Lois’s answer to “George Eliot wrote always with a sense of failure and doom. Nabokov was fully aware of his greatnes…” > Likes and Comments
33 likes · Like
to original poster: just curious if you posed this same rhetorical question on harper lee's page
Is.. there an issue with Mr. Reitz wrote (whether it's because of what... or how he wrote it)?
Obligation? What obligation? I prefer the concept of freedom. We'd all like our favourite writers to write more, but how much they write and what is up to them. I wouldn't have it any other way.
Kevin - the issue is you don't tell an author (or anyone really) who owes YOU the reader absolutely nothing that they are under an obligation still to write. It's no one's business but the author's. We've no idea what else is going on in an author's life that means they aren't as prolific as we'd perhaps like them to be. Mr Reitz was rude.
Ahm. There is such a thing as a "noble obligation". Mr. Reitz's text seems to be more of a compliment, however constructed, than a demand or a rebuke. And as we are all aware, Lois is on a semi-retirement status, which she usually points out on similar occassions. It is true that writers seldomly can maintain the required state of mind and physique to steadily deliver two excellent, extraorinary books every year over the course of their whole life, writing beeing what it is. To me the tone of Mr. Reitz's text is joking and even galant, implying that Lois is one of these rare talents who don't flare up only occassionally. Lois has just delivered, after all. And Mr. Reitz obviously has sympathy with the heavy task of both living the retirement life and obliging the fans. (I am not assuming Lois is only writing for us, though). So... what's the fuss about?
I may have gotten my wires crossed. A close friend died last year, a powerful criminologist whose work had broad influence. She affected many thousands of lives for the better. Long before she became ill, she and I often discussed whether there was a responsibility to keep working after reaching retirement age. In some areas of public service it’s a hard question of personal and civic morality. I think Lois has contributed to the world in a profound way that will last for many generations to come. It’s not identical to reducing a state’s prison population by 40,000 souls, but it’s right up there. Art at the level of greatness changes the world, too. I believe we underestimate how much good it does.
@ Robyn... Er, the original poster, or me...?
For the record, I took the OP's remarks to be well-meaning.
L.
I hadn't previously noted your feline qualities Lois but your reply gave me the distinct impression of a cat curled up comfortably, opening one eye briefly to acknowledge praise before getting back to your own more important priorities. Well deserved; both the praise and the freedom to chart your own course. Always a pleasure when that produces another novel/la.(less)
I didn't think it was possible for me to love Lois more than I already do, but then she wrote "I don't do mornings". YES! I'd enjoy the day more if it started later, too.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Evyr
(new)
May 25, 2020 05:40PM
to original poster: just curious if you posed this same rhetorical question on harper lee's page
reply
|
flag
Is.. there an issue with Mr. Reitz wrote (whether it's because of what... or how he wrote it)?
Obligation? What obligation? I prefer the concept of freedom. We'd all like our favourite writers to write more, but how much they write and what is up to them. I wouldn't have it any other way.
Kevin - the issue is you don't tell an author (or anyone really) who owes YOU the reader absolutely nothing that they are under an obligation still to write. It's no one's business but the author's. We've no idea what else is going on in an author's life that means they aren't as prolific as we'd perhaps like them to be. Mr Reitz was rude.
Ahm. There is such a thing as a "noble obligation". Mr. Reitz's text seems to be more of a compliment, however constructed, than a demand or a rebuke. And as we are all aware, Lois is on a semi-retirement status, which she usually points out on similar occassions. It is true that writers seldomly can maintain the required state of mind and physique to steadily deliver two excellent, extraorinary books every year over the course of their whole life, writing beeing what it is. To me the tone of Mr. Reitz's text is joking and even galant, implying that Lois is one of these rare talents who don't flare up only occassionally. Lois has just delivered, after all. And Mr. Reitz obviously has sympathy with the heavy task of both living the retirement life and obliging the fans. (I am not assuming Lois is only writing for us, though). So... what's the fuss about?
I may have gotten my wires crossed. A close friend died last year, a powerful criminologist whose work had broad influence. She affected many thousands of lives for the better. Long before she became ill, she and I often discussed whether there was a responsibility to keep working after reaching retirement age. In some areas of public service it’s a hard question of personal and civic morality. I think Lois has contributed to the world in a profound way that will last for many generations to come. It’s not identical to reducing a state’s prison population by 40,000 souls, but it’s right up there. Art at the level of greatness changes the world, too. I believe we underestimate how much good it does.
@ Robyn... Er, the original poster, or me...?For the record, I took the OP's remarks to be well-meaning.
L.
I hadn't previously noted your feline qualities Lois but your reply gave me the distinct impression of a cat curled up comfortably, opening one eye briefly to acknowledge praise before getting back to your own more important priorities. Well deserved; both the praise and the freedom to chart your own course. Always a pleasure when that produces another novel/la.(less)
I didn't think it was possible for me to love Lois more than I already do, but then she wrote "I don't do mornings". YES! I'd enjoy the day more if it started later, too.
