I didn’t know Flannery O’Connor was a whore
In their manner of honoring the dead old lady from Milledgeville, GA, UGA Press, ever the pioneering visionaries, have ‘blindly’ selected Andrew Porter’s The Theory of Light and Matter, which comes, blindly, from an Iowa grad who has published stories in One Story, Epoch, the Pushcart Prize anthologies, and so on.
Those factors certainly don’t have to add up to a boring book, if a slightly predictable one, but then the copy on the book’s win already has the thing looking like it will be on the shelf next to all those books we could have read in its place:
In the tradition of John Cheever, ten stories that explore the loss and sacrifice in American suburbia: These ten short stories explore loss and sacrifice in American suburbia. In idyllic suburbs across the country, from Philadelphia to San Francisco, narrators struggle to find meaning or value in their lives because of (or in spite of) something that has happened in their pasts. In “Hole,” a young man reconstructs the memory of his childhood friend’s deadly fall.
Sure, O’Connor wrote narrative stories with development and all, but she did that years ago, before a lot of others, and I can’t imagine what she’d be doing now, years later. I honestly think this kind of repetitive story blandering is a knock on her name more than a praise.
‘Don’t shit in my mouth and call it a cookie.’
Even Barry Hannah’s blurb seems a little stilted: “I’ve known of Andrew Porter’s genius for ten years. He’s a born storyteller. Every page of The Theory of Light and Matter will change something in your life and refresh you. Yet it is an easy read, nothing like classroom lit. He makes his own space instantly and invites you in. Hats off!”
So here’s to another win we could’ve called from outside the stadium. Another contest rewarding mimicry. Can’t wait to read more Cheever. Yay.
Tags: andrew porter, flannery o'connor award
I will say that the above description of “Hole” sounds awful– But the story is pretty fucking great. It’s the only thing I’ve read in the collection, so I can’t speak for the rest of it yet, but “Hole” is a damn good story.
I will say that the above description of “Hole” sounds awful– But the story is pretty fucking great. It’s the only thing I’ve read in the collection, so I can’t speak for the rest of it yet, but “Hole” is a damn good story.
Before you get riled, read some of it! Otherwise, you come off as reactionary. Put some heart into this site. In fact, I’d love to see you read one of the stories, and write an honest review of it. That would be cool. Or maybe Matt can do that, since he read some of it alread.y
Also, Flannery O’Connor not only wrote “narrative stories with development”, she wrote explicit Catholic literature, all set in the rural south which is predominantly protestant, wherein through the grace of God, protestants were shown the real way, The Catholic way. She wouldn’t give a rats ass about anything literary now as she didn’t then. It was all religion to her. She HATED literary people. That said, the people who host this award do so because they liked her writing, so they probably like narrative fiction.
Regarding Cheever, if you haven’t read Falconer, you should. Great book. He wrote lots of other wierd stuff, too. Fucking genuis. Now, if you’ve read him and still think he’s ass, fine. But I have this feeling you’ve never looked into his work.
Before you get riled, read some of it! Otherwise, you come off as reactionary. Put some heart into this site. In fact, I’d love to see you read one of the stories, and write an honest review of it. That would be cool. Or maybe Matt can do that, since he read some of it alread.y
Also, Flannery O’Connor not only wrote “narrative stories with development”, she wrote explicit Catholic literature, all set in the rural south which is predominantly protestant, wherein through the grace of God, protestants were shown the real way, The Catholic way. She wouldn’t give a rats ass about anything literary now as she didn’t then. It was all religion to her. She HATED literary people. That said, the people who host this award do so because they liked her writing, so they probably like narrative fiction.
Regarding Cheever, if you haven’t read Falconer, you should. Great book. He wrote lots of other wierd stuff, too. Fucking genuis. Now, if you’ve read him and still think he’s ass, fine. But I have this feeling you’ve never looked into his work.
pr:
i love you.
pr:
i love you.
I don’t think O’Connor could have hated literature all that much. She went to the Iowa Writers Workshop. Most of her friends were writers. She also wasn’t nearly as naive as pr seems to be implying that religious people are. She blurbed effin’ John Hawkes. Also- try actually reading her. You want Catholic propaganda, you go read GK Chesterton. O’Connor was onto something much larger and more complex. I’m not saying she wasn’t a Christian; I’m saying she wasn’t a sap. There’s a difference.
I’ve never heard of Andrew Porter before reading this blog post. So while I’ll withhold comment re whether he’s a good or bad choice for this prize, since I have no idea, I will say for the record that I personally could not have called this one from outside of the stadium.
I don’t think O’Connor could have hated literature all that much. She went to the Iowa Writers Workshop. Most of her friends were writers. She also wasn’t nearly as naive as pr seems to be implying that religious people are. She blurbed effin’ John Hawkes. Also- try actually reading her. You want Catholic propaganda, you go read GK Chesterton. O’Connor was onto something much larger and more complex. I’m not saying she wasn’t a Christian; I’m saying she wasn’t a sap. There’s a difference.
