But while The Uncommon Reader was a funny, easy read, it had unnecessary crudity, and therefore I can’t whole-heartedly recommend it.

The Queen, a non-reader, follows her dog outside of the Royal Kitchens and onto the local library’s traveling Bookmobile that is parked on the lawns. There, she feels obligated to check out a library book. But to her surprise, she actually enjoys reading it! Thus begins a love affair with the written word. As we watched her progress from reading popular fiction to reading classics new and old, we, the readers, are reminded of our own journeys of how we have made reading a part of our lives.

As the Queen begins to read more, people are shocked that she has time to read; she points out time and again that everyone has time to read if it is made a priority. Granted, in this novella, the Queen fails to learn how to balance her time properly, and that adds to the humor.

I don’t believe anyone doesn’t have time to read. For someone who tells me that, I say: “Take every minute you spend watching TV of any kind and replace that with an audiobook, a book, or a magazine. Add a book to your purse or car and read wherever you go. You have time to read; you choose not to!”

A few memorable quotes:

[Said the Queen], ‘[B]ut briefing is not reading. In fact it is the antithesis of reading. Briefing is terse, factual and to the point. Reading is untied, discursive and perpetually inviting. Briefing closes down a subject, reading opens it up.’ (page 21-22)

[Said the Queen], ‘Books are not about passing the time. They’re about other lives. Other worlds. Far from wanting time to pass, Sir Kevin, one just wishes one had more of it.’ (page 29)

The appeal of reading, she thought, lay in indifference: there was something undeferring about literature. Books did not care who was reading them or whether one read them or not. All readers were equal, herself included. Literature, she thought, is a commonwealth; letters a republic. (page 30)

To begin with, it’s true, she read with trepidation and some unease. The sheer endlessness of books outfaced her and she had no idea how to go on; there was no system to her reading, with one book leading to another, and often she had two or three on the go at the same time. The next stage had been when she started to make notes, after which she always read with a pencil in hand, not summarizing what she read but simply transcribing passages that struck her. It was only after a year or so of reading and making notes that she tentatively ventured on the occasional thought of her own. (page 47)

There are so many more memorable lines, but you have to read the novella to discover them.

I found myself making a reading journey about ten months ago. While I’ve always been a reader, I started being more critical of what I picked up; reading one book encouraged me to pick up a different, related novel or nonfiction work, and I found myself devouring that as well. I started a blog where I can write about what I’ve learned. I’ve learned to make reading a part of my life, even while caring for my little child. And I love the journey!

Great, Except for One Part

The writing in this novella is fine: it’s a quick, fun read. The plot is very universal, and I kept thinking I could recommend it to book groups everywhere. I could share my copy with my family. It would be a great book for discussion of reading as a process, as a pastime, as a lifestyle.

But then there was some sexually crude dialog between the queen’s assistants.

I know most people won’t care. I suppose some people will find it funny. Most people probably won’t even notice it. But I did notice it, and it ruins this novella for me. Why, oh why, do authors add crude sexual language to an otherwise clean, delightful book? I fail to see how it was integral to the development of the plot. I fail to see the humor.

It means I can’t recommend this book.

The Uncommon Reader by Alan Bennett was delightful and easy to read. I could relate to the Queen’s own personal development as a reader. But in the end, “modern fiction” disappointed me again with irrelevant crudity.

I won The Uncommon Reader from Booking Mama. Thank you very much for an entertaining read!

Other Reviews:

• The Bluestocking Society
• books i done read
• things mean a lot
• The Hidden Side of a Leaf
• Just Add Books
• Page After Page
• The Written World
• Stuff As Dreams Are Made On
• Bermuda Onion
• Reading Adventures
• A Striped Armchair
• Blogging ‘Bout Books
• It’s All About Books
• The Book Zombie
• The Biblio Brat
• BooksPlease
• Care’s Online Book Club

If you have reviewed The Uncommon Reader on your site, leave a link in the comments and I’ll add it here.

