The Rules

On the first day of each new quarter, I tell whatever creative writing class that I happen to be teaching that there are five rules which must never be broken while in my class. After reading this well-reasoned story in the Boston Globe (link via the OG Bookslut), I'm reminded why, exactly, I have these rules -- specifically, I'm reminded by this passage:

Novelist Douglas Bauer, currently the writer-in-residence at Smith, asked his creative writing students what their memories were of early high school English. They loved Twain, Poe, John Irving, Haruki Murakami, he reports, but rolled their eyes at ''The Great Gatsby." Bauer was dumbfounded. How could they miss the allure of this haunting classic?

Because they were forced on pain of death to expound on the meaning of the green light at the end of Daisy Buchanan's dock. Enter the Godzilla of high school English -- the dreaded metaphor. ''Why the obsession with the green light? Because it's the way the teachers were taught," says Bauer.

The goddamned metaphor is the bane of my existence. Oh, now, realize that I write them, certainly, though I don't think I do it with any kind of forethought, they just occur. But the need to point it out, expound on it, explore it until the story lacks all the originality and heart it once had, no thanks. My rules are simple. When workshopping these terms and actions are never allowed to occur:

1. The word motif. As in, "What was the motif you were aiming for with this story of alien sexbots?" Not for nothing, but really, who gives a fuck?

2. The term vis-a-vis. If you regularly say vis-a-vis in conversation, you are pretentious. No two ways around it. If you use vis-a-vis while workshopping -- as in, "Vis-a-vis the alien sexbot and the bounty hunter sent to eradicate it," -- you are also the kind of person who will someday later in life wear tweed to the extent that neighborhood kids will fear you, will tell stories about you long after your death, and one day they'll see your ghost as just a mist appearing outside of the men's suits department at Sears and they will fear you, your tweed, and the scent of Gray Flannel cologne.

3. Air quotes. Are you directly quoting? Are you using a word out of context? Are the rest of the people in the room rudimentary sign language users? We're writers. We understand context and significance when you speak. If you don't believe this is true, try Air Underlining or Air Italics next time.

4. The word theme. See motif. And then get your head out of your ass. Who cares about theme? I mean, really, when you walk into Barnes & Noble, do you say, "I'd like to find a book today with a really good theme," or when you see an ad on TV for a new movie like, say, Sahara, do you immediately begin wondering about how cool the theme will be? No. No you don't. Do you know why? Because it is bullshit you learned in high school because your teacher was lazy. I had a student last quarter that I rather liked personally, but her story suffered because she kept talking about getting the metaphor and theme right, until finally I said, "Who gives a fuck about theme and metaphor? Let's see a show of hands." No one raised their hands -- well, okay, one person did, but she dropped the class with two weeks left, so she doesn't count -- and I said, "No one gives a fuck about theme and metaphor except high school English teachers." I then remembered, uh, yeah, she was a high school English teacher.

5. The term, "But that's how it really happened." A few quarters ago, someone said this during week three and I responded, as I'm wont to do, "I don't give a fuck about how it really happened, this is fiction." The student subsequently began to cry, which is never good, because, well, I never want people to cry because that just sucks, and then I had to stop the class an explain exactly why I don't give a fuck, which made the person cry even more. So here's the deal: if you want to write what really happened, write nonfiction.

Comments

[Angela Stubbs]

I'm laughing so hard right now because it's so true. All those ridiculous essays in English classes you had to write about the two main themes in Book X. And compare and contrast.

Thanks to Tod for calling out those who still do it. It makes for far better fiction. You get such an interesting bunch of students everytime. I dont' envy the job of figuring out who's gonna be a nut.

But, as always, you make things fun. So thanks for that.

[James C. Hess]

--sigh--

It is rather comforting to know I am not alone in the universe when it comes to handling would-be writers and authors in writing workshops. Bless be the Writer who manages to hold his temper while explaining to the ink-stained wretch who writes such tripe as:

"The Captain barked, 'Bring me the light!'"

that this be shit before you.

