joy williams (fiction)
there's an article (i found via lexisnexis) titled
i don't think i expect anymore to 'learn' anything about existence from reading
i don't 'trust' writers who feel motivated to 'teach' or 'prove' anything
joy williams has, to me, gotten less rhetorical and funnier with each new book
State of Grace (novel, 1973)
was nominated for the national book award
it felt to me like something written straight through, maybe slowly, but without many revisions
The Changeling (novel, 1978)
i think it went quickly out-of-print (because of bad reviews maybe; see below) and so i can't find it, have not seen it in used bookstores
half the stories seem State of Grace-like
the other half are colloquial (in a loose, childish, unpretentious way), are funny and strange; have clear scenes with dialogue; and some even end in sort of epiphanies, but a kind of epiphany where so little--nothing, pretty much--is realized that that, the blankness and vaguness of realization, itself is the epiphany: that actually there will be no more epiphanies, ever, in the future, starting now
one story from this collection, 'summer,' was in the new yorker
i feel the new yorker is, or was, maybe, 'afraid' of joy williams
Breaking and Entering (novel, 1988)
she started to 'allow' herself to be funny, i feel, with this novel
or rather started to allow herself even more
ignore these last two sentences, i think
she gets further away from the State of Grace-abstractness/dreaminess here
almost the entire novel is in a conversational, mostly concrete, highly readable prose style
the second to last story in Taking Care is in this novel, near the beginning, revised a little
a part of that story that i think is funny:
these stories were written, i think, when 'kmart realism,' or 'minimalism,' were maybe at 'peak popularity'
five of these stories were in 'best american short stories' ('78 '85 '86 '87 '90) (chosen by ann beattie, raymond carver, anne tyler, someone else, and i think richard ford)
one, 'rot,' won an o'henry prize ('88)
they are almost all about death and, to me, are almost all funny and calming
they are written in an interestingly odd, sometimes awkward, sometimes endearingly ungrammatical, almost childlike prose style
michiko kakutani said:
The Quick and the Dead (novel, 2000)
was nominated for the pulitzer prize, michael chabon won
joy williams changes here again, i feel
the language is now lyrical, colloquial, affected, metaphorical, almost always with a certain tone, which made it feel, to me, like joy williams was always strongly present
[the following quotes are from a bookworm (1/01) interview about The Quick and the Dead]
on after her parents died, when she was 50, before she wrote The Quick and the Dead:
the language here is simple, childlike, concrete
this is her funniest book, to me, and the one i reread most
death is given no more 'weight' or 'importance' than anything else
people often call joy williams odd, strange, bizarre
but really joy williams is seeing things clearly (as they are, in their normal state), without preconceptions (as a child, or someone who enters the world from another world, might)
from a bookworm (2/05) interview about Honored Guest:
* people who 'don't get' joy williams, raymond carver, frederick barthelme, ann beattie, etc., i've noticed, usually interpret the things that happen in stories firstly, and most importantly, as symbolic, as representative of something else, something the author is trying to say, a message
i think most, or all, of the 'kmart realists' have said, or would likely say, if asked, based on what i know, that their stories do not have message or symbols
i wonder if those who 'don't get it' or 'don't like it' also interpret concrete reality as metaphorical or symbolic
i have never read an essay in which a 'kmart realist' criticizes, devalues, or dismisses the work of a writer who uses symbols, or is 'maximalist,' magical realist, or who writes in any other way
some writers who have criticized/devalued 'kmart realism' (** see the end of this post for quotes of 'kmart realists' 'defending' themselves): madison smartt bell, tom wolfe, frederick busch, cynthia ozick ("Less remains less. I feel very deprived. So many short-story writers are depriving themselves of the amplitude of language—both intellectually and lyrically. I don't know whether it's minimalism or incapacity. There is so little on the page that you can't make the judgment. It's data. It's menu prose. There's no wit in it, no joy in it, there's no sympathy.")
