Who likes Amy Hempel?

Half a page in the middle of a story? That was probably half the story

I like her. It's different and very minimalist. Some of the books are hard to find too. Reasons to live was the first book club pick. I dunno why she's not talked about more - maybe it's a slightly different style or subject matter that she writes about that isn't the most popular. It takes a little more effort to dig into her stories though, a lot of reading into things. For me it was hard to get an image in my head. I had to re-read a lot before I could picture the story.

I really like Amy Hempel, but have not been able to get any of her books. I tried to order Reasons to Live off of Amazon and ended up waiting 2 months before I just canceled the order. If you want to read one of her stories all the way through, The Harvest is posted online at Pif Magazine. Here's the link: [URL=http://www.pifmagazine.com/SID/413/]The Harvest[/URL]

well after reading the short story, yea i think she is good, but still very confusing and pretty hard to read sometimes.But thanks for the link anyways and thanks for the feedback hopefully some more people will respond too.

I've read At The Gates of The Animal Kingdom and Tumble Home, which I liked a lot and a lot less respectively. Until I can apprehend Reasons To Live, I'll have to suspend final judgment.

In the meantime however, I've become enthralled with Mark Richard, who's been the recipient of some of Amy's most ardent adulation. The Ice At The Bottom of The World in particular, and also Charity and his novel, Fishboy, which develops a short story by the same title from his first collection into a 200+ page sea-faring escapade.

I liked the writing style of Reasons to Live, but in no way understood any of the stories or the message behind them, and for this reason have a tendency not to buy into all the Hempel hype-el. Perhaps reading another of her books may give me better perspective, but they are so hard to find I probably will not be able.

[QUOTE=codyC003]or is she not really as good as Chuck says in the cult member's opinions?[/quote]

She's better.

[QUOTE=codyC003]But anybody who Chuck loves id figure would be popular[/QUOTE]

I would hope not...that would be taking 'hero worship' a bit too far, no?

_Reasons to Live_ is essential reading. Some of the best writing I have ever read.

Bloody amazing that it is so hard to find (pops up on eBay from time to time, I snag copies whenever I can to give away), kinda telling, though.

Anyone not 'getting' the content (pain, emotion, “love”, etc) may be...a bit young and/or inexperienced (certainly no offense meant).
Another good example is many, many people having no bloody clue who Al Jolson was.
(A story is entitled “In the Cemetery Where Al Jolson Is Buried”)

Sadly I do think her books, in order, (Animal Kingdom and Tumble Home, respectively) lose something.
But all worth a read.

Not sure why she hasn’t written anything in many, many years. I believe she still teaches, though.
j(ay)

yea, well it is still kind of confusing. You are probably right about the immature/young thing because I just started reading books maybe 6 months ago. So, I'm probably just not ready for that deep of reading, but i can still tell there is something there to get - hopefully I'll realize that when I get a better understanding of writing period.

i found at the gates of the animal kingdom at a used bookstore for $2 and i've read it about 3 times since. it's pretty good, plus i get alot more time to read short stories than i do novels.
i made the library order a copy of reasons to live(this is how poor people get to read books) but some motherfucker checked it out and kept it. damn it.

I am pretty sure that this has been posted somewhere else on here, but this is still a place where it can be reposted. Chuck Palahniuk wrote a piece about Amy Hempel for L.A. Weekly. Here's the link for [URL=http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/44/books-palahniuk.php]She Breaks Your Heart[/URL]. Check it out. It goes along with the other link I gave to the story The Harvest.

[QUOTE=PGoutis01]Chuck Palahniuk wrote a piece about Amy Hempel for L.A. Weekly. Here's the link for [URL=http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/44/books-palahniuk.php]She Breaks Your Heart[/URL].[/QUOTE]

This is also reprinted [with, I think, no changes] as "Not Chasing Amy" in _Stranger Than Fiction_
j(ay)

I enjoy her a great deal, she may be the best short fiction writer alive today.

Very few writers excel at all lengths. Vonnegut's shorts mostly stink but his novels are awesome. For that matter, 'Slow Learner,' a collection of Pynchon shorts would not have made me a fan of Pynchon the way 'V.' and 'Crying of Lot 49' (a novella really) did. Faulkner cheated: 'Spotted Horses' is just an excerpt from his Snopes Trilogy, and without knowing Ratliff & Co., the story isn't nearly as good.

Then there's those guys, mostly unread by me, who apparently excell at the 1000+ page epic. I have to be convinced before I dedicate my time to that long a novel these days. Like with a Pulitzer or similarly prestigious prize on the cover of the Trade.

Hempel writes these amazing short stories that put my mind whirling, trying to fill in gaps, think of ramifications, etc. She's great at it, but she's said in more than one interview that the novel is not her thing. You would think that woud be a plus in this attention deficit world.

