Love everything you've said here, John. It really sums up the way I've always felt about books versus the writers of books. Thanks for the interesting wake-up read.
I'm relatively new to your substack but am enjoying it tremendously and looking forward to tackling your books.
I read Against Interpretation in high school and it remains one of my favorite essays. As an undergraduate, I drove Susan Sontag to the airport the morning after she gave a talk sponsored by a student group at my college. A year later, I had dinner with Kurt Vonnegut, my favorite novelist from the ages of 14-19.
Those experiences taught me valuable lessons about the difference between reading the work of an author I admire, hearing an author speak, and meeting an author socially. I came away determined to pursue the first, occasionally indulge in the second to better understand voice, that mysterious and elusive element of great writing, and avoid the third altogether.
Neither could have lived up to my expectations, even if they tried. The fact that they didn't even has had the happy effect of giving me more time to read.
Very interesting reflections. I do socialize with writers, but it's on a peer basis, or at least I try to think of it that way, even when they're more successful and established with me. Any time I've been tempted to put someone on a pedestal, they're going to fall off, so I try to not go there.
That seems spot on. Socializing as a peer and socializing as a fan is an important distinction. Fan interactions feel like they have to be one-sided. Once you've told a writer or artist you admire their work, what more can you say except provide more detail? And what can they say in return, except thanks?
Approaching someone as a peer is different. Talking to someone in your field, even someone starting out, is valuable because it is shop talk. Comparing notes on craft is often worthwhile. Beginners sometimes offer insights that old pros are blind to.
Yes, shop talk is exactly what I'm after. I really like it when someone who is teaching writing reaches out to me after they've read one of my books and wants to talk because it gives me a chance to hear about the work from their perspective. I think we all crave community in our work. When I start to think of other writers from the perspective of being their "fan" it makes it hard for that community to form.
I had a professor who said there's no point going to listen to a writer speak, reading their interviews, looking into their letters, etc, because writers put the most interesting part of themselves into their work, so if you've read the work you've gotten the best of them. Proust makes the same observation in his novel--when his character finally meets Bergotte, he realizes the great author isn't a particularly great conversationalist, and Mme de Villeparisis, the great chronicler of society, actually hosts only a third-rate, unfashionable salon. He realizes these authors are great not because their lives are inherently interesting, but because they are able to transmit some (any) sense of life in their work.
I think I've only ever been overwhelmed once by an academic writer whose work I had liked but I had never met before seeing them speak, and that's Stuart Hall. Hall turned out to be more dazzling in a seminar-format presentation than his writing, and more gracious and gentle too--extremely charismatic and humble in the same moment. Mostly scholarly writers are as they are on the page--just one of the gang, and often a bit boring--and unfortunately some are not as they are on the page, in very negative ways. So I generally don't feel strongly about going to see a famous academic talk, except as you do here--if I suspect it's going to make me like someone's work far less, I really don't want to be there. That would certainly go for novelists and essayists more generally.
For better and worse, my view of someoneβs art is influenced by what I know of the rest of their life. I think thatβs useful information. I can only read so much and I get/have to make choices.
I think this is wise advice. Itβs probably in our nature to want to find out everything about an artist or writer (or any public figure) whose work has truly moved us. And it always leads to disillusionment or disappointment. A third bad outcome is exhibiting cult like behavior. Thatβs the worst outcome.
I would like to say I have never succumbed to fandom but throughout my life it has happened. Musicians, actors etc. Even if the person is relatively good, itβs still unhealthy to fixate on a mere human being who will of course have flaws. I do think it might be okay for a teenager to have a crush if this is a safe way to experience βloveβ from afar but even there, there must be boundaries. Sadly, that is not the case today where the internet can create toxic spaces for fans. Itβs not super common for writers but not unheard of. Maybe George RR Martin comes to mind. And in general, there are mini-fandoms for writers: they will bully anyone who has written a βbadβ review (anything less than 4 stars) of their faveβs books. Your approach is smarter - just stay out of it!
