RSS Feed

Category Archives: Good Writing. Read It.

Worth Reading: “The Undefeated Champions of Defeat City”

Ask me if I enjoy sports writing, and I’ll probably tell you “No.”

Unless, that is, you happened to catch me the day before yesterday, when I read Kathy Dobie’s exceptional article, “The Undefeated Champions of Defeat City,” published by GQ in May.

Dobie’s article is remarkable for a few reasons, but one I particularly wanted to comment on here is the way she expertly avoids a common problem in writing about urban issues, and that’s the problem of identifying people by race. Often, writers seem to have a reflex that compels them to mention the race of a subject they’re profiling when, in fact, that subject’s race isn’t necessarily germane to the story or the particular experience being recounted. It’s information that many writers seem to feel is important as long as the subject isn’t white. White, of course, is the default race, so if the subject is white, there’s no need to mention it.

If race isn’t identified, then there’s often the even more troubling tendency to attempt to let diction and slang serve as racial cues. In most writers’ hands, the effect is as grating and reductive and unconvincing as the exaggerated drawls of actors in TV shows and movies who are supposedly portraying Southern (US) characters.

Dobie avoids all that– the naming and the appropriation of a voice that isn’t hers– and at the same time still manages to channel voices that are authentic, not stilted. If you’ve ever tried to do this yourself, you know it’s not an easy task, and that’s why I’m sharing this piece. Read it. Study it. I’m willing to bet you’ll learn a lot.


Worth Reading: “The Poets Caught by Giant Despair”

So much to write, so little time.

Which makes this bit of reading–an interview between poets Gillian Wigmore and Ariel Gordon–relevant and comforting. It’s worth reading the whole interview, of course, which you can do here. But if you need the highlights version, read on:

“… I have a partner, a job, a house, two healthy kids, but I do take note of the fact that this pace is unsustainable and the whole thing runs solely on our commitment to keeping everyone alive and tamping down any simmering resentment. Where writing fits into this is easy: it doesn’t. Every writing moment I have is stolen. What would my writing be like if I could devote myself to it? It’s not worth considering. I do the absolute best I can with what I’ve got. I tell myself I’m sparing my male peers from my genius by working with a handicap – it makes me feel better.

But let me say, too: I’m an ambitious female poet. With kids. I’m going to do this whether or not I have time or the Canada Council supports me; whether or not the boys get the breaks; whether or not the toilets need cleaning; I’ve got shit to do and I’m going to do it. Do I have a level of fury simmering under the surface? Maybe, but it fuels my work; it makes me efficient and honest and humble. When there is time to sit and focus, sometimes a poem comes out almost fully formed because I have been hatching it the whole time a child has been telling me the plot of his favourite episode of Myth Busters (with the EXPLOSIONS, mum! Mum? are you listening?), or I burned the soup because I was reading up on jeweled top snails. I admit my scattered brain, at the time or in the acknowledgements of my books, and I’ll keep going as long as I can manage it.”

“… I feel like I hustle hard all the time. And I sometimes I wonder how good it is for me and for my family, knowing that all of it is self-imposed. And then I remember how joyful writing – engaged first draft writing – is for me. I remember what it feels like to be part of a community of writers, to be a working writer. And the rest of it is redeemed, at least for a while.”

Read and Learn: “The Jockey”

If you haven’t already taken the time to experience The New York Times’ latest epic of multimedia reporting, please do yourself a favor and put it on your to-do list. Writer Barry Bearak’s and photographer/videographer Chang W. Lee’s “The Jockey” is an exceptional work and if you read it as a writer, you’ll finish it exhausted, as if you just completed an intensive with a master teacher.

Highlights for me included:

-The choice and handling of subject: Bearak chose an obscure, overlooked subject and within that topical area, found a compelling figure to profile who was still more obscure (at least to people not in the world of horse racing). And yet, that compelling figure is so vanilla; his absolutely normal personality requires Bearak to rely upon his own narrative skills to create tension and interest in other ways, as the character alone doesn’t do it. This kind of management is easy if you’re a writer working with a flashy personality. It’s much more nuanced and challenging when your subject is so, well, ordinary.

