Hifalutin
In one of my previous posts i was railing against the over-interpretation of art in the critical circle. I think what got me started was because in the english honours course that i'm doing, one element of it is a creative piece. And i thought i'd write a psychological sci-fi piece dealing with the very nature of the human mind, and following a very mediocre character etc... And to go along with the creative piece is a research essay almost as long as the creative piece. So i was talking to my assigned advisor about how Tolstoy's 'The death of Ivan Illych' really inspired me to write a story about a mediocre character, and what not, but because i'm doing sci-fi and it's considered a 'genre' piece she was urging me to shy away from doing it. She was saying how they don't encourage genre pieces and what not... I showed her some of my awesome ground-breaking story, lol, and she admitted she doesn't like sci-fi, but then came to an agreeance to get me a co-advisor that has an interest in it. Now i've got no problem with her not liking sci-fi or what not, but if i was writing crime or anything genre they wouldn't want me to do it, even if it's a really hard thought provoking philosophical piece which mine is going to be. And i'm only choosing sci-fi so i can deal with some far out brain altering stuff... I'm having a real experience writing my piece, in the medium of sci-fi i can explore any crazy idea that appeals to me. And i think it's the most philosphical piece i have ever written. But according to my advisor i have to follow exactly Tolstoy and make it a modern sci-fi interpretation of the death of ivan illych instead of just using it as my inspiration to write a really cool piece. So anyway, in the creative workshops, the sort of non-genre literary stuff that they seem to gobble up is most of it crap. I can't stand listening to any more self-indulgent tripe being spewed out and fawned over. Where the hell is the character development? Seriously some of the gay-ass pieces that come from being moulded the way the university wants it are terrible. Tolstoy was the man, yet why mould everyone into little literary heads. Let's also explore how wonderful 'genre' can be. You go to a bookshop and 90 % of the stuff is genre, because it's interesting and stuff people actually want to read. So anyway i'm just going to write the piece i want and say it's a really loose abstact interpretation of ivan illych.
The main point i'm getting at is that i'm dealing with the very nature of the human mind in my story and i hope it is really thought-provoking, yet if i handed in a wacked out piece that just had me walking down the street and describing all the things i'm seeing, and every little gayass feeling i'm having then they would fawn over it and love it, even though i've just written about walking down the street. Nothing cool like altering the mind with machines and what-not.
So i'll fight the machine!! and write my own damned story.
You've been a great audience.
posted by danielinamerica at 4:11 PM
6 Comments:
Yeah dan! Yeah. I totally agree with you. I can't believe how much they(english lecturers/tutors & professors) are against 'genre'. Like its a dirty word or something. Now i know historically the English have been opposed to all things French (kings, language etc) but i thought they had moved on. I don't understand why they are so freakin narrow minded. Like if you mention a spaceship in one of your submissions they'll be all like "Oooo, yeah do you have to include the word 'spaceship'? It sorta makes this story a bit too... pardon my french, 'genre'."
Surely they must understand that the only reason stories are classified into genres is to make books easier to find when you walk into a book store.
For example, "Hey, I heard that the hit tv series Underbelly was based on the book 'leadbelly' by John Silvestri. Where the hell can i find this book?"
"You might wanna try the true crime section of your local bookstore."
And voila, 'genre' to the freakin rescue.
So why then do they dissaprove of anything other than what they want? Isn't that extremely prejudice and limiting and conflicting in a so called creative writing course?
But believe it or not Dan, some of these people giving you stick over writing sci-fi are pretty damn smart. Some of them are professors and have the abrrv of Dr in front of their name. So what's their problem? Do they have a phobia of labels?
"This story can be defined and classified and labelled as 'sci-fi'. And that is why you fail."
Or is it something else? Something more cerebral like a deep-seeded sunconscious fear of reading and re-reading bad fantasy and sci-fi and detective stories all with non-sensical plots and one dimensional characters and no goddamn conflict. Instead of giving them Bladerunner you give them Battlefield Earth to read and analyse and mark and make detailed comments on.
But why can't they just say, "You're sci-fi story had no plot. The characters were one dimensional and the conflict was incoherent or non-existent." OR "Wow, I'm really not a fan of all this genre and easily classifed fiction but I really thought you had excellent character development and even though you mentioned a spaceship that could time-travel in the first paragraph, i really thought the plot was well constructed." Instead of just saying, "Oooo, You're gonna write a sci-fi piece? But I don't really like sci-fi. And me and the other faculty members were thinking maybe creative writing is just not for you."
So goddamit Daniel Callaghan you write the best danm science fiction stroy you can write. And when Dr Professor says he doesnt like sci-fiction or any fiction that can be classified within a genre you grab your nuts and say "Genre this."
Ok i gotta get back to work now.
Hey dan, that last post was from me. Totally didn't mean to post anonymous.
Hey Lach i've been trying to think of a good reply comment but i can't seem to come up with anything while racking my brain except for the 'literati' which didn't reveal much in my search on google, but i did find out about an intellectual elite such as the intelligenstia. A group of mental elitists, like the arts department at University!!! So i have copied word for word what i found:
The notion of an intellectual elite as a distinguished social stratum can be traced far back in history. Examples are the philosopher-kings and guardians of Plato's Republic and monks in medieval Europe, who are now seen as custodians of history and culture.
Use of the term "intelligentsia" is first reported to have occurred in the Russian Empire in the first half of the 19th century. For example, the word was casually used in the diaries of Vasily Zhukovsky, dated to 1836. In Poland, or more precisely in Greater Poland (which then was a part of the Kingdom of Prussia) the term was popularised in a sense close to the present one by Polish philosopher Karol Libelt, and became widespread in Polish science after the publication of his O miłości ojczyzny (On Love of the Motherland) in 1844, in which he defines "inteligencja" to be those well-educated members of the population who undertake to lead the people as scholars, teachers, clergy, engineers, and who guide for the reason of their higher enlightenment. The term was also popularised by a Russian writer, Pyotr Boborykin, in the 1860s, who proclaimed himself the "godfather" of the notion in 1904. From there it came into English and several other languages. In English this word is often applied to the "intelligentsia" in Central European and Eastern European countries in the 19th and 20th centuries. The distinction was based on the economic and cultural situation of intellectuals in these countries and is different from that in Western Europe or North America.
The emergence of elite classes of intellectuals or well-educated people had been observed in other European countries (e.g., "intellectuels" in France and "Gebildete" in Germany). However, there were important distinctions observed in the lands of the Russian Empire. These differences were caused by various historical processes, whose influence still is disputed by historians. The presence of long-lasting autocratic regimes or national suppression in this region, or a low level of general education in these countries in the 19th century, are among these. This situation motivated local intellectuals to elaborate a system of common values and a sense of mutual sympathy.
this is a great blog, but, once again, i am saddened that you're reading tolstoy instead of dostoyevsky... the entire blog was saved by the use of the word intellegentsia, which is a very jroc word... all things considered, i am pleased.
how's that married life treating you?
plu
J
Hey Dan. How are you man? Im in Mexico at the moment, probably be back in Oz round the end of the year. Good to see your blog is still going
ah jroc my friend married life is wonderful, dostoyevski is cool, a little dark but cool. I'm sure you feel very priviliged to be part of the intellegentsia at UVa, lol...
morris, mexico, wow you've had one far out adventure. It will be good to see you when you return.
Post a Comment
<< Home