March 24th, 2010 / 6:21 pm
Snippets
Snippets
Alec Niedenthal—
Story by James Franco up over at Esquire. I can’t say it’s great–if it weren’t by James Franco, this 100% would not be in Esquire–but I can’t say it’s bad, either. Seems like a pretty typical “MFA story,” if that’s even a type of story.
Funny you should mention this…we heard rumor a few weeks back that he had been accepted into our creative writing program here at FSU. Further rumor reported that he’d been accepted at a few different programs and was still deciding where to go.
Funny you should mention this…we heard rumor a few weeks back that he had been accepted into our creative writing program here at FSU. Further rumor reported that he’d been accepted at a few different programs and was still deciding where to go.
James Franco is attractive (just wanted to admit that in ‘public’). = )
Also, “Freaks and Geeks” is fantastic.
James Franco is attractive (just wanted to admit that in ‘public’). = )
Also, “Freaks and Geeks” is fantastic.
didn’t particularly care for his story in McSweeney’s Panorama, though. i’ll read this, see if i like it more
didn’t particularly care for his story in McSweeney’s Panorama, though. i’ll read this, see if i like it more
Another?
Another?
I think he’s going to Phd school now.
I think he’s going to Phd school now.
i haven’t finished reading this yet
but does anyone else besides me try to find and erase all instances of the word “just” in their stories?
i haven’t finished reading this yet
but does anyone else besides me try to find and erase all instances of the word “just” in their stories?
I’m always looking out for “just” and “that.”
I’m always looking out for “just” and “that.”
“just” bugs me some, but isn’t much of a problem right now b/c my 1st-person narrator ain’t no MFA writer. he’s just a freak!
“that” bugs me more, but sometimes it seems unavoidable. part of my problem w/ latest — and FINAL — round of 3xbad edits is how to tighten up the language and streamline the narrative w/out going overboard w/ literary constructs, which do not serve the story or the voice. (same goes for “which”… and “really,” etc.)
“just” bugs me some, but isn’t much of a problem right now b/c my 1st-person narrator ain’t no MFA writer. he’s just a freak!
“that” bugs me more, but sometimes it seems unavoidable. part of my problem w/ latest — and FINAL — round of 3xbad edits is how to tighten up the language and streamline the narrative w/out going overboard w/ literary constructs, which do not serve the story or the voice. (same goes for “which”… and “really,” etc.)
(John) Carter directed a film called ‘Erased James Franco’ which “features Franco re-enacting scenes from his career and reinterpreting Julianne Moore’s role in Todd Haynes’ Safe, in which a housewife grows allergic, literally, to her surroundings.” USA Today article: http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2009-04-07-james-franco_N.htm. Clip from film on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR9A4vNB3nY.
Here’s a blog essay about James Franco’s candid guest-appearance on General Hospital, featuring a Youtube video of the episode with all of the segments not including James Franco edited out: http://racecarbrown.blogspot.com/2010/01/false-dichotomy-of-jokes-vs-serious.html.
(John) Carter directed a film called ‘Erased James Franco’ which “features Franco re-enacting scenes from his career and reinterpreting Julianne Moore’s role in Todd Haynes’ Safe, in which a housewife grows allergic, literally, to her surroundings.” USA Today article: http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2009-04-07-james-franco_N.htm. Clip from film on Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR9A4vNB3nY.
Here’s a blog essay about James Franco’s candid guest-appearance on General Hospital, featuring a Youtube video of the episode with all of the segments not including James Franco edited out: http://racecarbrown.blogspot.com/2010/01/false-dichotomy-of-jokes-vs-serious.html.
god, i would totally hate fuck “that”
god, i would totally hate fuck “that”
[…] “fiercely vivid”, which is how Amazon.com describes Palo Alto? The litblog HMTLGIANT says of the story: “If it weren’t by James Franco, this 100% would not be in Esquire… Seems like a […]
I’m not really sure what an MFA story is, though. I think I could predict the broad contours of a story that might come out of Brown (experimental, obsessed with form, rejects the tropes of psychological realism except to subvert them) or Syracuse (experimental, lyrical, colloquial, closer to a popular sensibility) or Iowa (naturalist, a fair amount of exposition, a clear, elegant prose style) or Eastern Michigan (nonlinear, in-your-face, youthful energy.) But of course then if I set down the work of any four writers from those schools, they’d all be different, and there would probably be one that didn’t at all conform to that stereotype.
The program from which I graduated, Ohio State, produced, during the time I was there, Christopher Higgs, Christopher Coake, Donald Ray Pollock, Holly Goddard Jones, Douglas Watson, and Bart Skarzynski — all fiction writers who have one way or another begun to make a name for themselves, and not one of whose writing — stylistically, thematically, or temperamentally — has much to do with the other’s.
I’m just not sure what an MFA story is, or how useful a descriptor “MFA story” might be. It seems to mean whatever whomever is using it thinks it means, but sometimes that seems to mean Jhumpa Lahiri, and sometimes that seems to mean Raymond Carver, and sometimes that seems to mean Dennis Cooper, and sometimes that seems to mean Angela Carter. If that’s the case, it’d probably be more useful to just describe how the story works or in what way it’s deficient, and we know it will be deficient, since “MFA story” is always used in the pejorative, despite the fact that the MFA has been a way station for writers as diverse as Denis Johnson, Thom Jones, Rick Moody, TC Boyle, Richard Price, Edwidge Danticat, Jeffrey Eugenides, Benjamin Percy, Edward P. Jones, Brian Evenson (and so on and so on and so on and so on . . .)
I’m not really sure what an MFA story is, though. I think I could predict the broad contours of a story that might come out of Brown (experimental, obsessed with form, rejects the tropes of psychological realism except to subvert them) or Syracuse (experimental, lyrical, colloquial, closer to a popular sensibility) or Iowa (naturalist, a fair amount of exposition, a clear, elegant prose style) or Eastern Michigan (nonlinear, in-your-face, youthful energy.) But of course then if I set down the work of any four writers from those schools, they’d all be different, and there would probably be one that didn’t at all conform to that stereotype.
The program from which I graduated, Ohio State, produced, during the time I was there, Christopher Higgs, Christopher Coake, Donald Ray Pollock, Holly Goddard Jones, Douglas Watson, and Bart Skarzynski — all fiction writers who have one way or another begun to make a name for themselves, and not one of whose writing — stylistically, thematically, or temperamentally — has much to do with the other’s.
I’m just not sure what an MFA story is, or how useful a descriptor “MFA story” might be. It seems to mean whatever whomever is using it thinks it means, but sometimes that seems to mean Jhumpa Lahiri, and sometimes that seems to mean Raymond Carver, and sometimes that seems to mean Dennis Cooper, and sometimes that seems to mean Angela Carter. If that’s the case, it’d probably be more useful to just describe how the story works or in what way it’s deficient, and we know it will be deficient, since “MFA story” is always used in the pejorative, despite the fact that the MFA has been a way station for writers as diverse as Denis Johnson, Thom Jones, Rick Moody, TC Boyle, Richard Price, Edwidge Danticat, Jeffrey Eugenides, Benjamin Percy, Edward P. Jones, Brian Evenson (and so on and so on and so on and so on . . .)
He went to Columbia’s MFA program and also took classes at Brooklyn College.
Oh wait, I read this as a few years back instead of a few weeks back.
He went to Columbia’s MFA program and also took classes at Brooklyn College.
Oh wait, I read this as a few years back instead of a few weeks back.
I love the word just :(
I love the word just :(
I fell asleep after reading the first paragraph of “that” story.
I fell asleep after reading the first paragraph of “that” story.
What a boring ass story.
What a boring ass story.
But words like just, which, really, that, you know, say, etc., can serve as qualifiers that extend the sentence and enable the thought to double- and triple-over on itself, to zig and to zag, to wheedle, warble, wiffle, waffle, and wingdangdoo, so that the reader can just really dive seventy feet into the consciousness of, say, Louie the mechanic, that lugnut who seems on the surface to be about ten inches deep, but whose passion for European dance hall music stirs in him something not unlike what he felt the day his father asked him to tie a rope around his ankle, and the other end of the rope was around the ankle of his senile 70-year-old uncle, who promptly dragged him in his sleep out the window and down the ravine and into the exposed roots of the tree by the river, where his uncle sometimes believed himself unjustly incarcerated as he shook the branches like bars and screamed: “You know who I am, Jesus! Release me from this prison!”
Roxane, I think if you were copy-editing that sentence, you’d tell me to cut down on the consonance and kill the wiffle, the waffle, or the wingdangdoo (pick two), but I think you’d let me keep the justs and the thats, right?
But words like just, which, really, that, you know, say, etc., can serve as qualifiers that extend the sentence and enable the thought to double- and triple-over on itself, to zig and to zag, to wheedle, warble, wiffle, waffle, and wingdangdoo, so that the reader can just really dive seventy feet into the consciousness of, say, Louie the mechanic, that lugnut who seems on the surface to be about ten inches deep, but whose passion for European dance hall music stirs in him something not unlike what he felt the day his father asked him to tie a rope around his ankle, and the other end of the rope was around the ankle of his senile 70-year-old uncle, who promptly dragged him in his sleep out the window and down the ravine and into the exposed roots of the tree by the river, where his uncle sometimes believed himself unjustly incarcerated as he shook the branches like bars and screamed: “You know who I am, Jesus! Release me from this prison!”
Roxane, I think if you were copy-editing that sentence, you’d tell me to cut down on the consonance and kill the wiffle, the waffle, or the wingdangdoo (pick two), but I think you’d let me keep the justs and the thats, right?
Actually, I guess the “that” after so probably ought to go. I guess the “just really” before “dive” could go, too, although it does convey a certain earnestness that tells us something about the speaker.
Actually, I guess the “that” after so probably ought to go. I guess the “just really” before “dive” could go, too, although it does convey a certain earnestness that tells us something about the speaker.
hate fuck? really? that’s just not how I would ever fuck.
and over a word?
hate fuck? really? that’s just not how I would ever fuck.
and over a word?
I love the phrase “hate fuck.” It has its charms in both word and deed.
I love the phrase “hate fuck.” It has its charms in both word and deed.
I’m twitching, Kyle.
I’m twitching, Kyle.
therein lies the great fun w/ revising… of course, I agree on most counts above, esp. when first-person narrator or in dialogue. I think dialogue that’s too taut, let’s say, isn’t natural, as it can sound like the writer writing about his or her own ideas rather than a character speaking like a real person might speak. granted, this is one of several ways to write dialogue (see matthew simmons’ recent post) but I think it matters if we’re writing dialogue (i.e., words a character speaks) v. dialogue as a literary construct.
therein lies the great fun w/ revising… of course, I agree on most counts above, esp. when first-person narrator or in dialogue. I think dialogue that’s too taut, let’s say, isn’t natural, as it can sound like the writer writing about his or her own ideas rather than a character speaking like a real person might speak. granted, this is one of several ways to write dialogue (see matthew simmons’ recent post) but I think it matters if we’re writing dialogue (i.e., words a character speaks) v. dialogue as a literary construct.