I’ve never heard of Andrew Porter before reading this blog post. So while I’ll withhold comment re whether he’s a good or bad choice for this prize, since I have no idea, I will say for the record that I personally could not have called this one from outside of the stadium.
Barry- I love you too.
She was far from a sap, and not at all naive, but if you’ve read her letters “A Habit of Being”, she was actually very disdainful toward the literary world. Some funny, nasty bits are to be found in it during her few visits to NY. I love her disdain for Mary McCarthy, for instance. And I will quote her as saying “I don’t like to read anything that looks funny on the page”- modernism, and post, were not her bag. She liked other religous writers, Walker Percy, Graham Greene, Isaac Bashevis Singer (catholicsm is close to judiasm, more so in some ways than protestantism), but her writing was an exploration of Catholicism. Period. That doesn’t make it propaganda. And she would mock you for saying she was onto something “larger” in that nothing is larger than serious religious belief. As far as I know, she had very few friends and lived at home with her mother in Georgia, raising peacocks. All of her close friends (like, 5 people) were Catholics, from my reading of her letters.
Barry- I love you too.
She was far from a sap, and not at all naive, but if you’ve read her letters “A Habit of Being”, she was actually very disdainful toward the literary world. Some funny, nasty bits are to be found in it during her few visits to NY. I love her disdain for Mary McCarthy, for instance. And I will quote her as saying “I don’t like to read anything that looks funny on the page”- modernism, and post, were not her bag. She liked other religous writers, Walker Percy, Graham Greene, Isaac Bashevis Singer (catholicsm is close to judiasm, more so in some ways than protestantism), but her writing was an exploration of Catholicism. Period. That doesn’t make it propaganda. And she would mock you for saying she was onto something “larger” in that nothing is larger than serious religious belief. As far as I know, she had very few friends and lived at home with her mother in Georgia, raising peacocks. All of her close friends (like, 5 people) were Catholics, from my reading of her letters.
yeah, JT is right. O’Connor was a storyteller. She didn’t loathe other writers; she loathed lit people who thought, as she once put it, that you could “climb out of a story into the meaning.” She was very Catholic, yeah, but she wasn’t thinking about ‘themes’; she wrote stories that ended up being, as they always are, informed by who she was….
yeah, JT is right. O’Connor was a storyteller. She didn’t loathe other writers; she loathed lit people who thought, as she once put it, that you could “climb out of a story into the meaning.” She was very Catholic, yeah, but she wasn’t thinking about ‘themes’; she wrote stories that ended up being, as they always are, informed by who she was….
Garson- I just can’t agree with you. Her stories were about God’s acts of grace on the sinners that we are, specifically, protestants and agnostics getting visited by avenging angels or the spirit in some way, and coming to the Catholic mind. Another good book is “Mystery and Manners” , her collection of essays, but truly her letters are unbelievabley great stuff. Habit of Being is my favorite book of hers these days, and all of her work along with the work of Tolstoy (another seriously religious person) are my two main interests in literature these days.
Garson- I just can’t agree with you. Her stories were about God’s acts of grace on the sinners that we are, specifically, protestants and agnostics getting visited by avenging angels or the spirit in some way, and coming to the Catholic mind. Another good book is “Mystery and Manners” , her collection of essays, but truly her letters are unbelievabley great stuff. Habit of Being is my favorite book of hers these days, and all of her work along with the work of Tolstoy (another seriously religious person) are my two main interests in literature these days.
pr- man, you are seriously the best commenter on this blog. everybody loves you. i think we agree more than we disagree, but in any case, you’ve out-read the shit of me re O’Connor, so I’m prepared to concede all your points. I’m a big fan of hers, especially Wise Blood and everything in the Collected, but I haven’t yet read either the Letters or the Essays. They’re on my list. I’m waiting for either to pop up at The Strand so i can buy it for cheap.
what the hell is your non-this-blog life? i’m officially curious. if you want to, drop a line via my website anytime you like.
pr- man, you are seriously the best commenter on this blog. everybody loves you. i think we agree more than we disagree, but in any case, you’ve out-read the shit of me re O’Connor, so I’m prepared to concede all your points. I’m a big fan of hers, especially Wise Blood and everything in the Collected, but I haven’t yet read either the Letters or the Essays. They’re on my list. I’m waiting for either to pop up at The Strand so i can buy it for cheap.
what the hell is your non-this-blog life? i’m officially curious. if you want to, drop a line via my website anytime you like.
I would take that “stilted” Barry Hannah blurb any day of the year.
I would take that “stilted” Barry Hannah blurb any day of the year.
I would be intimidated to read a book that changed my life on every page. That’s a lot of life changing. I don’t want to change my life that much. It’s kind of good now. Maybe a little change. One change per year.
I would be intimidated to read a book that changed my life on every page. That’s a lot of life changing. I don’t want to change my life that much. It’s kind of good now. Maybe a little change. One change per year.
wise blood bored me to tears.
wise blood bored me to tears.
Justin- I’ve been to your site! I love it! But I’m confused- what do you mean non-this-blog life? Huh? Did I write something wierd that I don’t remember?
