I still don't know whether I like Annie
Dillard, whether I can't stand her, whether I am indifferent to her.
From time to time, I pick up her books and commit myself to reading
them. I am not the kind of writer Dillard is. I am (usually) not
interested in poetic meanderings, even if I have been prone to it in
my attempts to sound like a “real” writer as I mimic someone I
happen to admire all the time, or just for a few weeks.
Some of times I understand Dillard.
Her writing is elusive and maybe this is the quality and a gift which
is uniquely her own. But I should also add, most of the time I
really have no idea what she's talking about. Did she have too much
wine? Did she perhaps smoke some kind of grass that she often
describes in her writing about nature? And what would possess
someone to write pages about a spider in a study? (Can you tell that
I am not exactly a fan of Proustian expressions?). If she is having
wine, I bet she's not even drinking reds but whites or pink. And
really, why even waste your time with wine? Why not go straight to
scotch!
But I digress, and I am not trying to
make a plug for the Glenlivet.
Really, it's the truth.
Regardless of my feelings about
Dillard, I've been reading her book The Writing Life,
which was published in 1989. The reading of the book came at an
appropriate time, and maybe Dillard would appreciate the “perfect
moment” for everything in life. One passage caught my eye, which
dealt with the question of beginning a book – something, which I am
sure, plagues every writer.
It is
as follows:
You may wonder how you start, how
you catch the first one. What do you use for bait?
You have no choice. One bad winter
in the Arctic, and not too long ago, an Algonquin woman and her baby
were left alone after everyone else in their winter camp had starved.
Ernest Thompson Seaton tells it. The woman walked from the camp
where everyone had died, and found at a lake a cache. The cache
contained one small fishhook. It was simple to rig a line, but she
had no bait, and no hope of bait. The baby cried. She took a knife
and cut a strip from her own thigh. She fished with the worm of her
own flesh and caught a jackfish; she fed the child and herself. Of
course, she saved the fish gut for bait. She lived alone at the
lake, on fish, until spring, when she walked out again and found
people. Seton's informant had seen the scar on her thigh (The
Writing Life, 12-13).
I am not sure
whether I am supposed to take comfort in this. Probably not. And if
I am, then I have missed the point. I won't be cutting my own flesh
– I can tell you that much, but I do like this comparison.
I have not read it,
but I wonder whether Dillard writes about how she feels about the act
of writing. I don't like it all. It rarely gives me pleasure. I
just try to get through it. My breaths are too uneven, the air is
humid (even if it's freezing out there), and I move too slowly.
Sure, sometimes moments of great freedom come along but those are
usually in the middle of the night where you write feverishly and
think this is the best freakin' piece of writing you have ever
written and then you go to bed but not really wanting to and you're
high because you were up when the rest of the (what you deem at the
moment) unintelligent, trivial population is asleep and then in the
morning or late afternoon you take a look at what your genius came up
with and it's mostly crap.
And right about
now, my breathing is getting shallower and I am getting impatient and
I am picking at my fingers and adjusting my glasses. I think again
about Dillard's book. Maybe she is too dramatic, too brooding, too
inward. But these are not virtues or vices. They just are.
I don't know why
but something takes a hold of me and I write. I don't enjoy it, just
as I don't enjoy writing this either. In fact, I am standing,
leaning against the desk. I don't even want to sit down. Pretty
soon, my legs will begin to ache, and I would have reached (more or
less) my 800 word count for the day and thank God I did!
7 comments:
I think some write because they want to and others because they have to...
Sometimes writing is like speaking into an empty room; it doesn't necessarily mean the words won't be heard.
You are so right about that!
You should write a book, and it will be much better than anything Dillard has written. (I'm meh towards her writing overall.)
Absolutely I should write!! And you know, I think that I actually agree with you about Dillard. Meh is a perfect word. She's not bad or anything, I just sometimes have no clue what she is saying or trying to say. Even poetry has to have clarity and aim!
Arghh, typos spotted after the fact. Let's try a repost of this comment, shall we?
I hope you do pen some 1000-page wrist-breaking tome under the Dr. Lulu sobriquet. I don't know what genre you're aiming for -- philosophy? You know, with your incisiveness and wit, you'd be terrific at something along the lines of non-fiction/new journalism -- à la Hunter S. Thompson or Tom Wolfe.
Oh my goodness Mayrock! I was just thinking about both of them the other day. That is quite the compliment. I am beginning to realize that I am unable to write a totally serious book, that somehow there will always be humor. Finally coming into my own, I think. Oh yeah, there will be a book at some point with the name Dr. Lulu, you better believe it!
Post a Comment