a single time and place with a small cast of characters. The storyline is usually quite simple with a few twists and turns along the way. It helps if there is some interest for the adult who may have to read the book over and over to their child. Picture books are aimed at children from two or three years of age up to six or seven, who differ greatly in terms of emotional and intellectual development, linguistic and reading skills. Their books are correspondingly diverse in theme and style. They have in common that the present tense is often used, with lots of speech and humour. If you love writing picture books, sooner or later you will want to write a text in verse. Agents and publishers seem reluctant to accept them on the grounds that rhymes do not translate into the foreign language co-editions needed to make publication worthwhile. Clearly, some of the most loved picture books ever published are in verse, so perhaps rhyme is just a convenient criticism of an inadequate text. A picture book writing exercise Write a very short and simple story about animals. Animal texts are very common for the very young. Story animals can be smarter and more adventurous than children themselves. So what if they are people in animal skins? Children love them. If you get stuck for ideas, just recount a day in the life of your chosen animal, your own pet perhaps. Aim at 500 to 1,000 words. Now try to cut your story into twelve more or less equal parts. You may find it helpful to draw twelve boxes and write your text into them. Does it work? If you are used to writing only older stories, or adult short stories, the chances are that it doesn’t. There will be too much ‘rationale’ and not enough action. Some boxes will be bursting with text, others almost empty. So change your story until it does work. Consider the point of each scene. What is it really about? If there is nothing of interest there, cut it out. Develop what is lively and moves the story along. You can repeat yourself. Picture books often use fairytale threes. For example, a character looking for something may have to look in the cupboard and behind the sofa before finding it under the bed. They would find something interesting each time. Don’t worry if the last page punch-line seems predictable to you. Very young children love repetition and anticipation. If they take to your book they will read it dog-eared. I would not submit a text with my own pagination. Editors like to make their own decisions about such things. They may want very little text on some pages. The last might have just one word. If your text is seriously considered for publication the commissioning editor will make up a package that includes samples from an illustrator, input from a design editor and 166 The Handbook of Creative Writing commitment to co-editions from publishers abroad. Then it is examined by the accountants and marketing people. Along this long, hard road you are likely to be asked to make many changes to your text. You will be one of a project team. Picture books may be short but each is polished to as near-perfection as the team can achieve. The time between submitting a text and seeing it in a bookshop is unlikely to be much less than two years. First story books Children who take to reading soon want something meatier than a picture book but with some of the same visual appeal. First story books are a hybrid form, perched between the text heavy novel and the illustration heavy picture book. As well as text, they have pictures on most pages, sometimes in colour but often black and white. These pictures may add to the story but they are not expected to carry meaning essential to the storyline that the text does not. You will not usually be asked to change your words to fit the illustrations. The text will contain the rationale and scene linking that is minimal in picture books. In fact, a ‘scene’ is now a chapter in the style of a novel. Each chapter has its own structure and moves the story along, though it may be very short. The sophistication and word length of early story books varies according to target age, with series for each age group. Each publisher divides up the field in a slightly different way, and a useful source of information about how they do so is contained in the annual Writers’ & Artists’ Yearbook (A&C Black annual). Make a trip to your bookshop to read some samples for yourself. New and aspiring writers often debate the value of agents. A neglected factor (because you don’t see it if you don’t have one) is that your agent will pass on requests by publishers for contributions to new series such as these. Their letter will set out the aims, style and topics wanted. This is the point at which you are most likely to get a story accepted. You might get this information by writing regularly to every children’s publisher, but it is unlikely that you or they would have the patience to do so. A first story book writing exercise School is one of the first big adventures for children, and is very useful for writers because parents are mostly absent. It can be a pretty scary place. Teachers have a parental role but with a tough core of authority most parents lack. Other children may be friends, but their friendship may be fickle. They may be rivals or bullies. School stories rest upon the fact that schools are where important social interactions take place. This is their hidden agenda, if you like. Think back to the earliest school days you can remember. Don’t worry if there have been changes since then. Concentrate on the emotions that you felt at the time, or imagine you felt. Children today will be not be so very different. Populate your classroom with characters – best friends, enemies, teacher, and class pets. Invent what you can’t remember. Imagine the everyday routine of registers, lessons, dinner time and breaks. Now think of an event that breaks this cosy routine and you have the basis of your story. A visitor, human or otherwise, a new student, a change of teacher, an accident. How do you and the class react? 167 Writing for Children Write your story in a lively style, and be humorous if you can. For five-to seven-year-olds aim for five chapters of about 300 words each. For seven to nines extend the total length to about 3,000 words. Longer story books Even a casual glance at the books on offer will tell you that the boundaries between categories in terms of age and length are quite flexible. The categories themselves are much firmer, because they correspond to the sales strategies of the bookshops. All books might be presented in alphabetical order of author’s name, but they are not. For better or worse, they are categorised by age and other more transient marketing devices. Many children from the age of eight or nine are ready to tackle stories of 8,000 words or more, and writers and publishers are keen to provide them. They may be series, or standalones linked by a series format. A popular author may write all the titles in a series, or there may be many authors. The supposed author may not exist or have written only the first titles. Thereafter, some series are written by jobbing authors working from a brief supplied by the publisher. This kind of work should not be demeaned. It is a good way of learning the craft and acquiring useful contacts. Many classic books have been written for this age group, for example Roald Dahl’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2004) and Dick King Smith’s The Sheep-pig (1999). These story books are fun to write; long enough to allow substantial plot and character development, but short enough so that the writing never becomes heavy labour. These ‘mini novels’ usually have illustrations, but only one or two per chapter, of which there may be ten or twelve. A longer story book writing exercise Children are often obsessive about their hobbies. They are avid collectors. A child may, for example, be fascinated by dinosaurs. They will then collect anything about dinosaurs – models, fossils, books of fiction, books of facts – anything that remotely bears upon those fabulous beasts. Did you have such a hobby? Do you still? Think of something that children in the preteen years might find fascinating. The endless possibilities include princesses, monster trucks, spaceships and ponies. Choose one that you like too, and let your enthusiasm shine through your writing. Now all you need is a storyline that gives a child protagonist what the child reader dreams about in relation to that hobby. Not too quickly or easily, but with some ups and downs, twists and turns. Remember that the essence of dramatic storytelling is unfulfilled desire and conflict between characters. So your heroine living in an apparently ordinary family might discover that she is really a princess. Your hero might find a spaceship at the bottom of the garden. A villain is invaluable for generating conflict, and from this age onward villains can be really villainous. A usurper imprisons our princess to keep her from claiming the throne. A rogue scientist steals our hero’s spaceship. The issue of gender is also becoming important. We can more easily be politically correct with younger children. Girls of five or six may like the engine stories of the Rev. Audrey 168 The Handbook of Creative Writing as much as do boys, but most people would admit that by age ten differences between the sexes are emerging. So, some books will probably appeal to one sex more than the other. Much of the work of Jacqueline Wilson is unashamedly aimed at girls and she is Britain’s most borrowed author in public libraries. Publishers make great efforts to keep boy readers, knowing that they are more likely than girls to lose the reading habit as they grow older. There is a whole genre of football stories, for example, from the likes of Michael Hardcastle. In your story, you will generally appeal more to boys with a male chief protagonist, and vice versa. If you can have a gang of mixed gender, so much the better. Enid Blyton’s famous and secret gangs were always so. You have your characters, a setting and the rudiments of a plot. Is it time to start writing the story? Perhaps so, if you can write 8,000 words without any formal outline. I find a written outline essential for longer story books and novels. Do whatever works for you. Short novels Fluent readers of age ten and average readers of just a few years older (the early teens) want a substantial book in ‘grown-up’ novel format. These are dealt with in the chapter ‘Writing for Teenagers’. In conclusion WFC invites children to identify with characters in situations both strange and familiar, allowing them to imagine how they themselves might act in such situations. Remember to make your young heroes and heroines as proactive as possible in order to keep your novel firmly for children and not just about them. Let those heroes and heroines achieve their own resolutions to problems. By empowering your characters, you empower your readers – of which may there be many. References Alborough, Jez (2006), Hit the Ball, Duck, London: HarperCollins. Ahlberg, Allan and Ahlberg, Janet (ill.) (2006), The Jolly Postman or Other People’s Letters: 20th Anniversary Edition, London: Little, Brown and Company. Almond, David (2000), Counting Stars, London: Hodder Children’s Books. Carle, Eric (2002), The Very Hungry Caterpillar, London: Puffin. Dahl, Roald (2004), Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, London: Viking. McBratney, Sam and Jeram, Anita (ill.) (1997), Guess How Much I Love You, London: Walker Books. Roy, Arundhati (1997), The God of Small Things, London: Flamingo. Smith, Dick King (1999), The Sheep-pig, London: Puffin. Writers’ & Artists’ Yearbook (annual), London: A & C Black. 16 Writing for Teenagers Linda Newbery Teenage fiction, young adult fiction, ‘crossover’ books – these terms seem to be used interchangeably, and therefore confusingly. In bookshops and libraries, the shelves labelled ‘teenage fiction’ often display books aimed at readers who are two or three years short of their teenage years; the term ‘crossover’ is used sometimes to indicate suitability for older teenagers and adults, but elsewhere to mean a book written primarily for children, and with child characters but also adult appeal, such as Philip Pullman’s Northern Lights (1995) or Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1865). Young adult fiction is more clearly defined in the US and Australia than in the UK, and is given a standing and a critical attentiveness which most UK authors only dream of; on the other hand, a large proportion of the world market has little concept of teenage or young adult fiction, making sales of translation rights difficult. For the purpose of this chapter, I’m concerning myself with fiction likely to be enjoyed by capable readers of thirteen or fourteen and up, and possibly by adults. From about 2002 onwards, highly successful ‘crossover’ titles such as Lian Hearn’s Across the Nightingale Floor (2002) and Jennifer Donnelly’s A Gathering Light (2003) have won prizes and hit bestseller lists. It would be easy to think that the phenomenon of the upper-end of fiction for the young – titles which could be, and have been, published with equal success on adult lists – has only now been invented by publishers and authors. That isn’t the case, though: fiction of adolescence has been around for a very long time. J. D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye (1951), Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey (1818), Dodie Smith’s I Capture the Castle (1949), Sylvia Plath’s The Bell Jar (1963), To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee (1960), Mervyn Peake’s Gormenghast trilogy (1946–59) and All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque (1929) – to pick just a few of the best-known – could all fit into this category, or rather span these categories. All these were first published on adult lists, and several have reached teenage readers via an exam syllabus rather than because publishers saw ‘crossover’ potential. Fiction of adolescence isn’t new, but newly-branded. The concept of teenage fiction didn’t arrive in the UK until the 1970s – which is odd, as teenage fashions, music, and magazines were very much in evidence, so why was fiction so slow to catch up? It’s possibly because fiction has to be filtered through large numbers of adults before reaching its audience, and it seems to be felt that young people must be protected in their fiction reading from the realities of modern living which are so apparent in the magazines, films and TV available to them. Writers such as K. M Peyton, Jane Gardam, 170 The Handbook of Creative Writing Jill Paton Walsh, Aidan Chambers and Jean Ure in the UK, and S. E. Hinton, Robert Cormier and Katherine Paterson in the US, were among the first to write challenging fiction for readers at the upper end of the youth market, with US writer Judy Blume topping bestseller lists – and causing shelving anxieties for librarians – with Forever, in which she was determined to show that sex need not be guilt-ridden, nor first love for ever. Issues-driven? Since then, this upper end of the children’s market has had its ups and downs before reaching the ‘crossover’ boom in around 2005. In the UK, by the late 1980s, every publisher was keen to leap on the teenage bandwagon, and several imprints appeared such as Teen Tracks from HarperCollins, Plus from Puffin, Topliners and Limelight from Macmillan, all of these given a distinctive branding to separate them from the core nine to twelve fiction the publishers were known for. Teenage fiction tended at that time to be dominated by issuesdriven fiction, and some might argue that it still is. Anorexia; squabbling or separating parents; sibling death; racism; drug-taking; unemployment; bullying and other forms of peer pressure – topics such as these made easy marketing hooks, and assured teenage readers, often perceived by publishers as reluctant, that they would find stories relevant to their own lives. Although some of this, as publishers rushed to fill the teenage gap, could be formulaic, there were also enduring and satisfying novels from the authors mentioned above, and others. Publishers and authors soon found, however, that it was (and still is) hard to achieve the same levels of sales with a teenage title that might be achieved by a younger book. Books for the core nine to twelve age-group and younger are bought for children by parents and relatives; teenagers are more likely to choose and buy books for themselves, but have many other demands on their money. Even for a well-established author, it’s hard to make a living by writing teenage fiction alone. Many well-known writers for this older age group earn their bread-and-butter by writing for younger children as well. Reaching readers It can be particularly hard, I think, for fiction of adolescence to reach readers. As I’ve mentioned, ‘teenage’ shelves in bookshops and libraries are often dominated by books aimed at ten or eleven and up. (Although publishers use the term ‘pre-teen’ or ‘aspirational’ for this just-below-teenage fiction, most shop or library shelving doesn’t distinguish.) The unfortunate result is that readers of fifteen or sixteen are often deterred from browsing by the belief that they’ve outgrown teenage fiction. And, as in every area of publishing, shops give more shelf and table-space to the highly-promoted books with immediate mass appeal and a big marketing budget, with the result that books produced without fanfare can be overlooked. It can be depressing, on scanning the shelves, to see ephemeral but glossilyproduced books and series given prominence. Faced with this apparently large but in fact limited choice, it’s not surprising that some teenage readers feel patronised by the fiction targeted at them, and consider that it has little to offer them by the age of thirteen or fourteen. Undoubtedly, the children’s book world benefits from an enthusiastic army of support, composed of teachers, librarians, volunteers helpers, reading-group organisers, journalists, knowledgeable booksellers and suppliers, who are devoted to bringing books and readers together. Many children and teenagers have daily access to a good school library, with a 171 Writing for Teenagers keen and well-informed librarian, reading clubs, fresh and appealing stock. But, regrettably, too many are not reached by this network. Their experience of books will then be limited to the drab and outdated stock in a library they’re unlikely to visit voluntarily, or to the local bookshop – if they choose to go there. The sad fact is that the greater proportion of books published each year remains invisible to most readers. Why write for teenagers? Why write for this age-group, then? You’re unlikely to get rich, unless you’re phenomenally successful with high ‘crossover’ sales or a film deal. Your audience is possibly the hardest to reach, the hardest to please, and the least likely to spend their money on books. Yet writing for and about adolescence can be immensely satisfying, offering – among other things – the immeasurable reward of reaching young people at this crucial stage of their lives. Many writers for the young say that they remember some particular stage of childhood with particular clarity. Many reviewers have commented on Roald Dahl’s ability to speak so directly to child readers. Chris Powling, himself a children’s author, wrote of Dahl: ‘When asked how he can communicate so successfully with eight-year-olds he once replied, “I am eight years old”. And so he is – or five or ten or fifteen years old, as necessary’ (Powling 1983: 69). Maybe you have a particular closeness to teenagers, through work or family; maybe you are a teenager! Or maybe you rely on your own memories. Whatever your circumstances, if you feel that you can re-experience the peculiar intensity of teenage years, with all their anxieties, exhilaration, disillusionment, wild hopes, passions, frustrations, yearnings, insecurities, soaring ambitions and acute sense of injustice, then maybe you can write a teenage novel, whether you choose to set it now, in the past or in the future. One of the attractions for me is that if I write about a character aged fifteen, sixteen or so, I’m focusing on a stage of life at which many things will imminently change. A sixteen-year-old, within the next ten years, will inevitably be faced with many decisions, will encounter new people and places, will develop and change values, and will make discoveries about his or her own strengths, weaknesses and qualities. People of this age can have a fair amount of independence, too – travelling unaccompanied, going around on bikes, walking home at night, etc. (One of the problems faced by authors of stories for younger children is the need to separate them from controlling parents or teachers. Unlike the Famous Five or the Swallows and Amazons, twenty-first-century children don’t, unless in exceptional circumstances, set off for islands, forests or ruined castles without adults in attendance.) Since I always assume that I’m writing for readers, I can write a substantial and complex novel which absorbs and challenges me in the writing; I can experiment with structure; I can set up puzzles and questions for the reader; I can use contradictions, irony, juxtaposition. In other words, I can do whatever suits the story I’m telling. Writers are frequently asked who they write for, but not all of them know the answer. I tend to have far more idea of an intended readership if I’m writing, say, a story for six-yearolds. With my older fiction, I don’t particularly consider that I write ‘for’ teenagers, or indeed ‘for’ anyone other than myself. The needs of the story determine the style, structure, tone and pace, not the response of an imaginary reader. More important than aiming at any supposed readership is to be as honest as I can in portraying my characters and their concerns. What is crucial, in any kind of writing for the young, is that the actions or choices of the young protagonists must be significant. The main characters must affect the 172 The Handbook of Creative Writing development of the story, whether through actions, allegiances or decisions, right or wrong; they can’t simply have things happening to them. Not a genre As with many areas of writing, it’s possible to try too hard to give publishers or readers what you think they want. This presupposes that editors and readers know what they want, before they get it. Teenage fiction is not a genre, though it’s often spoken of as if it is. Mention the term, and a number of likely subjects and characters spring to mind: first love and sex, rivalries, teenage pregnancy, drugs, independence, conflicts at school, exam pressures, clashes of values, etc. But successful fiction cannot be produced by ticking off items on a check-list. The best novels of adolescence don’t, to my mind, have a self-conscious focus on obvious teenage interests, or a crowd-pleasing intent. They are simply novels in which the main character or characters happen to be at some stage of adolescence. Good fiction – for whatever age group – should offer, not narrowness, but widening and expansion. Paradoxically, it can be the assumption of some editors that teenagers have to be prised away from computers or TV to read at all, and must be offered undemanding plot-driven fare in which everything’s spelled out for them, that risks driving away more discerning readers. ‘Teenagers’, obviously, range from thirteen to nineteen, which is a vast stretch in anyone’s life, and reading tastes vary as widely as for any other age group. I find it as patronising to assume that teenagers are solely interested in fashion, sex, fame and rock groups as it would be to assume that thirty-year-old women only want chick-lit, or that young men will always choose sex, cars and football; but a glance at bookshop shelves – particularly at series fiction – shows how prevalent this assumption is. That’s only the surface, however. You might have to look a little harder to find them, but some of the most striking and compelling novels for this age group fit no formula, and might have been considered unmarketable or at least unlikely to sell well. For example, Ann Turnbull’s No Shame, No Fear (2003), set in England in the seventeenth century, is about religious persecution and the relationship between a Quaker girl, Susanna, and William, the son of a wealthy wool merchant. Not a subject that the marketing department would gleefully seize upon: but the quality of the writing ensured that the book was shortlisted for two major prizes, the Guardian and the Whitbread awards, and thus found readers who would not otherwise have come across it. Aidan Chambers’ Postcards from No Man’s Land (1999) combines two stories, that of a Dutch family protecting an injured soldier after the Battle of Arnhem in the 1940s, with the present-day experiences of Jacob who is visiting Amsterdam, and an elderly woman who has chosen euthanasia as the preferred end to her life. This outstanding novel won the Carnegie Medal, bringing its author to a wider audience than his previous novels had reached. Neither of these authors began by taking a survey of teenagers and their interests, nor by scanning teenage magazines to see what’s topical, but with the story they had to tell. Taking issue with issues Earlier, I mentioned the prevalence of ‘issues-driven’ fiction. As the author Melvin Burgess points out: There are some stout defenders of these kind of books, and rightly so – many of the very best novels are set in areas of social tension. But the discomfort people feel about ‘issue’ books is 173 Writing for Teenagers also justified. In some ways, the problem is bad writing – books that twist life to suit an educational purpose. But a more insidious effect has been what I’d like to call educationalism – the idea that a book is somehow better because it is useful in socialising young people. (Burgess 2005: 14–15) My own novels certainly include elements that could be termed ‘issues’ – confusion over sexuality, prejudice, religious doubts in The Shell House; racism, alienation and belonging, in Sisterland – but then, that is what life is made of. I resist saying that my novels ‘deal with’ any particular subject, which suggests that a topic is being given a decisive sorting-out and laying to rest. The risk of issues-led fiction is that the author can seem to be writing on behalf of a particular group of people, such as asylum-seekers, or sufferers from anorexia. This can produce a sense of duty to the reader, which is not quite the business of fiction. For instance, it would be hard to imagine a teenage novel focusing on anorexia which ended with the central character obstinately persisting in the face of all offers of help, advice or treatment. Such books almost invariably contain a ‘self-help’ element. David Fickling, of David Fickling Books, made a similar point in an address to the Scattered Authors’ Society (Oxford, 2004): ‘The danger of issues is that you appear to know what is good. And then you are not writing a story but a lecture’. Young readers are very alert to any attempt to teach them through fiction, and quite rightly so. In this, they are no different from adults. Most of us willingly absorb information about, say, the American civil war or managing crop-rotation on a smallholding through reading Cold Mountain (Frazier 1997); this is one of the pleasures of reading fiction, and a particular pleasure of literature in translation or of reading about an unfamiliar culture or period. But being bludgeoned with an overt message or moral is not the same at all, and young readers resent being patronised just as much as adults do. I’ll quote myself here, referring to my young adult novel The Shell House (2002): Fiction does not concern itself with offering helpful advice, but with inhabiting the consciousness of one or more characters. In The Shell House I did not aim to represent all teenage boys in doubt about their sexuality, as Greg is, nor all teenage Christians experiencing a crisis of faith, as Faith does. I tried to be Greg; experiencing, from inside his mind and body, confusion, doubt and denial. My treatment of Faith was different, as she is not a viewpoint character, so I tried to see her as Greg does: to find such respect for her conviction, even though he does not share it, that he wants to help her regain her wavering belief. The question ‘Does God exist?’ certainly looms large in the novel, but, of course, I made no attempt to answer it . . . Questions are as important as answers – perhaps more important. (Newbery 2004: 13) Adolescence is a stage of life at which values, priorities, politics, moralities are likely to be questioned more than at any other time. Stimulating fiction for this age group not only permits but provokes questioning, allows for more than one interpretation, and encourages re-reading. Who’s talking? First-person or third-person narrative? Since the creation of Holden Caulfield, with his direct and unmistakable voice (Salinger 1951, The Catcher in the Rye), first-person narrative has been widely used to engage teenage readers. The single first-person viewpoint can be colloquial, confiding, recognisable, and can give the impression that the narrator is speaking directly to the reader as an equal. There are inherent risks, though. One is that 174 The Handbook of Creative Writing first-person narrative must usually use the slang of the period, and thus, if set in the present, risks dating rapidly; a second is that vocabulary and expression must be limited to that of the narrator. Such literary ventriloquism can be more authentic than interesting. Where used skilfully, though, it can work magnificently, as in David Klass’s You Don’t Know Me, in which John is a most engaging narrator – witty, self-mocking, with an eye for detail and absurdity even through the painful experiences he relates. Alternating voices are effectively used by Robert Swindells in Daz 4 Zoe (1990) in which episodes by articulate, middle-class Zoe are offset by the illiterate but expressive account of Daz, denied an education in this near-future Britain in which affluence and poverty are exaggerated and forcibly segregated. First-person narrative can work well in historical fiction, too, carrying the reader through an initial sense of strangeness. Ann Turnbull effectively uses the alternating-narrator structure in No Shame, No Fear, and Celia Rees’ Witch Child, Mary Newbury, speaks to us directly from the seventeenth century. Third-person narrative may at first seem to be more removed from the reader, but it doesn’t have to be the voice of an author obviously present in the text; it can be endlessly flexible, allowing for single- or multiple-viewpoints without restricting vocabulary. An example of third-person narrative deftly handled to include multiple viewpoints is Deep Secret, Berlie Doherty’s moving novel about a Derbyshire community threatened by the flooding of their village for a new reservoir. A trawl through recent publications would suggest that all taboos have now been broken, and that there’s no subject that can’t be used in young adult fiction: Boy Kills Man by Matt Whyman and Looking for JJ by Anne Cassidy (2004) are both about children who kill; Melvin Burgess’s Junk (1996) and Doing It (2002) concerned themselves with heroin and sex respectively, the latter including an exploitative relationship between a teacher and a student; Julie Burchill’s Sugar Rush (2004) must be one of the first novels on a teenage list which ends with lesbians in a happy and trusting relationship. But the shock or novelty factor will only take you so far. An intriguing plot or a catchy marketing hook might get your typescript as far as an editor’s desk, but then it’s over to the writing. And if you want to get enduring satisfaction from the writing itself, rather than (or as well as) from advances and royalties, then the most important person to please is yourself. If you want to write for teenagers, I suggest that it’s better to start from the position of wanting to write fiction, and to write it as well as you possibly can, than by wanting to write specifically for a teenage audience. Not only for teenagers Aidan Chambers, who ‘accidentally’ became an editor as well as author in the 70s when he created the Macmillan Topliners series, had this to say: I do not believe teenage literature is only for children or teenagers; I do not believe that young people should only read what is published for them, and nothing else. Far from it. The sooner children and teenagers reach into the mainstream of our literature the better. But I do believe that most people will reach into it more vigorously, more willingly, and with a deeper understanding of the pleasures it offers if they have encountered on the way a literature which is for them . . . and which is written with as much dedication and skill as is the best of the mainstream work. (Chambers 1985: 86–7) This is just as true twenty years later. Without diverse, stimulating, challenging fiction to take readers through their teens, the risk is that they lose the reading habit; they may forget 175 Writing for Teenagers the pleasure they had from reading as children; they may even consider it childish. At the time Aidan Chambers published Booktalk, readers may have been discouraged by a dearth of books; now, they’re more likely to be overwhelmed by the baffling quantity. But, however fashions change, and whatever we choose to call it, fiction of adolescence will always be crucially important. Publishers will always be looking for writers who can tune into the adolescent years, and can take readers with them. References Austen, Jane (1818), Northanger Abbey, London: John Murray. Blume, Judy (1975), Forever, New York: Bradbury Press. Burchill, Julie (2004), Sugar Rush, London: Macmillan. Burgess, Melvin (1996), Junk, London: Andersen Press. Burgess, Melvin (2002), Doing It, London: Andersen Press. Burgess, Melvin (2005) ‘What is teenage fiction?’, Books for Keeps, no. 152, 14–15. Carroll, Lewis (1865), Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, London: Macmillian. Cassidy, Anne (2004), Looking for JJ, London: Scholastic. Chambers, Aidan (1999), Postcards from No Man’s Land, London: The Bodley Head. Chambers, Aidan (1985) Booktalk, Stroud: Thimble Press. Doherty, Berlie (2003), Deep Secret, London: Penguin. Donnelly, Jennifer (2003), A Northern Light, New York: Harcourt Brace. Published in the UK, (2003), as A Gathering Light, London: Bloomsbury. Frazier, Charles (1997), Cold Mountain, New York: Atlantic, Monthly Press. Hearn, Lian (2002), Across the Nightingale Floor, London: Macmillan. Klass, David (2001), You Don’t Know Me, London: Viking. Lee, Harper (1960), To Kill a Mockingbird, Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott. Newbery, Linda (2002), The Shell House, Oxford: David Fickling Books. Newbery, Linda (2003), Sisterland, Oxford: David Fickling Books. Newbery, Linda (2004), ‘How the authors of children’s books perceive their audience’, Books and Boundaries: Writers and their Audiences, Pat Pinsent (ed.), National Centre for Research in Children’s Literature papers 10, London: Pied Piper Publishing. Peake, Mervyn, The Gormenghast Trilogy: (1946) Titus Groan, (1950) Gormenghast, (1959) Titus Alone, London: Eyre and Spottiswoode. Plath, Sylvia (1963), The Bell Jar, London: William Heinemann. Powling, Chris (1983), Roald Dahl, London: Hamish Hamilton. Pullman, Philip (1995), Northern Lights, London: Scholastic. Rees, Celia (2000), Witch Child, London: Bloomsbury. Remarque, Erich Maria (1929), All Quiet on the Western Front, trans. A. W. Wheen, London: G. P. Putnam’s Sons. Salinger, J. D. (1951), The Catcher in the Rye, Boston: Little, Brown. Smith, Dodie (1949), I Capture the Castle, London: William Heinemann. Swindells, Robert (1990), Daz 4 Zoe, London: Hamish Hamilton. Turnbull, Ann (2003), No Shame, No Fear, London: Walker Books. Whyman, Matt (2004), Boy Kills Man, London: Hodder. 17 The ‘Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Creative Nonfiction, But Were Too Naïve or Uninformed to Ask’ Workshop Simulation Lee Gutkind Scene 1: sucking them in I usually begin this workshop by telling students I am not going to define creative nonfiction for them. No one asks a poet to define poetry or a novelist to provide a meaning of fiction, because art defines itself. Rules and regulations are for journalists and government officials – not writers. Creative nonfiction demands what the name implies: that a writer find an interesting and compelling way – a creative approach – to communicating information and teaching readers something they don’t necessarily want or need to know. It is easy to write for an audience geared to a particular subject; for example, animal lovers or people who live in the country will be interested in an essay about a farm veterinarian. But how to attract readers with little interest in animals, medicine, or rural life? That’s the challenge. You do so by telling a story – a true story about real people – that captures their attention and engages their imagination. Along the way, readers learn a great deal about whatever it is the writer is trying to teach them – in this particular case, the problems and challenges of a working farm veterinarian. But you have enticed them with story, not with an informational pay-off. That is what I say in my real workshops. I can hear it now, as I write. ‘That’s creative nonfiction in a nutshell’, I say. The story is the ‘creative’ part and the information (also called ‘the teaching element’) is the ‘nonfiction’ part. I do not mean ‘story’ here in the generic sense the way in which reporters often rely on the term, as in ‘I have to write my story’ or ‘Did you see the story in today’s paper?’ I mean ‘story’ with a beginning, middle and ending. I mean story with drama, suspense, and conflict – a story that compels a reader to say, ‘I couldn’t put it down’. At this point, I inform my students that the workshop is over. I have told them everything they ever needed or wanted to know – and I begin to pack up my papers. Scene 2: the yellow test My students may think I am a bit of a fool at this point, but since they are not asking for their money back – yet – here’s what I say next: ‘OK, you get the story idea here. The building blocks of creative nonfiction are scenes, or little stories, that are pieced together in such 177 Creative Nonfiction a way that they tell a larger story’. I make a big point of this ‘building block’ concept, and repeat it over and over again so they will not forget. As my students discover, the concept of writing in scenes is easier to digest – intellectually – than to practise. Journalists, especially, have trouble ‘seeing’ a story or a series of stories because their work is often so formulaic. So, we move on to the ‘yellow test’. ‘Get yourself a highlighter’, I say, ‘and go to the books or magazines you like to read. Look for the writers you appreciate and respect’. I name a few very prominent creative nonfiction writers, like Gay Talese, Tom Wolfe, and Annie Dillard. ‘Read them carefully and with your marker, yellow-in the scenes or little stories. Guess what? Anywhere from 50–70 per cent of the text will glare back at you in yellow’. Scene 3: what’s a scene? Creative nonfiction allows – in fact, encourages – the writer to use basic literary techniques once previously and primarily employed by the fiction writer rather than the journalist. By ‘literary techniques’ I mean the obvious stuff, like description. What do the characters and places about which you are writing look like? Make material come alive visually by evoking specificity of detail to provide three-dimensional texture. ‘There’s specific details and what we call “intimate details”’, I say. By ‘intimate’ I don’t mean sex and drugs and rock-and-roll, but stuff that your readers won’t necessarily or easily imagine. There’s the old story about Gay Talese’s classic profile of Frank Sinatra, published in the mid-1960s in Esquire Magazine. Talese was prohibited from interviewing Sinatra when he arrived in California because ‘Old Blue Eyes’ had a cold and wasn’t in the mood to chat with anyone. Talese followed Sinatra around and interviewed his entire entourage – from bodyguards to PR flaks. He eventually happened upon a little old blue-haired lady who carried around a hatbox and shadowed Sinatra virtually anywhere he went. This woman, he discovered, was Sinatra’s wig lady. She tended to his toupees. This was an intimate detail – something a reader would not easily imagine. Not only was the existence of a full-time wig lady a telling detail about Sinatra, but it also enhanced Talese’s credibility by reflecting a level of awareness and intimacy about his subject that was deeper and more thorough than other writers’ Sinatra efforts. Description with specificity and intimacy of detail is an anchoring element of a good scene. So is dialogue. In creative nonfiction, characters are sometimes interviewed and quoted – this is often a necessity – but people more often than not talk with one another. Dialogue increases the pace of the essay and helps make the characters more human and accessible. Sometimes interviews can be made to simulate a conversation between writer and subject. Rather than a Q and A experience with a table and a tape recorder dividing the two ‘adversaries’. And while use of the first person ‘I’ is not a requirement of creative nonfiction, it is not (as it is in traditional journalism) anathema. In creative nonfiction the narrative determines the writer’s point of view and presence. The idea always is to make the narrative seem natural; there’s no reason to strain to keep yourself out of the story if you are part of it – or in the story if you are not. Scene 4: don’t hold back You are free to say what you think about the people you meet. Creative nonfiction encourages, though it certainly does not require, subjectivity. The writer’s particular orientation, 178 The Handbook of Creative Writing should he or she choose to share it, adds an eye-opening three-dimensional element to what might normally be a more conventional, hesitant observation. Under certain circumstances, writers can also see their world through the eyes of the people about whom they are writing. This technique, used frequently by fiction writers, is called inner-point-of-view. Inner-point-of-view helps establish a direct link between reader and the story, without a writer in the middle as an interpreter or filter. ‘So you’ve got dialogue, description and detail, inner-point-of-view, personal voice – what else?’ I ask. Invariably, in these workshops students eventually say, ‘Action’. ‘This is a good word,’ I answer. But action is not enough – you don’t want action without some sort of resolution. Something has to happen. Something big and memorable. The action can also be small, as long as there is a happening – a beginning and end. At this point, I raise the Magic Marker I have been using to write down the anchoring elements of a scene on a whiteboard and wave it in the air, saying, ‘The professor lifts the Magic Marker in the air. That’s the beginning of a scene. If he drops it, well then, something happens. And even if he doesn’t drop it – but only threatens to drop it – that’s also a happening’. An action is initiated. Tension is established – and suspense is created, if only for a few seconds. (‘Will the professor throw the Magic Marker? At whom? Will he put it down and walk away?’) The reader will usually stick around to see the end if he or she is intrigued in the beginning. Scene 5: the nonfiction part And speaking of the beginning, I next take my students back to the way my presentation started, by reminding them about what creative nonfiction is all about – style and substance. ‘The story is the style part’, I say, ‘and it acts as a receptacle for the information or reportage you are doing. So what you try to do is embed or include information about your subject inside the scenes you write, and then you also embed information between the scenes you write. So it is kind of like a TV show. First there’s a story, and the audience is hooked by what’s happened. Then, when you know you have them in the palm of your hands, you give them a commercial. You tell them what you want them to know about your subject. Then, when you think they might be getting bored, you continue the story until they’re hooked again. Any time you get the chance, you also put information into the story itself. It is kind of like a dance: Story, information inside the story, information between the stories, then more story’. Scene 6: frame and focus I now ask students to notice the different ways in which the scenes are rendered. A scene can be recreated with dialogue, description, and other literary techniques, or it could be straight monologue with the subject simply telling a story. Another scene could be a combination of quotation and paraphrasing by the writer. Remember that scenes can also be stories told to you, so when you interview your subjects, keep in mind that you are not doing a Q-and-A. Ask questions which will lead into stories – get them to set the scene, supply characterisation and description. Talk to them and squeeze out the details. Let them do the writing for you. Good writing begins with good material. Digging out the details is the writer’s responsibility and the ultimate challenge. Creative Nonfiction 179 Each scene should have a beginning and an end. Something happens. Some scenes contain information, some scenes don’t. But in between those scenes that don’t should be blocks of information. ‘OK?’ I ask. ‘Does everybody understand? The building blocks are scenes. The scenes aren’t scenes unless they have a beginning and an end. Something has to happen. Information – the reporting – is embedded in the scenes and between the scenes. That’s the rhythm and that’s the dance, whether it is an essay or book chapter or even the entire book. OK?’ I repeat. ‘Yes’, they say. ‘Are you ready to go home?’ I ask, even louder. ‘Yes’, they yell. ‘No’, I tell them. ‘You haven’t learned the “F” words. Creative nonfiction won’t work until you can use the “F” words’. Now they are really interested. The ‘F’ word’ gets their attention. But I am about to disappoint them. ‘How is this essay framed?’ I ask. ‘Framed?’ they say. ‘Good creative nonfiction is put together in a series of scenes or stories – moving pictures’, I explain. ‘But you can’t just throw eight stories together and assume they will fit. There must be an order – a “structure” to it. And in the story-oriented genre of creative nonfiction, even the structure or the frame must be shaped like a story’. ‘Frames are almost always timelines’, I say. A day in the life, a year in the life – even a minute in the life of a person, place or thing. Tracy Kidder, a Pulitzer Prize winner, is famous for his ‘year in the life of’ books, which include stories about nursing homes and elementary schools. One of his early books, House, begins with the moment a husband and wife decide to build a new house for their growing family. We meet the architect, the contractor, carpenters, electricians – everyone having anything to do with the conception and construction of the house. In the interim, we learn vividly about the complications, challenges and frustrations of home building from these many different perspectives. The book ends when the family moves into their new house. Thus the frame begins with a dream and ends with the fulfilment of that dream. That’s the frame. Every essay has a frame. ‘Sounds kind of boring’, a student says. ‘Every essay put together in a chronology’. ‘It would be boring if every essay ever written had a “this happened first, this happened last” chronology’, I agree, ‘but that’s not the case. A writer can manipulate time – can start in the middle or even at the very end – and backtrack before working back to the beginning. How many people saw the movie Forrest Gump?’ Everybody in the room raises a hand. I always use Forrest Gump as an example because it has been so eminently popular. ‘Where does it start?’ ‘On a bus stop bench’. ‘Yes, Forrest is sitting on a bus stop bench, and he turns to a stranger sitting beside him and starts to tell his life story. We are immediately carried back to his birth and his mom’s story. In a little while, we are back at the bus stop bench. Forrest turns in the other direction and he is talking to another stranger – and continuing his story. This happens at least a half-dozen times. It takes half the movie before we work our way back to the present and learn why Forrest is waiting for a bus’. Writers often move back and forth in time. You can even start at the end and then go back all the way to the beginning to explain how and why your story ended in that particular way. James Baldwin’s classic, Notes of a Native Son, starts with his father’s funeral 180 The Handbook of Creative Writing procession and ends when the procession arrives at the cemetery – twenty minutes later. But it takes Baldwin 15,000 words of background and flashback to get there. Baldwin’s essay was long, but he had a lot to say about racism, poverty, fatherhood and being black in America. And indeed, having a message – saying something to a reader – is very much part of the reason creative nonfiction is going through such an explosion of popularity. This leads to the second creative nonfiction ‘F’ word: ‘focus’. In order for creative nonfiction to be creative nonfiction, it must be framed and focused. We get focus when phrases and ideas recur throughout the scenes. Focus is the second way in which the scenes must be organised. The first ‘F’ – frame – means organising by time and shape, and the second ‘F’ – focus – means organising by meaning and content. In order for the scenes to fit together, they must reflect the same or similar focuses. ‘And when you put it all together’, I tell my students, ‘You get creative nonfiction: story and information, style and substance, frame and focus. That’s all there is to it’. It’s like this essay, this workshop simulation. I have provided a lot of information about the genre and the classic structure of the creative nonfiction essay. But I have also shaped the presentation in order to make the information more compelling and accessible to the widest possible reading audience. If this works – I mean, if you find this engaging and are still reading – then I have done my job; I have written a compelling and informative chapter for a textbook, and I have had fun in the process. And that’s what this genre is all about – engaging the reader, as well as the writer in the writing and reading experience. References Baldwin, James (1984), Notes of a Native Son, Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Dillard, Annie (1998), Pilgrim at Tinker Creek, London: Harper Perennial. Kidder, Tracy (1999), House, New York: Mariner Books. Talese, Gay (1995), Fame and Obscurity, New York: Ivy Books. Talese, Gay (2003), The Gay Talese Reader: Portraits and Encounters. Introduction by Barbara Lounsberry. New York: Walker Publishing. Wolfe, Tom (2005), The Right Stuff, London: Vintage. Zemeckis, Robert (1994), Forrest Gump. POETRY 18 Introduction to Poetry Sean O’Brien In order to gain the greatest benefit from writing and studying poetry on a postgraduate creative writing course, there are number of matters to be borne in mind and acted on. Some of them are perfectly obvious; some may be completely new to you; and some of them have a significance which may not be immediately apparent. They are discussed under various headings below, but what they have in common is the aim of helping you to see your poems not simply in isolation but in relation to the art of poetry as a whole, its practices, history and traditions. The practising poet needs to occupy several roles, among them those of reader, critic, advocate and, perhaps, performer. We read and write poetry for pleasure – a pleasure intensified by knowledge and understanding. The poet studying on a writing course should feel free – no, should feel obliged – to be imaginatively and intellectually gluttonous. You may never have a better opportunity. Enjoy it! Suggested reading Eliot, T. S. (1951), ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’, Selected Essays, London: Faber. Herbert W. N. and Matthew Hollis (2000), eds, Strong Words: Modern Poets on Modern Poetry, Newcastle upon Tyne: Bloodaxe Books. Preminger Alex and T. V. F Brogan (1993), eds, The Princeton Encyclopaedia of Poetry and Poetics, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Wandor, Michelene (2003) ‘A creative writing manifesto’, in Siobhan Holland (ed.), Creative Writing: A Good Practice Guide, London: English Subject Centre. 1. Vocation Only a lunatic or a charlatan would consider poetry as a possible career. It can, however, be a vocation, in the sense of ‘a calling’, rather than in the present-day sense of an occupation requiring practical training (although writing poetry is, of course, a wholly practical activity). In 1903 the German poet Rainer Maria Rilke (1876–1925) wrote the first of a series of Letters to a Young Poet, addressed to a military cadet, Franz Xaver Kappus, in which he tried to answer the young man’s questions about poetry and being a poet. Rilke’s first letter includes this very famous passage: 184 The Handbook of Creative Writing You must seek for whatever it is that obliges you to write . . . You must confess to yourself whether you would truly die if writing were forbidden to you. This above all: ask yourself in the night, in your most silent hour – Must I write? If there is an affirmative reply, if you can simply and starkly answer ‘I must’ to that grave question, then you will need to construct your life according to that necessity. (Rilke 2000: 174) Rilke’s words are both stirring and intimidating. Who would not aspire, at least with part of themselves, to satisfy that stern central enquiry? One is also tempted to irreverence: for most of his working life Rilke lived like an aristocrat, that is, without having to make a living, which took care of the construction of life. He lived separately from his wife and took a fairly distant interest in his daughter. Many of us have obligations other than poetry, and we would not willingly neglect them. Yet if writing poetry is to matter to us, if it is to stand at the centre of our imaginative lives, we must make a contract with ourselves to keep its importance in view. We must, in fact, have enough selfishness to go on tending and deepening our interest. Poetry is uncompromising. Rather than take second place, it may simply go away. Many of those undertaking writing courses are returning as mature students, often with family responsibilities. To enrol on an MA is an assertion of freedom which may well require a degree of courage. Yet experience shows, even at this stage, how often and how easily students’ interests are pushed aside in favour of other claims. One consequence is frustrated literary development, a fragmentary poetic education in which bad habits go unchallenged and important areas of the poetic repertoire remain unexplored. It is sometimes said that poetry suits a crowded life better than fiction, but the grain of truth such statements might contain is often tainted with an inhibiting modesty about the value of the undertaking, and by formal timidity. The poet must find a modus vivendi, a time and a place to work with neither infringement nor the sense that poetry is being privileged beyond its ‘real’ importance. This remains as true for the poet now as it was for the novelist Virginia Woolf when she wrote ‘A Room of One’s Own’ in 1929. Suggested reading Rilke, Rainer Maria (2000), Sonnets to Orpheus and Letters to a Young Poet, trans. Stephen Cohn, Manchester: Carcanet. Woolf, Virginia (1998), A Room of One’s Own, Morag Shiach (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2. The status of poetry In our time poetry has little cultural prestige. As Dana Gioia puts it, the residual respect for poets is like that accorded ‘to priests in a town of agnostics’ (Gioia 1992: 1). The reasons for this are complex, but among the most important is poetry’s accessibility – not to readers but to writers. It is often said that poetry has more writers than readers. It costs nothing to write a poem, but to make a film or stage an opera is an expensive business, beyond the reach of the amateur. The economic accessibility of poetry to participants is, in a sense, one of its problems. Anyone can have a go. The question is: have a go at what? What do the millions of amateur poets consider themselves to be doing? Somewhere among the motives, though perhaps not named as such, is the idea of self-expression. That self-expression is an undeniable good is a tenet of modern orthodoxy, and this is not the place to dispute it. Applied to poetry, however, self-expression becomes problematic when it is assumed to be identical with artistic success. 