It infuriates me that the work of white American writers can be universal and lay claim to classic texts, while black and female authors are ghetto-ized as 'other.'
Jesmyn WardRead
The cry that 'fantasy is escapist' compared to the novel is only an echo of the older cry that novels are 'escapist' compared with biography, and to both cries one should make the same answer: that freedom to invent outweighs loyalty to mere happenstance, the accidents of history; and good readers should know how to filter a general applicability from a particular story.
Interpretation
Fantasy offers a freedom of creativity that is often undervalued compared to more grounded forms of storytelling.
In this quote, Tom Shippey argues that labeling fantasy as merely escapist, much like the past criticism of novels compared to biographies, overlooks the intrinsic value of imaginative storytelling. He emphasizes that the ability to invent and create new worlds and narratives holds more significance than merely adhering to factual historical events; good readers are encouraged to recognize and extract general truths from specific fictional stories.
In practice
This quote could be used in a discussion on the value of genre fiction at a literary festival.
It infuriates me that the work of white American writers can be universal and lay claim to classic texts, while black and female authors are ghetto-ized as 'other.'
You may translate books of science exactly. ... The beauties of poetry cannot be preserved in any language except that in which it was originally written.
THE WRITER can get free of his writing only by using it, that is, by reading oneself. As if the aim of writing were to use what is already written as a launching pad for reading the writing to come. Moreover, what he has written is read in the process, hence constantly modified by his reading. The book is an unbearable totality. I write against a background of facets.
He was the man who of all modern, and perhaps ancient poets, had the largest and most comprehensive soul. . . . He was naturally learn'd; he needed not the spectacles of books to read Nature; he looked inwards, and found her there. . . . He is many times flat, insipid; his comic wit degenerating in to clenches, his serious swelling into bombast. But he is always great, when some occasion is presented to him.
I can tell you that as a writer and as a reader, I regard character as king. Or queen. No matter how riveting the action or interesting the plot twists, if I don't feel like I'm meeting someone who feels real, I'm not going to be compelled to read further.
That the question of likability even exists in literary conversations is odd. It implies that we are engaging in a courtship. When characters are unlikable, they don’t meet our mutable, varying standards. Certainly we can find kinship in fiction, but literary merit shouldn’t be dictated by whether we want to be friends or lovers with those about whom we read.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.