Why aren't there 20 minute movies, released in groups of six or seven? I bet I've seen 100+ movies that could have said what they had to say in 20 minutes, some less some more. So why does the publishing world reward Clive Cussler more than Amy Hempel? It's not like Borders sells more popcorn if somone buys a long book.

Long post about a short story author...

Amy rocks my world. I don't think I could ever refine my stories to that level, keeping so much detail and richness while dispensing with so much bullshit.

She makes me try, though. She makes me tell myself that if I'm going to tie readers up with 400 pages, they better be 400 pages no one in good conscience could omit.

I still claim the title over her for shortest story (hers being 'Housewife'). "Once upontime, there were three turtles."

I wrote the Three Turtles at age 4 or so, and that's the whole of it. You fill in the rest.

[QUOTE=Chixulub]she may be the best short fiction writer alive today.[/quote]

I think I agree with you. And the simple fact that she hasn’t produced a new story in (around) 7 years makes a bold statement about the current state of the short story.

[QUOTE=Chixulub]Very few writers excel at all lengths….Faulkner cheated: 'Spotted Horses' is just an excerpt from his Snopes Trilogy[/quote]

While I agree that few have managed to master the short and long form, I think Cheever, while being an outstanding short writer, faired pretty well with the long form. Joyce Carol Oates is another.

But I do take major exception with your Faulkner comment.
Many, many writers have published a short story (in this case 1931’s “Spotted Horses”), and this would also include a certain Mr. Palahniuk, and later expanded it into a longer form (1940’s _The Hamlet_).
Faulkner has indeed done this a few times, and more than just “Spotted Horses” melded into _The Hamlet_, “Fool About a Horse” and “Barn Burning”, are others.
But to me, especially with the later story, a story possible deemed a “classic”; it is more of an interesting study into fiction and/or Faulkner’s process than it is “cheating”.

Kindly don’t relegate such amazing and wonderful stories as “Red Leaves”, “That Evening Sun”, “Dry September”, “An Error in Chemistry”, “Two Soldiers” and “A Rose for Emily” (a story any Palahniuk fan would love) as the works of a ‘cheater’.

Send me your address and I will have Amazon ship you a copy of Faulkner’s _Collected Stories_ or _Uncollected Stories_, your choice.
I don’t think you’ll feel ‘cheated’ at all…

Cheers,
j(ay)

well today I just decided to go ahead and buy one of her books to really see what shes like, so I bought Reason to Live off of amazon...hopefully after reading that I'll understand how good she is.

it is kind of sad that more people don't write short stories. i generally read and reread the ones that do because i lack the time to read longer stuff.
thom jones is pretty decent.
oh, and great avatar, glassjaw rocks.

yes glassjaw does rock, but im trying to remember where your avatar is from. I remember it was a show, i think on mtv, late at night with some really skinny girl with a gun...weird show

[QUOTE=codyC003]yes glassjaw does rock, but im trying to remember where your avatar is from. I remember it was a show, i think on mtv, late at night with some really skinny girl with a gun...weird show[/QUOTE]

That was Aeon Flux, but I imagine the avatar could be from any other run of the mill animated shit and we'd all still not give a fuck.

[QUOTE=the audacity!]That was Aeon Flux, but I imagine the avatar could be from any other run of the mill animated shit and we'd all still not give a fuck.[/QUOTE]
run of the mill?
aeon flux still rocks when i catch it on m2, hell it even kicks the shit out of most modern anime shows (except fooly cooly).
reign the conqueror sucked and i don't know why cartoon network doesn't buy the rights (or whatever) to aeon and beavis and butthead for adult swim, probably because mtv fucking sucks now and they're a bunch of bitches.
blah blah blah.
(i can't believe i ust went off on a mini-rant, sorry)
oh, and they're making a live action aeon flux movie and it will likely be way better than the other crap hollywood regularly pumps out

[QUOTE=Voodoo Dolphin]
oh, and they're making a live action aeon flux movie and it will likely be way better than the other crap hollywood regularly pumps out
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, Charlize Theron, yeah, yeah, masturbate, yeah, chafing penile shafts, yeah, yeah, yeah, synthetic mold vaginas.

Today the Austin Public Library had two Amy Hempel books.

I was amazed to be able to find them. Most of the books are missing.

Reasons to live
Tumble Home

I opened one of them up in the parking lot of the library and 45 minutes later, I started the car.

There are lines in there that are fucking amazing.
I wanted to quote a line but taking it out of context would be disgraceful.

This writer is very fucking good.

RK Daley

Chuck once said something along the lines of "If you don't understand (read: like) Amy Hempel, you don't understand me." If this is true, I don't have a fucking clue what either of them are talking about.

[QUOTE=rkdaley]Today the Austin Public Library had two Amy Hempel books.

I was amazed to be able to find them. Most of the books are missing.

Reasons to live
Tumble Home

I opened one of them up in the parking lot of the library and 45 minutes later, I started the car.

There are lines in there that are fucking amazing.
I wanted to quote a line but taking it out of context would be disgraceful.