Interesting story about Richard Ford! Just wow. I have read one book by him, βCanadaβ. 4 people showed up to my book club for that book. Nobody liked it. He sounds like an arrogant jerk.
In my younger days, I was a huge fan of Tim O'Brien's book THE THINGS THEY CARRIED. In 2001, I was accepted into a summer writer's workshop and got to be in his class and *gasp* have a private conference with him about one of my stories. I wanted to work with the writer Tim, not the man Tim; my friends had told me stories about his tendency to take advantage of his reputation to woo the ladies. I did not want him to see me as a woman, only as a writer. What if he made a pass at me? How could I still teach his books if he did that? How could I take his writing advice seriously? I could have asked to be paired with a different writer so as to never know what would happen. But I just had to know!
I'm glad to say that his tomcat days seemed to be over. He arrived with a young wife who'd just had a child. He was all business, and nothing untoward happened. I was so effing relieved.
John, regarding our Chicago connections and what you said regarding sports teams. I have felt the same way with respect to my sports fandom as you articulate here re authors. I don't get why people want a sportsman's autograph. I have no particular interest in even meeting them -- what is interesting is watching their performance on the field, which is where their genius lies.
[re 2016 Cubs -- my mom was a lifetime Cubs fan. She would regale me with her story of listening to the radio in 1938 when Gabby Hartnett hit his "Homer in the Gloamin' ." She passed away a few months before the Cubs won the Series. When I saw that fans were writing names of family in chalk on wall outside the bleachers, I asked a relative to do that for me, and the pictures of that mean a lot to me.]
As always, your thoughts have become an important part of my Sunday.
You are reminding me of a time in the late 70βs when I wrote a βfanβ letter to Richard Bach after reading Illusions. It was the first book of many more to come that liberated me from my strict Catholic upbringing and conservative beliefs still associated with NoDak today! I wrote asking him if he ever went on book tours because I wanted to meet him in person. He actually wrote a postcard back writing words to the effect that meeting in print was better. Love your writing! Thank you for your insights and candor.
I had a wonderful encounter with Percival Everett here in Chicago at a "James" event. I had arrived early with a bit of time to stroll down Michigan Ave. OMG, there he was walking right in front of me. I followed him for awhile until he walked into a restaurant. Later, after the interview and Q&A were over, Mr. Everett came to the lip of the stage to engage a bit with the audience. When he crouched down on the lip of the stage to acknowledge me, I fessed up to the fact that I had been "stalking" him earlier. We had a good laugh over it. Delightful man!! (John, I know you're a fan of his too!)
I'm lucky to live in an area with tons and tons of author events and poetry readings. I attend quite a few of them, but I almost never get a book signed - it just doesn't really mean anything to me to have a signed book. I often enjoy the events, although they can sometimes be duds. I recently saw Daniel Handler at an event, and he was very funny and interesting, not to mention very charming with the small crowd of kids who came to get their Lemony Snicket books signed. I also saw Percival Everett recently where he spoke before a showing of American Fiction. He was fairly genial and had some interesting things to say, but he was also a bit mumbly and seemed to me that he'd rather be somewhere else. That's often what makes author events less than enjoyable: the authors are shy, maybe, or exhausted from their book tour, sick of the same old questions, whatever. Probably my favorite kind of event is the small bookstore event with a new or not-so-famous author.
Iβm with you, John. I avoid fandom completely, especially with authors, but also with actors, directors, musicians, and always with politicians. This allows me to still like Orson Scott Cardβs novels, Woody Allenβs movies, and the Mad Max movies.
While crafting an email to my boss intending to clarify a criticism I wished to convey about the efficacy of his work, I segued to your piece. Though the subjects of interest could not be more divergent (in your case works of literature, in mine the painting of police helmets) the parallels in terms of focusing on the outcome rather than the personality of the technician/creator resonated with me.
Love everything you've said here, John. It really sums up the way I've always felt about books versus the writers of books. Thanks for the interesting wake-up read.
I'm relatively new to your substack but am enjoying it tremendously and looking forward to tackling your books.
