![]() Okay, so what’s an anticapitalist writer to do? We’re trying to disturb, or subvert, or illuminate, or render a literary experience so vibratingly transcendent that it resonates inside a reader long after the last page. My guess is that most writers (or perhaps the ones reading Lit Hub) are not working toward the goal of customer satisfaction. Resonance is a way to talk about the music of a work of fiction, as well as the multitude of ways a piece might impact a reader. She’s more interested in pursuing endings with “resonance.” This feels like a better framework to me as well. Moniz, who pointed out that this language smacks of consumer capitalism. Do we really want a story to satisfy? To earn? Recently, I sat on a panel with Dantiel W. To start, maybe turn a critical eye upon those critiques themselves. The first: “This ending wasn’t satisfying.” And the second: “This ending wasn’t earned.” In other words: either a story’s ending was a letdown-given what the story seemed to promise-or the big swings taken by a story’s ending are not justified by what happens earlier. What’s more, those critiques tend to fall into one of two categories. Sure, there are outliers-Toni Morrison purportedly said: “I always know the ending that’s where I start”-but for many of us, finding that conclusive beat is slippery, maddening, even disastrous.Īs a writer and teacher of fiction, I can attest that few fiction workshops pass without the utterance of an ending-related critique. For writers working in all mediums, ending a work can be the most challenging aspect of the writing process. “Beginnings are definitely the most exciting, middles are perplexing and endings are a disaster.” ![]() ![]() Just detest them,” said Sam Shepard in an interview with The Paris Review.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |