I want to try to bring together the thoughts of two writers I admire and draw from constantly for my strength, John Gardner and Brenda Ueland. On the surface of things, they seem quite different. Gardner was somewhat of a renegade scholar who lived hard and died before he was 50. Ueland was knighted by the king of Norway, cared little for the hard facts of scholars (and she detested critics, whereas Gardner thought some of them to be useful, creative agents) and lived to be over 90 years old. What holds them together, in my mind, is their dedication to art and the importance both placed upon it. On closer inspection, one finds that Ueland was rather a renegade for her times: she was part of the Greenwich Village crowd of bohemians. It would have been something to see the two of them sitting at the same table talking about art.
Ueland's book, If You Want To Write, established her reputation in the world of writers. Gardner's On Moral Fiction, gave Gardner some fame also, although perhaps not in the way he would have wanted. Critics (the selfsame that Ueland probably wouldn't have liked) had a field day with Gardner's fiction, holding it up to the high standards he set for writers in Moral Fiction and often finding it wanting. At the time just prior to his death, he found himself hounded by scholars, critics, and old ghosts of memory. Ueland, on the other hand, lived her life by a simple maxim: she determined she would never do anything she didn't want to do.
In the belief that art came from some "divine" place and that true art is moral art, they both agreed.
There are so many quotes in both books I would like to call attention to in this entry, but I'm going to restrict myself to just a very few.
Ueland wrote: "This recognition that art, music, literature is a sharing, that a live, alternating current is passing swiftly between teller and listener, that a listener (even though imaginary or transcendent) is absolutely essential in the process, cleared up many things that puzzled me."
And Gardner wrote that "art's validity can only be tested by an imaginative act on the reader's part." He also wrote that "True art is a conduit between body and soul, between feeling unabstracted and abstraction unfelt." In other words, Gardner felt that art came out of the same place as dreams--and this is why it is original and true. He said that "out of the artist's imagination, as out of nature's inexhaustible well, pours one thing after another. The artist composes, writes, or paints just as he dreams, seizing whatever swims close to his net. This, not the world seen directly, is his raw material."
Gardner felt that when ideas were dreamed and then expressed in art, the audience entered into the artist's dream--the unconscious is that current that Ueland was talking about, the one that connects the artist to the audience.
Ueland wrote of one of the best stories I have ever seen explaining the relationship between the artist and the audience. She wrote:
Once I was playing the piano and a musician, overhearing it, said to me: "It isn't going anywhere. You must always play to someone--it may be to the river, or God, or to someone who is dead, or to someone in the room, but it must go somewhere."
7 comments:
How beautifully expressed, Theresa. It makes so much sense, too, yet I have not really seen it expressed so clearly. I think that THIS concept, above all, may be what could help me in my writing. When I write to you, in this venue or via e-mail, and when I leave comments and thoughts in the journal of others, the words flow so much more easily - BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING SOMEWHERE. Yes yes yes - thank you! OK, it is now time to pick up Ueland's book, which, incidentally, I found in one of my book piles today. Coincidence? I think not...
Love, Vicky
http://www.livejournal.com/users/vxv789/
You've tapped on a key element that I feel is missing in my writing, an intentional reader. Though I'm aware that people read my journal and I love that they do, if I bring my awareness that people will read my writing to the forefront of my consciousness, I paralyze myself. My perfectionism and my inner critical voice have a field day. I want to be read, but sometimes I can't imagine who would read me or why what I have to say is worthy of reading. I know that's the voice of my own poor self-esteem, though, and I will continue to pick up my pen and sit down to my keyboard. (This is such a wonderful part of Lent for me.)
Thank you for this entry. It's like you turned on a lightbulb in my head. I too like to write and what I'm missing is that all important audience. Like you said, I need my words to go to someone or something. For as long as I can rememeber I have always had a problem with flow and now that I think about, it makes perfect sense. I will definitely seek out this book.
Tami
http://journals.aol.com/rivercitygirl1/PicturePages
I had read that before about writing for a particular audience. It focuses the work. I don't often do it that way and that was my problem. I have stopped writing for the time being...actually Because of Ueland's book. I could never get past the chapter of writng at a certain time of day. She herself said if you can't do that you might want to re-think your career choice.
When I write, I see myself as an actress on stage delivering a monologue to my adoring fans. That's pretty egocentric and a form of literary masterbation. These journals are good for that (not masterbating of course) but...most people just want to be "heard", acknowledged.
I think...therefore I am
I write...I am here.
Or as The Who put it in "Tommy"
"See me, Feel me, Touch me, Heal Me"
Gypsy:
You wrote of Ueland's book:
She herself said if you can't do that you might want to re-think your career choice.
Are you sure we are talking about the same book? This doesn't seem like something Ueland would say. I just over the weekend reread IF YOU WANT TO WRITE and don't remember seeing that. Could you tell me which chapter you found this? --Theresa
Gypsy recently e-mailed me to say she was indeed mistaken about which book she had read. I can see where it was easy to make the mistake; the titles are very similar. Thanks, Gypsy, for clearing that up. Brenda Ueland's book is so open, so generous, so inspiring. I really think many people would benefit from reading it. She addresses the particular problems posed for women writer's too, which I found especially helpful.
Once I was playing the piano and a musician, overhearing it, said to me: "It isn't going anywhere. You must always play to someone--it may be to the river, or God, or to someone who is dead, or to someone in the room, but it must go somewhere."
That simple thought is quite profound when applied to our own personal writing. It made me question whom exactly my writing is playing to. And if in journaling, could that be self? An internal "somewhere?"
As usual, you prop me up with many thoughts. Never fails. Thanks!
Post a Comment