-The perfect, evocative detail: There’s a metaphor Bearak introduces to give the reader a visual image of the jockey: a hood ornament. Not only is this metaphor completely novel, it’s also perfectly parallel; nothing about it is a stretch.

-The divulgation of process: I love learning about other writers’ processes, and Bearak does an incredible job of making unobtrusive yet critical revelations about his, particularly with respect to ethics.

And once you’ve done that, then read this blog post from the Times‘ public editor about who gets to create these types of resource-intensive pieces and what it takes to execute them.^

^I totally disagree with the critics of both “The Jockey” and the Times’ earlier multimedia showpiece, “Snowfall,” who wonder if these types of pieces “really matter.” I’d argue that they absolutely do.

Read and Learn

Julie Schwietert Collazo
Various deadlines loom this Monday morning, so I’m keeping this short.

Jeanne Marie Laskas has an incredible article about Joe Biden in the August 2013 GQ, and I urge you to read it, even if you could care less about politics… or Joe Biden.

Notoriously critical media analyst and journalism professor Jay Rosen gave Laskas high praise for the article via twitter, where he said that it was “almost” as good as the classic “Frank Sinatra Has a Cold” by Gay Talese. I actually thought of “Frank Sinatra Has a Cold” when I was reading Laskas’ piece, too. Unlike Rosen, though, I didn’t think it was almost as good as Talese’s exemplar of new journalism.

Jay Rosen's public praise of Laskas' article.

Jay Rosen’s public praise of Laskas’ article.

I thought it was better.

Laskas’ Biden article is deceptively simple. She’s tagging along with Biden for months, gathering observations and information to write a profile piece about the vice-president. It’s not a particularly “deep” piece, by which I mean it’s not analytical. In it, Laskas spends a lot of time just quoting Biden (without actual quotes). But it’s in the particular style of telling the narrative of that experience that Laskas excels– and it’s in paying close attention to that style that other writers can learn a lot. Laskas’ sentence structure mimics Biden’s own speech and, we glean, his thought processes and personality. Sentences are rapid-fire; many aren’t even sentences. Laskas “gets” Biden. She has inhabited him and is able to put him in front of us as a result. She’s present, but she has disappeared. She has become Biden’s conduit.

It’s worth noting that this is not her typical style. Laskas is nimble, able to draw from a set of narrative skills that is both deep and broad, deploying different techniques for different topics (this piece about guns, for instance, is markedly different in style than the Biden piece).

Bottom line: Go read the article. Study it. Read it and learn from it.

F. Scott Fitzgerald on Writers and Money

What Fitzgerald made on his essays. Read it and weep.

What Fitzgerald made on his essays. Read it and weep.

As I tend to do with all overly hyped things, I’ve been avoiding anything related to The Great Gatsby film… though I confess to having read the absolutely eviscerating review in The Wall Street Journal and A.O. Scott’s exceptional meditation on the movie and much larger themes in The New York Times.

Somehow, though, I found myself checking out a book of essays by F. Scott Fitzgerald this weekend. Actually, it wasn’t coincidental; I was trying to track down the full source of a quote I’d read recently. I wanted to read it within the context of the complete essay.

And so it was that I spent a lazy, rainy Sunday in bed, reading a pair of Fitzgerald pieces about money in My Lost City: Personal Essays, 1920-1940. First up: “How to Live on $36,000 a Year.” The essay is totally tongue in cheek, but as my mother has said to me over and over again throughout the years, “Many a truth are spoken in jest.” In this essay, Fitzgerald explains that he and his wife find it impossible to live on just $36,000 a year. They’ve moved out of NYC proper and into the suburbs, where enterprising city butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers have decamped to take advantage of the status-conscious nouveau riche. The Fitzgeralds must, of course, employ help. And they must make frequent trips back to the city they’ve left in order to remain cultured. At the end of each month, they find they’ve spent $3,000 and can’t rightly account for at least $1,000 of that sum.

Keep in mind, this was in the 1930s. $3,000 was a lot of cash. $36,000 was practically mogul money… especially for a writer.