I dunno what The Captain had for lunch but if he be 'barking' I wanna be as far upwind from him as possible.

[Casper Vidor]

Extent, not extend. You teach? Good god!

[The Evil J Winter]

One of my high school English teachers was exactly this kind of pretentious bitch. Told me I was going to Hell for reading science fiction, which is not "literature." (Yes, I meant to use air quotes. Nice effect this time, eh?)

We had to do a collage based on some poem about the sun rising over a city. I cobbled together two cigarette ads - One a Marlboro ad with a blood red sunset and the other a Kool ad with a photo of some midwestern city at dusk just as the lights were coming up. I got an F because I could not provide a metaphor for the Kool billboard in the center of the collage.

Actually, I might have gotten a C if I hadn't said "Bite me, you stupid hag." I also might have avoided one of the last spankings I ever got from my mother (I was 15.), who babysat in high school for said pretentious fucktard.

Two years later, American Lit class. Same poem, different teacher. Mr. Murphy (aka GOD in my book) asked, "So what's this poem mean to you?" I said I thought it was like the 19th century version of Journey's "Lights."

Mr. Winter not only got an A for free thinking, he got to pretty much skate the rest of the semester. And mother was happy. She babysat the Murphy kids in high school, too.

Gimme a loud ex-Marine and former steelworker anyday over an opera-loving, theme-hugging, metaphor-spouting twit. I might actually learn something.

[Tod Goldberg]

One of my other rules, Casper, is that we don't point out typos as if they are an injustice to man and god and Dave Navarro. But I thank you for the copyediting and the changes have been made.

[James C. Hess]

Ah, the not-so elusive literary sparrowfart.

Sounds like a production for the Discovery Channel.

Or PBS.

[Harry]

I like theme.

[Graham]

If you have to use a theme, use the theme from Shaft. Or Peter Gunn - that's pretty cool too.

[Simon]

I like theme and motif. But then, I know and appreciate what they mean. A motif (a term borrowed from painting) is a textual picture; a theme (a term borrowed from music) is a recurring idea that serves to unify the text.

I will always strive to include meaningful motifs and themes in my writing, because I don't want to write one-dimensional, meaningless shit.

Meaningless shit would be the result of expunging motifs and themes from your writing. I don't believe any enjoyable writer does that, though, no matter how loud he or she screams.

[Holly Lisle]

There's nothing mystical or complex about theme. There are, of course, teachers who try to make it something mystical and complex. But there are teachers who make arithmetic into something that could baffle Mandelbrot, too.

The theme is the compelling question that drove the writer to write the damn book in the first place. If you're a writer, you don't own the theme; the theme owns you. Why does horrible shit happen to good people? is a theme. Who is God, and why is he screwing up my life? is a theme.

Some themes are weak, and some are pointless, but the good themes are the ones that make a book stick with us years after we read it, and that drive us to read the same book over and over again.

[Keith]

You're posturing in this passage, so I can't tell how much is just attitude and how much you really believe. So I'll just take it at face value.

I think you've mistaken your personal tastes for something else. Motif, theme, metaphor... they're basic elements of fiction, right along with plot, motivation, story question, style, and whatever else. They exist. Anything that exists is worth discussing, because it's there. If you don't want to think about certain aspects of writing, that's your business--but forbidding their mention in a writing class? I can see it if you want them to get their heads around plot and character first, but a writing teacher who outright despises any discussion of theme? I'd quit the class too. In disgust.

"They just occur?"

So does dialogue.

So do characters.

So do plots.

But for some reason, "theme" is the thing that "just occurs" that you refuse to examine.

We all hated high school English--I outright refused to read any of the assigned materials. We all hated comparing and contrasting. Once I'm the grownup taking the money, though, I owe my paying students more than just my personal distastes. We're not all practicing exactly the same art, and we don't all need to think about the same issues.