This writer is very fucking good.

RK Daley[/QUOTE]

I read 'Animal Kingdom' on loan from my public library. The copy has probably been lost by someone who saw what a killing they could make paying a lost copy feel and selling it as an ex-library edition on eBay.

The two you found are both still in print, get them while the getting's good. 'Tumble Home' can be had in hardback at my local 'Foozles' for $4 new. If I was more of a speculator, I'd buy them out in hopes that it becomes collectible, but if the current resale of 'Animal Kingdom' holds up, I expect a 'Stories of Amy Hempel' to come out with the lot of it, all three under one cover. Not until the market has gone completely nuts and you can't get one of the three for cheap as a remainder.

Here's the thing that I kick myself over: a year ago, the book they had remaindered at Foozles was 'Animal Kingdom.' I could have grabbed a big stack of that book, kept one for myself and made a mint off eBay with the rest of them this year.

I have to keep reminding myself, [B]'Tickle-Me Elmo.'[/B] Grandparents got into fisticuffs over that damned toy during a Christmas shopping season, and four months later you could get a copy as easy as an LP of 'Frampton Comes Alive,' the 'Saturday Night Fever' Soundtrack or 'Grease' back when I was 12.

[QUOTE=Rents]Chuck once said something along the lines of "If you don't understand (read: like) Amy Hempel, you don't understand me." If this is true, I don't have a fucking clue what either of them are talking about.[/QUOTE]

huh? I don't understand. What are you talking about?

I don't like Amy Hempel.

Edit: see the palahniukesque book section to get a little better idea what I'm talking about.

[QUOTE=rkdaley]huh? I don't understand. What are you talking about?[/QUOTE]

I think he's making a reference to 'Stranger Than Fiction,' where Chuck goes on about Hempel, having a beer with her without farting, and whatnot. Then finding out that her first book was out of print and going for a mint.

If memory serves, what he says is he gives her books, especially 'Animal Kingdom' to people and tells them if they can't dig it, they have nothing in common with him. But the age you're at when you encounter a book, and what you've experienced colors everything.

Hempel is the perfect writer for a deconstructionist with ADHD: short pieces with lots of blanks for you to fill in. The thing that makes her so perfect is the shit she leaves out always seems right, at least if you've experienced things that are analogous to what she's writing about. If you've never lost a friend or family member to disease or traffic accidents, never been betrayed by a lover or spouse, etc., you may not 'get' her. As I understand it, her mentor (Gordon Lisch) gave assignments like, 'write about the worst thing you've ever done.' That, supposedly was the homework assignment that produced the 'In the Cemetary Where Al Jolson is Buried.' Hell of a confessional, but when I search the memory banks, I've done as bad, so I can connect with it. And there are family tragedies that I can connect to her stuff too, and her basic message that adversity isn't enobling alone, but surviving adversity is, that is powerful shit.

I guess the thing I'd say about a writer like Hempel is if you can't relate to her stories, stick around. Life will dole out its lump of coal for your stockng sooner or later. If you're a diesel mechanic with a bachelor's degree, a gay guy from Idaho who's father was murdered by a jealous ex, maybe your lump was bigger and comes on an earlier Chrismas. But eventually, life will give you something to cry about. Your ultimatum, at that point, is whether to cry about it or figure out a way to get on.

In my own case, I've marveled both at life's ability to turn cruel tricks and rain undeserved rewards upon me. That makes both Amy Hempel and Tom Wolfe faves. And 50 cool-points to the Cult member who can top that gap, in terms of writers.

I read 'Tumble Home.' It was a quick read. Pretty dry, not very entertaining. I guess I expected more because of all the good things I heard about her on this website. So, I'm not a fan. Maybe in ten years I'll come back to her writing...

[QUOTE=Chixulub]I think he's making a reference to 'Stranger Than Fiction,' where Chuck goes on about Hempel, having a beer with her without farting, and whatnot. Then finding out that her first book was out of print and going for a mint.

If memory serves, what he says is he gives her books, especially 'Animal Kingdom' to people and tells them if they can't dig it, they have nothing in common with him. But the age you're at when you encounter a book, and what you've experienced colors everything.

Hempel is the perfect writer for a deconstructionist with ADHD: short pieces with lots of blanks for you to fill in. The thing that makes her so perfect is the shit she leaves out always seems right, at least if you've experienced things that are analogous to what she's writing about. If you've never lost a friend or family member to disease or traffic accidents, never been betrayed by a lover or spouse, etc., you may not 'get' her. As I understand it, her mentor (Gordon Lisch) gave assignments like, 'write about the worst thing you've ever done.' That, supposedly was the homework assignment that produced the 'In the Cemetary Where Al Jolson is Buried.' Hell of a confessional, but when I search the memory banks, I've done as bad, so I can connect with it. And there are family tragedies that I can connect to her stuff too, and her basic message that adversity isn't enobling alone, but surviving adversity is, that is powerful shit.