The essay is funny but also likely to be uncomfortable for many writers, who are notorious for having “money issues,” for being resistant to budgeting (especially when it comes to denying oneself an expense that might produce a story), and for regularly cashing in the meager savings one has managed to accumulate. It’s also oddly poignant to see, through Fitzgerald, how much time we spend waiting to be paid, and how much we pin our hopes and financial plans, such as they are, on the expectation of a particular financial return (that, of course, rarely materializes) for a work that’s “sure to be successful.” At the end of the essay, Fitzgerald is not just broke; he’s in debt. Zelda suggests that “[t]he only thing you can do… is to write a magazine article and call it ‘How to Live on $36,000 a Year.'”

The article was, by his account, received so well that he believed (rightly) it was worth anthologizing. It also warranted a follow-up essay, “How to Live on Practically Nothing a Year,” because, of course, Fitzgerald is now broke and forced to economize.

Well, sort of… to economize in that New York City writerly sort of way, which is to say, subletting out your own home and moving somewhere cheaper for a season. Having heard about the affordability of the French Riviera, the Fitzgeralds pack their suitcases, withdraw $7,000 from the bank, and quite literally set sail. Living frugally on the Riviera, of course, isn’t any easier than living frugally on Long Island and to no one’s surprise but their own, they find themselves broke by the end of the summer.

If it all feels familiar, well, it probably is.

An appendix at the book’s end details the sums Fitzgerald was paid by each of the magazines that originally ran the essays included in the collection. What’s interesting (and disheartening for modern readers who are also writers) is that Fitzgerald really was making bank. Rates have hardly kept apace with what he made between 1920 and 1940… much less been adjusted for inflation and cost of living.

Bottom line: these essays are great. Spot on. Uncomfortably so. Get the book, read the essays, and then, maybe, think a little bit more about your own finances. How can you, as a writer, be more financially responsible?

I mean “me,” of course.

Writing Advice on Pinterest

After initial resistance to yet one more combination of user name and password, I have started playing around with Pinterest.

One of the nice functions for my purposes (and, perhaps, for yours) is the ability to share images, ideas, information, and inspiration for/about writing in a more organized way than, say, StumbleUpon or any of the other social media platforms I use.

I’ve just set up a “Writing Advice” board and will be pinning articles and other resources I consider worth sharing.

Have you read anything lately that has inspired you as a writer? Please share your recommendations in the comments.

Excerpt from Naomi Shihab Nye’s “Never in a Hurry”

“When my eye picked out a town named Nye on the map near Pendleton… it became suddenly imperative to visit it. Only twenty-eight miles off the interstate–I didn’t care how far it was….

I couldn’t stop imagining it. Maybe there would be a Nye Cafe. We could swivel on stools at the gleaming counter, ordering cocoa in thick white cups, or vanilla milkshakes. When people looked at us curiously–you here to visit someone?– we’d say the best thing possible to a lost little place in America: ‘No, we just came here to see the town….'”

The first thing my husband and I ever did together… was stare at a map of Texas and pick out a little village called Sweet Home. We drove there in the first excited flush of our togetherness, simply to see what could be at a place called that. All day we sat in a pool hall with the regulars, at a metal-topped table inscribed with the name of some beer. An older woman with a gravelly voice showed us her gold wedding band. ‘Lemme tell ya, I waited,’ she proclaimed. Waited?

‘Met Randolph back high school days, but wasn’t no way he was going to stick around this little old place after he was through. He took off, off, and I stayed here in Sweet Home, with my mama and daddy, all my relatives was here, did farming, my daddy fixed those kinda old tractors nobody uses anymore. I was just a small-town girl, ya know? But I don’t marry no one else, no matter who comes along, I keep thinkin’ a Randolph and I say to myself, Randolph’s the one fer me. Well he marry somebody else, up some bigger town by Houston, and they stay married all her life but God bless her she died. And one day last year Randolph come through here just to see how we all turned into nothin’….

Had Sweet Home changed much in fifty years? ‘Oh yeah. Went downhill completely. But we still love it.’