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** ann beattie: "Why should we have pretended that K-Mart didn't exist? Why should I have pretended that no one in Vermont owns a bong?"
ann beattie (from this): "Remember that the painters who were minimalists had a philosophy that what you see is what you get: no more, no less. But this has nothing to do with the so-called minimalist writers. Frederick Barthelme clearly believes that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. And the reader who understands that something is unstated--sometimes tragically unstated--between the characters would have to realize the connotations, the implied complexities. Also, Frederick Barthelme is funny. Bobbie Ann Mason can be quite funny. The minimalist painters were not funny. Minimalism in painting was a term of approval. It was a way to discuss a movement that was a responsive movement to a previous movement in art: Abstract Expressionism. When critics began to talk about literature in these terms, they were using it in a pejorative sense, saying that there were empty spaces. Bad empty spaces, not good empty spaces."
bobbie ann mason: "The people I write about are serious about their lives. If they go to a Marty Robbins concert and stand in line to get his autograph—there are more people who do things like that than not."
frederick barthelme: "I don't make spareness the god of all things, but it seems to me that if you intentionally understate things, you have a chance of allowing the reader's imagination to come into play."
Writer not as bent as her charactersin it it says
When novelist Thomas McGuane met fellow writer Joy Williams his parting comment was, "I thought you would be more twisted."one reason i like joy williams is because she's funny to me
"I was heartbroken I had disappointed him," Williams recalls. "I thought I should have been more twisted at our meeting." In fact, Williams, who reads from her latest short story collection, Escapes, tonight at 8 at the Premiere Dance Theatre, 207 Queens Quay W., is an extremely pleasant individual, without a hint of any major psychological disorders.
i don't think i expect anymore to 'learn' anything about existence from reading
i don't 'trust' writers who feel motivated to 'teach' or 'prove' anything
joy williams has, to me, gotten less rhetorical and funnier with each new book
State of Grace (novel, 1973)
was nominated for the national book award
it felt to me like something written straight through, maybe slowly, but without many revisions
The Changeling (novel, 1978)
i think it went quickly out-of-print (because of bad reviews maybe; see below) and so i can't find it, have not seen it in used bookstores
Her worst experience was the reception of her second novel, a work termed "startlingly bad" by a reviewer [i think anatole broyard] for the New York Times.Taking Care (stories, 1982)
"That book was just destroyed. It was an awful experience. I continued to write stories, but it took me a long time before I ventured out with a novel again. I felt at the time that some of the reviewers wanted me to die. They just wanted me to stop writing. They were saying, 'We have other writers out there who we have to deal with and all the writers yet unborn, so please go away.'"
half the stories seem State of Grace-like
the other half are colloquial (in a loose, childish, unpretentious way), are funny and strange; have clear scenes with dialogue; and some even end in sort of epiphanies, but a kind of epiphany where so little--nothing, pretty much--is realized that that, the blankness and vaguness of realization, itself is the epiphany: that actually there will be no more epiphanies, ever, in the future, starting now
one story from this collection, 'summer,' was in the new yorker
i feel the new yorker is, or was, maybe, 'afraid' of joy williams
Breaking and Entering (novel, 1988)
she started to 'allow' herself to be funny, i feel, with this novel
or rather started to allow herself even more
ignore these last two sentences, i think
she gets further away from the State of Grace-abstractness/dreaminess here
almost the entire novel is in a conversational, mostly concrete, highly readable prose style
the second to last story in Taking Care is in this novel, near the beginning, revised a little
a part of that story that i think is funny:
[Liberty's mother phones Liberty early one morning]Escapes (stories, 1990)
"I had a terrible dream about penguins tonight, Liberty."
"Penguins are nice, Mother. They don't do anyone any harm."
"There were hundreds of penguins on this beautiful beach and they were standing so straight, like they do, like children wearing little aprons."
[...]
"That sounds nice, Mother. It sounds sort of cheerful."
