I will admit that this book was a hard one to read for me but I wanted to persist with it because it was recommended to me by a friend and, despite the fact that I don’t agree with a lot of the things said, I am glad that I read it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I found myself carrying on a dialogue of sorts with book — it gave me a foil against which I could sharpen my own idea of what it means to be a writer and what the art of writing is for me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There were some ideas that I liked a lot but in more than one essay I felt that he had me on board for most of the time and then let me down at the end by kind of wimping out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Stafford seemed somewhat uncomfortable with his role as a teacher of writing and as an essayist, which I can understand, given that what I took to be his main philosophy being based upon techniques that shy away from the idea of technique. It is almost as if Stafford is advocating a hands off approach to his writing — a respect for the natural processes; an unwilling to codify specific practices.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As I say, some of what he said really resonated with him — some of it did not. His insistence (perhaps too strong a word given the general tone of the book) on a lack of intent in the writer went well with his egoless approach to everything but after a while seemed to make the writer almost incidental to his work. Stafford was self-deprecating to such a degree that it is amazing he ever managed to put out as much writing as he did. Perhaps I misunderstood him but I don’t think i went away from this book without learning a few things.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For me the views of Stafford were better served and crystallised into something more robust in the section which collected various interviews with the man. I would have liked more examples of his poetry included and I have to say that following this I am interested to actually read more of his actual work.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"