I guess the thing I'd say about a writer like Hempel is if you can't relate to her stories, stick around. Life will dole out its lump of coal for your stockng sooner or later. If you're a diesel mechanic with a bachelor's degree, a gay guy from Idaho who's father was murdered by a jealous ex, maybe your lump was bigger and comes on an earlier Chrismas. But eventually, life will give you something to cry about. Your ultimatum, at that point, is whether to cry about it or figure out a way to get on.

In my own case, I've marveled both at life's ability to turn cruel tricks and rain undeserved rewards upon me. That makes both Amy Hempel and Tom Wolfe faves. And 50 cool-points to the Cult member who can top that gap, in terms of writers.[/QUOTE]
Just for you and this post, I'm gonna read Amy Hempel again. I've now had time to cry a bit more since last reading her, maybe she'll become the fine wine of my dreams.

[QUOTE=Chixulub]I think he's making a reference to 'Stranger Than Fiction,' where Chuck goes on about Hempel, having a beer with her without farting, and whatnot. Then finding out that her first book was out of print and going for a mint.

If memory serves, what he says is he gives her books, especially 'Animal Kingdom' to people and tells them if they can't dig it, they have nothing in common with him. But the age you're at when you encounter a book, and what you've experienced colors everything.
[/QUOTE]

I was being a smart ass guys.

I knew what he meant. I need to be clearer in my sarcasm. Or...say what I really mean.

I am sure enjoying Hemple.

I was reading Sportsman, a short in Tumble Home and i wanted to cry. There wasn't anything sad going on really, but it was just under the surface, noting stated, just in the interaction between the characters. They were laughing and joking with other actually. I didn't cry, but my tears were right under the surface.

Fuckin' cool.

Her first book, _Reasons to Live_ is a masterpiece.
Sadly, she lost her flow (and she kind of admitted this) and her second book was ‘good’ (but not excellent), and _Tumble Home_ is also somewhere around, maybe slightly lower than ‘good’. Better than most though other writers, though.
And she hasn’t published a story 6+ years. Damn shame.
j(ay)

New Amy Hempel, "The Dog of the Marriage", is slated to come out on the Ides of March, '05.

[QUOTE=the audacity!]New Amy Hempel, "The Dog of the Marriage", is slated to come out on the Ides of March, '05.[/QUOTE]

Sheeeeeiiit! Nice catch.
How did you find out about that? I've been poor with keeping any eye on the periodicals, but I don't think she's published a story since around _Tumble Home_.

Cool, something to look forward to. A rare treat.
j(ay)

[QUOTE=jay]Sheeeeeiiit! Nice catch.
How did you find out about that? I've been poor with keeping any eye on the periodicals, but I don't think she's published a story since around _Tumble Home_.

Cool, something to look forward to. A rare treat.
j(ay)[/QUOTE]

I can't remember where exactly I first read this, but I recall that I felt the source was credible. And sure enough, orders are being accepted through various on-line retailers. The only information I can find is the title, publisher, release date. Nothing else by way of explanation. Really, the only signs of life, the only indications of movement I've seen regarding this are that the book is currently ranked 707,368 on Amazon and has had it's date of publication postponed by two weeks.

I just came here pissed off cause nobody told me about this. Glad I didnt start a new thread before reading the rest of this one.

I am fucking psyched !

Just sent off Reasons to Live—a Christmas gift to my mom—and saw this on Amazon while figuring out my own Christmas gifts. Oh, a happy day.

Wonders how her writing has developed since 97, esp. with the world being more minimalist happy.

Just maybe, Hempel will blow up for a powder. Just maybe, she'll have some tours that get coverage.

Sorry. Shutting up
kabol

[QUOTE=JKabol]I just came here pissed off cause nobody told me about this. Glad I didnt start a new thread before reading the rest of this one.[/quote]

I hear you.
While I’m pleased as punch about the news it’s disenchanting to not have any buzz going on with it.
Amazon, in their early years, before selling electronics, apparel and accessories, toys and (I guess) even babies, was once pretty astute with their email alerts.

It is a shame that Miss Hempel doesn’t have a nice web site dedicated to her work.

Here’s the very minimal info from her publisher, with a Chuck quote even:
[url]http://www.simonsays.com/content/content.cfm?sid=33&pid=504683[/url]

j(ay)

While that in itself is a very strong quote, I too dont understand any push, a force by any means to get the word out and around. Amazon is pretty close to terrible with updates and release dates far too often. They are a place to buy cheaper books--not to mention other apparel--and read and write reviews. And it is treated much that way, a place used. Not a community by any stretch of the word.

Jay, I'll make you a promise:

If you send her a letter asking her to maybe start a site, or have one started for her, or to do tours, or whatever comes to mind--asking her to do anything to get her words spread via the net or the open air--I promise to do the same.