Yeah, maybe 1% of the readership will get the metaphors. So what? The other 99% aren't there for that particular pleasure.

But a coherent theme, a coherent running metaphor or play of imagery? For the 1% attuned to that level, it's an additional pleasure. Last I paid any attention, giving the reader pleasure is one of the basic ideas here. Theme's another way of doing that.

Rotgut gives me the same buzz as an expensive Islay scotch; but I think I'll keep drinking Laphroaig. There's more pleasure to it--but not if you're not paying attention.

As for "opera-loving" as an epithet, Jim:

Guess that would be me, tough guy.

 

[Sandy]

I hated having to try to find the symbolism in the Great Gatsby in HS english, too. Hated it. Haven't been able to bring myself to reread the book as an adult, either, as a result. Maybe one of these days. HS english didn't manage to ruin Shakespeare for me, at least.

Oh, and you missed want/wont in the last paragraph, too. :)

[Chris]

I can't imagine a good teacher being proud of the fact that the one student with balls enough to disagree with him wound up quitting the class.

[tod goldberg]

Keith, in the immortal words fo Sgt. Hulka, settle down Francis. I don't rule with an iron hand, I don't beat people to death with dictionaries and then spit on their corpses. It's a joke, rooted in truth, naturally, but a joke no less and the class understands that.

Of course novels and stories will have themes and motifs and metaphors and if my books didn't, I would assume that they would be bland and boring crap filled tomes. (And there are some who would say that is absolutely true.) What my point is, as it relates to workshopping, is that these are contructs of high school english. When we talk about the novels and stories in my classes, we talk about the novels and stories. We point out metaphors that don't work, certainly, but as it relates to theme and motif, I have this silly rule because to the writers in the room it, to the man and to the woman, means nothing. "I don't think your novel is quite working yet because your motifs are bland." Uh, okay, I'll get to work on that. Now, if you point out where narrative is failing, or where dialogue is failing, or where the rise and fall of drama is absent and point out where these things occur, then you're addressing the issue as a whole, and not on some narrow term that is specificially difficult to pinpoint.

And when someone is asked in class, "What is the theme of your novel," the answer is typically: Love and redemption. The class nods their collective heads, the writer nods his or her head, and I sit there and wonder how, exactly, a novel about alien sexbots is about love and redemption. Is there a theme in every novel? Of course. But asking a person on page 1 to define it is counterintuitive in my opinion. Themes change as your novel changes and marrying yourself to a grand idea of theme is, I think, not always a wise decision. Novels are liquid. Novels are organic. Discuss the theme when you're done and being interviewed by Michael Silverblatt, because it likely won't be until then that you're really sure what it is.

Now, I don't hear anyone complaining about vis-a-vis...

[Clair Lamb]

I've taken Tod's class, and I'll vouch for his quality as a writing instructor. His point, which I endorse whole-heartedly, is that a writer's goal be to _tell a story_, first and foremost. If you know what story you want to tell, theme and motifs take care of themselves. Focusing on theme or motif before you tell the story is like trying to paint your kitchen before the drywall is up.

[tod goldberg]

Chris, c'mon. I'm not proud of anyone quitting and I'd wager to say that she didn't show up for the classes not because she disagreed with me. She likely did on some points, but the impression you're getting is not the fact of the matter. You know what makes me happy? People writing well. People succeeding with their writing, achieving their dreams, etc. I teach because part of the job of being a writer is that our art is not proprietary -- I've always believed that the knoweledge you have in this art is to be passed on and shared. No one has to take my advice. No one is forced. No one is even really graded. As Lloyd Dobler was told outside the Gas-n-Sip, it's a conscious choice on the part of the person taking part. If they don't like my opinion, that's fine. When I was taking workshops, the opinions I least appreciated were typically the ones that told me the most about my work. I'm just like anyone else in that regard: I want the praise. But I never learned anything from someone telling me what I wanted to hear.

