Cloverdew

fshk:

Someone at the Economist is bitter.

NaNoWriMo relies on the peculiarly American belief that every person has a story—or a novel, or a book of any kind—inside. (Some have quipped that this was where it ought to stay.) There is no analogous drive to write the Great French Novel, or the English, or the German. The very notion that a novel is in everybody’s grasp, and could be knocked out as a draft in just a month, is far more likely to induce some cringing in other countries.

The article makes light of the fact that all these thousands of people who participate in NaNoWriMo think they have a story, that writing a novel is a snap. He pulls a quote from Chris Baty: “novel-writing, we had discovered, was just like watching TV. You get a bunch of friends together, load up on caffeine and junk food, and stare at a glowing screen for a couple of hours.” Which is funny, right? Kinda true. Have a sense of humor, Economist!

I have two basic responses to all you haters, and they are these:

1. Literacy and communication are skills that we as a society (in the US at least) don’t seem to put much stock in anymore. Grammar isn’t really taught after fifth grade, for example, and teenagers talk to each other in code. (Get off my lawn!)

So I don’t see how it can possibly be a bad thing to encourage thousands of people to practice their writing skills, to promote that level of literacy. And not just writing, but novel writers have to think critically about fiction generally, about books and stories and craft, in order to be effective. Why are we not encouraging everyone to try to write a novel?

2. Sure, maybe it’s easy to write a novel. It is not, however, easy to write a good novel. It’s easy to write a bunch of gobbledygook—it’s really easy to do that—but it’s not easy to make those words into something that make sense, that is enjoyable for readers. That is, to me at least, part of the challenge. I mean, I could sit here and type “the” 50,000 times and call it a novel—it’s post-modern! geddit?—but that doesn’t mean it’s good or remotely marketable—except to hipsters, maybe.

(Also, it’s not that easy. Even if you take into account the Economist’s figure of roughly one-fifth of writers getting to 50K, which I think is a little high, that means there are thousands of writers who take on the challenge but don’t finish every year. That’s why it’s called a “challenge.”)

And, sure, a bunch of writers will send their unedited magna opera to CreateSpace and Lulu and whatever, but what harm does that do you, casual reader and/or Economist writer?

I mean, I’ve said it before, so here it is again: NaNoWriMo is a first-draft generation tool. You still gotta edit that beast. Even the most seasoned writers don’t crank out a masterpiece on the first go-round. So, you know, be nice to the Publishing Professional in your life and don’t send the NaNo raw material to them in December.

But otherwise, have at it!

(PS—Why is this a uniquely American phenomenon? I mean, why isn’t there a Great French Novel? Or a Great German Novel? Or, hey, a Great Italian Novel! Japanese! Is fiction really an American institution?)

(via stuffformymemoir)