August 31, 2009 James Wood On Fiction
Finished the Wood book today. Delightful. Lots of
splendid things. Super footnotes too. I never knew the thing about
French having a special tense for literary past only. Helpful to know
that somehow. Even if only to say “it figures.” Of course he is
English and Cambridge so he does irritate at times. One chief
instance---page 105: “But to repeat, what is a character? I
am thicketed in qualifications: . . . “
He gets Don Quixote wrong when he says the Don as a character
does not change. Virginia says, when I told her that, “he hasn’t read the
book very well if he doesn’t see the changes.”
If I were under 40 I would certainly attack him too, as many
have. He is re-doing that “centrist” English commonsense, pragmatic
setting us straight about the real essence of real fiction, real literature and
he does it with that superior, calm tone of utter authority designed to drive
all colonials crazy.
His chapter on voice, tone, register was just magnificent.
At other times, later in the book, the attempt to praise and define great style
gets tedious----but then I think that has always been the problem with such
attempts.
His last chapter feels ho-hum and not that enlightening or
new. And to offer “lifeness” as the term that will satisfy these ancient
troubles with truth, convention, realism just feels like a weasley, lame maybe
glib way out. Weakening finally his whole project.
I wish he had just stayed with character and forgotten the need,
the politics, to “save” realism from being considered a “genre” by some
writers.
I wish too he had just titled the
book “Ways I Really get Pleasure in Reading Fiction and Ways Many of You Also
Do Too.” Or something like that. I had to chuckle when I noticed in
tiny print on the back cover that the publisher put “Literature/Reference” on
the cover. Yeah, right.
No comments:
Post a Comment