[Danny Adams]

Yes, I remember next to nothing about metaphors and themes from High School English (all caps intentional). What I remember from my English classes were when we dived into the *story*, rather than "What is the author trying to accomplish?" (Somehow answering "The author wanted to tell a good story that people would enjoy reading" was never a good enough answer in high school.)

[The Evil J Winter]

Actually, pretentious English teacher loved opera. What does that mean? Nothing. So does this guy, and I love his stuff.

It's not that people talk about theme or motif; it's the false emphasis that gets placed on them. What I want to know is why no one ever remembers that the green light at the end of Daisy's dock is actually a plot point and not a symbol of anything in GATSBY.

[I skipped it in high school and didn't read it until last year. Ah! The freedom from preconceived notions is a wonderful thing!]

[Keith]

I agree, the knowledge needs to be shared.

Putting aside that "settle down" never means anything in this kind of context but "shut up" (and isn't it "Lighten up, Francis?")... Theme--you lumped it in with motif and metaphor and dismissed them all.

If a writer's consciously using motifs, he's consciously using motifs. Solid story of primary importance? Yes, of course. But it's not true, in my experience, that if you tell a good story the "themes and motifs take care of themselves." They're put there by the author, just like everything else, and they can be strengthened consciously, just like everything else. When there's a way to strengthen them, it's a valid thing to bring up in a workshop--just like tone, character, plot, and everything else. Otherwise, you're missing an opportunity to improve the student's writing, which is your entire job description.

"Themes change as your novel changes and marrying yourself to a grand idea of theme is, I think, not always a wise decision.

What a straw man that is! Whoever said anything about marrying selves to grand themes? I think when somebody says "theme," you're the one marrying yourself to a grand idea of what that means, left over from Mrs. S. (I had a Mrs. S. too, at North Hollywood High, and she sucked the life out of every book)--and you react disproportionately. Okay, fine, you don't want to deal with anything called "theme." But we've still got those motifs and metaphors hanging around. Story's of primary importance in the end, but if a student thinks in patterns and imagery, those things are how she gets the story. I recently read NARRATIVE DESIGN by Madison Smartt Bell. Good discussion of this kind of thing, if you're interested.

[David J. Montgomery]

The last thing a neophyte writer needs to be worrying about is what the theme of his/her novel is. They'd be a lot better off focusing on telling a good story. Discussion of theme and the like is usually just posturing.

[Kristy]

I just finished a college paper whereby I had to compare and contrast a topic of my choosing. I should have compared rocks to pebbles is what I'm thinking now.

YOU JUST MADE ME CRY...and that SUCKS... *sniff*

teehee...the paper sucked.....the teacher loved it...I didn't care about it and thought it showed....I got an A on it. I got the last laugh. And it wasn't fiction...it was non...non-everything.

[Karen]

So who dropped out? The long-haired lady of a certain age -- the one who never submitted?

I had no idea theme was so controversial. It's good to see people hopping mad.

[Aldo]

The first rule of Write Club is.....

[tod goldberg]

Did I misquote Sgt. Hulka too? Well, the spirit of the quote was simply that you shouldn't take what I'm saying too seriously -- I'm not telling anyone to shut up, I wouldn't write this stuff if I didn't want to talk about it and Keith your opinions are well intentioned and interesting, it's simply that we come from two different schools of thought on this matter and that's fine. My basic thing when I teach creative writing is that I'm not teaching comparative lit or theory of fiction or english comp, but that I'm teaching writing, or, in some cases, teaching people how to look at their own writing as the reading public -- and agents and editors as well -- might, not people doing clinical studies of the work. My success rate in this regard isn't bad, if I do say so, but it certainly isn't for everyone. People drop. People get mad. And that's fine, too. But I have to say how cool it is that the most comments I've received in the last month are about...Theme! It means people still care about the craft and that encourages me.

