Click on the link below and read Ghosh's blog about how literary festivals and other public engagements are changing the ways in which writers and readers interact, and the implications for their roles in the writing / reading process. Personally, I cherish meeting writers and every chance I get I like my students to meet with them, too. Our first Trinidad and Tobago literary festival (Bocas Lit Fest 2011) was an awesome experience.
However, Ghosh raises some valid points. What is your response to what he says?
http://amitavghosh.com/blog/?p=2361
I appreciate and understand all Amitav Ghosh has expressed and he has indeed made some food for thought. I have ever attended a Literature Festival but I imagine I would share the views of Dr. Skeete. While Ghosh postulates that in some way the author may view "attendance to be equivalent to approbation" . Personally, this may or may not be the case, and if it were then it would simply be the thoughts and the freedom of the author to think such. After all, a person will seldom waste his/her time to meet with someone who (s) he despised. Personally, this opportunity will afford the readers to meet and converse with the authors that they have only known about in paper. Ghosh also attests that reading a novel is a relationship between the novel and the readers but I cannot see how this avenue of meeting the author will in any way take away from that relationship. After all, there is some truth in almost everything, even lies. The author would have based the accounts if not on his life, his community , his culture or his beliefs..... In any way it is somehow related to him. The author is in some way acting as the mask for the characters in the novel and how would the story be told if the vessel did not exist. I do think that there is something exciting about meeting the authors of the novels that we read. It is like meeting the prodigy behind any work of art, like the signature on a priceless piece of art.
ReplyDeleteThanks for starting us off on this topic with such a deep and thoughtful response, Marilyse. Let's see what others have to say.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI can also attest to the fact that I found Amitav Ghosh's article enlightening and filled with pertinent issues. I would also love to meet the authors of the novels I have read to express my appreciation and question their technique and style. I can, however see Ghosh's view point. A good literary piece should be appreciate for what it is without the influence of the author. An author's work is infact related to his or her experiences,observations and to some extent his or her imagination. That in it self, is not debatable, but it is my personal opinion that the interpretation of the piece should be up to the reader. Gaddis puts it nicely when he states that books should have a life of their own and the relationship between the reader and the text is a sacred one. Human beings tend to have difficulty in separating man from his work.. in all situations one may not necessarily be the extension of the other. Meeting the author may add clarity to his or her work on one hand and diminish the reader's personal experience with the text on the other. The issue of Salman Rushdie being prohibited to attend the festival highlighted how fortunate we are in the western world and the true meaning of 'free expression'. The fact that words in a book can create social unrest is a testimony of its power. I truly see the value in meeting authors but I rather enjoy the relationship between myself and the text without the presence of a third party.
ReplyDeleteOnce again we can see how a critic can bring one to a new perspective on a subject. I have never thought about Ghosh's point before and it was truly enlightening. I am always opened to new thoughts on issues and Ghosh's perspective made me see things on an entirely different level on the subject of readers and writers meeting each other. I agree with what he says to an extent. Yes the novel should in no way be influenced by the writer in terms of its interpretation and meeting the writer may do this as one may ask questions on the novel and expect answers..which i may add is not right because we all know that although a writer may compose a piece,it does not mean that he/she may have the answers for them as it may not necessarily be from his personal views... and this may cause conflict if the reader is not satisfied with the writer's response etc. The writer should never come between the reader and the piece else the entire purpose of the novel has not been met. However it would be nice to express appreciation to a writer..praise should always be given where praise is due. And i am looking forward to meeting many of my favourite writers when the opportunity arises.
ReplyDeleteI see Ghosh's point and agree with him-the main interaction is between the reader and the book not between the writer and the reader. Meeting with the writer may or may not influence the reading but I feel that the whole idea of "let's go meet the author" is more PR work that would add to the commercial value rather than have any actual bearing on the value of the novel. The literary festival is somewhere to go to see and be seen but ultimately the reading should be a deeply personal experience strictly between the book and the reader and the writer should not intrude on these moments.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I'm not sure what to think. I agree that readers have a relationship with the book and not the author, but sometimes one must think about the author while reading. Quite often I wonder what a writer was thinking or experiencing in order to have produced their work and I wonder in the end what kind of person they are.
ReplyDeleteI've never really wanted to meet any of the authors I've read though, because that would shatter the images and memories I have of the books. I don't want to meet Stephen King or Dean Koontz or Toni Morrison beacause the worlds they created in my mind would become less real/ believable to me. I also don't believe that writers should have to be bombarded by fans from all sides, trying to get into their private lives and get a hold of the workings of their brilliant minds. Unless of course the writer wants that sort of attention.
