Skip to main content

Fiction Writing Class: Week 1


So last night was my first fiction writing class proper. I've sat in on my wife's workshops and tried some of the activities that were used in this class, but this is the first time I have sat in the room for four hours and done all the activities and in-class writing with a roomfull of writing students. There will be fourteen more classes like this, and as I said near the beginning of the class, my goals for this class areas follows:
"I have a lot of starts and slightly longer pieces of creative non-fiction based on memories of my childhood. Some of these have strayed into fiction after beginning with a real memory. I have used a lot of the shorter pieces in my visual art, too -- videos with voice over, audio recordings, even performance. But so far I feel that I haven't gone as deeply as I could with this material. So I want to use this class to explore what comes out when I try different forms, ways of telling, ways of seeing a story. I want to be completely open to where the writing takes me. If that's fiction, if it leads to something that I'm not aware of yet, I want to see what that is, what it sounds like. I also know that there are talented writers in this class, and I want to use the listening part of the activities to feed into my own writing, too. I don't even necessarily want to end up with a 'done' or finished piece, though that would be nice: just getting a good start on the voyage will be great."
The class is called Fiction Writing, but I believe that the Fiction Writing Department's teaching method, called the Story Workshop approach, is designed for people to find their voice in any genre or form. I've sat beside teachers who use this approach, and have used elements of it myself in teaching journal and sketchbook. But this was the first time I've been able to immerse myself in it and direct it to my own writing. First of all, everyone sits in a tight semicircle with the instructor on the diameter line. No hierarchies, no front of class and back of class. Everyone sees everyone else's face. Everyone becomes the audience for everyone else, like the first storytellers around the giant fire. That might sound poncey, but in practice it works.

The activities in the first class went like this (as far as I can recall): a listening exercise, starting with close-to sounds, moving out to the street, then to action, gesture, a moment of story; an activity called One Word, in which you go around the circle putting forth the first word that comes to mind -- but I noticed the instructor very cleverly led us eventually towards objects, verbs, smells; taking a place from some story material, seeing it in the mind, trying to place other people's "object words" in that place; telling a moment from that place you're seeing in the mind; writing the moment of scene that emerges from all these imaginative word based activities; reading back what you wrote to the rest of the group. Then lots of reading and writing assignments for the next class. Homework! I haven't had to do homework in over twenty years!

One of the main differences between this Story Workshop and the more conventional writing workshop is there is no handing around fourteen copies of your first drafts to be vivisected by your peers. I know that some people miss that if they come to Columbia College's fiction writing classes from that kind of workshop, but having experienced both kinds of teaching close-up, I am convinced that this one ultimately trusts the writer more. But I don't even need to generalize: I can just say that already, after one class in which I reconnected with a piece of writing that I started last year, I saw more in the scene than I did before last night's class.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On my 300th blog post

Crikey!

It's my 300th blog post. And I seem to remember that in my 200th blog post I said that I would start quoting from John Ruskin's "Praeterita", after which this blog was named. Well, better late then never, so quotation number 2 is below.

First, though, some thoughts on this blog and blogging in general. I started Praeterita at the end of last year after reading a book by an art-marketing guru called Alyson Stansfield that recommended it as a means for artists to publicise their work better. But from the start I thought it would be more interesting to talk in a discursive way about my wider interest in art, and artists, and the history of art. After a desultory beginning where I only posted once a week, my blogging habit has now grown to the point where I am posting sometimes twice a day, and more than 45 times per month (helped enormously by the Blogger feature that lets you save blog posts with a post-dated timestamp, so that you can put posts in the bank to …

My worst open studio

Most open studios are notable for nothing really happening. You sit there waiting for people to come into your studio, eat all your nibbles and guzzle the free drink, and then leave after a cursory glance at your work. Usually, the worst thing that happens is that you get stuck in a boring conversation with a dull person,

But there was one time a few years ago when I got into one of these conversations, and quite quickly the person I was talking to started to make homophobic remarks about another artist in the building. After a few minutes, I decided I'd had enough and asked him to leave. He seemed genuinely surprised that I had any objection to what he was saying, which in retrospect makes me even angrier if he thought he had a sympathetic ear.

He asked me why, and I told him I didn't like people talking that way, and I said: "This conversation ended 30 seconds ago." So he left.

So, nothing dramatic like Jackson Pollock getting drunk in a fancy New York apartment a…

Van Gogh on Degas

From a letter dated July 31, 1888:
“Why do you say Degas can’t get it up properly? Degas lives like some petty lawyer and doesn’t like women, knowing very well that if he did like them and bedded them frequently, he’d go to seed and be in no position to paint any longer. The very reason why Degas’s painting is virile and impersonal is that he has resigned himself to being nothing more than a petty lawyer with a horror of kicking over the traces. He observes human animals who are stronger than him screwing and f—ing away and he paints them so well for the very reason that he isn’t all that keen on it himself.”
Subscribe to Praeterita in a reader