Don’t knock it till you try it angry
Don’t knock it till you try it angry
“hatefuck” deserves to be its own oneword.
yadigg?
“hatefuck” deserves to be its own oneword.
yadigg?
yeah, i’m not saying it’s an unequivocally awesome thing to search and cut all the instances of “just”
i was just wondering who else did it
there can be good justs.. justice for all.. gesticulate.. etc.
it is mostly a ritual, i guess, to search and destroy any “voice-y” word like that.. a way to unhook my knowing the language as a product/rehearsal of consciousness and let me have a pass at the language as construction
if it wasn’t your house, maybe you wouldn’t put the couch there, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a great couch to nap on, what with the way noon hits it, etc.
so then i go back and put half the justs back in
rinse repeat exfoliate frolic
yeah, i’m not saying it’s an unequivocally awesome thing to search and cut all the instances of “just”
i was just wondering who else did it
there can be good justs.. justice for all.. gesticulate.. etc.
it is mostly a ritual, i guess, to search and destroy any “voice-y” word like that.. a way to unhook my knowing the language as a product/rehearsal of consciousness and let me have a pass at the language as construction
if it wasn’t your house, maybe you wouldn’t put the couch there, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a great couch to nap on, what with the way noon hits it, etc.
so then i go back and put half the justs back in
rinse repeat exfoliate frolic
I’ve never been to an MFA program, so obviously I’m not qualified to throw around the term MFA story. I scare-quoted it because the MFA story is, to me, a story paradigm that might, in fact, not be so paradigmatic. The “MFA story” I have in mind features: a colloquial/conversational voice, the ordinary elevated by the narrator’s activity in the work rather than by the voice (if that makes sense), broish comedy to which the narrator is superior, etc. Does all this make sense?
Kyle, I wasn’t, or didn’t mean to, generalize regarding MFA programs. Obviously MFA programs produce tons of great writers, but they also produce drones. But there would be drones without MFA programs. I’m not sure why the drones are so often associated with MFA programs. I’m not the MFA sociologist here. I know nothing about MFA programs.
The “MFA story” thing wasn’t meant to be pejorative, but neutral. The story is absolutely fine, but there isn’t much to it. It’s the same thing with a lot of stories in The New Yorker. They’re fine, but please do something else. I get it. There is some ennui, and you are married. Or you are a bro, but you are eloquent and can describe broish activities in an eloquent way. Great. Wonderful. You have crafted the safest good story possible.
I’ve never been to an MFA program, so obviously I’m not qualified to throw around the term MFA story. I scare-quoted it because the MFA story is, to me, a story paradigm that might, in fact, not be so paradigmatic. The “MFA story” I have in mind features: a colloquial/conversational voice, the ordinary elevated by the narrator’s activity in the work rather than by the voice (if that makes sense), broish comedy to which the narrator is superior, etc. Does all this make sense?
Kyle, I wasn’t, or didn’t mean to, generalize regarding MFA programs. Obviously MFA programs produce tons of great writers, but they also produce drones. But there would be drones without MFA programs. I’m not sure why the drones are so often associated with MFA programs. I’m not the MFA sociologist here. I know nothing about MFA programs.
The “MFA story” thing wasn’t meant to be pejorative, but neutral. The story is absolutely fine, but there isn’t much to it. It’s the same thing with a lot of stories in The New Yorker. They’re fine, but please do something else. I get it. There is some ennui, and you are married. Or you are a bro, but you are eloquent and can describe broish activities in an eloquent way. Great. Wonderful. You have crafted the safest good story possible.
What would Barry Hannah do to this story?
What would Barry Hannah do to this story?
He would say the first paragraph was stupid and then he would leave the room
He would say the first paragraph was stupid and then he would leave the room
He would roll twenty cigarettes with it.
He would roll twenty cigarettes with it.
Alec,
I wasn’t offended or anything. The MFA program was great for me, but I know great writers who didn’t do one, and I know great and terrible writers who did but felt it wasn’t helpful. When I think of a “workshop story” I guess I think of a domestic realist story derivative of writers like Richard Bausch (a writer of a very different temperament than mine, who has, it must be said, written six or seven stories I wish I could have written, such as “Aren’t You Happy for Me?” and “Not Quite Final”), probably because I saw a lot of those in grad school, but that’s not what you described here. I’m just interested in the way the conversation is always so slippery, and how what it usually amounts to is a means of dismissing something on stylistic grounds without doing the work of actually describing what’s lacking in the story and/or style (not unlike the comment Michael Fischer made below: “What a boring ass story.” Well, okay, that’s how you felt about it, but why?)
Alec,
I wasn’t offended or anything. The MFA program was great for me, but I know great writers who didn’t do one, and I know great and terrible writers who did but felt it wasn’t helpful. When I think of a “workshop story” I guess I think of a domestic realist story derivative of writers like Richard Bausch (a writer of a very different temperament than mine, who has, it must be said, written six or seven stories I wish I could have written, such as “Aren’t You Happy for Me?” and “Not Quite Final”), probably because I saw a lot of those in grad school, but that’s not what you described here. I’m just interested in the way the conversation is always so slippery, and how what it usually amounts to is a means of dismissing something on stylistic grounds without doing the work of actually describing what’s lacking in the story and/or style (not unlike the comment Michael Fischer made below: “What a boring ass story.” Well, okay, that’s how you felt about it, but why?)
Also, along those lines (and sorry, Michael Fischer, to single you out, because it’s not like I haven’t thrown a hundred offhand comments on this site myself), but “What would Barry Hannah do to this story?” is a similarly lazy way to talk about it, because what it presupposes is that whatever Barry Hannah (or Gordon Lish or William Maxwell or fill-in-the-blank-whatever-respected-pronouncer) would say or do about the story, operating as they do (as we all do) out of their aesthetic inclinations and predispositions, is necessarily the thing that ought to be done to the story. While I think Barry Hannah was a smart reader, and that he probably would have something interesting and constructive to say about just about any story written by anybody, what the comment really seems to mean is that the story ought to conform more closely to the vision of story as practiced and proclaimed by Barry Hannah, and if that were so, a lot of the writers Barry Hannah professed to admire whose work is closer to the kind of thing James Franco is trying to do in the Esquire story (Elmore Leonard, Richard Price, James M. Cain, etc.) would come in for similar derision, even though my guess is that Hannah himself would have found little to dislike about the best work of any one of those writers.
If that’s a misreading of what Michael Fischer wrote, it’s a misreading that rises from a paucity of clarification on the part of Michael Fischer, and ditto the MFA-as-shorthand-for-__________________.
Also, along those lines (and sorry, Michael Fischer, to single you out, because it’s not like I haven’t thrown a hundred offhand comments on this site myself), but “What would Barry Hannah do to this story?” is a similarly lazy way to talk about it, because what it presupposes is that whatever Barry Hannah (or Gordon Lish or William Maxwell or fill-in-the-blank-whatever-respected-pronouncer) would say or do about the story, operating as they do (as we all do) out of their aesthetic inclinations and predispositions, is necessarily the thing that ought to be done to the story. While I think Barry Hannah was a smart reader, and that he probably would have something interesting and constructive to say about just about any story written by anybody, what the comment really seems to mean is that the story ought to conform more closely to the vision of story as practiced and proclaimed by Barry Hannah, and if that were so, a lot of the writers Barry Hannah professed to admire whose work is closer to the kind of thing James Franco is trying to do in the Esquire story (Elmore Leonard, Richard Price, James M. Cain, etc.) would come in for similar derision, even though my guess is that Hannah himself would have found little to dislike about the best work of any one of those writers.
If that’s a misreading of what Michael Fischer wrote, it’s a misreading that rises from a paucity of clarification on the part of Michael Fischer, and ditto the MFA-as-shorthand-for-__________________.
Seriously though, are people reacting to this story because it’s written by James Franco? The story is not great but it’s not terrible. I have seen worse from “big names.” James Franco isn’t the problem. He really isn’t. The problem is the editor who decided that this story was acceptable, who didn’t try to work with the writer to make it better. For better or worse, we live in a culture enamored by celebrity. Of course this story wouldn’t be in Esquire if it weren’t written by James Franco and I didn’t care for it at all but this would probably be published by some lit mag. We’re sort of having the wrong conversation here.
I’m also interested in this idea of the “MFA story.” While I understand that there is an unspoken MFA genre, and that it can be tedious to see that type of writing repeatedly being put out into the world, I d’on’t think that it’s an illegitimate form. I also wonder why sometimes the term MFA seems to be tendered as an insult. The posturing isn’t really necessary, is it? Shouldn’t we worry more about the writing than the writer?
Seriously though, are people reacting to this story because it’s written by James Franco? The story is not great but it’s not terrible. I have seen worse from “big names.” James Franco isn’t the problem. He really isn’t. The problem is the editor who decided that this story was acceptable, who didn’t try to work with the writer to make it better. For better or worse, we live in a culture enamored by celebrity. Of course this story wouldn’t be in Esquire if it weren’t written by James Franco and I didn’t care for it at all but this would probably be published by some lit mag. We’re sort of having the wrong conversation here.
I’m also interested in this idea of the “MFA story.” While I understand that there is an unspoken MFA genre, and that it can be tedious to see that type of writing repeatedly being put out into the world, I d’on’t think that it’s an illegitimate form. I also wonder why sometimes the term MFA seems to be tendered as an insult. The posturing isn’t really necessary, is it? Shouldn’t we worry more about the writing than the writer?
You know a story sucks when people say “it’s not terrible.” This story is garbage. The opening paragraph is as pedestrian as it gets. Nothing unique in the voice, language, or situation.
Also, most big names still had to prove themselves before they could publish a crappy story in the New Yorker, so I don’t think it’s fair to compare some actor’s first story–published in a slick–to a bad Updike or insert_big_name story.
You know a story sucks when people say “it’s not terrible.” This story is garbage. The opening paragraph is as pedestrian as it gets. Nothing unique in the voice, language, or situation.
Also, most big names still had to prove themselves before they could publish a crappy story in the New Yorker, so I don’t think it’s fair to compare some actor’s first story–published in a slick–to a bad Updike or insert_big_name story.
Well, I could say “I can’t say what’s missing in the story because it’s not there,” but I won’t. I’m not dismissing the story. It didn’t excite me. Why?
Let’s look at the first paragraph. This is a great first paragraph. I don’t know about you, but it certainly draws me in–I like the voice, the plain and laconic description. I expect that plainness to be deconstructed as the story goes on. That would be, to me, an exciting story–one whose plainness masks depth. Simple enough. It eventually becomes clear that the language is not self-consciously plain, but plain under the guise of “colloquial.” So we get one layer instead of two, one voice instead of a multivocal narrator. Because the story has no emotional pull for me–simply put, the characters are stereotypes, even the narrator himself, and there is no subversion of the easy characterizations at work–I have to rely on the complexity of the narratorial voice. But the voice is not fleet-footed.