For the rest of October, I’ll donate 10 cents to World Food Programme for every (non-spam) comment I receive on any post of Rebecca Reads. See most post on Blog Action Day 2008 here. I’m also donating any proceeds (4%) from my Amazon Store.

• The Old Man and the Sea by Ernest Hemingway
• Carmen by Prosper Merimee
• The Odyssey by Homer: The Story
• What is a Reader?
• The Magic Flute by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Emanuel Schikaneder
• Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan
• The Touchstone by Edith Wharton
• Two Books on Literacy (Growing a Reader from Birth and The ABCs of Literacy)
• A Stop in South Africa (Two Novels by Alan Paton) + Giveaway
• Google Reader Overload! + Blog Thoughts + Memelet

A few months ago, I wrote a post about Stephen King’s On Writing.  I didn’t like the book. My main argument was that good books should be determined by a good story and good writing; many best-selling authors’ writing is mediocre, so being a best-seller doesn’t necessarily make the authors good. King’s book seemed to explain how to become a best-seller, not how to write well. I said in the post, “I’ve never read any Stephen King, ” but that should have been, “I’ve never read any Stephen King until now,” as I had just read On Writing.

Well, this week I got a furious comment from a reader. She accused me of being unfair since I had not read Stephen King’s books and suggested a book by him that I should read. I responded by clarifying that I had read a book by him: On Writing. I suppose that I should have also added that the writing in On Writing and the excerpts in On Writing from his other books haven’t convinced me of his superior writing ability, and, as I don’t normally like horror in any form, reading the book she recommended wasn’t on my list. But I only wrote the first part.

Her response to me was even angrier. At first, I deleted her second comment because it seemed to be angry hate mail that was somewhat irrelevant to the discussion. However, I usually wait a day before responding to anything that makes me annoyed or mad; I’ve since reinstated the comment because really, it strikes me now as rather amusing.  Besides, she’s calling me a book banner: how can I then censor her comment? Here’s part of it if you don’t want to bounce over there:

…[F]or an author and a book lover, you argue like a book banner.  Don’t bother replying to this, I am removing this site from my bookmarks.

Here’s my question: Where do I sound like a book banner? What is book banning, by those definitions?

In my post, I made it clear that I didn’t like the particular book or the particular author. I have no intention of reading anything else by him. I suggest we all take a more critical view of the books we read, other than “It’s a best-seller.”

Does encouraging better book choice make me a “book banner?” Does saying “Don’t waste your time with this book!” make me a book banner? If so, then any blogger who reviews a book they dislike is a “book banner!”

So what is book banning? Here are some scenarios. I don’t think they’re all book banning.

• A librarian decides not purchase a certain book. (I’d say this isn’t book banning. Libraries can only buy so many books a year!)
• A librarian removes a certain book from circulation after parents complain. (Yes, this seems like book banning. If parents don’t like a book, they shouldn’t read it or they could encourage their children not to read it. That would be parenting a young child, not banning a book; a librarian removing a book would be making it unavailable to others. But even then, parents and children can find the book elsewhere. It’s still not unreadable.)
• Parents ask their young child not to read a certain book. (I’d say this isn’t book banning. Parents have the right to encourage children to read books with situations and morals appropriate for their age, and, most importantly, their maturity level.)
• Parents forbid their older child from reading a certain book. (I think this is border-line book banning. Older kids are able to choose for themselves. Forbidden status just makes it enticing anyway. But, older children will read what they want to read, regardless of parental influence.)

What do you think? What does book banning actually mean? Does not wanting to read Stephen King ever again make me a book banner? Apparently, I need your help, because I didn’t realize I was a book banner!

I concede that I shouldn’t critique authors when I haven’t read everything they’ve written, although I’m sure I’ll keep doing it, as do other bloggers. I suppose it is wrong. But, regardless, I still stand by what I said about Stephen King, and I won’t be reading his horror.