Karen -- yes, same person.

[Christopher Beha]

Tod-
I'm sure you're not trying to get people to drop out of your class. I also understand that the post--and your in-class spiel--are rhetorical and not to be taken at face value.

That said, I'll bet you more than one out of twelve "common" readers cares deeply--even primarily-- about theme, i.e., cares about the issues a story was created to grapple with, at least as much as about the intrinsic interest of the story's events. So, when you say that you asked a loaded, aggressive question and the entire class conformed to your expectation, that mostly just tells me that you're a bully of a teacher.

As someone who has both taught and studied writing, I chafe at the idea of beginning a class, however jokingly, by laying out rules for how work can be discussed. Short of preventing people from being petty or mean to their classmates, the teacher should always strive to engender a full range of opinions.

In fairness, I don't know what kind of writers you teach. True novices may be best served by concentrating singularly on the mechanics of getting a story on the page. But it cuts both ways, in my experience: as often as students allow Lit-Crit bullshit to muddy their work, it is just as common for work to be vague or uninteresting precisely because the author hasn't taken any time to think about what larger issues led her to try to tell this story in the first place.

There are endless ways of approaching reading and writing good fiction. (I'm no relativist; not all of these ways were created equal.) It is natural and beneficial that a teacher hold firm to his prefered approach. At the same time, suggesting that all other approaches will be held prima facie in disdain hardly seems like a valuable approach.

[Chris]

One other thing: you consistently misuse the term "metaphor" throughout your post and subsequent reposts. A metapor is a specific rhetorical device. The Green Light is not a metaphor, it's a symbol. "You were a tiger last night," is a metaphor. Granted, people misuse the term all the time--especially in writing workshops--but that's no excuse. In fact, your inability as a writing teacher to seperate the way idiot English teachers use these words from what they actually mean is precisely the problem.

I think Keith gets at the heart of the matter: if the high school English crew have appropriated the ideas of theme, motif, and whatever you and they take to mean by the word "metaphor," perhaps one mark of a good writing teacher would be someone who reclaims these terms for proper use, rather than abandoning them as pretensions.

I appreciate your efforts to deflate pretension--"vis-a-vis," air quotes, etc.--but lumping valuable literary devices in with the rest of the shit does real damage to beginning writers. It tells them that thinking seriously about the many of things that make good writing interesting is the equivalent of wearing berets and turtlenecks and snapping one's fingers instead of clapping.

Far better to take the time to explain that theme and motif are not, in fact, just that boring shit your high school teacher talked about. That metaphors and symbols are not the same thing, and that both have their place in good literature.

[Linda Woods]

Geez...nobody has a sense of humor anymore. What is with everyone deconstructing jokes?

[Keith]

Dude... "people doing clinical studies?"

How about "good readers?"

Good readers catch this stuff. Bad ones (which is most people) don't. If you think metaphor, symbol (thanks, Chris--I wasn't going there yet), metonymy, and all those other high school English vocabulary words are the sole domain of dried up fuddyduddies, you're out of your mind. (Sorry--out of your FUCKIN' MIND! I forgot how we brash writers are supposed to talk for a second there. And me living in New York and all.)

I haven't read your books yet, but from what I've read about them, you're a good writer. You probably do a lot of this stuff naturally--hence your use of the words "organic," "liquid." But just because you do them naturally, that doesn't mean everyone works that way. So essentially, here's what I'm hearing:

STUDENT: What about motifs?
TEACHER: I'm good at that naturally, so you shouldn't worry about it yourself.

The attitudes that suit a writer do not necessarily suit a teacher. When somebody walks in wanting to concentrate on holding a story together using patterns of imagery, you need to be as up on that as you are on the cause-and-effect nature of a linear plot. Even if you hate stories that are held together with patterns of imagery.

Either that, or you have to be honest enough to say "I don't know how to do that, I'm not good at it, and I don't like it, so I'm the wrong person to ask."

