Um, Write Much?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
And how much is too much? Or is it ever enough? Can someone be too prolific? Hell, I can barely write an e-mail, so maybe I'm just jealous. But there is something wrong when I think to myself, "eh, I don't think I need to read that Joyce Carol Oates book, I think I'll wait till next week and then I'll have two more to choose from." Okay, it's not that bad, but she takes the cake. I did a cursory search and I stopped counting at 80 volumes. Plays, Crit, Novels, Short Stories, Poetry, and on and on. She makes William Vollmann look like a slacker. Guess it depends on how devoted you are to the author and how willing you are to travel with them thru all their various guises and be interested in whatever is interesting to them at the time. Do you end up taking for granted a writer whose rate of production rivals that of some small island nations? And who can pull off the multi-genre/multi-book trick as easily as the bard of Princeton (Joyce Carol Oates). And whose computer and/or typewriter would you like to confiscate for a little while until they promise to calm down.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 10 March 2004 18:33 (twenty years ago) link

I read a few of her books and liked them (especially "Because it is Bitter, and Because it is My Heart") but when I realized she was writing them faster than I could read them, I got discouraged and quit. I know that's not fair.

Not That Chuck, Wednesday, 10 March 2004 18:59 (twenty years ago) link

I read a short story by her, liked it, bought her recent book "The Tattooed Girl" after a good review by Toby Litt. Disaster. I hate it; I can't read it; it needs editing; it reads written fast. I've given up. Terrible, terrible, terrible.

I do read Wodehouse, who wrote about 93 books. I've probably read fifteen. Some are genius, hilarious; others less so; some poor. Situations repeat and characterisations repeat and jokes repeat. I think with a prolific writer you should pick out the best books, if you can find out what they are supposed to be.

All Bunged Up. (Jake Proudlock), Wednesday, 10 March 2004 19:31 (twenty years ago) link

My hero John Gardner was crazily prolific, although some of that has to do with the period when he was writing two novels a decade but none of them got published. It definitely led to some hastiness (On Moral Fiction, which is not nearly as stupid as is commonly assumed--in fact not stupid at all--is the major known example of that), but in general I've found him to amply repay reading and re-reeading even in the case of the "minor" works. (In plain English: I LOVED Freddy's Book.)
Now, John Updike? Not so willing to defend him. As for JCO, I'm still trying to figure out which 18 of her books to start with.
I wonder--who was the most prolific author (in terms of actual writing--so books of recut and recut anthologies, or books of interviews like half of Noam Chomsky's political backlog, don't count) of all time? Some of those medieval theologians have to be up there. (The Summa Theologiae was only one of Thomas Aquinas's massive elephantine books.) Samuel Johnson, too, or those superhuman Victorian scholars who wrote 18 volumes on prosody in the 1450s. Balzac? Oates herself?

Phil Christman, Wednesday, 10 March 2004 20:22 (twenty years ago) link

There's a great way around this. Wait till they're dead. Then you can relax and work your way through the opus at your leisure.

I would confiscate Patricia Cornwell's typewriter. We are regularly buried under avalanches of her crappy novels in our shop and no-one buys the damn things. They just go round and round from one second-hand shop to another like the sushi no-one buys.

accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Wednesday, 10 March 2004 20:31 (twenty years ago) link

Check out her works for yourself:

http://www.usfca.edu/fac-staff/southerr/works.html


46 novels since 1964. She's probably written more short stories than 95% of all short story writers. (The Wheel Of Love is a cool early short story collection if you want to read something good.)