To beth Powers who has made it clear she won’t ever read this (and to anyone else offended by me):  As I don’t normally read or like modern fiction, popular or not, I suspect we have different tastes in books. I occasionally read modern fiction, but it takes a really good one (and especially a good story) for me to really like it. There are literally hundreds of book bloggers out there that love modern genre fiction and review it regularly; I wish you luck in finding a blog better in line with your preferences. I’m sorry Rebecca Reads wasn’t a good match for you!

To other book bloggers: As a sub question, what do you do when you receive “hate mail” comments? Do you leave them untouched? Do you try to respond politely? Do you moderate them or edit them? Would that be “comment banning”? Is that wrong on your own personal webpage?

• Stuart Little Was a Banned Book
• On Writing by Stephen King
• Reading Journal (30 Sept): The Gift of Choice (Thoughts on Banned Books Week)
• Stories by Guy de Maupassant (Introductory Thoughts)
• A Ruined Author?
• Book Blogging Community
• Banned Books Week
• The End of Publishing?
• Why ARCs?
• Golden Legacy by Leonard Marcus

“The End: Have We Reached The End of Book Publishing As We Know It?” is a fascinating look at the publishing industry and struggles it is facing. While I don’t think publishing is going to ever end,  I thought the article had some great insights into book publishing. This article reminded me of some things I’ve been thinking about recently; that is, why do we read what we read?

Here are some of my thoughts after reading this article:

• Book publishers are commercial companies, out to make money. Therefore, they choose books because of commercial appeal, not necessarily because it’s quality literature.
• A quote from the article: “What I’ve heard from editors is, ‘My judgment doesn’t count any longer.’ They didn’t flock to publishing because they want to publish Danielle Steel.” In other words, editors don’t have much say in book selection. Danielle Steel gets published, while better authors might not. (I was an editor for a short time before I realized how much I don’t want to read most modern fiction.)
• Chic lit writers (for example) get better book deals than do former Pulitzer Prize winners. What has the world come to? That seems a sad commentary on what people read. It’s not that all Pulitzer Prize writing is superb or that all “chic lit” is generic, but I’d think there should be a standard of writing that we expect when we pick up a book. It’s a shame that monetary decisions get in the way of quality literature being discovered (or quality writing being edited properly). (For me, at least, “chic lit” stories are meant to be watched, as in “chick flick.”)
• Books by bloggers really are not the next big thing. Sorry, folks, but it’s not going to happen. Bloggers are not going to save the publishing industry,

The bottom line:

• Simply because a book has been published does not mean that (1) the author made any money or (2) it is worth reading. These days, especially, publishing a business venture!

Why do you read what you read? I know I didn’t answer the question myself, but I find it interesting to think about what “a published book” really is and how it got between two covers (or not).

• Stuart Little Was a Banned Book
• Is Reading Online is Making Us Stupid?
• Golden Legacy by Leonard Marcus
• Why ARCs?
• On Writing by Stephen King
• The Life of Our Lord by Charles Dickens
• Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling (and BBAW giveaway)
• Abandoned Book and Giveaway: Bridget Jones’ Diary
• Political Reading
• Jane Austen: A Biography by Carol Shields, a Quote Book, and a History of England

In honor of Book Bloggers Appreciation Week, I’m giving away my copy of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. For more BBAW giveaways, visit here and here.

My Thoughts

Most people in the blogging world have already commented on this series. But, nevertheless, I will add that I enjoyed Rowling’s amazing creativity in writing this series, although I think her writing was pretty generic and nothing special; especially in the later volumes, Rowling could have fine tuned the novels a lot more. The fact that publishing deadlines and impatient readers affected the quality of the writing was regrettable. To me, Rowling is an example of an marvelous creative writer, not necessarily a great writer. (If you disagree, please don’t attack me. To each his own!)

My favorite books were Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. I thought the first (Sorcerer’s Stone) was the most well-written and clever (it wasn’t too violent and yet all three major child protagonists had a significant role in the resolution). I thought Prisoner of Azkaban was the cleverest resolution. I disliked how violent the entire series got by Deathly Hallows, but I still enjoyed all of the series.