185 Introduction to Poetry The confusion of art with the self is in part an unintended consequence of the late eighteenth- early nineteenth-century Romantic period, when the self of the artist, and his/her interior life, became eminent and urgent matters for poets such as Wordsworth, Coleridge, Keats and Shelley. To the uninstructed, to write of what is ‘personal’ has gone on being the ‘real’ task of poetry. The border between poetry as an art and related but different activities such as diary-keeping and personal testimony, has ever since been breached in the popular mind; there, authenticity, truth to feeling and the fact that these-events-actually-happened-and-not-only-that-but-they-happened-to-me becomes the final court of artistic appeal, beyond the reach of serious critical authority because true (though rarely beautiful). By this article of faith, poetry is thus bound up with its creator in an especially privileged way. At its crudest, according to this confusion, to slight the poem is to demean its maker, an attitude which invokes discourses of rights, empowerment and identity, whose concerns are not ultimately with art as art but with the esteem due to the self or the group. Much has been written in recent years from the perspectives of ethnic minorities, feminism and sexual preference. Such political preoccupations are of course an inalienable part of poetry. The problem arises (as with any other interest group, white bourgeois males included) when the fact of making oneself heard is viewed as identical with the creation of art – that is, when craft is subordinate to sincerity. To need to state this so baldly indicates the tenacity of the error. To have something to say is fundamental to poetry, but subject matter is not the same as art. Suggested reading Gioia, Dana (1992), Can Poetry Matter? St. Paul: Graywolf Press. O’Brien, Sean (1998), The Deregulated Muse: Essays on Contemporary British and Irish Poetry, Newcastle upon Tyne: Bloodaxe Books. Paterson, Don (2004), ‘The dark art of poetry’, London: Poetry Book Society, www.poetrybooks.co.uk 3. The poem It is in the nature of poetry that the attempt to define a poem remains unfinished. The place to begin is by reading Aristotle’s Poetics (c. 350 BC), after which there is a vast body of description and analysis from which a number of phrases have entered common usage, including ‘emotion recollected in tranquillity’, ‘memorable speech’, ‘the best words in the best order’, ‘no ideas but in things,’ ‘negative capability’, ‘objective correlative’, ‘what oft was thought but ne’er so well expressed’ and ‘imaginary gardens with real toads in them’. As time passes and as needs and interests shift, new possibilities are added to the store of working definitions. The poems written by the New York poet Frank O’Hara (1926–66) would not have been thinkable for John Milton or William Wordsworth; equally, however, all three poets were writing with an intense consciousness of the medium in which they were working – as distinct, that is, from the instrumental, prosaic view of language appropriate to a letter from one lawyer to another, or for supplying instructions for the assembly of a flat-pack bookcase (though these language-uses can also be subverted into poetry). In his poem ‘Poetry’, O’Hara addresses the art itself, attempting to convey both its immediacy and its emerging historical context: 186 The Handbook of Creative Writing All this I desire. To deepen you by my quickness and delight as if you were logical and proven, but still be quiet as if I were used to you; as if you would never leave me and were the inexorable product of my own time. (O’Hara 1991: 18) We can note the conflict from which this poem derives its energy. The poem is an imaginative construction, a set of propositions qualified by the repeated phrase ‘as if’: the poem is not literally the case, but clearly the poet appears to need to believe that it is and that the poem can bridge the gap between the possible and the actual. And while we note the built-in reservations, we note too that the poem makes present to us possibilities (for example, that ‘you would never leave me’) even as it seems to deny them. This relationship to fact – which is, to put it mildly, ambiguous – is part of the power of poetry. It appeals to an authority beyond mere literal truthfulness, making present what is not literally there. In the Poetics Aristotle drew a distinction between the poet and the historian: ‘the one says what has happened, the other the kind of thing that would happen’ and goes on: ‘For this reason poetry is more philosophical and more serious than history. Poetry tends to express universals, and history particulars’ (Aristotle 1996: 16). Poets might want to insist that the way to the universal is through the particular, but otherwise would be pleased to accept this ranking. Sir Philip Sidney in his Defence of Poetry (1595) wittily rephrased the poet’s privileged condition. The poet he says, cannot lie, since ‘he nothing affirmeth, and therefore never lieth . . . Though he recount things not true, yet because he telleth them not for true, he lieth not’ (Sidney 1966: 25). Sidney has Plato in mind here: in the Republic (written c. 375 BC) the Athenian philosopher (427–347 BC) has Socrates argue that poets must be excluded from the ideal society because they deal in illusions, in imitations (Plato 2003: 335–53). Sidney also suggests that Plato, manifestly far from immune to the pull of art and fiction, was himself a poet (Sidney 1966: 19). To consider poetry as a power of such an order, capable of unsettling philosophers (and, perhaps more to the point, political rulers) is a useful and heartening corrective to the impression we might gain from the mass of relatively unambitious, frequently and flatly anecdotal poetry to be found in magazines. The misapplied democratising impulse of the times often seems to have shrunk the conception of the poetic to a condition of modesty so extreme as to produce work which is more or less invisible and inaudible. It should be noted that when we speak of modesty we are not speaking of subject matter or length – an epic is not in this respect superior to a brief lyric – but of imaginative compass, the threedimensional sense of all that is possible for a particular poem to offer through the poet’s alertness to image, music, tone and so on. In this sense, a brief, quietly spoken poem such as Edward Thomas’s ‘Tall Nettles’ (Thomas 2004: 111) is an ambitious piece of work, alert to every implication of its material, alert to the power of quietness itself in making the world present to us. A similarly brief poem, William Blake’s ‘The Sick Rose’ (Blake 1997: 216–17), vastly different in tone and address, manages to blend two scales of perception – the cosmically vast, the intimately particular – in a single utterance. Different again is 187 Introduction to Poetry Sylvia Plath’s ‘Ariel’, a wonderfully compact dramatic lyric rendering a complex sensuous and emotional experience (Plath 1981: 194). The Greek root of the word poem – poiesia – means making, an act dependent on artistry, skill, practice and – let it be said – a capacity not merely for taking endless pains but for enduring perpetual dissatisfaction. Our works, for example the poems we write, serve as our judges and give us the measure of ourselves. The court of poetry can be severe in its sentencing. But any poet worth the name is a recidivist. Suggested reading Aristotle (1996), Poetics, trans. Malcolm Heath, London: Penguin. Plato, (2003), Republic, trans. Desmond Lee, London: Penguin. Sidney, Philip (1966), Defence of Poetry, Jan van Dorsten ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press. 4. Form Form, which is discussed in detail in W. N. Herbert’s essay in the next chapter, is a term so important in poetry as to seem almost synonymous with it. Like poetry itself, form resists ready definition, but it is useful to think of it as a series of fruitful constraints whose function is both to exclude accidents and to provoke them. Rhyme, rhythm and metre, refrains, the stanza, enjambment, local and extended musical effects, all these will come under the heading of form, but form is also difficult to separate from matters such as sentence structure and rhetorical devices involving balance, contrast, amplification and repetition. Poetic form can be illuminated by a comparison with prose. The fiction of Henry James (1843–1916), for example, is elaborately formal at both local and structural levels: for James, this organising power, applied to the psychology of his characters – which it’s hard to resist calling poetic – is what elevates the novel to the status of art. Poetry carries the organising process a stage further, its thematic motifs not merely shaped by, but coming to being in the music of verse. Moreover poetry invites or teases the reader to notice (or at times insists upon) formality in action. Though form often works subtly, it can, equally, be a means of display, and of artistic assertion. Form is a source of authority: the octet, the turn, the sestet and the resolution of a sonnet all enforce the poem’s persuasive power. Form is a means of memorability, as playground rhymes and football chants indicate. In preliterate societies, poems for recital were learned with the aid of mnemonic devices whose traces persist in early written poems such as Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey (c.750 BC). Perhaps the first poetic form is the list. Given that poetry and form are inextricable, the subject creates a surprising degree of unease. Form involves a specific craft skill – the ability to organise words and sounds into patterns of varying complexity – a skill which exists independently of attitude or opinion and cannot simply be supplanted by them. Anthony Hecht puts the matter plainly: not a few poets, under the pretext of freeing themselves from the bondage of prosodic and formal considerations, have found . . . a convenient way to avoid the very obvious risks entailed by submission to form and meter: unskilled attempts are instantly to be detected, and on these grounds alone it is literally safer to play the poetic role of independent radical. (One such radical has recently affirmed that anyone who observes formal constraints is unambiguously a fascist.) (Hecht 2004: 2) 188 The Handbook of Creative Writing The widespread present-day confusion and ignorance about form provide another example of unintended consequence – in this case, derived from early twentiethcentury modernism. When Ezra Pound, T. S. Eliot and others began to employ free verse or vers libre they were attempting to overcome a crisis in English poetry, believing that Romanticism had run into the sand, and that its formal methods had lost their imaginative urgency and become merely habitual and decorative. Pound succinctly approved of Eliot’s view of free verse, commenting: ‘Eliot has said the thing very well when he said, “No vers is libre for the man who wants to do a good job”’ (Pound 1954:12), that is, that free verse is not an abandonment of form but, rather, a version of form, an addition to the existing repertoire of formal possibilities. Traditional, newly devised, free – whatever form a poem takes, it must be more than an accident, must be able to give an account of itself, even when, as is to be hoped, its effects exceed the poet’s deliberate intent. Lip-service is often paid to form nowadays. The Japanese haiku is widely used ‘as a form’ in a merely arithmetical sense. More elaborately, creative writing students are often encouraged to write villanelles, though there is perhaps no other form as likely to expose the merely mechanical nature of the exercise, not to mention the banality of the content. Form as exercise is only valuable as part of the continuity of writing, not as the arcane requirement of an imaginary examination board which, once satisfied, can be forgotten. If you want to write villanelles you should study versions of the form such as Auden’s ‘Miranda’s Song’ from The Sea and the Mirror (Auden 1991: 421) and variations such as William Empson’s ‘Missing Dates’, ‘Success’ and ‘The Teasers’ (Empson 2000: 79, 80, 86) before, or perhaps instead of, embarking on your own attempts. Similar reservations apply to the sestina. It is altogether more urgent to be able to master writing in iambic metre, to control a passage of blank verse, to be at ease with ballad form, with couplets, quatrains and sestets, to develop an accurate ear not just for stress and syllable count but for effective combinations of sound, and to understand how free verse alludes, directly or by contrast, to the forms from which it departs. At the same time, as a poet you need to develop an understanding of the powers and consequences of sentence structure, which is certainly as important (even when fragmentary) in poetry as in prose but which, like verse form, is often ignored or uneasily evaded. Suggested reading Donaghy, Michael (1999), Wallflowers: a Lecture with Missing Notes and Additional Heckling, London: The Poetry Society. Carper, Thomas and Derek Attridge (2003), Meter and Meaning, London: Routledge. Hecht, Anthony (2004), ‘On Rhyme’, and ‘The Music of Form’ in Melodies Unheard: Essays on the Mysteries of Poetry, Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Hollander, John (1981), Rhyme’s Reason: A Guide to English Verse, New Haven: Yale University Press. Pound, Ezra (1954), ‘A Retrospect’ in Selected Literary Essays, T. S. Eliot (ed.), London: Faber. Wainwright, Jeffrey (2004), Poetry: The Basics, London: Routledge. 5. Analysing Diverse experiences and attitudes mean that some of you will be comfortably accustomed to the academic context; others will be returning after long absence; yet others may be coming to the setting for the first time. For a significant proportion of each of these rough groupings, 189 Introduction to Poetry along with the students’ identification of themselves as writers there comes, in many cases, suspicion and fear of ‘academic’ approaches, of analysis and reasoned criticism, of a tendency to ‘kill’ material by ‘dissecting’ it. If you intend to write poetry seriously you will need to recognise these fears as hindrances to the development of your work, and that they can be outgrown and shed. If it is true that, as Wallace Stevens puts it in ‘Man Carrying Thing’, ‘The poem must resist the intelligence / Almost successfully’ (Stevens 1984: 350), the effort and the pleasure of understanding, with all the nuances which the word ‘understanding’ carries, form a major part of reading poetry. Our love of poems – a love, if we’re lucky, which is formed in childhood – may begin in a mixture of fascination, uncertainty and recognition, and a desire to follow this creature further into the wood, to learn its names and its habits. Reading as adults can intensify such pleasures by opening the question of how the poem exerts its effect on us. Its meaning is inseparable from its method. Sound effects, rhythm, timing, imagery, sentence structure, figures of speech, allusiveness, and all that comes under the heading of poetic gesture, are all working parts of the poem, and what they work on is the reader. T. S. Eliot was right to attribute to poetry the power to communicate before it is understood (Eliot 1951: 238); the task of the poet-as-reader, though, is to value and enrich that communication by enquiring into its methods – without expecting ever to exhaust the enquiry. It is not true to say that only poets can write about poetry, but the critical writing and informal observations of poets on their art are often among the most interesting and illuminating, perhaps because they arise from the poets’ efforts to clarify or justify their own practice, or to solve problems with which the poetry has presented them. Such writing is historically situated but remains at the core of discussion about poetry. We could go back to Sidney’s Defence of Poetry and work – very selectively – forward through Johnson’s Lives of the Poets, Wordsworth’s Preface to Lyrical Ballads, Keats’s letters, Coleridge’s Biographia Literaria, the essays of Eliot, Pound, William Empson and W. H. Auden, Elizabeth Bishop’s letters, Randall Jarrell’s reviews, the essays of Seamus Heaney and Tom Paulin and many others. Suggested reading Scully, James (1966), ed., Modern Poets on Modern Poetry, London: Collins. Hamburger, Michael (1970), The Truth of Poetry, London: Penguin. 6. Reading In her crisp and practical ‘Creative Writing Manifesto’, Michelene Wandor is surely correct to state that one of the primary purposes of undergraduate creative writing courses – and this applies equally to postgraduate courses – is ‘to create more hungry readers’ (Wandor 2003: 13). For many of you, reading will prove to be the most important and permanently influential part of the course. It is essential for you to read as widely as possible, not simply among contemporary or modern poets but in the whole tradition of poetry in English and in the poetic traditions of other languages too. Clearly, this is not a finite project, but that fact should reduce it neither to a hobby nor an option. Experience indicates that even strongly committed postgraduate students may in fact have read very little and that what they have read is often narrowly confined to the contemporary. There may also be resistance to items of required reading, on the grounds of difficulty, unfamiliarity or alleged ‘irrelevance’. These terms have become part of the informal orthodoxy (formerly known as cant) of the age. Before sitting down to write this paragraph, I heard a BBC Radio 4 continuity announcer explaining that the next programme would be about Macbeth. My interest turned to gloom 190 The Handbook of Creative Writing when she went on to say that the task of the director was ‘to make the play relevant and accessible to a modern audience’. How strange that the play had survived 400 years without such assistance. The challenge (and the pleasure, the more intense for being at times hard-won) is to equip ourselves to read poetry, not to adjust poetry to our limitations. As Robert Frost put it, ‘A poem is best written in the light of all the other poems ever written. We read A the better to read B (we have to start somewhere; we may get very little out of A). We read B the better to read C, C the better to read D, D the better to go back and get something out of A. Progress is not the aim, but circulation’ (Frost 1966: 97). Suggested reading Keegan, Paul (2005), ed., The Penguin Book of English Verse, London: Penguin. Ferguson, Margaret Mary Jo Salter and John Stallworthy (1996), eds, The Norton Anthology of Poetry, New York: F. W. Norton. Padel, Ruth (2002), 52 Ways of Looking at a Poem, London: Chatto and Windus. Ricks, Christopher (1999), ed., The Oxford Book of English Verse, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 7. Company Douglas Dunn’s poem ‘The Friendship of Young Poets’ opens: ‘There must have been more than just one of us, / But we never met’ and adds ‘My youth was as private / As the bank at midnight’ (Dunn 1986: 38). It is natural to seek the company of the like-minded. Those coming to postgraduate writing courses have often been members of workshops before and now seek a more formal setting in which to develop their work. The university may – in fact, should – also supply new and fruitful informal groupings. As well as sharing a literary passion, most poets need mutual support, acknowledgment and the recognition of their peers. It is worth being careful and demanding about the company you keep. Just as the border between poetry and testimony has been smudged, so in workshops the distinction between criticism and therapy is sometimes lost. There is a fear of giving and receiving offence, and often this is accompanied by a vague, impressionistic way of discussing poems, heavy on affirmation, light on explanatory detail and the examination of technique. Michelene Wandor offers a succinct account of an approach which begins in the classroom but should extend into informal workshops: Work to develop a critical vocabulary which outlaws all subjectivist responses: ‘I like’, ‘I dislike’, ‘I prefer’: all distract from the analytical process. Value judgements, if used at all, should be left to the END of the analytical process. I have found that if illuminating and exciting textual analysis takes place, value judgements effectively become unnecessary. This doesn’t mean that anything goes; rather, it constantly recreates a notion of the use of ‘criticism’, as a meaningful analytical process, which leads to understanding why certain approaches to writing work better than others, and thus encourages good practice. Notions such as ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ criticism, which accrue as correlatives to premature value judgement, thus also become irrelevant. (Wandor 2003: 14) If only it were so simple in practice! But Wandor’s severe clarity is bracing. She has no time for notions of writing as therapy or comfort, or for cosy mutual support. What she demands, without making it explicit, is that the poet be able to consider the poem as a work separate from the self, with its own life to live. This is, of course, extremely difficult, and the difficulty is by no means confined to novices. 191 Introduction to Poetry 8. Audience In fact, the people that students of writing are most keen to meet are not others like themselves, but publishers, agents, producers and anyone else with access to the business. The economics of poetry, as I suggested earlier, are relatively constrained, but the anxiety to publish is at least as powerful among poets as among novelists – perhaps because for most poets publication is likely to have to be its own reward. Writers want readers and audiences, understandably. The problem arises when public readings and publications are assumed to be proof of quality in themselves. In this respect there are districts of poetry which at times resemble the sub-cultural worlds of some kinds of genre fiction or music, existing beyond the reach of general interest or serious critical scrutiny – and intended, indeed, to occupy such a place of safety. It’s a free country; people may treat their work as they choose, but the real challenge of finding and addressing an audience is more exacting. Moreover, an indifferent MA in Writing is not infrequently used as a credential for teaching writing, which helps to perpetuate a cycle of mediocrity. Go where the difficulty is – the best magazine, the strenuous workshop, the impossible publisher. 9. Activities In his essay ‘The Poet and the City’ W. H. Auden imagined a poetic academy where the students would engage in activities such as learning poetry by heart, the study of ancient and modern languages, translation, parody, cooking, care of a domestic animal and the cultivation of a garden (Auden 1963: 77). The emphasis would be on doing what may not come easily, since originality can, in a sense, take care of itself. As indicated earlier, basic forms need to be acquired. For blank verse read Shakespeare, Milton, Wordsworth; for ballads see the Border Ballads and modern exemplars such as Auden and Louis Simpson; for sonnets you might begin with Don Paterson’s anthology 101 Sonnets (1999). More tailored workshop activities need to produce a friction between habit and challenge – to make you look again at fundamentals such as careful observation and the influence of sentence construction; to enhance your sense of the dramatic, three-dimensional possibilities of poetry; to offer specific technical challenges. 1. Just the facts, Ma’am Read Edwin Morgan’s ‘Glasgow March 1971’ from the sequence ‘Instamatic Poems’ (Morgan 1996: 217). Attempt a similar brief factual presentation of a single event without commentary. Then read ‘Ellingham Suffolk January 1972’ (223) from the same sequence and consider how depiction crosses over into suggestion and interpretation. Follow this by reading August Kleinzahler’s ‘Snow in North Jersey’, Carol Ann Duffy’s ‘Prayer’, Douglas Dunn’s ‘The River Through the City’ and Elizabeth Bishop’s ‘The Bight’. One of the most powerful symbolic properties is the fact. 2. The rules Use postcard reproductions of paintings, photographs, movie posters, wartime propaganda posters, advertisement, etc. Assume that each card contains the equivalent of a movie trailer for an entire world, consistent in every way with what is shown on the 192 The Handbook of Creative Writing card. Devise a set of rules – one sentence for each – governing this world. These can be commands, prohibitions and statements of fact. Now write a poem in the first person from the point of view of an inhabitant of this world (that is, write a dramatic monologue). Only one topic is forbidden: you must not specifically refer to the rules. You may prefer to exchange cards and rules with another member of the group. Read Robert Browning, ‘My Last Duchess’, Philip Larkin, ‘Livings’ and Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s story ‘The Yellow Wallpaper’. 3.The Poem Noir Parody and popular cultural references are significant elements in contemporary poetry. See Alice Notley’s ‘A California Girlhood’ and, for our present purpose, Charles Simic’s ‘Private Eye’. The aim of this activity is to explore and take possession of a prominent example – the intimately related hardboiled crime novel and Hollywood film noir. The Poem Noir Manifesto ‘To make a movie only takes a girl and a gun’. – Jean-Luc Godard 1. It is alleged that the demands of contemporary life prevent people having time to read – in particular the classics of nineteenth- and early twentieth-century fiction. Students of literature, for example, are often heard to say this. 2. It is alleged that the visible image – film, video, digital art – has displaced the written word in the affections of the world: the triumph of passivity. 3. It is alleged that film noir of the 1940s and 1950s is the most poetic of film genres because of the unity of form and content on which it depends, and because, too, of the secret artistry of writers, directors and cameramen working in the world of the B movie. 4. It is alleged that of the surviving written genres the crime novel is among the most enduring. Praise of such novels is often framed in approving comparisons with film noir. 5. It is alleged by the poet X that the best day’s work he ever did was writing the back cover blurb for a paperback reissue of a hardboiled crime novel. There is, he argued, a poetics of the blurb – economy, vocabulary, tone, a particular realm of detail and suggestion – which might assure such work the status of a secret art, a poem read by the many. 6. It is alleged that we must adapt or die. 7. Therefore let us write the secret poem that all the world will read. 8. Let it take the form of a blurb – which is to say a combination of synopsis and evocation. 9. Let it exploit the language and style of film noir and the hardboiled crime novel to reclaim the world for poetry. 10. Let this poem noir be laid out like a poem (no one will notice). 11. When people read nothing, they will still read blurbs. Examples of Existing Blurbs Dashiell Hammett – The Maltese Falcon (1930) Sam Spade is hired by the fragrant Miss Wonderley to track down her sister, who has eloped with a louse called Floyd Thursby. But Miss Wonderley is in fact the beautiful and treacherous Brigid O’Shaughnessy, and when Spade’s partner Miles Archer is shot while on Thursby’s trail, Spade finds himself both hunter and hunted: can he track down the jewel-encrusted bird, a treasure worth killing for, before the Fat Man finds him? 193 Introduction to Poetry James M. Cain – Double Indemnity (1936) Walter Huff is an insurance investigator like any other until the day he meets the beautiful and dangerous Phyllis Nirdlinger . . . Manda Scott - No Good Deed (2002) Orla McLeod knows too much for her own good. She knows about pain, she knows about guilt and she knows about survival . . . There’s no way Orla McLeod’s going to let anyone else take care of Jamie Buchanan. Not when Jamie’s the sole witness to Tord Svensen committing an act of savagery of the kind that’s rapidly turning him into one of the most feared criminals in Europe . . . Kenneth Fearing – The Big Clock (1946) George Stroud is a charming, yet amoral executive working for a magazine empire run by Earl Janoth. Stroud embarks on a dangerous affair with Janoth’s mistress and when Janoth kills the woman, Stroud is the only witness who can pin him to the crime. The catch is that Janoth does not know that the man he saw in a shadowy street was Stroud – and he gives Stroud the job of tracking down the witness. James Hadley Chase – You’ve Got It Coming (1955) ‘The world is made up of smart guys who get rich and suckers who stay poor’, Harry Griffin tells his girl friend, Glorie. ‘I’ve been a sucker too long, now I’m going to be smart’. 4. Revisions One of the hardest things to do is to manage the revision of your poems in a sufficiently detached way. There may be parts that, while immensely appealing, should be sacrificed for the greater good. Read A. E. Housman’s ‘Tell Me Not Here, It Needs Not Saying’ and Louis MacNeice’s ‘Meeting Point’. Argue the case for removing one stanza from each. 5. Restorations Tone and register are vital features of poetry. To recognise what is apt, to marry art and feeling in the gradient of a poem, to have the sense of imaginative hinterland – a poem will falter if these obligations are not met. Translation, and related activities such as restoration, can help develop our understanding and control of these factors. Restore the missing parts of this text. It is thought to consist of six three-line stanzas, of which there survive: the first; a fragment of the first line of the second; the second and third lines of the fourth; and the first and second lines of the fifth. When I see the silver Coiling waterways Like necklaces detached From throats Please God no Calm or oblivion Will occupy my heart, Or close it. Listen . . . 194 The Handbook of Creative Writing The original can be found in Christopher Middleton, (2000), trans., Faint Harps and Silver Voices: Selected Translations. 6. English is a foreign language Style is double-edged, offering both authority and entrapment. We sometimes need to go out and come in again. Imagine that English is a foreign language to you, which you must translate into your own tongue. We begin with two medieval examples. N. B. avoid reading any glossary which accompanies the poems. Example 1 Erthe tok of erthe Erthe with wogh; Erthe other erthe To the erthe drogh; Erthe leyde erthe In erthene through; Tho hevede erthe of erthe Erthe ynogh. Anonymous, 1300–50 Example 2 Gloria mundi est: Alse a se flouwende Als a skiye pasende Als the sadwe in the undermel And als the dore turnet on a quell. Anonymous, 1300–50 Example 3 Supply a second, decisive stanza for this example: I am the ancient Apple-Queen, As once I was so am I now. For evermore a hope unseen, Betwixt the blossom and the bough. (? 1891) Example 4 Attempt a translation of William Empson’s ‘Let it Go’. (The first two poems can be found in The Penguin Book of English Verse, edited by Paul Keegan. Avoid reading the glosses until you have completed the activity. The last two poems can be found in The Oxford Book of English Verse, edited by Christopher Ricks, 1999). 7. Line-breaks 1. List as many factors influencing line-breaks as you can think of. Then apply your list to the passage from T. S Eliot’s ‘Burnt Norton’ IV, lines 1–10, beginning ‘Time and the bell have buried the day’. 195 Introduction to Poetry 2. Ask a colleague to supply two anonymous pieces – one a free verse poem printed as prose, the other a prose poem. Decide which is the conventionally lineated poem and supply the line-endings. 8. The prose poem 1. Read and discuss the following: Rimbaud, from Les Illuminations, xli ‘Jeunesse’, in French and in parallel translation by Oliver Bernard; Zbigniew Herbert, ‘To Take Objects Out’, translated by John and Bogdana Carpenter; Francis Ponge, ‘La Valise’, in French and as translated by John Montague. 2. Write a suite of three prose poems – one about a city, one about a room, one about an object. 9. Sentences 1. The group divides in half. 2. The members of one half each write four lines in iambic pentameter taking the form of a command. At the same time, the members of the other half each write four lines in iambic pentameter in the form of a question. 3. When the pieces are written, the members of each half-group exchange work with the other half-group. 4. On a separate piece of paper, those who wrote the commands each reply to the questions with four lines each of iambic pentameter in the form of a single sentence. 5. On a separate piece of paper, those who wrote the questions each reply to the commands with four lines of iambic pentameter in the form of a single sentence riposte. 10. Ways in A miscellany of possibilities which may stimulate your work. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. A recipe Instructions for how to get there The Best Man’s speech The verdict of the court Exchanges in the Personal Column Last Will and Testament A Christmas Round Robin A review of a book of poems How to use this equipment Instructions for an original activity at a poetry workshop A manifesto Dear John A curse A prayer This news just in . . . A history of Spengler, Traum and Bubo Ltd 196 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. The Handbook of Creative Writing Blankness! Sex Tips for Dead People What I Always Say I wouldn’t mind, except Acceptance speech Hagiography Welcome to Xenograd: a guide for visitors Oh, look, darling: lots of giant crabs An epitaph Suggested reading Keegan, Paul (2005), The Penguin Book of English Verse, London: Penguin. Ricks, Christopher (1999), The Oxford Book of English Verse, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sweeney, Matthew and John Hartley Williams (1996), Writing Poetry and Getting Published, London: Hodder. Twichell, Chase and Robin Behn (2002), The Practice of Poetry: Writing Exercises by Poets Who Teach, New York: HarperCollins. 10. Conclusion 1. A poem is not an explanation but an event. 2. Consider language not as a vehicle for transporting meaning but as the place in which meaning is constituted. 3. The literal truthfulness of a poem is not an aesthetic defence of it. 4. Form is not a container. It is a creator. 5. ‘Relevance’ is a term of use to administrators, not to poets. The ‘real world’ is frequently mentioned, but its proponents never go there. 6. ‘Gesang ist Dasein’ – ‘Singing is Being’ – (Rilke 2000: 18–19) 7. ‘I have come up with a proposal as to why poetry seems difficult for readers of literature in general. In prose you can say that your main purpose is telling. In poetry it is making. A poem is analogous to a painting, a piece of sculpture or a musical composition. Its material is language, and often that language will be almost mosaically fitted together, with words as the pieces of the mosaic. A novel, an essay and a TV sit-com also use words but without the oppressive need to honour them outside their utility in conveying meaning and feeling. These are turbulent waters: poetry is charged with meaning and feeling also, but first it has to satisfy the turbulence of its hope . . . as we write the poem we pitch it both forward into existence and backwards to its need to exist.’ (Peter Porter, ‘The poet’s quarrel with poetry’ [Porter 1998: 171–2]) In ‘Musée Des Beaux Arts’ Auden writes that the ship in Breughel’s painting ‘The Fall of Icarus’ ‘Had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on’ (Auden 1991: 179). Where is there to get to in poetry? Though we may take degrees in writing it, poetry does not consist of a series of qualifications. Nothing of poetry is ever finished: the challenge of writing poetry, of studying it, and of serving it as a reader, extends perpetually, and should be accepted in the light of that fact. In the same way, the pleasures intensify and the discoveries extend without limit. 197 Introduction to Poetry References Aristotle (1996), Poetics, trans. Malcolm Heath, London: Penguin. Auden, W. H. (1963), The Dyer’s Hand and Other Essays, London: Faber. Auden, W. H. (1991), Collected Poems, Edward Mendelson (ed.), London: Faber. Bishop, Elizabeth (1983), Complete Poems 1927–79, London: Chatto and Windus. Blake, William (1997), Complete Poems, Alicia Ostriker (ed.), London: Penguin. Browning, Robert (2005), The Major Works, Adam Roberts and Daniel Karlin (eds), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Carper, Thomas, and Derek Attridge (2003), Meter and Meaning, London: Routledge. Coleridge, Samuel Taylor (2000), The Major Works, H. J. Jackson (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Donaghy, Michael (1999), Wallflowers: a Lecture with Missing Notes and Additional Heckling, London: The Poetry Society. Duffy, Carol Ann (1994), Selected Poems, London: Penguin. Dunn, Douglas (1986), Selected Poems 1964–83, London: Faber. Eliot, T. S. (1951), Selected Essays, London: Faber. Eliot, T. S. (1963), Collected Poems, London: Faber. Empson, William (2000), The Complete Poems, John Haffenden, ed., London: Allen Lane. Ferguson, Margaret, Mary Jo Salter and John Stallworthy (1996), eds, The Norton Anthology of Poetry, New York: F. W. Norton. Frost, Robert (1966), ‘The Prerequisites’ in Selected Prose of Robert Frost, Hyde Cox and Edward Connery Lathem (eds), Austin: Holt, Rinehart, Winston. Gilman, Charlotte Perkins (2003), ‘The Yellow Wallpaper’ in Joyce Carol Oates (ed.), The Oxford Book of American Short Stories, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gioia, Dana (1992), Can Poetry Matter? St Paul: Graywolf Press. Hamburger, Michael (1970), The Truth of Poetry, London: Penguin. Heaney, Seamus (2003), Finders Keepers: Selected Prose 1971–2001, London: Faber. Hecht, Anthony (2004), Melodies Unheard: Essays on the Mysteries of Poetry, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Herbert, W. N. and Matthew Hollis (2000), eds, Strong Words: Modern Poets on Modern Poetry, Newcastle upon Tyne: Bloodaxe Books. Herbert, Zbigniew (1977), trans. John Carpenter and Bogdana Carpenter, Selected Poems, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hollander, John (1981), Rhyme’s Reason: A Guide to English Verse, New Haven: Yale University Press. Housman, A.E (1997), Collected Poems, Archie Burnett, ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press. Johnson, Samuel (2000), The Major Works, Donald Greene (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Keats, John (2002), The Selected Letters of John Keats, Robert Gittings, ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press. Keegan, Paul (2005), ed., The Penguin Book of English Verse, London: Penguin. Kleinzahler, August (1995), Red Sauce, Whisky and Snow, London: Faber. Larkin, Philip (1988), Collected Poems, Anthony Thwaite, ed., London: Faber. MacNeice, Louis (2003), Collected Poems, Peter MacDonald, ed., London: Faber. Middleton, Christopher (2000), trans., Faint Harps and Silver Voices: Selected Translations, Manchester: Carcanet Press. Milton, John (2003), The Major Works, Stephen Orgel and Jonathan Goldeberg (eds), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Morgan, Edwin (1996), Collected Poems, Manchester: Carcanet Press. 198 The Handbook of Creative Writing Notley, Alice (1994), ‘A California Girlhood’, in Postmodern American Poetry, Paul Hoover (ed.), New York: F. W. Norton. O’Brien, Sean (1998), The Deregulated Muse: Essays on Contemporary British and Irish Poetry, Newcastle upon Tyne: Bloodaxe Books. O’Hara, Frank (1991), Selected Poems, Donald M. Allen, ed., Manchester: Carcanet Press. Padel, Ruth (2002), 52 Ways of Looking at a Poem, London: Chatto and Windus. Paterson, Don (1999), 101 Sonnets from Shakespeare to Heaney, London: Faber. Paterson, Don (2004), ‘The dark art of poetry’, London: Poetry Book Society, www.poetrybooks.co.uk Paulin, Tom (1997), Writing to the Moment: Selected Critical Essays 1980–95, London: Faber. Plath, Sylvia (1981), Collected Poems, London: Faber. Plato (2003), Republic, trans. Desmond Lee, London: Penguin. Ponge, Francis (1998), Selected Poems, Margaret Guiton, ed., Margaret Guiton, John Montague, and C. K. Williams, trans., London: Faber. Porter, Peter (2001), Saving from the Wreck, Nottingham: Nottingham Trent University. Pound, Ezra (1954), Selected Literary Essays, T. S. Eliott, ed., London: Faber. Preminger, Alex, and T. V. F. Brogan (1993), The Princeton Encyclopaedia of Poetry and Poetics, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Ricks, Christopher (1999), ed., The Oxford Book of English Verse, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rilke, Rainer Maria (2000), Sonnets to Orpheus and Letters to a Young Poet, trans. Stephen Cohn, Manchester: Carcanet. Rimbaud, Arthur (1962), Collected Poems, Oliver Bernard, trans., London: Penguin. Scully, James (1966), ed., Modern Poets on Modern Poetry, London: Collins. Shelley, Percy Bysshe (2003), The Major Works, Zachary Leader and Michael O’Neill (eds), Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sidney, Philip (1966), Defence of Poetry, Jan Van Dorsten, ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press. Simic, Charles (1999), Jackstraws, London: Faber. Simpson, Louis (2003), The Owner of the House: New Collected Poems 1940–2001, Rochester: Boa Editions. Stevens, Wallace (1984), Collected Poems, London: Faber. Sweeney, Matthew and John Hartley Williams (1996), Writing Poetry and Getting Published, London: Hodder. Thomas, Edward (2004), Collected Poems, London: Faber. Twichell, Chase, and Robin Behn (2002), Poetry in Practice: Exercises by Poets Who Teach, New York: HarperCollins. Wandor, Michelene (2003), ‘A creative writing manifesto’, in Siobhan Holland (ed.), Creative Writing: A Good Practice Guide, London: English Subject Centre. Wainwright, Jeffrey (2004), Poetry: The Basics, London: Routledge. Woolf, Virginia [1929] (1998), A Room of One’s Own, Morag Shiach, ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wordsworth, William (2000), The Major Works, Stephen Gill, ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press. 19 What is Form? W. N. Herbert Iambic pentameter. There now, I’ve said it. Please form an orderly queue to flee from this chapter. What other two words in the poetry world excite such intimidation, boredom, cantankerousness and, yes, passion? (Though ‘reluctantly rejecting’ or ‘talentless guff’ may come close.) ‘Iambic pentameter’ gives off the musty scent of the academy, with perhaps a topnote of formaldehyde – it’s Greek, for God’s sake, though apparently not in the way ‘ouzo meze parakalo’ is Greek. And it functions as shorthand for a host of terrors: metre, stress, stanza, and above all, form. Form consists of all the structural conventions within which most poetry in English has been written inside and outside the last hundred years. It is to the aspiring practitioner of literature as theory is to its critic. It is also the undisputed hero of this essay, even if it is an abstraction. Whether you are a new writer approaching this issue for the first time, a resolute antiformalist, or someone in their seventh year of fruitless struggle with the trochee, you are haunted by form. If you haven’t got to grips with it, says that over-familiar inner voice, then you’re not serious about this whole poetry business. If your inner voice happens to be Baudelaire, he’s even blunter: ‘I pity the poets who are guided solely by instinct; they seem to me incomplete’ (Auden 1987: 53). If you go to writers’ groups, you’ll find that form bores proliferate with their coronets of sonnets or praise of the amphibrachic foot. You’ll also find their opposites are just as bonkers about their anti-academic performance schtick, their aleatoric principles for generating text, or their Old Believers-type devotion to the ampersand. The temptation to shrug it off, to keep shrugging it off, seems entirely natural; to concentrate instead on the intricate, careful work of giving each poem its own combination of music and structure, according to one’s own principles of rhythm and discipline. To keep verse, as the vernacular has it, free. This essay tries to present both what form is, and the arguments for its use, in as clear a way as possible, in order to encourage you to engage with it if you haven’t, and to reconsider it if you have. Because they are just that, arguments for form, it cannot claim to be impartial, and I suspect it won’t entirely avoid the perils of the form bore. But I will attempt to confront the phantom, and to articulate the principles which might be behind that inner voice. My own practice as a writer is to use form and various types of free verse (and indeed anything else that seems to work), depending on the demands of the given poem. My 200 The Handbook of Creative Writing conviction, after the usual years of obscure struggle, is that the two types of writing are not in implacable opposition, but rather shade into each other in ways that demand closer study. My final assessment is, first, that all poetry is more or less consciously in a form; and, secondly, that consciously formal writing is, in certain cases, simply able to do more than what we think of as free verse. It does more in terms of the numbers of levels it functions on – particularly in terms of the types of allusion it can make – and it frequently does this more succinctly. Of course the same can also be argued about free verse in particular instances, but I will try to prove that this generally occurs because of principles we only discover through the study of form; that we can only say something meaningful about how such poems work using the language of form. Writing poetry is very much about engaging the senses, especially the ear, and perhaps the most basic thing we can say about form is that it too is firmly based in auditory perception. Just as you hear musical patterns in words as the vowels and consonants combine in assonances and consonances, so too you can hear the stresses in ordinary conversation form rhythmic patterns. Just as you can arrange the sounds into interesting shapes, so too you can arrange the beats. Indeed, just as in music, the melodiousness or otherwise of poetry is largely dependent on our manipulation of its rhythms. And just as in music, you can have an instinct for these things, in which case metre can seem too obvious to worry about, or even just a tool of the trade, a mode of notation. Or you must work to hear rhythms, and work harder still to note them down. Neither position is ‘correct’, neither is permanent (poets can both lose and refine their sense of rhythm), and neither is proper justification for any argument for or against form. So the first thing every writer has to learn to do is listen, both to themselves and to other writers. ‘Listening’ means reading yourself and other poets with pen in hand, trying to hear if there are specific recurrent rhythmic patterns in their verse (and whether there should be in yours), and, if so, finding a simple way of marking these down. Books about metre will supply you not only with bewildering explanations of the straightforward phenomenon of stress, but will also provide rather too many ways of indicating it. Philip Hobsbaum, for example, rather relishes telling us there are four different levels of stress according to the Trager-Smith notation (Hobsbaum 1996: 7) – about as helpful to the rookie ear as being told there are four tones in spoken Chinese. The succession of marks suggested by Thomas Carper and Derek Attridge are so complex you may feel they are sending you subliminal messages in some kind of manga cartoon shorthand (Carper and Attridge 2003: 19–41). So let’s not add to the confusion: whatever you go for, keep it simple. What I go for is ˘ above an unstressed syllable, and ´ above a stressed syllable, and | to divide one group of these off from the next. (If it helps, you could vocalise ˘ as a light ‘duh’ noise, and ´ as a heavier ‘dum’. | doesn’t need a sound.) The word ‘syllable’, for instance, would be sýllăblĕ (dum duh duh). This is what most poets do who aren’t nutters (and a few who are). Every word can be analysed for stressed or unstressed syllables (‘stréssed’ is always stressed, whereas the ‘ĕr’ in ‘either’ isn’t). The stress patterns of most words are fixed by usage; others can be stressed or unstressed according to context: the ‘or’ in ‘stressed or unstressed’ isn’t stressed; but it’s possible to say ‘OR, we could just let him go’, and place a lot of emphasis on that first syllable. It’s a matter of listening carefully. What people are doing when they use words like ‘iamb’ and ‘trochee’ is straightforward: they’re noticing the recurrent shapes that stresses fall into, and they’re giving them names. Helpfully in Greek. ‘Noticing’, not ‘imposing’: all English is stress-based, and an iamb is a unit for indicating this. We call these units ‘feet’, which at least indicates their purpose is What is Form? 201 to get us somewhere. This act of noticing is what Wordsworth was on about when he said: ‘The only strict antithesis to Prose is Metre; nor is this, in truth, a strict antithesis; because lines and passages of metre so naturally occur in writing prose, that it would be scarcely possible to avoid them, even were it desirable’ (Wordsworth 1994: 439–40). Notice how Wordsworth is quite strict about being strict, because what he’s talking about isn’t, strictly speaking, a stricture. It’s a description. Iambs describe what we do when we say ‘co˘urgéttes’: we go duh dum. Trochees depict us saying ‘frýı̆ng’ (dum duh). There are lots of other combinations (anapaests go ˘˘´ (duh duh dum), or ‘ı̆n á pán’; dactyls go ´˘˘ (dum duh duh), or ‘gárlı̆cky̆’), but the crucial thing to spot is that they do this whether we notice them or not. If we rejigged those examples, and ran them together with a divider between each foot, they’d go gárlı̆cky̆ | co˘urgéttes, | frýı̆ng | ı̆n â pán. I know, it’s not a great line, but it shows how natural patterns of stress can be gently adjusted into form. Having read it, being an obsessive, I’m strongly inclined to rearrange it as two lines with two stresses in each. gárl ĭcky̆ co˘urgéttes, frýı̆ng ı̆n ă pán. Now I’ve taken those dividers out you can see and hear the two phrases are rhythmically parallel. The line break helps to make that clear. So iambs, trochees, anapaests and dactyls are descriptors. Their only job is to help us hear rhythms clearly, and their interaction with the poetic line is the thing that sets rhythms – even workaday normal rhythms like these – into patterns. And rhythmic patterns are the rudiments of form. (By the way, that ‘in’ in the second line is one of those instances where usage could make the stress slightly stronger: ‘frýı̆ng ín ă pán’. What do you think?) The simplest way to attune the ear to metric feet is to find and create examples of them. Next time you find yourself admiring what someone has said, whether in conversation or in a newspaper, or a book, a film, or a TV programme, write it down. Analyse it for stress; see if you can find out if your admiration had to do with its rhythm. See if you can write something else in the same rhythm, and whether you like that imitative statement too. And next time you write up a shopping list, try arranging the items into groups according to their metric structure: it may not help you navigate the supermarket, but it might help prove how built into our daily lives these little rhythmic units actually are. So far so simplistic, but the repercussions of this kind of observation are important: form is not something imposed on language, it is derived from something naturally arising within it. So by the simple act of listening attentively, we can perceive rudiments of form in any piece of writing. Equally, by overlooking the essentially stress-based patterns of English, we can fail to see how closely form is linked to speech, and thereby the central error of the formal verse/free verse schism comes into being. When people think of metre, line and stanza as carapaces, shapes into which language must be forced, where it sits the way an invertebrate’s flesh is contained in a shell, they lose connection with the rhythmic roots of speech. When they write free verse and think of themselves as cracking the old moulds in which words used to be straitjacketed, they overlook the pattern-building facility which drives all verse from nursery rhymes to renga, from 202 The Handbook of Creative Writing the ballad to the calligramme. In other words they assume that a metrical writer has divided structure from content, whereas their proper practice is to unite these in a unique event. A writer who managed to express some of the functions of form succinctly was, perhaps unexpectedly, Robert Louis Stevenson. Writing in a period when conventional assumptions about verse were being challenged by French prose poems like those of Baudelaire, and America’s more rhetoric-driven structures, typified by Whitman, and being familiar with the experiments in free verse of his close friend W. E. Henley, Stevenson showed himself sympathetic to both innovation and tradition: Verse may be rhythmical; it may be merely alliterative; it may, like the French, depend wholly on the (quasi) regular recurrence of the rhyme; or, like the Hebrew, it may consist in the strangely fanciful device of repeating the same idea. It does not matter on what principle the law is based, so it be a law. It may be pure convention; it may have no inherent beauty; all that we have a right to ask of any prosody is, that it shall lay down a pattern for the writer, and that what it lays down shall be neither too easy nor too hard. (Stevenson 1905) This is admirably even-handed, and still applicable today if slightly incomplete, as is what he goes on to say about line: Hence . . . there follows the peculiar greatness of the true versifier . . . These not only knit and knot the logical texture of the style with all the dexterity and strength of prose; they not only fill up the pattern of the verse with infinite variety and sober wit; but they give us, besides, a rare and special pleasure, by the art, comparable to that of counterpoint, with which they follow at the same time, and now contrast, and now combine, the double pattern of the texture and the verse. Here the sounding line concludes; a little further on, the well-knit sentence; and yet a little further, and both will reach their solution on the same ringing syllable. The best that can be offered by the best writer of prose is to show us the development of the idea and the stylistic pattern proceed hand in hand, sometimes by an obvious and triumphant effort, sometimes with a great air of ease and nature. The writer of verse, by virtue of conquering another difficulty, delights us with a new series of triumphs. He follows three purposes where his rival followed only two; and the change is of precisely the same nature as that from melody to harmony. What Stevenson is suggesting here is that the poetic line is fundamental to our sense of verse as something structurally distinct from prose. This helps us to build up a theory of the line, one that can function independently of our sense of it as a metric unit. I’ve just been arguing that a sense of the metric foot is crucial to our understanding of rhythm. In the same way, a sense of line contributes to our sense of form. But for the moment, let’s put aside the issue of lines formed from metric feet. This is because the way the poetic line interacts with the flow of the sentence (which can be regarded as continuing to observe prose norms of syntax and grammar in the vast majority of cases) is actually the same for free verse and formal verse. There are essentially two options: to interrupt the flow of the sentence, or to coincide with it. Let’s have an example of the first. Here is Jo Shapcott’s Mad Cow at the exact moment when she falls over: . . . and then there’s the general embarrassing collapse, but when that happens it’s glorious because it’s always when you’re traveling 203 What is Form? most furiously in your mind. My brain’s like the hive: constant little murmurs from its cells saying this is the way, this is the way to go. (Shapcott 1992: 41) Here we can see that a line break which does not coincide with a pause in the structure of the sentence, whether that is a temporary pause for breath, a comma or a full stop, breaks into that flow and imposes the different unit of the line upon it. Whether that unit is syllabic, metrical or more instinctual, it has an effect on our reception of the sentence: the momentary pause while the eye travels to the beginning of the next line causes us, however subliminally, however involuntarily, to consider the fragment contained by the line (‘the general embarrassing’), and to question the sentence so far. This can send us on to that following line with our curiosity piqued, in which case it speeds things up; and it can lodge the alternative sense of that fragment in our unconscious. Now an example from Julia Darling, called ‘The Recovery Bed’: I am riding a raft that was made by kind women who have left me here, who gave me a key, for I was forgetting to look out of the window, but now, I shall float home, firm as this mattress. You will find me quite sure, convalesced. (Darling 2004: 46) Here those line breaks which coincide with a pause, a piece of punctuation, be it a comma or a full stop, slow things down and affirm the sentence. Each time, the line silently underscores the pause and redoubles its impact. In doing this it is implying there is consonance between the progression of each sentence