"They were being clubbed to death, Liberty. They were all being murdered by an unseen hand."
these stories were written, i think, when 'kmart realism,' or 'minimalism,' were maybe at 'peak popularity'
five of these stories were in 'best american short stories' ('78 '85 '86 '87 '90) (chosen by ann beattie, raymond carver, anne tyler, someone else, and i think richard ford)
one, 'rot,' won an o'henry prize ('88)
they are almost all about death and, to me, are almost all funny and calming
they are written in an interestingly odd, sometimes awkward, sometimes endearingly ungrammatical, almost childlike prose style
michiko kakutani said:
"Several of the stories in ''Escapes'' awkwardly strain to find a metaphor for their characters' lives: a rusting, rotting car becomes a symbol for a couple's deteriorating marriage in ''Rot''; and in ''Health'' an adolescent girl's glimpse of a menacing stranger becomes a symbol of all the frightening realities she will soon face in grown-up life."* for an entire 'thing' on 'kmart realism' that i wrote (that continues from the above kakutani quote), then deleted, go to the end of this post
The Quick and the Dead (novel, 2000)
was nominated for the pulitzer prize, michael chabon won
joy williams changes here again, i feel
the language is now lyrical, colloquial, affected, metaphorical, almost always with a certain tone, which made it feel, to me, like joy williams was always strongly present
[the following quotes are from a bookworm (1/01) interview about The Quick and the Dead]
on after her parents died, when she was 50, before she wrote The Quick and the Dead:
my faith, it wasn't tested, so much, as it was, uh—everything dropped away, and i seemed to be living a very—i saw everything the way it was, uh, for quite some time, and the way everything is is terrifically depressing, if not horrifying...uhm...death is supposed to, for a person of faith, ehm...one can accomodate it, i mean tolstoy in his, his what—in his readings and reflections on life, and god, and death, saying that death—that dead people don't go awayon (if the novel is supposed to ask 'how do we live?') if there is anyone in her novel that knows better than anyone else:
well, i don't think there is one, and think maybe that is why people feel uneasy about the going on—the goings on hereHonored Guest (stories, 2004)
the language here is simple, childlike, concrete
this is her funniest book, to me, and the one i reread most
death is given no more 'weight' or 'importance' than anything else
people often call joy williams odd, strange, bizarre
but really joy williams is seeing things clearly (as they are, in their normal state), without preconceptions (as a child, or someone who enters the world from another world, might)
from a bookworm (2/05) interview about Honored Guest:
i somehow want fiction to stand up and do more, but i guess all fiction can do is to just show the anamalous in life, and, uh, startle—startle the reader into realizing that life isn't as simple as it seems----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* people who 'don't get' joy williams, raymond carver, frederick barthelme, ann beattie, etc., i've noticed, usually interpret the things that happen in stories firstly, and most importantly, as symbolic, as representative of something else, something the author is trying to say, a message
i think most, or all, of the 'kmart realists' have said, or would likely say, if asked, based on what i know, that their stories do not have message or symbols
i wonder if those who 'don't get it' or 'don't like it' also interpret concrete reality as metaphorical or symbolic
i have never read an essay in which a 'kmart realist' criticizes, devalues, or dismisses the work of a writer who uses symbols, or is 'maximalist,' magical realist, or who writes in any other way
some writers who have criticized/devalued 'kmart realism' (** see the end of this post for quotes of 'kmart realists' 'defending' themselves): madison smartt bell, tom wolfe, frederick busch, cynthia ozick ("Less remains less. I feel very deprived. So many short-story writers are depriving themselves of the amplitude of language—both intellectually and lyrically. I don't know whether it's minimalism or incapacity. There is so little on the page that you can't make the judgment. It's data. It's menu prose. There's no wit in it, no joy in it, there's no sympathy.")
