The Juvenilia Files
Dear Students,
This is just a reminder that our first class will be on Tuesday, January 11th. By now you should have received your 1st assignment, but just in case you haven't...
1st Assignment:
Write your own credo. What do you want to bring to the world of fiction? What is meaningful to you? What do you think makes a story great? Who are your favorite writers? Faulkner has said that the tools he needs for writing are paper, tobacco, food and a little whiskey. What do you need?
---
Many sunsets ago, when I first felt the need to write, I wrote an article titled ‘Juvenilia’. I wrote primarily because I liked the title. It was a very convenient and liberating, one-word disclaimer that boldly said, “Dear reader, I know that this piece of prose is embarrassing and pretentious but I’m still OK with it. Because it constitutes my juvenilia and I’ve grown up since. And I look back at it indulgently the same way I look back on my childhood years”.
Writing, in one way or the other, helps me grow up. It helps me filter and get rid of the multitude of thoughts and ideas that plague me day and night. I’ve learnt that the only way to ascertain the true worth of my thoughts is to transcribe them onto paper. If I like what I write, I put it up on the web and make sure that Google can find it. If I don’t like what I write, I label it my ‘Juvenilia’ and still put it up on the web and again make sure that Google can find it.
I want to write because I have a lot to say. And I think that a good book is, in many ways, like a good conversation – engaging, provoking, discursive, obsessive, humorous, amorous, vacuous, scandalous and largely irreverent. I think that it was a character in J.D.Salinger’s book ‘Catcher in the Rye’, who remarks, “You know that you’ve read a good book when you want to pick up the phone and call the author even if it’s just to say ‘hi’ and talk vacuities”. I haven’t written much but a lot of my friends and other acquaintances often call to talk to me and I think that it’s a sign. They want me to start writing and I have to do it for them.
The idea of a good book as a good conversation was largely influenced by my obsessive readings of Salman Rushdie’s works. His books, as the cliche goes, have no beginning or ending but only a thick middle. He once wrote, “Writing is as close as we get to keeping a hold on the thousand and one things – childhood, certainties, cites, doubts, dreams, instants, phrases, parents, loves – that go on slipping, like sand, through our fingers”. Long before I read that line, I knew that I wanted to write to reclaim my own past. Initially, I thought that it was a case of acute nostalgia, the kind that you are prone to when you leave your country (India) and spend a sizable amount of time in another (U.S.A). But soon, I realized that this affliction was more widespread and the cause had less to do with spatial displacement and more to do with temporal displacement. I am, we all are, growing up and a healthy stimulus to dust our memories frozen in the recesses of past seems inevitable.
While an engaging, discursive conversation is the hallmark of the modern mind, the classical mind is purposeful and relentless in its dealings though the same might not be immediately apparent. I like books in which the seemingly desultory conversation is actually being steered by some broader structure and themes with a universal appeal. When asked what inspires him to make his movies, Manoj Night Shyamalan, the director of the movies ‘Unbreakable’ and ‘Signs’, said that the conflicts in his movies are something a ten year old and even a ninety year old can identify with. ‘Unbreakable’ was about finding one’s true vocation and ‘Signs’ was about our faith – themes that are still being explored in different contexts and books.
“One writes”, V.S.Naipaul once wrote, “to learn about oneself”. I think that this is true because we only know how to begin stories. Once begun, the story has to evolve and write itself and in the process reveal who and what we truly are. Because, as Umberto Eco said, “Writing is a cosmological event”. We get to play God and determine the fate of the very characters we create. We begin by setting the rules (such as, in this story the Animals shall take over the Farm) and then evolve the story within these bounds. As an engineer by profession, this kind of interplay between deliberate design and inspired improvisation is very appealing to me.
I like books which can seamlessly merge truth and fiction and history and memory. I like books in which authors have successfully dumped their visions of cities as they remember them or as they ‘want’ to remember them. I haven’t been to Bombay in a long time and have never been to Dublin. But I love the way they are recreated in suffocating detail in Salman Rushdie’s and James Joyce’s books. Joyce, I’m told, frequently wrote to his friends and relatives in Dublin asking for precise answers to questions such as ‘how high a particular tree in the backyard seemed when seen from a window in the attic of his childhood home’. These kinds of details, conceivably, do not constitute a sparkling conversation. But I like irreverent writers who still record them to largely amuse themselves and not the reader.
Beyond all these loaded reasons is a more sober pretext for writing. Writing is a very narcissistic exercise. We write because the writer of a memoir is also an exhibitionist, who by design, never comes off as being the second best. Our writings, however bad they are, always make us feel good. And remember, these days, a little vanity is everybody’s favorite virtue.
These and other contrived excuses compel me to defiantly write my own tales. In spite of my predilection for the beginning-to-end experience, I often find myself trying to structure my narratives with the right pace, a sound plot and the optional surprise ending. I try to write regularly, but in the same line, let me confess that I’m not trying hard enough. I picture myself waking up early, having a warm cup of coffee and getting down to the business of writing. But unfortunately, I don’t drink coffee. So I find myself feverishly scribbling on any piece of paper I can find, late in the night, drunk on a grande sized container-ful of some other stimulant. And the next morning, I wake up a sober person, bemoan my self-wrought torturous indulgences and put away the write-up along with my other ‘Juvenilia Files’.
20 Comments:
"As in, reality is that which has been written about."
I wrote a not-so-little something based on a similar view. It is very much a member of my Juvenilia Files, so read only if you are jobless!
www.arl.wustl.edu/~prashant/j2.html
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Great link! I wish I had access to your browsing history - you have some great haunts on the web.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
So I'm curious: have you completely dismissed audience from your theory? Hasn't appreciation from one's fellow men and women also been motivation for artistes... or does that make them faux artistes?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Blogger sucks ! Spent 20 minutes trying to figure out how to edit comments.
