Rote gibes in the early going directed at whatever it is that the author thinks of as "capitalism" made me unreceptive, but then I have to admit that the author does say a lot of useful things about writing. Perhaps can't help it that he spends a lot of time in campus environment? [As the book goes on, annoying comments about climate change activism, gender/class, "my truth" as a useful concept - pretty much the entire catechism. Why are politics even invoked? Whatever, the book remains quite useful.]
_____________
He head-on addresses in a useful way (first at page 102) something we've noticed and talked about but not really nailed down -
--that the appreciation of an art work at its deepest level happens when there is that instant of recognition that something special, or moving, is hitting us; and we can ride that for a while depending on the nature of the art work (and what's happening in the immediate environment - distractions?)
--that instant is somewhat sharable without words - the knowing look at another contemporaneous observer - we know there is some element of sharing but cannot know the extent of the overlap of our respective appreciations. which is fine.
--that moment will fade away every time . . . we may remember aspects of it, and we definitely will remember that it happened
--often it's followed by an attempt to verbalize or write down what was experienced (what I sometimes am trying to do in a weak way here in this blog). sometimes we do a decent job of that, but we (I don't think it's just me but who knows) always and quickly get the feeling that our words are mostly failing to express the experience
--which is interesting in itself. humans have developed this marvelous capacity for language, and for writing things down to speak across geography and years. And it's super-valuable. But - as valuable as words are - the "words cannot express" concept is real. Everyone knows/accepts it.
--the "instant of recognition/appreciation" is the best moment - better than the subsequent point at which we try our hardest to share via words - Proust/Mann as great at trying to put that experience into words but I don't recall, or didn't pick up, how they made this point. (Mann with music in Doctor Faustus; Proust with Elstir/painting, Bergotte/writing, Berma/acting, Vanteuil/composing)
Turgenev in "The Singers" - the reaction of the sharp-eyed innkeeper's wife (the author is telling us by this adjective that she's not sentimental or easily-swooned) - as soon as the second singer got going, she immediately "drew herself up to her full height" - eventually had to leave the room (we conclude because the performance was so striking). Wow - a wonderful way to tell us about the quality of the music via an observer's reaction - we all know that feeling even if we can't put it into words. Turgenev's description of other listeners also good but I thought this was the best.
_______________________
"Pattern stories" - where repeat certain elements but with variation and escalation - I often think this exact thought with the piano works that I try to learn. Those works are relatively short, just a few minutes - I think they can be fairly compared to short stories - these piano works introduce a theme, it comes back but escalates. Interesting. (This was "The Darling" by Chekhov.) (Also true of larger musical works but I don't play those on piano.)
_______________________
Master and Man - a story I've loved for decades. Author telling us how Tolstoy wrote with "facts" - I'll try to watch for this. Then the author annoys me with early 21st century "woke" criticism (about treatment of the peasant) - I'm pretty sure that criticism won't age as well as Tolstoy's story.
the moment when the "master" decides to take action - so powerful; it creates that "instant of recognition." The build-up pays off, immensely.
reminders of "The Death of Ivan Ilych."
__________________________
Gogol's "The Nose" - I find it worthless. And I find worthless the author's effort to explain why it's not worthless. (I also didn't much like "The Overcoat", but found "Dead Souls" great, so who knows.)
___________________________
The remaining stories and commentary not as striking.
___________________________
More generally - made me think why I don't read a lot of short stories - maybe because, like poetry, they often make the reader work harder? My habit is to rather rapidly read extended novels or history - I'm steadily rewarded with interesting or perhaps even moving passages that don't so much require me to stop and think; constantly presented with something new. I do believe this is my problem with poetry, something to work on. Short stories less of a problem, there are quite a few that I like a great deal.