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** ann beattie: "Why should we have pretended that K-Mart didn't exist? Why should I have pretended that no one in Vermont owns a bong?"
ann beattie (from this): "Remember that the painters who were minimalists had a philosophy that what you see is what you get: no more, no less. But this has nothing to do with the so-called minimalist writers. Frederick Barthelme clearly believes that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. And the reader who understands that something is unstated--sometimes tragically unstated--between the characters would have to realize the connotations, the implied complexities. Also, Frederick Barthelme is funny. Bobbie Ann Mason can be quite funny. The minimalist painters were not funny. Minimalism in painting was a term of approval. It was a way to discuss a movement that was a responsive movement to a previous movement in art: Abstract Expressionism. When critics began to talk about literature in these terms, they were using it in a pejorative sense, saying that there were empty spaces. Bad empty spaces, not good empty spaces."
bobbie ann mason: "The people I write about are serious about their lives. If they go to a Marty Robbins concert and stand in line to get his autograph—there are more people who do things like that than not."
frederick barthelme: "I don't make spareness the god of all things, but it seems to me that if you intentionally understate things, you have a chance of allowing the reader's imagination to come into play."
15 Comments:
I feel like minimalism sometimes becomes an affectation, especially with Ann Beattie. It grates and does not seem visceral. It seems too planned and deliberate without any soul or spirit, whereas Raymond Carver's stories seem like they need the minimalism to contain the painful subjects and characters. The minimalism in Carver's stories is more of a crystallization than a writerly device.
I'm interested in reading some Joy Williams now, particularly because of the humor.
I'm sort-of in the same camp as zeldafitz in that I just don't find Beattie's work altogether funny because the damn punchline always seems to be right there on the surface, like she's afraid someone will miss it.
Oh, and thanks for the posts. Very well done.
ann beattie's first two books are different than her others; funnier and more natural-seeming, i think
her third book is almost not funny at all, ever
then she wrote the book where she tries to be funny, Love Always
that was later
and then...
um... can't think of anything else to say about that
Ripping stuff, here.
I've perused Honored Guest (after listening to that Bookworm, in fact), and enjoyed. But haven't spent enough time with Williams.
Is this odd? I discovered Williams at around the same time I discovered Marylinne Robinson, and one almost automatically makes me think of the other?
And, though I've actually finished a book by Robinson (Gilead), and never finished more than two stories by Williams, I think I prefer Williams.
Robinson seems joyless. She's apparently very tall and imposing in person. Williams seems just nutty enough to love. And invite over.
(Why I never pursued Joy Williams after reading "The Little Winter" in the 1990 Best American Short Stories—I read Padgett Powell's "Typical", and ran out to buy a book by him. I read "Typical" on a bus. I bought Typical—the collection—at the bookstore near my house after getting off the bus.)
(Madison Smartt Bell is in that collection. I've never read anything by him because I don't like the hat he's wearing in his author photo. Is that odd?)
I'm disappointed in Cynthia Ozick, who I've liked in the past. Less is not less. I quote Dylan Thomas:
"The best craftsmanship always leaves holes and gaps... so that something that is not in the poem can creep, crawl, flash or thunder in."
I think it's okay to quote that, even though it's about poetry instead of short fiction, don't you?
I think so.
I wonder if some of these critics -- Wolfe, definitely -- are motivated by class. I've only read Taking Care, but the characters are more the kind of people who would wait in line for tickets to a country-western concert than, say...go to the opera. Or whatever. I don't know what people like that do for fun.
Carver's characters were mostly working class. Mary Robison's characters are workers, service industry workers sometimes, alcoholics and drug addicts.
I think some people are used to laughing at people like that, like when they watch the Jerry Springer show so they can make fun of the guests' accents, but Williams and Robison want you to laugh with them, and I don't think people like Wolfe are willing or maybe even able to cross that line.