Let’s take a sentence, or part of one–a pivotal sentence:
“And before I even know it, or can enjoy the new look on Joe’s face, like a blubbery peekaboo face, so surprised, because I’m driving us right toward the vague beige shadow-filled wall, and I can only see and hear Joe for a second, a high-pitched thing that cracks for just a second, and for that second I’m with Joe’s voice on a plateau in the black of space, wherever it is that noise cracks like that and decibels live, and then it’s gone because there’s the metal sound so loud and it’s how I had always planned it to be, crunching…”
I can point out many instances of “boring” phrasing/vocabulary/description/juxtaposition/etc. here, boring here meaning predictable in a very literal sense–it’s not hard to imagine, for example, “filled” being hyphenated with “shadow.” There are so many other “plain” adjectives besides “filled” that would subvert expectations. This is plain language being plain–I want plain language that operates as a trick, a mask, a voice that deceives and lies to the reader. Etc.
Well, I could say “I can’t say what’s missing in the story because it’s not there,” but I won’t. I’m not dismissing the story. It didn’t excite me. Why?
Let’s look at the first paragraph. This is a great first paragraph. I don’t know about you, but it certainly draws me in–I like the voice, the plain and laconic description. I expect that plainness to be deconstructed as the story goes on. That would be, to me, an exciting story–one whose plainness masks depth. Simple enough. It eventually becomes clear that the language is not self-consciously plain, but plain under the guise of “colloquial.” So we get one layer instead of two, one voice instead of a multivocal narrator. Because the story has no emotional pull for me–simply put, the characters are stereotypes, even the narrator himself, and there is no subversion of the easy characterizations at work–I have to rely on the complexity of the narratorial voice. But the voice is not fleet-footed.
Let’s take a sentence, or part of one–a pivotal sentence:
“And before I even know it, or can enjoy the new look on Joe’s face, like a blubbery peekaboo face, so surprised, because I’m driving us right toward the vague beige shadow-filled wall, and I can only see and hear Joe for a second, a high-pitched thing that cracks for just a second, and for that second I’m with Joe’s voice on a plateau in the black of space, wherever it is that noise cracks like that and decibels live, and then it’s gone because there’s the metal sound so loud and it’s how I had always planned it to be, crunching…”
I can point out many instances of “boring” phrasing/vocabulary/description/juxtaposition/etc. here, boring here meaning predictable in a very literal sense–it’s not hard to imagine, for example, “filled” being hyphenated with “shadow.” There are so many other “plain” adjectives besides “filled” that would subvert expectations. This is plain language being plain–I want plain language that operates as a trick, a mask, a voice that deceives and lies to the reader. Etc.
I guess that would depend on if we were talking Barry Hannah in 2003 or Barry Hannah in 1980.
I guess that would depend on if we were talking Barry Hannah in 2003 or Barry Hannah in 1980.
Sorry again about the MFA story thing. I really, honestly was talking out of my ass, utterly. It was not meant as an insult to anyone, only a “neutralizing” descriptor.
I agree that the story is not great but not terrible. And it is publishable. I could see it in a good journal. It needs editing, though. There are even basic syntax errors.
Sorry again about the MFA story thing. I really, honestly was talking out of my ass, utterly. It was not meant as an insult to anyone, only a “neutralizing” descriptor.
I agree that the story is not great but not terrible. And it is publishable. I could see it in a good journal. It needs editing, though. There are even basic syntax errors.
Alec, you don’t have to apologize. We’re just kicking around a piece of language.
Alec, you don’t have to apologize. We’re just kicking around a piece of language.
It needs serious serious editing. That’s what I have a problem with. I just don’t understand the editorial laissez faire here.
It needs serious serious editing. That’s what I have a problem with. I just don’t understand the editorial laissez faire here.
Ok. I wasn’t sure whether it was my slip-up or just a pre-existing term with lots of baggage.
(I’m really just scared James Franco will see this. Hi, James! I loved you in the new Batman.)
Ok. I wasn’t sure whether it was my slip-up or just a pre-existing term with lots of baggage.
(I’m really just scared James Franco will see this. Hi, James! I loved you in the new Batman.)
(I mean Spiderman. You were great in that.)
By the way, the story didn’t knock me out, but I did think it was okay, and I’m interested in reading the collection. James Franco the actor radiates a restless intelligence, and I’m eager to see how it manifests on the page. I’m not going to make my judgment about that based upon one story. I thought there were a few things about the language that were very interesting, such as the way he handles interiority (as in that lyrical dragon bong passage), and I’m drawn in general to a low-to-the-ground colloquial style. I agree with Roxane: Nobody would be kicking at it if it wasn’t James Franco and it wasn’t published in Esquire.
(I mean Spiderman. You were great in that.)
By the way, the story didn’t knock me out, but I did think it was okay, and I’m interested in reading the collection. James Franco the actor radiates a restless intelligence, and I’m eager to see how it manifests on the page. I’m not going to make my judgment about that based upon one story. I thought there were a few things about the language that were very interesting, such as the way he handles interiority (as in that lyrical dragon bong passage), and I’m drawn in general to a low-to-the-ground colloquial style. I agree with Roxane: Nobody would be kicking at it if it wasn’t James Franco and it wasn’t published in Esquire.
MFA story is a common term so I don’t think you have to apologize for it. Like Kyle, I see it normally used to describe a kind of polished but boring domestic realism short story.
The thing I find amusing about the term is that the idea that MFA programs produce safe, typical writers strikes me as particularly wrong. Yes, MFA programs do produce tons and tons of people like that, but as Alex says so does the normal world. But I think MFA students are more likely to be introduced to weirder and more radical writers and thus more likely to produce weird or experimental work.
MFA story is a common term so I don’t think you have to apologize for it. Like Kyle, I see it normally used to describe a kind of polished but boring domestic realism short story.
The thing I find amusing about the term is that the idea that MFA programs produce safe, typical writers strikes me as particularly wrong. Yes, MFA programs do produce tons and tons of people like that, but as Alex says so does the normal world. But I think MFA students are more likely to be introduced to weirder and more radical writers and thus more likely to produce weird or experimental work.
No, I agree. I really respect the guy. Seems to have a vision. We’ll see.
No, I agree. I really respect the guy. Seems to have a vision. We’ll see.
All of this said, as I said, it’s a fine story. Good and everything. But it’s kind of boring, too.
All of this said, as I said, it’s a fine story. Good and everything. But it’s kind of boring, too.
Kyle,
I like a low-to-the-ground colloquial style too, but his style isn’t very interesting, in my opinion. To each his own.
Kyle,
I like a low-to-the-ground colloquial style too, but his style isn’t very interesting, in my opinion. To each his own.
nic
nic
If that’s a misreading of what Michael Fischer wrote, it’s a misreading that rises from a paucity of clarification on the part of Michael Fischer, and ditto the MFA-as-shorthand-for-__________________
Kyle,
Why are you so defensive and uptight on this thread? The “what would Barry Hannah do” comment was mainly a joke based on many of the posts here after his death about his “honesty” in workshop. In the future, I’ll be sure to clarify my one liners.
If that’s a misreading of what Michael Fischer wrote, it’s a misreading that rises from a paucity of clarification on the part of Michael Fischer, and ditto the MFA-as-shorthand-for-__________________
Kyle,
Why are you so defensive and uptight on this thread? The “what would Barry Hannah do” comment was mainly a joke based on many of the posts here after his death about his “honesty” in workshop. In the future, I’ll be sure to clarify my one liners.
Michael,
I didn’t mean to personally offend you. I was just trying to talk about the shorthand that gets thrown around and how it doesn’t communicate much. Maybe it’s too much to ask of comments that they do, though. I’m sorry I missed the humor in your one-liner. I thought you were being serious (although you sort of also were being serious, right? Isn’t that half the fun of the one-liner, that you get to be the funny guy but also get the poke in at the same time?)
Michael,
I didn’t mean to personally offend you. I was just trying to talk about the shorthand that gets thrown around and how it doesn’t communicate much. Maybe it’s too much to ask of comments that they do, though. I’m sorry I missed the humor in your one-liner. I thought you were being serious (although you sort of also were being serious, right? Isn’t that half the fun of the one-liner, that you get to be the funny guy but also get the poke in at the same time?)
It’s cool, Kyle. I’m a fan of your work. We also share a mutual admiration for Mark Richard.
I understand your desire to have others explain—in greater detail—why they find the story boring, but sometimes, I don’t have the energy to thoroughly explain why certain stories bore me, outside of a few cursory comments. Maybe it’s the result of reading too much slush, teaching, and the clock reading 3:00 AM.
And yes, you’re interpretation of the one-liner is correct (half-serious, half-joking).
It’s cool, Kyle. I’m a fan of your work. We also share a mutual admiration for Mark Richard.
I understand your desire to have others explain—in greater detail—why they find the story boring, but sometimes, I don’t have the energy to thoroughly explain why certain stories bore me, outside of a few cursory comments. Maybe it’s the result of reading too much slush, teaching, and the clock reading 3:00 AM.
And yes, you’re interpretation of the one-liner is correct (half-serious, half-joking).
*your
*your
Oh, come on. I think what all know what the term “MFA story” is shorthand for. It’s the kind of technical accomplishment made possible only by a very precious strain of narcissism–the kind that is lovingly nurtured by parents who subscribe to the cult of attachment theory (and furthermore, have the fiscal means to be practicing members.) It’s the kind of story that is incapable of eliciting a response other than, “Wow, you certainly have read a lot of experimental fiction. So many techniques!” It’s the kind of story written by the kind of guy (and yes, they are always guys) who thinks that the world is his, as long as he hunkers down and works real hard. It’s the kind of story where the 25-year-old author tries to sound like an exhausted, 45-year-old Raymond Carver, and fails miserably. Not all the stories that emerge from MFA programs are like this, but a lot are. Paper flowers.
Oh, come on. I think what all know what the term “MFA story” is shorthand for. It’s the kind of technical accomplishment made possible only by a very precious strain of narcissism–the kind that is lovingly nurtured by parents who subscribe to the cult of attachment theory (and furthermore, have the fiscal means to be practicing members.) It’s the kind of story that is incapable of eliciting a response other than, “Wow, you certainly have read a lot of experimental fiction. So many techniques!” It’s the kind of story written by the kind of guy (and yes, they are always guys) who thinks that the world is his, as long as he hunkers down and works real hard. It’s the kind of story where the 25-year-old author tries to sound like an exhausted, 45-year-old Raymond Carver, and fails miserably. Not all the stories that emerge from MFA programs are like this, but a lot are. Paper flowers.
