joy williams (shifting things)
here is an essay by joy williams from an anthology of essays by women, i think, about writing
Shifting Things
My father is a congregational minister. My grandfather was a minister. My family is Welsh. I grew up, an only child, in Maine. This is not a paragraph from one of my stories. It is a paragraph from my life. My real life.
I was fascinated by the words in the Bible, and the stories. The stories aren’t comforting or sentimental, they’re tremendous and ruthless, and the words—horses and fish, blind men and dead men—all those words meant something other than what they appeared to mean, they were representations of other things, things I could and couldn’t imagine. Water wasn’t water, seeds weren’t seeds. This thrilled me. Everything, as image, was totally something else. There were levels of meanings in images, in sentences, in stories.
I wanted to write.*
The year I went to college I received three copies of Marguerite Young’s Miss MacIntosh, My Darling for Christmas. It was as though my loved ones were saying—So you want to be a writer! Well, it took this woman seventeen years to write this book which is about the search for reality in a world of illusion and nightmare. It’s pretty much unreadable but it’s supposed to be a work of art. We guess this is how it’s done and it’s by a woman too so... good luck.*
I wrote to Flannery O’Connor’s mother once. I said I really liked her daughter’s stories and could I have a picture of her. Meaning her daughter, of course. She wrote back and said I sure could not.*
At the time I didn’t realize what it was, the true nature of the peculiar gift the writer gives the reader.*
I like the short story as a form. The intensity of it, the swiftness. Assemble the ambulances. Something is going to happen.*
More can probably be found out about a writer from a single paragraph of work than from any interview or essay. Gertrude Stein said that paragraphs are emotional whereas sentences are not. She also said that the American way of writing was the disembodied way of disconnecting something from anything and anything from something. She suggested that something was always floating above the American paragraph—the well-done American paragraph—something detached from what it said and what it did.*
Here is a paragraph of mine. Turnupseed lived on the mainland in a little cement block house on land sucked senseless by the phosphate interests. Every time he tried to plant a tree in the queer, floppy soil, it perished. What does that tell you about me? It tells you that I sometimes find safety in the comic, because really there is a pit, a panic beneath everything and the comic is a safety net there to keep from falling further. It swings there kindly and yet it should be removed, really. Don’t count on the net. Fall further.*
I write out of a sense of guilt. I believe in guilt. There’s not enough guilt around these days for my taste.*
A woman recently told me that after reading my first novel, State of Grace, she kept dreaming that her house was burning down. I was charmed by this of course. At the same time, I suspected it had been said before about someone else. Words, you know. They’re around. They’ve been used a lot.*
I don’t dream much. I know this is not a good signifier. Writers are supposed to dream and keep diaries. Woman writers are supposed to, that is. Men don’t have to necessarily. I frequently have nightmares. They take two inarticulatable forms. There are no images in them at all. They are pure fear and dismay, a sense of the tremendous strength of the dark, a sense that I have not done what it was I knew I should have done.*
What I can conjure up in the daylight hours when I close my eyes tight are the faces of people. They are all totally unique, people I have never seen before or written about, blooming and fading one after another behind my shut lids. I don’t understand it. They come in the bright Florida sunlight. I would prefer them to be in the shape of animals... other things. But they are the faces of people. Strangers, very clear, but without their stories.*
The writer has to maintain a curious disassociation with the world. The act of writing in itself is a highly self-conscious retreat from the world. I live in beautiful places but I have to stay cooped up in a small, almost dark room if I’m ever going to get anything done. And I have to stay there for hours and hours, day after day, making this thing, setting this created, unreal thing in motion, a story. The literal isn’t interesting, but the literal must be perfectly, surprisingly rendered because the search is always to see things in a new way. That is essential.*