I’m sure I’ll read these books again, especially when my boy gets older.

A BBAW Giveaway

For now, I’m giving away my copy of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, along with a Harry Potter bookmark. The book is the hardcover British (Bloomsbury) edition and has only been read two times, so it’s in great shape. (My other Harry Potter books are the American versions, and I only got the British version this time because I was living in Australia last year.) I’m willing to ship it anywhere in the world.

How to Enter

To enter this BBAW giveaway, please leave a comment with what you loved most about the magical world of Harry Potter. In other words, what magical thing do you wish you could have in your life? Quidditch? Flo Powder? Dumbledore’s putter-outer? Diagon Alley?

For me, I really wish I had a time turner. I can always use more time!

Giveaway ends September 19, 11:59 p.m. CDT, but you can still comment on the post after that! The winner will be selected by a random number generator. Only one entry per person.

• Harry Potter Giveaway Winner
• “Used” Books Giveaways Poll
• Reading Journal (May 27): Distraction
• The Tales of Beedle the Bard by J.K. Rowling
• The Complete Tales of Beatrix Potter
• Stories by O. Henry (and Another BBAW Giveaway)
• BBAW Meme + Thanks for the Nominations
• May in Review
• On Writing by Stephen King
• Poetry for Young People: Robert Louis Stevenson (edited by Frances Schoonmaker)

His stories capture greed (a woman wanting to look elegant for a party, no matter the cost; a man in need of money selling his wife; a parent in need of money selling his child; etc.), self-interest (a young man escaping from his pregnant girlfriend; society shunning prostitutes while yet accepting them; a family having the funeral before the loved one died for convenience), desire for power (a man lusting after a woman; a man trying to politically overtake a city), and so forth.

For a specific example, in “The Devil,” Maupassant captures our natural impatience. The son of a dying woman needs to plant his crop, so he hires a peasant woman to sit with his dying mother. But as the hired woman has been hired for a set pay, she doesn’t feel like waiting for the woman to die. I won’t tell you how this is resolved, but I will tell you I laughed out loud, horrid as it was! Humans are impatient by nature, and Maupassant wonderfully captured us.

I’ve now read between 80 and 100 stories (probably about 400 pages, skipping around the huge volume I have). As I’m moving this weekend, I had to return the book to the library.

I think I’ve had a good taste of Maupassant’s great stories. I’m sure there are other great ones out there. Tell me if I missed your favorite! (Links below are to the stories on the web; all are in the public domain.)

Stories I Would Reread

• The Necklace: A middle-class woman really wants to look nice at a social gathering so she borrows a diamond necklace from her friend….and loses it.
• The Piece of String: A stingy man finds a piece of string in the middle of the town square and stops to pick it up, changing his life.
• The False Gems: When his beloved wife dies, the man eventually must sell her cherished-but-false jewels.
• The Horla: An invisible creature follows a man, driving him crazy.
• Was it a Dream?: A man’s beloved wife died, and he morns over her grave, only to be “haunted.”
• The Father: A man abandons his girlfriend once she becomes pregnant; only later does he realize what that meant for him.
• The Devil: A peasant woman is hired to sit with a dying woman and gets impatient for her to die.
• A Sale: Why did he dump his wife in a barrel of water? The judge wants to know.
• Simon’s Papa: Simon doesn’t have a papa, and the boys in the school yard are making fun of him. He is determined to find a papa.
• Clair de Lune: A priest hates women because they are only temptresses, and nothing good can come from women. And then he learns something.

Other Good Stories

• Boule de Suif: A group of citizens, including Boule de Suif (a local prostitute), travel in a carriage together during a heavy snowstorm in the midst of the Franco-Prussian war.
• Yvette: Yvette is the daughter of a high-class prostitute, but she wants to find love and marriage in her life. (I cannot find this online; the Yvette story credited to Maupassant that I find online is different!)
• Mouche – A Boating Man’s Reminiscence: Mouche is the only woman on the boating crew and they all love her.
• A Family: A bachelor visits a long-unvisited friend whose life now “disgusts” him (he has a wife and children and certainly must be miserable).
• Moonlight: A woman has the beginning of an affair.
• In the Wood: A couple is discovered making love in a forest…
• The Kiss: An old aunt sends a young girl a letter about why kisses are so important.

