Summer Reading (first spark of 3)

HydeAs a schoolboy, I spent my summers devouring books.  Not quite in the way Mark Strand’s “Eating Poetry” suggests, but close.  I remember treasuring the library reading cards, which most of my classmates quickly trashed or tore to spit wads.  The early cards were made of layered pasteboard and featured cartoon bears in silhouette pouring over open books with HONEY on the front.  I remember that they half absorbed the titles inked in my Martian-seeming scrawl.  Titles like The Golden Book of the Crusades, The Horse in America, Ethan Allen and His Green Mountain Boys, You Were There at the Battle of Gettysburg, Robinson Crusoe.  When I returned each volume, the librarian briskly stamped COMPLETED! on my card, and back I went to the shelves to see what other lore and thrills were available.

We had books at home, of course.  My father read Luke Short and Louis L’Amour westerns, the Perry Mason series, Christian books to help him in his Sunday School teaching, The Law of Arson and other technical books on investigation and interrogation.  A few copies of Readers Digest Condensed Books gathered dust on the shelves – Marjorie Morningstar, Youngblood Hawke, Peyton Place.  My father and his father both collected books on winning friends and displaying poise and assertiveness.  My grandfather also bought Pulitzer editions of Sandburg’s Lincoln biography series and Freeman’s Lee, which he kept locked in his barrister bookcases (prized possessions for a farming insurance man) and which I never saw him touch.

Most of the year, however, I was occupied reading textbooks and age-appropriate novels like Tom Sawyer or daunting behemoths like Oliver Twist, all in preparation for some test or summary.  But summer was freedom, the plunder of the branch and downtown libraries accessible, my parents and grandparents happy to see me playing the studious bear obsessed with honey.  After all, there were so many more unsavory sorts of mischief I might get up to.  Or so they thought.

So: summertime, the living easy, fish jumping, cotton high, nothing can harm you.  Without having heard of Sir F. Bacon, some books I tasted, some devoured, some digested thoroughly.  I even remembered a few and to this day, for nostalgia, traffic jams and a useful mirror, I keep a pocket copy of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde in my car.  Freed of what we would now call the syllabus and multiple choice questions, I chose books by their titles, their covers, their authors’ names, their smell and color and illustrations, size and typeface.  But I judged them by my own lights and was free from any responsibility to defend my choices.

Of course, my reading life has changed over the decades, and even though I get to select most of the books I read (and reread) with my students, I’m limited by what courses I’m allowed to teach (Cold Mountain with my Appalachian Lit students last fall, Hombre with my course in The Western Novel on the Page and on the Screen in the spring, Morrison’s Home last winter as a specimen for teaching my interns how to write a review).  And I have little to say about the contents of the short story manuscripts submitted to Shenandoah between September and May, little to say about their number and the pace I have to read them.  Night after night I plunge into the stacks and electronic files with hope and dread, following the Saxon recommendation to expect the best but never leave the house without my spear.  I admit that I don’t read every story from muzzle to scut.  In fact, I follow Flannery O’Connor’s regimen: “I stop when I feel I can do so without experiencing any sense of loss.”  Rough but handy, that plan.

Summer reading, however, more closely resembles childhood reading in both the whim of my choices and the sense of urgency (the living not being all that easy, after all).  “Summer’s lease hath all too short a date,” wrote Shakespeare, so I never set aside the O’Connor Rule; I may borrow or buy a book but abandon it pretty quickly, if the rewards are not swift.  Following this habit, I may never read Leviticus again.  Perhaps I should note that I certainly can’t apply this kind of triage to student essays and stories from September to May; I have to eat the whole ox, even if the first bite tells me the meat is tough. (Johnson again)

In my next entry, I’ll say a little something about some of the books I’ve read so far this summer, but anyone who’s read this far deserves a warning.  I don’t think much on the list falls into that Summer Reading/Good Beach Book category.  And nothing about zombies or super heroes, about which I suspect I already know more than I’ll ever need, even should an apocalyptic emergency arise.

BuschTeaser:
Point Omega by Don DeLillo
The Night Inspector by Frederick Busch
Life Among Giants by Bill Roorback
A Month in the Country by J. L. Carr
3 Civil War books, two collections of poems, one short story collection
(and for my comments on two books about Patsy Cline, see the last Snopes post from June)

Meanwhile, “I romp with joy in the bookish dark.”


recent-meR. T. Smith has edited Shenandoah since 1995 and serves as Writer-in-Residence at Washington & Lee. His forthcoming books are Doves in Flight: 13 Fictions and Summoning Shades: New Poems, both due in 2017.