And then it just seems preposterous. There I am, choosing my words so carefully, trying to build this pure, unanalyzable, transparent, honest thing in this dim room with the shades drawn and out there is the world, indecent, cruel, apathetic, a world where the seas are being trashed, the desert bladed, the wolves shot, the eagles poisoned, where people show up at planning and zoning meetings waving signs that say My Family Can’t Eat the Environment. That sentence is ill, it is a virus of a sentence, and as a writer, I should be able to defeat it and its defenders handily. With the perfect words, I should be able to point out, reasonably, that in fact the individual’s family is eating the environment, that they are consuming it with sprawl and greed and materialistic hungers and turning it into—shit. But perfect words fail me. I don’t want my words. I want to throttle this person, beat him over the head with his stupid sign.*
I think what happens to many writers is that they reach a certain age and they look around and think, My God, what an indulgence this writing is—stories! I mean, really—and then they go out and involve themselves in a more active way with the world. Writers must never engage the world in their stories. The writer must write stories. Or get out in the world and beat people over the head with their stupid signs.*
Oh thou lord of life, send my roots rain, Hopkins wrote. Some writers write too much. The rain doesn’t come, but they write still. And they are wilting while pretending they are a tree in bloom. Sometimes the literary establishment encourages them in this belief.*
I was once at lunch with a well-known writer and his family. It was our first meeting. Other people were there as well. It was a beautiful winter day in Key West. There I was, being friendly, drinking my eleven martinis or what have you, hair brushed as well as possible, napkin in lap, nibbling and chatting away, only to have the well-known writer remark later—“I expected her to be more twisted.”*
Jean Rhys once said that to be a writer you have to be a demon or a fraud. I don’t feel myself to be particularly demonic and in person I am an absolute fraud. Everything rests on the awareness that a hidden life exists.*
There’s a lot of flash in the story form these days. A lot of dazzle and dependence upon the net. Houdini said that of all his tricks the most difficult to perform was the wet sheet escape. The wet sheet treatment was used in lunatic asylums to restrain violent patients. It was very difficult to escape from being bound in a wet sheet. But this escape was not popular with the audiences. They wanted him to escape from chains and dead whales and water-filled safes. These things were easier to do than they appeared. A lot of fiction is stagey now—the equivalent of making an elephant disappear—right before your eyes. It’s easy to make an elephant disappear. The farmers of Zimbabwe are doing it every day.*
The equivalent of the wet sheet escape in fiction, perhaps, would be to create a character who gets out of life having lived it, having truly spectacularly lived it, used it all up. This would have to be done with words of course.*
The surface of a good story is severely simple. Clean and treacherous as new ice. Below the surface is accident, chaos, uncertainty—beautiful, shifting things. I believe in the mystery of things, their spiritual rhythm. I am not interested in man-woman things much. In-out. Or love. I am interested in loneliness, obsession, desperation. Well, perhaps I am interested in love. I am not interested in woman-woman matters much. Feminist matters. Support and consolation matters. Transformation is what I’m interested in the most. What it is that is beyond and beneath things. Moments, the levels in moments.*
None of this is what I long to say. I long to say other things. I write stories in my attempt to say them.*







8 Comments:
You are right. She is..something else.
JT
links to places that have joy williams:
morals
hunting
honored guest
joy williams gives student a C, student feels wronged and betrayed
i am copying and pasting this entire post here:
Writing Workshop 101... Dissed!
Last semester, I enrolled in a writing workshop taught by Joy Williams here at UT-Austin. She wrote The Quick and the Dead, a Pulitzer-prize finalist some years ago. Quite a well-know author, I was told, in the literary world. As that was my first class with a visiting writer, and a famous one at that, I was excited.
That excitement lasted all but a few weeks. In my opinion, she's a cold woman, brutally honest and cutting in her words. Don't get me wrong, honesty is definitely positive and is much needed in general, but there is a difference in honesty that leads to constructive changes, versus, well, honesty without decent regard of the other person.