HTR&W

Harold Bloom selected as his favorites “Madame Tellier’s Establishment” and “The Horla.”

While I didn’t really love reading “Madame Tellier’s Establishment,” it did fit in to the pattern of Maupassant’s stories that I mention above in terms of addressing aspects of human’s carnal desires. Madame Tellier’s “establishment” is a whorehouse. They all take a holiday to visit Madame Tellier’s niece’s first communion. I had an odd sense as I read it that the prostitutes weren’t really people in the society, and yet we find that they were.

“The Horla,” on the other hand, was wonderfully weird. It was written during Maupassant’s own “going crazy” stage, as were a few of his stories. As I mention above, it is about a man being followed by an invisible man, and slowing going crazy. There were some great passages in it, and I really enjoyed the sense of “is this really happening?”.

In How to Read and Why, Bloom compares and contrasts Maupassant and Chekhov, much as I did in my previous post. He has some interesting comments. (Again, he has no respect for Poe, which makes me want to go read Poe again just to prove him wrong.) He concludes with this:

Why read Maupassant? At his best, he will hold you as few others do.

Yes, Maupassant really does capture your attention!

What are you waiting for? Many Maupassant stories are very short. Read some of his stories online right now (links to specific stories above):

• Project Gutenberg
• classiclit.about.com
• Read Print
• online-literature.com

• Stories by Guy de Maupassant (Introductory Thoughts)
• Stories by O. Henry (and Another BBAW Giveaway)
• Stories by Vladimir Nabokov
• Stories by Flannery O’Connor
• Stories by Nathaniel Hawthorne
• Stories by Edgar Allan Poe
• Stories by Tommaso Landolfi
• Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert
• Stories by Anton Chekhov

Image via Wikipedia

If Guy de Maupassant lived and wrote stories or novels today, his name would appear on The New York Times best-seller lists many weeks out of a year.

As it was, in the late 1800s, his stories were best-sellers from the time the first one, “Boule de Suif,” appeared in a collection with five other previously unknown authors, until he died, mentally ill, at the young age of 42 in 1893.

But don’t let the best-seller title sway you from reading Maupassant. I tend to avoid modern-day best-sellers because, in my mind, they are (stereotypically) not written very well. But that’s not the case with Guy de Maupassant’s stories: he writes incredibly well.

Maupassant’s Style

I’ve only read about 40 of Maupassant’s stories thus far (out of a book with 270), so these are all preliminary thoughts. As I’m still reading his stories, I’ll share my favorites by Maupassant and my HTR&W thoughts in a subsequent post.

Since I recently read Chekhov’s stories, I can’t help but compare the two writers. Apparently, most people compare them. In the introduction to the volume I’m reading, Dr. Artine Artinian discusses at length why Maupassant is better than Chekhov. I don’t think I can assign one as better than the other; they are just very different.

Maupassant’s writing style is a stark contrast to Chekhov’s (read my discussion of Chekhov’s stories here). I loved Chekhov’s writing and style: it was thoughtful despite being (I suppose you could say) verbose. He explores the characters’ emotional states and their thoughts. Maupassant is much more concise. He also relies on dialog more than Chekhov seemed to, so his stories moved more quickly. But Maupassant’s stories are still beautifully written. He captures the essence of the setting in few words and makes it complete.

Maupassant’s subject matter is also a stark contrast to Chekhov. Both writers focus on the lives of everyday people, focusing on everyday matters. But while Chekhov wrote his stories with the ever-present political situation of various classes of people (money and station seemed to be a theme), Maupassant wrote with under-lying carnal desires in mind. In other words, he wrote about sex, greed, love, misunderstandings, and lying, among other things. The characters in his stories care most about themselves. Chekhov’s stories were more concerned with how people relate with each other.  In a sense, Chekhov’s characters felt more sensitive. Maupassant’s characters are more “human.”