I liked Gardner's On Moral Fiction! If you want to read something crappy, read C.S. Lewis's book on the same subject. Can't remember the title though.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 10 March 2004 22:14 (twenty years ago) link

I should also note that i'm not like the world's biggest JCO fan or something. She's really uneven. But the good stuff if really good. And i do admire how, even at this late date, she will go from gothic romance, to horror, to Updikean middle-class discontent, to transgressive rape/murder/nightmare stuff that can make dennis cooper look tame. I mean, she's no spring chicken! Dorris Lessing does something similar. Plus, I really like JCO's poetry and lit crit. But the avalanche of stuff might end up devaluing the good stuff. or at least make it harder for people to find the good stuff.(as Phil mentioned)

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 10 March 2004 22:23 (twenty years ago) link

>I liked Gardner's On Moral Fiction! If you want to read something >crappy, read C.S. Lewis's book on the same subject. Can't remember >the title though.

Dissing CSL! I like your postings, Scott, but them're fightin' words.

Kidding. Gardner's book probably is better than whatever ol' Clive Staples wrote on the subject, but I'm not sure which work you're talking about either. On Moral Fiction's argument is right on, some of the arguing is hasty, some is profound, and he makes some similar points in a more nuanced way in The Art of Fiction, a book that I like to hope has had a profound influence on me.

Oh, but Writers Who Write Too Much: I'd perhaps be amenable to nominating Hitchens in this category.

Phil Christman, Thursday, 11 March 2004 01:54 (twenty years ago) link

Stephen King. J.K. Rowling.

Begs2Differ (Begs2Differ), Thursday, 11 March 2004 02:05 (twenty years ago) link

The C.S. Lewis book was just aggravating because his opinions and ideas about what fiction should contain were so rigid and oversimplistic. Everything was black or white to him. And he was very intolerant of any shades of gray. I dunno, it was just so old-fashioned and naive. I realize he is well-regarded as a christian scholar or whatever, but that book was right out of the 19th century. Or the 12th century. One or the other. ( I didn't think it was that well-written or argued either. But i really don't have any strong opinions about him one way or another. I didn't grow up reading his kids lit, and i don't even know why i picked this book up. It bugged me is all.)

scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 11 March 2004 02:20 (twenty years ago) link

The C.S. Lewis book is a bit of a classic round our way (in Dublin). They give it to you to read in first year English Lit. I think the intention is to provoke discussion rather than take it literally.

Or at least I hope that's the intention, because I agree with you, Scott.

accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Thursday, 11 March 2004 15:33 (twenty years ago) link

The CS Lewis book is called An Experiment in Criticism, by the way.

SRH (Skrik), Thursday, 11 March 2004 16:14 (twenty years ago) link

From what I read in an essay, it sounded like Georges Simenon made JCO look constipated. I'm unfazed to reflect that I've not read a simple word of either of those. Life's too short.

Oh, mejustthought of a corrolary thread.

David Joyner (David Joyner), Saturday, 13 March 2004 04:34 (twenty years ago) link

JK Rowling has only written 5 books, surely that's not excessive. If you're going to pick on childrens' authors start with Enid Blyton.

isadora (isadora), Saturday, 13 March 2004 22:45 (twenty years ago) link

Yeah, the only thing of JCO's that I've read is "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been," because it's the only thing of hers that everyone seems to agree on as definitive or canonical.

jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 15 March 2004 08:09 (twenty years ago) link

I think that Andrew Vachss needs to walk away from his "Burke" series. In fact, he should have done so after the second or third book, really. At this point it seems like he's beating the proverbially dead horse (hey, is that saying a reference to Crime and Punishment?) and it feels like he's becoming a pornographer at this point.

I'm Passing Open Windows (Ms Laura), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 11:08 (twenty years ago) link

Rowling has only written 5 books, surely that's not excessive. If you're going to pick on childrens' authors start with Enid Blyton.

But at least each one of Blyton's books is pretty short. One of the many things that put me off buying the last Harry Potter book was the sheer size of it. Although it probably makes a handy step to reach those higher bookshelves.

accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 11:25 (twenty years ago) link

It also makes an excellent device for breaking one's toe, when it's left in the middle of the floor and then urgently kicked during a mad night-time dash to the loo.

(But I liked reading it, nonetheless.)

