Saturday, September 23, 2006

Defending the Pilgrim at Tinker Creek

We read Annie Dillard's Pilgrim at Tinker Creek. It was a tough, actually painful, evening for me at times. Some of the book club members thought Dillard was just rambling, filling the pages with a bunch of stuff so she could publish a book. It's not that I'm a huge Dillard fan, but the book has so much to offer, so many pearls:

"the microscope at my forehead is a kind of phylacter, a constant reminder of the facts of creation that I would just as soon forget"

"We little blobs of soft tissue crawling around on this one planet's skin are right, and the whole universe is wrong"

*The interwoven themes of shadow, spirit, nature, creation, beauty

*The amazing descriptions of giant waterbugs (who eats a whole frog--and, no, I don't care if she saw it or not), coots (those "singularly stupid birds"), spiders, trees, horsehair worms (who eat its prey from inside out)...

Ultimately I'm glad our book club is a diverse group (i.e. not just a bunch of English majors) but it's hard not to fall into the defending-literature-English-teacher mode. I certainly don't mind criticisms of Dillard and have some of my own; I just have to realize it's unfair to expect complete engagement from everyone: to be familiar with the tradition she invokes (Emerson, Thoreau); to be in the mindset it requires to meditate over her rambling insights; to understand that Dillard's not trying to write a biology textbook on bugs and animals...

Often I go to book club full of criticism but then I wind up defending the book because it seems many are suggesting there's nothing redeeming. It's interesting that English folks get tagged as being too critical (and this may be true at times)yet often the "English major" or the person who has read quite a bit can be a very forgiving reader, a reader seeking meaning, a reader more able to access that meaning maybe. I'm still not sure if this is mostly about training or disposition. Probably some of both but training must factor in.

Ultimately this speaks to the gulf between teachers and students. It speaks to helping students see that the act of criticism can be a gift, a way of appreciating pop culture and that the enjoyment of "texts" can be increased through knowledge of traditions, genres, conventions, language, and history. These things are accessible; it's not just for the elite; it's not about brilliance but about attention. Many of my students can quote the texts we read much more easily than I can (and I've often read them several times) but often they are unaware of which lines or themes require their attention.

9 comments:

middlebrow said...

I get irritated when people are completely dismissive of something. I dismiss them.

middlebrow said...

Of course, you have to pull the classic English prof trick: if you (you being the student, or in this case, fellow book club members) don't get the text, then there's something wrong with you.

Lisa B. said...

Interesting post. It's why I hate--and this is a weakness in me, I recognize, a character flaw--discussing books, movies, etc. that I totally love, because it hurts--it actually hurts and the hurt persists!--when people disagree. I spend enormous amounts of psychic energy defending stuff I love in my mind, holding forth (in my mind), arguing (in my mind), etc. I was having lunch with a friend and I tentatively asked, "did you like 'Pride and Prejudice'? (the K. Knightley one) 'I did like it,' she replied. 'I loved it,' I tentatively ventured. 'I loved it, too,' she said. Neither of us wanted to venture our love for the film until we were sure we wouldn't be derided for it. Not exactly what you're talking about, I realize, but related, perhaps.c

Counterintuitive said...

The pain is real. It seems we are like the proselytizing missionaries whose hearts ache for the people. Please please come unto Dillard and see the beauty of her crafted sentences.

Dr. Write said...

People just aren't close readers. It's why The Da Vinci Code sells and sells. I'm having a hard time getting my fiction students, whom you would think would be close readers, to step back from the story/plot and see the craft. So when there is no plot, per se, you know, readers get bored.
It's fun to be in a book club with other literary types. Then when you really hate a book, you can bitch.

Counterintuitive said...

Yes, it does come down to plot. Without traditional plot many readers are lost. Again, I'm unsure how much one can teach others to focus on craft. To a degree if there is desire but this "ability" also seems caught up in who we are, what we believe, how we see the world, and how we evaluate beauty and worth.

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that maybe the book wasn't appropriate for the book club. It has been a while since I read P at TC (and I enjoyed it) but not being a "literary type", that's not what I would have chosen to read. But I also wouldn't expect a book club of my friends to read what I am currently reading (a little bit of economics, social theory and magical realism). If you want to discuss "craft" maybe your book club should be made up of people who are just like you.

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that maybe the book wasn't appropriate for the book club. It has been a while since I read P at TC (and I enjoyed it) but not being a "literary type", that's not what I would have chosen to read. But I also wouldn't expect a book club of my friends to read what I am currently reading (a little bit of economics, social theory and magical realism). If you want to discuss "craft" maybe your book club should be made up of people who are just like you.

Clint Gardner said...

I really like to wrangle over texts with folks in cases like this. I too pull out an old English teacher trick at times: "What if the purpose of the text is to make you hate it." That always brings about a good discusison, even if it is a bit dodgy in the authorial-intent sense.