PhD story just doesn’t have the same ‘punch,’ you know?
PhD story just doesn’t have the same ‘punch,’ you know?
“Human resources drone and put-upon family man Harry imagines he could be the next Dostoyevsky if he could just get a little peace and quiet. When he moves into his own apartment to craft his masterpiece, his solitude is broken by an unexpected roommate-a foul-mouthed, Hawaiian shirt-wearing gorilla, eager to share his opinions on life, love, and animal magnetism.”
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0403848/
“Human resources drone and put-upon family man Harry imagines he could be the next Dostoyevsky if he could just get a little peace and quiet. When he moves into his own apartment to craft his masterpiece, his solitude is broken by an unexpected roommate-a foul-mouthed, Hawaiian shirt-wearing gorilla, eager to share his opinions on life, love, and animal magnetism.”
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0403848/
Why isn’t Franco’s fiction more like the above: Franco’s debut feature as a writer-director-star, in which he is visibly stoned in almost every scene.
Why isn’t Franco’s fiction more like the above: Franco’s debut feature as a writer-director-star, in which he is visibly stoned in almost every scene.
Anyone who wants to read a good Esquire story should read Chris Adrian’s “Promise Breaker” – http://www.esquire.com/fiction/fiction/chris-adrian-promise-breaker-1207
Read James F’s story last week on the train into work…
“Then we sit for awhile not saying anything. I can feel their mind-killing slime thought rubbing on me and corroding me and killing me.”
That sentence has stayed with me since…it’s bad.
The story is okay, I guess, but it felt overwritten in trying to be laid back. I barely made it through.
Anyone who wants to read a good Esquire story should read Chris Adrian’s “Promise Breaker” – http://www.esquire.com/fiction/fiction/chris-adrian-promise-breaker-1207
Read James F’s story last week on the train into work…
“Then we sit for awhile not saying anything. I can feel their mind-killing slime thought rubbing on me and corroding me and killing me.”
That sentence has stayed with me since…it’s bad.
The story is okay, I guess, but it felt overwritten in trying to be laid back. I barely made it through.
There are flashes of insight here, but the inconsistency of voice is distracting, trick-sy, and the “epiphany” at the end (“And I think of the olden times, when knights would aim huge lances at each other…”) = exponentially disappointing. This is a piece that would benefit from adhering less to or, better, following through on its commitment to less conventional notions of narrative form.
I’ll still probably read his book, eventually.
There are flashes of insight here, but the inconsistency of voice is distracting, trick-sy, and the “epiphany” at the end (“And I think of the olden times, when knights would aim huge lances at each other…”) = exponentially disappointing. This is a piece that would benefit from adhering less to or, better, following through on its commitment to less conventional notions of narrative form.
I’ll still probably read his book, eventually.
Yeah, sorry, should have been more specific…rumor has it he was accepted into our PhD in creative writing program, not our MFA program.
Yeah, sorry, should have been more specific…rumor has it he was accepted into our PhD in creative writing program, not our MFA program.
ha, well clearly we don’t all know what the term MFA story means as your definition is almost the opposite of the one I gave earlier in the thread and both are different than Alec’s definition.
I don’t know what you are even trying to say by saying the MFA story is by someone who has read a lot of experimental fiction yet is trying to sound exactly like a latter career Raymond Carver?
ha, well clearly we don’t all know what the term MFA story means as your definition is almost the opposite of the one I gave earlier in the thread and both are different than Alec’s definition.
I don’t know what you are even trying to say by saying the MFA story is by someone who has read a lot of experimental fiction yet is trying to sound exactly like a latter career Raymond Carver?
anger’s not hate.
anger’s not hate.
once again, the joy of revision. cut, reinstate, cut, rethink, reinstate, reinstate?
once again, the joy of revision. cut, reinstate, cut, rethink, reinstate, reinstate?
Am I the only one who didn’t know who James Franco was until this HTMLG post?
Am I the only one who didn’t know who James Franco was until this HTMLG post?
PhD’s tend to teach more than write, take refuge in the Ivory Tower? MFA’s tend to write more or quit, realizing their dreams or slap-in-the-reality (plus debt)?
PhD’s tend to teach more than write, take refuge in the Ivory Tower? MFA’s tend to write more or quit, realizing their dreams or slap-in-the-reality (plus debt)?
anyone know how to query or submit to esquire fiction? I know they accept nothing unagented, but still…
anyone know how to query or submit to esquire fiction? I know they accept nothing unagented, but still…
Who even has a PhD? The creative writing PhD, if that is what we are talking about, is a pretty new (and IMHO silly) phenomenon.
Who even has a PhD? The creative writing PhD, if that is what we are talking about, is a pretty new (and IMHO silly) phenomenon.
yeah i was going to say, MB, how can a story be reflective of someone having read a lot of experimental fiction and then trying to ape carver? and always guys! ha. here’s the thing. i’m in an mfa and i use the term mfa story. and it sounds like you all can distill that into specifics: realist, blah blah, colloquial voice, etc. when i use the term mfa story i’m not necessarily referring to the mfa but rather a story that feels like it was bastardized by the workshop process, although this is as much, if not more, the fault of the author than the collective. i’m not talking about stories that work within a particular vein or utilize certain techniques, for me the story could be realist, fabulist, etc. it could work linearly, be fragmented, whatever. point is, for me, when i use the term i’m referring to something that feels adequate. competent. it’s like the writer took all the axioms that are spouted and tried to checklist them off as he or she wrote the piece. it feels like it hews so close to aristotlean poetics to seem too familiar, dead on arrival. i don’t dismiss stories based on fictive technique or subject matter or form or tonality, but when i can only sum up my response to a story by “ehh” or “interesting” i do use the term “mfa story.” it’s a gut, intuitive completely subjective thing. mfa has become shorthand for workshop in our cultural lexicon, like it or not. and sure, we can trot out the names of people who taught in or subjected themselves to mfas: barthelme, wallace, coover, etc. but there are always exceptions to the rule. and, also, i don’t understand the people who get riled up on both sides of the issue. i either feel like it’s a rah-rah thing for people who work for universities or it’s a bad taste thing where someone didn’t get in and shits on mfas until they do. whatever the fuck. at the end of the day i just want to read some shit that cuts my fucking head off. interesting isn’t enough. off to workshop!
kidding, my shits on mondays.
yeah i was going to say, MB, how can a story be reflective of someone having read a lot of experimental fiction and then trying to ape carver? and always guys! ha. here’s the thing. i’m in an mfa and i use the term mfa story. and it sounds like you all can distill that into specifics: realist, blah blah, colloquial voice, etc. when i use the term mfa story i’m not necessarily referring to the mfa but rather a story that feels like it was bastardized by the workshop process, although this is as much, if not more, the fault of the author than the collective. i’m not talking about stories that work within a particular vein or utilize certain techniques, for me the story could be realist, fabulist, etc. it could work linearly, be fragmented, whatever. point is, for me, when i use the term i’m referring to something that feels adequate. competent. it’s like the writer took all the axioms that are spouted and tried to checklist them off as he or she wrote the piece. it feels like it hews so close to aristotlean poetics to seem too familiar, dead on arrival. i don’t dismiss stories based on fictive technique or subject matter or form or tonality, but when i can only sum up my response to a story by “ehh” or “interesting” i do use the term “mfa story.” it’s a gut, intuitive completely subjective thing. mfa has become shorthand for workshop in our cultural lexicon, like it or not. and sure, we can trot out the names of people who taught in or subjected themselves to mfas: barthelme, wallace, coover, etc. but there are always exceptions to the rule. and, also, i don’t understand the people who get riled up on both sides of the issue. i either feel like it’s a rah-rah thing for people who work for universities or it’s a bad taste thing where someone didn’t get in and shits on mfas until they do. whatever the fuck. at the end of the day i just want to read some shit that cuts my fucking head off. interesting isn’t enough. off to workshop!
kidding, my shits on mondays.
If you have loans from an MFA you did something wrong.
If you have loans from an MFA you did something wrong.
I’m not an expert but I do work in the slush, and if this showed up in my pile, I would reject it. I would say “Boring plot, ham-handed prose. Not right for [Lit Mag].”
I’m not an expert but I do work in the slush, and if this showed up in my pile, I would reject it. I would say “Boring plot, ham-handed prose. Not right for [Lit Mag].”
I gotta say, I’ve known so many idiot actors that I have to give anybody props when they go out and try to expand their horizons, explore other talents, when they’re not obsessed with their own celebrity, when they get that there’s a world out there that couldn’t give a shit about Hollywood or L.A. I like James Franco anyway, but this just makes me like him more. He seems like a cool, laid back guy who just happens to be famous. I didn’t read the story yet but it’s not like Esquire publishes stories from no-names, anyway.
I gotta say, I’ve known so many idiot actors that I have to give anybody props when they go out and try to expand their horizons, explore other talents, when they’re not obsessed with their own celebrity, when they get that there’s a world out there that couldn’t give a shit about Hollywood or L.A. I like James Franco anyway, but this just makes me like him more. He seems like a cool, laid back guy who just happens to be famous. I didn’t read the story yet but it’s not like Esquire publishes stories from no-names, anyway.
Lincoln,
I’m working on a PhD in “CW.” I don’t consider the degree “silly,” but I can understand why some might. The problem, though, is that many people who consider it “silly” don’t realize that a PhD in “Creative Writing” is really a PhD in English that allows a creative dissertation.
In most programs, students still have to pass qualifying exams in literature and fulfill the same basic lit req’s. Many students who already have MFA’s only end up taking 1-2 workshops and spend the rest of their time taking lit courses, while still leaving with a publishable diss in poetry or fiction. It’s certainly a more practical degree than an MFA, which doesn’t qualify the writer as a literature generalist and can often be completed in two years, often leaving the writer with one year of teaching experience.
Of course, the degree is worthless to the writer who doesn’t desire an academic career—no doubt. However, for the writer who enjoys teaching, covets an academic career, and wants to cover all of his bases (many CW jobs require the writer to do more than just CW), it’s not a bad option.
Lincoln,
I’m working on a PhD in “CW.” I don’t consider the degree “silly,” but I can understand why some might. The problem, though, is that many people who consider it “silly” don’t realize that a PhD in “Creative Writing” is really a PhD in English that allows a creative dissertation.
In most programs, students still have to pass qualifying exams in literature and fulfill the same basic lit req’s. Many students who already have MFA’s only end up taking 1-2 workshops and spend the rest of their time taking lit courses, while still leaving with a publishable diss in poetry or fiction. It’s certainly a more practical degree than an MFA, which doesn’t qualify the writer as a literature generalist and can often be completed in two years, often leaving the writer with one year of teaching experience.
Of course, the degree is worthless to the writer who doesn’t desire an academic career—no doubt. However, for the writer who enjoys teaching, covets an academic career, and wants to cover all of his bases (many CW jobs require the writer to do more than just CW), it’s not a bad option.
