More on Writing’s Purpose

Two weeks ago we took a look at Stephen King’s statement regarding why writers write. We concluded that while it sounded noble, it wasn’t overly accurate.

Most writers write to make money. If they happen to enrich people’s lives along the way, that’s a nice bonus.

This week I’d like to look at Edgar Rice Burroughs’s far more realistic assessment.

In August of 1931, Forrest J Ackerman, then 14, got into an argument with his teacher over the literary merits of Tarzan. Ackerman then wrote a letter to Burroughs telling him about it.

Burroughs sent a letter back to Ackerman. Here is the reply:

Thanks for your letter. Tell your teacher that, though she may be right about my stories, there are some fifty million people in the world who will not agree with her, which is fortunate for me, since even writers of garbage-can literature must eat.

My stories will do you no harm. If they have helped to inculcate in you a love of books, they have done you much good. No fiction is worth reading except for entertainment. If it entertains and is clean, it is good literature, or its kind. If it forms the habit of reading, in people who might not read otherwise, it is the best literature.

Last year I followed the English course prescribed for my two sons, who are in college. The required reading seemed to have been selected for the sole purpose of turning the hearts of young people against books. That, however, seems to be a universal pedagogical complex: to make the acquiring of knowledge a punishment, rather than a pleasure.

I want to emphasize two points out of this excellent statement.

Love of Books

“If [my stories] have helped to inculcate in you a love of books, they have done much good.”

To my mind, reading fiction should be a pleasure. It should instill in the reader a love of books.

Like many of you, I acquired that love very early. I doubt I was even in kindergarten. Books such as Seuss’s Scrambled Eggs Super and Syd Hoff’s Danny and the Dinosaur I still fondly remember. And I’ve loved reading and books ever since.

That love I helped to instill in my daughter. And I now encourage reading whenever I can. For a love of books is far more beneficial than a love of TV, or movies, or video games. Reading has so many additional benefits than video entertainment. It is a skill that is critical to the survival of civilization.

As Burroughs himself points out in his letter: teaching seems to universally have as its goal to make acquiring knowledge a punishment, rather than a pleasure.

This especially affects boys. Is it any wonder girls now go to college in greater numbers than do boys? When reading is a “girl thing”, it only follows that studying is also for “girls” — and what young boy in his right mind wants to like a girl? None when I was growing up, and I don’t think boys have changed all that much in the years since.

Therefore we should encourage authors to write books with good male role models. Because boys don’t identify with female leads. Reading about hot babes and kickass heroines comes in after puberty — if they read at all by that time.

Entertainment

“No fiction is worth reading except for entertainment.”

In my opinion, this is where it is at. Say what one will, the ultimate purpose of a story is to entertain. It may do other things as well — but if it doesn’t entertain, it does nothing beneficial. And it may even go so far as to destroy the impetus to read.

Burroughs noted that if a story entertains and is clean, it is good literature. And the best literature is that which forms the habit of reading in people who might not otherwise read. That is the best form of enrichment. The enrichment of lives. The lives of those who weren’t previously readers.

Comic books are entertainment and are often put down by parents. However, my first exposure to Jules Verne was a comic book version of From Earth to the Moon. It didn’t hurt me. I’m still an avid reader. And I even read “good literature”.

Writing’s Purpose

The purpose of writing fiction is the same as the ancient art of telling a story around the fire: to entertain. The story may also teach a lesson, or moral, or a bit of philosophy. But if the story doesn’t entertain, then it has failed in its main purpose and also in any secondary purpose. And may even turn off the reader. A lifetime of potential pleasure gone in a moment.

I also want to mention Burroughs’s comment “…even writers of garbage-can literature must eat.” Burroughs wrote to entertain and make money. And he made a lot of money.

What I especially like is that Burroughs was honest. He wasn’t afraid to say he wrote for money.

I wonder: if Mr King says one shouldn’t write for money, then why hasn’t he given away all of his earnings from writing? Seems to me the proof is in the pudding.

Comments are always welcome. And until next time, happy reading!

Share This!
Facebooktwitterpinterest

Writing’s Purpose

Writing isn’t about making money, getting famous, getting dates, getting laid, or making friends. In the end, it’s about enriching the lives of those who read your work, and enriching your own life as well. It’s about getting up, getting well, and getting over. Getting happy, okay? Getting happy.

(Stephen King, in On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft)

One of my favorite inspirational books is Letters to a Young Poet by Rainer Maria Rilke.

However, as with anything written by the human hand, it is not perfect. Because people aren’t perfect.