I read Against Interpretation in high school and it remains one of my favorite essays. As an undergraduate, I drove Susan Sontag to the airport the morning after she gave a talk sponsored by a student group at my college. A year later, I had dinner with Kurt Vonnegut, my favorite novelist from the ages of 14-19.
Those experiences taught me valuable lessons about the difference between reading the work of an author I admire, hearing an author speak, and meeting an author socially. I came away determined to pursue the first, occasionally indulge in the second to better understand voice, that mysterious and elusive element of great writing, and avoid the third altogether.
Neither could have lived up to my expectations, even if they tried. The fact that they didn't even has had the happy effect of giving me more time to read.
Very interesting reflections. I do socialize with writers, but it's on a peer basis, or at least I try to think of it that way, even when they're more successful and established with me. Any time I've been tempted to put someone on a pedestal, they're going to fall off, so I try to not go there.
That seems spot on. Socializing as a peer and socializing as a fan is an important distinction. Fan interactions feel like they have to be one-sided. Once you've told a writer or artist you admire their work, what more can you say except provide more detail? And what can they say in return, except thanks?
Approaching someone as a peer is different. Talking to someone in your field, even someone starting out, is valuable because it is shop talk. Comparing notes on craft is often worthwhile. Beginners sometimes offer insights that old pros are blind to.
Yes, shop talk is exactly what I'm after. I really like it when someone who is teaching writing reaches out to me after they've read one of my books and wants to talk because it gives me a chance to hear about the work from their perspective. I think we all crave community in our work. When I start to think of other writers from the perspective of being their "fan" it makes it hard for that community to form.
I had a professor who said there's no point going to listen to a writer speak, reading their interviews, looking into their letters, etc, because writers put the most interesting part of themselves into their work, so if you've read the work you've gotten the best of them. Proust makes the same observation in his novel--when his character finally meets Bergotte, he realizes the great author isn't a particularly great conversationalist, and Mme de Villeparisis, the great chronicler of society, actually hosts only a third-rate, unfashionable salon. He realizes these authors are great not because their lives are inherently interesting, but because they are able to transmit some (any) sense of life in their work.
I think I've only ever been overwhelmed once by an academic writer whose work I had liked but I had never met before seeing them speak, and that's Stuart Hall. Hall turned out to be more dazzling in a seminar-format presentation than his writing, and more gracious and gentle too--extremely charismatic and humble in the same moment. Mostly scholarly writers are as they are on the page--just one of the gang, and often a bit boring--and unfortunately some are not as they are on the page, in very negative ways. So I generally don't feel strongly about going to see a famous academic talk, except as you do here--if I suspect it's going to make me like someone's work far less, I really don't want to be there. That would certainly go for novelists and essayists more generally.
John Gorkaβs song βHeroesβ says:
βThey say that when it comes to choosing heroes
It's best to pick the ones who aren't around
If you choose among the living
You tend to have misgivings
When your hero lets you down
He might have a bad night in your townβ
For better and worse, my view of someoneβs art is influenced by what I know of the rest of their life. I think thatβs useful information. I can only read so much and I get/have to make choices.
I think this is wise advice. Itβs probably in our nature to want to find out everything about an artist or writer (or any public figure) whose work has truly moved us. And it always leads to disillusionment or disappointment. A third bad outcome is exhibiting cult like behavior. Thatβs the worst outcome.
I would like to say I have never succumbed to fandom but throughout my life it has happened. Musicians, actors etc. Even if the person is relatively good, itβs still unhealthy to fixate on a mere human being who will of course have flaws. I do think it might be okay for a teenager to have a crush if this is a safe way to experience βloveβ from afar but even there, there must be boundaries. Sadly, that is not the case today where the internet can create toxic spaces for fans. Itβs not super common for writers but not unheard of. Maybe George RR Martin comes to mind. And in general, there are mini-fandoms for writers: they will bully anyone who has written a βbadβ review (anything less than 4 stars) of their faveβs books. Your approach is smarter - just stay out of it!