and that of the poem, between the form of all the sentences and the form of the whole poem. As this unspoken agreement builds, its conclusion can sound like the resolution of a harmonic progression. Poetry which is aware of the play between the sentence and the line is filled with a sense of pace and elasticity. Poetry which is not feels either loose or hobbled: loose because there’s no tension in the way syntax overflows the line; hobbled because the line-breaks meekly and continuously agree with the syntax. You can experiment with this with your own drafts: take a poem and rearrange its lines so they always coincide with syntax; then rearrange it again, so they never do. In each case note the points at which the line break feels most effective. Then rearrange the poem a third time to accommodate the best of both options, as it were. Finally, compare this draft to your original layout: is it exactly the same? Are any of the changes improvements? So far so free. To bring metre back into the equation, we can now say it tests our sense of line by imposing a structure which interacts not only with the sentence but with our instinctive sense about when to break the line. When a formal restraint stretches or compresses that instinct, it challenges it: it shows us when we care passionately about a line unit, and when we are indifferent. Clearly it is not going to be enough to be indifferent. When a formal restraint matches our own instinct seemingly exactly, it affirms sentence, line and structure: there is a triple underscoring of what the poem is saying. Frequently, when we are writing formally, the demands of fitting phrase to metre and sentence to line cause us to say something we wouldn’t come up with normally. Opponents 204 The Handbook of Creative Writing of form regard this as unnatural; proponents find it as natural as any other act of communication. Composing within form is a dialogue with form, even a debate. In passionate dialogues, in arguments, we may say things we didn’t expect to – something gets blurted out. Frequently we say that we didn’t mean it; secretly, we sometimes discover that we do. What is drawn from us in the dialogue with form lies close to the point of writing poetry at all. Poetry is a means whereby we can discover what we didn’t know we knew. Form is a means of generating these unknown messages. What we have to say to satisfy the form can be judged quite starkly: it is either false or a new truth. And the line is the unit within and across which these outbursts, these new truths, are tested and found sound or wanting. The line is a unit of attention for the reader, and a unit of intent for the poet. It is the place where both meaning and formal scope are discovered. It is the unit within which these two essential elements of a poem are found to be either ignorant of each other, or in opposition; in harmony with each other, or even identical, one indisputable impulse. Let’s take a retrograde step, and look at how a genuine old master handles iambic pentameter. You may protest that I should at least be citing a contemporary example, but be assured, there will prove to be method in my antediluvianism. So here is Wordsworth, describing birds in Spring with no less energy than Jo Shapcott, and with as much attention to line-endings as Julia Darling, but with the clear formal design of iambic pentameter: They tempt the sun to sport among their plumes; Tempt the smooth water, or the gleaming ice, To show them a fair image, – ’tis themselves, Their own fair forms, upon the glimmering plain, Painted more soft and fair as they descend, Almost to touch, – then up again aloft, Up with a sally and a flash of speed, As if they scorned both resting-place and rest! (Wordsworth 1994: 247) Wordsworth distends his sentence for as long as possible, allowing his phrases to pause at the line-endings, and using a strong break within the line – what’s known as caesura – to catch the rapid shifts of the flock. He sets the stability of pentameter against the instability of his subject, in other words, reassuring the ear with long lines and definite end-of-line pauses, and destabilising that reassurance with more abrupt internal phrases. He gains the same effect within his lines as Shapcott does at the ends of hers, implying chaos can be contained within an underlying and finally affirmative order. So when he concludes line, verse paragraph and sentence with that triumphant exclamation mark, there is a real sense of fulfilment as well as release. His use of pentameter serves several purposes at once. Used well, form is always multi-tasking. The purpose of form is sometimes described as pleasurable or mnemonic. Though it is both of these things, this is too narrow a definition. As Wordsworth shows us, it actually gives us another way of speaking within the poem. Stevenson talks about the interplay of the line with the sentence. To this we should add the way that form interacts with subject, approaching and shying away from mimesis. And this isn’t all. Yes, form dictates the length of that line Stevenson speaks of, setting its regularity against the irregularity of the sentences. It plays with the patterns of the speaking voice, reforming what we normally say without losing the thread of how we normally say it. But 205 What is Form? it also engages in a dialogue with past examples of itself. It is not too large a leap to say that Wordsworth’s glad birds, celebrating the end of winter with aerial acrobatics, echo and contrast with Dante’s famous image of the souls of adulterers in the Inferno, constantly blown around on a scouring wind. In this sense not only is the Paradise of the English Lakes being set against the Peninsula’s conception of Inferno, the iambic pentameter itself is being compared with Dante’s terza rima as its British rival and equivalent. And this crucial ability of form to speak to form, present to speak with past, is a dialogue free verse would appear to deny itself. Everyone is aware of a slight sense of intimidation when they write a line in iambic pentameter because they are conscious of Wordsworth, Milton and Shakespeare standing over their efforts. This sensation is even more pronounced when we use the pentameter as a building block in something larger – say the sonnet – because everyone knows something of the illustrious history of that form (Auden, Keats, Shelley, WordsworthMiltonShakespeare). One response to the terror of how to create something new in an old form is parody (or pissing in the ear of Ozymandias). Abandoning such forms altogether is another response, and both have their roots in timidity as well as a desire to free yourself from the burdens of a heritage. But form in the best sense rehabilitates parody, because it establishes it as a dynamic dialogue with the past. This is a matter of structural allusion, for instance choosing a stanza form with a specific history, and it can occur alongside verbal allusion. (Verbal allusion has a similar relationship with pastiche, and, as Eliot taught us, a similar capacity for serious purpose.) Form is about treating structure as recyclable, and finding new uses for it each time, uses that have specific resonances with past instances. Instead of ridiculing or denying the past, form acknowledges and engages in dialogue with it. Most of us hope our work will resonate with future readers, whether five, fifty or 500 years ahead – a space we obviously can know nothing about. Form teaches us that we can relate to and resonate with the past, whether with those works that have proven their longevity, or with those we choose to resurrect, becoming their most receptive future readers. The sense of continuity this generates might even create a little momentum to carry us a short distance into that unpredictable future. Here is Douglas Dunn considering the suicide in the early nineteenth century of the Paisley poet, Robert Tannahill: Gone, gone down, with a song, gone down, My Tannahill. The tavern town Said one book was your last and frowned. The River Cart Ran deep and waste where you would drown, Your counterpart. (Dunn 1981: 73) Here Dunn uses a form Tannahill worked in, the Burns stanza or Standard Habbie. As its name suggests, use of this form harks back to Robert Burns, another poet from the labouring classes, and is thus, in itself, a reference to Dunn’s theme of the unacknowledged autodidact bard. Into that form he pops a verbal allusion to another Scottish writer, William Soutar, ‘Gang doun wi a sang, gang doun’, changing his vigorous resistance to death into a lament (Soutar in Dunn 1981: 73). So this poem is engaging with its predecessors and addressing its successors, and, crucially, it uses its form as eloquently as its content. You can experiment with this use of previous form by picking the structure of a formal poem you are fond of and writing something of your own to fit exactly into that metric 206 The Handbook of Creative Writing shape. Don’t try and match your subject to that of the original, but don’t fight it if some form of echoing or contrast creeps in. Now select a number from three to six, and another number from five to eight. You can combine these two numbers to form a stanza structure, in which the first will be the number of feet you’ll be using, and the second the number of lines per stanza. Rewrite your draft so that it conforms to this new shape. Does your poem ‘belong’ in the original, borrowed form, or is it just as happy (or indeed just as unhappy) in the new, invented stanza? Is there something you can do to the new stanza to make it feel more at home? Shorten a line length, say, or introduce a rhyme scheme? Or is there another subject matter which would now seem more appropriate for the original? So in a formal poem, not just imagery and music, or sentence and metre, but also verbal and structural allusion are all in dialogue with each other as well as with the subject of the poem: this is language in a heightened state of perception. And it’s the dynamics of these interchanges which make it difficult for the formal poet to divide structure from content: structure is in the best instances creating or influencing content. The argument that metre forces language into a pre-arranged shape, bruising or mutilating the voice, is too aggressive an interpretation: form is certainly an act of will, but its purpose is to transcend the will. We surrender to form in order to find out what it enables us to say, and in those best instances we find it generates further meaning, even further levels of meaning. None of this invalidates free verse in the slightest: almost any verbal structure can become a form in the terms discussed here (though from that point we might go on to raise questions of its flexibility and resonance). It is certainly the case that many experimental forms from the last two centuries were intended to replace form, to become new forms, and by now there are very few of them with which it is not possible to have that structural dialogue which I have been relating to, and would suggest is a transcendent use of, parody. The thing to note is that the freedom or freshness associated with breaking away from established form is momentary: it belongs to the writer in the act of composition, the reader in the first apprehension of the new text. Strictly speaking, it belongs to the writer intoxicated by the moment of creation, the reader distracted from their memory of other work. Crucially, it doesn’t belong to the text. Because the moment at which the piece settles into its final draft coincides with the moment at which it acquires the status of a new form, the moment at which it starts to become independent of its author. Compositional space is anterior to this, but, since it is where the pleasure of writing takes place, for the new or unpublished writer, or the inexperienced reader, it is easy to equate this space with that inhabited by finished works. In fact these are connected yet separate zones, adjoining chambers: the completed poem is still charged by the energy of creation, but it is more responsive to its ancestors, more open to its successors, than it is beholden to its creator. Toll a muffled peal from the bells; Hang flags halfway on the standards, on spires, and on steeple; hang flags half mast on the ships that come from afar; Hang crape in the churches – on the galleries, on the pews, on the pulpits – The good old town is gone, irrevocably gone, dead, vanished! (Geddes 1991: 99) Few people reading these lines by the minor Scottish poet James Young Geddes, for example, could read them as doing anything other than alluding to the work of Whitman, What is Form? 207 and in doing so they are clearly treating Whitman’s verse as a definable form. In the hands of Allen Ginsberg, that allusion goes beyond imitation into a discovery of new uses for the long, breath-based rhetorical line that equal the reinventions of the sonnet or the ballad we see in generation after generation of British poets. I saw you Walt Whitman, childless, lonely old grubber, poking among the meats in the refrigerator and eyeing the grocery boys. I heard you asking questions of each: Who killed the pork chops? What price banana? Are you my angel? (Ginsberg) (Why not try the exercise suggested above for formal verse for a free verse poem you admire? Analyse its structure as closely as you can, then write a new poem to fit it. Then revise the poem so that it finds its own best form: will this be another free verse shape, or does it require some kind of formal framework?) Similar tactics to Ginsberg’s can be seen in Tom Leonard’s relocation of William Carlos Williams to Glasgow; Barry MacSweeney finding a home, half-Geordie, half-Cambridge, for, among others, Michael McClure; or many British and American poets’ rephrasing of the distinctive tropes of Frank O’ Hara or John Ashbery, from Ted Berrigan to Mark Ford. Formalists who are reluctant to concede this are as hidebound as experimentalists unable to contemplate writing a single line in pentameter. These are all cases of writers who are aware of the formal tradition they are working in, even if in some cases they have had to invent that tradition. But what many apprentice writers produce under the heading of free verse is more based in bookless assumption than any sense of continuity. And there is a structural weakness inherent in the pursuit of the apparently liberated voice. Where there is no perception of form in terms of metrics, and so no sense of an underlying support to decisions about line, the writer frequently must rely instead on the restraints of rhetoric. The integrity of the poetic voice becomes the strongest principle holding a poem together. This places pressure on the poet to produce significant utterance. That pressure of course already and always exists, but now the intensity of that utterance is directly related to the structural competence of the poem: it must be sound, in both senses of that word. There is therefore an inherent temptation to pump up the rhetoric and with it the status of the poet producing it, to become overblown. Ironically, form, by providing a simple means of validating poetic structure, acts as a restraint against this type of potential strain: it is a protection against preciosity. Of course there are other strategies the poet can employ before turning to formal metrics. The American poet Jane Hirshfield, for instance, places emphasis on the integrity of the syntax in her poetry. The weight of utterance in her work is comfortably held by the interaction of line break and grammar, by the clarity of punctuation: Brevity and longevity mean nothing to a button carved of horn. Nor do old dreams of passion disturb it, though once it wandered the ten thousand grasses with the musk-fragrance caught in its nostrils; though once it followed – it did, I tell you – that wind for miles. (Hirshfield 2005: 29) 208 The Handbook of Creative Writing But, muscular as this writing is, people who express some commitment to form would argue that metre provides the essential vertebrae, the skeletal structure onto which those muscles should fit, on which the flesh of subject hangs, into which the organs of its imagery may all be placed exactly. This is as fundamental to them as the music of a poem, or the way metaphors and similes can combine or contradict each other, and complement or contradict the sense of the text. In fact, Glyn Maxwell would use the same physical imagery to argue that a sense of metre is above all a bodily function: ‘Poetry is an utterance of the body . . . It is the language in thrall to the corporeal, to the pump and procession of the blood, the briefly rising spirit of the lung, the nerves’ fretwork, strictures of the bone’ (Maxwell 2000: 257–8). If this seems an extreme position, ask yourself this: what are we acknowledging in a free verse poem through the interplay of sentence and line, if not the ghost of metric structure? What are we engaged in, other than the unwitting imitation of form through the use of unmeasured linebreaks and unscanned stresses? Here is the real phantom of form, and these are its lineaments: pentameter, tetrameter, trimeter, dimeter, and (very rarely) monometer; iamb, trochee, dactyl, anapaest, and (occasionally) pyrrhic. Let these words haunt us in the same way as the shapes they refer to haunt our verse. If we are fully aware of them we can make structures as elaborate and strange as Gray’s Pindaric odes (which contain deft combinations of many of the above). Without awareness of them, we can only make structures which look as elaborate and strange as those odes. In this particular sense, free verse can only be an imitation of formal verse. Of course we don’t have to go this far. Of course well-made intelligent poems exist which are not in thrall to metre, which do not use stanza in the dialogic form I’m suggesting above. Of course poems which do utilise such techniques can be accused of a certain obscurity if their references are not commonly understood (and so few are these days, even among poets). But there is a difference between deciding not to write in metre in a given instance, and always writing in despite of it. The first decision accords your poem its own formal space alongside other forms, it acknowledges those forms but appeals to its right to operate differently. Implicitly, it acknowledges that the author may not have read everyone, but is at least aware that they might exist. The second not only denies those other forms relevance, it denies those other writers influence, and it denies itself formal analysis of its own success or failure. The unique poem has unique problems. While a formal piece can allude structurally to the context it comes from, the poem that refuses even to acknowledge that it has a context has to teach the reader its strategies and goals at the same time as revealing its subject. Just as much of the obscurity complained of in modern poetry stems from this as from references to examples of previous writing – which can at least be researched. But if the author of the unique poem fails to acknowledge the pressure on that poem to explicate itself as well as to pronounce, the reader is left without any field of reference for the techniques or devices it deploys. This is particularly true of typographic innovation: should its gaps represent a notation for performance or a graphic representation or an indication of some inner space? Without reference to previous practitioners, be they Guillaume Apollinaire, e e cummings or Charles Olson, how shall the reader know which way to proceed? All truly innovative experimentation needs to be formally aware, otherwise it is either incoherent, or an unwitting repetition. So how do we become aware, specifically, of metric form; of how line and stanza interact to create a device, or indeed to devise a creature, which addresses contemporary and 209 What is Form? future readers and even poetic ancestors with one and the same voice? Well, we read, in exactly the same way as I suggested earlier that we listen, that is, we read as much for form as for content (sometimes, as in the case of Gray’s odes, we read despite content). We read with pen in hand making marks all over those neat printed pages (that’s what all that white space is for: for you to think in). But reading for a writer is never far away from writing, in the same way thinking is always close to practice. Try every structural device you become aware of on for size. Accept that 90 per cent will be arid exercises (that way you might loosen up enough for more than ten per cent to succeed). Examine everything you’re writing in any case and check whether any of it has a hidden structure – if two or three lines fall into anapaest, consider the rest; if two stanzas rhyme ask yourself if you’ve seen this pattern before. Don’t just wonder if something would be better recast in tetrameter, try it out. But above all, be patient. Success is so rarely automatic in poetry I should hardly need to say this, but metrical ability, stanzaic competence, even the decision whether or not to write in free verse, are all dependent on developed skills, not your current opinions. In the same way as a musician or dancer must repeat an action enough times for the neural pathways to be established, for the body to learn what is required of it, so too rhythmic awareness needs time to accommodate itself to verbal dexterity. What is happening is a double effect: you are becoming more and more aware of how your voice fits, say, the pentameter; and the pentameter is becoming more and more aware of you. Your voice must develop as a result of interacting with metre, in the same way as it obviously changes in response to all life experiences. What must begin as deliberate is sinking back into the instincts where it belongs. An understanding of form is fundamental to our understanding of poetry because it brings to our awareness the particular poise of consciousness from which poetry springs. We must be as aware as possible without self-consciousness – the self is of interest only as another subject matter. We must be technically adept without the need to display mere technique – form is not a decoration, it is a function. We must be responsive to instinct and inspiration without becoming slaves to one or idolators of the other. Above all we must be as aware as possible of what our language is doing, how it combines as sound and stress as well as how it builds up sense – form is the means by which we bring one into harmony with the other, and our skill in doing so, not just our eloquence or our message or our social role, is what makes us makers. Or, to use the Greek, poets. References Auden, W. H. (1987), ‘Making, knowing, judging’ in The Dyer’s Hand, London: Faber. Carper, Thomas and Derek Attridge (2003), Meter and Meaning, London: Routledge. Darling, Julia (2004), ‘The Recovery Bed’ in Apologies for Absence, Todmorden: Arc Publications. Dunn, Douglas (1981), ‘Tannahill’ in St Kilda’s Parliament, London. Geddes, James Young (1991) ‘The Glory Has Departed’ in Dundee: A Dundee Anthology, Dundee: Gairfish. Ginsberg, Allen, ‘A Supermarket in California’ in Howl, www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/supermarket.html Hirshfield, Jane (2005), ‘Button’ in Each Happiness Ringed with Lions, Tarset: Bloodaxe. Hobsbaum, Philip (1996), Metre, Rhythm and Verse Form, London: Routledge. Maxwell, Glyn (2000), ‘Strictures’ in W. N. Herbert and Matthew Hollis (eds), Strong Words: Modern Poets on Modern Poetry, Tarset: Bloodaxe. 210 The Handbook of Creative Writing Shapcott, Jo (1992), ‘The Mad Cow Talks Back’ in Phrase Book, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Soutar, William (1992), ‘Song’, in Douglas Dunn (ed.), The Faber Book of Twentieth-Century Scottish Poetry, London: Faber. Stevenson, Robert Louis (1905), ‘Essays in the art of writing’, http://robert-louis-stevenson.classicliterature.co.uk/essays-in-the-art-of-writing/ All references to Stevenson are to this source. Wordsworth, William (1994), Selected Poems, ed. John O. Hayden, Harmondsworth: Penguin. 20 New Poetries Aaron Kunin Two reasons for studying new poetry are suggested by Arthur Rimbaud in A Season in Hell where he writes that ‘one must be absolutely modern’ (Rimbaud 1945: 87). The mood of this sentence is ambiguous. ‘Must’ could be a wish, implying that modernisation is a duty (poets should work hard to become as modern as possible); or, alternately, ‘must’ could be grimly deterministic, implying a historical necessity (poets are modern because they live in the modern period). Consider the wish-reading. You must always be completely modern because novelty and originality are the primary criteria of value, as in the motto adopted by Ezra Pound in The Cantos, ‘Make it new’ (Pound 1940: 11). To make something, such as a poem, that has no precedent in the history of forms is a heroic act. This reading is based on a romantic notion of poetic composition (you invent an image out of your unique self and project it beyond yourself, like a lamp, which consumes its own fuel in order to illuminate the world) as opposed to a classical one (you follow an assigned pattern, like a mirror, which receives an image from outside, from nature). The limitations of the romantic aesthetic for any account of new poetries are: • Novelty and originality are never the only values. • A lot of the best new poetry is explicitly anti-romantic, introduces no new ideas, uses exclusively pre-fabricated material, and attempts to dismantle the individual human speaking subject. (See the section on ‘Non-intentional writing’ below.) • Poetry is almost never original. New poetry typically authorises itself in reference to its own encoded history. Even Pound uses models from Confucian China, Jeffersonian America, and fascist Italy to authorize his practice of making new. These limitations are visible in some of the unwieldy names by which the subject of this chapter is known in criticism: ‘innovative poetry’ (which implies that poetry has an expiration date), ‘non-traditional poetry’ (which implies that poetry could exist apart from any tradition of reading and writing), ‘experimental poetry’ (which implies a lack of finish or polish – ‘Whoops! Well, there’s my experiment, back to the drawing board, etc.’ – or, more sympathetically, a Baconian attitude, as though one might make a discovery or proof in the process of writing), ‘avant-garde poetry’ (which implies a progressive and militaristic history of literature), and ‘post-avant poetry’ (which defaults on the possibility of any future avant-garde activity). 212 The Handbook of Creative Writing Here is one further illustration of these limitations. John Cage, whose characteristic works are based on chance operations, always maintained that he was not interested in novelty. Cage tells a story in which a friend observes that the ‘most shocking thing’ he could do when invited to lecture would be to give a normal lecture – no one would expect that. Cage’s response to this proposal is that he doesn’t write and deliver lectures in order to shock people, but rather ‘out of a need for poetry’ (Cage 1961: x). Cage, one of the most radical artists in history, is careful to distinguish shock from poetic value. His point is well taken. Some gaps in the history of form-making are felicitous; not all untried forms would represent an improvement on the available ones. Now consider the determinist reading of ‘must’. You are already modern, whether you want to be or not, whether you know it or not. This is a very good reason for studying new poetry, no matter what kind of poetry is important to you. A question for all poets in the first years of the twenty-first century is: what do we want the poetry of the next century to be? If a well-tempered poetry is what you want, you will have to look at many examples of different kinds of poetry in order to determine the rules according to which they operate or should operate. Also, remember that many ways of writing poetry, which no one has seen yet, are possible. Even if you want to resist or reject old or new models for writing and understanding poetry, you still may need to study them, simply because they are part of your culture, and because sheer ignorance may not be the most effective mode of critique. In short: new poetry is whatever we poets do. That is both a threat and a promise. What have poets been doing for the past century? Here are some generalisations. The most advanced art of the modern period: • • • • Is interested in the elemental and primordial (medium and object specificity) Includes process in product (a procedural aesthetic) Is structured as theme-and-variations (a recursive rather than progressive paradigm) Privileges the non-recurrent element (non-commensurability). We will fill in some of the details as we proceed. Intentional writing In his lectures on Shakespeare, Samuel Coleridge distinguishes between what he calls ‘mechanical form’, in which a limit on what a poem can and can’t say is imposed from outside, and ‘organical form’, which he prefers, where a poem discovers its own limits (Coleridge 2004: 325, 515). Confusingly, his examples of organic form are trees and people rather than poems. Sol LeWitt makes a more precise statement of this distinction in his ‘Paragraphs on conceptual art’. According to LeWitt, there are two strategies for making art. In the normal, intuitive, organic way, you’re constantly discovering new problems and improvising responses to them. What colour should this be? What materials should I use? What scale am I working on? You have to make a whole new set of decisions at every stage of the project. In the other, conceptual way, you make all the decisions before you start working ‘and the execution becomes a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes a machine that makes the art’ (LeWitt 1996: 822). In the conceptual way, all the creative energy goes into the idea. It isn’t necessary to do the labour of turning the idea into an object, and you certainly don’t have to perform this labour yourself; you can hire someone to ‘fabricate’ the object. The distinction, whether organical/mechanical or intuitive/conceptual, is not between imposing form and not imposing form, because LeWitt believes that you can’t 213 New Poetries have art without some degree of control. The question is: ‘At what point in the process are you going to introduce the controls?’ Either you plan ahead, or else you have to improvise. The international literary society called the Ouvroir pour la littérature potentielle (Workshop for Potential Literature, or Oulipo) represents an extreme commitment to planning. This group, formed in the 1960s by the writer Raymond Queneau and the mathematician François LeLionnais, was originally supposed to explore links between poetry and mathematics, with special attention to the design of a poetry-writing machine. An important early work in this mode is Queneau’s book Cent mille milliards de poèmes, a collection of ten sonnets in which each line, helpfully printed on a separate strip of paper, can be combined with others to produce the astronomical number of formally exact, thematically coherent poems given in the title. This is a work of ‘potential literature’ in that no single person, including its author, can read all the possible poems in a lifetime. The Oulipo has become increasingly identified with ‘restrictive forms’ – historical ones such as the sonnet, sestina, and lipogram (writing without a chosen letter of the alphabet, a formal procedure made famous by Georges Perec’s novel La disparition, which does not include the letter ‘e’), as well as recent inventions such as the septina, devised by Jacques Roubaud. Some members of the group believe that these restrictive forms are of conceptual and aesthetic interest in their own right (such as Perec, who always made his process of composition explicit in the work or in prefaces addressed to his readers), while others believe that the restrictive forms are of merely practical interest (such as Queneau, who tried to avoid making his arcane compositional systems available to readers and critics). The use of restrictive forms is obviously intended as an expression of control. Particularly for Queneau, control is an ethic: nothing should happen in a text that has not been planned by the writer. Artists should be fully aware of the rules governing their decisions, because otherwise they are ‘slaves to rules of which they know nothing’ (Queneau 1986: 64). However, one advantage for writers who work with restrictive forms is the loss of control in later stages of composition. John Ashbery has said that writing a sestina is like riding a bicycle downhill, when the pedals start pushing your legs instead of the other way around (Packard 1974: 124); the six repeating end-words of the sestina effectively become ‘a machine for making art’, as LeWitt might say. Placing a limit on one area of decisionmaking encourages surprising inventions in other areas. You think what you would not otherwise have thought, and write what you would not otherwise have written. Non-intentional writing For some writers, the goal, which may be an impossible one, is not to express an intention, or not to have an intention at all. This is an ancient idea: for example, the classical poet is often imagined as a conduit through which a divine voice speaks. In the twentieth century, William Yeats used his wife’s automatic writing, ostensibly dictated by spirit voices, as a source of ‘metaphors for his poetry’. The use of automatic writing and dream imagery in surrealist poetry was supposed to connect poets not to a spirit-world but to a deeper reality than that of conscious awareness. Similarly, William Burroughs used chance operations (cut-ups, fold-ins, etc.) to make his novels subject to a ‘third mind’ not his own. Jack Spicer called his mature poetry ‘dictated’ in that it consisted of messages from an outside source that he sometimes described as ‘Martians’ or ‘ghosts’ but that he was apparently not curious to identify. Hannah Weiner called her mature poetry ‘clairvoyant’ in that it was based on words that she either ‘saw’ (on objects, on the bodies of people, and sometimes suspended in air) or ‘heard’ (here she made a difficult distinction between words that 214 The Handbook of Creative Writing had a determinate physical source, words that had no apparent source, and words that were spoken ‘silently’) and then transcribed and interpreted. A more sustained, rigorous effort to divest poetry of intention occurs in the work of John Cage and Jackson Mac Low. Cage’s use of chance operations in order to generate writing is not as well known as his chance-based musical compositions, but is part of the same project. His typical procedure as a writer was to ‘write through’ another text, such as Ezra Pound’s Cantos or James Joyce’s Finnegans Wake, using a mesostic. Cage would start with a keyword, usually the name of his subject (for example, ‘Ezra Pound’) then write a poem using words from The Cantos containing letters from the keyword. The resulting poem Writing through the Cantos is planned by Cage but does not express his intentions, opinions, or (this claim is dubious) his taste; its diction and syntax are determined solely by the source text and the keyword. The ultimate aesthetic ideal for such poetry would be to perform an action, such as writing, without leaving a trace. Failing that, the ideal would be to make the smallest possible intervention, as in the work of the minimalist sculptor Carl Andre, who made a series of sculptures using blocks of wood as materials in which each block received exactly one cut from a radial arm saw. For writers, the advantage of using chance operations is that you don’t have to be special – you can write poetry without being a genius and without having a privileged relationship with an outside source (gods, muses, spirits, Martians, etc.). You can write poetry in mundane circumstances, even when you don’t feel like a genius. Moreover, the labour is not taxing. Cage liked to quote the following Zen poem: ‘without lifting a finger I pound the rice’ (Cage 1995: 174). Another recent iteration of this project is Kenneth Goldsmith’s ‘uncreative writing’. Goldsmith’s main activity as a writer is transcription – of a phonetic event (his book No. 111 collects instances of the schwa), of every word spoken by Goldsmith in a week (Soliloquy), of a taped verbal commentary on every physical movement performed by Goldsmith in a 24-hour period (Fidget), or of a copy of The New York Times (Day). Goldsmith’s work is important, interesting, and readable, but neither his practice nor his theory is as rigorous as Cage’s. Fidget, his best book, is incomplete, because Goldsmith got so drunk in the sixteenth hour of the project that he was later unable to transcribe his slurred verbal commentary on his intoxicated bodily existence; instead of giving a record of the last few hours, the final chapter presents the first chapter in reverse. According to Goldsmith, this failure proves that the project itself is impossible; actually, it proves that Goldsmith was unable to do it. Another artist might not encounter the same problems, and might realise the project more fully, if not perfectly. The most serious problem for this kind of writing is that it is often a blatant exercise in taste-making. Cage always makes interventions in canonical modernist masterpieces by writers he personally admires; when he writes ‘through’ Joyce and Pound, he is also identifying with them, channelling them, going inside their heads, or trying to. The ‘writing through’ projects thus become inadvertent portraits of great modern artists, as well as selfportraits insofar as they are expressions of personal appreciation. Cage’s use of Joyce to authorize his practice as a writer is particularly egregious and almost delusional. The aesthetic ideal implied by a novel such as Finnegans Wake would seem to be the exact opposite of the chance aesthetic: a book in which every available space has been marked, and in which the smallest mark reflects a coherent intention. Goldsmith’s Fidget has a similar problem, in that it takes place on June 16 – in other words, ‘Bloomsday’, the day Joyce describes in Ulysses. This coincidence effectively recasts Goldsmith’s external monologue as an experiment in stream-of-consciousness writing; it also signals an impasse for concep- 215 New Poetries tual writers who keep returning, as if by compulsion, to Joyce as a model. These problems, however, present opportunities for future writers. Jackson Mac Low, originally Cage’s student, is more various in his use of chance- and intention-based writing procedures; his poetry is alternately spontaneous, planned, machine-assisted, personal, notational, performative, mesostic, and diastic. Some of Mac Low’s writings are based on word lists generated randomly by computer programmes; his intervention as a poet is then to recognise the poem delivered by the machine. Mac Low is also somewhat more realistic than Cage in his claims for non-intention. In interviews and statements, Mac Low always insisted that poets can’t get away from intention regardless of the formal procedures they’re following, because ‘the ego is implicit in everything you do’ (Bezner 1993: 110). Mac Low thus supports Sol LeWitt’s point that art can’t exist without the exertion of some control. Which brings us back to the beginning. As a poet, you have three kinds of decisions to make: selection (why this word rather than some other word?), order (why this word before the next word?), and division (what is the compositional unit – the word, the line, the fragment, the sentence? What marks the boundary between units?). We will consider each of these sites for decision-making in turn. Vocabulary Here is a simple way of thinking about poetry: a poem is a list of words. Slightly more complicated: a poem is an attempt to define one word (that is, the poem is still a list, but some of the words on the list are more important than others). Even more complicated: a poem creates a community in which its language is the only one. Only these words can be spoken in the space of this poem. Or finally: the words themselves are the community. Modern poets tend to insist on one of these formulations. In A Textbook of Poetry, Jack Spicer says that a poem first establishes a vocabulary, takes a cut out of the English language, then says: ‘Imagine this as lyric poetry’ (Spicer 1975: 177). Similarly, William Carlos Williams: ‘A poem is a small (or large) machine made of words’ (Williams 1988: 54). And Stéphane Mallarmé: ‘Poems are made of words, not ideas’ (Mallarmé 1956: 145). Poets who insist on words as materials are making a claim about medium specificity. The project is to say what can only be said in the form of a poem and can’t be said in the form of a painting, novel, film, dance, etc. Is there such a thing as medium specificity? Not insofar as poetry is conceived as a technology of representation. If a poem can describe a film or a painting (the technical name for this kind of mixed-media image-making is ‘ekphrasis’), it can include anything that the film or painting might do. Any medium of representation is always capable of including and outflanking all the others. If, however, you are committed to object specificity as well as medium specificity, representation is not an issue, because you assume that the replacement of any object (such as a film or painting) with a convenient image (in the form of a poem, say) is going to fail, or, in any case, is morally wrong. Many poetic revolutions have been founded on vocabulary. In their Lyrical Ballads, Wordsworth and Coleridge make a theoretical claim for ordinary language (not ‘plain language’ but ‘scenes from common life . . . in a selection of language really used by men’) as a useful, interesting material for poetry (Wordsworth 1984: 596–7). Whether any of the poems collected in Lyrical Ballads actually uses such a language is debatable. In the modern period, Ezra Pound makes a different claim for ordinary language as opposed to literary language (for example, words that appear only in poems, such as ‘eglantine’) in the name of 216 The Handbook of Creative Writing clarity. The principle is ‘nothing that you couldn’t, in some circumstance, in the stress of some emotion, actually say’ (Kenner 1971: 81). For Pound, ordinary language is not valuable because it is the language of a particular class (Wordsworth’s ‘common life’) but because it effectively communicates ideas and experiences. In the 1950s and 1960s, Barbara Guest put ‘eglantine’ and other super-literary words back into circulation. Such flagrant archaisms are a signal of the expansive vocabulary available to New York School poets: Guest reserves the right to use any word she wants. This expansiveness is thematised and exemplified in the flat, prosaic diction and syntax of John Ashbery’s Three Poems. The book begins by distinguishing between two compositional practices: ‘I thought that if I could put it all down, that would be one way. And next the thought came to me that to leave all out would be another, and truer, way’. Ashbery then gives some examples of leaving out: ‘clean-washed sea/ the flowers were’ (Ashbery 1972: 3–4). ‘Leaving out’, then, is the exclusive, artificial language that marks a boundary around poetry. With eyes fully open to the implications of his decision, Ashbery dedicates himself to what he has identified as the less true way – the use of a language that does not draw attention to itself as poetic. Other poets work valiantly to expand their vocabulary beyond the personal – see, for example, Tom Raworth’s poem ‘Sixty Words I’ve Never Used Before’ (Raworth 1999: 10–12). Perhaps the greatest vocabulary in all new poetries is that of Clark Coolidge. For Coolidge, the very fact that a poem has a vocabulary is a deplorable expression of human finitude. It is unfortunately impossible to have all experiences, to be all persons in history, to know every language; it is impossible even to use all the words in one’s native language. Most people, poets included, use a few words, a tiny piece of English, over and over, in every conversation and in every poem. Poets normally respond to this fact by ignoring it or by inventing a poetic persona which becomes an emblem for a different language. Coolidge responds, first, by ransacking dictionaries to find new, unfamiliar materials for poems. Coolidge also carries out these investigations on a micro-level in books such as Ing, where division occurs below the level of the individual word, allowing part-words such as ‘ing’ and ‘ness’ to become bearers of meaning. Excursus on plagiarism One essential formal feature in new poetries is collage, which means that the compositional unit is not the individual word (or something smaller, such as a part-word), but a larger prefabricated language piece often called a fragment. The term ‘fragment’ could imply that the unit is grammatically incomplete or miniature in scale, but this is not necessarily the case; the fragment can be a phrase, a line, a sentence, a paragraph, etc. In poetics, its actual valences are: • the fragment has another context outside of the poem; • the edges of the fragment are not coextensive with those of the poem. We will consider the problem of the fragment’s edginess later (under ‘Syntax’ and ‘Measure’). Here we are concerned with the problem of the fragment’s original context, a problem sometimes identified as appropriation, and sometimes, more bluntly, as plagiarism. To whom do words belong? Montaigne: ‘I myself am the substance of my book’. Rimbaud: ‘“I” is an other’. Both of these quotations occur, unattributed, in Walter Abish’s book 99: The New Meaning, a collection of sentences and paragraphs copied from other New Poetries 217 books and arranged, or as Abish says ‘orchestrated’, to give them a new meaning (Abish 1990: 9, 16). (The title piece takes passages from the ninety-nineth page of ninety-nine different books.) If the three kinds of decisions writers have to make are selection, division, and order, Abish has tried to limit his decision-making, as much as possible, to order. Although he gives no author citations for any of the passages, he is careful to give an exact word count for each one. The Montaigne and Rimbaud quotations may be understood as the conceptual limits of his project. Both are statements about how the person relates to writing. Montaigne, whose essays grow out of short tags copied from ancient poetry, identifies with the materials of writing. This writing, this ancient poetry, is Montaigne. Rimbaud, on the other hand, is alienated from the materials of writing as he receives them. The language is contaminated by other voices on the most elemental level. Even the personal pronoun ‘I’ is useless; Rimbaud will have to invent a new term to designate himself. The only completely satisfying solution would be to invent a new language every time he sits down to write. The quotation marks inside the Rimbaud quotation tell a different story. They are intended as a distancing device. They mean: that isn’t my word. That isn’t my voice. That isn’t me. Are the quotation marks enough of a shield to protect Rimbaud from what this sentence is actually saying? Is the disagreement between subject and verb, a grammatical error, enough of a shield? The words of the sentence may be too close to be entirely detached from one another and from the writer. The meaning of the sentence finally cuts across boundaries imposed by punctuation and grammar. In the Montaigne sentence, on the other hand, the subject is not as stable as it wants to be. It is curiously doubled: ‘I myself’. The ‘myself’ is redundant. It’s there only for emphasis. But its presence suggests a problem: Montaigne isn’t exactly the substance of his book. The book doesn’t even look like him. The distance from ‘I’ to ‘my book’ is a full sentence. That distance could be bridged to an extent; the relation could be expressed as ‘I ⫽ book’ or Ibook or boIok. But there will always be some distance between Montaigne and what he writes, just as there’s a necessary distance between ‘I’ and ‘myself’. They are different words. The positions that Montaigne and Rimbaud want to occupy are impossible. They are theatrical performances of absolute proximity and absolute distance. Abish manages to include both of them in one piece ‘What Else’, an arrangement of sentences and paragraphs that he describes in a prefatory note as his ‘pseudo-European autobiography’, in that the sentences are all written in the first-person singular. In ‘What Else’ the word ‘I’ is a lie. It conceals many voices, many unnamed authors. We know this much from the preface. But we can’t help putting it together anyway – constructing a character, a personality, a life story, out of the fragments. And we also know that the ‘I’ isn’t entirely a lie. There is an organising intelligence behind this anthology. ‘What Else’ is a personal record of a lifetime of reading. A person selected these passages and put them in order. Isn’t that always what we do when we write? We select words – which, usually, we didn’t invent – and arrange them. Abish is just using larger language pieces – complete sentences and paragraphs. Can ‘I’ ever be a lie? ‘I’, the personal pronoun, the word we use to designate ourselves, the word that we identify with at the most profound level, doesn’t belong to anyone. Everyone says ‘I’. We are all part of it. Abish is manufacturing an autobiography that anyone could have, making himself anonymous, flattening his own ‘I’ against an unnamed, faceless European past. Acts of literary collage, such as Abish’s, are incorrectly described as 218 The Handbook of Creative Writing theft, appropriation, plagiarism. Collage is really about letting go, becoming another person, in the same way that we become other people when we read books. Syntax Collage procedures usually do not involve a laborious or painstaking selection process. Finding fragments to use as materials is not much more difficult than recognising a poem delivered by one of Jackson Mac Low’s word generating programmes. Instead, collage puts pressure on the other sites of decision: order (what principle determines the arrangement of the fragments?) and division (what principle determines the boundaries of the fragment?). To understand the issues involved in ordering a composition, it may help to adopt or at least consider some more precise definitions of our terms. Collage is sometimes used as a synonym for montage, but sometimes is opposed to montage. Strictly speaking, collage may designate only the introduction of fragments from other media. Thus, a poem becomes a collage when it incorporates drawings, photographs, newspaper clippings, labels ripped from cans, jars, and bottles, etc. The precise name for a poem that incorporates only pieces of other texts is montage. However, the terms collage and montage are also sometimes used to make another useful distinction: collage designates a spatial arrangement of fragments for visual effect; montage designates the arrangement of fragments in chronological sequence (that is, the order of the pieces is the order in which they should be read). Finally, montage is sometimes thought to have a special political significance because of its association with photography. In Soviet constructivist film theory (most notably that of Sergei Eisenstein), montage gives viewers power to interpret images actively. Presented with two images that have been edited together, the viewer creates a new, third image to connect them. In a similar spirit, the German photomontage artist John Heartfield claimed, falsely, that the etymology for montage is from ‘Montour’ (or ‘factory worker’), implying that the act of assembling photographic images is equivalent to production on an assembly line. These precise definitions may not be satisfactory in that they are not congruent among themselves and not universally agreed-upon. However, the distinctions they make are extremely useful. Consider the first one, which is based on medium specificity. The introduction of a fragment from a different medium (collage in the strict sense) announces the embeddedness of the fragment in another context, but the introduction of a fragment from the same medium (montage in the strict sense) does not. A flower pasted into a poem clearly originated elsewhere, but a description of a flower, regardless of whether it’s quoted from another text, looks about the same as the other words in the poem. The distinction is crucial. In the work of some writers, the syntax emphasises the prior embeddedness of the fragments in another context. For example, Marianne Moore usually puts quotation marks around fragments to show that someone else is speaking, and gives bibliographical information to show where the fragments came from, giving an overall impression of polyvocality. This sharp use of collage also emphasises the difficulty of writing itself, the labour of the artist who puts the pieces together. Other writers who use fragments arrange them so that they present a relatively seamless surface, with narrative, thematic, and stylistic coherence. For example, T. S. Eliot’s ‘The Journey of the Magi’ incorporates phrases and images from a variety of poems, sermons, and memoirs, but the poem is presented as a univocal performance. (The ‘different voices’ of The Waste Land are presented more crisply.) This distinction becomes even more interesting when it is politicised, as it spectacularly is in Language writing, a poetic and intellectual movement from the 1970s and 1980s. The New Poetries 219 Language writers are radical formalists in their deployment of a broad range of formal devices, their sense that whatever a poem does is its form; in their tendency to make formal devices visible in their writing (the meta-device called ‘estrangement’ in Russian formalism and ‘alienation’ in Brecht’s ‘epic theatre’); and in their insistence that poetic form has political effects. (The earlier Objectivist poets – Zukofsky, Oppen, Niedecker, and others – whom the Language writers frequently claim as models are equally committed to a radical politics and to formal experimentation in poetry, but not to their co-articulation; instead, they insist on the separation of political and poetic activities. Thus, George Oppen did his most effective work as a labour organiser during the decades when he was not writing poetry.) The political effects are explained in Charles Bernstein’s lucid essay in verse ‘Artifice of Absorption’. Synthesising the poetic theory of Veronica Forrest-Thomson and the art history of Michael Fried, Bernstein distinguishes between poems that conceal artifice, pretending to ignore their readers in order to absorb them more effectively into an imaginary world; and poems that foreground artifice, challenging their readers with difficult interpretive problems. The first kind of writing is escapist fantasy; the second kind encourages readers to become active participants in the construction of meaning, and also, perhaps, to become more alert in their engagement with other cultural and social objects. I have written elsewhere that this is a rather weak and unappealing way of giving power to readers, and that readers always have the option of aggressive reading tactics, regardless of whether they are reading Language poetry or confessional poetry or the newspaper, because texts do not set limits on our ability to interpret them. (For an illustration, see the exercise ‘Page from a Tale’ below.) However, I agree that formal decisions have political consequences. In fact, poetic form is only interesting insofar as it produces a social relation or an image of one. Form can produce a social relation rhetorically (for example, a poet uses a formal device to have an effect on the minds and bodies of readers) or it can define a community of people who have read the same poems or write in similar forms, such as the Language writers. Form can also be understood as political allegory; however, any form is capable of several allegorical interpretations. For Pope, the closed couplet indicates an enlightened community in which people live in harmony and their knowledge can be externalised, grasped, and transferred to others. For Milton, the closed couplet indicates an imposed order that should be resisted. For Bernstein, the artificiality of the closed couplet represents a deliberate refusal of an unseen order imposed on ordinary language; the couplet helps to make that order visible, and thus is a useful tool for resisting it. The Language writers attribute special political significance to parataxis, a syntax in which compositional units (typically not verse lines but sentences, or, in Ron Silliman’s terminology, ‘new sentences’) are sequenced without implying chronology (one thing happens before another), etiology (one thing happens because of another thing or so that another thing can happen), or hierarchy (one thing is more important or more valuable than some other thing); without conventional transitions or other connective material; or (a device learned from Ashbery) with misleading connective material – for example, a non sequitur beginning ‘Therefore . . . ’ or ‘And yet . . . ’ Here is an example from Carla Harryman’s 1987 collection Vice. As often happens in Language writing, this example both performs and theorises parataxis: Twenty-five years later the words that had passed between them were unalterably compromised by everything they had come to know in the meantime. I believe in an order that does not exist, will never exist, and that one must seek in order to preclude its existence. The impulse of the painting I have turned you around in is dissatisfied with 220 The Handbook of Creative Writing a place to go – so as not to have been here, we have come up with a monochrome by which your remarks are masked. Here, syntax is initially a spatial relation, one that occurs on the page between two sentences or paragraphs; then, a psychological one that occurs in the distance ‘between’ people; then, a historical one that occurs across time (‘twenty-five years later’); finally, an artistic one, in which the first-person singular commits to a self-defeating search for order so that it ‘will never exist’. This kind of writing is sometimes called ‘disjunctive’, but the only disjoining going on here is my own act of quoting this passage apart from the context of Harryman’s book. Her work might be described more accurately as conjunctive, in that she proceeds by conjoining language pieces paratactically. It is also conjunctive in its wish to provoke a new social organisation. Excursus on repetition In his late autobiographical statement on poetics A Vision, Yeats describes the experience of reading Pound’s first drafts of The Cantos. Yeats immediately recognises the structure as one of theme-and-variations. Instead of progressing toward a goal, the development of the poem is recursive. The compositional elements of this ‘poem including history’ are historical fragments arranged ahistorically, producing a flat chronology in which a painter from renaissance Italy can appear to engage a colonial American architect in conversation. Yeats is comfortable with this structure, which he knows from his own work. However, he notes that ‘some of the elements’ in Pound’s long poem ‘do not recur’, and this failure puzzles and irritates him (Yeats 1966: 4). What is the significance of the non-recurrent element? Instead of translating people from contingent into absolute reality (as Yeats does in ‘Easter, 1916’, where the names of the Irish nationalists can be ‘written in a verse’ only after their bearers have been killed and thereby made efficacious in history), Pound locates value in the contingent: events, people, and things that occur only once in history. For the same reason, Gertrude Stein’s highly repetitive writing rejects the possibility of repetition. Each person, thing, and event is different, unique, unrepeatable. You can’t repeat a word any more than you can repeat a person. The same word is no longer the same when it occupies a different space. Few writers have attempted the difficult task of repeating no compositional element, so that there is no consistent narrative, argument, or style, and each step forward is a step into new territory. Lyn Hejinian’s early book Writing Is an Aid to Memory makes some gestures in this direction. (The title is partly a joke on the difficulty of memorising a poem in which almost nothing is repeated.) Christian Bök makes non-recurrence one of the formal constraints on his progressive lipogram Eunoia, each chapter of which uses words with only one vowel; for each vowel, Bök tries to exhaust the available vocabulary and to avoid repeating individual words. Lisa Jarnot embraces repetition as a structuring device, building poems around anaphoric repetitions and distortions of a keyword or phrase. One of Jarnot’s characteristic productions is her ‘Sea Lyrics’, a series of statements centred upon the firstperson singular speaking subject that Language writing would like to dismantle. Also worthy of note in this regard is Tan Lin’s ‘ambient stylistics’ project, a perverse response to Bernstein’s aesthetic theory that tries to take the literary technology of absorption as far as it can go, in order to produce a writing that would be ‘relaxing’, environmental, like wallpaper (Lin 2002: 109). Lin pursues this project by taking the materials of popular culture personally – for example, rewriting restaurant reviews, wedding notices, and obituaries as 221 New Poetries though they were about him as an individual subject instead of addressed to him as a member of the collective readership of The New York Times. Measure One of the oldest and most beautiful ideas about poetic form is that it is a system of measurement. Specifically, the line measures. What does it measure? The traditional answer is time. In classical prosody, you’re measuring time in units called long and short syllables that have precise lengths. Because it measures time, this kind of poetic line also implicitly measures human life. It may also be thought to regulate, therefore to institute or control time, to stop time, or to shield objects from the effects of time. As in Shakespeare’s Sonnet 15: ‘And all in war with time for love of you,/ As he takes from you, I engraft you new’, whatever the speaker might mean by ‘engraft’. Lyn Hejinian’s My Life is an unusual example of a prose poem in which the compositional unit, the sentence, measures time – not the time it takes to say the sentence, which is not precisely regulated, but a year. The number of sentences per paragraph is the number of years Hejinian has lived at the moment of composition as well as the number of paragraphs in the book. (Hejinian first wrote My Life at age thirty-seven; then revised it according to its own internal logic at age forty-six, adding sentences to each paragraph to close the gap; then invented a new time regulation system for the most recent sequel My Life in the Nineties.) Miles Champion’s poetry does not measure time notationally, but time becomes an issue because of his reading speed, which is just at the limit of intelligibility. Champion writes slowly but reads very fast; each line is thus subjected to intense dilation in time at the moment of composition, then contraction in time at the moment of performance. The result is a postmodern version of sublime: an aesthetic experience that almost outstrips one’s capacity to enjoy it because it happens too quickly. ‘Time’ is still a very good answer to the question of what poems measure. The typical, modern, vernacular answer is voice. In traditional English prosody, you’re measuring voice in units called long and short syllables that bear a precise stress. It might not sound as though very much is at stake in the modern conception. Time sounds like a profound concept; accent doesn’t, maybe because everyone has a distinct accent. No one speaks exactly the same English, no one puts stress in the same places or pronounces a stressed syllable in the same way, or not all the time. But that’s what makes the reduction of voice – of a particular, accented voice – to a uniform, abstract pattern so ambitious. The project of measuring accent is really a wish for a universal language, and, beyond that, a common world. There’s a poem by the nineteenth-century German poet Christian Morganstern in which only the title, which translates as ‘Fishes’ Nightsong’, is in German; the rest of the poem is written in accent marks. When you diagram voice as a pulse, human language looks the same as fish language. After the twentieth century, there are many possible answers to this question. For example: for the Black Mountain poets (Charles Olson, Robert Creeley, Denise Levertov, and others), the line measures breath, which could mean that the end of the line marks the assumed limit of the speaker’s lung capacity, or that the line break is notational, marking a place where a reader would be expected to pause. The line in Zukofsky’s poetry often has a consistent word count, so something is measured, but the measure is not universalised; the word count has a private numerological significance for Zukofsky and does not regulate time or voice. The implication of Zukofsky’s frequent practice of homophonic translation – re-articulating foreign poems to make them sound English – is the same: the rules governing the behaviour of the voice are private. Zukofsky himself is the measure. 