Hookless and Committed
Saturday, January 9, 2010
I've now read at least a half dozen reviews of Elizabeth Gilbert's new mega-memoir, Committed, including the Curtis Sittenfeld version that appears on this weekend's cover of the New York Times Book Review. I've watched her talk. I've read the interviews. And it occurs to me that, were I to read this book, I probably wouldn't know much more about Gilbert's travails or voice or happy ending than I already do. There's a remarkable sameness in the press, in the reviews. There is little variation in how Gilbert's story is summarized (she never wanted to get remarried, but she was forced to), in which telling anecdotes are brought forward (her grandmother's marriage story, the marriage stories of Hmong grandmothers), in how Gilbert herself is portrayed (chatty, entertaining, self-knowing bordering on self-absorbed). Were Gilbert running for office no one would be left confused about the party line. There is no murk in the margins. No room, it seems, for the unexpected retelling or interpretation.
A dozen years ago, when I was just starting out in this book life, I was encouraged to think about the "one line or two" that summarized my books. The hook that would broadcast their intentions, content, style. I failed for the first book. I failed for the next. I pretty much gave up by the time I'd written a book called Flow, the autobiography of a river. Say what? most editors said, after listening to me talk in a circle about it. Is it history? Is it poetry? Is it fiction? Even my novels have refused to fit inside the lines of what might be easily parlayed; I end up writing most summaries or jacket flap copy with a sense of familiar defeatism. I need more sentences than there's room to print. Again and again, I come up hookless.
I should probably work on that, but frankly, I don't know how to. That's not a boast; it's a confession. It's the reason why I need to write most of my books all the way through before I can try to sell them, for I never fully know, until I'm done too many drafts to count, what my books are all about. Even then, I need some room to explain them. Even then, they will be summarized, reviewed, and interpreted in ways that I often don't see coming.
11 comments:
You and I often travel the same mindset. I've been asked over and over what my first book is about and come up...strangely overstated.
Maybe it's because to us the characters in our books, are very much alive in our minds. They have these lives and personalities that don't exactly fit a summary.
To me it's a good thing. It means whatever we are writing has substance, it's more varied and complicated than a meager two liner.
I'm working on it. I imagine it's something we'll both get better with over time. (Hugs)Indigo
I can see how this is a hurdle, a stumbling block in a few ways (some important), but as a reader I actually like — am drawn to — books that defy categorization and easy summary.
http://wordlily.com
Hello to you both on this lovely Saturday morning!
I, like you both have expressed so well, see tremendous value in the non-categorize-able. I love to be surprised, not just by the works of others, but by the books I write myself.
It's not a great marketing strategy. But it's what I often lean toward.
Thank you for thinking out loud about this.
I'm glad to hear this. I am in the middle of revising my first novel and just started thinking a little bit about summarizing the book for queries, etc. in the future. It's really difficult to do without more and more words, when I'd prefer to use less. I have no idea how I would summarize it in one sentence. And I'm not convinced it's because of a flawed plot.
It's encouraging to hear that other writers and readers like stories that are a bit more layered.
Yes, exactly. I have thought (deep now into the 3rd draft of my first novel) that there must be a central failure to the story since I cannot, for the life of me, come up with a boilerplate "what this book is about."
So so so relieved to know I am not alone. (Of course, my storyline may indeed be flawed, but that remains to be seen, doesn't it?) ;-)
A heartening post, Beth! In my reading (and writing) life, I've felt most strongly that it's the work that defies categorization and that shuttles between poetry and fiction that's the most rewarding.
Happy weekend,
Jane
I know that often happens with my blogs. I imagine it has to be much more so for a whole book!
You say "I should probably work on that." But I say I think it's already working.
I also have trouble describing my books while working on them. There's not always a hook to truth and loveliness. It's a journey.
And that (not being able to wrap it up in a tidy bow) is a good thing.
It is exactly the reason that I want to read your books. Even after I finish, I cannot fully explain the content but I can explain the experience. Thank you.
Post a Comment