Maybe she doesnt care, one of those authors that only wants to know the work is published. But, maybe she doesnt know that people care. Maybe the best way to find out is to reach out and touch.

kabol

Here is a link to Amy hempel reading some of her stories.

[url]http://www.wiredforbooks.org/amyhempel/[/url]

[QUOTE=JKabol]Amazon is pretty close to terrible with updates and release dates far too often. They are a place to buy cheaper books--not to mention other apparel--and read and write reviews. And it is treated much that way, a place used. Not a community by any stretch of the word.[/quote]

I don’t want it to be a (shudder) community, nor do I give a hell about the reviews. I just want it to be a cracking business, which it once was, that is concerned with selling *books*, and therefore informing their customers.
If they were more timely with their ‘alerts’, customers may be prompted to immediately pre-order the book and getting word out and abound.

Although I gather fuck-wad inventions like the iPod make them more money than bound paper with some ink splattered on it.

[QUOTE=JKabol]If you send her a letter asking her to maybe start a site, or have one started for her, or to do tours, or whatever comes to mind--asking her to do anything to get her words spread via the net or the open air--I promise to do the same.[/quote]

I don’t have a problem doing this, aside from a direct contact - last I heard she was a faculty member in the graduate writing programs of Bennington College in Vermont and The New School University in New York City - I guess we could go through Simon and Schuster, but I think it’s futile.
While I would be hesitant to say she ‘doesn’t care’, I would lean toward ‘not interested’. I believe everyone and their mother having their own web-site has plateau’d, and if she were to be concerned about her lack-of one, it would have been taken care of by now.

And her publisher doesn’t seem to really have any solid links for any of their other writers, Dr Charles Johnson (also with a forthcoming book, and former student of John Gardner) runs his own page off of the Uni he teaches at and is available through email and such. Amy is not even mentioned on the VT site and barely anything in on the NY. So it’s possible, like we know with Chuck, that she’s just not, whattayacallit, ‘Net savvy.

But sure, the ‘reach out and touch’ thing certainly can’t hurt, so let’s give it a go. I’ll work on a letter within the next few days. I’ll let you know…

As for her reading, she has in the past, limited cities and dates, so I’d guess she will again. Don’t fret.

[QUOTE=rkdaley]Here is a link to Amy hempel reading some of her stories.[/QUOTE]

I heard her read “The Harvest” some time ago –totally ruined it for me.
Great writer, gawd awful reader.

j(ay)

I too will work on one in the next few days. A short one. Mostly about being excited for her upcoming book.

Oh, and I agree about the reader thing. And that it killed my read of The Harvest. Unfortunately.

kabol

[QUOTE=CynicCat]I don't know about you guys, but I bought Hempel's Tumble Home on Chuck's recommendation, and was severely, severly disappointed.[/quote]

Were you disappointed with it based on the fact that someone you greatly admire recommended it, and you don’t ‘get it’?
Or
Simply just because it’s a book that you didn’t like?

This is the trouble with recommendations. Baggage.

Was _The Contortionist’s Handbook_ good?
Sure.
But if it was the ‘best book’ Chuck’s read in ’10 years’…he needs to read some more.

[QUOTE=CynicCat] I don't notice anything special at all in her word economy, tone, mood, or anything else[/quote]

Um, ok.

[QUOTE=CynicCat]Not to mention that there's really not much of a point to any of her stories. Nothing quoteable.[/quote]

Define “point”.

And while I disagree about the lack of quote-ability, that is *not* what a story’s function is.
Better try philosophy.

[QUOTE=CynicCat]Maybe it's the book selection[/quote]

Sadly you did chose the weaker of her 3 books…but I’m guessing that the others won’t do it for you either.

[QUOTE=CynicCat]He's way better than her, and he can manage to write a full novel as well as short stories.[/QUOTE]

1) You’re fantastically wrong, craft-wise (and other wise, but then it verges on basic “opinion”).
2) Chuck is very unproven at “as well as short stories”, unless you’ve got a sneak peak at _Haunted_, we’ve got one mediocre story to base this argument on.
3) What market(s) a writer decides to work in hardly acts as leveling-rank toward being a “writer”.
Be it a Faulkner that mastered both the short and long form, or a Raymond Carver who dominated the short form and only attempted a fragment of a novel once.
Or a Stephen King, who manages to suck in both. For decades.

Shall we base status on ‘well, they never wrote a play!’ by your standard also?

But as always, some books work for some people.
Maybe shelf it and try it again in a few years. Miss Hempel certainly requires maturity in many areas.

Better luck next time,
j(ay)

I have a couple Amy Hempel books. They are easy to find on Borders.com (Amazon.com)

I love her use of language. Yet, like a few others, I have a hard time following her story lines. Same with Mark Richard.

Her work reminds me of the kind of poetry you read in the New Yorker – wonderful language and style, but when I reach the end I think ‘What the hell was that all about’.

I look at her as a challenge. Something to read and re-read over and over. A visual jigsaw puzzle.

