Scan barcode
A review by dsuttles
From Where You Dream: The Process of Writing Fiction by Robert Olen Butler
3.0
For all those who revere postmodern theory, “From Where You Dream” will both inspire and infuriate. Butler is a successful fiction writer who shares some valuable insights about his own craft, and his creative way of piecing together seemingly random, dreamed-up scenes on the structural level is definitely reflective of postmodern literary movement. But in the same lectures, he undermines the diversity of processes that exist among story tellers by arguing there are "fundamental truths" which separate literature from non-literature, thus reinforcing limited and dualistic perspectives on art.
Butler argues that artists are sensualists, not intellectuals. He immediately adopts a traditional perspective on the nature of art and intellectualism that is quite alienating to the contemporary aspiring writer – that art and intellectualism are two polar opposites, antithetical concepts that necessary repel each other. What Butler does not consider is that intellectualism is fed by experience – the information we process through our senses. Our ideas (a word which he strongly rejects) are born from what we hear, what we smell, what we see and touch and taste. Intellectualism, therefore, can be deeply sensual, emotional, etc. Indeed, cultural studies are a beautiful example of intellectualism that rises from lived experience and story telling!
What Butler should state is that our *intentions* as artists shape the heart of our work. When you approach a project, whether it be a painting or a novel or a poem, and you aim to win accolades, your work falls flat. When you create a story because you want to be a “writer” or “meaningful,” it almost necessitates that your work deflates. What Butler wants his pupils to understand is that when they set out to write a story, it should come naturally and organically from a part of them that earnestly desires to create (or, rather, recreate) experience. Indeed, they shouldn't "set out" to write a story at all, but rather allow the story to emerge from their inner self. This is a powerful concept!
Yet should a story about a man who yearns to kill another man emerge from your inner self, you're writing "entertainment fiction." This is because the desire (or *yearning*) of your character is base in nature, limited to a low-brow cultural plane. If, on the other hand, a story about a man searching for his connection to the other or his self, you're writing "true" literature, artistic prose of the higher plane. Butler distinguishes unabashedly between the works of Stephen King and Charles Dickens, Ernest Hemingway and Jean Paul Sartre. He doesn't explore the possibility for overlap or ambiguity.
As a result of his own black and white approach to reading and writing prose, Butler traps himself in contradiction. On the one hand, he urges for pure, visceral reaction to literature -- but on the other hand, he provides scholarly analysis of different works to demonstrate this point. Another example...On the one hand, Butler pushes students to write in an unconscious trance-like state, but then penalizes them for their natural inclination toward statements and descriptions that are less than glorified "moment-to-moment" imaginings of sensual detail.
Ultimately, I *was* deeply impacted by Butler’s teachings. I honestly couldn't put this book down because his forceful approach is so absorbing. Butler himself speaks from his “white-hot center” and I appreciate the teacher who walks their own talk. In the same measure, however, I take issue with the way Butler approaches his students and the global community of readers and writers. I would have appreciate Butler's teachings so much more if they weren't presented as the penultimate means of producing *real* art, however Butler chooses to define it.
Butler argues that artists are sensualists, not intellectuals. He immediately adopts a traditional perspective on the nature of art and intellectualism that is quite alienating to the contemporary aspiring writer – that art and intellectualism are two polar opposites, antithetical concepts that necessary repel each other. What Butler does not consider is that intellectualism is fed by experience – the information we process through our senses. Our ideas (a word which he strongly rejects) are born from what we hear, what we smell, what we see and touch and taste. Intellectualism, therefore, can be deeply sensual, emotional, etc. Indeed, cultural studies are a beautiful example of intellectualism that rises from lived experience and story telling!
What Butler should state is that our *intentions* as artists shape the heart of our work. When you approach a project, whether it be a painting or a novel or a poem, and you aim to win accolades, your work falls flat. When you create a story because you want to be a “writer” or “meaningful,” it almost necessitates that your work deflates. What Butler wants his pupils to understand is that when they set out to write a story, it should come naturally and organically from a part of them that earnestly desires to create (or, rather, recreate) experience. Indeed, they shouldn't "set out" to write a story at all, but rather allow the story to emerge from their inner self. This is a powerful concept!
Yet should a story about a man who yearns to kill another man emerge from your inner self, you're writing "entertainment fiction." This is because the desire (or *yearning*) of your character is base in nature, limited to a low-brow cultural plane. If, on the other hand, a story about a man searching for his connection to the other or his self, you're writing "true" literature, artistic prose of the higher plane. Butler distinguishes unabashedly between the works of Stephen King and Charles Dickens, Ernest Hemingway and Jean Paul Sartre. He doesn't explore the possibility for overlap or ambiguity.
As a result of his own black and white approach to reading and writing prose, Butler traps himself in contradiction. On the one hand, he urges for pure, visceral reaction to literature -- but on the other hand, he provides scholarly analysis of different works to demonstrate this point. Another example...On the one hand, Butler pushes students to write in an unconscious trance-like state, but then penalizes them for their natural inclination toward statements and descriptions that are less than glorified "moment-to-moment" imaginings of sensual detail.
Ultimately, I *was* deeply impacted by Butler’s teachings. I honestly couldn't put this book down because his forceful approach is so absorbing. Butler himself speaks from his “white-hot center” and I appreciate the teacher who walks their own talk. In the same measure, however, I take issue with the way Butler approaches his students and the global community of readers and writers. I would have appreciate Butler's teachings so much more if they weren't presented as the penultimate means of producing *real* art, however Butler chooses to define it.