Flip217
02-17-2009, 04:37 PM
I wanted to share a few words about this terrific and original criticism about what the author sees as "growing pretentiousness" in American writing.
B.R. Myers originally published his critique in The Atlantic Monthly (well, he actually published himself and tried to sell it on Amazon, but I digress...) but he felt he had to make so many compromises to make it "work" in the way the editors at A.M. wanted that he ended up going back, reworking it, and trying to make it "the light-hearted polemic" that he intended.
In a nutshell, then, his argument runs thusly: the modern, "prize winning" novel that is held up by critics as an example of supreme literary craftsmanship is, more often than not, confusing, unintellectual, full of clumsy and inelegant prose, pretentious,and generally nowhere near as good as the top-shelf writing of previous generations.
Furthermore, he argues that literary critics have abandoned any sense of objective assessment and are little more than bullying snobs who refuse to take seriously any well-written, straightforward story, and will instead label it as "genre fiction" or dismiss it with the curious qualifier of "a good read" or "a page turner", as if these were qualities to be avoided.
Myers takes to task many of the authors I have read and enjoyed -- Annie Proulx, Don DeLillo, and Cormac McCarthy, to name a few -- but he's not just lamenting the style or substance of authors past; he really is examining the work of these modern authors and finding what I regard as real faults, though I would say that many of his criticisms fall under the category of subjective taste (but I guess that's a fine line when you're playing the role of critic).
Some examples:
On Proulx:
"...by running a dozen dull attributes together Proulx can ensure each is seen only in the context of a flashy whole. This technique, which calls to mind a bad photographer hurrying through a slide show, is the key to most of her supposedly lyrical effects...like so much writing today it demands to be read quickly, with just enough attention to note the bold use of words. Slow down, and things fall apart..."
On David Guterson:
"...it takes more than a few sentences to demonstrate the repetitive sluggishness of Guterson's prose...luckily for Guterson many readers...are willing to buy into the scam that anything this dull must be Serious and therefore Fine..."
I don't agree with everything Myers says, and when I first started reading it my thought was that this was a frustrated author who couldn't get published and is taking it out on successful writers. But that's not it at all -- he's an extremely well-read man with a critic's keen eye, and he writes well.
If you love these authors or hate them, I'd recommend picking up this book; maybe especially if you love these authors, but haven't been exposed to some of the works Myers holds up as superior. There really is no substitute for going straight to the source, reading for yourself, and making up your own mind. That said, it is refreshing to see someone who takes a contrarian point of view and can express it so well.
By the way, as you might expect "A Reader's Manifesto" was not well received by the literary community when it was published. Myers includes a good bit of the critics charges against him, and takes the time to respond. Most of the critics seem not to have even read it, and often their reaction can be boiled down to "this fellow Myers seems to think all writing should be easy and direct and not involve any work on the part of the reader" which isn't it at all.
A Reader's Manifesto (http://www.amazon.com/Readers-Manifesto-Pretentiousness-American-Literary/dp/0971865906)
B.R. Myers originally published his critique in The Atlantic Monthly (well, he actually published himself and tried to sell it on Amazon, but I digress...) but he felt he had to make so many compromises to make it "work" in the way the editors at A.M. wanted that he ended up going back, reworking it, and trying to make it "the light-hearted polemic" that he intended.
In a nutshell, then, his argument runs thusly: the modern, "prize winning" novel that is held up by critics as an example of supreme literary craftsmanship is, more often than not, confusing, unintellectual, full of clumsy and inelegant prose, pretentious,and generally nowhere near as good as the top-shelf writing of previous generations.
Furthermore, he argues that literary critics have abandoned any sense of objective assessment and are little more than bullying snobs who refuse to take seriously any well-written, straightforward story, and will instead label it as "genre fiction" or dismiss it with the curious qualifier of "a good read" or "a page turner", as if these were qualities to be avoided.
Myers takes to task many of the authors I have read and enjoyed -- Annie Proulx, Don DeLillo, and Cormac McCarthy, to name a few -- but he's not just lamenting the style or substance of authors past; he really is examining the work of these modern authors and finding what I regard as real faults, though I would say that many of his criticisms fall under the category of subjective taste (but I guess that's a fine line when you're playing the role of critic).
Some examples:
On Proulx:
"...by running a dozen dull attributes together Proulx can ensure each is seen only in the context of a flashy whole. This technique, which calls to mind a bad photographer hurrying through a slide show, is the key to most of her supposedly lyrical effects...like so much writing today it demands to be read quickly, with just enough attention to note the bold use of words. Slow down, and things fall apart..."
On David Guterson:
"...it takes more than a few sentences to demonstrate the repetitive sluggishness of Guterson's prose...luckily for Guterson many readers...are willing to buy into the scam that anything this dull must be Serious and therefore Fine..."
I don't agree with everything Myers says, and when I first started reading it my thought was that this was a frustrated author who couldn't get published and is taking it out on successful writers. But that's not it at all -- he's an extremely well-read man with a critic's keen eye, and he writes well.
If you love these authors or hate them, I'd recommend picking up this book; maybe especially if you love these authors, but haven't been exposed to some of the works Myers holds up as superior. There really is no substitute for going straight to the source, reading for yourself, and making up your own mind. That said, it is refreshing to see someone who takes a contrarian point of view and can express it so well.
By the way, as you might expect "A Reader's Manifesto" was not well received by the literary community when it was published. Myers includes a good bit of the critics charges against him, and takes the time to respond. Most of the critics seem not to have even read it, and often their reaction can be boiled down to "this fellow Myers seems to think all writing should be easy and direct and not involve any work on the part of the reader" which isn't it at all.
A Reader's Manifesto (http://www.amazon.com/Readers-Manifesto-Pretentiousness-American-Literary/dp/0971865906)