themanwhocouldnt:
robinson seems joyless to me too
i can imagine us hanging out and me trying to make jokes and she getting offended and then ditching me in some shopping mall or something
i need to edit this post... so she had five stories in best american in this collection
it's hard to imagine joy williams getting into best american nowadays
it seems like everything has been mainstream'ed ... with michael chabon editing the next one and all
that madison smartt bell photo makes me want to read his books so that i can make fun of him with authority
about dylan thomas, i like what frederick barthelme said better (see above); the same thing, meaning-wise, i guess; but i feel like i can actually talk to frederick barthelme, whereas if dylan thomas came up to me and said that i would feel embarrassed
michael:
maybe
though Wolfe would probably never admit it
whatever the reason, it's stupid
i feel that expressing hatred for a work of fiction is the same as expressing hatred for a person; if you're doing it, you're just not thinking hard enough or trying hard enough to understand
also, you can have 'favorites' or you can 'like' something, but you should do it with the knowledge that what is your 'favorite' is not the 'best'
there is no 'best'
it's idiotic and mindless to ever use the words 'best' or 'better' or 'worst' when talking about fiction
one time i saw Dale Peck outside the sunshine cinema, walking along, at night, alone, and he had this grin on his face
by the way
i'm deleting all comments by impersonators
the person pretending to be both sarah strickley and me at the same time
if you want to call me a piece of shit or say that i'm a worthless son of a bitch, or whatever, i'm okay with that, just don't impersonate anyone... because that's bad; you're taking someone's identity and acting with it, getting bad or good credit for it
and then when the real owner of that identity goes out into the world, people will react against the identity in a way that the owner of it does not deserve and has no causal relation to; sort of like when calves are born as a by product of milk-cows having to be pregnant all the time, and who are then put in the dark where they can't move and fed liquid feed and then killed for veal
they didn't ask for it; they don't deserve it
so if you want to call me a shithead or whatever, please, i encourage you; just don't impersonate anymore, please
I read Honored Guest last night, the version printed in the 1995 Best American Short Stories, which I bought a few months ago at a garage sale for 50 cents.
I enjoyed the story very much, but in light of your previous discussion about minimalism vs. maximalism, and using symbols/metaphors vs. not using them (I think that's what you were saying?), I wanted to ask -- in your opinion, is Joy Williams a minimalist or a maximalist? In any case, Honored Guest in fact uses a very heavy metaphorical scene.
The girl, Helen, goes to a salon to get a haircut, to please her dying mother Lenore. The woman cutting her hair, a descendent from an aboriginal Japanese tribe, who proceeds to tell Helen a story about how her tribe revered bears -- how they would nurse it with human milk, keep it caged but treated like an honored guest no less, only to slaughter it brutally in an act of ritual sacrifice.
When I started reading this scene, I thought to myself, okay... here's what the story is all about... better pay attention...
I'm not quite sure how to get around this 'problem' (the problem being heavy-handed metaphor).
Now, the scene was essential because it communicated the theme/meaning of the story, and it's a wonderful message to take away. I can't say I ever thought about my life in those terms exactly, but it makes sense: Better enjoy life while the good times last, because inevitably, dying will catch up with you. And when it does, you will suffer and eventually die, and when you do, its darkness for eternity.
So, if I can accept that a heavy-handed metaphor such as this is necessary, then I might accept that people do go through life looking for symbols that relate to their own plights -- (referencing your initial post).
I think I do this. I think sometimes I view my life like it's an unfolding story. This has been a tough year for several of my friends -- luckily, not for me -- but I've internalized their plights and analyzed how they apply to my own self-growth. I've learned lessons through their hardships.
Which is what the character Helen did, I think. She had been floating through the story, trying to make sense of her mother's dying, and even though we don't see it happen, we can assume the hair stylist's anecdote resonated with her. We see this just before the final scene, when Helen tells Lenore that she loves her. It was the first time in the story Helen expressed anything positive, which is subtle and beautiful. It demonstrated growth without actually telling us that she had grown.
Then, in the final scene, the bus driver says, "I lost my mother at your age, you just have to hang in there." This is also the point of the story. He gave this advice in such a mundane, everyday manner. It's deceptively callous. But when her girlfriend babbles on about her own death experiences, you know the bus driver was right, and you trust Helen knows he was right. It was a very good ending.
This brings me to the "less is less" discussion. I often think that "less is less", but this opinion comes from my experience in workshops. Often I read stories that merely skirt the surface of the deeper themes beneath, and arent't very thought-provoking to boot. The stories read as shallow and dull and mechanical. I remember a woman who turned in a story containing only dialogue. It was awful. One person, in her defense said, "I read a Hemingway story that was all dialogue." Until someone else said, "No offense, but she's not Hemingway."