But outright barring mention of metaphor from a workshop? Grow up, Francis. (And I think workshops are, themselves, of limited value, but that's another issue.)

Linda, the reason it's important to me to keep after this particular "joke" (which isn't one) despite feeling a little like an ass about it is the power teachers have. Attitudes that are casually knockaround between friends can be damaging in a classroom because of the imbalance of power. And yes, there is an imbalance of power. Even if you feel the students are your equals, and they agree, they're hanging on your words and doubting themselves more than your friends do.

[tod goldberg]

For the record, I do know the difference between metaphor and symbol. I was pointing out that the bane of my existence as a high school student was metaphor (it sort of followed what the story in the globe was talking about) and the endless conversations that we were forced to engage in about it...not unlike this discussion, it seems, after nearly 30 comments

So here are a few other things that are banned in my classes, in case anyone is curious about the iron curtain of truth that unfolds each Monday night at 7pm:
Corey Hart
Any mention of Nicolas Cage movies where his acting method is to not blink
Food from Rubio's (I'm a Baja Fresh guy)
Anyone who says, "It's all good."
Anyone who enjoyed Universal Soldier
Anyone who read one of my brother's books and enjoyed it more than mine
People who ask me, "Are you the wrestler?"
People who don't list The Jazz Singer as one of their favorite movies -- the Neil Diamond one.
Yankees fans
Derek Jeter himself
Jeremy Giambi -- slide, I say, slide!
Defunct rock bands touring with different names -- like Credence Clearwater Revisited
Ashlee Simpson
People who say, "Know what I'm saying?"
People who liked my first book -- people, it sucked.
Crunchy peanut butter
James Patterson
People who say "ATM machine."
13 year old girls wearing Ramones t-shirts.

[Keith]

We agree about crunchy peanut butter.

[christian bauman]

I thought that was about the funniest thing I've read all week. Then went to the comments, and boy oh boy are there a lot of complaints and hair splitting and ipso facto caveats and wringing and ranting.

These comments led me to a few conclusions:

1. There is a serious lack of sense of humor in the literary community, or, at least, the online literary community
2. Someone with that massive a lack of humor and massive self-importance as a teacher would have ruined any chances I had of becoming a writer
3. One is left to wonder, again, whether writing can truly be taught at all, or whether it is simply deconstruction being taught

I'll close with one comment, strictly from my own personal experience as a writer and a reader: Tod is right; in the end, these things do, for the most part, "just happen." Writers who belabor their metaphors, symbols, et al, write stories and novels with amazingly obvious metaphors, symbols, et al.

We are storytellers, first and foremost. If a fiction writer is not a storyteller first and foremost, then he/she is simply a public masturbator.

You know the old saying "shit happens"? It's also true to say "theme happens." If a writer crafts his/her story properly, "theme happens."

And, by the way, to add to your "ATM machine," Tod, let's not forget "PIN number."

Cheers.

[Keith]

Christian:

I'll skip the personal attack (but thanks) and respond to your claim that "theme happens."

EVERYTHING "happens." Are you so confused about the difference between writing and teaching that you think things that "happen" in writing should be dismissed out of hand in teaching? If that's the case, teaching consists of absolutely nothing. There is no such thing as teaching, since all of it "happens."

I have the same question you do, regarding whether writing can be taught, and I don't have an answer. I think I've occasionally been helpful to people, and people have occasionally been helpful to me, but I'm still uncomfortable when I'm invited to teach. I think the writing-teaching industry is mostly a big scam, and I don't like contributing to it. On the other hand, when you're invited... and then when someone says you helped them, and the writing does seem better...

[christian bauman]

Personal attack? I didn't think I attacked anyone personally. I sure didn't mean to, and apologize.

No, Keith, your points are taken, of course. I think my point was that Tod's words were being taken a little too seriously by everyone; that he was trying to make a lighthearted stab at the writing and teaching establishment, and some took it very seriously and personally.