Barry- Wise Blood and her other novel, The Violent Must Bear it Away (OK, I’m on my 3rd glass now, hope I got that right) are harder to get through and were not her best medium. Her stories are the best way to read her fiction, but I do love her non-fiction tremendously. I’ve read all of her work at least 3 times through- shit- that’s right, I’m old. But!– my obsession with her started at 14. I don’t think that her vision of Catholicism should turn away readers who aren’t interested in the Catholic way. I am not a Catholic. I also understand the whole Derrida, de Man, so on and so forth, idea that once a text leaves an author’s hand, it no longer matters what the author meant. I just like to know what some authors mean- that is not for everyone. I understand that.
I think the way to read her is not that she had themes- but that she was a “visionary”. Her visions were Catholic, in that she saw her world- which she did write about- in terms of a Catholic vision. In other worlds, not only did she believe in Catholicism (sorry about the bad spelling), but – to her- it believed in us.
Justin- I’ve been to your site! I love it! But I’m confused- what do you mean non-this-blog life? Huh? Did I write something wierd that I don’t remember?
Barry- Wise Blood and her other novel, The Violent Must Bear it Away (OK, I’m on my 3rd glass now, hope I got that right) are harder to get through and were not her best medium. Her stories are the best way to read her fiction, but I do love her non-fiction tremendously. I’ve read all of her work at least 3 times through- shit- that’s right, I’m old. But!– my obsession with her started at 14. I don’t think that her vision of Catholicism should turn away readers who aren’t interested in the Catholic way. I am not a Catholic. I also understand the whole Derrida, de Man, so on and so forth, idea that once a text leaves an author’s hand, it no longer matters what the author meant. I just like to know what some authors mean- that is not for everyone. I understand that.
I think the way to read her is not that she had themes- but that she was a “visionary”. Her visions were Catholic, in that she saw her world- which she did write about- in terms of a Catholic vision. In other worlds, not only did she believe in Catholicism (sorry about the bad spelling), but – to her- it believed in us.
Kevin- Fuck yeah.
Kevin- Fuck yeah.
pr- I just meant I only know you in your capacity as a commenter on this blog. As opposed to some other people here who I also know in “real” (ie, non-this-blog) life. unless we already know each other and i just haven’t put 2 & 2 together yet.
Kevin- yeah dude, me too. Barry Hannah can stilt my blurb any day of the week.
barry- you’re going to burn in hell.
pr- I just meant I only know you in your capacity as a commenter on this blog. As opposed to some other people here who I also know in “real” (ie, non-this-blog) life. unless we already know each other and i just haven’t put 2 & 2 together yet.
Kevin- yeah dude, me too. Barry Hannah can stilt my blurb any day of the week.
barry- you’re going to burn in hell.
Justin- I blog sort of anon here.
Darby, where did someone say something changed their life?
And where is the review of Porter? Come on Matthew! I can’t find his stories online. I want to know what someone thinks of his work.
Barry, let’s burn in hell together.
Justin- I blog sort of anon here.
Darby, where did someone say something changed their life?
And where is the review of Porter? Come on Matthew! I can’t find his stories online. I want to know what someone thinks of his work.
Barry, let’s burn in hell together.
you guys are funny
i knew i wasn’t gonna get away with that one, however earnest or disearnest
disearnest?
falconer is great. and quite quasi-narrative.
of course anybody with half an ass would take a hannah blurb, even if it said, ‘this kid’s got salt in the head.’
i’m just saying, another book of stories about suburban disillusionment? really?
i’m sure the guy could write circles around me.
suburban disillusionment?
you guys are funny
i knew i wasn’t gonna get away with that one, however earnest or disearnest
disearnest?
falconer is great. and quite quasi-narrative.
of course anybody with half an ass would take a hannah blurb, even if it said, ‘this kid’s got salt in the head.’
i’m just saying, another book of stories about suburban disillusionment? really?
i’m sure the guy could write circles around me.
suburban disillusionment?
o’connor was bat shit crazy.
if she lived now i doubt she’d be writing about suburban disillusionment
i’m saying, for her time, she was ahead of her time, however narrative her work is
continuing to pick books that sound like her writing seems to me like a disservice, and not something someone that classically stubborn and on her own course should be followed up by.
kevin, your creamy bullets is a better o’connor prize pick than a book about suburban disillusionment
say your book is about suburban disillusionment
o’connor was bat shit crazy.
if she lived now i doubt she’d be writing about suburban disillusionment
i’m saying, for her time, she was ahead of her time, however narrative her work is
continuing to pick books that sound like her writing seems to me like a disservice, and not something someone that classically stubborn and on her own course should be followed up by.
kevin, your creamy bullets is a better o’connor prize pick than a book about suburban disillusionment
say your book is about suburban disillusionment
flannery o’connor is a name so sacred it should not be spoken. people should not be getting prizes using her name. i am going to flip a table.
flannery o’connor is a name so sacred it should not be spoken. people should not be getting prizes using her name. i am going to flip a table.
serious business
serious business
My book is about the disillusionment of Barry Hannah and John Cheever. Thank you, Blake.
My book is about the disillusionment of Barry Hannah and John Cheever. Thank you, Blake.