222 The Handbook of Creative Writing Other poets reject the impulse to measure, which is considered inaccurate at best (because time and voice are not fully accessible to one person), violent at worst (because measurement is thought to introduce divisions in nature that were not previously there). The various marks of division in Leslie Scalapino’s writing – which include, but are not limited to, dashes, brackets, and quotation marks – and their tendency to occur at unpredictable intervals and to interrupt line units and grammatical units, may indicate the copresence of several measuring systems, or an effort to reject measurement altogether. For example: so the man – as gentle – for causing the fine – in that situation of being on the subway – when the cop had begun to bully him – at its inception and – a senseless relation of the public figure – to his dying from age – having that in the present – as him to us as is my relation to the mugger – a boy – coming up behind us – grabbing the other woman’s purse – in his running into the park By contrast, the marks of division in Alice Notley’s poetry represent a traditional voice regulation project. The quotation marks in The Descent of Alette represent the presence of different voices and the fact that Notley is alienated by any language that she did not invent herself; the spaces and ellipses in Close to Me and Closer . . . the Language of Heaven, indicate the voice of a particular speaker, Notley’s father: ‘you will be given a strange gift/ a number no one has seen before/ the number [unrepresentable]// the magic number . . . ness’. Final excursus on the page The father in Close to Me who presents ‘a number no one has seen before’ is proposing a new prosody in which divisions occur below the level of the individual word – so that ‘ness’, for example, becomes a complete unit – but using the language of traditional prosody. As in Alexander Pope’s Essay on Criticism: ‘But most by Numbers judge a Poet’s Song,/ And smooth or rough, with them, is right or wrong’ (337–8). ‘Numbers’ here means the tendency of prosody to reduce a specific grouping of words to a universal, abstract pattern. The sound of the words becomes a diagram. The term ‘numbers’ has the same meaning in baseball, where every player and every action can be replaced by a number or a long list of numbers. It’s one of the three or four things that baseball players are allowed to say in interviews: ‘I’m not thinking about my numbers, I’m just glad that my team got the win’. For Pope, the function of the numbers is rhetorical: ‘The Sound must seem an echo to the Sense’ (365). Here, the relation between form and content is redundant. Formal devices are always bearers of meaning, and their meaning is always the same as the semantic content of the line. Thus, a line that describes ‘a smooth stream’ is enacted ‘in smoother 223 New Poetries Numbers’ (367). The numbers function to reinforce, below the level of literacy, a meaning already in the words. The radical formalism of some new poetry links poetic form to social organisation by analogy, exactly as in Pope. However, other new poetries are committed to formal properties that exceed the production of meaning, so that the relationship between form and content is one of tension rather than redundancy; the sound effects may have a meaning different from or opposite to the semantic content, or they may be conceived as purely formal and meaningless. Susan Howe’s poem ‘A Bibliography of the King’s Book, or Eikon Basilike’ provides examples of all of these tendencies. The graphic eccentricities in Howe’s writing are sometimes used as political emblems (for example, a line that can only be read intelligibly when the page is oriented differently, which may signify resistance to convention), sometimes as notation for vocal performance (so that different typographic conventions represent distinct voices or characters), sometimes as purely visual objects (for example, lines crossing each one another or printed directly on top of one another so that they become illegible). Here, the page becomes a field or canvas. It may include notations for sound effects, but its most interesting formal properties are based in sight rather than sound. Unfortunately, prosody has no vocabulary for naming or measuring visual effects. I want to conclude by recalling two other uses of the page in new poetries that may be productive sites for future work. Ronald Johnson’s RADI OS is a poem based on the first four books of Milton’s Paradise Lost. Most of the words have been removed, and are represented by Johnson as white space; the remaining words take their positions from an 1894 edition of Milton. Johnson uses Milton, and a nineteenth-century editor, to make all of the decisions in the area of order (the sequence of the words is that of Paradise Lost), and most of the decisions in the area of selection (the words are chosen by Milton) and division (the page layout is determined by the nineteenth-century editor). He only allows himself to make negative decisions about selection and division; as he puts it, ‘I composed the holes’. A related project from roughly the same period is Tom Phillips’s A Humument, described by the author as a ‘treated Victorian novel’. Phillips performs extraordinary interventions on H. R. Mallock’s novel A Human Document, drawing and painting over the pages to make most of the original text illegible, drawing ‘channels’ or ‘rivers’ of space between words and phrases to create a new syntax among the remaining islands of legible text, combining pieces of text from several pages into one page, and introducing new divisions above and below the level of the individual word to form new contractions and compound words (for example, the hero of the first edition of A Humument is a figure named ‘Toge’, a word that appears nowhere in Mallock’s novel). The only rule for these interventions is that the collage has to be internal. Johnson’s and Phillips’s books are inspiring not just because of what they achieve but also because of their limitations. Although Phillips is primarily a visual artist, A Humument is more interesting as a verbal composition than as a visual one. The visual interventions are mainly illustrational – for example, a text piece naming or describing ‘steps’ is laid out by Phillips as a set of steps. Future writers may be interested in exploring the possibility of stronger tensions between text and image. Exercises ‘Page from a Tale’ A group of people divide a text between them so that everyone has a page. (If there are ten people, the text should be ten pages long.) Each person reads the assigned page carefully and becomes an expert on it. The text thus is divided over the consciousness of the 224 The Handbook of Creative Writing entire group. The group then meets to reconstruct the complete text based on their shared knowledge. The point of this experiment in reading is that any idea you have about a text is a reading of that text. On any page, there are energies of many kinds, possibilities for many different continuations, which tend to disappear when you put the page together with others. Reading is normally conceived as a process of imposing control on the disparate energies of the page, making the words line up so that they all appear to be saying the same thing. This exercise is a way of articulating the possible continuations before they disappear. This exercise can also be used as a germ for a series of writing exercises based on the assigned page. For example: write a poem using only words from your page; or write a poem without using any of the words from your page; isolate the textures on your page and write a poem with them; circle all words containing the letter ‘s’, draw lines between them, and write a poem about the resulting constellation; write a poem by crossing out words on the page. Another reading experiment Put this book under your pillow and sleep on it. Or, if you can’t sleep with the book under your pillow, read the book continuously until it puts you to sleep. Then write a poem based on your dream. This exercise is based on Carl Jung’s analysis of Joyce’s Ulysses, which is actually an analysis of the dream Jung had after falling asleep over the novel. ‘Inverted sonnet’ Write a fourteen-line poem in which the first word in every line is a rhyme-word from a sonnet. ‘Reducing the sauce’ Write a poem. Write another poem by removing most of the words from the first poem. Write a third poem by removing most of the words from the second poem. Write a fourth poem by paraphrasing the third poem (not using any of the words from the first poem). Other ways of reducing the sauce. Remove all the people from a poem. Remove every trace of human civilisation from a poem. Write a resumé of the people who appear in a poem and comment on their actions (morally, intellectually, aesthetically, personally). Write a review of a poem that you would like to write. Write a rejection letter for a poem you would like to write. Determine the keywords in a poem; write a glossary for them. Imagine that a censor will go over everything you write and remove certain references (to sex, politics, religion, and technology); rewrite your poem so that it can be submitted to the censor. ‘The lost suitcase’ Reconstruct the life of a person based on the contents of a suitcase. ‘Physical symptoms’ Write ‘automatically’ – in other words, making a direct connection between your unconscious and your hand, if such a thing were possible. After five minutes, switch hands and continue writing. (If you’re right-handed, switch to your left hand; if you’re left-handed, switch to your right; if you favour neither hand, put the writing instrument in your mouth, hold it between your toes, or close your eyes). New Poetries 225 The point of this exercise is that when you write, you have a body. This is also the case when you read – the best way to remember the second point is by placing the book at a distance slightly greater than your comfortable reading distance. Writing and reading are normally conceived as the elimination of physical awareness and confrontation. Exercises in confrontation Write a poem that will make readers laugh. Write a poem that will make readers cry. Write a poem that will disgust readers, nauseate them or make them throw up. Write a poem that will arouse readers. Write a poem that will put readers to sleep. Write a poem that will cause readers to commit violent acts (such as: fall out of their chairs, throw your poem out the window, tear the poem into bits, etc.). Write a poem that will make readers hungry. Write a poem that will make readers sweat. Write a description of an action that can be read in the time it would take to complete the action. Write an abbreviated description of an extended action. Reverse the chronology of the action. Reduce the action to its smallest components. Write about everything that happens prior to or following the action. Write a scene in which all actions are facilitated by servants. ‘Blow Up’ Write three pictorial descriptions of an action or event: one from inside the event, where you experience everything as it happens without being able to predict where it’s coming from or explain why it’s happening; one from directly outside the event, where you see and understand everything that happens but are either powerless to stop it or enjoying it too much to want to stop it; one in which the event is in the background and you are unaware of what’s happening or its significance for you. ‘Blow Out’ 1. As above, write three descriptions of an action or event relying exclusively on the sounds attendant to the scene or produced by it. 2. Write a poem in which words are used for sound value rather than semantic value. ‘Memory palace’ Use lines from a poem to memorise a set of facts or instructions. Then use those lines to write a new poem about their new subject. Monetary value 1. Put a monetary value on different parts of speech. Or put a monetary value on particular words. (You can imagine either that this is how much you will have to pay in order to use the word, or that a reader will pay more for certain words than others.) Now write a poem. 2. Put a monetary value on each line in a poem (as on a restaurant menu). 3. Write a poem using only numerals. ‘Restraining order’ 1. Write a poem in which there are five people; no more than one person can be named in a line; no two people can come within 100 feet of one another. Or write a poem in which five people are introduced in the first line. Or write a poem whose referents are limited to a ten-foot square space. 226 The Handbook of Creative Writing 2. Write a poem in which there is only one object: a chair. Now write a poem about a universe in which there are two objects: chair and pencil. Now write a poem with chair, pencil, and umbrella. Finally, add a newspaper. (The newspaper allows you to do pretty much anything, because it is not just an object but also a technology of representation. Any object that can be represented in the newspaper can also be represented in the poem.) Questions to ask about objects. What does it look like? What physical properties does it have? How does it take up space? How does it appeal to senses other than vision? How does it relate to the human body – can you pick it up, is it constructed to accommodate your body in any way, does it resemble a human body? How does it relate to other objects? What activities can be performed with this object (including, but not limited to, the activities for which it was designed)? 3. Rewrite a poem so that people and things can be seen only from behind. 4. Take three sentences and distribute them over three pages, adding words, pictures, doodles, glosses, etc. There should be at least two significant graphic interventions on every page. 5. Write a poem about an abstract concept in which you substitute the homophonous name of a concrete substantive for the name of the concept (for example, ‘bowtie’ for ‘beauty’). 6. Write a poem that exactly copies the cadences of another poem. 7. Write a poem that can only communicate by quoting another poem (or song, novel, movie, etc.). 8. Write a poem that re-enacts another poem (knowingly, ritualistically, or against its will). 9. Derive a vocabulary from a poem; use the vocabulary to write a new poem. 10. Translate a poem into another vocabulary, keeping as close as possible to the paraphraseable content of the original. 11. Invent a new language and write a poem in it. References Abish, Walter (1990), 99: The New Meaning, Providence: Burning Deck. Andre, Carl (2005), Cuts: Texts 1959–2004, Cambridge: MIT Press. Ashbery, John (1972), Three Poems, New York: Viking. Bernstein, Charles (1990), A Poetics, Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Bezner, Kevin (1993), ‘Jackson Mac Low, Interviewed by Kevin Bezner’, New American Writing, 11: 109–24. Bök, Christian (2001), Eunoia, Toronto: Coach House. Brecht, Bertolt (2003), Brecht on Theatre, trans. John Willett, London: Methuen. Cage, John (1961), Silence, Middletown: Wesleyan University Press. Cage, John (1979), Empty Words, Middletown: Wesleyan University Press. Cage, John (1995), with Joan Retallack, Musicage, Middletown: Wesleyan University Press. Champion, Miles (2000), Three Bell Zero, New York: Roof Books. Coleridge, Samuel Taylor (2004), Poetry and Prose, ed. Nicholas Halmi, Paul Magnuson, and Raimonda Modiano, New York: W. W. Norton. Coolidge, Clark (1968), Ing, New York: Angel Hair Books. Coolidge, Clark (1970), Space, New York: Harper and Row. Creeley, Robert (2006), Collected Poems, Berkeley: University of California Press. Eisenstein, Sergei (1970), The Film Sense, trans. Jay Leyda, New York: Harcourt. New Poetries 227 Eliot, T. S. (1971), Complete Poems and Plays, New York: Harcourt. Gizzi, Peter (2003), Some Values of Landscape and Weather, Middletown: Wesleyan University Press. Goldsmith, Kenneth (1997), No 111 2.7.93–10.20.96, Great Barrington: The Figures. Goldsmith, Kenneth (2001), Fidget, Toronto: Coach House. Goldsmith, Kenneth (2001), Soliloquy, New York: Granary Books. Goldsmith, Kenneth (2003), Day, Great Barrington: The Figures. Guest, Barbara (1973), Moscow Mansions, New York: Viking. Harryman, Carla (1987), Vice, Elmwood: Potes and Poets. Hejinian, Lyn (1987), My Life, Los Angeles: Sun and Moon Press. Hejinian, Lyn (1996), Writing Is an Aid to Memory, Los Angeles: Sun and Moon Press. Hejinian, Lyn (2003), My Life in the Nineties, New York: Shark Books. Howe, Susan (1993), The Nonconformist’s Memorial, New York: New Directions. Jarnot, Lisa (2003), Ring of Fire, London: Salt Publishing. Johnson, Ronald (2005), RADI OS, Chicago: Flood Editions. Kenner, Hugh (1971), The Pound Era, Berkeley: University of California Press. Levertov, Denise (2002), Selected Poems, ed. Paul Lacey, New York: New Directions. LeWitt, Sol (1996), ‘Paragraphs on conceptual art’, in Peter Howard Selz (ed.), Theories and Documents of Contemporary Art, Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 822–6. Lin, Tan (2002), ‘Mary Mary Ellen Ellen’, Conjunctions 38: 99–122. Mac Low, Jackson (1986), Representative Works 1938–1985, Washington, DC: Sun and Moon Press. Mallarmé, Stéphane (1956), Selected Prose, trans. Bradford Cook, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Moore, Marianne (1994), Complete Poems, New York: Penguin Books. Morgenstern, Christian (1993), Songs from the Gallows, trans. Walter Arndt, New Haven: Yale University Press. Niededeer, Lorine (2002), Collected Poems, ed. Jenny Penberthy, Berkeley: University of California Press. Notley, Alice (1995), Close to Me and Closer . . . the Language of Heaven and Désamère, Oakland: O Books. Notley, Alice (1992), The Descent of Alette, New York: Penguin. Olson, Charles (1997), Collected Prose, Donald Allen and Benjamin Friedlander (eds), Berkeley: University of California Press. Oppen, George (2002), New Collected Poems, ed. Michael Davidson, New York: New Directions. Packard, William (1974), ed., The Craft of Poetry: Interviews from the New York Quarterly, New York: Doubleday. Phillips, Tom (2005), A Humument: A Treated Victorian Novel, Fourth Edition, London: Thames and Hudson. Pope, Alexander (1963), Poems, ed., John Butt, New Haven: Yale University Press. Pound, Ezra (1940), Cantos LII–LXXI, New York: New Directions. Queneau, Raymond (1961), Cent mille milliards de poèmes, Paris: Gallimard. Queneau, Raymond (1986), ‘Potential literature’, in Oulipo: A Primer of Potential Literature (ed. and trans.), Warren F. Motte, pp. 51–64, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Raworth, Tom (1999), Meadow, Sausalito: Post-Apollo Press. Rimbaud, Arthur (1945), A Season in Hell, trans. Louise Varèse, New York: New Directions. Scalapino, Leslie (1988), Way, San Francisco: North Point Press. Shakespeare, William (1977), The Sonnets, Stephen Booth ed., New Haven: Yale University Press. Silliman, Ron (1987), The New Sentence, New York: Roof Books. Spicer, Jack (1975), Collected Books, Santa Rosa: Black Sparrow Press. 228 The Handbook of Creative Writing Spicer, Jack (1998), The House That Jack Built: The Collected Lectures, ed. Peter Gizzi, Middletown: Wesleyan University Press. Stein, Gertrude (1998), ‘Composition as explanation’, Writings 1903–32, New York: Library of America, pp. 520–9. Weiner, Hannah (1978), Clairvoyant Journal, New York: Angel Hair Books. Weiner, Hannah (1984), Spoke, Washington, DC: Sun and Moon Press. Williams, William Carlos (1988), The Wedge, in Collected Poems, Vol. 2, Christopher MacGowan, New York: New Directions. Wordsworth, William (1984), Major Poetry and Prose, ed. Stephen Gill, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Yeats, William Butler (1966), A Vision, New York: Collier. Zukofsky, Louis (1993), ‘A’, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Zukofsky, Louis (1997), Complete Short Poetry, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 21 The Poet in the Theatre: Verse Drama Sean O’Brien I say that prose drama is merely a slight by-product of verse drama. (T. S. Eliot, ‘A Dialogue on Dramatic Poetry’ [Eliot 1951: 46]) Poetry is all I write, whether for books, or readings, or the National Theatre, or for the opera house and concert hall, or even for TV. All these activities are part of the long quest for a ‘public’ poem, though in using that word public I would never want to exclude inwardness. (Tony Harrison, 1987 [Astley 1991: 9]) Climate In 2005 the BBC broadcast on its most popular television channel, BBC 1, a series of ‘modernised’ Shakespeare plays, that is, plays appearing under Shakespeare’s name but not containing his language. This is not the first such effort, on either side of the Atlantic. In 2001 there was a television version of Othello, set in the present-day London Metropolitan Police, written by Andrew Davies, a leading literary adaptor for television. Anthony Hecht recalls a 1975 parallel text of King Lear ‘with the folio text on the left hand side, and facing it, a version intended to appeal to modern readers’ – in other words, a translation from English into English. Hecht comments with restraint: there must be others who feel no loss in the dignity of utterance of the original. Yet I can’t help feeling that such dignity is conferred by . . . a species of music, which, while not simply a question of meter, cannot wholly be separated from it. (Hecht 2004: 278–9) The contemporary verse dramatist faces two problems. The first is a widespread view of language as instrumental and readily transferable. It’s only words. The second is a similarly widespread failure to understand the work of metre. Remove Shakespeare’s language and the music where it lives, and you will have a completely different work, which should not in fact have his name attached. The existence of such a work – Fakespeare – will help the gradual extinction of the ability to read the original. This process may have begun with a baffled, irritated sense of Shakespeare’s difficulty among relatively educated but impatient people, but extinction is now the intention (albeit usually unwitting) of the vulgarisers, for whom the existence of 230 The Handbook of Creative Writing the literature of the past has come to seem an intolerable reproof, to be resisted to the death with the weapons of ‘relevance’ and ‘accessibility’. The verse dramatist needs to bear this unfavourable climate in mind. She will be swimming against the tide – a good thing in many ways, but exhausting and often solitary. It would be unfair to generalise, for the theatre is a very broad church, but one could be forgiven for thinking that nowadays there seem to be fewer actors with the training and experience to handle Shakespearean language; and that likewise fewer directors and literary managers seem trained or inclined to read verse drama with appropriate understanding and to discriminate between good and bad examples of the form. Verse drama receives lip service but adequate textual attention is by no means guaranteed. Partly as a result, it is often assumed that verse drama is characteristically undramatic. Audiences, too, are encouraged, in effect, to fear poetry, on the grounds that its difficulty will make them unhappy and expose their ignorance, as though people only watch plays to confirm what they already know, rather than to extend their experience or perhaps even confound their understanding. King Lear comes immediately to mind as a play which does both of these things. The fact that the assumption (verse drama is undramatic) and the fear (it will present an intolerable challenge) are both groundless is not the point: a cultural myth is in operation, and its assurances are more compelling than mere facts. It is also widely assumed that verse drama is ‘uneconomic’, a description no more true of verse drama than of any other kind of new writing. Most serious drama of any kind in the British theatre, for example, has long depended on government subsidy in order to be written and initially staged. The desirable transfer to the West End is a matter of economic calculation, carried out once the play has a life, the makings of an audience and the potential to attract a larger one. In the light of these conditions, the poet-dramatist in particular may conclude that the theatre is not ‘literature’ in the same sense as poetry and fiction. Theatre is a collective activity. Its preoccupations lie elsewhere than with literary quality and the kinds of detailed discrimination employed in framing the literary judgements with which poets are likely to be intimately familiar. A play can be ‘too literary’ for the theatre. It is hardly surprising that very few poets make a career in the theatre; less so that the theatre produces verse dramatists who have no reputation as poets offstage. If these conditions do not sufficiently discourage you, if you simply want to write the best verse play you can, then you should set to work. The poet in the theatre The theatre is a collaborative art form. You will hear this statement often, though perhaps more frequently from directors, producers, actors and designers than the poet herself, who may feel rather isolated from her surroundings, a bit like the pig described by Randall Jarrell, which wandered into a bacon-judging competition and was asked on what authority it was there (Jarrell 1997: 63). The poet’s play is the result of an individual vision, a way of reading the world. It has its own integrity as a complex imaginative arrangement. She has come to the theatre in order to see that vision embodied on the stage. She may be in for a nasty shock. Whatever their real level of enthusiasm, the other people involved in the production – director, actors, designer, composer and even the publicity and marketing staff – will 231 The Poet in the Theatre: Verse Drama need to think of the play as being as much theirs as the author’s. Their labour and talent is being invested in the play; they themselves are in many cases artists; ergo they will need to leave their mark on it in some way. New plays usually undergo an extended period of drafting, interspersed with first readings, discussion, redrafting, perhaps a rehearsed reading and then the rehearsal of a final draft, which may still be subject to change, before the play reaches the stage, at which point changes may still be being made. The theatre is necessarily an extremely practical place, concerned with what works – though this, of course, is a matter for debate. Writers profess to enjoy the theatrical process, and to a certain extent this is true (it gets them out of the house), but it can also present a serious challenge to the writer’s determination and self-assurance. The verse dramatist needs to have an extremely clear sense of what she has in mind before she goes into the arena of collective endeavour where prose is viewed as the normative and natural linguistic form. She will need to act as an advocate, an explicator and a propagandist for the kind of work she wishes to present, and to be prepared to engage in a much more basic level of explanation than she might have expected. She needs to bring a good deal more than the play itself into the theatre. In order (to paraphrase Wordsworth) to create the taste by which they may be understood, dramatists have often created or led their own companies, Yeats and Brecht prominent among them. There is much to be said for doing the same, at any rate in the early stages of writing verse drama, though the labour is necessarily immense, and not every poetdramatist possesses, or desires, the totalising vision necessary to see such a project through. After all, isn’t that what the theatre is for? Traditions The contemporary verse dramatist may at times feel like an orphan. Where does she come from? The Greeks? Shakespeare? Tony Harrison? Although a good deal of modern verse drama has been written and staged, it has come to seem more like a series of interruptions to the dominance of prose than a continuous tradition of its own. Verse drama is like one of the ancient rivers that runs beneath a city, usually unseen and unheard but occasionally breaking out before being sealed away again. Since 1900 there has been a good deal more verse drama than contemporary readers and audiences may be aware of. Ruby Cohn’s essay on dramatic poetry in the New Princeton Encyclopaedia of Poetry and Poetics provides an extensive survey (Preminger 1993: 304–11). Verse drama has played a significant role in the German-speaking theatre into the present day, while in the UK, the US and elsewhere in the Anglophone world it has attracted some of the major poets of the time, among them W. B. Yeats, T. S. Eliot, Robert Lowell, Tony Harrison and Seamus Heaney – with Eliot and Harrison making an important part of their careers in the theatre. Among the other significant contemporary poets who have written verse plays are Simon Armitage, Douglas Dunn, Ted Hughes, Kenneth Koch, Derek Mahon, Glyn Maxwell, Paul Muldoon, Tom Paulin and Richard Wilbur. As in other literary forms, verse drama has produced famous names which have now lapsed from currency – Archibald MacLeish, Christopher Fry and Ronald Duncan among them. Leading American dramatists such as Arthur Miller (in the first draft of The Crucible) and David Mamet have at times used verse. So too have English playwrights including John Arden, Caryl Churchill and David Edgar. It is necessary, however, to draw a distinction between poets who work in the theatre, and playwrights who sometimes employ verse but have no status as poets. There is at times a 232 The Handbook of Creative Writing desire to include poetry without having mastered the art, and the theatre’s problems with that art take us back to where we came in. Playwrights and language The poet and critic Neil Powell has argued : the . . . development of cinema, television and video seemed to reinforce a general assumption that dramatic language should make some attempt at verisimilitude; the mainstream English playwrights of the post-war years – Osborne, Pinter, Wesker – are, despite their differences, essentially engaged in presenting a language which purports to be that of ‘real life’, in which characters are unlikely to speak poetry. (Roberts 2001: 561) The reader may pause over Pinter’s name here, since his interest in language is everywhere apparent, although his claims as a poet are limited to a handful of early pieces; but otherwise Powell accurately describes the naturalisation of prose as the pre-eminent theatrical form. He indicates that there is an underlying assumption that there is a ‘natural’ fit between prose and speech, although of course speech is not in fact a written form, as also between ‘realism’ (and naturalism) and prose – the total effect of which is to produce ‘reality’. But drama (pace Brecht) deals in illusion, in the impersonation of reality, and its effects are stylised by convention: see most television soap opera for the ritualised degeneracy of dramatic ‘realism’. The theatre of prose is engaged, however minimally, in a form of rhetoric – the employment of artistic persuasion. The verse dramatist would contend that the confinement of prose sets limits to the imaginative scope of that persuasion, limits by which verse drama is not bound. For example, David Edgar’s Destiny (1976) is an absorbing play, set in the English West Midlands, about the rise of the neo-Fascist National Front in the 1970s. Destiny treats serious subject matter with a great deal of skill. What it misses, however, is the further dimension imparted by a more-than-instrumental view of language, capable of carrying us beyond documentary earnestness towards the Shakespearean scope its theme deserves. Edgar himself has succinctly observed that ‘the social-realist form has significant limitations when it comes to representing the contemporary world to itself’ (Edgar 1987: ix). From a slightly earlier date, Trevor Griffiths’ The Party (1974) is a play almost without action – set among a group of writers and intellectuals watching on television the 1968 street battles in Paris between students, workers and the forces of De Gaulle’s tottering government. It is a play about the impotence and bad faith of the Left in Britain, notable for one great speech, originally delivered in the 1973 National Theatre production by Laurence Olivier, the Shakespearean actor par excellence, playing the part of the elderly Marxist, John Tagg. This is a tour de force of passion and political analysis, and it stands on the border of poetry – from where it probably helped to sink the play by outshining a context in which, inert though it was, critics and audiences felt more or less at home. Griffiths’s work, always problematic in theme and method, has been superseded by the current leading contemporary political playwright in Britain, David Hare, a bourgeois ‘playwright of ideas’, whose writing harks back to the ‘well-made play’ dominant in English theatre before the arrival of John Osborne in 1956. It is an honourable tradition (it encompasses Terence Rattigan, for example), but its core language is that of the English middle class, and like that of the more intellectually spectacular Tom Stoppard, it cannot help seeming disempowered. The brooding The Poet in the Theatre: Verse Drama 233 repetitions and silences of Pinter, and the abraded last-ditch language of Beckett, are much more alert to the medium itself. The classical model The work of the three great Greek tragedians, Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides, continues to exert a powerful hold on the imagination of directors and poets alike. So does the comedy of Aristophanes. New versions of the Aescyhlus’s Oresteia, the Theban plays of Sophocles (in particular Antigone) and Euripides’ The Bacchae continue to be made; the same is true of Aristophanes’s comedies, such as The Birds and Lysistrata. The tragedians’ concern with order, violence, justice, freedom and fate remain the bedrock concerns of western literary culture; Aristophanes’s (equally enigmatic) plays read the world in comic parallel. ‘Relevance’ is, of course, a term to be used with extreme scepticism, given that it so often serves a historical disconnection rather than a sense of human and historical continuity, but the reader should consult Terry Eagleton’s Holy Terror (Eagleton 2005: 1–41) for a reading of The Bacchae in the shadow of the War on Terror which does justice to the psychological dimension of political intransigence. The most sustained and successful commitment to re-presenting the Greek classic drama has been that of Tony Harrison (b.1937). Harrison has famously commented: ‘Poetry is all I write’ (Astley 1991: 9). He has also argued for the unique power of poetic language to comprehend (in the sense of containing, absorbing and responding to) the recurrent atrocities of the modern age, and has found in the Greek drama an enduring capacity to face, and give form, to the worst that life can do to the human race. Harrison, unsurprisingly, has little time for the conventions of realism. His plays are all manifestly performances, with the artifice of the verse (see his version of Molière’s The Misanthrope) brandished as a means of engaging and delighting the audience. His original plays move readily towards music-hall (Square Rounds) and towards deliberate naïveté and doggerel in the story of the Airedale weaver-poet John Nicholson (Poetry or Bust). In a sense Harrison has been a one-man disproof of the inevitable dominance of prosaic realism. Seamus Heaney’s translations of Sophocles, The Cure at Troy (from Philoctetes) and The Burial at Thebes (from Antigone) are dignified, impersonally faithful renderings of the plays. Versions of Antigone, including those by Tom Paulin and Blake Morrison are always timely, but dramatisations of the resistance of the individual (Antigone) to the arbitrary and peremptory power of the state (embodied by Creon) seem particularly urgent at present. The Shakespearean model Contemporary theatre is usually governed by the need for plays with small casts, so that to invoke the Shakespearean sense of scale and population-in-depth may seem utopian, but the world-creating opportunities of the Shakespearean-Jacobean model speak to the desire for ‘history plays’, capable of treating politics and society as a whole, plays capable too of rising to the intensity of tragedy. David Edgar describes a selection of his plays in the following terms: Most of the plays in this volume can be described as social-realist pieces . . . they present what aspires to be a recognisable picture of human behaviour as it is commonly observed, but, unlike naturalistic drama, they set such a picture within an overall social-historical framework. The characters and situations are thus not selected solely because that’s how things are but because 234 The Handbook of Creative Writing they represent a significant element in an analysis of a concrete social situation. The most popular definition of this endeavour is by Lukács, who said that social realism presents ‘typical’ characters in a ‘total’ context. (Edgar 1987: viii) The reference to Lukács helps to point out the indebtedness of social-realist drama to the nineteenth-century novel. The intention Edgar describes is a universalising one, but the separation between the actual and the typical reveals the problem of squaring that circle. In verse drama, the representative status of the persons of the play is taken for granted as a phenomenon present in the first place in a way that social realism (as Edgar describes it) can never be. What Edgar is gesturing at is a Shakespearean imaginative confidence and competence. The contemporary interest in the verse dramas of the great German romantic Friedrich Schiller (Don Carlos, Mary Stuart, Wallenstein) indicates the persistence of a hunger for scale, political scope and linguistic richness. As Ruby Cohn has observed, ‘It is . . . the English language, forever haunted by Shakespeare’s ghost, that has hosted most twentiethcentury efforts at dramatic poetry. Each generation seems to sound its own clarion call for a revival of poetic drama’ (Preminger 1993: 308). That call was sounded in Britain in the years after 1945 by Christopher Fry in particular. Fry’s gorgeously mounted rococo verse plays enjoyed a tremendous popularity for a time. The verse plays of Louis MacNeice (most notably The Dark Tower) were successfully broadcast on the old BBC radio Third Programme. Other names have almost vanished from memory, such as that of Ronald Duncan, a verse dramatist of repute in the 1950s. It is arguable that just as the ‘well-made play’ represented by Terence Rattigan was doomed by the unlikely but then massive success of John Osborne’s Look Back in Anger, staged at the Royal Court Theatre in 1956, so the likes of Duncan must have seen the writing on the wall at the same time, though Duncan himself was involved in the setting up of the Royal Court. Duncan’s Don Juan and The Death of Satan were programmed to follow a short run of Look Back in Anger, in the expectation that they would succeed at the box office where Osborne’s play would probably fail. History has made its judgement in the matter, in favour of Osborne rather than what Mark Lawson has described as ‘Duncan’s unspeakable historical pieces [which] were pulled off after catastrophic reviews’ (Lawson 2006: 16). What may be an unintended consequence was the seemingly widespread belief thereafter that dramatic energy was the preserve of prose, and that if the common man and the working classes were to be heard, it would happen in prose. The assumption that verse drama is undramatic may arise in part from a contemporary unease with the ritual and statuesque mode of the Greek tragic drama to which poets are so often drawn. It is also felt that poetic language is often merely decorative, inclined to exert a brake on the action of the drama. A bad verse play will probably fail on both counts, quite aside from problems of characterisation and emotional engagement. A verse drama is not a staged poem but a play in verse. It has the same obligation as any other play to compel the audience’s commitment and absorption, while at the same time offering poetry’s greater suggestiveness, precision and musical power. The audience should rapidly come to accept poetic language as the drama’s natural medium, and to enjoy its greater imaginative scope. Chorus in Henry V describes the epic possibilities of verse drama: O, for a Muse of fire, that would ascend The brightest heaven of invention! A kingdom for a stage, princes to act, 235 The Poet in the Theatre: Verse Drama And monarchs to behold the swelling scene! (Henry V I, i, 1–4) The Muse (warlike, in this case) is invoked at the very beginning of the action, as a guiding power, with the audience enlisted as imaginative collaborators (‘Suppose, within the girdle of these walls / Are now confined two mighty monarchies’), making present what Chorus professes only to long for. The ancient trope of poetic unworthiness is here laid bare in the service of imaginative triumphalism. Which form the verse dramatist will adopt varies from writer to writer and play to play, but there is an argument for selecting blank verse or rhyming couplets. These methods clearly manifest themselves to the audience from the outset, offering an artistic contract signalled by a layer of formality which magnifies and intensifies the action in view, giving language a human eminence which even the most artfully scored of Harold Pinter’s works cannot quite match. It is a mode of privilege, a gift to all its speakers, able to unlock tongues that would elsewhere be unready for their burdens. With this in mind, despite the problems discussed in this essay, the poet-dramatist may legitimately conclude that the very absence of a stable and generally recognised theatrical tradition for verse drama offers a unique opportunity to create the stage-world anew, as poetry. References Astley, Neil (1991), ed., Tony Harrison, Newcastle upon Tyne: Bloodaxe. Eagleton, Terry (2005), Holy Terror, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Edgar, David (1987), Plays One, London: Methuen. Eliot, T. S. (1951), Selected Essays, London: Faber. Griffiths, Trevor (1974), The Party, London: Faber. Harrison, Tony (1992), Square Rounds, London: Faber. Harrison, Tony (1993), Poetry or Bust, Halifax: Salts Estates. Heaney, Seamus (1991), The Cure at Troy: a Version of Sophocles’ Philoctetes, London: Faber. Heaney, Seamus (2004), The Burial at Thebes, London: Faber. Hecht, Anthony (2004), Melodies Unheard: Essays on the Mysteries of Poetry, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Jarrell, Randall (1997), Poetry and the Age, London: Faber. Lawson, Mark (2006), ‘Fifty years of anger’, London, The Guardian G2, 31 March, pp. 14–17. Preminger, Alex, and T. V. F. Brogan (1993), The New Princeton Encyclopaedia of Poetry and Poetics, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Roberts, Neil (2001), ed., A Companion to Twentieth-Century Poetry, Oxford: Blackwell. Shakespeare, William (1995), The Arden Shakespeare: King Henry V, T. W. Craik, ed., London: Thomson Learning. Shakespeare, William, adapted by Andrew Davies, Othello, broadcast on ITV 1, 23 December 2001, Granada International. 22 The Sequence and the Long Poem George Szirtes Can poems be long at all? Good question. ‘Epic, lyrical or dramatic?’ asked the Victorian poet, Robert Browning, when told that his excellency the Japanese ambassador, wrote poetry. ‘His excellency’s verse’, replied the interpreter, ‘is chiefly enigmatic’. A lot of confusion can arise if we apply too rigid a framework to anything, but Browning’s courteous question wasn’t nonsense. The three likely categories for the ambassador’s poetic activities were appropriate to most European poetry, epic being concerned with narrative, lyrical with states, incidents and moments, and dramatic with verse as spoken, sung or chanted in plays as part of a dialogue. If it no longer occurs to us to think in these categories it may be because verse drama has become very rare on stage and fewer people – though there are exceptions – write epics. ‘Why are there no verse dramas?’ you may ask, or ‘Why so few epics?’ The reasons are long and complex. Enough perhaps to say that linguistic naturalism or ‘realism’ on stage has come so far to dominate theatre that it might be difficult for audiences to hear or appreciate speech that is anything but immediate, colloquial, smacking of the language they themselves speak. They allow for productions of historical verse plays, and make headspace for operas and musicals where the conventions are familiar, but the notion of spoken verse seems artificial to them. There is a good argument to be made for certain plays by, say, Samuel Beckett or Harold Pinter, to be regarded as poem-plays if not exactly verse plays, simply because the language is so carefully weighed, so precise that it carries the power of poetry. But that is not quite the same as Shakespeare or Webster or Molière or T. S. Eliot, who wrote verse that functioned as drama rather than drama that felt like poetry. Epic verse is not quite so rare as dramatic verse now but some of the functions of the epic have become problematic. The grand narratives of the epic required a hero and some kind of adventure – a war or a voyage or a process – that summed up part of the history of a people. It offered a mythic history as the common ground of a nation or tribe’s idea of itself. ‘This is how we got to be who we are’, said the epic, but in modern nations where societies contain many elements the epic has restricted meaning, and in any case, people have grown suspicious of grand narratives of ‘us’ and ‘them’ – or so they say. You will notice I say ‘them’ rather than ‘us’ in talking about audiences and readers, but we can safely assume that ‘them’ is as likely to mean ‘us’ as anybody else. The Sequence and the Long Poem 237 Are ‘we’ then left with the lyrical poem, that short piece of verse that rarely exceeds a page in length when written down? Is that what we think poetry is now? Some think so. A long poem, where such exists – if such exists – is only a series of short poems stuck together to make a series or sequence, they say and they might be right, pointing to T. S. Eliot’s The Waste Land as an example: yes, a single complicated theme but not really a narrative, more a series of mysteriously related brief scenes and fragments, hardly telling a single story, or not as we would expect a story to be told. One of the essential differences between prose narrative and poetry is that prose narrative is expected to maintain tighter story lines. What this means is that the language itself needs to be pushing on from one consequence to another. This has a moral dimension for when one action is a consequence of another we tend to wonder what the choice of original actions was, and whether the choice made was the right one. We identify with the choice-maker. The crudest interpretation of this dynamic is the one made by Miss Prism in Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest, where she says: ‘The good ended happily, and the bad unhappily. That is what Fiction means’. She is wrong of course in that this principle would make for very predictable novels, but not altogether wrong in the essential moral notion of consequence. And such consequence is exciting. There are so many ‘wrong’ choices one might make! You will have heard children telling stories in which the phrase ‘and then’ keeps recurring. ‘And then’ is narrative prose at its simplest. It is the exciting next thing, the cliff-hanger, the breathless operation of railway points to prevent the train crashing so that it may arrive safely at its destination, which in the case of tragic works can be a very sad and deserted station and not much more. I began by referring to traditional distinctions between three kinds of poem, and suggested briefly why two of those kinds – the epic and the dramatic – were less frequently written now than they used to be. Long poems are, nevertheless, written, although it all depends what you mean by long. Some people might say anything over forty lines is long, but I think we ought to look for something longer than that, something at least the equivalent of the prose chapter in length, that is to say a good clutch of pages. It’s not asking for much, is it? But how does it work when, or so it seems, the modern poem is restricted to the short lyrical form that fits on the page of a magazine, in a corner between a piece of, often, critical prose text about something else. If we look at it like this the poem is merely a commodity that has to struggle for its place among other available commodities. And – so the argument would go on – that real space ‘out there’ must surely carry an echo in the apparently virtual space ‘in here’, in the head. Our notion of possibilities must be influenced by that which actually seems to be possible, it insists. Furthermore (we are still listening to the same voice) there is something about the way we live our lives that seems to prefer short attention spans to long ones, or, if we must have something long, to demand lots of distractions, loads of action: nothing we have to think about too much. Consumers prefer things that go down easily. And poems are relatively hard work, aren’t they? They take all your attention. The language in them isn’t necessarily the kind that slips down the throat. They are somehow denser, more packed than something of that length in prose would seem to be. Who would actually want to read a long poem that doesn’t, by its very nature, come straight to a point that isn’t in any case too far away. People might have done so once in a different society with different values, the voice may argue, but we have so many other things to absorb our attention, so many more commodities to choose from that our minds glide rather than meditate, are maybe even passive rather than active. Frankly, the argument might conclude, I can’t really see why you bother with the poem at all: either (if the argument is put forward by a lover of commodities) 238 The Handbook of Creative Writing because it is so unlike any other commodity, so stubbornly un-commodity-like, that you wouldn’t want to bother with it – get a tattoo instead or a T-shirt with a message – or (if you are a critic of commodities) because having had to make its way in a world of commodities in which value is reduced to easy consumability and low price the poem cannot be worth much at all. In order to be consumed, it must become merely a prettified kind of commodity that fools you into thinking that you are having some kind of ‘spiritual’ experience. Get off the public page, the argument might insist. Nothing happens there. Go subvert instead. Well, yes – the same argument might go on – except subversion too can be bought in neatly packaged tubes. There is, no doubt, something in both arguments though, and that something will be as true or false as you think and feel it is. What is true and what is misunderstood will depend on you. I, for my part, bear in mind what the poet Martin Bell, who had taught English schools for several years and later, at art college, taught me too, once said: ‘Poetry should not be taught in schools. It should be a secret and subversive pleasure’. Secret and subversive and a pleasure. Poetry can be all those things and more, once you enter it. It is never simply a neatly packaged tube. While the arguments above all apply, to some degree at least, to the public page, they don’t necessarily describe the world in the dreaming head where space is less tidily compressed for consumption. It is true that we are not living in a world of unlimited possibilities. A poem has to appear somewhere and space is limited. If you want to appear in magazines you were probably best not to send them something that occupies a whole page, let alone several pages. And most people start publishing by appearing in magazines. So we come to think the poem is something short that fills a space in a context dedicated to something else, the glimpse of a small bird through the windowpane of a study, but the bird can fly a long way and we can follow it. Nor do we have to stay in the study. But once out there, how can we get our minds around that longer journey, the long poem. Is it just a rhythmical, possibly rhyming version of the prose story set out in lines? Is it in fact a version – a subversive, submerged, altered version – of the epic? Is it just a collection of short lyric poems that happen to be strung together on some arbitrary string? A series of towns on the map that you can drive through if you really want to but with no particular connection between them? Let me pursue the town analogy for a while, though later I want to switch to something less fixed and more fluid. It is worthwhile thinking for a moment about the short lyrical poem – a single one of those ‘raw towns’ that W. H. Auden in his ‘In Memory of W. B. Yeats’ said ‘we believe and die in’. It is, of course, the business of the whole poetry section of this book to deal with that question but perhaps I could offer a brief necessary handle on it, just so that what follows makes better sense. There are so many definitions out there that any new one is likely to be a vainglorious act of chutzpah, but let me have a go. A lyrical poem, from the point of view of this chapter, is a poem of between roughly, say, six and forty lines, employing some variation on a regular rhythmical unit plus any possible number of known poetic and rhetorical devices to articulate and explore an experience that is registered on the consciousness as something important and vivid but to which you cannot do justice by simply describing it or talking about it. The point of the experience – of all experience when you come to think of it – is that it registers at several levels through memory, association, hope, fear, indifference, fascination, and has then to work its way into language, clearly, memorably, in a way that sings in the nerves like music but has the power of statement. Poetry, at its best, is about what it is like to be alive, now, in the passing 239 The Sequence and the Long Poem minute. It has that kind of intensity, that kind of emotional drive. It is less interested in what happens next than in what exactly it is that is happening now. But that which is happening is not static. It cannot be simply ‘described’: it shifts and drifts all over the place. A poem has to move through some transformation in which the transformations that go on in any experience are enacted. Something, in all poems, is different by the end. Something moves and happens next, but the interest is not so much in destinations as in the sense of movement, in some crucial shift in the apparently frozen moment. To sum up, a lyric poem is usually the enactment of a single experience that is associated with others, and a way of exploring how these others hang with the original one, so that by the end of the exploration we have arrived at a new point of understanding, an understanding that cannot be articulated any other way, that cannot be paraphrased, because the experience it makes is made in those specific words and in those specific order. To read a poem is not like measuring a field: it is rolling around in the grass. It is a way of understanding the field directly. A lyrical poem is that sort of experience. There you are. It is pretty long as explanations go, but it’s the excitement of it – the level of potential excitement – that matters, that mixture of music and statement. There’s nothing fancy about it in itself. It’s not mystical or intellectual stuff: it is just what is and how what we say embodies and transforms what is. That is our basic block, the bead we may be trying to arrange on a string, the town along the route we might drive through. There are two main ways such a body of words may be joined together, one closer to straight prose narrative than the other, so let me start with the one in which the raw towns are clearly distinct and might even appear to be strewn a little off track: the poem sequence. The sequence A poem sequence, you might argue, is not exactly a single narrative poem, nor exactly a group of poems that happens to be about a particular subject. The ties between the poems that comprise it are looser than they would be in a story, but not quite so loose as in a batch of poems about the same thing, in which the order is of no particular importance, or is not, at least, conceived to be of importance. (A narrative impression may be created by a later ordering of poems and that impression may not be beside the point, but the issue here is the conception.) A sequence, then, as the word implies, is a particular order without the ‘and then’ness too heavily inscribed in it. It is not a series of cliff-hangers in which we necessarily follow the fortunes of a single group of characters. What holds it together and gives it a sense of progression is more a sense of consistent, developing exploration. A sequence is a consecutive set of poems that embark on a journey to find something that is only guessed at in the beginning. It resembles the individual lyric poem in that it is an enquiry into the meaning of an experience or group of experiences, an enquiry that may well entail catching a flight to a distant city, or moving underwater to follow the faint scent of something that seems important enough to follow, but here one enquiry leads to another naturally connected one. It is a journey. The journey, as in fiction, as in any text or speech, is through language in the first place, but through the particular kind of language that has been developed for just this purpose, with just this instinct in mind, the language of poetics. By poetics here I mean essentially any device that has a historical association with poetry, historical because we don’t make language from scratch. Language carries its history with it and no more intensively perhaps than in poetry. As one of the greatest 240 The Handbook of Creative Writing American poets of the twentieth century, Elizabeth Bishop, put it in her poem, ‘At the Fishhouses’: It is like what we imagine knowledge to be: dark, salt, clear, moving, utterly free, drawn from the cold hard mouth of the world, derived from the rocky breasts forever, flowing and drawn, and since our knowledge is historical, flowing, and flown. (Bishop 1983: 66) The knowledge in the poem is of the sea, but if even the sea is historical how much more must language be so. Language, for a poet, is something you put your hand in and feel. Very well then, let us switch analogies from towns to seas and currents. Let us say a poem sequence is a journey through a medium that is, in Bishops’ words to do with history, a history that is ‘flowing and flown’, and that its movement is less like that of a train, more like that of sea or water. That is to say it consists of currents and that the journey therefore is one of currents. Poem sequences have been with us a long time. There are poem sequences in Latin, in all languages in fact, because the sequence is probably the most natural of longer poetic constructions. But let’s take a modern – indeed early Modernist – poem as a possible example, Wallace Stevens’s ‘Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird’ that begins: I Among twenty snowy mountains, The only moving thing Was the eye of the blackbird. II I was of three minds, Like a tree In which there are three blackbirds. III The blackbird whirled in the autumn winds. It was a small part of the pantomime. IV A man and a woman Are one. A man and a woman and a blackbird Are one. (Stevens 1997: 74–5) These are all, clearly, about a blackbird, or about the sensation of seeing and hearing a blackbird. What does it mean to hear a blackbird? Could Stevens have organised his poem differently, starting with, say the fourth part? Or the third? Is this an arbitrary order of notations by some over-refined figure with too much time on his hands? But it might be just as The Sequence and the Long Poem 241 well to set the scene first and those snowy mountains do serve to do that. Then we shift to the observer and the three trees. There is a quiet joke about being ‘in two minds’. Then the blackbird takes off and the whole world seems like a pantomime. A woman appears, and the sense of love. The man and woman are watching the blackbird together: the blackbird brings them together; it is an aspect of the togetherness. It is a natural thing to be together. There is some kind of harmony between living creatures. But then the blackbird stops singing. That’s rather nice too, that moment it stops but when you can still hear it in your head. Granted, this is a kind of philosophical poem. It is the mind that is moving, not so much the actors, but there does seem to be a floating, singing kind of order in the movement. The poem is celebrating something (the blackbird), in fact two things (the language and the blackbird), in fact three things (nature, the language and the blackbird), etc. And so it resounds, though the blackbird, like Stevens, is ‘historical, flowing and flown’. But the sequence need not float quite so delicately and abstrusely through language, nor need it float in free verse. There are more formally structured approaches available, such as the Crown of Sonnets (also known as the Hungarian Sonnet) that consists of fifteen sonnets, the first fourteen ordinary sonnets related by theme but more closely joined by the last line of the first forming the first of the second, the last of the second the first of the third and so on down to the end of the fourteenth, the really demonic thing about the fifteenth being that it is made up of the fourteen first lines of the previous sonnets. It is an obsessive, intricate shape. A number of contemporary poets have used it including John Fuller, Peter Scupham, Nigel Forde, and I myself wrote a group of three such poems in what might seem a fit of madness for a 1998 book. Peter Scupham’s poem, ‘The Hinterland’, written in the early 1970s, was about the First World War, and looked to place that war in the cycle of human history, a cycle in which the observer too was involved. The way the sonnets link together can be shown by joining the end of one sonnet (the third for instance) to the beginning of the next, like this: 3. ... They were buried shallow and the putrid meat Soured through the grass, wept the green over ‘So the cattle were observed to eat Those places very close for some years after.’ We fat the dead for our epiphanies, But there’s a no-man’s-land where skull talk goes. 4. But there’s a no-man’s land where skull talk goes: She sits alone by the declining sea; Winds turn continually upon their course And all their circuits are a vanity . . . ... the sonnet ending: ... 242 The Handbook of Creative Writing A hinterland to breed new summers in. (Scupham 2002: 104) And these are joined in lines four, five and six of the fifteenth and last sonnet like this: But there’s a no-man’s-land where skull talk goes, A hinterland to breed new summers in. The unfleshed dead refusing to lie down – ... (Scupham, 2002: 110) It is an intricately linked series of events in the sea of language: it is the current that matters. There’s room in the passage above for a quotation from another book (‘So the cattle were observed to eat’), for the introduction of a woman sitting by the sea, for a little turn of the wind, for figures of speech that refer to emblems and moralities, but then that’s the whole idea of the poem – or rather its mode of feeling – it feels the event of the war as it works its way into myth and memory. It isn’t quite a narrative of course. It is not consequences that are linked along its journey, but a series of registerings. The mind registers this or that impression or experience and strives to give it, to give the combination of them, a shape in language. Wallace Stevens and Peter Scupham are both contemplative, erudite poets. That is not to say they are merely cerebral because everything they think they also feel, and those feelings are very precisely and passionately registered. Stevens is interested in philosophy and aesthetics, Scupham in history and memory. Stevens is music, Scupham ghosts. But neither is exactly demotic, that is to say their voices are not of what tend to value as being of ‘the street’. Their noise isn’t street noise. I quote them to demonstrate the main aspects of the mechanism of the sequence, the almost intangible way in which passages that follow one another are linked by motif, association, theme and formal devices. The sequence will support any kind of mindset though. You don’t have to be an intellectual, a scholar or an aesthete to explore it. Poetry belongs to everyone. That is not to say it has to look too determined to endear itself to everyone. It is best as itself, not pretending. If it sings itself truly people will come to it. The American poet Adrienne Rich’s ‘Twenty-One Love Poems’ is exactly what the title says it is, twenty-one linked poems of roughly sonnet size about love, though the love is set as part of an exploration of feminism and is directed towards another woman. This is how it begins: I Wherever in this city, screens flicker with pornography, with science-fiction vampires, victimized hirelings bending to the lash, we also have to walk . . . ... No one has imagined us. We want to live like trees, sycamores blazing through the sulfuric air, dappled with scars, still exuberantly budding, our animal passion rooted in the city. 243 The Sequence and the Long Poem II I wake up in your bed. I know I have been dreaming. Much earlier, the alarm broke us from each other, you’ve been at your desk for hours. ... . . . and I laugh and fall dreaming again of the desire to show you to everyone I love, to move openly together in the pull of gravity, which is not simple, which carried the feathered grass a long way down the upbreathing air. (Rich 1993: 77–8) Beginning with impressions of the street, it describes the world in which the lovers live, a world of ‘rancid dreams, that blurt of metal, those disgraces’, then, in the second poem, zooms up close the way a film might, to give an intimate picture of the lovers before moving on, in the third poem, into memory of the past. It is something like a cross between a letter and a film in this respect, and the film is in fact a useful analogy for the sequence. (Analogies are always useful – all poetry is analogy – as long as we don’t take the analogy literally, for the one thing poetry is not is ‘literal’.) By film I don’t mean a straightforward Hollywood kind of film but something more adventurous: the kinds of things you can do with film, narrative techniques explored in pop-videos of the less glossy or clichéd sort for example. Sharp cuts, changes in colour and angle, panning across to follow a moving figure, zooming in, dissolving, all these are reasonably useful ways of referring to the notion of the poem-sequence. Then there is the theme of course. The journey – we mustn’t forget the journey – is about following the glimpse of something that seems to matter for some reason. That thing we follow is a notion of the theme, but however formal the poem is, the poetry moves by its own underwater radar, sensing the currents. The long poem The long poem of the epic kind often involves gods and supernatural beings as well as people, usually engaged in some great emblematic war or voyage that entails conflict, such as the Iliad, the Odyssey, the Aeneid, the Nibelungelied, Beowulf, the Mahabharata, the Ramayana, or the Epic of Gilgamesh. There are many epics of various types, and most cultures possess one that draws on history and mythology offering the culture a definition of itself. But long poems of other kinds exist. Some wars-and-voyages narratives are about creation or ancestry, others about the rationale for some particular world or social order. The affairs of the gods, in the thirteenth-century Roman Catholic Dante’s hands became a tour of the regions of Hell, Purgatory and Heaven. A little later in the fourteenth century Geoffrey Chaucer told stories of the Canterbury pilgrims in his Canterbury Tales, a series of colourful anecdotal narratives spoken by specific characters. John Gower also worked with tales in his Confessio Amantis. William Langland’s Piers Plowman is a dream vision. Then comes the great age of poetic drama, of Marlowe and Shakespeare and Webster. In the seventeenth century Puritan John Milton’s Paradise Lost considers God and the fall of humankind in great musical unrhymed narrative verse. An alternative model arises in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries once the activities of gods are seen in a more rational, less mystical framework. Humour and irony re-cast 244 The Handbook of Creative Writing the epic. There are long satires by, for example, John Dryden in the late seventeenth century, his chief follower being Alexander Pope who writes a mock-heroic epic, The Rape of the Lock, as well as other long poems that are essentially about ideas. He deals with these through biting wit, an extraordinarily attuned ear and brilliant rhyme. His discursive poems give rise to a lot of imitations, with long poems about various subjects, from smoking and cooking through to cider and art. They generally use much the same techniques – Pope’s – some well enough and entertainingly but none to such effect. Pope himself draws on discursive poems of the ancient Greek and Latin period: poems about ideas, about science, or art, or society, or work. There is perhaps a limit to the excitement aroused by civilised rationality in the form of witty, polite conversation. In the Romantic period, it is the state of the individual and its relationship to nature, rather than God, that becomes the main theme. The great work in this field is William Wordsworth’s autobiographical and philosophical poem The Prelude about the growth of the individual mind. Byron’s Don Juan is a marvellous combination of adventure, romance, comedy and social satire and bears comparison with the poem known and quoted by all Russians: Eugene Onegin by Alexander Pushkin. Light and colloquial in tone but dramatic, romantic and philosophical in subject, and available in four highly readable translations, it has been an interesting influence on English language writing in the last twenty years or so. But once the novel is established as the chief story-telling form – and that process begins in the eighteenth century and is more or less complete by the middle of the nineteenth – the work of social narrative and high adventure is generally taken over by prose. The rhetorical manners of the long poem begin to seem unnatural. The poem has to concentrate on what is its own specific, different province. The long poems of the mid-nineteenth century draw on medieval legends almost as an act of nostalgia, trying to re-establish some kind of natural order or code of behaviour, but though offering wonderful often sonorous passages they don’t necessarily convince on the narrative side. What does the long poem in our own time do? What kinds are there? And what can we ourselves do? Here are a few examples of what has been thought possible. The form of the epic voyage is revived by the Nobel Prize winning Caribbean poet, Derek Walcott in his book-length Omeros that plays directly on the Odyssey. Like the Odyssey it is a sea voyage with adventures and a return home. It springs in some ways from one of the best of Walcott’s earlier poems, ‘The Schooner Flight’ that mixed standard English, with patois and bits of French to marvellous effect and gave some useful advice to those attempting long poems: You ever look up from some lonely beach and see a far schooner? Well, when I write this poem, each phrase go be soaked in salt: I go draw and know every line as tight as ropes in this rigging; in simple speech my common language go be the wind . . . (Walcott, ‘The Schooner Flight’, 1, 1986: 347) That sense of the line as tight as ropes in rigging, in simple speech is necessary to most long poems that take the epic route. Walcott rhymes unobtrusively (beach / speech, write / tight, etc.) and his use of the loose enjambment gives the poetry the prose drive of the sentence The Sequence and the Long Poem 245 without ever losing the wavelike rhythmic pulse of poetry. At sixteen pages ‘The Schooner Flight’ could be considered a long poem, but Omeros, written in a more standard English, comes in 325 pages, showing how flexible the definition is. Les Murray’s The Boys Who Stole the Funeral is a novel in sonnets, much like Vikram Seth’s The Golden Gate. Murray’s poem-novel is also about a return, to the Outback in this case. Seth’s is a witty, social novel whose tone picks up from Byron and Pushkin: light, conversational, ingenious. Murray has also written a novel-length travelogueepic, Fredy Neptune, about a man who loses his ability to feel, then travels around the world. Like all poems that are also partly novels the work is subject to a two-fold criticism, firstly from those who read it as a poem, and then those who prefer to read it as a novel. The problem perhaps is that a long poem, even one of novel length, is not – indeed cannot be – a novel as such, because the novel itself is historically defined: it is not the whole enterprise of narrative, only one form of it. Fiona Sampson and Deryn Rees-Jones have recently written long poems of short novella length. Rees-Jones’s book, Quiver is a sort of detective story about a poet following up the discovery of her husband’s old lover. It moves through a sequence of short poems that serve for chapters, some as short as nine lines: She takes my arm, says ‘Ssssshhh’, pushes a note in my gaping pocket. Her dark eyes are cool as a church, fixing on mine, both query and quest. Who’s written this strange yet familiar script? Who’s following who? Then she’s off, and I’m left with her whisper, a mark on my arm where her grip was too tight, handwritten lines on an unlined page. (‘Then’, Rees-Jones 2004: 42) The language is slightly more charged than it would be in prose here (those eyes, ‘cool as a church’, the wordplay on query / quest and on lines / unlined) but the story is clear, although it is told in mostly notational form by the central character who, being a poet, naturally thinks and writes like a poet, albeit a poet under the pressure of action. The book begins with a nod to Dante and with characters like Nate Devine (hinting at a divine birth) the story is clearly more than about a routine murder. Sampson’s The Distance Between Us is a more overtly philosophical search for the self in terms of narrative and sequence, in fact it is almost more sequence than long poem in that the narrative arc is secondary to the enquiry, which is conducted through meetings and reflections, as if there were an action but the poems had decided to work in the margins in order better to seek the meaning. Her reading of European poetry, of European states of mind, is an important part of the development: Scars on a map. The distance between us might be no more than fifty yards 246 The Handbook of Creative Writing under the proscenium arch of a stairwell. Might be no more than half an hour: time stepped out of its daily clothes every second febrile as the hair’s on a girl’s skin . . . (‘Brief Encounter’, Sampson 2005: 31) This complex, allusive poetry is far from the novel in terms of voice, but is driven by the necessity of a search. You could argue that the crime-novel, a genre developed chiefly in the twentieth century, has bred its own poetics, that the reader – or the watcher of the film derived from the book – is participating in a kind of poetry of moods and hidden meanings. So Raymond Chandler, for example, whose poetry-quoting detective Philip Marlowe has become the fount of all private-eye clichés since, lends himself to poetry, as do the films of Alfred Hitchcock and other directors of mysteries. Time’s Fool by Glyn Maxwell is another mystery verse novel of wandering and seeking. And it may be true that the syntax of film has entered the bloodstream of poetry, particularly of long poems, and that we may be able at some stage to talk of long poems in terms of establishing shot, tracking, zoom, fade-out and so forth, because all these are narrative devices, and because out common culture is as likely to be informed by films as by books. There are light long poems by John Fuller on art forgers, by Ranjit Bolt (in rhyming couplets) on a girl’s quest for romance. Pushkin stanzas, sonnets, rhyming couplets, terza rima and ballad are after all stories seeking song form. The storyline in these lighter textured poems may sometimes be fragmentary, but is rarely too far from the colloquial, so should make a natural enough read for the general reader. It is clear that poets sometimes want to push at the edges of their craft and see whether the long arc of narrative can be accomplished by means other than prose with its relentless forward drive. Poetry itself seems to clamour for it. It will not always be crammed into the spaces between other things or be satisfied with a single breath or a single if complex perception. Rhythm, after all, is the most natural of instincts, and song follows close behind. This is by no means an attempt to define a canon of long poems or poem sequences. If it were it would certainly include Basil Bunting’s ‘Briggflats’, David Jones’s ‘In Parenthesis’, Ted Hughes’s ‘Crow’, Louis MacNeice’s ‘Autumn Journal’, John Berryman’s ‘Dream Songs’, Marilyn Hacker’s novel in sonnets, ‘Love, Death and the Changing of the Seasons’, Anthony Hecht’s ‘The Venetian Vespers’, Andrew Motion’s ‘Independence’, Craig Raine’s ‘History, The Home Movie’, Bernardine Evaristo’s ‘The Emperor’s Babe’, a number of poems by W. H. Auden, Peter Reading and many many other works, to mention only those written in the twentieth century. I have tried instead to establish one or two historical markers then pick up on contemporary work, particularly by younger writers. It is by no means a way of saying that the books I have discussed in brief are worth reading and the rest are less so. References Auden, W. H. (2004), Collected Auden, London: Faber. Bishop, Elizabeth (1983), Complete Poems, London: Chatto & Windus, Hogarth Press. The Sequence and the Long Poem 247 Bolt, Ranjit (2001), Losing It, London: John Murray. Byron, Lord (1982), Don Juan, London: Penguin. Chaucer, Geoffrey (2005), The Canterbury Tales, London: Penguin Classics. Dryden, John (2003), The Major Works, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Eliot, T. S. (2004), Complete Poems and Plays, London: Faber. Forde, Nigel (2003), A Map of the Territory, Manchester: Carcanet Oxford Poets. Fuller, John (1996), Collected Poems, London: Chatto & Windus. George, Andrew (2003), trans., The Epic of Gilgamesh, London: Penguin. Gower, John (2005), Confessio Amantis, London: Penguin. Hacker, Marilyn (1995), Love, Death and the Changing of the Seasons, New York: Norton. Hatto, A. T. (1973), trans., The Nibelungenlied, London: Penguin. Heaney, Seamus (2000), trans., Beowulf, London: Faber. Homer (1992), The Odyssey, trans. George Chapman, Knoxville: Wordsworth Classics. Homer (1998), The Iliad, trans. Robert Fitzgerald, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Langland, William (1999), Piers Plowman ‘B’ Text, Knoxville: Wordsworth Classics. MacNeice, Louis (1989), Collected Poems, London: Faber. Maxwell, Glyn (2001), Time’s Fool, London: Picador. Milton, John (2003), Paradise Lost, London: Penguin. Murray, Les (1989), The Boys Who Stole the Funeral, Manchester: Carcanet. Murray, Les (1998), Fredy Neptune, Manchester: Carcanet. Narayan, R. K. (2004), trans., The Mahabharata, London: Penguin. Pope, Alexander (2006), The Major Works, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Reading, Peter (1997), Collected Poems: Poems, 1970–84, Volume 1, Newcastle, Bloodaxe. Rees-Jones, Deryn (2004), Quiver, Bridgend: Seren Books. Rich, Adrienne (1993), Adrienne Rich’s Poetry and Prose, ed. Barbara Charlesworth Gelpi and Albert Gelpi, New York: Norton. Sampson, Fiona (2005), The Distance Between Us, Bridgend: Seren. Sattar, Arshia (2001), trans., The Ramayana, India: Penguin. Scupham, Peter (2002), Collected Poems, Manchester, Oxford Poets: Carcanet. Seth, Vikram (1999), The Golden Gate, London: Faber and Faber. Stevens, Wallace (1997), Collected Poetry and Prose, New York: The Library of America. Walcott, Derek (1986), Collected Poems, New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux. Wilde, Oscar (2003), The Complete Works of Oscar Wilde, London: Collins. Wordsworth, William (1995), The Prelude, London: Penguin. SCRIPTWRITING 23 Introduction to Scriptwriting Mike Harris The argument Beckett, Tarantino, Churchill, Shakespeare, Ponte, Buñuel, Wagner and the writers of The Archers all have something essential in common: if they want an audience to understand what they say, they have to keep us in our seats till they’ve finished saying it. The poet doesn’t have to do that, and although the novelist needs the reader to keep turning pages, her task doesn’t have to be completed in one sitting. Only the scriptwriter has to deal with the problem of passing time in this immediate and visceral way. Scriptwriters create the interest and attention of an audience mainly through narrative. Even scriptwriters who subvert narrative can’t do so without using its conventions. This is not surprising given that we’re soaked in stories from the earliest age. What is surprising is that when we come to write we often focus on anything but narrative: the ideas or the language or the characters or our experience, as if narrative were a lower form of aesthetic life which can either be dispensed with or left to itself to evolve slime-like while we concentrate on these spiritually higher matters; and it’s the main reason why scripts don’t work. So this chapter is about dramatic narrative and its practical uses. The basics An exercise that establishes the basics is to give a group five minutes to write a simple story or anecdote (no dialogue or descriptions and no longer than a paragraph). Collect them in, un-named, re-distribute them and invite people to read out the one they got. Each will inevitably involve one or more of the essential building blocks (a specific world, a protagonist, an incident that starts the story off, a chain of events, plot twists, a theme, etc.) which can be identified and form the basis of further discussion. In a drama things have to happen. Yes, really. Small children who write stories that are simple chains of events (‘I got up, had my breakfast, walked to the bus stop, got scooped up by a passing pterodactyl and dropped my homework’) have grasped the essentials. In King Lear our protagonist gives up his kingdom, divides it up on the basis of which daughter says she loves him best, disinherits the one who won’t lie, marries her off to a Frenchman and then banishes the best friend who points out to him the folly of all this, and that’s only scene one. What the plot of Lear has, which the child’s story above doesn’t, is plausibility. 252 The Handbook of Creative Writing Chains of plausibly-connected events keep people in their seats not only because they create anticipation and suspense but also because in them character is explored and thoughts provoked. Novelists editorialise and write down the thoughts of their characters at will. A scriptwriter can of course use soliloquy and narration and in radio drama all forms of direct address can be especially effective (see the chapter on ‘Radio Drama’) – but performances composed entirely of these put a heavy strain on audience attention: which is probably why Ancient Greek and Medieval priests added incident and dialogue to their ceremonies and thus gave rise to drama in the first place (See Thomson, Aeschylus and Athens [1980] and Chambers [1963], The Medieval Stage for detailed discussions of this). In the main, therefore, Drama explores character and ideas through the medium of events, generally in the following way: when characters confront obstacles they have to act (or not act) in one way or another. The choice they make reveals them. We think Macbeth is a loyal subordinate but when ambition overcomes the obstacle of his conscience, he kills the King and we realise he’s not so loyal after all. Robert McKee calls this a ‘story event’ (McKee 1999: 33–5). And that’s a useful term because it makes a distinction between events in life, which are more often than not meaningless, and events in a play, which can’t be. The more ‘story events’ in a script, the more obstacles we see a character dealing with and the more various, the more we are likely to understand (or be puzzled by) him, and the more liable we are to ask questions: why do Vladimir and Estragon persist in waiting for Godot? Why do they not leave, or commit suicide? Why don’t we? The mechanics of this can be explored by inventing aloud a simple collective story in which the group can employ only physical obstacles. Here’s one: a powerful woman dresses in a rush because she’s late for the most important business meeting in her life but still pauses to hug her beloved poodle. She goes to the front door – and? Physical obstacle only, please. It won’t open. OK so she looks for the key – and? She can’t find it/it breaks/ whatever. Fine, so she tries the back door all the windows and? The windows won’t break, the phone won’t work, people don’t see her when she waves. Time-shift: a week later. She’s eaten all the food in the fridge. What’s she going to do? Eat the dog! shouts a cynic. Not yet, you reply, because she loves it, doesn’t she? Time-shift three more days. Is she hungry enough to eat the dog now? Yes! Cry all but the most hardened pet-lovers. But she’s got to catch it first and kill it, hasn’t she? Stop the story and discuss how we’ve turned this sophisticated woman into a primitive hunter and tested the limits of her values; mostly by keeping the doors shut. The list of story events in a play are its most basic structure and if we haven’t got enough we haven’t got a play. The approximate number of significant story events a script needs depends on taste, length, genre and medium. Full-length films tend to have more than fulllength stage or radio plays. Action thrillers more than European art films. Writing by numbers is idiotic but given that most of us generally under-estimate just how many narrative ideas we need to tell our stories effectively, it’s worth quoting (sceptically) a guesstimate. McKee reckons you need forty to sixty full-blown story events in a feature film and forty or so in a full-length stage play. Most first drafts I come across, including my own, certainly have far fewer, which is one reason why they aren’t working. Count the number of times in a great play or film when characters confront obstacles. Then count the number of times your own protagonist confronts obstacles. It will almost certainly be far fewer. Obstacles in story events aren’t just physical. They can also be the conflicting desires of other people: for example the younger son who resents his returning father in Andrei 253 Introduction to Scriptwriting Zvyagintsev’s The Return; or social: for example the racism of the 60s deep South, against which Sidney Poitier’s sophisticated New York cop has to struggle in order to conduct a murder investigation in In The Heat Of The Night; or psychological. In Hiroshima mon amour, we gradually realise that The Woman’s rejection of The Man is a deep-seated response to the death of a lover when she was eighteen. The arena of such a script is primarily interior; its gladiators the competing impulses within a character: not Arnie with an Uzie, but that memory you don’t want to walk over. Radio Drama is particularly suited to dramatising psychological conflicts. Most story events in drama occur because Character A wants something different than Character B. This can be reduced to an equation, if you are so inclined. A wants x, B wants y and therefore z (where z is what happens as a result). If there is ever a moment in a script when A wants x and B wants x too, and they both get it, it’s either the end, a third antagonistic force is about to ruin the idyll (for example, Martians, a psychopath, a Bad Thought, etc.) or your story just died. It may also suggest that you have characters who are too similar. A cast of characters should be as diverse as possible in order to maximise the range of possible conflict. The equation above is a crude but useful way of testing whether story events in an outline or in a scene are working, and what’s wrong with them if they’re obviously not. What does your A want? Is it different than what your B wants? If it isn’t, why not? If it is, what happens as a result, if anything? If you don’t know the answer to all these questions, why have you started writing? Scenes and sequences Whenever the narrative shifts in time or space, the scene changes, with the exception of single-room dramas. In these the location is fixed so the scene changes whenever the script shifts in time and, if you like, whenever a character enters or leaves thus affecting the balance of power, for example see 12 Angry Men. The essential core of any scene on stage, and a long scene (or a sequence of quick-cutting very short scenes) on radio or screen, is at least one story event. Most will have more. For example the two-page first ‘scene’ of Harold Pinter’s The Dumb Waiter (between lights up and Gus retiring to the toilet) contains a couple of dozen small story events. There are long scenes that don’t have any and most need to be dumped or re-written. Some might be giving or establishing essential information but they’re a lower order of life and are altogether better if they contain a story event as well. There are lots of short scenes in film which simply give information. For example establishing shots which give us an external view of the location in which the next scene will take place, and travelling shots like the many we get of John Mills and co. trudging through blizzards in Scott of the Antarctic. Scenes in film can convey a simple single piece of information very quickly. More complicated meanings are often made by editing together lots of these simple shorter bits. This can also happen in radio drama, but it’s less common. The basic narrative unit in film is frequently the scene sequence, for example the Polish wedding in the first act of The Deer Hunter, and then it’s this that always needs at least one story event. To all intents and purposes a scene or scene sequence is the story event that controls it. When we list story events, in the order in which we think they might occur, we have our most basic plan. Prose descriptions of what’s going to happen in a script are a good way of forcing oneself to think and plan. This is not a late intrusion of Hollywood into serious writing: ‘The poet should first plan the general outline and then expand by working out appropriate episodes’ 254 The Handbook of Creative Writing (Aristotle’s Poetics, fourth century BC). Our reasons for not planning enough have nothing to do with seriousness and everything to do with the fact that thinking is much harder than writing screeds of bad dialogue; which is why we generally start writing dialogue before we know properly what we’re writing it for and then run out of ideas. It’s possible of course to finish a draft and then try to decide what it’s all about. The problem is you might just decide it’s not about anything and have to dump months of work, which is demoralising, wasteful and not viable on a serious writing course or with a commission because both have deadlines attached. An outline, or something like it, is therefore essential. You can discuss an outline with others and discover quickly that there’s only three story events in it and then profitably wonder what’s going to be going on for the other hour and three quarters? An outline can be re-drafted in far less time than a whole script and then repeatedly pulled apart and put back together until it’s got enough plausible story events in it, so that if you start writing and get stuck on one scene you can drop it, write an easier one, and come back to the hard one later when, if you’re lucky, you’ll have figured out the first problem whilst you weren’t looking. Beginnings . . . Of course, planning and organising aren’t just a matter of listing in roughly the right order all the story events one can think of, although that’s a good start. It’s well known, for example, that every script has to have a beginning, a middle and an end. So why not start at the beginning? Problem is, stories don’t start at the beginning. They start when we know everything we need to know in order to understand the story when it does start. Take the panto script of Cinderella. Before we can make any sense of the main storyline involving a fairy godmother, a ball and a glass slipper test, we have to know that Cinders is badly treated by her step-mum and sisters, that she is deserving and beautiful, lives in an undemocratic state run by a bachelor prince who is looking for a bride, and also it’s the kind of world in which magic can happen. That’s the set-up, without it the story can’t work and it’s generally sensible to do it as quickly and as economically as possible. In Die Hard we need to know that Bruce Willis is an ordinary-Joe New York cop visiting his estranged and more successful wife in California, and that he still loves her. We get Cop when a fellow plane passenger sees his gun and asks about it. We get the back story on his marriage when a nosy chauffeur badgers it out of him. We understand some of the complexity of his feelings when he keys his wife into a computerised reception and discovers, resentfully, that she’s reverted to her maiden name. When the set-up’s completed the story needs something to make it start. This is a very particular story event or a series of proximate and linked events – call it the Inciting Incident or Plot Point 1 or what you like (McKee prefers ‘inciting incident’, Syd Field ‘Plot Point 1’ – it doesn’t matter) – but it’s the big bang that disturbs the status quo of the fictional world, creates volatility and makes narrative life possible. ‘The inciting incident’ in the panto Cinderella is of course the fortuitous arrival of a Fairy Godmother after Wicked Step-mother has banned Cinders from the ball. Robert McKee insists that ‘the inciting incident’ has to happen ‘in the story’ (McKee 1999: 189–94) and Syd Field that it happen no later than page thirty (Field 2003: 119) but the fact is that in drama outside mainstream Hollywood it occurs almost everywhere. In Chekhov’s Uncle Vanya it’s the arrival of the professor and his young wife months before the play begins; in the Oresteia of Aeschylus it happens in the mythic past when Tantalus 255 Introduction to Scriptwriting feeds the Gods on his own son’s flesh and so brings down a curse upon The House of Atreus. And in Christopher Nolan’s back-to-front memory-thriller, Memento, it happens, quite remarkably, at the very end of the film. But it’s normally a lot closer to the beginning of a script and tends to need to be if you want to avoid your audience turning off before you’ve even started. In Die Hard it’s the classic twenty minutes in, when Alan Rickman’s gang capture the building and Bruce Willis’s wife but not Bruce himself. Elizabethan theatregoers were as familiar with the conventions of stage kingship as we are with cop-show procedurals so the inciting incident of King Lear can occur early (before the end of Scene One). However, in Brazil, Terry Gilliam’s quirky, complicated dystopia about a state dominated by a cruel but comically inefficient bureaucracy (and ventilation ducts), it takes nearly fifty minutes to arrive. In a long set-up it helps if there’s a sub-plot in it to tide us over till the real story begins. In Brazil it’s the wrongful arrest of the innocent Buttle instead of the renegade ventilation engineer Tuttle. It’s even better if the sub-plot is a thematic variation on the main one, which Tuttle and Buttle is, so it not only grips us but also helps us understand the rules of the world we’re in. No matter where it occurs, however, the inciting incident obliges the protagonist to act, or leads us to expect that he will, eventually. In Die Hard, Bruce Willis has to because he’s trapped and Alan Rickman’s just kidnapped his wife. Hamlet thinks he has to because the ghost of his murdered father has just grassed up his step-dad. Middles . . . and then what? There’s a whole series of obstacles in the way, of course. What keeps things going is the protagonist’s persistence in seeking to overcome them and the insights we gain as that happens. Protagonists persist long after most of us would have given up and gone to the pub. That’s how they get to be protagonists. Even Hamlet – the greatest prevaricator in world drama – doesn’t actually give up, and Macbeth fights on even when he realises his death is inevitable because Macduff was Not of Woman Born. There are of course dramas that don’t have a single main protagonist. A good example is Paul Thomas Anderson’s magnificent Magnolia in which the stories of half a dozen equally important characters are inter-cut throughout. Several things are instructive here: each character’s story is plotted as carefully as if he or she were the sole protagonist; we then discover, to our great narrative satisfaction, that the stories gradually link up, and that they all are subtle variations on a common theme. Being unable to decide who is one’s main protagonist, is not the same thing at all. But most scripts do have a single main protagonist and they are very pro-active. Syd Field suggests that you can’t have one who isn’t. If this were true, drama would lose some of it greatest protagonists. For example, The Alienated Hero and an awful lot of Child Heroes. Alienated protagonists find it hard to act – because they are alienated. Hamlet decides he’d better kill his step-dad at the end of Act One and then spends the best part of the remaining four acts not doing it. Child protagonists in an adult world tend to be limited in what they can do. What happens therefore is that other characters act instead. In Hamlet virtually every other character in the play does what Hamlet says he ought to do: Ophelia commits suicide, Laertes acts to revenge the death of his father and so on. In Billie August’s Pelle the Conqueror the child hero is primarily an observer of older lives but each is in some sense a trial run for what he might be when he grows up. As the alienated or child protagonist watches, or dithers, the narrative energy goes to the sub-plots of 256 The Handbook of Creative Writing secondary characters, until he finally acts. Hamlet slaughters almost the entire cast, and Pelle, now pubescent, leaves to make his own life. King Lear shows how obstacles in The Middle get progressively tougher. When Goneril tries to strip him of some of his rude retinue of knights, Lear goes to Regan in the hope of better treatment but she takes all his knights away and Lear, unable to reconcile himself to this or to do anything about it, goes mad. The course of the plot through the middle doesn’t have to be progressively Worse, it can get Worse then Better, or Better then Worse. But it does need to progress and the cost of action nearly always escalates. Matters are generally forced by one or two major story events that cause things to change (reversals) or which bring the audience or the protagonist to a very different understanding of what has been happening (recognitions). (1) Macbeth kills Duncan and there’s no going back, but Duncan’s heirs escape. (2) He’s consolidating his power at a banquet for the nobles when Banquo’s ghost appears and throws him into embarrassing mental torment. (3) He goes back to the witches for re-assurance, they confirm that Banquo’s descendants will inherit the throne but tell him his position is secure unless Burnham Wood comes to Dunsinane and he can’t be killed by any man of woman born so he’s happy, until . . . When the consequences of one of these main story events, or ‘plot turns’, or ‘twists’, have run out and the next has not yet kicked in, the audience will start to fidget and it’s time to reach for sub-plot again. In Memento when the love-interest, Natalie, proves to our protagonist that the man we saw him shoot at the start was the one who killed his wife, the main story seems to be over. At this point, Nolan gives us in flashback the vital subplot/back story of how our hero discredited another amnesiac whilst conducting an insurance investigation and the tragic consequences that ensued. This holds us in place until we shortly realise that Natalie is not to be trusted and the main plot is on the road again. Pick a genre and then list what always happens in it. Then pick another, and so on. If we know what generally happens in stories and therefore what the audience will be expecting, there’s a chance of coming up with something different. Make everyone decide what genre they are writing in. Some will claim they aren’t but they are and pretending not to be is the surest way to write the clichés of the genre in which we are, in fact, writing. Hamlet is a great play, in part, because Shakespeare uses the conventions of the Elizabethan revenge tragedy to do something different. Thelma and Louise works because it re-imagines the Buddy-Buddy adventure genre for two modern women. When we’ve worked out what genre or genres we’re writing in it’s possible to root out the clichés and make something different happen. Ends … and what happens in the end? The protagonist generally comes up against the greatest obstacle of all, which is usually in some form or other himself, and then he overcomes it, or not. In Krapp’s Last Tape, Beckett’s protagonist literally confronts his younger self in the form of a tape-recording, whilst the final obstacle The Woman in Hiroshima mon amour has to face is not whether she loves her new married lover enough to be with him, it’s whether she can abandon her love affair with Death and, in the end, we’re not sure whether, in choosing the lover, she’s done that, or its opposite. This is the Ambiguous Ending. There are also, of course, the Happy and Sad ones. Uncle Vanya ends with Vanya and his niece going back to their farm accounts as they return to their life of provincial obscurity (Unhappy). In Groundhog Day, Bill Murray gets the girl and time stops repeating itself 257 Introduction to Scriptwriting (Happy). Hollywood films now end with such idiotically predictable happiness that all reasonable people leave the cinema wishing the entire cast had died in a bath of acid instead. But a Happy ending is perfectly viable if you’ve earned it after inflicting lots of misery, and it’s still plausible despite that. Both McKee and Field require the penultimate sequence or section of a script to be in the opposite mood to the end. So a happy ending should always be preceded by an unhappy sequence and visa versa. This is one of the many reasons why it’s possible to watch almost any current Hollywood movie and predict exactly what will happen. But that up-down-updown rhythm is common in good scripts too. Just when you think it couldn’t get any worse for Lear, Cordelia turns up with an army and you just know it’s going to be all right, and then she’s defeated and it gets much worse. There’s a good reason for the prevalence of this pattern. A string of dialogue, scenes, sequences, turns or big story events written in the same emotional register runs the risk of inappropriate audience reaction. One unhappy bit ⫽ sad audience; two unhappy bits in a row ⫽ not quite so sad audience; three unhappy bits in a row ⫽ audience stifling inadvertent guffaws. Scripts that repeat Sad-Sad-Sad or Happy-Happy-Happy and get away with it have to play half-tones in scenes or descend into bathos and worse. In Sarah Kane’s Blasted, eyes are sucked out, babies eaten and people try to strangle themselves to death in such quick succession that the tittering audience member begins to feel like he’s just stumbled into Benny Hill’s Theatre of Cruelty. Whereas, although scene after scene in Magnolia is unutterably sad, the bleakness is subtly interwoven with strands of dark comedy. Literary critics merely describe plays. We have to make them better. To do that requires practical evaluative criteria. Academic debates about the impossibility of evaluation since it is always conditional on class, gender or history, or about the irrelevance of The Writer either because we’re all dead or because our intentions are always fallacious, are deeply damaging to any writer who takes them seriously. We do exist and we do have to try and make our work better. The evaluative terms described above and below work for me and have proved useful in developing scripts with students, but they may not work for you. Suck them and see. For example: has a draft outline got an inciting incident, and does it start the story off convincingly? Has it got a couple of major ‘turns’ in the middle; if it’s only got one, or none, that’s why it feels flabby. Who’s the protagonist? If the writer doesn’t know (a surprisingly common phenomenon) that’s why the whole thing feels unfocused. Look at the cast of characters. What motivates each one, and is it incompatible with what motivates the others? If not, why not? How many of these characters have stories of their own, apart from the protagonist? None? Then the script is going to feel very thin and you’ve got no sub-plot to play with. Kill characters who do nothing or merge them with another cipher to create a more interesting composite. Are characters being pushed far enough? People in plays are much less dull than people in life and do much more extreme things, even when they’re supposed to be ordinary. For example Chekhov’s ‘ordinary’ characters are much given to suicide, and waving guns around. Most important of all, what ideas or values are being explored in the drama? If none are, why are you writing it? Life is very hard to change. Drama on the other hand is an entirely virtual reality that the writer can fiddle with at will until it seems to work. Dialogue Most people think Drama is dialogue but they’re wrong. Drama is about doing things. The word itself is ancient Greek meaning deed or action and in his Poetics, Aristotle lists in 258 The Handbook of Creative Writing order of importance the constituent elements of Tragedy (the dominant dramatic form of his time): (1). Plot, (2) Character, (3) Ideas, (4) Dialogue. If you’re disinclined