I'm Passing Open Windows (Ms Laura), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 11:34 (twenty years ago) link

I think that Andrew Vachss needs to walk away from his "Burke" series. In fact, he should have done so after the second or third book,
really. At this point it seems like he's beating the proverbially dead horse (hey, is that saying a reference to Crime and Punishment?)
and it feels like he's becoming a pornographer at this point.


I completely agree with this!!! I felt that way after the 4th or 5th book probably. And then I just stopped reading them. Just the same damn thing over and over. The last stuff i liked were the comic book things. Another Chance To Get It Right and the series that was called Hard Life or Hard Times I can't remember. He just keeps picking at the same old wounds. There is something to be said for obsessiveness i suppose. And he did turn me on to Judy Henske years ago, so i will always be grateful for that.

scott seward (scott seward), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 12:03 (twenty years ago) link

*laughing* He turned me on to Judy Henske, too! And for that I will always be grateful as well.

I've read all but the most recent in the Burke series, as they were a gift and I feel bad if I don't read gift books - but now they're in the "donate these some place but I don't know where" pile. I've not read any of his comic works - maybe I need to look into those, next.

I'm Passing Open Windows (Ms Laura), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 12:12 (twenty years ago) link

Simonon wrote literally hundreds of books. He claimed to be able to write a novel in 7 days. Which means the last Simenon I read took me longer to finish than it did him.

Jonathan Z. (Joanthan Z.), Tuesday, 16 March 2004 12:45 (twenty years ago) link

I know these are YA, but my 7 year old has read like a bidillion books by Mary Pope Osborne and every one is crap.

Clellie, Tuesday, 16 March 2004 22:02 (twenty years ago) link

Clellie - that made me remember that my sister had almost everything that Ruth Chew published, all of those YA books about witches (The Wednesday Witch, The Witch's Garder, The Would-Be Witch, etc.)

Actually, come to think of it, E.L. Konigsburg (From the Mixed-Up Files of ..., etc.) is quite prolific, too. Is this a common thing for successful (not necessarily talented) YA book writers?

I'm Passing Open Windows (Ms Laura), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 03:29 (twenty years ago) link

I think they learn how to crank them out at a fairly good clip. You could say the same about a lot of genre writers who are less than spectacular. They've got their set pattern/structure/outline and they stick to it. Doesn't mean that they can't be enjoyable of course. A lot of crime/mystery writers put out the same book over and over again with slight variations and people dig them. Me too, if I like the characters and the style.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 04:26 (twenty years ago) link

Good points there, Scott. I'd not been thinking about genre writers, but now that you mention it I can see whole collections on my shelves by the same authors.

I'm Passing Open Windows (Ms Laura), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 05:36 (twenty years ago) link

IPOW, In defense of YA I'd like to say that I just read "The Tale of Despereaux" by kate DiCamillo and it is a lovely book. It is also DiCamillo's second Newberry medal winner. So If she keeps cranking out stuff of the same calibur I for one will be delighted.

However, the first time I strolled through a Boarders and saw a display of those Sue Grafton mysteries "A is for ...." "B is for ..." "C is for ..." I reeled in horror. I was appauled and simultaneously I knew they would sell and sell and sell.

Clellie, Wednesday, 17 March 2004 15:17 (twenty years ago) link

*chuckling* I loved The Tale of Despereaux, too Clellie. Though I must admit that I think I love her Because of Winn-Dixie even a little better - very different books, of course.

I wonder about those whose writing seems to be formulaic (the Sue Grafton mysteries, those One for the Money books, etc.) - does one have to be a fan of the author and/or the genre in order to derive pleasure from every book they crank out? I mean, after I read one or two in a series like that I pretty much think "well, now I know what her writing's like, so onto something else." But I know others who will buy and devour every book in a series - where I might see all of the books as being basically the same they see each as standing alone.

I do wish that people would broaden their reading habits and venture away from the basic genre works - but at the same time I'm pretty thrilled to think that people are reading anything these days. So I'll quit my complaining *grin*.

I'm Passing Open Windows (Ms Laura), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 18:01 (twenty years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.