 |
 |
|
From
the May/June 2001 issue of The Horn Book Magazine Letters to the Editor For the past few months, I have been
surprised and puzzled to find no letters to the editor in the Horn
Book. This has always been the first section I turn to, curious
to see how readers responded to issues raised in past articles.
I would delight in noting the tremendous variety in the place of
residence of each writer. Sydelle Pearl Jennifer Armstrong (“The Writer’s Page: Blood from a Stone,” September/October 2000) insists that characters do not speak to her when she writes, and adds, “I really don’t think it happens with other writers.” I am surprised that a writer of her experience does not accept that there are as many ways of creating as there are individual creators. She favors research and planning before actually beginning to write, but others may work by just sitting down and recording whatever images, characters, dialogue, and plot twists present themselves, then filling in gaps, researching and revising as a second step. I could never work the way she does, nor would I expect her to adopt my process. Perhaps Ms. Armstrong is simply trying to show how much effort goes into the crafting of a text. Few experienced writers would argue with this. I couldn’t help feeling, however, that she is also trying to justify the control she asserts on her creative process. The surrender to the mystical part of the writer’s work is frightening, but I suspect that learning to do so leads us to great rewards, both for ourselves and our readers. Betsy Hanson
Without wishing to argue with any of the opinions in the editorial (“When Harry Met Dorothy,” January/February 2001), I do wish to take issue with the judgment of “unmistakable signs of series-itis” in the Harry Potter books. Of course, it all depends on the definition of series that is being used. I think in this case it does not include such “series” as the nineteenth-century novels that were serialized in the magazines of the day (and, of course, the term serial is generally applied to them). While some of those books may have been written deadline to deadline, that is not the way we think of them today. And I understand that J. K. Rowling has had the outline of all seven books, including plot lines and details of the characters, planned from the start. That does not necessarily free her from the charge of writing a series—does it matter if she is doing just that?—but I think it immunizes her from the diagnosis of “series-itis,” the symptoms of which surely must include: the initial shoddy desire to cash in on a good thing; a desperate search for novelty, leading to either a lack of cohesiveness or a clinging to unchanging protagonists; a growing sense in the reader of the writer’s ennui; and, to sum it up, a general lack of artistry. I wasn’t constantly enthusiastic as I read the fourth volume, but a quality I’d disliked a great deal by the time I got through the third had disappeared, and the writer’s enthusiasm for her characters and their stories was vividly evident. Second opinion, please. Katherine Adamson |
 |
  
 
  |
||||||||