By the way - I can’t imagine someone reading the kind of poetry in the New Yorker and having people “get it” on the first run through. Most of it seems so complex.

I like the poetry of Billy Collins, Ted Kooser and Jane Kenyon. I try and harness that kind of thought compression into a short story form. Notice I said TRY.

Someday, I hope to be smart enough to understand Amy’s work.

After reading about Chuck's obsession with her, I couldn't help but go to amazon and order [U]Reasons to Live[/U] and [U]Tumble Home[/U]. Sorry to piss everyone else off, but I got them relatively quickly.

I liked them a lot. You miss the advanced story that you get from novels, but they really are beautiful works of literature in themselves.

If I want to try and base my work on something I give it a good read first and then I go back and read it as work.

Too bad she doesn’t do the whole novel thing, I think they’d be great stories.

[QUOTE=jay]Or a Stephen King, who manages to suck in both. For decades.[/QUOTE]
Ok, I don't usually stand up for Stephen King, but I gotta draw a line somewhere. He has written some damn good short stories. Sure, when he's going through all that It bullshit, it sucks, the entire horror genre is lacking in much literary talent, but when it comes to his writing outside of that, something tells me most people are just unaware of some of the things he did write. Ever here of The Shawshank Redemption? Stephen King. How bout Stand By Me? Stephen King. Those are the only two that could qualify as a short story that I can think of right now (I know there's more, just drawing a blank), but my point is that the man is not without talent.

[QUOTE=Rents]Ok, I don't usually stand up for Stephen King, but I gotta draw a line somewhere. He has written some damn good short stories. Sure, when he's going through all that It bullshit, it sucks, the entire horror genre is lacking in much literary talent, but when it comes to his writing outside of that, something tells me most people are just unaware of some of the things he did write. Ever here of The Shawshank Redemption? Stephen King. How bout Stand By Me? Stephen King. Those are the only two that could qualify as a short story that I can think of right now (I know there's more, just drawing a blank), but my point is that the man is not without talent.[/QUOTE]

I've wondered about the constant dislike expressed around here for King myself. While some of his books are junk, he has written several that I like. [I]The Shining[/I], [I]The Stand[/I] and [I]The Dark Tower[/I] series are all good books in their genre. [I]Skeleton Crew[/I] has good short stories. I don't know if it comes from frustrated writers who hate him for his ability to sell thousands of copies of crappy books like [I]The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon[/I] or just plain old literary snobs, but there's gotta be more to writing than trying to impress your English professor.

When it comes to an experience, two people will probably not have the same kind after reading the same book. I for instance feel pretty safe in stating that Rod's experience with [i]Survivor[/i], or any of Chuck's books, was not the same as my own. Though I have seen his stance on the enjoyment of those fun reads, I am not at this point able to compare with such works as Pynchon's [i]Mason & Dixon[/i] or DeLillo's [i]Underworld[/i]. At the same time, I am sure my experience with [i]Hell's Half Acre[/i] would differ greatly from Jay's. For me, it was a fun, burning experience and easily the most enjoyable read I've had in years. Maybe not the best book written in years, as such is always arguable. But, I can say--for me--that it was easily the best book I've read in years. Because the experience--for me--attests such feelings.

People read books differently.

I too dislike Kings writing. I don't dislike the guy or anything like that, nor will you find me bad-mouthing his character. But to say that he is a great writer is something that I disagree with. But then it goes back to my above point, and is arguable both ways.

For me, his work is mostly unfocused and loose and needs much more revision. Though he possesses a very strong imagination. But for the recognition that he gets, why does Daniel Steel not get the same regard. Or VC Andrews. I mean aside from movie adaptations. The writing isn't that much better, is my opinion.
kabol

[QUOTE=Rents]something tells me most people are just unaware of some of the things he did write. Ever here of The Shawshank Redemption? Stephen King. How bout Stand By Me? Stephen King.[/quote]

I think it’s common knowledge these are stories based on S. King’s work (kindly note you are naming the movie titles and NOT the titles of the stories themselves, which is kind of telling).

So because King occasionally stepped outside of the “horror” field this shows diverse and specific “good writing”? [And I’ll be guilty of cross-pollinating here, but in the Baer thread you are rambling on about the use of “urban legend/cliché” with a kidney thief but now cite 2 stories *lathered* in “urban legend/cliché” as a defence for “good story”.]
By this classification if Puff Daddy writes/produces/dances in an opera, no matter what the quality, he’s a more rounded “musician” and should be taken (more) seriously. I guess.

[QUOTE=Rents]Those are the only two that could qualify as a short story that I can think of right now (I know there's more, just drawing a blank), but my point is that the man is not without talent.[/QUOTE]

“Gramma”, “Smokers, INC.”, “Apt Pupil”, “The Monkey”…there are others but I, as the loather of King can cite more than his defence team, off the top of my head. And I didn’t need Hollywood to help me.