In searching for a recommended translation, I stumbled upon an Amazon reviewer who wasn’t too impressed with Maupassant. He/she says:

The real reason that everyone makes such a big deal about Maupassant is because he mostly wrote about sex. His stories are entertaining but not extraordinary…

He’s right, and he’s wrong. Yes, Maupassant mostly wrote about sex. But I believe that Maupassant’s writing has a hint of extraordinary. Some stories are simply masterpieces. I believe Maupassant deserves the credit he received.

The Verdict

As I said, I haven’t read every story in this collection of stories by Maupassant. But when I read stories like these I am glad that I don’t have a rating system on my blog. How could I assign a “score” to these painfully beautiful stories after I assigned a “score” to Chekhov’s painfully beautiful stories? I am glad I read both authors, but I can’t begin to “grade” them.

If there is one author I’d read again someday, it would probably be Chekhov and not Maupassant. But that doesn’t mean that Maupassant isn’t as good or that I find his stories “worse.” Also, don’t judge a book by it’s cover: I’m liking Maupassant despite its stench.

In the end, Maupassant’s stories feel modern in writing style and subject matter. Therefore, you (personally) may relate to them more than you would to the under-lying politics in Chekhov’s peasant Russia. I guess you could say that Maupassant is the average “Guy.” That helped him become the best-seller he deservedly was.

Questions for you:

1. Which writing style do you prefer to read: verbose beauty or concise beauty?
2. If you’ve read Maupassant’s stories, do you think they’re “all about sex” or is there something else deeper in them?
3. Do you assign “scores” or ratings to books or stories you read? Why do you assign ratings? How do you determine which rating to assign?

• Stories by Guy de Maupassant (Favorites)
• Stories by O. Henry (and Another BBAW Giveaway)
• Stories by Anton Chekhov
• Stories by Vladimir Nabokov
• Stories by Flannery O’Connor
• How to Read and Why: Short Stories Retrospective
• The Student by Anton Chekhov: A Perfect Short Story
• Stories by Nathaniel Hawthorne
• The John Cheever Audio Collection
• Two Stories by Turgenev

A few weeks ago, a publisher contacted me: Would I like to review ARCs for my blog?

I’ve only been book blogging for a few months, so I was flattered they found me. I have an online presence! The publicist was able to answer my questions about ARCs, mostly. But I’m realizing that I don’t really want just any free books.

(For those unfamiliar: an ARC is an Advanced Reading Copy of a book slated for publication in the next few months. A reviewer gets it before publication.)

The publicist indicated that I’d be expected to review the book within two months of its publication. And “of course” I can write an honest review. But really, could I be completely honest when I know the publicist and the author are going to read my review? If you review ARCs, do you really feel as honest with your ARC reviews as you do about your other books?

To my surprise, after a few glances through this publisher’s catalog, I failed to find anything that I want to read, especially in the next months. There are some I may want to read at some point, but not right now. I have so many books on my TBR list.

This was an interesting revelation for me: free books, but I’d rather not read them. I’ve found that since I’ve started book blogging, I’ve gone through differing phases of reading.

Stage 1

In the beginning: I read what I wanted to read and reviewed it online.

Stage 2

What I started doing: For every positive review of an interesting book, I added the book to my TBR. I entered every drawing I found for any free book. I went to the library and got those recommended books instead of those I had planned on reading.

Stage 3

Present philosophy: I read what I want to read and review it online. If I see multiple positive reviews for a book that looks interesting, I add it to my TBR and plan it for a future read. If (and only if) a free book is already on my TBR do I enter a drawing.

I realize all book bloggers have their own methods of reading and considering recommendations. For me, I found it disconcerting to realize how I’d adjusted my reading habits to fit the blogging world; I don’t want to do that! When you started book blogging or reading book blogs, did you find your reading habits changing?

Why ARCs?

I no longer feel compelled to read every book before me. I feel this urgency to read the books I want to read. There are so many books, and so little time.

