Of Nonfiction Blogging: Calling All 21st Century Montaignes

Creative Nonfiction magazine has been republishing blog postings in the annual W. W. Norton Best Creative Nonfiction anthologies, and will soon do the same in the magazine itself.  Nominations (even self-nominations) cheerfully accepted.

Here’s some official language:  “Please note, blog nominations will be accepted only through our online submission manager and only during specific reading periods. We are currently accepting blog nominations until August 31, 2009. We’re looking for: Vibrant new voices with interesting, true stories to tell. Narrative, narrative, narrative. Posts that can stand alone, 2000 words max, from 2009.”

For more information, or to nominate a blog, click here.

Grappling with this muddled confusing wild world …

One of our favorite writers, Brian Doyle, is briefly interviewed on the Paper Cut blog today.

Just finished a lean little novel about a guy who goes looking for his foot, which was blown off in a war a while ago. It was glorious fun to write a novel. I was always terrified of fiction — I mean, I am an essayist, and proud of it, the Ancient Clan of Essayists, we are all descended from Plutarch and Montaigne, and Orwell’s our king, and it’s hard enough to grapple with this muddled confusing wild world — but it was very freeing to commit a novel like a venial sin.

The rest of the interview here. And some of Brian Doyle’s brief grapplings here and here and here.

~~~~

Is the Essay Dead? Patrick Madden Responds

Patrick Madden, one of our favorite essayists and keeper of the exquisite Quotidiana, responds to our response to Nehring’s thoughts on what is wrong with the essay. [We welcome more responses].

I sympathize with Nehring’s lament, but I, like you, think she’s overstating a lot, which, in my opinion, is an unessayistic move. I don’t think that Montaigne was making grand proclamations; his way was very leisurely and reflexive, and subversive. He did make his way to truths, yes, so maybe that’s the more important point. Emerson, on the other hand, was a Baconian essayist, a guy with Wisdom to impart. He wrote well, had lots of great aphorisms, but he’s not the example I send my students to. My greater problem with what we call “essay” in a lot of contemporary journals jibes with Nehring’s line: “In our own day the essay is an apologetic imitation of the short story.” Writers have been doing autobiographical stories forever. But they’re stories. Essays ought to think more, to essay.

As for the Best American Essays 2007, my problem with it is much the opposite of what Nehring seems to be preaching. I find that too many of the pieces in it are overtly and uninterestingly political. They grab at current issues, state opinions, build arguments with evidence. David Foster Wallace calls them “service essays,” but I call them just articles or opinion pieces. They’re well-written, intelligent, right, etc., but they’re not essaying because their authors set out not to explore and discover but to make a predetermined point. Heck, I largely agree with their points (war is bad, torture is bad, George W. Bush is a knucklehead), but I don’t think we should be calling them essays.

Meanwhile, I think there are plenty of great essays being written, but they’re not widely read, and that IS too bad.

Is the Essay Dead?

I don’t really agree with a lot of what Christina Nehring has to say in her recent anti-essay rant, but I am intrigued by this:

The problem, of course, is not merely our essayists; it’s our culture. We have grown terribly—if somewhat hypocritically—weary of larger truths. The smarter and more intellectual we count ourselves, the more adamantly we insist that there is no such thing as truth, no such thing as general human experience, that everything is plural and relative and therefore undiscussable.

Well, yes! I actually do agree here.

And the rant is worth a read, even if only to define where and when you think she is over-stating .

– Dinty