Writing Is Not A Contest! (No Matter How Much Some Dudes Wish It Were)

Try to contain your excruciating, nearly mind-numbing boredom at this newsflash: there has been another dumbass-dude comment about all women writers, living or dead!  The latest offender?  Nobel Prize Winning writer V.S. Naipaul.  In an interview at the Royal Geographic Society, Naipaul said that no woman writer was his equal, singling Jane Austen out for particular derision for her sentimental tosh, and claiming that within one or two paragraphs of every piece of writing he can immediately tell if it was written by a woman. 

When I first read of Naipaul's idiotic comment, all I could think was, "Who was the idiot who asked him that question?" The transcript and audio recording of the interview have not yet been released, but reportedly it was something along the lines of, "Is there any woman writer, living or dead, you regard as your match?" Is it any surprise that it was a man who asked it?  Or that it was a man who took it seriously enough to answer?

The exchange between these two men brought to mind an old Saturday Night Live skit, "Da Bears."  In it, Chris Farley and friends sit around eating wings, swigging beers, burping loudly and inventing ever-more-absurd fantasy matchups between their favorite football team of all time, the Chicago Bears, and just about anybody or anything else.  The gag was that no matter what the opponent or the activity, in any contest these guys picked The Bears. Bears versus all the cars in the Indianapolis 500?  Da Bears! Bears versus the Assembled Choir of Heavenly Angels? Da Bears!  Chris Farley, god bless him, knew what he was doing: parodying the obsession of boys and men with contests, winning, and a never-ending game of who-beats-who.  My four and seven-year-old sons would not see the humor in this just yet.  They take the question of who-beats-who extremely seriously.  A longhorn versus a badger?  Superman versus an asteroid?  Superman versus an alien asteroid on fire?  Derek Jeter versus Obama?  And on and on...

It doesn't matter if the two combatants are from different planets, or run on entirely different kinds of fuel, or even whether they are real.  What matters is knowing who, in a battle to the death, would win. 

It is almost impossible to imagine a woman either asking or answering a question like, "Is there any male writer you would consider your match?"  But between two men the exchange is woefully predictable, and had Jane overheard such a conversation in her drawing room, she would have parodied it with relish, quite clear as to what it revealed about the men in question and their obsession with who-bests-who.  (Whereas V.S. Naipaul would have failed to see the irony. Round Two: Jane!)

And yet every year our most revered cultural institutions and our most prestigious publications do just this.  First there is awards season, predicated on the notion that it is possible to anoint one book in a genre "the winner", the best one of all!  We have "The Best [X] of the year" season, and pretend that these lists originate somewhere aside from the brains of flawed, subjective human beings. We have lists coming out of our ears, in fact: the 100 best books of all time, the 100 best albums of all time, and on and on, and the self-important publications that produce them act as though they set the contenders down in a ring and let them fight it out like cocks, with the resulting lists as unbiased as the notes of a spectator recording which combatants were left standing after the fight.

To be sure, I believe that literature can be judged.  Like porn, good writing is one of those things that is difficult to define, but relatively easy to distinguish from the other kind (writing that is bad).  The range of writing that people like, however, is as broad as humanity, and once certain things have been established -- good sentence structure, good story-telling, good fact-checking, and so on -- what appeals to one reader or another is anybody's guess, and everybody's right to decide for themselves.  Informed decisions are preferable, and to that end I am grateful for the critics and scholars who devote themselves to the study of the craft; but only so long as education, not declaration, is their aim. Writing is not a contest, and by definition can never be.  There are too many variables, far too much subjectivity, and the work itself defies definable metrics or binary judgments.  It is this confounding of clearcut "answers" that makes writing, and reading, such pleasurable activities and such singular joys; our tastes are something each of us owns, and defines.  

Which is why, to be frank, I don't care what V.S. Naipaul thinks about his writing or Jane Austen's.  Instead I care what I think about it. And when I do that, refusing to let Top Ten lists or half-wits distort my own judgment, I win.

Views: 215

Tags: #issues we face, women

Comment

You need to be a member of She Writes to add comments!

Join She Writes

Comment by Niranjana Iyer on June 9, 2011 at 5:42pm

I so agree with you, Kamy.

