Category Archives: OT/Lecturing/PhD Reviews

L is for… Le Guin on Writing (The Wave in the Mind) (Book) #AtoZChallenge

L is for… Le Guin on Writing (The Wave in the Mind) (Book)

IMG_1609

This book has been knocking around on my shelf unread for a while too. The Wave in the Mind by Ursula K. Le Guin has the subtitle: Talks and Essays on The Writer, The Reader and The Imagination.

Once again I am led back to thinking that writers don’t half write about writing. This is one of the things that interests me most. It seems like there is a need to explore why we write.

I had a quick flick through last night and Ursula writes about a variety of topics, reading, writing, feet!!

I’ve decided just to pick a few select quotes and note what I thought when I read them.

‘…I tried to figure out what was troubling me. I did it in writing because I think best in writing.’ (p.152)

I feel this way too and wondered how true this is of writers in general. In fact this was one of my arguments for looking at doing online data collection rather than face to face interviews.

She talks, as others do about multiple meanings in texts and that there is no one way to read something explaining that is depends on who is reading/writing, ‘what their relationship is, what society they live in, their level of education, their relative status, and so on.’ Books aren’t there to simply disseminate information or facts. ‘They are full of meaning and of meanings.’ (p.187).

I wonder if this is true of the writer’s relationship to their writing too?

In an essay called A Matter of Trust she says ‘In order to write a story, you have to trust yourself, you have to trust the story, and you have to trust the reader.’ (p. 223)

•    You have to have trust and confidence in yourself as a writer – to do this you need to write.
•    You have to be prepared to lose control when in the composition phase (control comes in planning and revision)
•    In terms of trusting a reader she talks about dancing with them, not attacking them. Trusting them not to give up if your first line isn’t perfect.

I wondered whether getting to this state of trust links to engaging in writing being better able to support our health and wellbeing. I don’t think I have point one yet. I can definitely lose control in the composition phase but struggle to regain in when editing. I hope I trust the reader.

In The Writer and the Character she talks about characters starting to ‘have a life of their own, sometimes to the extent of escaping from the writer’s control and doing and saying things quite unexpected to the author of their being.’ (p.235)

Oh yes this happens – they do things like get themselves killed when you aren’t expecting it too.

Ursula says the question she gets asked most is where do your ideas come from. A comment I’ve heard lots about books are, I don’t know how they thought of that,  how odd. It made me wonder about openness. Are writers just more in tune with their thoughts and feelings, even the dark ones that some people repress?

In Old Body Not Writing Ursula lets out a secret, writing is hard work, it is challenging. She describes being in ‘a kind of trance state that isn’t pleasant or anything else.’ (p.283). To me this is interesting because of discussions about occupational flow and its link to health and wellbeing. This ‘trance state’ doesn’t really sound like flow so there must be something else to explore here. This is one chapter I want to read in detail.

The final chapter is an extended poem The writer on, and at her work – I’m just going to pick a very tiny portion of it to conclude.

‘So if I am
a writer, my work
is words. Unwritten letters.
    Words are my way of being
human, woman, me.

That certainly set waves going in my mind, especially the pause on the word being – what about yours?

wavemind

By MG_FX – from http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1418313 (used with permission)

K is for… King – On Writing (Book) #AtoZChallenge

K is for… King – On Writing (Book)

IMG_1604

If I recall correctly I think this book was one of the first I bought about writing (it didn’t stop there!). I think it must have been around the time that I started studying creative writing with the Open University (or ‘taking it seriously’).

Anyhoo the book goes like this:
Two humorously contrasting quotes
Followed by three forwards
C.V (The memoir/autobiography bit)
A couple of pages called What Writing Is …Telepathy
Toolbox (On vocabulary, grammar, style,
On Writing (the bit about writing)
On Living: A Postscript (About his accident and recovery)
Furthermore, Part 1: Door Shut, Door Open (an insight into editing)
Furthermore, Part 2: A Booklist (Stephen’s Goodreads bookshelf ;o) – including the first three Harry Potters [this was published in 2000]
Finally it ends with the winning entry of a short story competition – Jumper by Garrett Addams.

What writing is – Telepathy. This relates back to the discussion on the I post of writers seemingly getting into our heads.

Stephen King’s Prime Rule is Write a Lot and Read a Lot – I’m trying – have been succeeding more with the latter than the former at the moment but it’s all food and nourishment.

Now it is a long time since I read this book but I remember it being good. I need to read it again, I want to after skimming for the purposes of writing this. It isn’t laid out like a how to guide (according to the man himself p.xiii – ‘most books about writing are filled with bullshit.’), there is no index to help you find the section on writing dialogue or which tense to use. It is, as the subtitle says ‘A memoir on the craft.’ It reads like a story, it engages for the full duration then – that is what I hope to do with my thesis.

After his accident Stephen didn’t want to go back to work – he thought it would be too painful. His wife helped him. He ends the postscript section with this quote (p327) –
‘Writing is magic, as much the water of life as any other creative art. The water is free. So Drink.
Drink and be filled up.’

Stephen suggests that why most books on writing are bullshit is because most writers don’t understand what they do – do you agree?

I is for… Intertextuality #AtoZChallenge

I is for… Intertextuality (Book)

photo 2

Image taken by me

On the back cover of Intertextuality by Graham Allen (2000) it is written that:

‘No Text has meaning alone.
All texts have meaning in relation to other texts.’

I’ve mentioned before that I sometimes struggle with analysing writing in relation to only that text alone preferring in some cases to better understand context or being very accepting of multiple analysis. Comparison to previous texts I’ve read also plays its part.

This text is an academic one, a study of intertextuality within the context of literary criticism.

It discusses Bahtkin and Dialogism (again), Roland Barthes and the idea of the Death of the Author, feminism, postmodernism and lots of isms and textualities in general.

I think this book will be of interest to my PhD because of its discussion about relations between books. I also wonder whether the idea of the Death of the Author might be interesting to explore more with reference to what happens post publication. We now have unprecedented access to authors of new books and can ask them their meanings and intent – maybe the author is on the rise from the grave? Does this mean we have to zombie follow them and not accept our own creation of meaning? I know that as a writer some of my writing appears subconscious and I then read meaning back into it.

If you have ever been to a psychic you will probably have heard people say that we cling to aspects that relate to us and ignore the bits where they go totally off track. I wonder if this is how we relate to books too.

For example I have seen the quote above a lot recently and it really can feel like this is happening sometimes, that someone is writing out the thoughts in your head. But I suspect that often books have as much that we don’t relate to as that which we do – but the relations are more powerful and longer lasting though.

Another book I need to read properly rather than skim so apologies if I have misrepresented any of the theories – my comments are just rambles at the moment.

If you are a writer what other books do you nod to in your work?
When looking back at the meaning of things you have written do your ideas change over time or stay static?
As a reader do you find yourself making links to other books you’ve read, films and TV series you’ve seen and, of course your own life experiences?