This week is eating me alive. Sorry is posting becomes sporadic for the rest of the month.
So quickly: Philip Pullman hates books written in present tense. That's cool. I hate narrow-minded people. You know, though, Pullman makes some valid points. But the deal is that present tense books have a place in the literary world. Especially YA. Pullman laments the lack of scope in present tense but that's the point and it's why it's so prevalent in YA. That's because teens often don't give a damn about the scope of their actions. They're tightly focused on their own lives. I know I was. I didn't think about my actions in a broader sense when I was that age. Shit, I still often done. But writing in that limited fashion helps teens connect to those particular stories.
I guess everyone's entitled to their opinions. And who knows, maybe next year we'll all be saying, "Pullman was right!" but I think to essentially dismiss a book because of the tense it uses is a bit narrow minded.
There's also be a huge Twitter campaign with the #Speak hashtag because some total nutjob wanted to ban the book SPEAK and TWENTY BOY SUMMER, claiming that speak, a book about rape, is pornography. Anyway, I've got a finger for Mr. Scroggins, the gentleman who posted the complaint, but I'd probably get in trouble for posting it. In the meantime, stand up for banned books. No one should be allowed to ban books. If you don't like them, don't read them. If you don't think other people should read them, explain to them why and then step back and let them decide for themselves. But never ever believe that you have the right to decide for someone else. That's just ridiculous.
Um...yeah. Not much else. This rambling post was brought to you by coffee.
His name is Mr Scroggins? Like his REAL name?? Reminds me of Mr Scrooge. Bah, humbug.
ReplyDeleteLOL I agree with Looksie...
ReplyDeleteYou need cake? I do cakes. What kind you want? Got some pics up. winsandwoes.blogspot.com
No one should be allowed to ban books. If you don't like them, don't read them. If you don't think other people should read them, explain to them why and then step back and let them decide for themselves. But never ever believe that you have the right to decide for someone else.
ReplyDeleteWise words! I wish more people thought like that.
Past tense is limited, too, because it has an inherent barrier against immediacy.
ReplyDeleteBlanket dos and do-nots are a waste of time for any art, including writing.
I don't know about that. I've hardly ever felt, while reading a book, "Boy, if only this book were in the present tense. I'd feel that everything was so much more immediate."
ReplyDeletePresent tense kind of bugs me. Few writers do it well. The only writer I can think of who does it particularly well is Updike, and I STILL find it jarring. In the later Rabbit novels particularly he either ditches it or masks it.
But certainly to each their own. I just personally share Pullman's opinion.
Looksie: I know, right? Someone said he sounded like he should be the head of Slytherin house.
ReplyDeleteBabydoll: Wait, I don't see any cake!
Fairyhedgehog: I think people should be more concerned with themselves and stop worrying about others. Sadly they don't.
C.N.: I remember always hearing in writing classes NEVER to do this or ALWAYS to do that. You're totally right about blanket statements.
Joe: You're totally right that few people do it really well. I also don't disagree that present tense is a bit faddish right at the moment. What I take issue with is his dismissal of all present tense books because he doesn't like it. I personally can't stand books in the second person, yet Charles Benoit's book YOU was really well done and an example what a great writer can do with something different.