Interesting story about Richard Ford! Just wow. I have read one book by him, βCanadaβ. 4 people showed up to my book club for that book. Nobody liked it. He sounds like an arrogant jerk.
In my younger days, I was a huge fan of Tim O'Brien's book THE THINGS THEY CARRIED. In 2001, I was accepted into a summer writer's workshop and got to be in his class and *gasp* have a private conference with him about one of my stories. I wanted to work with the writer Tim, not the man Tim; my friends had told me stories about his tendency to take advantage of his reputation to woo the ladies. I did not want him to see me as a woman, only as a writer. What if he made a pass at me? How could I still teach his books if he did that? How could I take his writing advice seriously? I could have asked to be paired with a different writer so as to never know what would happen. But I just had to know!
I'm glad to say that his tomcat days seemed to be over. He arrived with a young wife who'd just had a child. He was all business, and nothing untoward happened. I was so effing relieved.
John, regarding our Chicago connections and what you said regarding sports teams. I have felt the same way with respect to my sports fandom as you articulate here re authors. I don't get why people want a sportsman's autograph. I have no particular interest in even meeting them -- what is interesting is watching their performance on the field, which is where their genius lies.
[re 2016 Cubs -- my mom was a lifetime Cubs fan. She would regale me with her story of listening to the radio in 1938 when Gabby Hartnett hit his "Homer in the Gloamin' ." She passed away a few months before the Cubs won the Series. When I saw that fans were writing names of family in chalk on wall outside the bleachers, I asked a relative to do that for me, and the pictures of that mean a lot to me.]
As always, your thoughts have become an important part of my Sunday.
You are reminding me of a time in the late 70βs when I wrote a βfanβ letter to Richard Bach after reading Illusions. It was the first book of many more to come that liberated me from my strict Catholic upbringing and conservative beliefs still associated with NoDak today! I wrote asking him if he ever went on book tours because I wanted to meet him in person. He actually wrote a postcard back writing words to the effect that meeting in print was better. Love your writing! Thank you for your insights and candor.
I had a wonderful encounter with Percival Everett here in Chicago at a "James" event. I had arrived early with a bit of time to stroll down Michigan Ave. OMG, there he was walking right in front of me. I followed him for awhile until he walked into a restaurant. Later, after the interview and Q&A were over, Mr. Everett came to the lip of the stage to engage a bit with the audience. When he crouched down on the lip of the stage to acknowledge me, I fessed up to the fact that I had been "stalking" him earlier. We had a good laugh over it. Delightful man!! (John, I know you're a fan of his too!)
I'm lucky to live in an area with tons and tons of author events and poetry readings. I attend quite a few of them, but I almost never get a book signed - it just doesn't really mean anything to me to have a signed book. I often enjoy the events, although they can sometimes be duds. I recently saw Daniel Handler at an event, and he was very funny and interesting, not to mention very charming with the small crowd of kids who came to get their Lemony Snicket books signed. I also saw Percival Everett recently where he spoke before a showing of American Fiction. He was fairly genial and had some interesting things to say, but he was also a bit mumbly and seemed to me that he'd rather be somewhere else. That's often what makes author events less than enjoyable: the authors are shy, maybe, or exhausted from their book tour, sick of the same old questions, whatever. Probably my favorite kind of event is the small bookstore event with a new or not-so-famous author.
Costco not stocking books year round? That is just sad.
Iβm with you, John. I avoid fandom completely, especially with authors, but also with actors, directors, musicians, and always with politicians. This allows me to still like Orson Scott Cardβs novels, Woody Allenβs movies, and the Mad Max movies.
While crafting an email to my boss intending to clarify a criticism I wished to convey about the efficacy of his work, I segued to your piece. Though the subjects of interest could not be more divergent (in your case works of literature, in mine the painting of police helmets) the parallels in terms of focusing on the outcome rather than the personality of the technician/creator resonated with me.
I enjoyed the moments of remote comradery.
Clarification: the criticism was related to a painter's work - not the boss!