Of course, if one is going to teach writing over a semester or year or whatever, one will of course get to theme etc. But don't be so dismissive of "theme happens." I think it's something that should be explored in the classroom setting...discovering then focusing one's theme in a draft of written work. Because that's what it is. One does not "create" a theme, and then wrap a book around it. You know what I mean?

I don't believe that "all of it" just happens. Not at all. You could have all the natural writing talent in the world, but you still need to learn craft; that doesn't happen, that is absorbed through reading and if possible teachings. Craft doesn't "happen" at all. Craft is purposeful, deliberate.

Your story is your story; that's your pure creative brain. Then comes craft; floating the story in the best possible way to communicate...craft is both natural and learned. Theme floats on top of all of it, and if there others were excuted properly, is simply born. You look up, an you find your theme. If the others were not properly executed, you don't have a theme, you have a flawed theme, and then you go back and redo your equation

Anyway, this is a lot of hoo ha about vague and weird things that none of us really understand anyway and all we end up doing is blowing hot air around, myself very much included.

I hear what you're saying, Keith. Points well taken.

I just wished more had smiled at Tod's post than grumbled.

[Keith]

Thanks, Christian. Much appreciated.

Here's my feeling about it:

You can get to a story through just about any avenue. The pure creative brain, the craft, even the need to masturbate publicly. There aren't any bad reasons or invalid approaches. All that matters is the result, which means if you start with (say) a motif, yes, the next thing you need to do is build a story--but you can't do it without discussing the motif.

The reason I brought up NARRATIVE DESIGN earlier was that it's got a whole section on ways of organizing what are a little annoyingly called "nonlinear" narratives. One of those ways is the use of repeating devices--motifs. The stories used to illustrate the techniques are good. They couldn't have been achieved by simply letting the theme arise from the story--there had to be a conscious organization (and reorganization) of the motif in order to construct--not just pretty up--the story. The motif is a basic part of the structure itself.

I also disagree that there is such thing as "the craft." I think there are various crafts, and different writers are interested in different ways of reaching "story." So if you're the teacher, and you've got all these students, all of whom have different internalizations and ways of organizing thought...

[Keith]

And to clarify further--can you tell I'm at my day job?--I'm not at all dismissive of "theme happens," and if I came off that way, I needed to say it differently.

What I am dismissive of is the idea that there is only one way to do any of this. "Theme happens" is absolutely true. But so is "theme doesn't happen." It all depends on the writer.

There's a popular belief among writers that shitty first drafts and just let the words happen; revise later are gospel. They're not. They're merely a subset of all the myriad valid approaches, a subset that agrees in tone with leftover Romantic beliefs about making art.

I'm a geek, so I'll geek: Dyonysian art isn't the only kind. Apollonian exists, too. It's not as revered in our society, and there's no swirly Romantic nonsense playing rhythm behind it, but it exists. Yes, you can start with craft and get to exactly the same place in the end. I've written stories because I was in love with the characters, and I've written stories because I was in love with a technical idea. Doesn't matter where you start. Only matters where you end.

[christian bauman]

<>>

Yeah baby yeah. Exactly.

[Al]

Sure, theme is important. It's TALKING about theme that's a waste of time.

[Anna]

Wow, thank you ladies and gents for making my morning read very entertaining and informative on some level! I'm glad to see that the study of literature and the writer's craft (?) is still alive. I am considering and researching becoming *gasp* a high school English teacher so I found this comment string of particular interest.
I guess teaching high school is a little about keeping the mind open, I wouldn't want to be a crusty teacher.

[David J. Montgomery]

The most difficult part about being a high school English teacher, I think, is engaging the students and helping to connect them to reading in a meaningful way. Sadly, it seems, so many of them have given up trying. I applaud your desire to be one of the faithful and wish you the best of luck with your decision!