I can’t finish this story. It’s not terrible, it’s just that the world has 10 ga-zillion stories and I can’t keep reading them all unless the author makes me keep reading on the first page. Then I keep reading, as the wind whispers on my forehead.
I can’t finish this story. It’s not terrible, it’s just that the world has 10 ga-zillion stories and I can’t keep reading them all unless the author makes me keep reading on the first page. Then I keep reading, as the wind whispers on my forehead.
Try for their contest is the best way. Or get an agent.
Try for their contest is the best way. Or get an agent.
Hey Micheal, I don’t want to get into a big fight over degrees but to clarify my comment a bit, I’m sure as an individual you can get a lot out of a PhD program and thus it isn’t silly to get one. That said, I think an MFA is perfectly sufficient to become a college professor and the PhD seems like something of a scam to force people to take even more years of schooling if they want to become a teacher. I think it is a bad thing for the creative writing academic world to move in that direction, even if for the individual it is smart.
Hey Micheal, I don’t want to get into a big fight over degrees but to clarify my comment a bit, I’m sure as an individual you can get a lot out of a PhD program and thus it isn’t silly to get one. That said, I think an MFA is perfectly sufficient to become a college professor and the PhD seems like something of a scam to force people to take even more years of schooling if they want to become a teacher. I think it is a bad thing for the creative writing academic world to move in that direction, even if for the individual it is smart.
I think it’s silly to call a degree silly just because it’s something you wouldn’t choose for yourself. Lots of people have creative writing PhDs. It’s a really interesting degree that focuses more on theory while still allowing people to participate in workshops and other elements of a creative writing program. I was going to get one before I decided to get my PhD in technical communication instead.
I think it’s silly to call a degree silly just because it’s something you wouldn’t choose for yourself. Lots of people have creative writing PhDs. It’s a really interesting degree that focuses more on theory while still allowing people to participate in workshops and other elements of a creative writing program. I was going to get one before I decided to get my PhD in technical communication instead.
That isn’t my objection.
That isn’t my objection.
Lincoln,
With all due respect, your post demonstrates that you don’t know much about the current job market in English if you think “an MFA is perfectly sufficient to become a college professor.” It’s also odd that you’re against writers choosing to skin this cat in a different way than your rigid “MFA or bust” model. Besides, how is the PhD a “scam” when people with MFA’s and books still land jobs on the regular?
As I noted in my first post, many creative writing jobs–mainly at small liberal arts colleges and universities, jobs that a two or three book writer with Random House doesn’t want—require a creative writer to teach literature, in addition to comp and CW. Whether or not an MFA grad is capable of teaching gen ed literature is beside the point—he’s not a “generalist” by academic standards until he’s ABD (i.e, passes literature qualifying exams). God forbid graduate programs in creative writing do more to prepare their students for the full-range of creative writing jobs that exist.
If you think, though, that the only route is for the writer to publish two books with Knopf and apply for jobs at Iowa and Brown, that’s fine—just understand that your way of approaching the market is outdated and limiting.
Lincoln,
With all due respect, your post demonstrates that you don’t know much about the current job market in English if you think “an MFA is perfectly sufficient to become a college professor.” It’s also odd that you’re against writers choosing to skin this cat in a different way than your rigid “MFA or bust” model. Besides, how is the PhD a “scam” when people with MFA’s and books still land jobs on the regular?
As I noted in my first post, many creative writing jobs–mainly at small liberal arts colleges and universities, jobs that a two or three book writer with Random House doesn’t want—require a creative writer to teach literature, in addition to comp and CW. Whether or not an MFA grad is capable of teaching gen ed literature is beside the point—he’s not a “generalist” by academic standards until he’s ABD (i.e, passes literature qualifying exams). God forbid graduate programs in creative writing do more to prepare their students for the full-range of creative writing jobs that exist.
If you think, though, that the only route is for the writer to publish two books with Knopf and apply for jobs at Iowa and Brown, that’s fine—just understand that your way of approaching the market is outdated and limiting.
Lincoln,
With all due respect, your post demonstrates that you don’t know much about the current job market in English if you think “an MFA is perfectly sufficient to become a college professor.” It’s also odd that you’re against writers choosing to skin this cat in a different way than your rigid “MFA or bust” model. Besides, how is the PhD a “scam” when people with MFA’s and books still land jobs routinely?
As I noted in my first post, many creative writing jobs–mainly at small liberal arts colleges and universities, jobs that a two or three book writer with Random House doesn’t want—require a creative writer to teach literature, in addition to comp and CW. Whether or not an MFA grad is capable of teaching gen ed literature is beside the point—he’s not a “generalist” by academic standards until he’s ABD (i.e, passes literature qualifying exams). God forbid graduate programs in creative writing do more to prepare their students for the full range of creative writing jobs.
If you think, though, that the only route is for the writer to publish two books with Knopf and apply for jobs at Iowa and Brown, that’s fine—just understand that your way of approaching the market is outdated and limiting.
Lincoln,
With all due respect, your post demonstrates that you don’t know much about the current job market in English if you think “an MFA is perfectly sufficient to become a college professor.” It’s also odd that you’re against writers choosing to skin this cat in a different way than your rigid “MFA or bust” model. Besides, how is the PhD a “scam” when people with MFA’s and books still land jobs routinely?
As I noted in my first post, many creative writing jobs–mainly at small liberal arts colleges and universities, jobs that a two or three book writer with Random House doesn’t want—require a creative writer to teach literature, in addition to comp and CW. Whether or not an MFA grad is capable of teaching gen ed literature is beside the point—he’s not a “generalist” by academic standards until he’s ABD (i.e, passes literature qualifying exams). God forbid graduate programs in creative writing do more to prepare their students for the full range of creative writing jobs.
If you think, though, that the only route is for the writer to publish two books with Knopf and apply for jobs at Iowa and Brown, that’s fine—just understand that your way of approaching the market is outdated and limiting.
@ lincoln. i have one. i don’t understand the objection. that a phd makes you go to school longer, yeah? the difference between the two, in my experience, is that an mfa will allow the teacherperson to teach workshops, but probably not a ton of literature. with a phd, i have a stronger argument to teach literature, because that’s actually what my degree was in. so yeah, i went to school longer, but i’m supposedly qualified to teach lit now. which is what i’m doing. actually haven’t taught a workshop since being out of school. so, only a scam from a certain perspective. but then, so is an mfa.
oh, i liked your thing in the new noon a lot.
as for this story, i’d say the voice is pretty well conceived, if already something we’ve seen. i don’t like the voice, but it’s pretty well done. the real problem for me is i have no idea what the world is here. it’s tiny, almost non-existent. these guys smoke pot and are bored and there’s a highway with lights. i don’t know, feels lame. also, the end is so fucking calculated, so set up, that there’s absolutely no surprise no feeling, etc, when he crosses that center line. the story reads more like a formula than a story. to me this is an idea of what a story should be rather than an opening up, a story happening before us.
@ lincoln. i have one. i don’t understand the objection. that a phd makes you go to school longer, yeah? the difference between the two, in my experience, is that an mfa will allow the teacherperson to teach workshops, but probably not a ton of literature. with a phd, i have a stronger argument to teach literature, because that’s actually what my degree was in. so yeah, i went to school longer, but i’m supposedly qualified to teach lit now. which is what i’m doing. actually haven’t taught a workshop since being out of school. so, only a scam from a certain perspective. but then, so is an mfa.
oh, i liked your thing in the new noon a lot.
as for this story, i’d say the voice is pretty well conceived, if already something we’ve seen. i don’t like the voice, but it’s pretty well done. the real problem for me is i have no idea what the world is here. it’s tiny, almost non-existent. these guys smoke pot and are bored and there’s a highway with lights. i don’t know, feels lame. also, the end is so fucking calculated, so set up, that there’s absolutely no surprise no feeling, etc, when he crosses that center line. the story reads more like a formula than a story. to me this is an idea of what a story should be rather than an opening up, a story happening before us.
I’m saying an MFA is supposed to (and IMHO should) be a terminal degree. We seem to be moving to a point where it isn’t terminal and is suddenly just a stepping stone to a PhD. I don’t think this is a positive development.
I’ve nowhere said writers should do “MFA or burst”…
I’m saying an MFA is supposed to (and IMHO should) be a terminal degree. We seem to be moving to a point where it isn’t terminal and is suddenly just a stepping stone to a PhD. I don’t think this is a positive development.
I’ve nowhere said writers should do “MFA or burst”…
Alan:
Are you saying you got a PhD in literature? Cause that is a different beast.
Agree it is probably all a scam and thanks for the kind words on my story!
Alan:
Are you saying you got a PhD in literature? Cause that is a different beast.
Agree it is probably all a scam and thanks for the kind words on my story!
Then I guess this is where we disagree, because I think the MFA will always be “terminal” as long the writer has a book or two and is applying for jobs that only require teaching CW.
In fact, it seems to me that there are now more t-t creative writing jobs today that involve teaching undergrads at small colleges and universities, giving writers more options. This is where it helps to have a PhD and the ability to teach comp, CW, and lit.
Then I guess this is where we disagree, because I think the MFA will always be “terminal” as long the writer has a book or two and is applying for jobs that only require teaching CW.
In fact, it seems to me that there are now more t-t creative writing jobs today that involve teaching undergrads at small colleges and universities, giving writers more options. This is where it helps to have a PhD and the ability to teach comp, CW, and lit.
From a job market perspective, would there be an advantage to having an MFA and PhD in creative writing over an MFA and a PhD in English? (Or are we assuming most PhD students in CW are not getting MFAs?)
From a job market perspective, would there be an advantage to having an MFA and PhD in creative writing over an MFA and a PhD in English? (Or are we assuming most PhD students in CW are not getting MFAs?)
“Then I guess this is where we disagree, because I think the MFA will always be “terminal” as long the writer has a book or two and is applying for jobs that only require teaching CW.”
Also, I think if you have multiple books and are popular enough you can teach without an MFA anyway.
But isn’t the prose intentionally / pointedly ham-handed?
Which, assuming it is, might be worse and depending on one’s p.o.v.
“Then I guess this is where we disagree, because I think the MFA will always be “terminal” as long the writer has a book or two and is applying for jobs that only require teaching CW.”
Also, I think if you have multiple books and are popular enough you can teach without an MFA anyway.
But isn’t the prose intentionally / pointedly ham-handed?
Which, assuming it is, might be worse and depending on one’s p.o.v.
MFA/MFYou vs. PhD/PhDoo
MFA/MFYou vs. PhD/PhDoo
Most PhD students in CW have MFA’s. I have an MFA.
As for your question, it depends on the job. You’d have less time to write and publish with that 250 page Chaucer diss hanging over your head.
Anyway, I doubt it would make a difference for most of the CW/generalist combo type jobs I’m thinking about that tend to go people with PhD’s in CW.