On the other hand however, by actually meeting an author, a reader might be able to better grasp what that writer was trying to portray through their work. There is also probably a great amount of knowledge that can be gained from meeting a literary artist in the flesh.
The relationship between a reader and writer can have advantages as well as disadvantages. That's all I can say really.
When you read a book, you enter into that reality and lose yourself in it. This is where the reader and the text meet and this is the ultimate goal of the writer, to engage the reader. Although the trend is to have PR meetings bridging the gap between the writer and reader and that it is important to know a bit about the author but I believe that meeting them would blur that reality created in the novel because in the back of your mind you would connect the writer with the book thereby breaking the barrier between the world created and our reality. There also instances where mediocre writers are elevated, writers whose work show little or no creative effort. This could be either because of lack of talent or due to impositions put to them to change certain elements that is not believed to be in keeping with the fake utopia. If the latter, it would limit the freedom of expression and has the makings of society whereby everything is being controlled, even freedom of thought.
ReplyDeleteOpinions, opinions...I have read the article and can see Ghosh's point, yet I totally disagree. For those who wish to meet their readers, great, for those who don't, all the best to them. As a child I thouroughly enjoyed the books I read and cared little about the author. As I grew older I must admit that I would have given anything to meet certain writers.For some it may be just a show and an attempt by publishers to boost sales, but for others the knowledge that you have touched someone at the core of their being and the expressions of thanks from others whose story was told though the author never met them, must be rewarding. The fact that a book may never reach our hands because of the ratings of a critic or the lack of backing from the 'Time magazine' or some other great "spokesperson". The story of the "Kaffir Boy" by Mark Mathabane was the first widely published auto biographies to come out of South Africa by a native. Two of his family members were killed shortly after but he could not risk the world forgetting what was happening there. He continued to travel and talk about his book and life trying to force the world to notice and America to help. An authors' voice at a lit. festival can stir people and generate/create new audiences. Visit these festivals while you still have the freedom to.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with Gosh's opinion that the relationship should remain between the reader and the writing. A couple of years ago i had the opportunity of meeting the author of a novel that was really close to my heart for many years, but i walked away from that book signing very disappointed. It had the effect diminishing my love for the book because i could not separate her attitude during the event from my feelings about the novel. In retrospect she may simply have been tired or having a bad day, but for me the damage was done. My relationship with the characters within those pages was destroyed.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, there is no relevance in meeting the writer of a book. It wouldnt change my outlook of a book in any way.Because the writer is supposed to sell himself through his writing.
ReplyDeleteFor example, if I read a book that, to me, was dull and uninteresting, and I somehow get the opportunity to meet the writer of that particular book, it wouldn't change anything, He/She could be the most bubbly and interesting person in the world, yet it wouldn't change my outlook of his/her dull and uninteresting book.
a writer should be able to carry across his story in the clearest form possible to hold a reader's attention and should write in a way in which the reader will understand. however if i do get to meet the writer my opinion of the book may not change because the book still stands as it is, although after being enlightened by the author i may understand and change my opinion on the story line not the book
ReplyDeleteAmitav Ghosh does make some interesting points about the way writers and readers may interact with one another. It must be noted however that not everyone may like literary festivals simply because a) the person is not interested in meeting the author or b) critics opinions on a book that one may like. I must say that for myself however I never really thought about the implications for the author’s role in the writing and reading process since I believe that this job is best left up to the agents, editors and publishing houses.
ReplyDeleteGosh's view that the relationship should remain between the reader and the writer is true. If the truth be told, just because I like a book, that doesn't mean I care to meet the writer. My relationship with the author is a LITERARY one. His/her books are his/her contract with me. That's our friendship. A writer has to make him/herself clear enough so people can be enticed. The writer's personality has nothing to do with the work they produce. Sometimes meeting the person is beneficial, but ultimately, that won't serve the LITERARY purpose. After all, you're a writer, not a popular friend-friend person, right?
ReplyDeleteMr. Ghosh has placed this perspective in a whole new light, the behavior of Mr. Gaddis must have been very shocking to him, but what the author said is very true, “books should have lived of their own” on the other hand times have changed and thanks to Globalization it is now a small world after all, the writer can no longer maintain his privacy and so it should be a matter of choice for both . If a writer chooses to meet his reading public and listen to their opinions that’s his prerogative if he chooses not to like Mr. Gaddis he should also be respected. I would not want to meet the authors of all the books I have read but I would be fascinated to meet a few.
ReplyDelete