Podcast
Rumpus Events
Rumpus Book ClubThe Part About Writing
I was thinking about this essay by Sam Tanenhaus in The New York Times, arguing against the New Yorker‘s 20 under 40 list. These young authors are not necessarily people to watch; it’s quite likely they’ve already written their best work, or will before they turn 40. Sam points to Joyce, who wrote Ulysses in his thirties, and Melville, who was 32 when Moby Dick was published. Faulkner was also 32 at the release of The Sound and The Fury. What’s interesting to me is while many authors wrote their best works before they were forty it was almost never their first book. As a reader with limited time I avoid first books. The Sound and The Fury was Faulkner’s fourth, Moby Dick was Melville’s third.
I think continuing to write well has a lot to do with a healthy lifestyle. Kerouac and Thompson burnt out early, but Dave Eggers released his best book, Zeitoun, last year (at the age of 39). Dave’s never even smoked pot. Tobias Wolff continues to get better as well, Philip Roth exercises regularly.
This doesn’t explain Janet Malcolm, who continues to write great stuff but nothing quite as good as The Journalist and The Murderer or In The Freud Archives. The Year of Magical Thinking belongs among Joan Didion’s best despite miles of difference with The White Album and Slouching Toward Bethlehem. And nothing really unravels the mystery behind Leonard Michael’s Nachman stories.
The point? There is no point. We’re talking about writing.
**
From today’s Daily Rumpus email.
June 11th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
I don’t know, here are some of the greatest books ever written:
James Joyce: Finnegan’s Wake (arguably his best book) Age 57
Dostoyevsky: Brothers Karamazov (arguably his best book) Age 60
Tolstoy War and Peace (arguably his best book) Age 41
Balzac: Cousin Bette (arguably his best book) Age 47
Zola: Germinal (arguably his best book) Age 45
Victor Hugo: Les Miserables (arguably his best book) Age 64
Dante: The Devine Comedy (his best book) Age 65
Charles Dickens: Great Expectations (arguably his best book) Age 48
June 11th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
moby dick is melville’s 6th book, after typee, omoo, mardi, redburn and white jacket. in melville’s case, the first book, typee, is pretty wonderful.
June 11th, 2010 at 6:51 pm
Wait a minute…Dave Eggers has never smoked pot?
June 11th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
“Tobias Wolff continues to get better as well, Philip Roth exercises regularly” is kind of a strange sentence, but i guess i get what you’re saying.
having said that, philip roth wrote “portnoy’s complaint” (probably, mostly likely, though it is certainly open to debate, his best book). and “goodbye, columbus” (a national book winner) was his first book.
June 11th, 2010 at 7:30 pm
meant to say philip roth wrote “portnoy’s complaint” in his mid thirties. these abbreviated sentences are contagious maybe.
June 11th, 2010 at 8:13 pm
I don’t know that I have any particular problem with a list of folks it might be a good idea to watch. Though, I think it’s silly to think that watching or not watch this or that author has anything to do with anything or any sway on anything. Brendan’s above list and, indeed, many of the folks in Stephen’s essay are dead (in some cases, long-dead). Lists I am more interested in are those debating the peak of someones collection. For instance “Portnoy’s Complaint” vs. “Everyman” in the case of Roth. But these arguments can’t really be made until an author dies.
I guess what I am getting at is, are these lists meant to be a benefit to the reader of the writing community or the bottom line of authors and publishers? I think the most clear answer is, certainly they are no benefit to the reader. Or at least, they don’t appear to have that aim.
I’ve looked at the list for many years. As a publisher/editor with limited time, I’ll give titles but these youngsters a glance but, like Stephen, I have limited time and so they get just as much a glance as the books recommended by friends, or my aunt, or anyone really.
Every author wants to be on this list. Nearly everyone appreciates a little attention for their hard work. My authors are great. They all deserve to be listed. But, I’d never promise them that’d make them a better writer, a happier person or even, really, help sell books. “Better to focus on writing,” I’d say. “Better to keep your eye on your craft. Like Roth, better to keep swimming well into your sixties.”
Ramble over.
June 11th, 2010 at 8:14 pm
Excuse the typos.
June 13th, 2010 at 7:59 am
That part about “avoiding first books” sounds ridiculous to me. Would you avoid The Beatles early work? Would you ignore Dali’s first paintings? Skipping to the “best” work of an author sounds to me like watching a highlight show of the super bowl, buying a greatest hits album of pink floyd, or reading cliffs notes of shakespeare. Perhaps I misunderstood.
June 13th, 2010 at 11:21 am
You didn’t misunderstand. In general, unless an author’s best works really win me over (Bolano, Malcolm), I don’t want to read their lesser works. I know people that read five books a week and they can read lesser works but I read two, sometimes three books a month. I read books carefully, every word. I just don’t have the space for lesser works. I don’t have anywhere near enough time to read the great works of literature.
June 15th, 2010 at 8:27 am
“Portnoy’s” is by no measure Roth’s best book, though it certainly deserves a spot (under Sabbath’s Theater, The Counterlife, American Pastoral, Operation Shylock and the first Zuckerman Trilogy) in Roth’s Top Ten.
June 15th, 2010 at 1:13 pm
I have to agree. I don’t think Portnoy’s Complaint is even close to Roth’s best work.
June 15th, 2010 at 2:19 pm
I’d put in my vote for the Counterlife or the Ghost Writer for “best Roth,” but should mention I haven’t yet gotten to Sabbath’s Theater or anything after American Pastoral.
June 24th, 2010 at 12:40 pm
How many lifetimes would one need to read the great works of literature? 5,10,40? “A donkey loaded with great books is still a donkey”– Sufi saying