Joy was downright insulting on my second story. Now, as it had elicited a variety of responses from my classmates, which were not unanimously negative, I didn't think it was all that horribly written. She pointed out two sentences she liked and said I could chuck the rest of the story. Then someone said, "Oh, here's another good one." She responded, "Great! Now we have three!" That little scenario offended me, not so much that she didn't like the story, but the condescending tone she chose to open the discussion with. It was not only disrespectful on her part, but humiliating to me. If she only liked two sentences, she could at least elaborate on why the others weren't working for her. Since when did disparaging students become part of writing pedagogy?
I ended up with a C in the class. I contested the grade on the grounds that 1) she had set absolutely NO grading criteria (which the entire class thought as well); and 2) I, like everyone else, had put in my best effort into the class. I did my work, I went to class, I wrote my critiques. It's a workshop; we bring in work-in-progress stories to get critiques. Am I mistaken here?
In my letter, I questioned whether it was my oral participation or my stories that were the problem. I did some investigation and found out that both extremely talkative and reserved students got Bs. Thus, oral participation wasn't the determining factor. That meant it had to have been my stories. Which brings me to my point about how we all brought in work-in-progress stories in order to benefit from a workshop. As long as they were the writers' best efforts (and not plagiarized), isn't that what matters? That's where you find out whether you had succeeded or failed. Clearly, I had failed to her, but I didn't think it was fair of her to hold my experimentation against me.
Well, I got her response today. It was about five lines, saying that I would have benefited from a "nuts & bolts lower-level workshop" and that "the C was meant to discourage" me (her emphasis). She added that the only way I could've gotten a B was if everyone else had gotten As. Thank you, Joy, for making your opinion of me sarcastically clear. Was it too difficult to explain to a student, an aspiring writer, what she could have done instead, in a civilized manner?
I feel wronged and betrayed. It is not so much the grade but her attitude. Students attend classes in good faith; they trust the system and the teachers to support their learning. If the grading criteria was defined from the beginning, that we all had to be of a certain level, perhaps I could accept this without complaint. This entire grading system defeats the concept and purpose of writing workshops, does it not? I am now angry at my program and the writing center as well. After I talked to them I realized that 1) they agreed with me about the concept of workshop and how grading should be; and 2) they never talked to Joy about any of this. They were surprised so many people were displeased with her and the workshop.
You might say to me: face it, this is the reality of the writing world, harsh and competitive. People who succeed in the field have no doubt been discouraged numerous times. I am not asking for people to pretend it's easier than it really is. Any grade in the class reflects just one person's opinion. Although I had aced all my previous workshops, I never felt these As guaranteed me anything in the literary world. It just meant my instructors appreciated and supported my efforts, which in turn encouraged me to continue working hard and pursuing to improve what I like to do. Writing is draining, and support in the field makes endeavors a bit easier. It is not a published figure's approval, or anyone else's that I seek. I write for the joy of writing, and the experience of the process. Publishing is the secondary perk. I am okay with never publishing, as long as I stay true to myself. It is also okay if my creations don't appeal to everyone. It's subjective and it's part of life. But, what I do demand is to be treated with respect. I am no less human than Joy Williams is. Her nasty response to my plea for an explanation and a reconsideration was unwarranted.
And so why can't I just suck it up and live with the C? It is, after all, just a grade. A letter on a transcript. Well, pragmatic reasons related to my potential academic goals motivates me to take further action. But, really, regardless of the grading issue, I would contest this all the way for the principle of the matter. UT's English Department and Writing Center is going to get an earful about their lack of organization and coordination in their grading policies. As for Joy Williams-- well, I can only say I am sorry that I had to cross paths with such a woman.
I love the organic quality of this essay. Because of it, my reactions are organic. I suppose that’s why it’s titled ‘Shifting Things’.
“More can probably be found out about a writer from a single paragraph of work than from any interview or essay. Gertrude Stein said that paragraphs are emotional whereas sentences are not. She also said that the American way of writing was the disembodied way of disconnecting something from anything and anything from something. She suggested that something was always floating above the American paragraph—the well-done American paragraph—something detached from what it said and what it did.”