It’s kind of freeing to not be tied down by a publisher’s list. It’s freeing to realize that I won’t read a book just because it’s free. It’s freeing to realize that I’m not going to read a book just because it is published.

For the purpose of full disclosure, I admit that I worked at a book publisher one summer during college, assigned to the “slush pile.” I read the first chapters of submitted novels (by unknown authors) and summarized whether that chapter had merit and whether the publisher should request the rest of the novel. Needless to say, none of the “slush pile” chapters I read were “winners.” I don’t want to work the slush pile ever again.

To some extent, in my mind, ARCs by unknown authors are just beyond the slush pile: they had enough merit to get published, but no one has spoken for them yet. Some published books are very good. Some are not very good. Reading a not-yet published book is reading a book no one knows about; it could be “slush.” Then again, it could be the next Pulitzer. It’s a risk. Do I really want to risk spending time on a not-very-good novel?

That said, all best-sellers and prize winning novels were once ARCs. If it’s that good, I’ll get to it. Let someone else recommend it first. I’m not interested in changing my reading habits to fit someone else’s schedule.

But I’m curious, why do you read ARCs? Does the fact that it is free impact your choice to read that book? Would you pick up those books if it wasn’t a free ARC copy from the publisher?

If you do not read ARCs, why don’t you? Have you not had the chance, or do you feel as I do?

I’m sincerely interested in why ARCs are so intriguing to other book bloggers. Please don’t take my thoughts as criticism of you or your blog if you do like ARCs, since as I’ve said, I realize all books start as ARCs. Make your comment anonymous if you prefer (as long as it’s not spam or a personal attack on me, that is…).

• Celebrating the Classics: A Dead Author Blog Tour? (An Idea)
• How to Read and Why: Short Stories Retrospective
• The End of Publishing?
• The Book That Changed My Life, edited by Roxanne J. Coady and Joy Johannesson + Giveaway
• Blogging as Storytelling and Blogging Tips from an Unprofessional
• What Are Banned Books? (Do I Favor Book Banning?)
• Blogging Goals for the Coming Year
• This Is NOT Goodbye
• Thoughts on Blogging and Reading + HTR&W Giveaway Reminder
• LibraryThing versus Shelfari versus ?

I picked up Stephen King’s memoir, On Writing, because it seems to be a commonly recommended book for aspiring writers. I’ve never read any Stephen King. I am not often drawn to best-selling authors. (By best-selling author, I mean an author who writes a book every year that ends up selling millions of copies.) I’ve heard of Stephen King, of course. Unfortunately, I found little in his memoir about writing that helps me in my personal craft. I think his memoir should have been named On Writing Best-Selling Horror Novels.

There were a few gems in On Writing, most of them obvious. For example, to improve your writing, you need to make the time to write. (King suggests a goal of words, like 4,000 a day: I think “quantity” as a standard is ridiculous.) He also discusses the need to read good writing (obviously) and learn grammar so you can actually write (doubly obvious). However, for me, the most inspiring thing I learned was the realization I had every time I picked up On Writing: I don’t want to be a best-selling author.

My General Thoughts about Writing and Books

I feel that there is a big difference between writing well and writing a story. A superior novel (or short story) needs both aspects: just because an author has created a great story and written it does not mean it is good writing. Also, I feel very strongly that quality is more important than quantity. An author can write one book and be a great author; an author can write 35 novels and be mediocre (although they certainly have a great imagination and a knack for turning out books for publication). I also feel intended audience and subject matter is important to keep in mind when approaching writing.

Stories and Writing: Many best-selling books are great stories, but not great writing. For example, I think the Harry Potter series is a great story. I am in awe of J.K. Rowling for having an imagination to conjure up such a world! I have read the series and I enjoyed it. However, I do not think J.K. Rowling is a good writer. Her writing is contrived and repetitive. (I may be unpopular among die-hard fans, but I believe it is true!) I feel many of the best-sellers also lack the good story element: they neither are good stories nor contain good writing. I read them sometimes, but I read them knowing that they are not great. Sometimes I may be pleasantly surprised.