 

A Writer’s Worthiness by Sophie Xiong

 

imagesWhat makes a writer worth our attention? What defining characteristics qualify a writer for history books? Most people would agree that a great writer must have prolific output and a unique perspective or style. After that, however, it is difficult to determine what exactly makes them valued.

When settling on a thesis topic, many people told me to shy away from Ding Ling, a Chinese woman writer, known in China for her socialist realism, and known by Western sinologists for her subjective modernism. Some said she was too political, too boring, too leftist. Others gossiped about her romantic lifestyle. Detractors called her a “bad writer,” unworthy of further research. Many compare Ding Ling to Eileen Chang, and woman from a similar time period that was able to write in the British-controlled and relatively free Hong Kong, rather than the chaos of Communist China. Others compare her to Xiao Hong, who died young, and did not get the chance to surpass Ding Ling, as their mentor Lu Xun predicted. These women were writers I was encouraged to research, because they were “good writers.” Because of a stubbornness on my part, I continued to study Ding Ling, and pondered what determines “a writer.”

Ding Ling participated the May Fourth revolution in 1919 as a teenage student rebelling against the traditional Confucian ways. During this time she discovered a passion for writing as well as the women’s movement. In 1928, she published her first popular short-story, Miss Sophie’s Diary, a ground-breaking work that bluntly detailed women’s problems from a woman’s perspective, unheard of in the strictly patriarchal society. She was immediately swathed in attention, and with this new-found power to influence, she decided to contribute to politics as well as literature. The focus of her stories slowly shifted from solitary women in the turmoil of a traditional culture’s upheaval, to a whole class of people exploited by a rotten system in process of revolution. Many literary critics from both the East and West believe the quality of her writing faded when she gave up on the subjective narrative.

Ding Ling, however, continued to write brilliant pieces that detailed the unfortunate lives of the women, the poor, and the oppressed of China in transition, even while being kidnapped by Chinese Nationalists, escaping to and working in the Chinese Communist Party base, and visiting borderland villages during wartime. After the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, she was a cultural leader figuratively and literally. She finished a novel that garnered a second place Stalin Award. Most of her writing became essays, the most famous was “Thoughts on March 8th,” a critique of the Communist Party’s treatment of women. Writing during the nascence of the People‘s Republic of China was particularly difficult, due to Mao Zedong’s general distrust of intellectuals. Ding Ling continued to fight for the importance of literature while balancing her role in the Communist Party, but after many years of political struggle, she was exiled in 1957.

Ding Ling continued to write during the following decades despite living in constant fear. Much of her writing was destroyed by police, the Red Guard, or village tormentors during the Cultural Revolution. After two decades of torture, public humiliation, imprisonment, hard labor, and solitary confinement, she was officially rehabilitated in 1979. When she came back to the public stage, many new young writers were expecting a moderate wise mentor figure because she had suffered so much for the literary cause. Instead, they were disappointed by her seemingly ultra-Leftist tendencies concerning literature and her competitiveness with new styles of writing. This coincided with a resurgence of research on Ding Ling, and the narrative was influenced by this disappointment. Undeterred, Ding Ling continued to write and was able to publish a few books and translations before dying in 1986.

Some researchers of Ding Ling dubbed her a failure. The last Western biographer of her’s, Charles Alber, believes Ding Ling will only serve as a cautionary tale for future writers. His discontent seems to lie with her behavior at the end of her life. Due to her reluctance to lay bare the facts of her personal life (she believed her life should be completely unrelated to her stories,) Alber was disillusioned with her identity as a writer.

I do not agree with Alber. A lifetime of dedication to the act of writing, as well the preservation of the art of literature, deserves attention and understanding. Her abandonment of the subjective or her extremely Leftist ways do not immediately tarnish her image as a writer. Ding Ling’s rebellious nature continued to her last years when she decided not to follow the trend of moderation. Her decision to act by writing in her own style about the Cultural Revolution (rather than the popular scar literature style) delivers in a similar manner as her pioneering first works. Ding Ling was not only a writer, but a writer worth my attention.

Readers are more than welcome to give their opinion on the matter. What makes a writer worthy of your attention?
Sophie Xiong

 

 

 


sophienewSophie Xiong is a 2011 graduate of Washington and Lee University, where she served as a Shenandoah intern.  She is a fiction writer and has recently completed a Johns Hopkins Masters Degree in China.