Most PhD students in CW have MFA’s. I have an MFA.
As for your question, it depends on the job. You’d have less time to write and publish with that 250 page Chaucer diss hanging over your head.
Anyway, I doubt it would make a difference for most of the CW/generalist combo type jobs I’m thinking about that tend to go people with PhD’s in CW.
“Also, I think if you have multiple books and are popular enough you can teach without an MFA anyway.”
Doesn’t this sort of support my point?
And these people tend to only teach workshops.
“Also, I think if you have multiple books and are popular enough you can teach without an MFA anyway.”
Doesn’t this sort of support my point?
And these people tend to only teach workshops.
I’m three years into teaching post-MFA, as a visiting professor. Last year, after the stock market crashed, the job market crashed with it, and it hasn’t entirely recovered. Also, a lot of older professors who had planned to retire have decided to teach longer since their retirement portfolios tanked. Also, many universities are trying to use these events as an excuse to continue dismantling the tenure system and to replace full-time positions with part-time positions, and to replace professors with two and three class loads with lower-paid lecturers carrying four and five class loads.
The market is pretty brutal right now. When I got my MFA, I was a hot commodity. This year I only was invited to one interview, even though my profile as a writer is much higher than it was three years ago. I’m not sure if I’m going to find a teaching job, and I’ve been forced to consider changing careers in order to keep the cash flowing. If that happens, I don’t know whether it will or won’t be good for my career as a writer, but I do know that one luxury of being a teacher has been the flexibility of time to nourish the writing, and if and when I lose that, it will be a significant loss.
Those who are getting Ph.D.’s in good programs are getting stipended (in some cases pretty well, too — my friend has been offered $25K a year at Texas Tech for one year of fellowship (no teaching) and one class per semester thereafter), which means they’re getting paid to go to school. Even if there’s not a job on the other end, that’s buying a few more years of protected writing time (assuming they can protect the headspace for it amidst all the immersion in theory and other extra-writerly disciplines), and that sounds pretty good to me. Maybe that’s what I should have done, too.
no, i have a creative writing phd. but it’s a phd in lit with an emphasis in creative writing. etc.
holy shit, there goes my dog.
i’m back. my dog got out of the backyard.
umm, stuff about mfa and phd. i don’t know. yeah, i agree there’s no need for both degrees. i’m just saying i got one because there seemed to be more teaching options (i like talking about books/films with students) with a phd.
oh, no problem about your story. i want to read more.
michael, i don’t think lincoln is saying the only route for a writer is to publish two books, knopf, job at brown, etc. he’s saying that the division between mfa and phd might be problematic, because the phd makes the mfa seem less like a terminal degree.
I’m three years into teaching post-MFA, as a visiting professor. Last year, after the stock market crashed, the job market crashed with it, and it hasn’t entirely recovered. Also, a lot of older professors who had planned to retire have decided to teach longer since their retirement portfolios tanked. Also, many universities are trying to use these events as an excuse to continue dismantling the tenure system and to replace full-time positions with part-time positions, and to replace professors with two and three class loads with lower-paid lecturers carrying four and five class loads.
The market is pretty brutal right now. When I got my MFA, I was a hot commodity. This year I only was invited to one interview, even though my profile as a writer is much higher than it was three years ago. I’m not sure if I’m going to find a teaching job, and I’ve been forced to consider changing careers in order to keep the cash flowing. If that happens, I don’t know whether it will or won’t be good for my career as a writer, but I do know that one luxury of being a teacher has been the flexibility of time to nourish the writing, and if and when I lose that, it will be a significant loss.
Those who are getting Ph.D.’s in good programs are getting stipended (in some cases pretty well, too — my friend has been offered $25K a year at Texas Tech for one year of fellowship (no teaching) and one class per semester thereafter), which means they’re getting paid to go to school. Even if there’s not a job on the other end, that’s buying a few more years of protected writing time (assuming they can protect the headspace for it amidst all the immersion in theory and other extra-writerly disciplines), and that sounds pretty good to me. Maybe that’s what I should have done, too.
no, i have a creative writing phd. but it’s a phd in lit with an emphasis in creative writing. etc.
holy shit, there goes my dog.
i’m back. my dog got out of the backyard.
umm, stuff about mfa and phd. i don’t know. yeah, i agree there’s no need for both degrees. i’m just saying i got one because there seemed to be more teaching options (i like talking about books/films with students) with a phd.
oh, no problem about your story. i want to read more.
michael, i don’t think lincoln is saying the only route for a writer is to publish two books, knopf, job at brown, etc. he’s saying that the division between mfa and phd might be problematic, because the phd makes the mfa seem less like a terminal degree.
One other thing: At many schools you can teach literature classes with the MFA. I have, at Ohio State, Antioch, and now at the U. of Toledo. I’ve taught as many lit classes as I’ve taught creative writing workshops.
One other thing: At many schools you can teach literature classes with the MFA. I have, at Ohio State, Antioch, and now at the U. of Toledo. I’ve taught as many lit classes as I’ve taught creative writing workshops.
In theory the MFA is a terminal degree but the job market is such that without at least one book (and generally you need more) it is very challenging to get a tenure track faculty position with an MFA. The market is intensely competitive these days. You might go here to see the kind of clusterfuck that’s going on: http://academicjobs.wikia.com/wiki/Creative_Writing_Jobs_2009-10. Also, check out the P & W article from a few years ago about the MFA no longer being a terminal degree.
@ lincoln, that last post, mainly. i wanted to ask what kind of work you do for noon, too. i saw somewhere you did work for them.
In theory the MFA is a terminal degree but the job market is such that without at least one book (and generally you need more) it is very challenging to get a tenure track faculty position with an MFA. The market is intensely competitive these days. You might go here to see the kind of clusterfuck that’s going on: http://academicjobs.wikia.com/wiki/Creative_Writing_Jobs_2009-10. Also, check out the P & W article from a few years ago about the MFA no longer being a terminal degree.
@ lincoln, that last post, mainly. i wanted to ask what kind of work you do for noon, too. i saw somewhere you did work for them.
Does it support your point? Maybe we are more in agreement than we think. What i’m saying is that for a long time there was an MFA that was a terminal degree that allowed you to teach. It didn’t guarantee you a teaching spot, obviously, but if you had some good pubs and some experience, etc. If you wanted to be able to teach English classes, you got a second degree in English. Then somewhere along the line some universities though, wait, we can get people to do PhD’s in writing too and created that as a PhD. This idea is spreading and presumably people with equal publications and experience will get the job with a PhD easier than an MFA meaning the practice of getting a PhD in writing will probably keep being more common until the MFA ceases to really be a a terminal degree.
To me, this isn’t a great trend for the writing world. I think we are probably too academic as it is and people probably spend too much time in school.
Although again, that doesn’t mean it isn’t beneficial for the individual writer right now looking to get a job. I’m just not sure it is beneficial to the writing world.
Does it support your point? Maybe we are more in agreement than we think. What i’m saying is that for a long time there was an MFA that was a terminal degree that allowed you to teach. It didn’t guarantee you a teaching spot, obviously, but if you had some good pubs and some experience, etc. If you wanted to be able to teach English classes, you got a second degree in English. Then somewhere along the line some universities though, wait, we can get people to do PhD’s in writing too and created that as a PhD. This idea is spreading and presumably people with equal publications and experience will get the job with a PhD easier than an MFA meaning the practice of getting a PhD in writing will probably keep being more common until the MFA ceases to really be a a terminal degree.
To me, this isn’t a great trend for the writing world. I think we are probably too academic as it is and people probably spend too much time in school.
Although again, that doesn’t mean it isn’t beneficial for the individual writer right now looking to get a job. I’m just not sure it is beneficial to the writing world.
Is ‘diss’ the accepted abbreviation for ‘dissertation’? That’s funny to me. I just think of ‘diss songs.’ I bet you could ether the fuck out of Chaucer with a 250-page diss. That sounds massive.
Is ‘diss’ the accepted abbreviation for ‘dissertation’? That’s funny to me. I just think of ‘diss songs.’ I bet you could ether the fuck out of Chaucer with a 250-page diss. That sounds massive.
“Also, check out the P & W article from a few years ago about the MFA no longer being a terminal degree.”
Right, but all that is my point. It has ceased to be a terminal degree, in part because of the growing number of PhD programs.
“Also, check out the P & W article from a few years ago about the MFA no longer being a terminal degree.”
Right, but all that is my point. It has ceased to be a terminal degree, in part because of the growing number of PhD programs.
James Franco apparently doesn’t think an MFA is a terminal degree, either:
http://yaleherald.com/thebullblog/james-franco-at-yale-from-pineapple-express-to-english-phd/
James Franco apparently doesn’t think an MFA is a terminal degree, either:
http://yaleherald.com/thebullblog/james-franco-at-yale-from-pineapple-express-to-english-phd/
i think it’s entirely impossible to say whether this mfa/phd situation is beneficial or not to the writing world. it is possible to say that there’s a weird fuckup between mfa and phd right now, that is confusing in the job market. then again, i don’t really care about the job market much. i just wanted to study literature for a long time with teachers i respected, though i know not everyone has this same feeling.
the more i think about the franco story though, the more i think it is lame.
@alan
Gotcha, but I don’t think the division is problematic because the best creative writing jobs–the ones that require the writer to teach MFA students on a 2/2 or 3/3–will always go to people with top notch publications.
@kyle
Certainly. I was referring to tenure track jobs in my post. Sorry for any confusion.
Well that’s how the discussion got started! PhD in English is a different beast though.
i think it’s entirely impossible to say whether this mfa/phd situation is beneficial or not to the writing world. it is possible to say that there’s a weird fuckup between mfa and phd right now, that is confusing in the job market. then again, i don’t really care about the job market much. i just wanted to study literature for a long time with teachers i respected, though i know not everyone has this same feeling.
the more i think about the franco story though, the more i think it is lame.
@alan
Gotcha, but I don’t think the division is problematic because the best creative writing jobs–the ones that require the writer to teach MFA students on a 2/2 or 3/3–will always go to people with top notch publications.
@kyle
Certainly. I was referring to tenure track jobs in my post. Sorry for any confusion.
Well that’s how the discussion got started! PhD in English is a different beast though.
I really don’t have that much of an opinion on all this though and probably shouldn’t have been snarky on a public messageboard!
I really don’t have that much of an opinion on all this though and probably shouldn’t have been snarky on a public messageboard!
Lincoln, I don’t think the MFA no longer being a terminal degree is so much about the creative writing PhD as it is about a very saturated market.
Lincoln, I don’t think the MFA no longer being a terminal degree is so much about the creative writing PhD as it is about a very saturated market.
Saturated market and what degree is “terminal” in a given field are separate questions though.
Quite literally a terminal degree is the highest degree in an academic field. It used to be the MFA in creative writing until people created the PhD.