Quantity and Quality: The more novels a popular writer publishes, and the more frequently those are being published, the less likely I am to read their books. There may be some gems, and I’d love to give those highly recommended gems a try, but overall, I can’t stand the thought of writing that has been produced in such a short time: can we really call that quality? For an analogy, I think “quality” writing is like risotto: I know I can’t rush risotto. If I do, the creaminess is missing; to produce good risotto, I must stir it constantly for 30-40 minutes. To produce good writing, I think it’s necessary to polish it again and again. (King has four drafts of each novel. Yeah.)

Audience and Subject Matter: Stephen King is obviously a horror novelist. I guess he has found his calling in life, but I found even the summaries of his novels disturbing. I have no desire to think outside the box if that is the result! I would never be proud of what I’ve written, if that is what I’ve produced. Even 35 novels worth; even for millions of dollars.

For me in my writing, I’ve determined that I want to write quality letters, stories, children’s poems, and prose. I especially want to write for my family, friends, and others whom I respect. As Stephen King described his methods to arriving at his “success,” I realized I have no desire to write the next best-seller.

The Main Reason I Didn’t Like On Writing

The biggest reason I have no respect for Stephen King’s advice in On Writing is this one comment (encapsulating the above issues):

I’ve written thirty-five [novels] … On the other hand … there is Harper Lee, who wrote only one book (the brilliant To Kill a Mockingbird) … [names other authors who wrote few books] … I always wonder two things about these folks: how long did it take them to write the books they did write, and what did they do the rest of their time? . . . I’m probably being snotty here, but I am also, believe me, honestly curious. If God gives you something you can do, why in God’s name wouldn’t you do it? (page 118)

Excuse me, Mr. King? Did you just compare your horror novels to Harper Lee’s novel? How dare you?!

I guess this goes back to the fact that I’m not drawn to best-sellers. I have the stereotype in my mind that best-sellers do not contain good writing and probably lack good stories. Stephen King thinks he is being snotty, but I found it painful to read his comparison of his 35 horror novels to a masterpiece like To Kill a Mockingbird.

Obviously, some best-sellers are well-written and come to be considered “masterpieces.” I’m generalizing here. However, best-sellers, in my mind, are nothing compared to real writing. In Stephen King’s case, I’m sure he may be a creative (yet disturbed) story teller, but he is not a good writer (in my definitions). With that one paragraph, I lost the little bit of respect I still held for him. He thinks he writes like Harper Lee!

I may offend people. More likely, you will think I’m being “snotty,” just like Stephen King claims he was being “snotty” to criticize Harper Lee for writing only one book. But this is what I’ve learned from Stephen King’s On Writing: popular, best-selling authors think they are also good writers. That may be true sometimes, but generally, I don’t believe it.

What do you think? Do you expect “best-sellers,” in general, to contain “good writing”? Is an author a “good writer” if they have published dozens of novels?

By reading On Writing, I learned that if I want to write and I want ideas on how to write, I should read authors I respect. I hold no respect for Stephen King, 35 horror novels or not.

Have any good writers compiled their thoughts on writing? No, probably not. They have better things to do.

I was more inspired to write a few months ago when I read a masterpiece. I guess I’ll stick to reading masterpieces for my inspiration.

Other reviews (from those who probably liked it more than I did):

• 5-Squared (Amanda)
  

If you have reviewed On Writing, leave a link in the comments and I’ll add your link to this post.

• What Are Banned Books? (Do I Favor Book Banning?)
• Golden Legacy by Leonard Marcus
• The End of Publishing?
• Will in the World by Stephen Greenblatt
• Stories by Guy de Maupassant (Introductory Thoughts)
• A Circle of Quiet by Madeleine L’Engle
• Stories by Edgar Allan Poe
• The Beekeeper’s Apprentice by Laurie King
• The Student by Anton Chekhov: A Perfect Short Story
• To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee