Had to read this book for a class, and it was not an English class.John Gardner passed away in 1982. This book was originally published one year after his death, (its first publication by Norton was in 1999). I don’t believe the 28-29 year gap makes the advice particularly dated, though it did make me question how Gardner would consider the impact of computers and the Internet in becoming a novelist. I also wondered if Gardner would use examples in the recent years as examples of excellent writing or if he would think to same books as classics. tThis book would appeal most to aspiring novelists. Other fiction authors, such as short story writers or poets may gleam some good tips here – particularly short story writers on focusing on details and characters – but other sources are likely more helpful. Gardner writes in a straight-forward manner so there are no hidden meanings or double-checking to see if he meant what I thought he meant. His opinions are very blatant in terms of what he thinks is “good” fiction and “bad” fiction. He is a literary fiction writer, and seems to hold a lot of science fiction writers in contempt – he uses an excerpt of Robert Heinlein’s Over the Edge as an example of hack-writer style – but also acknowledges there are some masters. Detective fiction or thrillers are genres he describes as using tropes and clichés and “it’s hard to rise above your class” (13) is his statement about seeing “Sharkskin” and “Gray Suit” stock characters even in good detective novels. There is further sense of elitism in his book, such as his claim that “a good poem takes a couple of days, maybe a week to write. A good short story takes about the same. A novel may take years” (63) and thus the novelist works harder than the poet. I know he was using it as an example of a novelist’s need to have drive to write his book, but I found it slightly insulting. I don’t believe novelists are the only writers who have to put away a work-in-progress aside for week or months before they can come back and continue writing it.tIn one section Gardner describes that novelists need to have an accurate eye and for some it comes from awareness of their own personality. Some novelists are very idiosyncratic and their fiction exposes their idiosyncratic personalities. Other novelists are accurate in the way that their mind is capable of magically jumping into different mind and personalities from their own. Part of this comes about naturally, while others can only do this by observing other people in the real world. Gardner describes people who aren’t able to guess what others are thinking and feeling in real life. He has no idea why this is so, though he thinks it is a “neurosis.” I was surprised to see his description – if he were alive today he would realize he was likely describing people with autism spectrum disorder.I found his comments on workshops and what delineates a good workshop from a bad one very useful. He cautions about having a teacher who encourages attacks instead of constructive criticism, teachers who cannot separate their way of writing from helping a student find their own voice, teachers who do not realize their own style is one of many and are resistant to styles different from theirs, and teachers who have no standard of goodness or clarity to reach for and a teacher who come from a literary analysis perspective rather than a writer’s perspective. A friend told me of getting the feeling from a Creative Writing class that the professor didn’t like her style as it was very different from his own. Gardner himself uses an example of a student’s work he thought was badly written with a horrific theme, and after conferring with the student Gardner realized his own prejudice about what “good” writing should be was responsible for his hostile reaction and it was a well thought-out story. I appreciated the times Gardner used personal examples throughout the book.I can understand why On Becoming a Novelist is a classic. I picked it up mostly because my Creative Writing professor mentioned it in class. It is a bit dated but its specific focus on novelists is helpful. There are many books about technique, but John Gardner’s book focus on the personality, general lifestyle choices and steps needed to become a successful novelist really makes the process of becoming a novelist go beyond fighting with words.
This book isn't your friend; someone who stands unfailingly behind you, supports you, and whispers, "You can do it!" in your ear, like many of the "how-to" writing books out there. More realistic than fantasy, John Gardner lays the groundwork on what you can really expect from a writing career; hard work that is endless, tiring, and thankless for the serious writer.If being told that you'll probably not make a living by being a writer, this book isn't for you. If the following statement isn't mostly true ("Its benefits are quasi-religious--a changed quality of mind and heart, satisfactions no non-novelist can understand--and its rigors generally bring no profit except to the spirit. For those who are authentically called to the profession, spiritual profits are enough."), then this book probably isn't for you either.It is a self-proclaimed "elitist" book with one man's opinion on the Writer's Nature, Training and Education, Publication and Survival and, lastly, Faith. It is informative, though sometimes rambling, and author self-indulgent (Gardner uses his own pieces to highlight some of his points). Though the sentence structure in the book winds and meanders, he passes along many pearls of wisdom."Write as if you were a movie camera." (pg. 71)"The question one asks of the young writer who wants to know if he's got what it takes is this: "Is writing novels what you want to do? Really want to do?" If the young writer answers, "Yes," then all one can say is: Do it. In fact, he will anyway." (pg. 72)John Gardner doesn't promise riches beyond your wildest imagination, but what he does promise is satisfaction when you've managed to write a serious piece of fiction (he's not a lover of genre fiction). Along the way, you'll learn a bit about the trade, his experience in the industry, and a foundation of knowledge you can fall back on."Finally, the true novelist is one who doesn't quit." (pg. 145)
What do You think about On Becoming A Novelist (1999)?
Whether apprentice or accomplished, every author should read this book. It's a sobering pill to swallow, most of the time, but good medicine nonetheless. Today's publishing landscape has a different rolling sprawl than in Gardner's day, so his outlining of a writer's journey to that of a published one is at odds with what is available to the modern, aspiring novelist. This may very well be the reason to read it. It shines insight on a dark and bygone age and, if one is practiced in self-publishing, provides great encouragement and appreciation for the tools at our ready. Gardner is one of those artists whose deep investment into their craft can shake an onlooker into feeling belittled or shameful or unworthy. His passion borderlines neurotic--and it makes one wonder if they have what it takes. We do. It's just a matter of diligent application and an aversion to quitting. Or, at least, this is what John wants us to believe. I believe him.
—J.S. Leonard
This book addresses nearly any emotion or trial you might experience as a novelist. I struggled with some of Gardner's assertions. I left a conflicted review on Amazon when I'd read the first half of this book, but I might have to delete that or amend it, because the majority of this book is so, so excellent. Like any other mystical experience, reading this is uncomfortable and challenging. The tone is calmly authoritative. The truths in it run so deep into the nature of creative writing that it really is the King James of novel writing. I scoffed when someone else called it "The Bible of Novel Writing" since so many creative writing books receive excellent reviews, despite their being repetitive, plain or shallow. Not so with this one! The thing that will bother you the most about this guy is his commitment to his own point of view, which can sometimes be elitist. Now that I'm finished, I'm afraid that he might be right though, because this guy really, really does know what he's talking about, and he communicates it beautifully. He's a genius.I feel that I've made deeper commitments to my personal ethics and life path because of this book. Wow! Now that doesn't happen every day!
—Naja
Anne Lamott's Bird by Bird has just fallen to the #3 position in my list of favorite writing books. I don't think she'd mind, though, as she herself sings the praises of John Gardner in her book with, "What he says about plot is so succinct it will make you want to sit up and howl." What he says about plot is this: all stories boil down to protagonist wants something, goes after it, and ends up with either a win, a lose, or a draw. That's pretty good, but what makes me want to sit up and howl is what he had to say about writer's block. It's a form of perfectionism, of course, but really, there's no reason to get it. The writer simply must bear in mind that writing is like any other human activity. There's no reason to feel guilty for not doing it, and there's no reason to feel enormously proud for having done it.Anyone who's tried to be a serious and professional writer will find nuggets of wisdom just like that throughout this book. Unlike his The Art of Fiction, which is more about craft, this book takes on the question that so many writers ask themselves, "Do I really have what it takes?" Talent is part of the equation, of course, but so is persistence and patience. But not only does Gardner address these psychological issues, he goes into practical ones, like earning a living and finding the right support group.Has this book solved my writer's block? It may have, a little. I don't know if I'll start working on my fiction again tonight, but at least I have a few ideas about how to slowly work writing back into my life again. More importantly, I think I learned a little to lower my expectations of success.
—Kressel Housman