So yes, many of us that say discouraging things about him actually have an informed opinion, we just don’t’ like him and clearly think his “writing” (farrrrr different than telling a good story”) is pretty weak. Consistently.

But that’s cool. It works for some people, not for others.
j(ay)

[QUOTE=jay]I think it’s common knowledge these are stories based on S. King’s work (kindly note you are naming the movie titles and NOT the titles of the stories themselves, which is kind of telling).

So because King occasionally stepped outside of the “horror” field this shows diverse and specific “good writing”? [And I’ll be guilty of cross-pollinating here, but in the Baer thread you are rambling on about the use of “urban legend/cliché” with a kidney thief but now cite 2 stories *lathered* in “urban legend/cliché” as a defence for “good story”.]
By this classification if Puff Daddy writes/produces/dances in an opera, no matter what the quality, he’s a more rounded “musician” and should be taken (more) seriously. I guess.

“Gramma”, “Smokers, INC.”, “Apt Pupil”, “The Monkey”…there are others but I, as the loather of King can cite more than his defence team, off the top of my head. And I didn’t need Hollywood to help me.

So yes, many of us that say discouraging things about him actually have an informed opinion, we just don’t’ like him and clearly think his “writing” (farrrrr different than telling a good story”) is pretty weak. Consistently.

But that’s cool. It works for some people, not for others.
j(ay)[/QUOTE]
*cliched slow clapping* Well done, well done. (See what I did there?) Though to be fair, I think you're giving me far too much credit by referring to me as the "King defence team." I'll admit it, I've barely read any of his stuff, a majority of it I really didn't like. You failed to quote my confession that I'm not really one to stand up for the guy. I just thought the whole "no writing abilities" thing was a bit harsh for a guy has had as much success as he has. Admittedly there was a lot of residual success, but you gotta start somewhere.

I think it was in the Baer thread you mentioned something about what one does with the story rather than what the story is actually comprised of. I suppose I have to agree with that, but I really just don't see what's so appealing about this particular stolen-kidney-induced romance. I guess there are certain cliches in my mind that just shouldn't be touched. The kidney theft one has just been way too overdone for me. I'm done with kidneys for a while. Bring on the prison break outs and necrophiliac children though.

Forgive me if not much of this makes sense, but it's 4 in the morning and I'm in the middle of writing a big ass paper. My brain's pretty well fried. (I'm almost done, Jane, I swear)

[QUOTE=Rents]I think you're giving me far too much credit by referring to me as the "King defence team."[/quote]

Twas more in jest. But I assure you, the drips of my sarcasm get missed in real (audio) conversation, so this typing thing sometimes results in huge misfires.

[QUOTE=Rents]I just thought the whole "no writing abilities" thing was a bit harsh for a guy has had as much success as he has.[/quote]

Well, I just don’t’ see success and “talent” being automatically inter-linked.
[looking around my lab…]
In any field.

[QUOTE=Rents]The kidney theft one has just been way too overdone for me. I'm done with kidneys for a while.[/quote]

(this portion really more belongs on the Baer thread but)
I don’t recall you ever citing one other book with this them in it.

[QUOTE=Rents] Bring on the prison break outs and necrophiliac children though.[/quote]

I sense a modern day version of “The 12 Days of Christmas” coming on…

[QUOTE=Rents]I'm in the middle of writing a big ass paper.[/QUOTE]

On what?

Good luck,
j(ay)

[QUOTE=jay](this portion really more belongs on the Baer thread but)
I don’t recall you ever citing one other book with this them in it.

I sense a modern day version of “The 12 Days of Christmas” coming on…

On what?

Good luck,
j(ay)[/QUOTE]
4 comments, 4 answers, just for you, j, cuz your my favorite swissite.

Well, most recently, I can only think of a film, Dirty Pretty Things, which was good, I just didn't buy into it. It has a bit part in a lot of craptastic stories though, of varying genres of "art." Where are your kids-looking-for-dead-body-but-discovering-themselves references?

Ah yes, I've already got the piece on it's way to the printers. took me a while to mesh those damn zombie humping kids and the prison break, but by golly I did it.

Varying forms of identity in Alice Walker's The Color Purple. Highly recommended book, btw.

Thank you. Have fun with your lab.

[QUOTE=JKabol]When it comes to an experience, two people will probably not have the same kind after reading the same book. I for instance feel pretty safe in stating that Rod's experience with [i]Survivor[/i], or any of Chuck's books, was not the same as my own. Though I have seen his stance on the enjoyment of those fun reads, I am not at this point able to compare with such works as Pynchon's [i]Mason & Dixon[/i] or DeLillo's [i]Underworld[/i]. At the same time, I am sure my experience with [i]Hell's Half Acre[/i] would differ greatly from Jay's. For me, it was a fun, burning experience and easily the most enjoyable read I've had in years. Maybe not the best book written in years, as such is always arguable. But, I can say--for me--that it was easily the best book I've read in years. Because the experience--for me--attests such feelings.