In the first letter, Rilke tells the young poet

Perhaps you…are called to be an artist. Then take that destiny upon yourself, and bear it, its burden and its greatness, without ever asking yourself what reward might come from outside.

Rilke is saying essentially the same thing as King in the quote with which I began this post.

In a discussion I had with the late Jane Reichhold (who was a premier American writer and translator of haiku), I mentioned that it seemed to me the flaw in Rilke’s advice to the young poet was that Rilke himself was published and famous — and that he was telling the young unpublished poet to not worry about getting published or famous.

Jane’s answer was simply, “And there you have it.”

In other words, it’s easy for the famous and those who are wealthy to tell the rest of us — Don’t worry or concern yourself about fame or wealth.

To my mind, that touches a bit on hypocrisy.

For the record, Jane Reichhold encouraged me to pursue publishing and fame, if I could get it. And there you have it.

Mind you, I don’t disagree with Rilke or King. But I don’t wholly agree with them either. After all, Rilke is one of the most famous Twentieth century poets and King is a multi-millionaire (and he made all his money writing).

Writing is very much about enriching the lives of others. Writing is very much about getting happy. It is also a calling, and if we’re called to it I believe we must follow that calling and not look back.

But for Mr King to write, “Writing isn’t about making money” — when, I repeat, he’s a multi-millionaire — is just a wee bit hypocritical. Keep in mind, he didn’t self-publish his books and give them away. He got a contract with a publisher and made a lot of money.

Nor do I think King is in the majority among those who currently practice, or have in the past practiced, the craft of writing fiction.

I doubt Shakespeare would have agreed with him. Bill wrote for money. I don’t think Nathaniel Hawthorne, or Louisa May Alcott would agree. They wrote for money, especially Alcott — and she made no apologies for doing so.

Anthony Trollope boldly declared his whole purpose in writing was to make money.

Edgar Wallace (he created King Kong) was in the same camp. So was Rex Stout, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Murray Leinster, Ray Bradbury, Robert Heinlein, and my late friend Jack Koblas.

Robert E Howard wanted to be a writer, he told HP Lovecraft, because it gave him freedom. What he didn’t tell Lovecraft was that a large part of that freedom was not having to work 9 to 5 to make money. Because Howard very clearly wrote for a paycheck.

Salinger didn’t like the publicity success brought, but he didn’t turn down the money. He ultimately became a recluse. Writing didn’t make him happy, apparently.

I think King is on the money about enriching lives. The books and stories I remember most are those that in some manner enriched me, usually by bringing me joy. As a reader, I want my books to bring me some manner of joy and happiness. To enrich my life.

As a writer, I want to enrich the lives of others, as well as my own. Very much so.

But I also want money, and I wouldn’t mind a little bit of fame to go along with that money. I want people to read my books and I want them to smile when they see or hear my name. Like I’m an old friend who always brings them a gift.

And I don’t think there’s anything wrong in wanting that either.

Would Shakespeare have written all those plays and enriched generations — if he hadn’t made money? We’ll never know. But he did make money and he kept on writing. That we do know.

Louisa May Alcott’s father, Bronson Alcott, was a thinker and totally inept at providing for his family. Louisa wrote because the family needed to eat and pay the rent. But millions have been enriched by Little Women.

I could go on naming author after author who has enriched our lives. And virtually all of them wrote for money. And I’m glad they did.

In the end, writing is about enriching lives. I’ve enriched a few lives with my poetry. It’s a good feeling. There’s no money in poetry. But there is fame. The poets who are the most successful enrichers, the ones who have the largest readership — are also the ones who are famous to one degree or another. If you can’t be rich, you can at least be famous.

Mr King’s statement is very noble sounding. But it’s as much a fiction as are his books.

As a reader, I want writers to make money. Making money means people are buying their books. Which most likely means they will keep on writing.

Ask yourself, you readers, how many books do you read by writers who don’t sell anything?

I asked myself that question. It started me on a crusade to champion the underdog. Those writers who aren’t getting the readers they deserve.

Today I pretty much eschew bestsellers. Those authors don’t need me. Or you, for that matter. But many excellent writers, whose books aren’t selling, do need you. They need your and my support so they will keep writing and can enrich many, many lives.

Every Monday on Facebook I post the Book of the Week. Singing the praise of an undiscovered gem. Take a look at my Facebook page and discover some very good and even excellent books and authors. Let’s help some writers make money.

Comments are always welcome. And until next time, happy reading!

Share This!
Facebooktwitterpinterest