Even when writing seemed difficult bordering on the
impossible to you, all you had to do was find something to read and things
would balance out. Then writing seemed
easy again, not because of anything you’d done, except perhaps to read.
So far as you were concerned, there were two distinct types
of things to read. First and foremost,
you found books that engaged and engrossed you to the point where you’d put
aside necessary chores to finish them, rereading passages that seemed to sing
to you. In some cases, your game was to
pretend you were some of Odysseus’s sailors, hearing the sirens. If you were called back to reread or called
to read on, you were glad to comply.
What could be the polar opposite? Why of course, writing that seemed to you
sketchy or indulgent or somehow using language and story techniques at a
distance. You were on the alert for the appearance of any of your favorite
tropes in such things. Writing at this
level heartened you because it was being published, which meant to you that you
could—and did—find your way in. Such
books made it possible for you to come after the books you loved, the ones that
made the concept of story telling seem simple.
It is not simple, nor is mere narrative prose simple even if
it reads as though it were. You’ve been
spending some time reading the latest work of a writer you have not taken to
well in the past and whom you are now quite admiring.
The author is Richard Ford.
The work has a one-word title, which you love because it seems to have
such nuance. Canada, You’re in such awe of Ford’s use of
sentences and detail and of your favored tactic, withholding, that you find
yourself writing some of the passages in your note pads. You’re quite taken with this one: “Chickens bobbed and pecked over the dry
ground.” Not that there is much
importance to the chickens, but if you’re going to have them in the story in
the first place, having them represented this way helps you see them, believe
they are present, believe you are there with them in the scene.
When you are in the scene, you are in the story.
When you are in the story you are engaged in that
simultaneous thing humans do; you inhale the elements to the point where you
are a breathing part of drama.
In what stand for you as the old days or the pulp days, you
were in the frequent company of noir fiction that was not always of an even
quality. Nevertheless you felt the
kinship with it beyond whether it was either of the two types you described
above. You could get at the feel of that
type story—but not quite. You could get
at it except for the places where your own attitude shone through. In this way, you came to what you would call
noir or dark funny. Funny in places, but
dark in others.
One of your favorite writers from those times, when pulp
novels were flourishing in magazines and as massmarket originals, was Jim
Thompson, 1906-77. Here’s how he starts Savage Night.
“I’d caught a slight cold when I changed trains at Chicago,
and three days in New York—three days of babes and booze while I waited to see
the Man—hadn’t helped it any. I felt
lousy by the time I arrived in Peardale.
For the first time in years, there was a faint trace of blood in my
spit.”
Years of reading and trying to get your writing squeezed
into that mode started to produce some results.
And while you were experiencing those results, you were being squeezed
into being an editor, which meant that persons who wrote such things were
coming into your office or having drinks with you and telling you about strange
things they wished to publish.
And you listened.
And you published some of them
No comments:
Post a Comment