People read books differently.

I too dislike Kings writing. I don't dislike the guy or anything like that, nor will you find me bad-mouthing his character. But to say that he is a great writer is something that I disagree with. But then it goes back to my above point, and is arguable both ways.

For me, his work is mostly unfocused and loose and needs much more revision. Though he possesses a very strong imagination. But for the recognition that he gets, why does Daniel Steel not get the same regard. Or VC Andrews. I mean aside from movie adaptations. The writing isn't that much better, is my opinion.
kabol[/QUOTE]

What you describe in this post is essentially a working definition of 'deconstructionism,' which allows that the only meaning of a story is the reader's meaning. Such obviously symbolic writers as William Golding and Tolkein have basically come down hard in favor of this view of literature, and it strikes me that even if the author intends symbolism, the deconstructionist case is true at least for the reader. To an extent, the 'meaning' of a novel is about as objective as the 'meaning' of a symphony or a piece of graphic art.

The fun part is arguing the points, thinking about this stuff, interpretting it and playing critic. I enjoy exchanges between my inner Siskel and, for instance, J(ay)'s inner Eibert. We often disagree, but the exchange is always fun.

For my own part, I think I must have burned myself out on WCB, because I went from street teaming him to struggling to finish the last of his three books. Maybe a matter of overexposure to his style or I read it at the wrong age or whatever, but I'm much more ambivalent about him after reading all three novels than I was at, say, page 100 of KMJ or page 90 of PD. And after the three, I think I find PD the most satisfying of the three. Which isn't to say that I regret distributing 28 copies of KMJ from Gardner, Kansas to friends in New York, Zurich, Baghdad, Afghanistan, Los Angeles, and the greater KC metro area. Saying that I'm ambivalent about Baer at this point is a far cry from saying the books weren't worth reading.

Some books I'm more apparently enthralled by, which isn't to say I find no fault with them. For that matter, back when I read Stephen King and the horror genre in general a lot, I thought of him as a great writer. Granted, I didn't hold that view after 'Gerald's Game' came out, though that was an interesting twist in his writing, his [I]chick phase[/I] in my argot. I really loved some of those books. I still think 'The Shining' is a good novel, as well as a good Kubrick film. I just can't think of why they paid King a royalty since they were about two name changes away from being able to make that movie and claim it was not based ont he novel. Why buy the option if you're going to change EVERYTHING???

But the last King I read was 'Insomnia,' and he'd grown old for me at that time, but it was a Christmas present and I can't turn away from a gift that extravagant. It was a hardback, first edition, brand new. I could have pissed on my Dad easier than I could have not given the book a go. He knew I'd been reading King for a couple of years, had been since he got the mistaken idea that I'd ever read King and given me the hardback of 'Needful Things.' As with 'Insomnia' the $25 my Dad spent on that hardback just screamed at me, "I know you've never read Stephen King, but please, out of gratitude for misguided parental love, read me!"

The difference between 'Needful Things' and 'Insomnia' is while they are both mediocre as King novels go, nowhere near being on par with 'The Shining,' 'Pet Semetary,' and 'The Stand,' they are the book ends, so far, in my reading him. The first got me started, the second marked the end of the affair. I'm probably missing out on some of his better stuff, stuff that he's turned out since he quit cocaine and booze, and maybe someday I'll discover that.

The thing about cocaine and booze is you may have some great ideas, but it's not like you can differentiate between [I]those[/I] ideas and your [I]shitty[/I] ones when you're that fucked up. A writer I think has gotten better as he's drifted away from intoxicants is David Sedaris, who's experiment in sobriety is documented in 'Me Talk Pretty One Day,' easily tied with 'Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim' for his best work to date.

Of course I ramble. I'm drinking a martini after a 12 hour day at the office, what do you want? As John Irving (not a minimalist by any stretch of the imagination, nor a deconstructionist as far as I can tell) said, drunks ramble, as do books by drunks. That's why I won't work on 'Wealth Effects' under the influence. I did on the first draft, and it was so much more a case of 'Alcohol Effects' that I literally burned my first draft in my Weber kettle, using up a quart of Gulf to keep what I previously assumed to be very combustible paper going until all 600 pages were ashes. I was driven to these extremes by a fear that someone would read the shit. It's painful enough to have excerpts from the third draft on display, but I recognize that any abuse it might receive in the Workshops will only make #4 better.

[QUOTE=rkdaley]Here is a link to Amy hempel reading some of her stories.

[url]http://www.wiredforbooks.org/amyhempel/[/url][/QUOTE]

beat me to it - i knew there was a link to her reading - her voice is so freaking perfect for her reading - not always the case with an author. the story about her and the buy and the motorcylce - my wife cried instantly. she has a very powerful voice, and she knows just how to drone on and when to sharpen it up.

Yes, I thought her reading was great. Hearing the author read has never "ruined it" for me. It's only given me another way to look at the piece.