to credit dead foreigners (even when their compatriots invented what you’re trying to do) you might prefer to consult the Oxford English Dictionary which defines drama as, ‘a series of actions or course of events leading to a final catastrophe or consummation’. It doesn’t mention dialogue. The most common fault in scripts is Too Many Words, which is understandable because the most obvious way of externalising thoughts and feelings is by having one character tell another character what he’s really thinking and feeling. The problem is, if a character tells us everything about herself, what’s left for the audience to find out and why should we carry on watching? Experience teaches that people aren’t like that, anyway. What we say is rarely what we think and what we think is not what really motivates us and what really motivates us is, more often than not, a complete mystery: what is Hamlet’s problem at bottom? Or Lear’s? We’re just not sure, so we keep thinking about them long after the play has ended and centuries after they were first written. Of course, fiction isn’t reality and need not be held hostage by it, but when an aesthetic strategy is neither true to life nor dramatically effective, why use it? The principle way we explore character in drama, as in life, is by comparing what people say, with what they do (‘I love you more than word can wield the matter;/Dearer than eyesight, space and liberty’ – Goneril to Lear, [I.i]). Which is why it makes sense, when planning a scene, to start not with a list of things we think should be said but with the main story event in it. Dialogue will then happen if A and B happen to use words to get what they want. They may also use violence of course, or silence or gestures, or the merest glance. Moments of silence in drama are more expressive than the noisiest dialogue. Cassandra stands silently to enormous theatrical effect for most of the Second Act of Aeschylus’s Agamemnon. Whole sequences on film can (and should) contain no dialogue at all. One of my favourites is the long speechless sequence in the middle of the Coen brothers’ Blood Simple, which culminates in a good man burying his lover’s husband alive because he can’t bring himself to kill him. Perhaps most remarkable of all is the almost total silence of Anthony Minghella’s protagonist in the radio script of Cigarettes and Chocolate. Getting rid of unnecessary words: take a few bad or early draft scenes and set everyone to cut as many words as possible but still tell all the story. Very soon you can’t see the black for the red. Then get them to re-write a sequence of their own scenes with very little dialogue – no more than ten or twenty words. Dialogue in a scene based on conflicted desire is more dynamic and engaging because it involves a struggle for power the outcome of which is uncertain. In a good scene or scene sequence power is held in contest and then shifts at least once from one character to another. In the Oresteia, Clytaemnestra urges Agamemnon to cross the blood-red carpet that will lead him to his death. He refuses, she persuades, he crosses and is lost. In the case of psychological drama, power passes between one aspect of a person’s psyche to another. In Tyrone Guthrie’s groundbreaking 1930 radio play Matrimonial News the thoughts of shop-girl Florence are personified and conflict with each other as she sits waiting for her blind date to arrive. Conflicted dialogue can sound more like real speech with all its interruptions, half-finished phrases, non-sequiturs and so forth, as in Caryl Churchill’s Top Girls. This is not because writers set out to copy ‘real life’ speech, because they don’t, being primarily interested in the exploration of character and ideas within a particular aesthetic structure. And most ‘real speech’ is too unutterably dull to be worth copying, anyway. A tiny portion of it, Introduction to Scriptwriting 259 however, embodies interesting struggles for power or status and we remember this as ‘real speech’ because it sounds like good dramatic dialogue. Set people to tape-record some ordinary conversation in a pub or at home. Each should select a section that interests them, transcribe it exactly and then read it out aloud. Underneath the naturalistic surface there will almost certainly be power-play. It was this that caused it to be selected from all the taped dialogue that didn’t contain conflict. A legendary piece of advice on scene structure (probably emanating from William Goldman) is ‘go in late, get out early’. By which he means start the scene as close to the moment of conflict as possible (in mid-conflict even) and get out before it can resolve. The late start means we avoid the kerfuffle dialogue that infests so many first drafts (‘Hello come in, sit down, have a cup of tea, lovely day isn’t it’) and the early departure ensures that audience interest will be maintained as they are made to wait to find out what happens next. Even the dullest information-giving can be lifted this way. At the start of Lear, Shakespeare offers one of his, ‘two courtiers doing the set-up’ dialogues that can feel drearily functional but here he starts half way through a debate: Kent: I thought the King had more affected the Duke of Albany than Cornwall? Gloucester: It did always seem so to us; but now . . . And the small disagreement makes a significant difference. Disagreements can of course make all the difference: contrast bad dialogue in which, for no good reason, characters tell each other everything that’s in their head and hearts, with those scenes in which a succession of climaxing disagreements force out secrets. In these we accept the revelations because they are first refused many times. In Act Two Scene One of Lorca’s Blood Wedding a peasant Bride is visited by Leonardo, her former lover who is himself now married. The more she evades his advances the more we suspect that she is protesting too much, and the more Leonardo is forced to reveal. This scene also illustrates the importance of making things literally happen in scenes. During this scene the wedding guests are arriving, adding crucial pressure to the confrontation. Setting and physical action should be written into each scene. It’s a good idea to write (on a sequence of cards or A4 sheets, in an outlining programme, on the back of cigarette packets or whatever suits) the main story event in every scene, where it’s occurring and what is literally happening in it, apart from talk. After that scribble down anything else you think needs to go in a scene. For example any dialogue that is starting to emerge, any other information that has to be carried, and anything else that occurs to you. But what of soliloquy, narration and choruses? There are plenty of occasions in Shakespeare, and in radio drama, when characters directly address the audience but such passages generally dramatise either psychological conflict (‘To be or not to be’), or are in conflict with what happens before or after it, for example Edmund’s ‘I’m the Bad Guy’ soliloquy in Act One Scene Two of King Lear undermines Gloucester’s defence of him in Scene One. And in every case soliloquies must move the drama on or we need to ask, why are they there? When Mozart was trying to re-invent the moribund form of Opera Seria with Idomeneo, he bombarded his old-fashioned librettist with demands that the lyrics embody the action and not simply repeat lyrically what the audience knows already (Anderson 1997: 662). A Chorus can perform many different functions. In Greek Tragedy it sometimes becomes a character in conflict with or a confidante of the protagonist, for example the 260 The Handbook of Creative Writing Corinthian Women in Euripides Medea; at others it performs a holding operation at a moment of great suspense, making the audience wait whilst it reflects on what has gone before. Lorca re-invents this technique very effectively in Act Three of Blood Wedding. Greek Choruses often related violent offstage action or essential back story and, Greek Tragedy being closer to opera than modern drama, the lack of dramatic action on stage at these points was compensated for by music, movement and heightened verse. Which is precisely what happens in Steven Berkoff’s Greek in which characters speak MockneyShakespeare and the sheer virtuosity of the language and the physical theatre (actors turning each other into motorbikes, etc.) almost blinds you to the fact that what you are watching is little more than a series of misanthropic music hall sketches. Narrators work like choruses. That is, best if they are part of the play’s conflicts and best of all when unreliable. Direct address written simply to cover an inability to tell the story through dramatic action, is best avoided. Strange worlds, minimalism and anti-narratives It’s widely believed that lots of dramas work without using narrative, or with so little of it that it doesn’t signify. Richard Gilman, for example, thinks that Chekhov’s Three Sisters abandoned, ‘the usual linear development of a play . . . from a starting point, to exposition and development . . . to a denouement’, and instead, ‘worked toward the filling in of a dramatic field’ (Chekhov 2002: ix). If this were true we would justifiably baulk at going to Chekhov to learn how to write minimalist dramas of ordinary life, for how does one teach, or learn, how to ‘fill in a dramatic field’? Fortunately, it’s not true. At the most basic narrative level, lots of things happen in Three Sisters: a weak, selfish woman marries their beloved older brother who becomes a wastrel and a gambler. His wife gradually takes over the family house, forces the sisters out and has an affair with his boss. Irene gives up her dreams of Moscow to marry the manager of a brick works, who is then killed in a duel by a thwarted admirer. Masha has an affair with an army officer who is unhappily married to a lunatic and then, when he leaves, finds out that her boring husband knew all along. Oh yes, and there’s a major conflagration at the start of Act Three. These events all occur in regular time-sequence (not back to front, at random or in flashback) and the multi-narratives are organised into inciting incidents, progressive developments, sub-plots and a dramatic climax. But Chekhov is very different from the writers of melodrama against whom he was in revolt because he does successfully create a sense of quiet unchanging lives riven by regret and despair. He doesn’t do this by abandoning narrative but by using two of the oldest known narrative techniques to help give the impression that this is what he is doing. He sets his most melodramatic events (the duel, the fire and most of the adultery) offstage and tells the rest, ‘on the cut’, that is, in time-shifts between acts, leaving him free to devote onstage action and dialogue to what may appear to be ‘ordinary life’, but which, amongst other things is getting the audience up to speed on what’s happened since the last act. We realise this soon into Act two, and are thereafter partly hooked by the need to find out not so much what’s going to happen next, but what’s happened since. But if we want to boldly go beyond the merely humdrum to the Utterly Purposeless and Absurd, the best pilot is that master storyteller and all-round entertainer, Samuel Beckett. But not if we think that his plays, ‘lack plot more completely than any other Introduction to Scriptwriting 261 works’, because they adopt ‘a method that is essentially polyphonic . . . [confronting] . . . their audience with an organised structure of statements and images that interpenetrate each other and that must be apprehended in their totality’ (Esslin 1976: 44). Try teaching that. ‘Everyone interpenetrate your meanings in their totality now please!’ Luckily Beckett no more does this than Chekhov fills in fields. Take Waiting for Godot. He gives us four very distinct characters (Vladimir, Estragon, Lucky and Pozzo) who vie for status throughout a play which is, in essence, a simple one-room, invasion of space drama. There’s an inciting incident: when Vladimir informs Estragon and us that they are waiting for Godot, which induces the wholly conventional audience anticipation that Beckett plays cat and mouse with for the next two acts. On several occasions in Act One he deliberately, Hitchcock-like, makes us think that Godot has arrived: vladimir estragon vladimir Listen! (They listen, grotesquely rigid) I hear nothing Hssst! But of course he hasn’t. Eventually, instead of him, Pozzo and Lucky arrive to inject danger into the play just when it’s in danger of flagging. In between these conventional narrative tropes Becket occupies his waiting audience with stand-up patter and music hall slapstick routines. In the second half the pattern is often said to be identical but isn’t. There’s considerable development – the power relations between Pozzo and Lucky have been transformed, Vladimir and Estragon are more despairing and it is also, sensibly, much shorter than the first, because by then we know that Godot probably isn’t coming and Beckett is too wily a storyteller to push us over the brink. He gives us the illusion of a purposeless, story-less world by invoking narrative expectations that he never, completely, fulfils but which allow him to portray ennui without making his audience feel it (too much). When one turns to Absurdists like Ionesco and Ominous-ists like Pinter, the case hardly needs making. Ionesco’s shtick is injecting highly conventional narrative with something ridiculous to see what effect this has on the audience. Thus the plot of Rhinoceros is Invasion of the Body Snatchers with rhinoceroses, and The Lesson is 10 Rillington Place with added gibberish. Pinter’s preferred mode is to put lots of pauses into highly conflicted, idiomatic dialogue whilst refusing ultimate explanation of his characters’ generally violent or oppressive behaviour. The Room, for example is, like Godot, a conventional invasion of space drama, except we never learn exactly why Riley has come back for Rose or why Bert brutally kills him in the end. And all these writers also maintain attention and interest second by second with dialogue that contains almost as much blocking and gainsaying per-scene as a soap. Scripts that inhabit strange worlds are sometimes conflated with these ‘antinarratives’ but they are generally even more conventionally structured. So only two additional points need to be made. First, the main plot in a weird world script ought to arise at least partly from the strange conditions of that world, otherwise what’s the point? So, in Delicatessen, which takes place in a post-holocaust Gallic No-Time in which food is scarce and cannibalism rife, the unemployed clown-protagonist is (of course) in danger of being turned into steak fillets by his butcher-landlord. Secondly, the stranger the world the more helpful to the audience will be at least one conventional narrative strand. It’s not an accident that Delicatessen, Brazil, and Groundhog Day 262 The Handbook of Creative Writing (in which the protagonist experiences the same day over and over again) are all partly powered by a love-story. References Aeschylus (1977), The Oresteia: Agamemnon, The Libation Bearers, The Eumenides, London: Penguin. Anderson, Emily (1997), ed., The Letters of Mozart and his Family, London: Macmillan. Anderson, Paul Thomas (1999), Magnolia, screenplay: Paul Thomas Anderson. Aristotle (2000), Poetics, London: Penguin. August, Bille (1987), Pelle the Conqueror, screenplay: Bille August. Beckett, Samuel (1979), Krapp’s Last Tape, Waiting for Godot, London: Faber. Berkoff, Steven (1989), Greek, Decadence and Other Plays, London: Faber. Caro, Mark and Jeunet, Jean-Pierre (1991), Delicatessen, screenplay: Gilles Adrien. Chambers, E. K. (1963), The Medieval Stage, vol. 11, book 3, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chekhov, Anton (2002), Three Sisters, Uncle Vanya, London: Penguin. Churchill, Caryl (1993), Top Girls, Plays 2, London: Methuen. Cimino, Michael (1978), The Deer Hunter, screenplay: Michael Cimino, Deric Washburn. Coen, Joel (1984), Blood Simple, screenplay: Joel Coen, Ethan Coen. Esslin, Martin (1976), The Theatre of the Absurd, London: Penguin. Field, Syd (2003), The Definitive Guide to Screenwriting, London: Ebury. Frend, Charles (1948), Scott of the Antarctic, screenplay: Walter Meade, Ivor Montague. Gilliam, Terry (1985), Brazil, screenplay: Terry Gilliam, Tom Stoppard. Goldman, William (1984), Adventures in the Screen Trade, London: Macdonald. Guthrie, Tyrone (1931), The Squirrel’s Cage and Two Other Microphone Plays, London: Cobden Sanderson. Ionesco, Eugène (1962), Rhinoceros, The Chairs, The Lesson, London: Penguin. Jewison, Norman (1967), In the Heat of the Night, screenplay: Stirling Silliphant. Kane, Sarah (2001), Blasted (Complete Plays), London: Methuen. Lorca, Federico Garcia (1999), Blood Wedding, Four Major Plays, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lumet, Sidney (1957), 12 Angry Men, screenplay: Reginald Rose. McKee, Robert (1999), Story: Substance, Structure, Style, and the Principles of Screen Writing, London: Methuen. McTiernan, John (1988), Die Hard, screenplay: Jeb Stuart. Minghella, Anthony (1989), Cigarettes and Chocolate, Best Radio Plays of 1988, London: Methuen/BBC Publications. Nolan, Chris (2000), Memento, screenplay: Chris Nolan. Pinter, Harold (1978), The Dumb Waiter, The Room, London: Methuen. Ramis, Harold (1993), Groundhog Day, screenplay: Danny Rubin. Resnais, Alain (1959), Hiroshima mon amour, screenplay: Marguerite Duras. Scott, Ridley (1999), Thelma and Louise, screenplay: Callie Khouri. Shakespeare, William, King Lear, Hamlet, Macbeth (Arden Editions), London: Methuen. Thomson, George (1980), Aeschylus and Athens, London: Lawrence and Wishart. Zvyagintsev, Andrei (2003), The Return, screenplay: Vladimir Moiseyenko, Alexander Novototsky. 24 Writing for the Stage A blueprint, a suggestive text, a thrown gauntlet for aspiring, stalled, and practising playwrights Brighde Mullins Terms and conditions The word playwright is in the same etymological family as that of a shipwright, a cartwright, a wheelwright. The words shipwright, cartwright, wheelwright are descriptive: they summon up a craftsperson making a useful object – a ship, a cart, a wheel. A playwright is the maker of a script for the stage, a useful text. The second half of the word playwright, then, emphasises the craft aspect of writing for the stage. Not that there isn’t a good deal of artfulness, and a wealth of aesthetic complexity involved in playwrighting. But these elements are yoked to the psyche of the maker, so much so that they are idiosyncratic and unteachable. Exercises that can increase craft and make a playwright aware of existing models and practical techniques are highly teachable, and they are what will be focused on in this chapter. Writing for the stage implies that you are writing words that will be spoken by actors and heard by an audience. If you are writing for actors, then actors are your vehicles, your instruments. This is the most important distinction between writing for the stage and writing for another genre. Poems and prose occur in a private space between the reader and the writer. The play, however, like a composer’s score or an architect’s blueprint, exists as a written text as a stop along the way. The play fully exists only in production, and therefore the single most vital element that a playwright has to shaping her craft is access to a theatre. The most important information that a playwright can have is an arsenal of experiences in the theatre. By experiences I don’t mean that you have to have worked on plays – although that is of course extremely useful. Indeed, one playwright I know (Paul Selig) has said that his best insights and ideas have come to him when he worked on running crew backstage and sat waiting for a cue light. There are some things that only proximity to stagecraft can transmit. If you cannot work in or on a production, the next best thing is to read and then to see plays in performance. If you live near a large city, such as London or New York or Paris, you are in luck on this count. You should seek out as much theatre as possible, whatever productions you can find. I was raised in Las Vegas, Nevada, which may seem cosmopolitan, but at the time that I grew up (in the late seventies) was really a small town in the Mojave Desert, and the first theatrical productions that I saw were musicals on the Strip. But it was enough to whet my 264 The Handbook of Creative Writing appetite, and as a teenager I started going to the Shakespeare Festival in nearby Cedar City, Utah. If you live in the provinces, or in the desert, then it is necessary to make pilgrimages every now and then to see plays in production. You may live in a city that has an ‘underground’ theatre scene: Austin, Texas; Los Angeles; Providence; Rochester; many places around the US have theatre scenes that happen in small spaces that are just off the radar of the official theatre culture. You should seek out these venues. If you do have theatres in your area that are doing plays from the canon, that is also useful: ideally, you should read the script and then go to see the actual production. That is the most practical way to begin to understand the relationship between the page and the stage. A production is a somatic event, an experience that engages all of the senses. There is no substitute for witnessing live theatre. It is the necessary background. The fullimmersion of a production is what any play is written towards. And so, seeing a play in production after reading it can help you to fill in the gaps. You can start to see and then to articulate the contributions that designers, actors and directors make in embodying the play. You start to be able to imagine your own writing as being breathed into a space where it can be met and taken up by a collaborator. Many playwrights also have acting experience. Shakespeare, Molière, Sam Shepard, Athol Fugard and Christopher Durang, Erin Cressida Wilson, Harold Pinter and Tom Stoppard, to name a few. But acting is by no means a prerequisite. Some of our finest living playwrights are essentially very shy people, who would never dream of setting foot onstage. I am thinking of Caryl Churchill and Richard Greenberg. But facets of temperament aside, it is important that you are able to locate the sources of your connection to the theatre, and to read and see as many plays as you can before you start writing for the stage. The primary thing, then, is to acquaint yourself with practical models, plays that you can read and then go to see in production. In this way, you can see the way that theatre works on the level of the pores: as a physical embodiment, a collaboration with actors and designers, and of course that other unstable but necessary element, an audience. This chapter will include some writing exercises that I’ve developed in my ten years of teaching playwrighting at both the graduate and the undergraduate level. Many of these exercises were developed with playwright and film-maker Madeleine Olnek, who is one of the co-writers of the much-used acting textbook A Practical Handbook for the Actor, and trained by David Mamet at The Atlantic Theatre Company in NY. My background is also as a poet: and so this methodology brings together a very pragmatic approach toward practice (Mamet’s work is heavily method-based) as well as my own more experimental, poetic foundation. It will also discuss ways to focus your writing through the lens of your own obsessions and themes. Writing for the stage starts with writing for the page. Your personal connection to your material, as in all genres, is paramount. Your private obsessions, ideas, ideals, recurring dreams, fondest hopes, greatest fears will be tapped if you are writing, as they say, from the heart and from the gut. All of this sounds abstract, but there is a real skill in being able to translate these areas into a story onstage. A necessary step A primary text, a tried and true, both railed against and derided, but always seminal, always indispensable text is Aristotle’s Poetics. It is both a how-to book and a cook-book. It is also a very practical book to have in that it articulates the tools that a playwright needs to create a playable text. The Poetics introduces a vocabulary that is the foundation for thinking and conversing about plays. Whether a playwright misinterprets, over-interprets or attacks the 265 Writing for the Stage Poetics, Aristotle is always on some level being referenced. Beyond the fact that he is in our collective bone-marrow then, there is also the practicality of knowing his terms. What are the ingredients of a play? Aristotle was interested in parsing how a play affects an audience. He was trained as a scientist, so his method was empirical. He was interested in the way that a story, shaped into a plot, was presented to the group-mind of the audience using all of the tools at the playwright’s disposal. Aristotle names and describes six ingredients that he noticed as occurring in the plays. These ingredients may be emphasised or de-emphasised, but they are still the template of the dynamic of any play. The choices that the playwright makes in the script as far as emphasising or describing these ingredients are what will guide the production, both in terms of design interpretation, actors’ and directors’ understanding. The first three, the most important elements, are the non-perishable elements. These are in the DNA of the script, they are written into the play by the writer. The second three are the elements that are more perishable, and, in Aristotle’s understanding, are related to the interpretation or to a particular production. But there is a way to use these elements as well in our writing of plays, and I will emphasise my interpretation of these elements. Aristotle’s elements in a nutshell 1. Plot Every play must have a beginning, a middle and an ending. This sounds disingenuous, but it isn’t. A plot is not a story. Story is not as sculpted as plot. Plot contains elements of causality and consequence; this brings up necessity and inevitability. 2. Character These are the agents that will enact your story. Aristotle divides characters into tragic and comic, flat and round. 3. Thought Something is proved or disproved through the writing of the play, through the exploration of the material. We often write to effect a change upon ourselves or upon others. 4. Diction Diction refers to the spoken rhythms of the language, according to Aristotle. Also, for a writer’s purposes, the storehouse of words themselves that a character has at their disposal to describe, to change, to think about their predicament. Since language is a distinguishing feature of the contemporary theatre (film and television can do images so much better) it is worthwhile for a playwright to pay attention to this chapter of the Poetics. 5. Music Again, Aristotle is thinking of production-specific effects, but again, this is not just a phenomenological situation. A play may be structured on musical lines: it can yearn toward a fugue-like structure. 6. Spectacle Props and scenic design are probably the most perishable elements of all, according to Aristotle. But, again, for our purposes, which are generative, props and scenery can be suggestive. If you consider, for instance, Beckett’s situational elements that entail writing from 266 The Handbook of Creative Writing a place onstage, such as the urns in Play or the mound of dirt in Happy Days, you see that these elements of place can help to dictate the action of the play. Aristotle presents a wealth of useful ways of thinking about what it is to write a play. For instance, he emphasises action over narration; and the pleasure of imitation or mimicry. These are still baseline elements of a play, even in the most experimental work. Even the work of Sarah Kane, Mac Wellman and Chuck Mee capitulate to these ways of realising the form. You can certainly proceed with the exercises in the rest of the chapter without reading the Poetics, but I suggest that you go get a copy of it if you don’t already own one. I recommend Francis Fergusson’s translation. And then, as an antidote and a corollary, read Bertolt Brecht’s ‘Short Organum for the Theatre’. Approaches and temperament There are various ways that playwrights approach writing a play: some work from subject (indeed, Aristotle says that ‘the only thing is to have a subject’). The subject of the play is the material from which the play is formed. In psychological terms, the subject is ‘one whose actions are studied’, which blends into about how we think about the character as carrying the subject into the body of the play. In musical terms, the subject is the principal theme or phrase of a melodic composition. In philosophical terms, the subject is perceived reality; and since the laws of human perception are our most valuable tools as playwrights, the modes of perceived reality are valuable to contemplate. These are useful distinctions, although at this point they may be a bit abstract-sounding. Some of your preparation for writing your play, for dwelling in the material and the ideas that you are exploring in the play itself, will be to steep yourself in what the play is ‘about’. Some of the play’s about-ness has to do with why you are writing the play: perhaps you want to expose the conditions of the working class; perhaps you want to exorcise a personal demon; perhaps you simply want to tell a good story. No matter. The vital thing is that you have the originating impulse. The writing exercises that follow are improvisatory, in the way that actors sometimes create movement and gesture in rehearsal or as warm ups. Preliminary exercises Exercise 1. Brainstorming An early exercise that I use with students who have a desire but no clear story yet is a series of generative exercises. The first of these is a writing warm up. Brainstorm a few ideas after writing down these words ‘I want to write a play in which . . .’ Anything can follow this jumping off point. The writer may want to see a certain image onstage, explore a complicated psychological situation, make people laugh, make people cry. This is a place to begin. It can help you to identify and start to narrow down what you want to work on. After you write down the words ‘I want to write a play in which . . . ’ start writing and keep writing for at least fifteen minutes. Some writers set an egg timer. Others listen to music. The point is to write in an uncensored fashion for fifteen minutes to write as much as you can generate. As Virginia Woolf writes: ‘what is essential is to write fast and not 267 Writing for the Stage break the mood’ (Woolf 1981: 282). Then re-read what you’ve written and isolate and choose three ideas that have bubbled up. Exercise 2. Origins Write about your first theatre experience, as either a participant or as an audience member. Again, write for fifteen minutes and generate as much material as you can. This exercise will put you back in touch with your earliest experiences in the theatre: these early emotions are ones that you should still be trying to graft onto your work, to recreate for yourself and for others. They are what initially got you hooked on theatre. After re-reading and looking over what you’ve written, you may be able to locate a subject that interests you. If so, if you are going to work from a subject, you are in good company. Many playwrights work from a desire to understand, to investigate, to search out a terrain. This is the playwright as researcher, as hunter and gatherer. This has to do with channelling your obsessions and realms of interest into your work. This is the underneath of the play. A playwright such as Tom Stoppard writes from this methodology, these are plays of ‘ideas’. Not that every play doesn’t contain ideas, but Stoppard plays do so rather boldly. I am thinking of Arcadia, of The Invention of Love, of Jumpers. Caryl Churchill also has written from this category, plays such as Mad Forest and Top Girls take an area or topic (Romania, Victorian sexuality) and examine them from a theatrical stance. Exercise 3. Childhood map Samuel Beckett once said, about Dublin: ‘I have changed refuge so many times in the course of my route that I now cannot tell the difference between dens and ruins. I know only the city of my childhood’ (Beckett 1997: 61–2). This map exercise is one that I learned from one of my first teachers, the novelist John Irsfeld. 1. Draw a map of a place that you lived in your childhood. Include everything that you can remember about this place on this map. It can be a neighbourhood map, of the locale that you frequented as a child. If you moved around a lot, as I did, choose one particularly resonant place that you lived. 2. Circle places where events happened: describe these events in one or two sentences. 3. Pick one event from your childhood map and write it down; describe it in detail. Use all of your senses in describing this event. Now that you have a handle on the event, take the event and make it either a setting or part of a scene between two characters, A and B. This scene may be the seed of a longer play, or a character study. The Irish poet Seamus Heaney has said ‘I began as a poet when my roots were crossed with my reading’ (Covington 1996) and this exercise takes the playwright’s earliest memories and dislocations and brings them to the forefront of the writing. Reading list Plays to look at in relation to this writing exercise: Barry, Lynda (1998), The Good Times are Killing Me, New York: Samuel French. 268 The Handbook of Creative Writing Bowles, Jane (1954), At the Summer House, New York: Random House. Friel, Brian (1998), Dancing at Lughnasa, New York: Dramatists Play Service. Kron, Lisa (2005), Well, New York: Theatre Communications Group. McCullers, Carson (1993), The Heart is a Lonely Hunter, New York: Modern Library. Rapp, Adam (2002), Nocturne, London: Faber and Faber. Vogel, Paula (1999), How I Learned to Drive, New York: Dramatists Play Service. Williams, Tennessee (1998), The Glass Menagerie, New York: Dramatists Play Service. Exercise 4. Images 1. Collect twenty images. These may come from anywhere: they may be from the newspaper, from magazines, from postcards. Cut them out into manageable sizes and shapes. 2. Look at your twenty pictures; look with an open mind for at least five minutes. 3. Look for some potential relationship among ten of these images. 4. Arrange those ten in some order. Take about five minutes to do this. 5. Write for fifteen minutes about what potential linkage there could be among them. 6. Write three to five lines of text to accompany the images. 7. Now take your pile of discarded images. Do the same thing with this pile of images. Look at your ten pictures; look with an open mind for at least five minutes. Look for some potential relationship between these images. Arrange them in some order. Take about five minutes to do this. Write for fifteen minutes about what potential linkage there could be among them. Write three to five lines of text to accompany the images. 8. Choose one of these scenarios to expand into a scene. Reading list Aristotle (1961) ‘Spectacle’ in Poetics, trans., S.H. Butcher, New York: Hilland Wang. Artaud, Antonin (1966), The Theatre and Its Double, New York: Grove Press. Brook, Peter (1995), The Empty Space: A Book About the Theatre: Deadly, Holy, Rough, Immediate, London: Touchstone Press. Iizuka, Naomi (2003), 36 Views, New York: Overlook Theatre Press. Pirandello, Luigi (1987), The Man with the Flower in his Mouth, in Collected Plays, New York: Riverrun Press. Vogel, Paula (1992), The Baltimore Waltz, New York: Dramatists Play Service. Exercise 5. Writing from character 1. Write down on a piece of paper a character that you are drawn to: in literature, mythology, film or public life. In one or two sentences describe why you are drawn to this particular character. 2. Now write down a character from your life, someone who intrigues you on the level of behaviour or appearance. This can be a stranger, someone you see in line at the kiosk, a favourite aunt, whomever. Someone who strikes you, although you aren’t sure why. 3. Write two five-page scenes that includes these characters, both the characters from category one and from category two. 269 Writing for the Stage Reading list Aristotle, ‘Character and Character Types’ in Poetics, trans. S. H. Butcher, New York: Hill and Wang. Brecht, Bertolt (1991), Galileo, trans, Eric Bentley, New York: Grove Press. Churchill, Caryl (1991), Top Girls, London: Methuen. Greenberg, Richard (2003), The Dazzle and Everett Beekin, New York: Faber and Faber. Guare, John (2003), A Few Stout Individuals, New York: Grove/Atlantic Press. Kushner, Tony (1993), Angels in America, Theatre Communications Group. Olnek, Madeleine, Wild Nights With Emily, unpublished. Parks, Suzan Lori (2002), Topdog/Underdog, New York: Theatre Communications Group. Stoppard, Tom (1994), Jumpers, New York: Grove Press. Exercise 6. Writing from place Quidditas as Aquinas called it, is the ability, the desire to write from a landscape. Onstage this will manifest itself as a setting, and this is a vital place to begin. The setting often dictates what can happen, what kind of language can be used. The limitations are also the potential freedoms. ‘To know who you are, you have to have a place to come from’ Carson McCullers says (quoted in Heaney 1981: 135), and so a place also conjures up a way of speaking, a way of saying. Write a treatment or précis, a prose description of an event that must take place in one setting. It can be a bar, a bus station, a coffee shop. But the characters must remain in that place. As research you may want to do a transcription exercise, in which you go to the place that you are using as a setting and you record the activities and language that you overhear as closely as possible. Reading list Albee, Edward (1998), The Zoo Story and The Death of Bessie Smith, New York: Dramatists Play Service. Aristotle (1961), ‘The Unities’ in Poetics, trans. S. H. Butcher, New York: Hill and Wang. Baraka, Amiri (1971), Dutchman and the Slave, New York: Harper Perennial. Fugard, Athol (1996), Valley Song, New York: Theatre Communications Group. Gorky, Maxim (2000), The Lower Depths, New York: Dover Thrift. Stein, Gertrude (1995), ‘Plays’ in Last Operas and Plays, Johns Hopkins University Press. Valdez, Luis (1992), Zoot Suit and Other Plays, Arte Publico Press. Exercise 7. Writing a playable scene This exercise was learned from Madeleine Olnek, and owes its genesis to her own particular brilliance as well as her acting work with David Mamet. It encompasses all of the other exercises, and it also gets to the animating principle of all actable (in psychological terms) dramatic writing: it gets sub-text, action and conflict into a scene. 1. Take a piece of paper and tear it into three sections. Write one place on each slip of paper. Examples of places are: a high-rise apartment, a coffee shop, a swimming pool, etc. 2. Take a piece of paper and tear it into three sections. Write one relationship on each slip of paper. Examples of relationships are: mother–daughter, cop–perpetrator, lover– 270 The Handbook of Creative Writing ex-lover, etc. (By relationship what is meant essentially is: what two people mean to each other.) 3. Take a piece of paper and tear it into three sections. Write an object on each slip of paper. Examples of objects are: a bottle of expensive shampoo, a tube of lipstick, a dead seagull, etc. 4. Take a piece of paper and tear it into three sections. Write an action on each slip of paper. Examples of actions are usually written with an infinitive verb and describe an effect that one person wants to create in another. Examples of actions are: to put someone in their place; to open someone’s eyes to the truth; to beg someone for forgiveness, etc. Now take all of your slips of paper, fold them in half and sort them into piles for each of the categories: Relationships, Objects, Places, Actions. You will be choosing slips of paper blindly, or randomly, from the piles, so it’s important to fold them up. Writing Round 1 Take one slip from the relationship pile and one slip from the place pile. Write a scene with these characters in this place. Round 2 Take one slip from the relationship pile and one slip from the action pile. Write a scene with these characters playing this action. NB only one character plays the action. Round 3 Take one slip from the relationship pile, one from the place pile and one from the action pile. Write a scene incorporating all of these elements. Round 4 Take one slip from all of the piles: the relationship pile, from the place pile, from the action pile, the object pile. Write a scene incorporating all of these elements. This exercise can be repeated indefinitely. It can also be done extremely successfully with students, or in a group of writers. Madeleine Olnek and I used to write scenes using this method, and then reading the scenes that we had just written aloud to each other. What is most vital about this exercise, what is solid gold about it, is that it shows you how a scene operates; how place can dictate an action; and how the animating factor of action is at the heart of writing playable text. Reading list Beckett, Samuel (1954), Waiting for Godot: A Tragicomedy in Two Acts, New York: Grove Press. Beckett, Samuel (1979), ‘Play’ in Collected Shorter Plays, New York: Grove Press. Bond, Edward (2000), Saved, London: Methuen Modern Plays. Chekhov, Anton (1989), Uncle Vanya, New York: Grove Press. Churchill, Caryl (1994), The Skriker, New York: Theatre Communications Group. Churchill, Caryl (1997), Blue Heart, New York: Theatre Communications Group. Greenberg, Richard (2004), Take Me Out, New York: Dramatists Play Service. Lorca, Federico Garcia (1997), Blood Wedding, London: Faber and Faber. Miller, Arthur (2003), The Crucible, New York: Penguin. 271 Writing for the Stage Nagy, Phyllis (1995), Butterfly Kiss, London: Consortium Books. Pinter, Harold (1979) Betrayal, New York: Grove Press. Wallace, Naomi (2000), The Trestle at Pope Lick Creek, New York: Broadway Play Publishing Services. Wellman, Mac (1994), ‘The Hyacinth Macaw’ in Two Plays: A Murder of Crows and the Hyacinth Macaw, Los Angeles: Sun and Moon Press. Wertenbaker, Timberlake (1998), Our Country’s Good, London: Dramatists Pub. Co. Structure As you continue to write plays, you will become more and more interested in the overall heft and structure of the play. As Samuel Beckett says: I am interested in the shape of ideas even if I do not believe them. There is a wonderful sentence in Augustine. I wish I could remember the Latin – it is even finer in Latin than in English. ‘Do not despair: one of the thieves was saved. Do not presume: one of the thieves was damned’. That sentence has a wonderful shape. It is the shape that matters. (Schneider 1967: 34) Keeping going The limitations of the stage are also the places where the stage is unique and transcendent: exploring these boundaries is what writing plays is about. You can’t explore them alone, though. There are no Emily Dickinsons in the realm of the theatre. You must work with actors, directors, designers and an audience. That is the necessary next step. You can look at The Dramatist’s Sourcebook, or various other handbooks about how to get your play produced: the most important thing, though, is to find a theatre or a group of actors that you are simpatico with, and to find an artistic home. These homes can be found anywhere, not just in metropolitan centres: indeed, grass roots theatre activity is the future of innovative writing in the US, where I am based. There are vital theatre scenes happening in San Diego, California; Providence, Rhode Island; Austin, Texas, to name a few burgeoning theatre cities where cutting-edge work thrives. The advent of online publishing forums such as playscripts.com makes the baptism-by-fire of Broadway and the West End and the canonising powers of the Critics less of a part of what it is to be a produced playwright. There is more and more room for the idiosyncratic and the revolutionary voice. Indeed, the theatre is becoming more and more the antidote to what Brecht termed the ‘bourgeois narcotics factory’ of mass cultural entertainment. This chapter is meant as an introduction to writing and a smorgasbord of exercises that have proved useful over my years of teaching and writing. The making of plays is a broad church, and there are practitioners whose work is informative and inspiring, but who are less text-based, and so less useful for our purposes in generating texts for the stage. But part of writing is becoming acquainted with your own temperament as a writer. And so the work of the Wooster Group or of Cricot 2 may be what inspires you: the thing is to seek out your ‘tribe’ and as Emerson says, to be open to collaboration, since ‘thought makes everything fit for use’ (Emerson 1844). References Aristotle (1961), Poetics, trans., S. H. Butcher, New York: Hill and Wang. Beckett, Samuel (1961), Happy Days, New York: Grove Press. 272 The Handbook of Creative Writing Beckett, Samuel (1984), ‘Play’ in The Collected Shorter Plays, New York: Grove Press. Beckett, Samuel (1997), ‘The Calmative’ in Samuel Beckett: The Complete Short Prose, 1929–1989, Grove Press. Brecht, Bertolt (1964), ‘Short Organum for the Theatre’ in Brecht on Theatre: The Development of an Aesthetic, trans. John Willett, New York: Hill and Wang. Bruder, Melissa, and Lee M. Cohn, Madeleine Olnel et al. (1986), A Practical Handbook for the Actor, New York: Vintage Press. Chuchill, Caryl (1990), Mad Forest, New York: Theatre Communications Group. Chuchill, Caryl (2001), Top Girls, London: Methuen. Covington, Richard (1996), ‘A scruffy, fighting place’, Salon, www.salon.com/weekly/heaney2.html, 29 April, 1996. Emerson, Ralph Waldo (1844), ‘The Poet’ in Essays, 2nd series, John Chapman. Source: Literature Online. Heaney, Seamus (1981), ‘The Sense of Place’, in Preoccupations: Selected Prose, 1968–1978, New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux. Schneider, Alan (1967), ‘Waiting for Beckett’ in Beckett at 60: A Festschrift, London: Calder and Boyars. Stoppard, Tom (1994), Jumpers, New York: Grove Press. Stoppard, Tom (1994), Arcadia, London: Faber and Faber. Stoppard, Tom (1997), The Invention of Love, London: Faber and Faber. The Dramatists Sourcebook (2006), 24th edn, New York: Theatre Communications Group. Woolf, Virginia, and Anne Oliver Bell (1981), Diary of Virginia Woolf, vol. 3: 1925–1930, ‘Sunday, 12 January 1930’, Harvest/HBJ Book. 25 Writing for Radio Mike Harris Radio drama is a hybrid. Like theatre, words are crucial. Like film, scenes can cut rapidly from any place or time to another. Like prose fiction, we consume the product alone, hearing, ‘with our minds’, completing the physical images of people and places in our imagination from the merest suggestions. Radio plays that sound like theatre generally confine themselves to a few locations and try to tell the story entirely in dialogue. But sets, costumes and facial expressions are of course not visible on radio and non-verbal sub-text correspondingly hard to do. As a result the dialogue has more information to deal with. If it doesn’t carry this extra burden lightly, the mike will pick it up and draw attention to every plodding line. So, it’s best to detect the problems in the script before that happens. Here’s a case in point from At the Gellert by Gillian Reeve: (We are listening to rock music on a Walkman) old woman Karen, can I trouble you to lay the table? karen (Walkman stops) Sorry, course. [. . .] (Pots being cleared under) So when did you come here to England? old woman After the revolution I found I had no reason to stay, my parents were dead, Andrash was taken away, our houses had been confiscated, my job was to inculcate my pupils with the communist view of history. karen I’d love to be in a revolution, it must be so exciting. old woman It is an excitement I was happy to leave behind. Although you could say that Hungary has been in revolution ever since. It is in a big one now with capitalism taking over from communism. What shall I find when I go back next month? So much will have changed. karen You’re going back next month? old woman Oh yes. I told your mother when I came to look after your grandmother. karen Eastern Europe sounds so grim and depressing. old woman Actually Hungary is in central Europe. The lack of sub-text and dramatically significant in-scene activity, the weight of undramatised back story on the dialogue, and the failure to exploit potential sources of conflict (‘Karen, can I trouble you to lay the table?’ ‘Sorry, course’) turn the scene into a 274 The Handbook of Creative Writing ponderous lesson in Hungarian history and geography (‘Actually Hungary is in central Europe’). There are theatrical radio plays in which the quality of the writing triumphs over the essential perversity of choosing conventions that emphasise the limitations of a form more than its possibilities. Compare the opening scene of Jill Hyem’s almost perfectly constructed psycho-chiller Remember Me: (A music box plays an unsettling tune) nancy (Approaching) Mrs Weedon, Mrs Weedon (door) thelma (With us) yes? nancy There’s someone on the phone, long distance, wants to know if you’ve got a double room for the coming week. thelma Well you know we haven’t – we’re booked solid over the Easter holidays. nancy Thought I’d better check, only they said they were acquainted with you. thelma Oh. What was the name? nancy I think he said Sutton. (Music box lid slams shut. Music stops) Would that be right? thelma Yes, Nancy, yes, that’s right, good girl. Leave it to me. I’ll deal with it. In which far less is said, to far greater, and appropriately ominous, effect. On the whole, though, radio dramas that exploit its similarities to screen drama are a more interesting technical proposition. Here’s a whole scene from Ken Blakeson’s army wives drama Excess Baggage: (Interior quarters) denny Three Bedrooms, Sarge? sergeant Yes, three bedrooms . . . denny But I put in for two . . . sergeant Well you got three, didn’t you! Three beds, one bath, one reception, one dining, one hall and one shithouse . . . you! The mike then cuts like a camera from parade ground, to bedroom, to pub, and back, rapidly interweaving the stories of several army families. This ‘cinematic’ approach need not be confined to gritty realism. In The Falklands Play Ian Curteis inter-cuts seamlessly between Whitehall, Washington, Buenes Aires, mid-Atlantic plane flights and half a dozen other locations, to tell the political story of that war as a gripping drama-doc. The novel and short story are both print-based, non-performance forms but radio drama’s most distinctive output has more in common with them than either stage or screen. This is because voices on radio transfer directly from the studio mike to the listener’s mind without the distraction of little people emoting in boxes, or actors gurning and gesticulating for the benefit of the back circle. As a result radio drama is at least as intimate as prose fiction and so direct address of all kinds can be especially effective. Michael Butt uses the most apparently simple form of it in A Fire in the West. A mother, father, sister and former boyfriend talk directly to mike as each tries to understand why Cirea burnt herself to death. The style is so intimate and the dialogue so ‘real’ that we wonder if we’re not listening to a documentary. Then, as the testimonies inter-cut and con- Writing for Radio 275 flict, we slowly realise that this is an artfully constructed drama about the impossibility of ultimately understanding anyone. The technique is similar to a novelist using several narrative voices, but the impact is specifically radio. It brings the emotions and evasions of the characters right inside our heads. It’s not surprising therefore, that radio dramatists often allow their protagonists to address the listener directly with their thoughts. One of the earliest and best examples of this is Tyrone Guthrie’s Matrimonial News. Florence, a thirty-something shop-girl who fears that she’s ‘on the shelf’ is waiting for a desperate blind date in a café. And that’s it. The rest is psychological. Guthrie does radio stream-of-consciousness: florence [. . .] Ten years younger that would make me twenty two – ten years younger that would make me tootaloo– twenty two to two tattoos at Tooting. I don’t feel a bit different– Not a bit– Characters appear and disappear in her thoughts in short, sometimes only one-line, montage scenes that summarise neatly great swathes of monotonous time: man (Very quiet and very near) Then you don’t have any say in the management of the business? florence I hate the business. (Shop bell) customer Good morning. florence Good morning. (Shop bell) I hate the business. Giles Cooper’s comic tour de force Under the Loofah Tree uses a similar approach, dramatising the rich fantasy life of Ted as he takes a long luxurious soak in the bath, harassed by his spouse, child and an encyclopaedia salesman. Gerry Jones puts it to more disturbing service in the Kafkaesque Time After Time, in which a character eventually decides that he’s ‘all alone talking to myself in the madhouse’. Most radio dramas inter-cut between direct address and dialogue, so a lot of the art is deciding when, how and why to do that. But it should never be forgotten that radio drama is drama. So, whether you’re telling the story using dialogue or direct address you’re always doing it through action and conflict (see ‘Introduction to Scriptwriting’ for a more detailed discussion of the practicalities of this). In Matrimonial News, Florence’s restless personified thoughts contradict each other constantly: alice Why you look a picture in that blue! florence Oh dear, I wonder if I ought to . . . I don’t know what mother’d say. mother What’s that flo? florence Nothing mother. mother Oh yes it is – you needn’t try to have me on. florence Go away. mother You needn’t try to keep me out of your thoughts, you can’t you know. florence Can. 276 The Handbook of Creative Writing When the direct address is continuous, be it in the form of un-personified thoughts or any other kind of ‘monologue’, it needs to conflict within itself – expressing doubts, contradictions and so forth etc – and/or to be in conflict with the dialogue on either side. Here’s Stoppard doing both simultaneously, in ‘M’ is for Moon Among Other Things. (Alfred is reading the paper) constance (Thinks) [. . .] Thirty days hath April, June, is it? Wait a minute, the Friday before last was the twenty-seventh . . . alfred (Thinks) ‘I found her to be a smooth-as-silk beauty with the classic lines of thrust of . . .’ constance Alfred, is it the fifth or the sixth? alfred Mmmm? (Thinks) ‘surging to sixty mph in nine seconds . . . ’ constance Fifth? alfred Fifth what? constance What’s today? alfred Sunday . . . (Thinks) ‘. . . the handbrake a touch stiff . . . ’ Direct address never works when it’s used simply because the writer can’t work out how to convey information dramatically. Here’s a bad lapse by Louis MacNeice in Persons from Porlock (our protagonist is pot-holing): hank (Calling) Peter, you OK? peter (Calling) I’m OK. How are you? hank (Calling) Fine. (to self) I’m not though. Talk about back to the womb! Difference is the womb was soft. Nowhere else in the script are we given access to thoughts so their sudden arrival here simply draws attention to the fact that they’re being used to clumsily dump information on us. The one exception to this rule is when the words of direct address are so vividly written that the listener does not care whether they’re conflicted or not. Norman Corwin was the grand master of American radio drama in its heyday, and his beautiful Daybreak is narrated by a pilot following dawn around the world. Here’s how it starts: pilot A day grows older only when you stand and watch it coming at you. Otherwise it is continuous. If you could keep a half degree ahead of sun-up on the world’s horizons, you’d see new light always breaking on some slope of ocean or some patch of land. A morning can be paced by trailing light. This we shall do . . . So if you think you’re that good, you can always try it. But it’s over-used by bad dramatists who’d prefer to be writing prose fiction or poetry, and it shows. Direct address works best of all within a framing device that complements the soundonly nature of the medium. Anthony Minghella employs an answer machine at the start of Cigarettes and Chocolate. Its messages deftly establish six different characters and kick off the story by making us wonder why Gail is not answering. A good part of the rest of the play consists of these people one by one visiting Gail to find out why she has, literally, stopped talking. Gail does not reply to them, so they deliver self-revelatory monologues straight to the mike, putting the listener in the position of the silent protagonist. In If Writing for Radio 277 You’re Glad I’ll Be Frank Tom Stoppard imagines that the telephone speaking clock is not a recording but a constantly live telephone ‘broadcast’ given by Gladys, whose estranged husband Frank hears it and tries to rescue her. Tape recorders, call-centres, short-wave radio, letters, mobile phones, diaries, taxi-cab calls, intercoms, all-night radio call-ins, and many other such devices, all isolate or evoke the human voice, and provide appropriate contexts for inventive radio drama. There’s another possibility in radio drama worth mentioning, which is to experiment and self-consciously play with the form itself. Here’s Beckett in All That Fall: mrs rooney All is still. No living soul in sight. There is no one to ask. The world is feeding. The wind – (brief wind)– scarcely stirs the leaves and the birds – (brief chirp)– are tired singing. The cows – (brief moo) – and sheep – (brief baa) – ruminate in silence. The dogs – (brief bark) – are hushed and the hens – (brief cackle) – sprawl torpid in the dust. We are alone. There is no one to ask. Beckett is a dark comedian who never loses sight of character, conflict and popular art forms. The above clearly owes much to Spike Milligan’s use of radio in The Goon Show. Experimentation in German radio drama (Horspiel) is rather different. Peter Handke’s Radio Play (No. 1) abandons characterisation, consistent narrative and disassociates sound from words to produce an effect analogous to a Magritte painting: (A screech owl cries. A car tries vainly to start) […] interrogator a Why do you speak of the cat’s naked ear? interrogated Do you sell peach preserves? interrogator a Why do you clap your hands in an empty room? interrogated What do you mean by that? (The tiger hisses. A brook splashes. Water gurgles. Whistle) His later work ‘dispenses with language altogether to become a play of pure sound’ (Handke 1991: 194) prompting the observation that a radio play that dispenses with narrative, character and language in favour of ‘pure sound’ isn’t a play at all but either aural performance art or a form of modern programme music, for which one is more liable to receive an arts council subsidy than a Radio 4 commission. It is of course one thing to describe what can and can’t be done in general with radio drama. It’s quite another to do it in detail. Here are some tips. • Close your eyes and listen for a minute. Try and remember what you heard. If you’re running a group ask everyone in turn. Differentiate between sound, words and music (if there were all three). That’s radio drama. If you don’t hear it, it’s not there. • Audiences can’t see actors and locations in radio drama, so it’s absolutely essential to answer three questions within a few lines of the start of nearly every scene: Where are we? Who’s there? What’s going on? This is how it’s done: • Characters need to name each other and keep doing so, without the audience noticing. Characters in a scene who don’t speak and aren’t referred to for any length of time simply ‘disappear’. • Music can give a general cultural signal at the start of a whole play or a new scene. Vaughan Williams’ ‘Lark Ascending’ might suggest a yearning English summer. ‘White 278 The Handbook of Creative Writing Riot’ by The Clash is probably anticipating violent urban realism. Music can also help create atmosphere; adding pace and tension within a scene (as in bring up driving rhythm) or a mood (run sad theme under). It can also be used ironically. Go from, ‘White Riot’ to a cricket match on a village green and the listener will expect ructions in paradise. • Sound effects pin things down more. If it’s church bells after ‘Lark Ascending’, not only is it England in summer but we’re in a village. Follow ‘White Riot’ by lots of spitting, and it’s almost certainly a punk gig in 1977. Some music and sound effects can be instantly evocative but most aren’t. For example, cicadas always mean ‘hot and abroad’ but rain on radio is just as likely to sound like someone rustling through long grass. Does a burst of Tchaikovsky mean we’re in Russia, or just in a bit of an emotional state? And no combination of music and sound effects is going to tell you, ‘Ibiza, Sunday Afternoon, 2005, Chantelle Smith applying sun-block to burnt skin’. For a precise picture in the listener’s imagination, you need words. You almost always need words, actually. For example, the very first scene of Excess Baggage: (We are outside) corporal (Shouts) Squad will fix bayonets. (Pauses) Fix bayonets! (Sound effects: ten men fix bayonets) Squad . . . Squad shun! An exterior acoustic would have given us ‘outside’ but it’s the dialogue that tells us a squad is being drilled. The sound of fixing bayonets merely confirms it. Not all dramatic situations allow basic visual information to come out so unobtrusively. The classic bad radio line, ‘put down the gun that you are pointing at me’, illustrates the problem. Here’s Norman Corwin solving it in Radio Primer: (Desk drawer opening; something heavy being removed) jb What are you doing? rm What does it look like? jb Like suicide. But don’t be hasty (shot). The word ‘gun’ is never said. We hear a drawer being opened and the clunk of something heavy. JB’s question, and the actor’s delivery would suggest that something’s wrong. The line, ‘like suicide, but don’t be hasty’ does most of the rest and the shot clinches it. But most important of all, the information was transmitted within dramatic conflict, which is what the audience are paying attention to, not the slick technique. Here’s Harold Pinter smuggling visual data inside a conflict of sensibilities in A Slight Ache: flora Have you noticed the honeysuckle this morning? edward The what? flora The honeysuckle. edward Honeysuckle? Where? flora By the back gate, Edward. edward Is that honeysuckle? I thought it was . . . convolvulus or something. But it’s not just a question of Who, Where, and What at the start of each scene. We need to know where the characters are in physical relation to each other throughout the play. This is called ‘perspectives’ and it might seem complicated, but it’s just about the microphone. Writing for Radio 279 The mike in radio drama is like the camera in film. It does long shots, medium shots, close-ups, and tracking. Several actors two-three feet away from the mike are having a conversation or an argument. Two actors closer to it are talking privately. Two actors very close up are probably in bed, and an actor right on the mike is generally voicing thoughts. An actor coming into a location is approaching a mike. An actor leaving a location is going from the mike. When we go with an actor, the mike stays close to him whilst he simulates movement by walking on the spot and the other actors literally move away from it. And that’s it. There’s no absolutely fixed way of writing this but the following vocabulary is OK: approaching, going, we go with, off a bit, right off, close, very close. Or you can simply write it out as we would hear it: in her head, or thinking, or, leaving the room or, entering the room, etc. Norman Corwin again, doing movement and perspective with great precision in Appointment: (Cell door clangs shut; two pairs of footsteps on stone floor) vincent (Yelling further and further off mike as Peter and the guard walk down the corridor) They can’t do this to you! Peter! (Rattling of steel door) God in heaven, let me out of here! . . . Peter. turnkey What’s the matter with that guy? (Steps come to a stop). In there. (Wooden door. When it shuts, Vincent’s uproar cuts off) The footsteps are appropriate here because they would be audible in a jail acoustic and in any case serve a dramatic purpose in the scene. Inexperienced radio writers over-use footsteps to suggest movement (footsteps on carpets?) but this is generally done more effectively by characters approaching or going and by them speaking as they do so. Val Gielgud, Head of BBC Radio Drama from 1929 to 1963, suggests, rightly, that sound effects should normally be used sparingly and only for a dramatic purpose because their ‘significance . . . decreases in proportion to the amount of their use’ (Gielgud 1957: 89). Battle and action scenes can be confusing because, ‘one sound effect unaided by sight is liable to be horribly like another’ (Gielgud 1948: 51). The Rule is always, put it in dialogue as well. And, in general, keep things simple, to begin with at least. Small casts (two or three) are easier to deal with than big ones (seven is liable to be your budget maximum anyway). Each character should be ‘aurally distinguishable on immediate hearing’ (Gielgud 1948: 22). Differing genders, ages, and accents are obviously good for this and should be specified. The only other technical vocabulary worth using in radio scripts occurs at the end of scenes. They can cut, fade out, fade in, fade to black, and cross-fade, just like a film and with the same dramatic effects. It’s more acceptable in radio than theatre to give directions to actors in the script (‘angrily’, ‘long suffering’, etc.) because rehearsal time is shorter and it can be helpful if there is ambiguity in the line and a particular interpretation is essential to the plot. Otherwise don’t. Actors know what they’re doing. Let each member of a group choose one from several short and deliberately difficult radio scenarios and then try and write it in one half-page scene. Here’s a couple from my list, but they’re easy to make up: 1. Rachel, a pushy young journalist from a working class background, is being rowed down the river Nile at night by an Egyptian peasant who happens to be mute. Also in the boat is Ali, assistant chief of the Cairo police, who is risking his life to show her the secret installation. He also fancies her. 280 The Handbook of Creative Writing 2. A child ages from three to the verge of death in old age. The subject has several different careers and lives in more than one country. You only have five lines of dialogue for the subject but can have in addition one line each for up to five other characters. Read the results and discuss what was easy, what was hard, and why. Selling the play Once the play is written, it has to be sold. In the UK, Canada, and Australia the national public service broadcasters are the main (effectively the only) significant national market. In the UK BBC Radio 4 and Radio 3 produce between them about 500 plays a year, and most of them are original, which is possibly more than anyone else in the world, in any medium. Therefore you’ve got a much better chance of selling a new play here to radio than to stage or screen. There’s no point in writing a script longer than sixty minutes (about fifty to fifty-five pages, depending) because, outside Radio 3 (which tends to use wellestablished writers) there’s no spot for it. Because there are more afternoon plays than any other, you’ve got a statistically better chance of selling one, so start at forty-five minutes (forty-ish pages). You can send your script to any in-house producer at a BBC production centre (London, Bristol, Manchester, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Belfast). There’s usually one with a special brief to develop new writers, or you can send it to specific new-writing initiatives that pop up every so often. Since ten per cent of radio drama is now ‘outsourced’ you can send it to independent producers as well. They can be hungrier for new material than the officials but they also have a statistically smaller chance of selling it. Go to The Radio 4 Drama website for addresses, contacts and detailed information about formatting and programme content. Make sure the script is formatted correctly and don’t put clip art on the front page unless you want them to think you’re barking. Then don’t hold your breath. There’s lots of you and not many of them. If the producer hasn’t replied in, say, three months, a polite reminder is in order. In six, send another reminder, and after that try another producer (my record is two years waiting for an outline to be read, and I was an established radio writer by then). It’s worth persisting. They pay, and the audience for an afternoon play in the UK can be as many as a million people (Radio 4 2005: 20). In Canada information on writing for the CBC’s Sunday showcase and Monday Night Playhouse (and contacts for specific producers) can be obtained from www.cbc.ca/showcase/writersguide.html. In Australia the only national producer of radio plays is ABC Radio National, www.abc.net.au/rn/ Acknowledgements Radio drama is alive and kicking but almost no recordings are commercially available. The failure of the BBC to exploit either its current output or its vast back catalogue of great radio plays is, in the age of the audio book, truly remarkable, and a significant cultural loss to the nation. So if you’re thinking of writing a radio play you need to listen to lots of them live, or catch up on the previous weeks output on the BBC website. Podcasts and online broadcasting now give anyone with a computer and the internet access to radio plays from all over the world. Most of the published scripts listed here are out of print but can be obtained relatively easily from online second-hand sites such as abebooks.co.uk. The very best source of information on British radio drama and writers is not the BBC but the non-profit making, 281 Writing for Radio wholly unofficial ‘Diversity’ website http://web.ukonline.co.uk/suttonelms/ which I cannot recommend highly enough and to whose webmaster, Nigel Deacon, I am very much in debt for information, the loan of his personal recordings, and unstinting help and assistance. References Beckett, Samuel, All That Fall (TX Third Programme, 13 January 1957), All That Fall, London: Faber (1978). Blakeson, Ken, Excess Baggage (TX Radio 4, 22 February 1998), Best Radio Plays of 1988 (1999), London: Methuen/BBC Publications. Butt, Michael, A Fire in The West (TX Radio 4, 6 September 2003). Cooper, Giles, Under the Loofah Tree (TX BBC 3 August 1958), Giles Cooper: Six Plays for Radio (1966), London: BBC Publications. Corwin, Norman, Daybreak (TX Columbian Broadcasting Service, 22 June 1941); Radio Primer (TX CBS, 4 May, 1941); Appointment (TX CBS, 1 June 1941) in Thirteen by Corwin (1945), New York: Henry Holt. Curteis, Ian, The Falkland’s Play (TX BBC Radio 4, 6 April 1902). Gielgud, Val (1948), The Right Way to Radio Playwriting, London: Elliot. Gielgud, Val (1957), British Radio Drama 1922–56, London: George Harrap. Guthrie, Tyrone, Matrimonial News (TX BBC, 1930 approx.) in Squirrel’s Cage and Two Other Microphone Plays (1932), London: Cobden-Sanderson. Handke, Peter, Radio Play (No. 1) (TX 1968) in German Radio Plays (1991), eds, Frost and HerzfeldSander, New York: Continuum. Hyem, Jill, Remember Me (TX BBC Radio 4, 20 May, 1978). Jones, Gerry, Time After Time (TX BBC Radio 4, 30.05.79, 18.06.80, 25.04.84, 09.03.06). MacNeice, Louis, Persons from Porlock (TX Third Programme, 30 August 1963), in Persons from Porlock and Other Plays for Radio (1969), London: British Broadcasting Corporation. Minghella, Anthony, Cigarettes and Chocolate (TX Radio 4, 6 November 1988) in Best Radio Plays of 1988 (1999), London: Methuen/BBC Publications. Pinter, Harold, A Slight Ache, (TX BBC, 29 July 1959) in Plays 1 (1997), London: Faber. Radio 4 Commissioning Guidelines 2005 (sent to producers). Reeve, Gillian, At the Gellert (TX Radio 4, unknown). Stoppard, Tom, If You’re Glad I’ll Be Frank (TX BBC, 1966), M is for Moon (TX BBC, 1964), in Stoppard the Plays for Radio 1964–1983 (1990), London: Faber. 26 Writing for Television Stephen V. Duncan In the highly competitive industry of television programming, weekly series come and go. Most experts agree, whether drama or comedy, the primary reason a series fails is the lack of excellent writing. For this reason, high-quality TV writers are in constant demand. The Writers Guild of America1 suggests series executives assign several freelance scripts each season, however, the Members Basic Agreement doesn’t require this.2 Essentially, freelancers compete for assignments against writing staffs. Therefore, in order to join the ranks of those sought-after writers, you must demonstrate the knowledge and talent to write for television. To this end, this chapter presents concepts to help you begin the journey toward becoming a successful television writer. The television writing sample Your primary task is to mimic the series by entangling its existing cast of characters in conflicts within the bounds of an original story that befits the series creator’s week-to-week blueprint. Whether writing for a drama or comedy series, you must never breach this imperative. The vehicle to prove your abilities is the speculation script (spec). The spec is a writing sample used to attract professional agents and managers3 who assist writers in gaining employment. Your representative sends the spec to a series producer with the primary objective of setting up a ‘pitch’ meeting where you must present several original story ideas in order to land an assignment. Ironically, the specific show for which you’ve written a spec is generally the last one – if ever – your representative will approach. This is true because it’s nearly impossible to impress the Executive Producers4 who spend five days a week and entire seasons working on a series. Ideally, the writer-producers of series with a similar franchise should read your spec teleplay, for example, a cop show spec goes to other cop series. Of course, there are exceptions to this general practice. Regardless, those who read and judge the quality of a spec will do so against the series weekly formula. Television series ‘Hallmarks’ Become familiar with a series’ ‘Hallmarks’ – the style and use of storytelling devices – integral from week-to-week. For example, the popular CBS TV forensic investigation series 283 Writing for Television ‘CSI: Crime Scene Investigation’ (premiered in 2000) and its two spin-offs – ‘CSI: Miami’ and ‘CSI: New York’ – replaces expository dialogue with a distinctive visual device that illustrates for the audience what may or may not have happened at a crime scene through both the investigator’s and suspect’s points-of-view. In the HBO comedy ‘Sex in the City’ (1998–2004), voiceover from the main character drives each episode. Whether writing drama or comedy, you must be aware of each character’s moral values, speech pattern, and vocabulary. Be sensitive to the series Television Rating Code.5 It’s important to stay abreast of the nature of the relationships in the series since they are dynamic. The most prudent approach is if you materially alter the series established concept and/or character relationships in your spec, return it to status quo by ‘The End’. The ‘nuts and bolts’ of writing the spec Once you decide which series to write, the next step is to develop the episode. This section addresses the critical elements to master both in drama and in comedy. The one-hour drama The storyline premise for the one-hour drama Create an appropriate story premise (the underlying idea for a story). For established series, the obvious story premises have been generally considered, used, or discarded by producers, so strive to create unique storylines. Admittedly, this is difficult and pre-supposes that you must watch every single episode of a series. There are two solutions: utilise free internet websites such as www.tv.com6 to research story summaries of produced episodes and purchase and view each season’s DVD package. Many drama series employ an ‘ensemble cast’ and you may need to invent more than one storyline premise per episode, called ‘multiple storylines’. A concept called ‘The Area’ or ‘Arena’ which establishes each storyline’s central theme, is of primary importance to this task. The one-hour drama is an ideal form to explore subjects such as date rape or international art thief or serial killing or euthanasia or police corruption. Interweave the beliefs and values of the characters that regularly appear in the series – called the ‘series regulars’ – into the Area and invent the following elements: The Problem-predicament: What is the primary source of conflict? The Protagonist: Who is the storyline about? The Protagonist’s goal: What does the protagonist want to accomplish? The Antagonist: Who opposes the protagonist’s efforts? Writers can ‘service’ series regulars who do not have prominent roles in a major storyline by creating ‘Runners’; these are not storylines, per se, but the exploration of conflict in relationships and can also be used to spawn future storylines. Generally, a Runner will have only a few scenes over the course of an episode. Carefully study the series and analyse numerous episodes to see how the series utilises Runners, and then mimic it. The basic story for the one-hour drama Following existing character problems in established plots can quickly render a spec teleplay obsolete since producers can change them at anytime. The ‘“Bottle” Story Concept’ is a technique used by producers to curtail an episode’s budget or to attract a wider audience 284 The Handbook of Creative Writing during ratings periods called Sweeps.7 The series writers essentially ‘bottle up’ the characters in a small number of sets in one primary location. Use this concept to help you escape the grip of the dynamic nature of continuing plotlines. For example, after a big storm hits and knocks out the power and phone lines, trap the entire cast of a series in the basement of a building where personal dramas unfold at a heightened level of conflict. However, be careful. If you write the most obvious ideas for a Bottle Story, the likelihood of the series producers using that same idea is extremely possible. A Bottle Story should be, ideally, a ‘one time’ occurrence in the context of the series. The keys to writing an extraordinary spec Bottle Story are creativity, originality while faithfully duplicating the series Hallmarks. Story structure for the one-hour drama For advertising-based television networks, you must take into account commercial breaks. Over the 2004–5 Television Season, a typical one-hour episode ran forty-four minutes with each of the four acts unfolding in eleven minutes. However, in a spec teleplay, each act is written within thirteen to fifteen pages and its overall length falls between fifty-five to sixty pages. With the premiere of ‘Alias’ in 2001, the ABC Television network introduced the five-act structure in primetime, a structure which had previously only been utilised in firstrun syndication. The net effect is shorter commercial breaks with the same amount of programming. As of the 2005–6 television season, the four act structure continues in general use. For series on non-advertising based networks, such as HBO and Showtime, the pacing generally remains the same in terms of four acts since many of these series will eventually get syndicated on advertising based networks. The ‘Act Break’ is an important element of storytelling in television since it provides the audience with a reason to continue viewing – with or without commercial breaks – by providing the audience with a dramatic highpoint. Think of the last scene in each act as a ‘mini-climax’ that motivates each protagonist to do more about the problem in the next act. Each storyline uses an alphabet designation, that is, A-Story, B-Story, C-Story, etc. The fundamental story structure of a one-hour drama consists of Story ‘Beats’ (important developments in the plot). Here is the general format of a Beat Sheet, with Beats per Act for OneHour Drama: Beat Sheet Write one to three sentences for each beat: Act One A1-Teaser B1 C1 R1-1 A2 Act Two B2 C2 A3 B3 A4 285 Writing for Television Act Three A5 R1-2 B4 A6 R2-1 Act Four C3-Climax R2-2 B5-Climax A7 A8-Climax While the example illustrates five Beats per act, the number and order of your Beats will probably vary. However, this is more or less a typical quantity given the time constraints of television programming. From these Beats, you develop specific scenes whose number and lengths vary for each act depending on the storytelling style of the series. The dramatic goals of each act In Act One, the Teaser or Prologue is a part of the first act. Some dramatic series do not use Teasers but most do. The number of scenes in a Teaser varies. Series that use ‘continuing storylines’ often begin with a short segment containing ‘Previously on . . . ’ voice-over which features short clips from previous episodes intended to bring the audience upto-date; this is not a part of the Teaser and should not appear in your spec. The main purpose of the Teaser (or Prologue) is to ‘hook’ the audience into a storyline’s problempredicament. The Teaser is exceptionally dramatic and/or ends with a ‘cliff-hanger’ to motivate the audience to ask the question ‘What’s going to happen next?’ The Teaser usually presents only one major story Beat; in the case of a series that utilises multiple storylines, the first Beat in the ‘A-Story’ is presented. Some series that utilise the ‘continuing stories’ approach use longer Teasers to set up several storylines. Occasionally, series that utilise multiple storylines will open with a different Beat than the A-Story in order to stay fresh. Series producers sometimes break their own rules because they – not necessarily the audience – are bored with the series’ weekly formula (or its Sweeps). This shouldn’t distract you from the fact that it’s more important to mimic the weekly formula and write a ‘typical episode’. Introduce the problem-predicament to the protagonist. Generally, each storyline’s first Beat, at a minimum, appears in the first act. Runners do not strictly follow this rule, though each Runner should have conflict. End the act with a strong mini-climax, preferably in a cliffhanger. In Act Two, the protagonist complicates the problem-predicament by getting involved and, in fact, causes it to ‘get worse’. This Act Break is the most important one of all since it marks the half-hour point when programmes are starting on other networks. Use the cliffhanger device to motivate viewers to come back after the commercial break. Generally, this second mini-climax puts the protagonist in some kind of jeopardy or in a heightened emotional state because of having gotten involved with the problem. In Act Three, the problem-predicament intensifies for the protagonist because he or she tries to solve it prematurely and fails in some way. This conflict escalation, called the ‘reversal’, is a major setback to the protagonist’s efforts toward solving the problem in the 286 The Handbook of Creative Writing storyline. The act break, again, is important because this third mini-climax shows the protagonist defeated and at the lowest point in the story. Again, the cliffhanger technique is the most effective technique for sending the audience into the commercial break wanting to know the outcome of the storyline. Act Four. The protagonist(s) resolves the problem-predicament in a final confrontation with the antagonist, called the climax. The protagonist’s discovery of a ‘key thing’ to solving the problem or removing the predicament from the story sparks him or her to try to solve the problem regardless of possible negative consequences. The more risky the effort – what’s at stake if he or she fails – the more entertaining it will be for the audience. Each storyline should have its own climax in this final act. Be sensitive to the way a particular series typically ends its episodes. In fact, some series do not end every storyline with a happy conclusion. Finally, it bears repeating, you should be as creative and original as you can while mimicking the series for which you’re writing. Once you have a rough draft continue to watch new episodes of the series, as this will help unveil any weaknesses in your spec. After watching each new episode, pen notes directly onto the pages of your script, then execute a revision. Follow this process until you have a strong sample script that represents your talent and ability to write for the one-hour drama art form. The half-hour situation comedy There are some essential differences between the one-hour drama and the situation comedy (sitcom): • • • • programme length is one half hour story structure utilises two acts teleplay page format is more specialised for production the focus is on humour. In nearly every sitcom series, the same basic two underlining themes are repeatedly used: ‘We’re all in this together.’ ‘It’s OK to be yourself.’ When developing stories for a sitcom, it’s wise to keep it simple. Most situation comedies are about some form of family whether it’s domestic or, for example, the camaraderie of a group of girlfriends. This suggests that the series regular characters are metaphors for typical family roles such as father, wife, son, daughter – even the crazy uncle who lives in the basement. To create a story, exploit a predicament by putting the series regulars in situations that generate conflict in the ‘family’. The more ridiculous the conflict is for the story or for the characters, the more potential there is for humour. In the sitcom, the ‘Area’ would most likely embrace such moral themes as ‘faithfulness’ or ‘honesty’ or the ever-popular theme of ‘sex’. Sitcoms tend to stay away from serious themes such as murder and rape. Writing ‘funny’ When writing a sitcom ‘spec’, being funny is important and the humour should match the hallmarks of the series you are writing. If a series depends heavily on physical humour, then you must create physical humour. If a series depends on intellectual Writing for Television 287 humour generated from the characters, then that’s what you must mimic. The most essential skill a writer needs to learn is the art of writing comedic dialogue. The structure of funny dialogue uses the ‘theory of “threes”’. To illustrate, I’ve taken creative licence with a classic Mae West joke: The straight-line: You told me to come up and see you sometime . . . The punch line: Well, big boy, is that a gun in your pocket or are you just glad to see me. The follow-up or Topper: You’d better come in before that thing goes off. Physical comedy fits into the same construction. A look or reaction can be a straight-line, punch line, or topper. Alternatively, you can use a combination of dialogue and physical expression. Timing (where you place the humour) and rhythm (the length of the lines of dialogue) are also important. To write humour, you must first recognise why people laugh. The true essence of comedy ironically embraces conflict (pain) with which the audience can relate (truth). This merger is important since the audience laughs because they are familiar with a situation. Therefore, the art is to take out of context what the audience expects to create an unanticipated result. To put this technique into practice, utilise the concept of ‘The Area’. Start with something on which to mine humour. Most times, it’s a ‘situation’ (thus the nickname situation comedy). Let’s say characters have to attend a funeral, therefore the ‘Area’ is ‘a funeral’. A funeral is not funny in and of itself but there are ways to extract humour from the characters who attend a funeral. First, make a list of the normal or expected facets of a situation or activity, in this case, a funeral. Then use those as the basis of the humour. For example, mourners cry at funerals – have a character’s quiet sob grow into a gut-gripping laugh. Mourners view the reposing corpse – create humour from the way different personalities perceive the actual dead body in the casket, for example, a character might say: ‘He looks better dead then when he was alive’. Put the wrong banner on a funeral wreath: ‘Congratulations’ instead of ‘Rest in Peace’. The other component of this equation is to incorporate a character’s personality, which is essentially comprised of attitudes and values. On the long-running American sitcom Frasier (1993–2004), much of the humorous dialogue emanates from the erudite, snobby view of life of two brothers who practise psychology in different ways. Let’s say Frasier’s line of dialogue is ‘you’re not going to make one cent on that scheme’. To make this line more humorous – and in keeping with the character’s personality – he might say, ‘You’re not going to earn one Euro, Shekel or Botswana Pula on this ruse’. Deconstructing the line of dialogue, you see I used three different kinds of money – two of which sound funny. Some words do sound funnier. For example, it’s funnier for a waiter with a tray of finger snacks to break the tension of a serious moment at a cocktail party by innocently asking ramacki rather than hors d’oeuvre. In my example, to indicate a welltravelled character, I used money from around the world. Replacing the word ‘make’ with ‘earn’ and ‘scheme’ with ‘ruse’ better captures the sense of Frasier’s intellectual personality. Story and structure for the sitcom Start with an appropriate premise for the series you are writing. The half-hour comedy utilises simple story ideas. As I’ve already emphasised, focus on the drama of the story premise and use Area in order to create a foundation from which to evoke humour. 288 The Handbook of Creative Writing In terms of pacing, the sitcom teleplay uses two pages for each minute of screen time. Half-hour teleplays typically run between forty-five to fifty-five pages in length and much of the script is double-spaced to allow for production notes. That computes to an act running about twenty-five pages and twelve minutes. The page format is difficult to replicate in standard word processing computer software programs such as Microsoft Word®, so it’s strongly recommended you use commercially-available screenwriting software. The dramatic goals for each act Some sitcoms do not use the Teaser; those that do, use it to grab and draw-in viewers. Unlike the drama, the Teaser can have absolutely nothing to do with the ‘A-’ or ‘B-Story’. Sometimes, the Teaser sets a ‘Runner’ into motion. How to use the Teaser depends on the series. The length of a Teaser is, generally, less than two minutes; this computes to about four script pages or less. Above all, the Teaser should be funny. In Act One, each protagonist becomes aware of the problem-predicament and intensifies it by getting involved. Accomplish this by placing the series regulars into a succession of situations that relate to the storyline’s problem. The act break is often dramatic with a humorous spin, of course. On average, the length is twenty-five pages or twelve minutes. In Act Two, each protagonist tries to solve the problem-predicament only to make it worse. Again, use situations that relate to the protagonist’s attempts to solve the problem to draw out the humour. In many sitcoms, you can characterise these attempts as ‘schemes’. These efforts should backfire and create a ‘reversal’ in the story. In sitcom writing, this is commonly called the ‘the act two bump’. This bump (in the road) is usually an unexpected result or turn for each protagonist as well as for the audience. This event is what leads each protagonist to the climax or resolution of the problem-predicament. On average, the length is twenty-five pages or twelve minutes. Note the sitcom structure collapses Acts One and Two dramatic goals of the one-hour drama structure into the first act. Then, in Act Two, collapse Acts Three and Four’s dramatic goals. A short scene called the Tag or Epilogue ‘buttons up’ the story’s loose ends. In comedy, all the characters generally come back to where they started in the story. More often than not, the Tag punctuates the ‘We’re in this together’ and/or ‘Be yourself’ themes and are topped with a laugh or a poignant moment. Since the 1980s, few sitcoms utilise the Tag as a dramatic element in an episode. So study the series for which you are writing your spec sitcom. Other popular forms of television writing The MOW: Movie of the Week Television producers or studios generally acquire an idea and/or the rights to a story from individuals or publishers who own them. Rarely do producers purchase a spec movie teleplay. Therefore, if you own the story rights, it’s wiser to write a ‘treatment’; this is a synopsis of the story that is eight to ten double-spaced pages organised in a seven-act structure. Set up the story and its premise in the first page or two, and then write one page per act to create this ‘sales tool’. A completed teleplay would have the first act at twenty-five pages with Acts Two through Seven at fourteen pages each. These are, of course, averages. As series TV, indi- 289 Writing for Television cate act breaks in the script’s page format. However, non-advertising based television networks do not use the seven-act structure and are written like feature films. Since audiences primarily watch TV for the characters, producers and networks prefer movies with strong social themes and universal appeal. MOW stories tend to be exceptionally emotional. Like series television, stories about families appeal to buyers and tales about the average woman succeeding against overwhelming obstacles are most popular. There’s a short list of actors whose popularity draws big ratings.8 You have a better chance of selling a TV movie if one of these actors is perfect casting for the lead role. The daytime drama series Commonly called the soap opera, this genre is, by in large, written by staff writers and supervised by a headwriter. Some staff writers specialise in writing certain character’s storylines and dialogue. Others write ‘Breakdowns’ – a detailed scene outline for an episode. Breakdown writers are sometimes freelancers who are part of a pool that producers turn to because of the sheer volume of writing necessary for a series that airs five days a week. Some of these writers work via email and fax. If you’re interested in writing for Daytime Television, you’ll need an agent with good contacts in this genre. The reality series Game shows fall into this category and essentially use what is called ‘researchers’ to come up with questions and answers. Allegedly, the hosts ‘ad-lib’ their lines for the programme and provide them for the teleprompter. However, on some reality series, writers are being employed and receiving screen credits. The game show has transmuted outside of the studio set with such hits as ‘Fear Factor’ and ‘Amazing Race’. Reality Drama Series such as MTV’s ‘Real World’ and the CBS network’s ‘Survivor’ technically do not use writers. However, these reality series do use the series episodic technique of multiple storylines and unfolding storylines using the two-or four-act structure based on a formula of activities the ‘real’ people are required to perform. Producers achieve this in the editing room applying the same principles used in writing a scripted episode. The skills you learn for writing scripted episodic teleplays are very useful in the reality genre. It won’t be long before collective bargaining agreements are forcing this genre to employ writers beyond consultants or researchers. The improvised series The success of Larry David’s HBO ‘Curb Your Enthusiasm’ (creator of the hit series Seinfeld) has set the creative pace for this new form of reality television since it hit premium pay cable in 2000. In this category of series, the writer comes up with a story and scene outline (and receives a screen credit as per the MBA) and the actors ad-lib the scenes during actual production, aided by the director and producers. This is a growing genre on television. In closing . . . Television is among the largest employers of writers in the entertainment industry worldwide. Becoming a professional takes training, commitment, stamina and, yes, some luck. As someone once said, ‘writers who write the most are the luckiest’. This chapter has only 290 The Handbook of Creative Writing addressed the fundamentals required to start a career as a TV writer. But to be truly successful, you must love television and watch a lot of it. Notes 1. The Writers Guild of America (West and East) is the union for screenwriters and affiliates with other writing guilds around the globe. Go to www.wga.org for more information. 2. The Members Basic Agreement sets forth working rules to which all members and signatories must adhere. 3. In the US, writers need someone who can legally negotiate contracts in order to sell material to producers or have it read by executives. 4. Executive Producers are generally also writers who have worked their way up the ranks and earned the title ‘Showrunner’. For more non-artistic information on being a professional television writer, go to the Writers Guild of America website and download their free publication entitled ‘Writing for Episodic TV: From Freelance to Showrunner’. 5. TV ratings are divided into six basic categories: TVY and TVY7, which are just for children’s programming and TVG, TVPG, TV14, and TVMA for all other programs. The ratings do not apply to sports coverage and news. 6. TV.com (formally known as tvtome.com) has over 2,500 complete guides covering nearly all the current shows and past series. The site also features over 250,000 people associated with TV, including the actors, writers, directors, and producers. 7. Rating Sweeps take place in November, February and May of a television programming year and serve to set the advertising rates for American networks. 8. ‘TV-Q’ is a service that measures the popularity of certain actors with the audience and often influence casting decisions of producers and network executives. 27 Writing for Television – UK Differences John Milne I’m sure you could not be better prepared for writing for American television than by reading and understanding Stephen V. Duncan’s chapter. But at the risk of stating the obvious, American television is not British television. Put brutally, American television was developed to fill the spaces between adverts. Though the situation has since become more complex, the basic rationale persists. American television exists to make money for the people who make it, and the source of the money is usually advertising. The primary purpose, therefore, of American television is to stop people switching either over to another channel or switching off altogether. There has never been any other motive to American television production. Public Broadcasting in America is a rump. Oddly, subscription cable or subscription satellite TV in America raises its head from this singularly commercial approach from time to time. Once the bills are paid you can be a little more adventurous, and it might be that those capable of meeting the monthly subscription for, say HBO, need the ‘Sopranos’ or ‘Curb Your Enthusiasm’ or ‘Six Feet Under’ to keep their appetites whetted. British independent television suffers from (or enjoys, depending on your point of view) a similar singularity of purpose. Once British independent broadcasters were from time to time reminded of standards required by broadcast regulators. Since the so-called ‘lighttouch’ regime of recent years, designed to allow free-to-air ITV to stay competitive, producers have found themselves under more pressure than ever to deliver audiences from an increasingly fractured market. Shows which had audiences of twelve million less than ten years ago now have audiences of three million. This has some extraordinary results. If you stumble upon ‘ITV play’, for example, you will be watching gambling, not drama. This pressure means drama broadcast on British Independent TV has to meet certain expectations, and this is achieved by a lighter version of the highly manipulative way of writing drama described by Stephen Duncan, as used in America. If you wrote for ‘The Bill’ (as I have done a great deal) at one time you might have expected to draw up a document containing formal storylines, teasers, ends of parts, reveals for the ends of eps (as they are called) and all the rest of it. This has relaxed a little at this at the time of writing (2006) because British audiences for main-stream free-to-air TV are middle-aged and didn’t like it. The British middle-aged, lower middle-class Daily Mail type of taste is for something a little more organic, and research carried out in the ‘focus groups’ beloved of modern advertising men and women proved it. 292 The Handbook of Creative Writing I should point out that none of this highly structured, centralised approach to scriptwriting was ever there because the producers or script departments are by nature oppressive (some are, but not many). It existed simply because they have accountants breathing down their necks. Once the accountancy model spreads right through an industry (any industry) it means that everyone signs off on what everyone else does and only that which is capable of being ‘signed off on’ is achievable. This kind of self-fulfilling prophecy writing would have been unthinkable in the 1980s. The BBC used to be different. Since the BBC is financed by what is in effect a public tax (the licence fee) its formal chartered purpose is to raise its head above that which is merely commercial. It should inform, educate and entertain. In the past, Reithian standards, referring to the first Director General of the BBC, prevailed. However, in an extraordinary inversion which George Orwell (himself a BBC employee under Reith) would have recognised, the theory got around in the 1990s that the BBC would have to deliver mass audiences to justify the tax (sorry, licence fee) and should therefore match ITV step for step. It did not lead but was led. At one time, whether a certain BBC executive’s mother would watch a drama was reputed to be the benchmark. Things have improved since and the BBC’s expansion into digital and cable have left the organisation with a wide variety of channels to feed, while poor old BBC 1 carries the burden of delivering what mass audience there is. Sometimes it’s very successful but in general is rather conservative. The BBC also receives enormous income from its ‘Worldwide’ arm, and one wonders to what extent commercial pressures come from that corner. BBC drama is not generally sold to other organisations like itself but to commercial entities, and this may be the underlying reason why the BBC drama ‘hour’ has shortened and you have (in the UK) to watch endless puffs of other BBC programmes at the beginning or end of BBC dramas. The puffs are in the airspace which will be used by advertisers when the BBC subsidiary rights are sold on by BBC Worldwide. What does all this mean for the would-be TV scriptwriter? Interestingly, the conservatism of both main channels and their rush for ratings do not necessarily find themselves reflected in the views of individuals in script departments of production companies. Originality and the ability to deliver powerful emotions and stories are still very high on the list of desirable qualities for a British TV scriptwriter. For this reason there isn’t a lot of point in writing try-out examples of TV shows in an attempt to get hired on the show (as is the case in the US) – I can only think of one scriptwriter who broke in this way. However, theatrical work does seem to have some considerable ‘cachet’ for the guardians of the gate, the script editors and readers on whom producers and for that matter writers rely. They might be in a drudge job but their minds are not those of drudges, and if they are young they may very likely have come straight to the job after studying Renaissance drama for four years at university. So if I were to offer a single piece of advice for people wanting to be a British TV scriptwriter, it would be ‘write a little play and get it put on somewhere’. Anywhere. Above a pub, preferably in Islington or Edinburgh. Get it staged during the interval of another play, if you must, or in the foyer of a bigger theatre. You get the picture – just get something performed. The other route which is available to writers for the British market is BBC radio, which is poorly paid and sometimes has wildly variable standards of both writing and performance, but will (like the play above the pub) give you the writer a professionally performed and original piece of work with which you or your agent can start bothering script editors. Good hunting. 28 Writing for Film Bonnie O’Neill Introduction In my mind, there’s no writing form that requires a higher degree of discipline than writing a feature-length screenplay. The purpose of this chapter is to take the mystery out of the filmwriting process by giving writers a method to create within this art form. Once you have mastered the process of screenwriting, it is my experience that writing in all facets of your life will improve dramatically. First, let’s clear up the often-confusing filmwriting/screenwriting/scriptwriting terminology. I consider filmwriting/screenwriting as writing for the ‘big screen’. Today, however, that doesn’t necessarily mean your screenplay will be shot on film. We have moved into the age of Digital Video and there may be no turning back. George Lucas has been at the forefront of this movement and soon theatres worldwide will be equipped to project Digital Video. It’s less expensive and easier to manipulate than film, although it still has a ‘flatter’ look. So, chances are that in the future, your screenplays may be shot on video. However, whether shooting on film or video, your feature-length projects should always utilise the traditional stacked Hollywood (theatrical) format. There are specific formatting rules that I will discuss later in the chapter. You should not overly concern yourself with formatting until you know the basics of developing your story. I will take you through each step. Do not write a single scene until you’ve completed these steps. You will have an edge over other screenwriters if you develop film-viewing skills. Learn to look at films with a screenwriter’s eye. Time the acts. It’s important to be aware of film terms and formats; analyse film and television clips, shorts, tapes, and full-length films with emphasis on understanding the writer’s perspective. You should also devour as many screenplays as possible. A good site for screenplay research is www.script-o-rama.com. Here, you can read hundreds of screenplays. Make note of this art form. There’s nothing like it! And remember always to try to read the latest draft. The skills utilised in feature filmwriting are applicable to other scriptwriting formats including half-hour and one-hour TV programmes, educational and training videos, documentaries, and video games. Sometimes the split page format is used for the abovementioned projects. In this format, a page is ‘split’ into two vertical columns. The left 294 The Handbook of Creative Writing column represents the video and the right column is where the sound and dialogue is written. The audio and video should be matched up, side by side in each column. These are usually referred to as scripts. If freelancing, always ask your producers for a sample script or screenplay so you know their preference from the start. For the purposes of this chapter, we shall focus on the feature screenplay that is usually 120 pages long. The rule of thumb is one page per minute. Comedies are generally shorter, perhaps ninety pages. Regardless of the length, a screenplay should follow the 1:2:1 beginning, middle, end ratio. That is, the second act (middle) should be twice as long as the first and third act. There are essential steps that should be followed when you write a screenplay. Don’t skip the steps as you will likely end up with what I call ‘the mess in the middle’. After all, I think we can all write a great beginning scene and a great ending, but it’s usually that second act that kills the beast. In a sense, writing a screenplay and marketing is a circular adventure. You must know the essence of your story, the tone and code of your story and who, ultimately, your audience is. If you follow the natural process for writing a screenplay and don’t skip any steps, you will come full circle by the end so you can market your labour of love. If you skip steps, you won’t have anything worth marketing. Here are the steps I suggest you follow to avoid the typical screenwriter’s struggles and come up with a product you are proud of: Know your premise. Research your genre and audience. Write a good, tight logline. Know your ending. Flesh out your characters. Write a synopsis. Know each step of your hero’s journey. Create a working diagram of your Three-Act Structure. Write a treatment. Learn the proper screenplay format. Write your screenplay, scene by scene. Take your diagram with you everywhere. Rewrite, rewrite, rewrite. Premise Your premise is the arc of your theme. Theme ⫽ Subject. Let’s take the theme of love. You might try to prove the following premise: Trust leads to love. How about ego as a theme? One premise could be: Bragging leads to humiliation. When thinking of the premise for your screenplay, consider what the moral lesson or discussion might be. Without a concrete premise, you will have no foundation for a film. Genre and audience What specific category of film would your story fit into? Search for a screenplay on the web that is the same genre you want to write. You might consider a romantic comedy, suspense thriller or action adventure. Or, you might be writing a sub-genre film such as a biopic, zombie or neo-noir film. For some enlightening information on film genres, go to Tim Dirks’ website www.filmsite.org/genres.html 295 Writing for Film Define your audience and write accordingly. If you’re writing a PG comedy, don’t waste your time with strong language or nudity. Think of the kids, think of the parents who are buying their tickets. You can allude to adult humour, but don’t get carried away. On the other hand, if you’re writing an R zombie film, then extreme gore is expected. Logline After reading the screenplay, write your logline. A logline is the one to three sentence description of your screenplay. It’s the condensed version of the plot. Plot ⫽ Situation. Think of how movies are described in a TV Guide or on a Cable scroll. The logline for my screenplay Screw the Golden Years is: two eccentric, long divorced parents rebel when stuck into the same nursing home by their greedy children. Next, think deeply about the screenplay you will be working on and then write its logline. In your mind, begin with the phrase – this is the story of . . . Keep it brief, snappy and to the point. Then trim it down with the goal of one line. The logline doesn’t have to give the ending away. However, you must know the ending of your screenplay before you write your first scene. Each scene should lead the audience up to the ending. If a scene doesn’t establish something that leads to the end, then it doesn’t need to be written. Ideally, your screenplay should be so tight that it would collapse with a single scene removed. Characters Creating interesting and compelling characters is at the heart of a good screenplay. To do this, you need to develop tridimensional characters. The character sketch needs to give the whole picture of your character from the inside out. Not only do you need to know how your character looks, but you also need to know how your character thinks, feels and why. A well-developed character sketch should be done before you start to write a single scene. This sketch has the potential to help you understand the extraordinary nuances of a character that can later be used to create believable and unique scenes. As you progress in your screenplay, your writing will be clear and come to you more easily if you do the preliminary character work. The character sketch should be broken into the following three categories: 1. Physiology 2. Sociology 3. Psychology Following is an excerpt from a playwriting book that is considered an essential tool in the screenwriter’s toolbox. Lajos Egri’s The Art of Dramatic Writing (1972) is a must-have for the committed screenwriter. Tridimensional Character Guideline Physiology 1. Sex 2. Age 3. Height and weight 296 The Handbook of Creative Writing 4. Colour of hair, eyes, skin 5. Posture 6. Appearance: good-looking, over- or underweight, clean, neat, pleasant, untidy; Shape of head, face, limbs 7. Defects: deformities, abnormalities, birthmarks; Diseases 8. Heredity Sociology 1. Class: lower, middle, upper 2. Occupation: type of work, hours of work, income, condition of work, union or nonunion, attitude toward organisation, suitability for work 3. Education: amount, kind of schools, marks, favourite subjects, poorest subjects, aptitudes 4. Homelife: parents’ living, earning power, orphan, parents separated or divorced, parents’ habits, parents’ mental development, parents’ vices, neglect. Character’s marital status 5. Religion 6. Race, nationality 7. Place in community: leader among friends, clubs, sports 8. Political affiliations 9. Amusements, hobbies: books, newspapers, magazines Psychology 1. Sex life, moral standards 2. Personal premise, ambition 3. Frustrations, chief disappointments 4. Temperament: choleric, easygoing, pessimistic, optimistic 5. Attitude toward life: resigned, militant, defeatist 6. Complexes: obsessions, inhibitions, superstitions, phobias 7. Extrovert, introvert, ambivert 8. Abilities: languages, talents 9. Qualities: imagination, judgment, taste, poise 10. IQ (Egri 1972: 36, 37) Synopsis A good synopsis is a one-page description of your story. It reads like a very short story, preferably with no dialogue. You should use the 1:2:1 ratio in your synopsis. Your first paragraph should represent the beginning, the second two paragraphs your middle and the last paragraph should explain the end of your film. Fully capitalise your main characters’ names the first time they appear on the page. The Hero’s Journey No one knew the role of good and evil better than the master of mythology, Joseph Campbell. His work was both a spiritual and scholarly adventure. What is commonly referred to as ‘The Hero’s Journey’ was the culmination of years of studying ancient archetypes in order to bring that familiar story into our present consciousness. 