Back to SpaceK's comment - nothing wrong with being appreciated etc, but I think it has very little to do with the creative impulse - while composing, for example, the composer only thinks of the next note. Questions like 'Will I become famous?'/Am I hungry?/Will the chicks go ga-ga ? etc while always present somewhere in the subconscious (whether composing or not) are very much in the background.
The greatest singer I've ever heard (my former music teacher) very rarely performed in public and never took in any students. Her case is hardly unique - I remember from my occasional visits to the gult heartland (Tenali, Vijayawada in particular) hearing full scale RTP (ragam-tanam-pallavi) from neighbouring houses. The singers were just doing it for fun and didn't give a damn if there was anyone listening. I think at the core all creative impulses, particularly in the 'pure' sciences and arts, are like that.
As you mentioned, I think the whole audience adulation thing is very much a western thing - desis of course are taught to be modest and any little praise is reserved for the super talented. I remember, when an IIT Kanpur prof and his two students cracked the whole 'primes is in P' problem, there was hardly any mention on their website. I can imagine how a US univ (WashU for e.g) would have gone overboard with the news highlighting it in the largest font on their webpage. Curiously, this also ties in with Shobha's comment about salesmanship. Because, I sorta take pride in how IIT Kanpur underplayed it.
But I was also writing about a related issue - not what you want to write but what you would like to read, for instance. Clearly, good writing is for the rush etc. but what do you expect from a "good book". Its got to be liberating et al but clearly the experience of the reader will be much different from that of the writer.
Italo Calvino, apparently wrote a lot of crap before he decided that he would start writing exactly the kind of stories that he himself would like to read!
Exactly the same criteria for the reader as well. e.g. when you read and understand a clever proof you feel exactly the same rush the original prover felt. Same with art - when you begin to grasp it you have entered a very similar state of mind the artist was in.
Of course there are many variables like cultural conditioning, individual tastes etc which influence your interpretation - you might even resonate at a completely different frequency from the author. But the point is that you resonate and you are not very different from the author if you do.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Shoot! I wanted to say something about Calvino and the Oulippo movement. Forgot what it was. Anyway, the Calvino example doesn't show that the experiences of the reader and the writer are different - just that the reader may not always grasp (or even want to grasp) what the writer is trying to say.
In the ideal case, the act of reading itself is a performance (like performing a play or a piece of music composed by someone else).
Just remembered a poem on a similar theme - "Talking to the sun" by Frank O'Hara.
http://www.poemhunter.com/p/m/poem.asp?poet=8255&poem=181817
Appeared in today's NY times (another of those amazing coincidences) and the link might be dated soon, so check out -
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/16/books/review/16symposium.html
I just decided to pick some relevant swatches of text from the previous link and post them. Mainly because the link will be dated soon and there is a lot of text (and links) out there.
From Donald Barthelme's Obituary:
Mr. Barthelme once likened his style to that of collage. "The principle of collage is the central principle of all art in the 20th century", the author said. 'Dealing With Not-Knowing'.
Rebutting criticism of himself and of other writers as being too difficult, Mr. Barthelme said: "Art is not difficult because it wishes to be difficult, rather because it wishes to be art. However much the writer might long to straightforward, these virtues are no longer available to him. He discovers that in being simple, honest, straightforward, nothing much happens."
"Writing is a process of dealing with not-knowing, a forcing of what and how," Mr. Barthelme said. "We have all heard novelists testify to the fact that beginning a new book, they are utterly baffled as to how to proceed, what should be written and how it might be written, even though they've done a dozen. At best there is a slender intuition, not much greater than an itch. The not-knowing is not simple, because it's hedged about with prohibitions, roads that may not be taken. The more serious the artist, the more problems he takes into account, the more considerations limit his possible initiatives."
On Gunter Grass getting the Nobel prize:
Grass, whose passionate engagement in German society is utterly removed from the minimalist introspection of some modern literature, said Thursday: "A writer must not only fulfill literary obligations, but also those of a citizen by being involved politically. I hope that young writers remember this in the future."
Rushdie once confessed that Grass was his hero who inspired him to write. I think, Grass's 'Tin Drum' and the above comment provide good insight into Rushdie's own 'Midnight's Children'.
On Gabriel Garcia Marquez's Love In The Time of Cholera:
"I think that a novel about love is as valid as any other," he once remarked in a conversation with a friend. In reality the duty of a writer - the revolutionary duty, if you like - is that of writing well."
At the age of 19, as he has reported, the young writer underwent a literary epiphany on reading the famous opening lines of Kafka's "Metamorphosis," in which a man wakes to find himself transformed into a giant insect. "Gosh," exclaimed Garcia Marquez, using in Spanish a word we in English may not, "that's just the way my grandmother used to talk!" And that, he adds, is when novels began to interest him. Much of what come in his work to be called "magic realism" was, as he tells it, simply the presence of that grandmotherly voice.
An Indian writer (Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni) once said that women are the true keeper's of India's stories. I think that this is so darn true. My mom, aunts and their friends are the biggest and most engaging gossips I know!
From an interview with Borges:
"If some notion comes into my head, and now and then it does, let's say a notion about a story or about a poem, I do my best to discourage it. But if it keeps on worrying me then I let it have its way with me and I try to write it down in order to be rid of it."
"I write for the same reason a cow gives milk" -- G. B. Shaw
Are you saying that you are lactating?
WHAT IS THISSSSSSSSSS
If You are looking for more info on audio books and am glad to be on your site. If you want to find out more about......audio books then go visit http://heabooks.com......You wont be disapointed..Thanks For Visiting
Post a Comment
<< Home