Saturated market and what degree is “terminal” in a given field are separate questions though.
Quite literally a terminal degree is the highest degree in an academic field. It used to be the MFA in creative writing until people created the PhD.
nothing worse than contracting a terminal degree. this is why it’s so important to support the effort to find a cure.
nothing worse than contracting a terminal degree. this is why it’s so important to support the effort to find a cure.
Lincoln,
Why do you continue to imply that a PhD in “Creative Writing” isn’t a PhD in “English?”? Do you think students take 90 workshop hours or something?
Why shouldn’t a person be allowed to write a dissertation in his or her area within English?
Lincoln,
Why do you continue to imply that a PhD in “Creative Writing” isn’t a PhD in “English?”? Do you think students take 90 workshop hours or something?
Why shouldn’t a person be allowed to write a dissertation in his or her area within English?
Hmm? I think you are reading too much into my post. I’m only saying there are literally different PhD degrees. Yale, where Franco is going, does not have an PhD in creative writing degree, right?
Hi Lincoln – I think what you’re saying is right – the MFA is, and should be a terminal degree, but that doesn’t negate the validity of a CW PhD because the PhD is not an MFA, or meant to be an extended MFA – mine is basically an English Lit PhD – I took all the same courses and will take the same qualifying exams as a Lit PhD, but have a creative dissertation. Some might think this is silly, but that doesn’t negate the value of the degree. It’s been intense and educational for me both as a writer and reader. I don’t know if it’s like this at all schools. I don’t disagree that a Lit PhD with a critical dissertation is a ‘different beast’, but I’m not sure I follow why one is more valid than the other.
I don’t get the scam comment either – I get paid to go to school (well, get paid to teach which allows me to go to school for free), so the only scam might be to argue that grad students are slave labor to teach comp, but you could make the same argument about many MFA programs.
So, my point is that you’re right – the MFA is a terminal degree, but the PhD exists (and has existed for a while – I think mine is at least forty years old, not necessarily old, but not that much younger than the first MFAs in CW) as another type of degree for somebody interested in studying both CW and Literature. The real problem is that because of the explosion of MFA programs – many of which might be called a scam (compared to a PhD) in that they offer little or no funding and little hope of a teaching job after the degree, if we’re talking about them purely from an economic POV – is that the over-supply of people with MFAs has created the perception (not necessarily correct) that the PhD carries some objective measure as to a writer’s ability as a writer and teacher teach (maybe it has to do with selectivity, maybe it has to do with teaching experience – 4-5 years in a PhD teaching vs 2-3 in an MFA. I think it also has to do with a perception of selectivity since most people in PhD programs also have an MFA or MA in CW) but that in the end the reason the MFA is losing its weight as a terminal degree isn’t because of the existence of the PhD (which wasn’t ever meant to be a ‘new’ terminal degree, but a different way of studying CW and lit) – it’s because the steadily increasing number of MFA programs has created the perception (again, not necessarily correct) on the academic job market that the PhD is a better degree. I’m not saying this is correct at all, but arguing that MFAs aren’t losing steam as a terminal degree because of the PhD, only that the value of the PhD (on the job market) has increased because of the shear number of MFAs.
Hmm? I think you are reading too much into my post. I’m only saying there are literally different PhD degrees. Yale, where Franco is going, does not have an PhD in creative writing degree, right?
Hi Lincoln – I think what you’re saying is right – the MFA is, and should be a terminal degree, but that doesn’t negate the validity of a CW PhD because the PhD is not an MFA, or meant to be an extended MFA – mine is basically an English Lit PhD – I took all the same courses and will take the same qualifying exams as a Lit PhD, but have a creative dissertation. Some might think this is silly, but that doesn’t negate the value of the degree. It’s been intense and educational for me both as a writer and reader. I don’t know if it’s like this at all schools. I don’t disagree that a Lit PhD with a critical dissertation is a ‘different beast’, but I’m not sure I follow why one is more valid than the other.
I don’t get the scam comment either – I get paid to go to school (well, get paid to teach which allows me to go to school for free), so the only scam might be to argue that grad students are slave labor to teach comp, but you could make the same argument about many MFA programs.
So, my point is that you’re right – the MFA is a terminal degree, but the PhD exists (and has existed for a while – I think mine is at least forty years old, not necessarily old, but not that much younger than the first MFAs in CW) as another type of degree for somebody interested in studying both CW and Literature. The real problem is that because of the explosion of MFA programs – many of which might be called a scam (compared to a PhD) in that they offer little or no funding and little hope of a teaching job after the degree, if we’re talking about them purely from an economic POV – is that the over-supply of people with MFAs has created the perception (not necessarily correct) that the PhD carries some objective measure as to a writer’s ability as a writer and teacher teach (maybe it has to do with selectivity, maybe it has to do with teaching experience – 4-5 years in a PhD teaching vs 2-3 in an MFA. I think it also has to do with a perception of selectivity since most people in PhD programs also have an MFA or MA in CW) but that in the end the reason the MFA is losing its weight as a terminal degree isn’t because of the existence of the PhD (which wasn’t ever meant to be a ‘new’ terminal degree, but a different way of studying CW and lit) – it’s because the steadily increasing number of MFA programs has created the perception (again, not necessarily correct) on the academic job market that the PhD is a better degree. I’m not saying this is correct at all, but arguing that MFAs aren’t losing steam as a terminal degree because of the PhD, only that the value of the PhD (on the job market) has increased because of the shear number of MFAs.
Lincoln…. a PhD in creative writing is an english degree. I think you might have the wrong idea about what the degree actually is.
Lincoln…. a PhD in creative writing is an english degree. I think you might have the wrong idea about what the degree actually is.
Also, besides the job market stuff, I’ve learned a ton in my PhD program, reading far, far more than I did in my master’s degree or would have read on my own. So there’s that, too.
Also, besides the job market stuff, I’ve learned a ton in my PhD program, reading far, far more than I did in my master’s degree or would have read on my own. So there’s that, too.
yes, but there are different kinds of PhDs in the field of English, no?
yes, but there are different kinds of PhDs in the field of English, no?
i kind of hope james franco finds this, feels threatened, drops out of the english program at yale, becomes the greatest writer no one has ever read, dies a young, self-loathing, horrendous death caused by dysentery, has his work saved by a devoted follower named Ticu, of unidentifiable foreign ancestry, who subsequently publishes said work to critical scorn, only to have it resurface fifty years later in an essay by the leading critic of the day who deems franco the greatest literary find/recovery since melville. thereafter, many essays and books will link the development of franco’s literary career to his time spent working on the spiderman films, during which toby maguire, attempting to become a poet himself, found and read and admired some of franco’s work, beginning a long and sometimes envious and sometimes lascivious interpersonal workshop and affair between the two, maguire finally giving up his own ambitions to support the more talented franco.
i kind of hope james franco finds this, feels threatened, drops out of the english program at yale, becomes the greatest writer no one has ever read, dies a young, self-loathing, horrendous death caused by dysentery, has his work saved by a devoted follower named Ticu, of unidentifiable foreign ancestry, who subsequently publishes said work to critical scorn, only to have it resurface fifty years later in an essay by the leading critic of the day who deems franco the greatest literary find/recovery since melville. thereafter, many essays and books will link the development of franco’s literary career to his time spent working on the spiderman films, during which toby maguire, attempting to become a poet himself, found and read and admired some of franco’s work, beginning a long and sometimes envious and sometimes lascivious interpersonal workshop and affair between the two, maguire finally giving up his own ambitions to support the more talented franco.
There are different… concentrations and specialties.
To clarify here, in the question of “terminal degrees” that Erin brought up, a PhD in some other english field doesn’t factor into what the terminal degree in the field of creative writing is. That’s what I meant by different beast.
There are different… concentrations and specialties.
To clarify here, in the question of “terminal degrees” that Erin brought up, a PhD in some other english field doesn’t factor into what the terminal degree in the field of creative writing is. That’s what I meant by different beast.
Yes, but one of the commonalities is that candidates are allowed to write a dissertation in their area of specialty after passing the basic req’s that all candidates have to pass, like coursework and exams.
You seem to assume that candidates in these programs don’t have do pass the same basic req’s as the lit students. You couldn’t be more wrong.
Yes, but one of the commonalities is that candidates are allowed to write a dissertation in their area of specialty after passing the basic req’s that all candidates have to pass, like coursework and exams.
You seem to assume that candidates in these programs don’t have do pass the same basic req’s as the lit students. You couldn’t be more wrong.
no that’s not what I’m assuming:
“To clarify here, in the question of “terminal degrees” that Erin brought up, a PhD in some other english field doesn’t factor into what the terminal degree in the field of creative writing is. That’s what I meant by different beast.”
no that’s not what I’m assuming:
“To clarify here, in the question of “terminal degrees” that Erin brought up, a PhD in some other english field doesn’t factor into what the terminal degree in the field of creative writing is. That’s what I meant by different beast.”
oh, i’m sorry i posted that. it’s mean. i’m too hungover to think anymore about any of this.
oh, i’m sorry i posted that. it’s mean. i’m too hungover to think anymore about any of this.
Okay, touche. My bad.
Okay, touche. My bad.
No problem. I don’t think i was clear! Although it is my understanding what is required varies a fair amount between PhD programs, but I wont’ pretend to know that much about that. I’m just saying the question of what is terminal is specific to degrees called “creative writing” and other English PhDs don’t factor into it.
I think this is something of a debate going on in academic creative writing…
No problem. I don’t think i was clear! Although it is my understanding what is required varies a fair amount between PhD programs, but I wont’ pretend to know that much about that. I’m just saying the question of what is terminal is specific to degrees called “creative writing” and other English PhDs don’t factor into it.
I think this is something of a debate going on in academic creative writing…
Lincoln,
At the same time, someone with a PhD in English who wrote a dissertation on Cotton Mather wouldn’t have a degree that’s “terminal” enough for a Shakespeare job–even though he probably pased the same basic req’s as the Shakespeare guy who’ll get the job.
Lincoln,
At the same time, someone with a PhD in English who wrote a dissertation on Cotton Mather wouldn’t have a degree that’s “terminal” enough for a Shakespeare job–even though he probably pased the same basic req’s as the Shakespeare guy who’ll get the job.
Sure, sure. But the concept of a “terminal degree” in a field is a real thing in our university system and there is currently something of a debate about whether the PhD is supplanting the MFA as the terminal degree in the field of creative writing, even if the PhD programs are also considered English degrees and housed in the those programs.
Sure, sure. But the concept of a “terminal degree” in a field is a real thing in our university system and there is currently something of a debate about whether the PhD is supplanting the MFA as the terminal degree in the field of creative writing, even if the PhD programs are also considered English degrees and housed in the those programs.
