Hello Gentle Reader
"I never wanted to be anything else. Well, if there had been a job of being a reader, I would have taken that, because I love to read and I don’t love to write. That would be blissful. Sometimes you meet people who really enjoy their work. Those are the people I am most envious of, no matter what their work is."
-- Fan Lebowitz; when asked by "The Paris Review," in the summer issue of nineteen-ninety three.
When reading this satirical and yet profoundly true, piece of information by a extremely successful person like Fran Lebowitz (and by success I mean someone who does something that they love, and is enjoying it. Which then can be seen as a paradox because Fran Lebowitz herself, despises writing. Therefore she no longer is doing something she loves. Which then leads her to no longer be successful. However for the purpose of the rest of this piece, Fran Lebowitz is successful; at least by the terms of which I measure success. -- Because she does love to talk) it strikes a cord within me knowing that someone ls out there, an author especially; has the sentiment of no longer liking to write, but enjoys reading. On a personal note, there is a great enjoyment in reading. At least for myself there is a great enjoyment in reading. However is there always enjoyment in reading? Not necessarily. Sometimes (once again on a personal note) I do not always read for enjoyment. In all honesty the concept of reading James Joyce's "Ulysses," or "Finnegan’s Wake," either finds great enjoyment in being confused or challenged, or they just want to look really pretentious. People who can read those two books and the books that are like it, are ninety-nine point nine percent a really damn good reader. I am part of the five percent of the reading population who does not waste time with the popular crap. then there is the other ninety-five percent of people who read all the pop stuff. So the concept of reading "Ulysses," to me is unfathomable but the ninety-five percent of people who read the mass market paper bound stuff, would not recognize the name James Joyce or "Ullyses," or "Finnegan’s Wake," at all.
Of course by the wise words of Fran Lebowtiz once again, she sums a better point of view:
"I used to love to write. As a child I used to write all the time. I loved to write up until the second I got my first professional writing job. It turns out it’s not that I hate to write. I hate, simply, to work. I just hate to work, period. I am profoundly slothful. Practically inert. I have no energy. I never have. I just have no desire to be productive. Now that I realize I don’t hate to write, that I just hate to work, it makes writing easier."
Of course Gentle Reader, I do enjoy writing. I however enjoy reading a hell of a lot more to be honest. I don't always read for entertainment. As an aspiring writer, sometimes I read, some profoundly interesting works. Not just interesting works, but some profoundly entertaining works, however, I was interested in how the author wrote. The way the sentences formed. How certain actions are performed within the story. Such as how does Haruki Murakami make a character pour ketchup in his sock drawer, and devour cats hearts or so on and so forth; but what’s interesting is how Haruki Murakami can make this all so much more normal. How does Alice Munro make the most mundane details of house wives, or women, interesting. How does Saki no when to make a satirical punch, and make a giggle and a laugh -- something that is difficult to do in written form in my opinion. How do these authors, make these aspects of their works of literature, work. Then as both a reader, and as an aspiring writer, it becomes apparent that I am reading for the enjoyment of reading but also for the study and observation of wanting to know what is a good author, and how does one become a good author. Why of course study the masters. However, what made the masters masters, and so on and so forth. The entire concept is an open ended question, with no real answer. The masters of literature from Dickens, to Joyce and Woolf, to Kafka, to Kawabata, to Nabokov. What about contemporaries. How does one become a master now. How is one considered a great author among the authors of today’s contemporary literary scene, to become a master like Margaret Atwood, A.S. Byatt, Phillip Pullman, Herta Muller (the two thousand and nine Nobel laureate in literature) Mario Vargas Llosa (the two thousand and ten Nobel laureate in literature) and so on and so fourth. Well now it comes to the attention that these authors are not necessarily masters of the literary form, but are masters of the literary form because others opinions shape them to be masters of the literary form. One can easily say that authors like Tim Nickel's, D. Harlan Wilson, Edgar Oliver, Carlton Mellick III, or Gina Ranalli. The point is if the right people’s opinions count then the person in time becomes a master of the literary form. Or the theatrical arts, or being a artist or composer, or whatever it is they do.
This now take’s me to the random musings of two opinions (simply titled in the small town newspaper in which I read it from "Double Standard,") on the best way to teach kids. One opinion by who knows who cares; on the fact, that the best way to teach children and expand their brains is by encouraging them to read. The opposite opinion though is that expanding children's minds is by letting them watch respectable television like sesame street, where they learn counting, and the alphabet, and are taught whatever else -- because according to the second opinion you have much greater chance of grabbing and captivating the attention of a child with visuals, then you would by shoving a book down their throat.
Both opinions provide great arguments for their cause (though someone certainly enjoys a bit more boob tube time then the other) both however, presented some wonderful opinions. The first opinion is write, when one thinks of books they think of academia, smart people, and cutting down tree's for all the paper. When one thinks of television, they think of celebrities, reality television, glamorous lives, and throwing pies in peoples faces. Both however are right, however. Shoving a book down a young child's throat, or a young adults throat is not going to get anyone anywhere. However neither is letting the child watch six hours of television. Its all about balance. Learning to read -- literacy; but also enjoying television while learning. But most importantly, exploring and experimenting. Let the kid run around in the park, go play on the jungle gym. Be a kid. All of this stuff about crap, about baby geniuses and Einstein’s at a young age, is rather silly. Every parents wants their kid to be destined (stupid word) for greatness, does not mean it happens. All of them however are special, and are able to succeed in their life. They just need to be content with what they have when they have it, and strive for more.
On a personal note, I was a late reader. All my (at the time they were my friends) friends, read fantasy and dragons, knights, and wizards, and little people with hairy feat, kind of books. No matter how hard I tried, there was no way I could get into that kind of stuff. Why does the wizard man have to say magical words? Why can he do spells and the others cannot? There were rules, to that universe, and to that world. As much as they differed on the same basic level they were the same. That I think the writing was terrible. Then I was able to find books that I enjoyed. Being seventeen or sixteen and picking up Jean-Paul Sartre's "The Age of Reason," did I feel smart and pretentious. I decided to learn about existentialism, and all that, and to decide to form my own sense of being an philosophy. Now days I just look at it, as a bunch of French fashion, nothing else. At best Jean-Paul Sartre, was a mediocre fictional writer. Not at all that entertaining and somewhat boring, but he did convey and get his point across. Since those days or those years or those decades, many many moons upon suns, ago, my reading tastes matured and continue to mature, and become more and more interesting and yet at times there are moments when I am more relaxed. Is it odd that I wish to read some Samuel R. Delany? Certainly not. However are there going to be works by Samuel R. Delany that I need to avoid. Yes. Yes indeed. Why because they are overtly erotic from the sounds of it. I am not a prude, I just think to myself keep it to the bedroom, and keep the lights turned off. However there is still some interesting in his works. Same for Mark Z Danielewski, would I like to give his works a try sure why not. Who knows Gentle Reader, there maybe a day when "Finnegan’s Wake,:" will be on my shelf and have read.
Thank-you For Reading Gentle Reader
Take Care
And As Always
Stay Well Read
*And Remember: Downloading Books Illegally is Thievery and Wrong.*
M. Mary