297 Writing for Film So, what is The Hero’s Journey? In essence it’s the universal myth. It’s the journey of a hero into conflict and back again. In his book, The Writer’s Journey, Christopher Vogler recaps the twelve steps of the Hero’s Journey: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Heroes are introduced in the ordinary world, where They receive the call to adventure. They are reluctant at first or refuse the call, but Are encouraged by a mentor to Cross the threshold and enter the Special World where They encounter tests, allies and enemies. They approach the inmost cave, crossing a second threshold Where they endure the ordeal. They take possession of their reward and Are pursued on the road back to the Ordinary World. They cross the third threshold, experience a resurrection, and are transformed by the experience. 12. They return with the elixir, a boon or treasure to benefit the Ordinary World. Once the rhythm of the journey is in the writer’s mind, its truth will become obvious in the heart. Like Aristotle’s Three-Act Structure, the stages of the journey are flexible. A multitude of paradigms have thrived over time and will morph into the future. Diagram Before you create your diagram, you must understand the Three-Act Structure. Some writers get a bit rebellious at this step, believing that such structure will somehow inhibit their creativity. I have found the opposite to be true. Once my screenplay is fully structured and diagrammed, I can focus all my talent on creating masterful scenes – finding the perfect, concise phrases and dialogue that will make my screenplay a page-turner. Remember, you must know the rules before you can break the rules. Act One is where you establish your screenplay. Here you introduce your premise, characters and conflict. It is the beginning of your story. It’s where the tone, texture, and the place becomes clear. Act One establishes a problem for the main character and his or her dramatic need. Act Two is where you build your screenplay. This is where you have a series of conflicts that will eventually lead to the resolution. It is the middle of your story. This act presents obstacles to the main character’s dramatic need. It creates the rising conflict and action of the screenplay. Act Two raises the stakes for the character. It develops tension and/or suspense. Act Three is where you resolve your screenplay. This is where your series of conflicts become a crisis and must get resolved. It is the end of your story. It presents obstacles to the main character’s dramatic need. It creates the rising conflict and action of the screenplay. It presents a moment of change and discovery for the character. It allows the character to achieve or not achieve his or her dramatic need. The first act is usually thirty pages long. The second act is usually sixty pages long. The third act is usually thirty pages long. Remember that this varies with genre. For example, comedies often run shorter, sometimes just ninety pages. Always remember that your screenplay should follow the 1:2:1 ratio. So, if you’re writing a ninety-minute comedy, your 298 The Handbook of Creative Writing first act would be twenty-two-and-a-half pages, your second forty-five pages and your third twenty-two-and-a-half pages. There are just a few other page markers you must be aware of. Within the first act is the ‘set-up’ – this is on pages ten to twelve of your screenplay. Within Act Two is the mid-point of your screenplay. This lands on page sixty. Within Act Three is the ‘climax’ – this is on pages 110–12 of your screenplay. Right before the end of Act One, there is a ‘turning point’ that spins the story around and catapults the audience into Act Two. Right before the end of Act Two, there is another ‘turning point’ that spins the story around and catapults the audience into Act Three. The short wind-up of the story that occurs after the climax, is often referred to as the denouement. Now, you’re ready to create your Three-Act Diagram. This is a portable screenwriter’s tool that reflects the Three-Act Structure. Take a long, rectangular piece of paper (side by side copy paper is fine – you can tape the centre). Then, fold it so it reflects a 1:2:1 ratio horizontally. At the top, mark your important page numbers: 1 12 30 60 90 110 120. You can use this to ‘diagram’ your screenplay. First, enter the twelve steps of your hero’s journey. Steps one to five will be in Act One, six to nine will be in Act Two and steps ten to twelve will be in Act Three. This diagram is really the foundation for me. It’s easily portable! I tend to write my first few drafts of my diagram in pencil and shift around constantly until I know that my set-ups and pay-offs are well planted. You can also trim postits and manipulate them on the page. I prefer this method instead of lugging my laptop around. My diagram goes with me everywhere and rests on my nightstand for those sleepless brainstorm sessions. Treatment The treatment is the first written form of a film outlining the scenes, the major characters, action and locations. It’s like the writer’s storyboard. It looks very much like a short story. It’s written in paragraph form, uses quotation marks for dialogue, and doesn’t include camera angles. It’s dramatic and full of action phrases. Your treatment should be written in proportion to the Three-Act Structure. In other words, if your treatment is twelve pages long, the first three pages should represent Act One, the next six pages should represent Act Two and the last three pages should represent Act Three. You may find when you are writing that great chunks of dialogue rush into your head. Add these as notes on the back of corresponding index cards. In general, the treatment is sparse on dialogue. There are two kinds of action that move a treatment forward – something happens to the character or dialogue. Just remember to only use dialogue that will move your treatment forward. Your treatment should be dramatic yet easy to read. Write in the present tense with highly visual prose and include important scenes and turning points. This is just another part of the expansion process – premise, logline, synopsis, diagram, treatment and then . . . finally you can start writing your screenplay. Format The simplest way to format your screenplay is to use scriptwriting software. I use Final Draft which is considered by many to be the industry standard. 299 Writing for Film The following is a general formatting guideline most of which can be found in The Complete Guide to Standard Script Formats by Hillis Cole and Judith Haag. Margins are moving a tad to the right, so that’s reflected in these tab settings which are always counted from the left-hand margin: Scene description 20–70 Dialogue 30–65 Parenthetical description 35–50 Character name 40 Page numbers 75 Do not use right-hand justification for any margins. All sluglines start at the left margin. Most angles are on the left margin. All narrative description is single spaced, lowercase and starts at the left margin. Double space between the sluglines and the description; between the description and the character’s name. Dialogue begins directly under the character’s name. Go to www.script-o-rama.com for examples. Use sparse camera directions. Scene by scene Now that you’re finally ready to write your first scene, take a good look at your diagram, treatment and index cards. Check out the following summary of script breakdowns. At this stage of the game, you might feel perfectly comfortable with all of your pre-work and ready to go on. Or, you might feel like something specific is missing or hasn’t ‘hit the mark’. Reflecting on these questions should help: Set-Up (1–12) Have you established who your main characters are? Is the place, time and mood clear? What is the story about? Who does the story belong to? Is the hero’s goal clear? What are the hero’s obstacles? Do we want to cheer for the hero? Does something significant happen to shift the story by the end of the set-up? Turning Point (30) Is there an event that forces a reaction, sets the hero firmly on a path to the goal? Point of No Return (60) Does something happen so that the hero, against all odds, must continue forward? Lost Hope (90) Does something huge happen to nearly discourage the hero from the goal? Does this event change everything, spin the story around? The Heroic Effort (90–108) Does your hero’s actions intensify to get the goal? Does your hero get focused on the one specific action that will lead him or her to the resolution? 300 The Handbook of Creative Writing Climax (110–112) Does your hero know what the final obstacle is? Is everything in jeopardy/crisis? Does the hero clearly fail or achieve the goal? Is the hero’s obvious motivation resolved? Unlike writing a novel, filmwriting is specific in that one must never write what is thought. Rather, you should quickly get into the habit of writing what is seen and heard. That’s it. What is seen and heard. Period. Every screenplay starts with the capitalised words FADE IN: which are flush on the left margin. It ends with FADE OUT. In between is where the fun begins! Next comes your slugline which is all written in capital letters and tells whether the scene is interior (INT.) or exterior (EXT.), where it takes place and whether it is day or night. Under the slugline comes your description. Pretend you are the camera. Describe what you see without using camera angles. Unless you are directing a film, you should only use specific camera directions when it’s necessary to understand what needs to be established in a scene. Dialogue is centred under the action line. You may use brief additional directions for the actor in parentheticals under the character’s capitalised names. Use parentheticals only when necessary and use no more than sixteen letters and spaces. If you’ve done all the steps leading up to actually writing that first scene, then don’t stop to re-write. The set-up is the only section I recommend re-writing before the entire first draft is complete. Then you can (and will) re-write your heart out. Re-write Becoming a re-write pro is the screenwriter’s spare key. At the most basic level, a ‘re-write’ is writing a story for a second (third, fourth, fifth, sixth and so on . . . ) time to add or delete information to make it more interesting to the reader. Screenwriters have the extra task of making sure it is presented in tiptop form. This is often a dreaded task – particularly when you think you have perfected your screenplay and a producer requests a major change. They’ll call the next draft a second draft when it’s probably your hundredth! The sooner you learn how to approach a re-write, the more open you’ll be to the process. Chances are, the more thought you put into diagramming your screenplay, the less severe the re-write will need to be. Begin your re-write with a quick read through. Don’t stop to take notes. Just get the overall feeling for your work. Do this all in one sitting whether it’s for this lesson (just the set-up) or an entire screenplay. Don’t break up this important read through. Don’t take notes yet. Just formulate your fresh impression. Then, ask yourself a few questions: Does it work? Does it have a beginning, middle and end? Is it interesting? Is there a clear climax? Did the story lead up to the climax? Now, do a detailed analysis. Focus on characters, settings, action and dialogue. Characters Do your characters have goals? Too many, too few? Do your characters evolve throughout the story? 301 Writing for Film Settings Have you chosen interesting settings? Are they described in an interesting way without appearing to be written by a frustrated set designer? Are the settings too claustrophobic and stage-like? Action Have you over-described the action? Are you ‘directing’ in your screenplay, overusing camera angles and terms? Does the action advance the story or did you just write it because it was fun to write? Scenes Did you get into your scenes at the last possible moment? Did you get out of your scenes at the first possible moment? Do the scenes build on each other? Do you have any unnecessary scenes that can be cut? Dialogue Did you truly write dialogue or are your characters simply delivering the message? Good dialogue will always sound natural, but clever. It is lean, but not too ‘on-the-nose’. I suggest that you start your re-write by reading all scenes out loud, paying particular attention to the length of the dialogue and how easily the words flow. If you have a ‘chunk’ of dialogue that is five lines, see if you can cut it to three, three to one and so on. Always try to write lines that are memorable. Don’t overwrite. Make sure the dialogue fits the character. Don’t be a lazy writer. Really try to put yourself in your characters’ shoes and write like they would naturally talk. That means pauses and beats. Some ahhhs . . . Make sure your dialogue fits the situation. Avoid clichés. Remember, good dialogue is re-written dialogue. When you re-write, I suggest that you drop (move) scenes and major dialogue pages to the end of your document. Nothing is more crazy-making than wanting that perfect scene or phrase back! If you drop it to the end of your screenplay, you can refer to it easily and (chances are) you’ll realise it wasn’t as perfect as you remembered, otherwise you wouldn’t have dropped it. Review the lessons from this chapter. Have you taken cues from all of them? Conclusion To be honest, it takes a couple of screenplays and screening hundreds of films really to get the experience needed to begin to write marketable screenplays. Don’t attempt to market anything until you know in your heart it’s ready to be shown. I’m a big believer in writers’ groups. Find a group of trusted writers in your area who have also studied screenwriting. Share you work and learn to take criticism with an open mind. Please check my website at www.cinetale.com for more information on The Art of Screenwriting. References Cole, Hillis and Judith Haag (1989), The Complete Guide to Standard Script Formats, CMC Publishing. Dirks, Tim: www.filmsite.org/genres.html Egri, Lajos (1972), The Art of Dramatic Writing, New York: Simon and Schuster. 302 The Handbook of Creative Writing O’Neill, Bonnie: www.cinetale.com Script-o-rama: www.script-o-rama.com Vogler, Christopher (1998), The Writer’s Journey, 2nd edn, Studio City, CA: Michael Wiese Productions. OTHER WRITING 29 Writing as Experimental Practice Thalia Field My husband and I make ‘experimental dinners’: we open the cabinets and create something from whatever we find. We never know what’s going to come of it and often we don’t even know what to call the results other than ‘tasty’ or ‘barely edible’. It doesn’t hurt that we have experience with traditional cooking, we know what to expect with foods or how to take a shortcut when needed. But when it comes down to it we enjoy the challenge and surprise of meeting the kitchen head-on. When I was asked to think about experimental writing, this is what immediately came to mind. When it comes to writing, I often wonder if designating something ‘experimental’ is more a public, critical or personal act? Most attempts at defining ‘experimental’ dead-end into ‘you know it when you see it’ tautologies, or result in descriptive catch-all-isms where ‘experimental’ means ‘non-traditional’. Tradition in this context mostly implies formally recognisable poetry and fiction oriented toward epiphany, closure, and a neat and tidy naturalism where visual details correlate to psychological ones and the author and characters are clear and coherent. In the opposite corner and equally generalised, the qualities of experimental writing include writing which is polysemous, indeterminate, polyphonic, multi-genre, documentary, meditative and puts the reader in an unstable position vis-à-vis the work’s meanings. Of course these only describe a spectrum, and most writing exists somewhere in between these extremes. Still, lists of attributes tell us more about the past than the present, so is there a less forensic and more useful way to determine a literary experiment? Are there material differences between experimental and other writing practices in terms of creative process? Let’s get back to this in a minute. Looking historically, there have certainly been normative aesthetic traditions against which various experimental avant-gardes positioned themselves. Staging innovative literature as a critique of dominant art practice, and by analogy a critique of dominant culture, requires faith that language takes action, that writing functions as a privileged social gest, or mirror. In this way the history of aesthetic forms can be read as the dialectical content of history and formal evo/revolutions as evidence of culture’s mutability. The revelation that no aesthetic attribute is ontologically fixed or sanctioned by God or King was an eyeopener of the early modern period, leading individual artists to work outside the patronage system to display other ‘knowledges’ and experience. Meanwhile, the term ‘experimental writing’ emerged from the scientific work of French physiologists in Second-Empire Paris. The new laboratory science positioned 306 The Handbook of Creative Writing ‘experimental’ medicine in opposition to the reigning paradigm of medicine as intuitive, quasi-religious art. The introduction of ‘scientific method’ was useful for debunking nonempirically tested beliefs about disease and treatment. Through the new experimental approach, knowledge emerged based on testing hypotheses in controlled laboratory conditions and ‘going on the evidence’. This was a stricter method in which one’s ideologies take a backseat to the experiment’s ongoing results. The experimental, in this idealised form, asks a practitioner to shed all notion of what ‘should happen’ in favour of a blunt realism, a moving aside of ego for the sake of the work. This so-called objectivity, this ‘materialism’, challenged prevailing (mostly religious) systems wherein long-dominant norms determined a priori what one would ‘find’ in practice. Nowadays the ‘objective’ ideals of scientific method have been rightly problematised, but in the late nineteenth century Émile Zola took up the charge for an ‘experimental literature’ which could translate the scientists’ realist vision into a more materialist literature, a hard core presentation of life’s facts without a moralising or transcendental lens. Of course escaping the lens of one’s own ideas proves difficult, and realism atrophied into naturalism, becoming a style all its own. But perhaps what is most important is that experimental writing began as oppositional and radical, self-consciously construed as a methodological way out of a prevailing symbolism, idealism and absolutism. To show unadulterated ‘truth’, artists paid attention to presenting ‘what is’ rather than what ‘should be’ thereby opening the way for literature to follow the visual arts into an allegiance to perception over ideas and phenomenological (temporal) process over static ahistoric objects. That social issues could also be addressed through a materialist/realist/ phenomenological language came from the modernist belief that structures of representation reveal the ‘unconscious fantasies’ of the cultural psyche and therefore making new forms is tantamount to remaking the inheritance of old ways of thinking. Metaphors and discourses of science, from relativity theory, chaos theory, quantum theory and information theory, have continued to find strong affinities and provide analogies for the experimental arts. That models of self and world are represented in culturally constructed (rather than ‘natural’) forms, that artistic expression is not ‘innocent’ of individual perspective, allows any writer to create agency (and share this with readers) using the same tools (language, narrative, discourse, performance) as the cultural mainstream. It might therefore be argued that experimental writing has played a dominant, even essential part in the modern industrial/democratising period, as integral to its character as it can seem oppositional within it. In this way one could say that the history of modern European/American art is the history of experimental artists breaking down familiar dichotomies between museums and streets, ‘high’ culture and ‘pop’ culture, masterpieces and Xeroxes, noise and music, thought and event, performance and object, process and product, author and audience. The list goes on to include the total hybridisation of established genres and the larger imperative that no matter what else one does, one should address the audience’s perception, ‘make it new’ or ‘make it strange’. This basic commitment to the practices of defamiliarisation (a concept popularised by the Russian Formalists but expanded across a range of avant-gardes) shows that artistic devices (formal structures) represent the life of the artwork in history. Art forms must change so that a distance between art and ‘everyday’ perception can be maintained or revived, renewing the audience’s sense of themselves as citizens of their time and agents of personal and collective history. If artwork thus made ‘strange’ was also challenging for the audience, this slowed or difficult reading was a sign of poetic potency, a measure of its distance from the commonali- Writing as Experimental Practice 307 ties which are useful in social interaction but deadening in art. This formulation of aesthetic revival through fresh language reveals a link between experimentalism and romanticism. When the critique is made that experimental writing feels perfunctory or empty of felt experience, this indicates both the critic’s longing for this romantic aspect as well as what may be the writer’s allegiance to form over practice. Bad experimental writing, like bad writing generally, fails to create the sublime shock of something surprisingly and suddenly true. I introduce the word ‘true’ as a gamble, a provocation. Though experimental literature has been aligned with post-structuralism and often foregrounds the non-essentialism of identity or the complex features of post-colonial cultures, its practitioners put forth the possibility that theirs is a more genuine literature in the sense of ‘filled with the shock of truth’ even if that truth presents itself as non-sense or new-sense. That experimental practice engages the complex, multifarious, non-generic world does not necessarily exclude the role of radical subjectivity. In fact, bringing together a writer’s unique experimental process with the material givens of the world results in what Gertrude Stein called the ‘continuous contemporary’. In this condition, an and/both phenomenon occurs between self and world relieving the pressure of previously intractable binaries into a new and productive interdependent space and time. So now we may ask again: what makes experimental practice different from other habits of writing? Certainly many writers confront the infinite and open possibilities of their art and world. Still, traditional writers take their discoveries only as far as normative limits of form or material allow. Where a poem reaches some sort of crisis, a more experimental practitioner makes an important swerve away from the habitual approaches to material and toward a radical ‘not knowing’, allowing the work to stay open, to be completed in the encounter with a reader. So perhaps what makes a writing practice ‘experimental’ is the intention of the writer to continually re-open their ways of proceeding, their habits, as they encounter the world. A text held open may go beyond the parameters of both familiar forms and habitual creative process. The results do not necessarily have to be complex or difficult, but they are surprising. The blank page has been the location of much excitement or trepidation. Fear of it can result in a writer’s retreat into stale and prefabricated choices. Confronting the blank page in a traditional practice is just as challenging as for the experimentalist, and yet I think the traditional writer fills in the blank page as though it were a pre-formatted space awaiting content. A sentence makes sense. A character emerges in a situation. A concrete detail, a situation to describe (‘the objective correlative’). Pretty soon, one finds oneself in a conventional fiction or poem, a single human protagonist described in adjectival prose, ‘life like’ against a scenic (cinematic) backdrop. The frame of the camera’s view provides the scale and time of the action, an antagonist will be there, a tragic flaw. The conflict will take the hero into some revelations, the resolution will provide a catharsis from the event. Language is only that which delivers this content in a clear and descriptive way from author to reader with a minimum of confusion. There is a tidiness to the symbolism, the events, and no messy confusion for a reader to grapple with. Language does not intrude upon the telling, but stays grammatical and ‘transparent’ to the intention of the author. Formally there are paragraphs or line breaks and type left-justified between wide margins. There is dialogue and there is plenty of visual and psychological description. Characters, plots, language remain stable and constant throughout the piece. You need to dream up the specifics, which constitutes the main writing practice. Perhaps you brainstorm on the blank page, troll for details and clues as you ‘discover’ the piece, even your ‘voice’ (your style within 308 The Handbook of Creative Writing the larger constraints of this overall style) and probably your characters, conflicts or themes. This describes the sort of psychological naturalism prevalent in our time. Yet many writers spend a lot of hard work and joyous exploration in the brainstorming/dreaming practice of this form. So why isn’t that experimental? I think the blank page for the experimentalist doesn’t exist to be ‘filled in’ in the same way. Because form and content are indistinct, one does not conjure the work from the imagination as though it was something detached from the world it emerges into. There is never ‘silence’ or ‘emptiness’ (or perhaps even a blank page) in the laboratory sense of a Newtonian idealised world in which art exists coherently and untroubled, to be looked in on as though from outside. Writing as an experimental practice assumes no convenient originating vantage, no way to present tidy geometries of symbol, culture or identity. And with the blank page troubled by the shadows and sounds of a world always already moving around it, there is material already present at hand. Writing in this sense is a finding, a following, a listening, and not only in the sense of going along with what’s in one’s mind. The many ways one enters the conversation with the world’s shadows and sounds provide the myriad of forms experimental writing takes. Finding content is never other than finding form. In what has been called an ‘organicist’ or ecological encounter, the fullness of the blank page becomes, then, a way of waking mindfully into an inseparable world. Experimental practice and the project of deep ecology come together where writers relate not to landscapes but to ‘being worldbound’. This awareness of a different definition of subject, object and action, results in work where the normative human-hero-centered conventions of representation are replaced by more polycentric, polyrhythmic, or stochastic processes. Whether these are mental or environmental, the very notion of ‘event’ and ‘character’ may reflect the collapse of distinctions such as those between nature/culture and media/message. So now let’s look at some specific ways one might proceed ‘experimentally’ in practice. These categories are intended to provide a few of the infinite approaches a writer might take as you move away from habitual strategies toward the play of the unknown. It is paradoxical to sketch examples as an invitation to ignore them and go on your own, but here we go. Mixed media, mixed genre To some, writing in conventional forms feels insufficient to express the fullness of creative energy, and though the usual print genres have their potency, an abundance of other resources gets overlooked. For example, could a story be written from an array of digital sounds? How about poetry as radio play, CD-Rom or site-specific installation? Experimental practice has long embraced multiple genres within a given work: photography and poetry create visual and aural images that abut, collide, overlap, or sculptural writing moves text away from two-dimensional pages and the conventions of the book form and brings print into social space and time. Perhaps a short story could gain poignancy by being printed on a length of fabric and read by being gathered in one’s arms or sorted through in piles, like laundry. Perhaps there is a piece in which writing and digital images are alternately projected on a dancing body. Any inter-genre experiment proceeds through a variety of drafts in which the expressive material takes different forms. These expansive gestures entice an audience to consider the act of ‘reading’ in surprising and poignant ways. As technology and new media increasingly impact cultural production and as questions of performativity become prevalent, one can see artists foregrounding how poetry or story- 309 Writing as Experimental Practice telling retain vitality in the face of new language or image practices. Consider this an area as open and complex as life itself: make a piece of work which uses different methods of creative expression – mix traditional print or writing with some other art or media. Other languages Related to mixed genre writing is the use of discourses or languages traditionally considered unsuitable or incompatible with ‘creative writing’. The paradigm of the writer squirreled away with only their mind, dreams and imagination as resource and muse does not easily give way to writing which incorporates multiple languages or vocabulary and discourse methods from other disciplines (such as television, sports, religion, science, etc.). Though the history of the novel began with an approach to the book flexible enough to contain letters, found texts, dialogues, treatises, etc. – this openness receded with the rise of the naturalist psychological novel and the convention of the ‘invisible’ author and seamless narrative. Instead, try playing with a collage of three or four distinct languages or texts. Don’t smooth them over into one whole but let the braided edges and untranslated parts create fortuitous connections. Another experiment might be to take one form of writing and try filling it in entirely with another such that the so-called form of one and the socalled content of the other make new meanings apparent in both. Another approach is through translation. Translate a text from English to English only by the sounds of words (homophonic), or do a translation from a language you don’t know by following what you think is the sense. You could try translating a piece by substituting words by other words which appear near them in the dictionary (a procedural approach) or by words that appear in the same place in a second text. Perhaps you could translate a very private text by asking a random sample of people what word comes to mind when they hear certain words and then make a number of these public ‘translations’ done by strangers. You might even collage different languages together to make something which is entirely unreadable in only one language. In a globalising world with ongoing local concerns, there is something potentially rich about these experiments in multi-lingual form. Related to some of the above are writing practices often called ‘documentary poetics’ or lyric essay which contain a high degree of researched material or ‘outside’ sources of information, current events or news. Work which uses these alternative sources (without subsuming them into a hermetic authorial style) again challenge the process model of the writer alone with their work, and allow historical or cultural materials to be redeployed and often defamiliarised by new context. Confound, invert, ‘make strange’ traditional genre expectations There is a long history of writers combining poetry and prose forms, and functionally this hybrid comprises a tradition in itself. Prose poetry, sudden fiction, so-called ‘new narrative’, even L⫽A⫽N⫽G⫽U⫽A⫽G⫽E poetry all consist of renewing the uses of the prose sentence and non-lineated form. As an exercise, a writer might ask oneself what they think is the limit of what can be called a story or a poem. Must it be written down? Must it have words? Must it have a character? Then ask yourself what exists on the other side of your own limits? Write something which is definitely not a story, according to you. Or definitely not a poem. The message on the answering machine? A grocery receipt? A single word? A scream? A gesture? A joke? Now find a way to make stories and poems from these things without turning them into traditional poem or short story forms. Then, for fun, find writing 310 The Handbook of Creative Writing in the world which is not intended to be either a story or a poem but which could be, and find a way to ‘publish’ this on a page. Another set of potential experiments might come from asking oneself what the parts and pieces of genres are, and examining what happens if these are radically altered or removed. Let’s say you feel a story must have at least one character. Try writing a story in which there is nothing that could conventionally be called a character. Or a story with at least a million characters. Do you think a poem must contain at least one image? Try a poem which has only sound. Any of these experiments would, through association to common understanding of aesthetic expectations, make visible a rupture in the expectations for that form. Rather than being merely oppositional, this rupture can provide a point of awareness, a way to reveal the habits of our story- and meaning-making culture. Meditative poetics, automatic writing A different lineage of experimental writing has emphasised what happens when the author applies contemplative or meditative practices to writing in an attempt to trouble authorial ownership (re: the ego) and habitual mind. These are strategies which foreground the cultivation of awareness without conceptual or intellectual filtering. Writing which is a record of these practices reveals relationships and qualities of things unseen when names (nouns) and other habits of mind constrain the open field of perceptual possibility. If you imagine writing in which you do nothing but transcribe bare awareness, allowing it to emerge unforced and without fabrication, you can see how different this is than writing which is modelled on what you ‘think’ about something, content conceived in conceptual terms. That a writer thinks of a specific tree and then transcribes that thinking as the general word ‘tree’ is diametrically opposed to writing that functions as thinking itself, a mind getting out of the way so that the tree is described from the ‘pure’ perception of it without ever using the concept-name ‘tree’ at all. There are several ways to try this, including the ‘automatic writing’ or ‘free writing’ approaches where you do not stop moving your pen for a certain length of time. This practice doesn’t allow you to stop and think and then write what you think, but keeps the writing and thinking moving apace. Historically, automatic writing was considered vital for revealing hidden aspects of the unconscious or intuitive associations between thoughts, images, etc. Meditative poetics functions slightly differently in the sense that one does not merely fill space with words but tries to employ the meditative equipoise of awareness to allow perceptions to pass unfiltered, recording those that seem particularly insightful or genuine. It is helpful for these if the writer also has a meditation practice, but not essential. Page and performance dynamics The book form has its own conventions: print must be durable, legible, reproducible, nonephemeral, able to fit on a bookstore shelf or held in the hand, the writing should be on pages which turn, and so on. What about writing for a different set of assumptions: writing using perishable materials, or ‘published’ as a sculpture or across a piece of architecture. Can you enhance the inherent performance qualities of text through spacing across the page or through a book? Can a piece put the issue of legibility at stake? How can secrets, lies, and other forms of human language behaviour be translated to a book form? Can a moment of time, in all its performative richness, be captured through a series of pages? What about using pages ‘unbound’ – that is, flyers, broadsides, posters, postcards, business 311 Writing as Experimental Practice cards, stamps? What about a piece which gets sent through the mail? Or is performed by actors at a particular time in the same spot every day? Procedural writing Perhaps a writer decides they will take the first word they hear every day when they step onto the subway and use it as the first word of each sentence of a story. When a proper name is heard, that character appears until the next proper name is heard. This experiment in storytelling becomes a combination of intention and accident in such a way that language from the world interpenetrates the writer’s language (habits of vocabulary, preferences of style) to create a new form of narrative, certainly indeterminate regarding outcome. This is a simple example of procedural writing, a form of experimentation which yields surprising and often riveting work. A writer might investigate a method such as this because they have a suspicion that ‘found language’ from the subway is integral to a narrative able to enact the experience of a crowded and anonymous world. How this writer ‘marks’ the found language (the procedural constraint) so that the reader can participate in the ‘game’ is one of the challenges of procedural writing. Allowing constraint to impact the writing not only challenges the notion of the writer as unfettered genius, but exploits the richness of accidents and obstructions, non-intention and rule-based practices, which represent the contours of freedom. In procedural writing, the initial constraint (in which the writer sets up the material and the ‘way of proceeding’) forms a large part of the meaning and impact of the piece, the ‘how’ which matters to the reader as much as the ‘what’. Alternative forms of authorship; collaborations From procedural work come other creative practices where the traditional role of the writer as sole creator/genius is troubled or redefined. Collage or cut-ups present the writer with a different role, as do collaborations and collective forms of writing. With a group of artists, come up with a project in which all can participate fully without constraining the outcome or impeding one another. This writing ‘jazz’ or indeterminate ensemble can produce performance work which is different every time or else create a print form which re-enacts the trace of the collaboration for readers. What’s most important is that the work remains beyond a single person’s vision and thus models a different kind of world. These approaches to writing practice are only experimental insofar as they are about a writer at play with the givens of their world, willing to forego attachment to outcome for the sake of following the material. In writing this I realised that both the history of experimental writing and these suggested exercises are totally up for grabs and there are certainly experimentalists who would ask other questions, public, private and critical versions of an unsolved riddle. Perhaps what ultimately comes from writing as experimental practice is the surprise of presenting yourself and your world as you hadn’t imagined them, and yet are shocked to recognise. 30 Writing as ‘Therapy’ Fiona Sampson Over the last two decades, creative writing in British health and social care has developed as a publicly-funded practice. It’s one which, though studied and imitated elsewhere in the world, has its roots in the particular British context of arts access thinking and policy since the 1970s (European projects on the British model include poetry-reading groups in a hospice in Lund, Sweden and writing projects with children in integrated day centres across Macedonia [Sampson 2004]). Teasing out the strands of this thinking a little can allow us to see exactly what’s going on when, for example, a poet leads a workshop with stroke patients in rehab; or a writer and a clinician co-run a psychotherapy group for people with dependency problems. And this, in turn, is important for the thinking about writing as ‘therapy’ which might go on in our individual practice as writers, students and teachers of creative writing. If, for example, work in health care suggested that certain ways of writing are always beneficial, or that the process of writing created a special kind of context in which particular beneficial interventions could be achieved, there would be a number of possible implications for individual writing practice. These might include: • The usefulness of open-ended, process-led writing techniques, such as free-writing, for an individual’s personal development • Or conversely, the significance of achieving narrative form, or meaning-making, in personal development • The resonance of certain forms or discourses, such as the heightened language of elegy, with significant human experience • Or conversely, the significance of the imaginary as a way of escaping the limits of immediate experience • Engagement in the writing process as a way either of reinforcing the individual self – their Subjectivity, their belief in the value of their own world-view – or of loosening up that self, making its boundaries more flexible and able to negotiate change or accommodate new approaches • A particular link between personal and writerly development – as if they might go in the same direction • A particular sense of what not only writing practice but written texts might be for: such as the idea that good or important fiction or poetry speaks from the best in Writing as ‘Therapy’ 313 human nature and does not embrace, by exploring, such aspects of the human psyche as intolerance. Some of these are large claims indeed; and this chapter will not be making very many of them. This does not mean, however, that they have not been made elsewhere: not necessarily by practitioners within the field of writing and health care but in a variety of literary critical discourses and approaches to the teaching of creative writing. I will refer to some of these sources later, when I suggest certain links which may nevertheless exist between writing – practice and product – and the importance of agency in sustaining a sense of the human self, especially when that self is under pressure. Particular contexts, such as health care or political orthodoxy, may bear down on the very individual they have, at least in theory, been instituted to help; in particular by ‘knowing better than’ him or her. This chapter looks both at writing in health and social care and at the wider significance of writing as a form of resistance; of individuation of approach and voice rather than necessarily through exploration of the writer’s own physical or mental health. ‘Writing as therapy’ may be seen here to refer to what John Keats calls its ‘salubrious’ effects within the shared world of the reading and writing community rather than simply to ‘privatised’ benefits experienced by writing individuals (Keats 1973: 781). In a recent essay, the Australian poet John Kinsella articulates his belief in the importance of writing which refuses to let the reader be lulled: and therefore to be accepting, conservative (Kinsella 2006). Since reading, like writing, is a form of thought, this means challenging the reader to think in a way that isn’t conservative; to read the world as well as the text in new, questioning ways. But Kinsella isn’t talking about writing essays on political or critical theory – but about the way an unexpected line break wakes the ear up and makes reading a poem suddenly much more ‘polymorphous’ than being guided by a seductive ‘lyrical’ music would be. In other words, the text can affect the experience of an individual reader. There’s nothing new in this insight, of course. Contemporary debate about censorship, or the nine o’clock watershed on broadcast media, reproduce arguments about the ability of a written or performed text to affect its audience which go back to the origins of tragedy in ritualised catharsis; or the arguments Plato makes for banning poetry from his ideal Republic: Poetry has the same effect on us when it represents sex and anger, and the other desires and feelings of pleasure and pain which normally accompany our actions. It feeds them when they ought to be starved, and makes them control us when we ought, in the interests of our own welfare and happiness, to control them. (Plato 1955: 384) What is distinctive is Kinsella’s point that, while responsibility for (some of) a text’s effects must lie with its author, these effects need not originate solely from programmatic authorial intent – for example using rhetorical devices, such as ‘accessible style’ or sentiment, to persuade the reader of a particular argument – but may instead transcend the piece’s particular content, releasing the reader not only from any particular reading of it; but into reading other texts and experiences altogether. A familiar example of this is T. S. Eliot’s argument, in ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’, that the new poet comes to his (sic) own writing through a feeling of intimate recognition of the pre-existing oeuvre of an earlier poet (Eliot 1951). That earlier writer didn’t produce his poems in order to generate 314 The Handbook of Creative Writing the work of his successor; yet, far from being a distortion or appropriation, this is a reinforcement of the original. I experience something similar when, in writing this chapter, I feel my training in Anglo–American philosophy ‘speak through’ me. What we study, which is to say read, can inform our thoughts to such an extent it might be said to form them. ‘Creative writing’ – that literary, inventive practice of which poetry is a useful paradigm – has regularly been cited by its exponents as a way of thinking which offers methodological insights, as well as the insights of particular content (such as those of a poem which concludes that myths of women are cultural conspiracies to keep the lid on the Pandora’s Box of their energy and talents [Jamie 1994: 9–11]), into the world of our experience. For Keats, poetry teaches us to be ‘capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason’ (Keats 1973: 768); for Romantic poets like Shelley its avowed Subjectivity makes it a model of individual self-governance (Shelley 2004): for Imagists like Ezra Pound it helps us bring thought out of abstraction into the immediacy of concrete experience – through what is elsewhere known as the ‘pathetic fallacy’ (the term is John Ruskin’s in Modern Painters [1856]); while for Celan – as, paradoxically, for Heidegger – it shows us the limits of language as a realist project (Celan 2001; Heidegger 1975). As models and – in being written and read – as mental experiences, poems have been widely held to help us think in ‘salubrious’ ways. If we look more closely, we see that these models of thinking cluster particularly around forms of agency. Poetry is associated with, respectively: the ability to ‘hold a line’ and not join one camp or another; thinking for oneself; having more fully-realised thoughts – and knowing their limits. The poetry writer or reader practises being not simply responsive, but responsible. This is some distance from the notion of poetry as ‘self-expression’, a somehow unmediated movement from the ‘inside’ outward, which we might associate with ‘writing as therapy’ (reflected in the name of the national organisation representing the field. LAPIDUS supports the ‘Literary Arts and Personal Development’). What the contemporary British poet Don Paterson calls ‘the sin of expression’ is something other than the work of a poem or piece of music (Paterson 2004: 33). We do not write fiction or poetry when we simply discharge emotion onto the page. What we do instead is complete what the art therapist Joy Schaverein calls a ‘scapegoat transference’: the text ‘takes on’ our emotion for us and we feel better as a result (Schaverein 1999). Our own relationship with such a text is based on its emotional role rather than intrinsic literary qualities. We may have an exaggerated view of its literary value because it is ‘emotionally true’; or conversely – as with what we could call ‘teenage diary syndrome’ – we may be mortified at the idea of our grotesque emotions being revealed. In therapy sessions, the image or text and the paper they’re on may be treated in a quasi-symbolic way – the touching emotions of grief stored away in a special box, the ‘bad’ emotions of anger torn up or set light to – or they may be analysed as symptoms. An art therapist won’t ‘read’ a series of strong marks (we might use the analogy, in writing, of a high register language or of imagery) as an aesthetic choice, but as a sign of an emotional experience such as anger. Analysis of an achieved literary text from within a psychoanalytic framework – when Susan Kavaler-Adler reads Sylvia Plath, for example – runs the risk of failing to move out of this therapeutic approach, in which writing is a symptom, into a literary one, in which writing is part of a professional cultural practice (Kavaler-Adler 1993). Kavaler-Adler cites Plath’s work as an example of ‘repetition rather than reparation’ because, she says, the poems describe unhappiness rather than attempt to resolve it. A poem such as Plath’s furious lament for her father, ‘Daddy’, represents an inability to ‘move on’ (Plath 1981: Writing as ‘Therapy’ 315 183–4). But in fact this is a reading not of the words on the page but of a conjectured motivation for those words. It misses the fact that writers may explore dark emotional material in order to produce a more interesting text. From the gothic novel to the finely-drawn psychodramas of Henry James; from Angela Carter’s dark fairy-tales to contemporary writing for teenagers, much writing plainly draws on unconscious and emotional experience. It does so because, as the Japanese poet Yasuhiro Yasumoto has said of poetry, each work ‘needs to include a little element of viciousness’ (Yasumoto 2005). A key idea here might be that of exploration. Rather than a passive re-experiencing of involuntary emotion, the writer actively engages with their material in order to shape a text. Instead of repeating an emotional experience already achieved, they are conducting a process of discovering its resources and dimensions. This is not to say that writing is simply ‘going on a journey’, that famously ‘therapeutic’ phrase, towards the destination of conclusive insight. Creative writing – as opposed to, say, diary keeping or email flirtation – is explicitly concerned with making as much as with preparing to make; with product as much as with process. Mental experience is shaped and developed through a series of thoughts which are had by writer and (subsequently) by reader. Looked at this way, we could say that writing is shared thinking. Writing, in other words, may help us to think – for ourselves. Our mental worlds can be inflected by both reading and writing. Political theory has understood this for a long time. Richard Hoggart’s The Uses of Literacy argued that literacy was what freed people not only into greater job opportunities but into a wide-ranging, reflexive awareness of the society and world they lived in (Hoggart 1992). This awareness was the first step in granting working-class individuals agency. Through having more sophisticated ideas than we could come up with by ourselves we are developed to that point of rational decision-making which fits us to be citizens. Raymond Williams’s later Marxism and Literature argues, rather like Keats in his talk of ‘soul-making’, that ‘literary production then is “creative” . . . in the material sense of a specific practice of self-making . . . : self-composition’ (Williams 1977: 210). Both Hoggart and Williams worked within the British socialist tradition; their theories echoed and were echoed by the practices of, for example, Miners’ Institutes in the Welsh Valleys (a gas-lit version of the world of the working-class auto-didact is evoked by miner’s son D. H. Lawrence in Sons and Lovers [Lawrence 1998]). In his Politics, Aristotle argues that education is important because ‘A city can be excellent only when the citizens who have a share in government are excellent’ (Aristotle 1990: 175). Education has traditionally been withheld from groups, such as women, slaves or peasants, who must not be allowed self-determination. The contemporary educationalist Jane Mace writes about how literacy is always a joint practice (Mace 2002). We all have textual questions we have to ask: whether because language changes fast to accommodate slang and loan words we don’t know how to spell, or when we don’t know the punctuation house style of a particular publication. Writing and thinking are also joint practices. So writing is socially beneficial – ‘salubrious’ – not only because it gives individuals in a society skills but because it is in itself a social, collective practice. Thinking along these lines seems to suggest all writing is persuasive and tendentious, consciously shaping the reader. Yet one of the rules taught in creative writing is that the polemical does not make good literature, because it is already programmatic. There’s nothing exploratory about a piece which already knows what it wants to say. This is not of course to say that standpoint writing – especially committed or political writing – must fail as literature: and this distinction is an important one for writing in health and social care. 316 The Handbook of Creative Writing But committed writing – whether the novels of J. M. Coetzee or the prose of John Berger – works when it doesn’t simply rehearse an argument but explores the world of a particular standpoint. Charles Dickens’s novels showed their middle-class readership the life of the Victorian poor in vivid detail – but did so within narrative-driven stories of loss or belonging; the Granta school of ‘dirty realism’ brought British ‘cool’ diction of the 1980s and 90s together with an essayistic, travel-writing sensibility to create highly-achieved literary forms. Writing which seems to adopt an overtly ‘political’ standpoint is in fact only doing what all good writing does, which is to offer the reader an author’s-eye view of the world. Even the Aga-Saga, and its baby sister chick-lit, write from a specific social and therefore political standpoint: it’s just that theirs is a conservative, socially-disengaged one. Helen Fielding’s Bridget Jones’ Diary works because it’s a small masterpiece of characterisation of the self-referential world of a young single woman in a society which sees that as a mark of failure (Fielding 2001). George Orwell’s Keep the Aspidistra Flying, first published in 1935, is the similarly claustrophobic story of Gordon Comstock, a young man who has chosen an anti-materialistic life, against the grain of contemporary society, and whose world contracts to small details of his daily struggle as a result (Orwell 2000). Awkward, dreary Comstock, progeny of the politicised Orwell, is a solipsist as fully-realised as the ditzy Bridget Jones. He is also as real as the Schlegel sisters in E. M. Forster’s earlier (1910) Howards End (Forster 2000). As Germans, these characters, too, are outsiders in English society. They illustrate their author’s recurring theme of the importance of authenticity, something which for Forster is characteristically witnessed by the outsider. But Forster is a writer who sails close to the polemical wind. Both lapse, at times, over the line from the exploration of a standpoint into the repetition of an argument. In his short stories, and in the more schematic first novel Where Angels Fear to Tread, Forster repeats oppositions – between Apollonian and Dionysian, city and country, the British ‘insider’ and the foreign ‘outsider’ – which become formulaic (Forster 2001). All writing, then, adopts a standpoint; but it is persuasive only when it works in literary terms. All writing – and reading – takes place in a context which is, by definition, social (for a fuller examination of the way the writing self brings their context into the authorial project, both deliberately and accidentally, see Writing: Self and Reflexivity [Hunt and Sampson 2006]). But as we write our context may also include, for example: our income and its consequences for the opportunities we have to write; a supportive or distractingly stressful personal life; our professional status and the career implications of what we’re writing; states of mental and ph