I love her follow-up paragraph, the one that excerpts her own work, and her analysis of it. I’m not sure if this is a uniquely American phenomenon – I don’t read enough non-American work – but in any case, it’s the type of writing I love, and the type to which I aspire. Recently, I read up a bit on Deconstructionism. It’s hard to grasp what it’s really all about, but it addresses the idea that language inherently communicates more than what it merely says textually. For everything written, there is a cultural, gender-related, religious, political, etc., undercurrent that flows through the words. It’s intangible, and difficult to express, but it is there, nonetheless.
Then there’s this paragraph, the one following her stated need to stay cooped up inside dissecting life while outside life is unfolding in all its hideous and glorious ways:
“And then it just seems preposterous. There I am, choosing my words so carefully, trying to build this pure, unanalyzable, transparent, honest thing in this dim room with the shades drawn and out there is the world, indecent, cruel, apathetic, a world where the seas are being trashed, the desert bladed, the wolves shot, the eagles poisoned, where people show up at planning and zoning meetings waving signs that say My Family Can’t Eat the Environment. That sentence is ill, it is a virus of a sentence, and as a writer, I should be able to defeat it and its defenders handily. With the perfect words, I should be able to point out, reasonably, that in fact the individual’s family is eating the environment, that they are consuming it with sprawl and greed and materialistic hungers and turning it into—shit. But perfect words fail me. I don’t want my words. I want to throttle this person, beat him over the head with his stupid sign.”
I love the honesty of this. Off and on I have a tendency to remind myself how everyone is different, how any perspective or belief can be validated in one way or another. But then there are certain people or beliefs that lack logic and careful consideration to such an extreme degree that I, too, want to throttle them and scream, “Open your eyes, brother! For the love of God!”
Then there’s this:
“Jean Rhys once said that to be a writer you have to be a demon or a fraud. I don’t feel myself to be particularly demonic and in person I am an absolute fraud. Everything rests on the awareness that a hidden life exists.”
This part resonates with me, but at the same time, it resonates as false. I might be considered a fraud. I can be a chameleon in social situations; I shift and adapt to meet the needs of those around me. Some might consider this false, but I consider it an act of love, an act of respect toward mankind. So, I might not always speak my truths, or live truthfully at all times, but at any given moment, I reveal as much truth as is needed for that particular moment. I reserve the whole of myself for my writing. This is why I write.
Thank you, Tao. I will link to this article on phillywriters.
karin:
jean rhys actually said something like, i feel like i must be a devil or a fraud to complete this book (she was talking about wild sargasso sea)
she didn't say in order to be a writer
why'd that paragraph seem false to you?
by what you wrote, it seems like joy williams might agree with you, a little...
i like the last paragraph:
"None of this is what I long to say. I long to say other things. I write stories in my attempt to say them"
I think you're right rodb (the real rodb). I think I do agree with what she said about being a fraud, and I suppose saying it resonated as false isn't accurate. I just reacted to her decision to use the word 'fraud'. The word has such negative conotations. I get the feeling she thinks she puts up a facade against the world, as if she wants to shield her enormous inner world from the outside one because... I don't know why. That's where I disconnect.
Perhaps that one writer said he expected her to be more twisted because -- from what I can tell -- there seems to be a heavy tone of anger running through her work. Which is cool... believe me, I get the anger. But at the end of the day, I try to live more optimistically, or at least form neutral conclusions about things.
So, I think this is why I recoiled a bit from her 'fraud' statement. To me, it implied some kind of misanthropic view of life. I choose not to view life that way -- and I think/hope most people don't.
I heard people saying it's a scorpion, but I am not sure.
hey there,
i'm obsessed with joy williams as well. no other writer can tranform despair and disorder into beauty and grace--just by virtue of her dazzling prose--the way she can. if you ever wanna start the joy williams cult, include me on the mailing list!
funshine22@gmail.com
Post a Comment
<< Home