One of my favorite parts of the interview, though, is this exchange, which begins with Karim’s question:
Before you took up full-time writing, you spent a good deal of time in academia, both as a student and as a community college teacher in Georgia. What did those experiences bring your writing?You can enjoy the whole interview here.
My academic life gave me lots of information that I later used, particularly a knowledge of history. I ended up in the Ph.D. program at Columbia University in New York, studying history. I never studied creative writing, never entered an MFA [Master of Fine Arts] program, or received the slightest instruction in how to write a novel, or anything else but a history monograph. Now, when I see the work of prospective writers, I can usually tell the ones who have been trained to write “academically” and those who are natural storytellers. Usually, though not always, the natural storytellers are far better. The MFA writers often appear to be straining very hard to make a mark in their prose, and because of that, there is an artificial quality to the work, as well as a tendency to impress professors, rather than actual readers. Thus they strive to be clever, when they should strive simply to be authentic.
1 comment:
I'm a big fan of Cook's novels. Now I'm a big fan of his perceptive literary criticism:
"MFA writers often appear to be straining very hard to make a mark in their prose, and because of that, there is an artificial quality to the work, as well as a tendency to impress professors, rather than actual readers. Thus they strive to be clever, when they should strive simply to be authentic."
Nailed it.
Post a Comment