Ultimately, I think every writer needs to find their own voice to express whatever it is they are trying to express. Don't emulate a certain form or ideal such as 'minimalism' -- just do whatever works for you and see how other people react. I overwrite sometimes, so I rely on my peers to point out when I'm doing to so. Then I cut it back. You just need to learn how to strike the balance that works.
Karin:
about minimalism vs. maximalism...
ideally, i will never have those words in my head; instead just look at each text as its own unique thing
i used the label 'kmart realism' so much on this site because i think it's funny for something to be called 'kmart realism'
actually, to me, one of the few things the 'kmart realists' have in common is that i like them all
i don't think honored guest is metaphorical... or rather, the metaphor is explicit (the daughter herself thought something like, to live is to be an honored guest) and therefore still like in 'real life'
the other kind of metaphorical story is where the author stands sort of outside of the story and arranges things for proper metaphorical resonance (subtle, etc.), where none of the characters themselves realize the metaphor...
to me, that is not like real life...
to me, the metaphor in honored guest was not heavy-handed, but rather 'real' because the character herself realizes the metaphor and thinks about it... and in that way, the story is not contrived to contain the metaphor, the 'meaning' of the story is not in that metaphor, but in the character's thoughts about the metaphor; therefore the author is not trying to 'teach' anything or even get any 'message' across, which i like
i think writers have two choices only
if they want to write to satisfy themselves, they should write what they want to / like to read
if they want to write to satisfy themselves by way of satisfying others (by way of fame or money) then they should write what the highest number of others will want to / like to read
neither one is 'better,' and there's overlap and whatever... and i guess the second kind of writer is usually happier (the first kind usually the writer is miserable and dies alone and depressed), and in the end, anyway, we are all doomed
i just think that 'less is less' is a vague, inaccurate, superficial statement
does it mean that less psychology is less meaning; less words in a sentence is less psychology; less adverbs and adjectives is less psychology (less insight into the psychology of the author) and therefore less meaning; less time elapsed for number of words used is less action and therefore more psychology; or what?
it's just too vague to say 'less is less'
A few brief comments:
"i don't think honored guest is metaphorical... or rather, the metaphor is explicit (the daughter herself thought something like, to live is to be an honored guest) and therefore still like in 'real life'
the other kind of metaphorical story is where the author stands sort of outside of the story and arranges things for proper metaphorical resonance (subtle, etc.), where none of the characters themselves realize the metaphor...
to me, that is not like real life..."
I agree with this, but also, what Williams did is sort of trick -- it's like she wanted to do what you expressed in the latter, but did what you expressed in the former just to sneak it in there without relying on traditional means.
Sometimes I like the latter better because it's less obvious. With Honored Guest, I couldn't escape the feeling that I was being told what the metaphor was -- the scene was so HUGE, and the punchline is the title of the story, etc.
~
Also:
"i think writers have two choices only
if they want to write to satisfy themselves, they should write what they want to / like to read
if they want to write to satisfy themselves by way of satisfying others (by way of fame or money) then they should write what the highest number of others will want to / like to read "
I don't agree with this at all. I think the writer should write whatever it is they are trying to express, and if it so happens that the means they use to express themselves does not conform with what society deems as popular or marketable, then so be it. But if the writer happens to have a style and a voice that is marketable, then good for them.
But I'm not going to compare myself to either lot. I'm just going to keep reading, and analyze what's good and bad about the writing, and try to absorb those principles into my own work.
Just to weigh in on "Honored Guest"--the bear metaphor was, to this reader, the least interesting part of that story. The dialogue between mother and daughter, on the other hand, was funny, cruel, heartbreaking.
We're printing a 30th anniversary edition of The Changeling. I finished reading the galley proof last week. This is a classic, completely overlooked. Advance copies will be available in January. Let me know if you're interested in a copy and I'll see what I can do.
Andy, Ass't. Ed.
Post a Comment
<< Home