I think my fear about this whole affair is that many will use his opinions to validate their own (misguided) notions about women and writing. It would be more of a joke if he was truly irrelevant, but he is studied and quoted widely (my first grad school term paper was on his work), and I think his writing still carries a lot of weight. He's inspired many South Asian writers, both male and female, and I personally have always admired his style, even when I've disagreed with the content. So this is all a bit...sad, really. I think Tina articulates my feelings (far better and deeper than I could!) in her "A House for Ms. Biswas" piece posted here yesterday. http://www.shewrites.com/profiles/blogs/women-doing-literary-things-1

Comment by Sharon D. Dillon on June 9, 2011 at 5:22pm
@Sara, Read your blog. Good job. Left a comment.
Comment by Sara Feustle Wilburn on June 9, 2011 at 4:12pm
I wrote a blog post partially in response to this article and based on my own recent experiences today: http://18years2life.blogspot.com/2011/06/dont-write-mom-off.html
Comment by Katrina Maloney on June 9, 2011 at 9:42am

In 9th grade, attending a new school, I had the notion that if I only signed my name with K. the teacher wouldn't know if I was a boy or a girl: this was my first action as a feminist, naive as it was.

Even in 2011, after public women like Chancellor Merkel, Hilary Clinton, Condoleezza Rice; historic women such as Rosamund Franklin and Rachel Carson; significant intellects such as Anna Freud and Frances Moore Lappe; not to mention hundreds of women CEOs, poets, novelists, artists and sanitation workers, we still have to be twice as good as a man at any endeavor to be "good at it". Me, I've stopped caring about approval from men, and cherish my women friends above rubies.

A comforting thought is that the idiot V.S. Naipaul will get his, without our intervention. Karma breeds karma.


Comment by henya drescher on June 8, 2011 at 5:26am
...And this is coming from a man who suffers from depression and bad temper. Go figure!
Nelle Douville Comment by Nelle Douville on June 7, 2011 at 4:27pm

It is a claim impossible to corroborate, because that would mean reading the entire subsets of male writers and female writers. Given that impossibility, his comment is boisterous blather. We might consider how women and men may differ in what they wish to read or write about as subject matter, because I can see where our interests diverge, but that is different from a claim of better writing skill.

I agree writing is not about a contest or competition. The day I write to compete is the day I walk away from the endeavour. I write because of a love of writing. I hope that others find enjoyment in the product of my mind, and nothing more.

 

Comment by Kelli Swearingen on June 7, 2011 at 10:29am
Funny,he can read a pargraph or two and know it's written by a woman. I can do the same thing only I can tell  that it's  been written by self-absorbed, self-centered,egotisitc sad old man whose writing has and probably will always bore me by the second page!
Comment by Kathy Ashby on June 7, 2011 at 8:38am
V. S. stands for very serious arrogance I guess.
Comment by Deborah Batterman on June 7, 2011 at 8:09am

The more things change, the more they stay the same . . .

Here's a tidbit from Joanna Russ's ground-breaking book, How to Suppress Women's Writing: in 1847, a novel appeared in England by an unknown writer. Reviewers called it "powerful and original," . . . "the work of a promising, possibly great, new writer." One reviewer characterized the author as a "rough sailor" who did not understand women. Flash forward to 1850, when a new edition reveals the author's true identity and there's a whole new take on the writer, now likened by one reviewer "to a little bird fluttering its wings against the bars of its cage." The book: Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights. I kid you not. 

Comment by marci alboher on June 7, 2011 at 8:07am
Amen, Kamy!

Latest Activity

Terri-Lynn Howell-Schlaiss posted a status
"I would love to learn the art of discipline - writing when I'm tired, when I have things to do, and even when I just don't feel like it."
18 minutes ago
Linda Weaver Clarke posted blog posts
1 hour ago
Clene` S. Elder liked Deborah Ailman's blog post Are You Letting It Pull You Down?
1 hour ago
Glynis Rankin left a comment for Gabby
"Welcome Gabby! Thank you so much for the friend request.  "
3 hours ago

Members

Badge

Loading…

© 2014   Created by Kamy Wicoff.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service