The PhD is not “supplanting” the MFA as the terminal degree in the field of creative writing; both are considered terminal, and the terminal-ity depends on the job type. It’s pointless to over-simplify the issue of “terminal-ity” when a “creative writing” job can be anything from teaching a 4/4 of comp, lit, and creative writing to 19 year old kids at a small liberal arts college and teaching a 2/2 of grad workshops at Iowa. Any time you’re dealing with a field in the arts, these matters will remain fluid–fields where the teachers are practicing artists, where the most important qualification for the best jobs is and always will be the artist’s own work. I don’t understand, then, why you or anyone else would have a problem with writers have multiple options, and for such fluidity to exist.
Also, there are only a handful of PhD programs, and this number doesn’t seem to be increasing at a rapid rate.
The PhD is not “supplanting” the MFA as the terminal degree in the field of creative writing; both are considered terminal, and the terminal-ity depends on the job type. It’s pointless to over-simplify the issue of “terminal-ity” when a “creative writing” job can be anything from teaching a 4/4 of comp, lit, and creative writing to 19 year old kids at a small liberal arts college and teaching a 2/2 of grad workshops at Iowa. Any time you’re dealing with a field in the arts, these matters will remain fluid–fields where the teachers are practicing artists, where the most important qualification for the best jobs is and always will be the artist’s own work. I don’t understand, then, why you or anyone else would have a problem with writers have multiple options, and for such fluidity to exist.
Also, there are only a handful of PhD programs, and this number doesn’t seem to be increasing at a rapid rate.
*having multiple options
*having multiple options
I guess my fear is that at time moves on it won’t be a matter of multiple options as PhD’s will become the new terminal degree. But as I said I really don’t have that much of an opinion on this and probably shouldn’t have had a snarky post on a public messageboard!
It’s all good. Whatever studying helps your goals and writing is all good.
I guess my fear is that at time moves on it won’t be a matter of multiple options as PhD’s will become the new terminal degree. But as I said I really don’t have that much of an opinion on this and probably shouldn’t have had a snarky post on a public messageboard!
It’s all good. Whatever studying helps your goals and writing is all good.
OK, Lincoln, that’s a worthy point. What I meant was, MFA stories often feature a fake Raymond Carver tone mashed up with experimental fiction techniques in terms of form. And the general personality that comes through has been astonishingly uniform over the last 40 years–an unholy Cheever/Roth stew. We could quibble over all the different strains of MFA stories, and come up with (semi) contradictory definitions, but I think that would involve indulging in the narcissism of minor differences. The point is, when someone says that a story seems like an “MFA story,” what they mean is that it reminds them of a bad MFA story. Bad MFA stories are all alike, every good MFA story is good in its own way. MFA programs are not inherently evil, but making fun of a certain type of MFA student is enjoyable for kids of all ages. Bad MFA stories tend to be really over-worked, which gives one second-hand emotional exhaustion. You can see the process that the writer took, and even appreciate the intellectual impetus behind his or her choices, but the finished product is flat. It’s depressing to see an intelligent person work really hard and fail, and (for me, at least) it engenders a sort of creeping insecurity about one’s own process. Because bad MFA stories hit so close to home for a certain kind of writer, they inspire way more vitriol than, say, a Nicholas Sparks novel. IMO/YMM/Run DMC, of course.
OK, Lincoln, that’s a worthy point. What I meant was, MFA stories often feature a fake Raymond Carver tone mashed up with experimental fiction techniques in terms of form. And the general personality that comes through has been astonishingly uniform over the last 40 years–an unholy Cheever/Roth stew. We could quibble over all the different strains of MFA stories, and come up with (semi) contradictory definitions, but I think that would involve indulging in the narcissism of minor differences. The point is, when someone says that a story seems like an “MFA story,” what they mean is that it reminds them of a bad MFA story. Bad MFA stories are all alike, every good MFA story is good in its own way. MFA programs are not inherently evil, but making fun of a certain type of MFA student is enjoyable for kids of all ages. Bad MFA stories tend to be really over-worked, which gives one second-hand emotional exhaustion. You can see the process that the writer took, and even appreciate the intellectual impetus behind his or her choices, but the finished product is flat. It’s depressing to see an intelligent person work really hard and fail, and (for me, at least) it engenders a sort of creeping insecurity about one’s own process. Because bad MFA stories hit so close to home for a certain kind of writer, they inspire way more vitriol than, say, a Nicholas Sparks novel. IMO/YMM/Run DMC, of course.
I have done several job searches. I mean as the one hiring the candidate, not trying to get a job (I have an MFA, btw). Either degree won’t matter in any way to the CW faculty on the search, more than likely. I mean I guess you could get an all MFA CW area or an all PhD one, but I just haven’t seen that. And to judge a candidate just be degree would be highly, highly unusual, unless the degree didn’t meet the minimum requirements for thew job. Like if a masters degree applied for an MFA/PhD job, it will never happen. The file won’t even be read.
As has been noted, both degrees–PhD, MFA–are “terminal.” Tenured professors have careers with both.
A job search is not about one thing. It is about a picture formed through multiple perspectives: writing samples, letters, teaching experience, collegiality, experience in secondary fields (could be editing, community work, tech, another discipline, on and on and on), transcripts, etc. etc. Way more factors than you might think.
If you think the PhD/MFA argument is going to decide a teaching career, the one degree option, I don’t think you’ve done many job searches.
Now, as far as experience in school as a student in these programs, other factors outside getting a job, etc. I cannot comment. I am talking to one aspect of comparing the degrees, so don’t get me wrong.
Getting a wriitng degree and not teaching is a fine option. Many of my fellow graduates (and the ones i teach and graduate at BSU) have jobs in editing, teaching at institutions outside university, are lawyers, write for video games, on and on and on.
I can say, with my MFA degree, I got job after job, as far as working in a university, teaching creative writing. But, again, was the degree the factor? One. Of MANY.
(uh, luck?)
I actually think it was BSN degree. I am a nurse.
I have done several job searches. I mean as the one hiring the candidate, not trying to get a job (I have an MFA, btw). Either degree won’t matter in any way to the CW faculty on the search, more than likely. I mean I guess you could get an all MFA CW area or an all PhD one, but I just haven’t seen that. And to judge a candidate just be degree would be highly, highly unusual, unless the degree didn’t meet the minimum requirements for thew job. Like if a masters degree applied for an MFA/PhD job, it will never happen. The file won’t even be read.
As has been noted, both degrees–PhD, MFA–are “terminal.” Tenured professors have careers with both.
A job search is not about one thing. It is about a picture formed through multiple perspectives: writing samples, letters, teaching experience, collegiality, experience in secondary fields (could be editing, community work, tech, another discipline, on and on and on), transcripts, etc. etc. Way more factors than you might think.
If you think the PhD/MFA argument is going to decide a teaching career, the one degree option, I don’t think you’ve done many job searches.
Now, as far as experience in school as a student in these programs, other factors outside getting a job, etc. I cannot comment. I am talking to one aspect of comparing the degrees, so don’t get me wrong.
Getting a wriitng degree and not teaching is a fine option. Many of my fellow graduates (and the ones i teach and graduate at BSU) have jobs in editing, teaching at institutions outside university, are lawyers, write for video games, on and on and on.
I can say, with my MFA degree, I got job after job, as far as working in a university, teaching creative writing. But, again, was the degree the factor? One. Of MANY.
(uh, luck?)
I actually think it was BSN degree. I am a nurse.
Hi Sean – I didn’t mean to reduce job getting to only MFA vs PhD – my impression (not having been on the job market, or on a hiring committee) is that the PhD has helped colleagues get jobs at small schools that are looking specifically for PhDs or generalists with experience teaching lit/comp/cw – this could be a myth in that my sample pool is a small pool of friends on the job market. I suspect (again an assumption) that a PhD has helped make up for the lack of a book, at least in some cases. For me, I had an MA and was choosing between MFA and PhD programs and ultimately went with the PhD only because it was only a year or so more than the MFA programs I was looking at and seemed more intense on the lit side of things, which is what I was after.
It might be more intense lit. My entire MFA was lit and workshop. But that was one MFA. I’ not sure what others are built on. I had to read a TON of books, but I actually wish we had read even more.
It might be more intense lit. My entire MFA was lit and workshop. But that was one MFA. I’ not sure what others are built on. I had to read a TON of books, but I actually wish we had read even more.
I love how this thread transmogrified into a referendum on the MFA vs. the PhD in CW.
Thanks for staying in school after all, Daniel Desario!
I love how this thread transmogrified into a referendum on the MFA vs. the PhD in CW.
Thanks for staying in school after all, Daniel Desario!
word.
word.
I agree it’s not a great story but Esquire is certainly no longer the literary magazine of record and has become, at best, a highbrow celebrity and style magazine.
For Franco, I know he’s applied to lots of places (including my school, where he’s been accepted as I suppose he has been everywhere else) for phD’s but the Yale thing seems weird. Unless it’s a publicity stunt, why would he choose a place that doesn’t have a creative dissertation option? Why would he dedicate three-four years and a dissertation to critical work when, presumably though I could be completely wrong, all his stuff so far has been creative? However, he might be doing it simply for the prestige.
I agree it’s not a great story but Esquire is certainly no longer the literary magazine of record and has become, at best, a highbrow celebrity and style magazine.
For Franco, I know he’s applied to lots of places (including my school, where he’s been accepted as I suppose he has been everywhere else) for phD’s but the Yale thing seems weird. Unless it’s a publicity stunt, why would he choose a place that doesn’t have a creative dissertation option? Why would he dedicate three-four years and a dissertation to critical work when, presumably though I could be completely wrong, all his stuff so far has been creative? However, he might be doing it simply for the prestige.
The last Esquire story I read before this JF piece was by Chris Adrian and is one of my favorites. http://www.esquire.com/fiction/fiction/chris-adrian-promise-breaker-1207
The last Esquire story I read before this JF piece was by Chris Adrian and is one of my favorites. http://www.esquire.com/fiction/fiction/chris-adrian-promise-breaker-1207
Why was he on General Hospital?
He’s a weird one.
I kinda like that.
Why was he on General Hospital?
He’s a weird one.
I kinda like that.
[…] James Franco, “Just Before the Black,” which seems to have left commentators either ambivalent or hedging their bets—nobody seems to much like the story, but nobody’s saying […]
First off, I applaud James for giving something a shot that’s not guaranteed for success. That being said, the story be channeled back and forth between being overly derivative/banal and trying too hard/overconfidence in some of his tumid ideas and points. Though I wanted to sink into the text, I found myself skimming and wanting it to be over. At least he tried though and hopefully he tries his hand at it some more.
First off, I applaud James for giving something a shot that’s not guaranteed for success. That being said, the story be channeled back and forth between being overly derivative/banal and trying too hard/overconfidence in some of his tumid ideas and points. Though I wanted to sink into the text, I found myself skimming and wanting it to be over. At least he tried though and hopefully he tries his hand at it some more.