'A writer should be invisible.' Do you agree/disagree? Why?

I disagree; instead I think that the visibility of the writer is dictated by a variety of factors. In today’s world authors are public figures, promoted by themselves or publishers in order to gain more exposure and therefore more success in their careers as writers.

Within the piece of writing itself the visibility of the writer depends on the writer, genre and readers. For example a piece of metafiction such as The Djinn and the Nightingale’s Eye, features a character that specialises in narrology. A character who can comment on the structure of stories, which makes the writer visible due to the fact the reader understands they are reading a fictional story. Other than this, the visibility of the writer is determined by the reader, the reader can infer how visible the writer is through analysis of the themes or events that take place in the writing and relating them back to the writer themselves. 

Though Barthes says in The Death of the Author that the critic is at fault and the text belongs to the reader, one who learns of the author will infer how that writer’s life or views have featured in the text. The story will always be tied to the writer; the writer will perhaps only remain invisible to those who don’t know them.

So in an age where the writer is more visible than ever thanks to their own efforts or that of others, the writer and text have become almost inseparable, for better or worse.

What influences and inspires you as a writer?

Influence and inspiration come in many forms, as a writer, influence and inspiration comes in part from viewing/reading other entertainment/information mediums from books to film and everything in between. I am influenced by these in the fact I see a good narrative or the style employed and want to emulate it. For example after reading The Hobbit whilst writing a fantasy piece, the book may influence me in such a way that I take on J.R. Tolkien’s informal, narrator’s voice which permeates the novel and foreshadows things to come.

Inspiration is distinct from influence in the fact it is not so much the desire to copy but to stimulate the imagination, to provoke the mind in such a way you develop original concepts, characters etc.  Thus, to use the same example of The Hobbit; it may inspire me to write a fantasy piece, of heroes and villains set in a mythical land of magical creatures.   

When I am influenced I am taking something or want to emulate something, when I am inspired I want to capture the essence of it, what made it powerful enough to make an impact and place it in the context of an original idea.

I am both influenced and inspired by the past and present, through experiences I have had and experiences I am having. Both affect the writer in distinctly different ways and it is the duty of the writer to remain vigilant to ensure inspiration does not become influence and influence does not become plagiarism.

It does not matter whether a writer writes about any recognisable social or political subject as long as the quality of writing exceeds expectations. (Do you agree/disagree?)

I disagree for several reasons. Whilst attention to details such as the political and societal can add authenticity, writing will not always demand it. For example a short story will probably not have the room for it and a character driven story would likely delegate less time to such issues. 

In The Swimmer by John Cheever, there is a brief moment which touches upon the fact one of the couples are suspected communists. This fleshes out the characters and frames the story clearly in the context of the height of Cold War paranoia in America. 

In regards to ‘expectations’ it is first worth noting that the expectations of authors new and old will vary wildly and it is not the fault of the author if the reader has placed unrealistic expectations on them. Then there is the question of what ‘expectations’ mean as it could refer to quality and/or content. For the former I have already explained and for the latter, why would it matter if the content i.e. themes etc don’t meet expectations? If the narrative was well written then it proves that such themes are unnecessary. A person’s expectations do not reflect the quality of writing and nor should they.

Thus I disagree with the statement, certain themes do not have to feature in writing and audience expectations are wholly irrelevant.

New Yorker Style Prose

Markus stared at the page, the black on white trying to make sense of the questions in front of him. His pen spun and twirled as his mind sought distraction, comforted by the soft tap it made as it danced through his fingers that hovered above the wooden table. In the stillness of the room every tap became ever louder and more prominent in his mind and where he had sought comfort he had created distraction. 

He put his pen down, the flash of an uncomfortable grimace as plastic hit wood. He sighed, softly mind considering the veritable wall of silence that had descended upon the hall of students so locked into their own personal battles with academia. 

He took a quick sip from the bottle of water he kept on the edge of desk, allowing his eyes to steal a glance at the rest of the room as he drank with small, measured sips. Most of the other students were deep in thought or writing, their pens scrabbling away as they rushed to fill their blank pages with whatever clarity they had achieved. He wished such clairvoyance would occur for him as he resignedly looked back towards the ever looming paper with only the smallest amount of trepidation betrayed by his lingering gaze.

Why are Cheever's short stories sometimes described as 'uniquely American'? What would make a story 'uniquely British'? Would you want to write a narrative that was uniquely identifiable with any culture?

Cheever’s short stories are sometimes described as uniquely American because his writing encapsulates small nuances and Americanisms that might be lost on readers of another culture. As well as this he features culturally, politically and socially relevant events that pertain to America and American society during the time period in which he sets a story. His writing encompasses the values of America which permeate through the characters and their relationships with one another. 

For example links to the Cold War and the paranoia surrounding communism can be found in some of Cheever’s works, such as The Swimmer. Then there are smaller things, such everyone having their own pool, something that would be unheard of in, for example a British story.

Certain themes or nuances can make a story unique to any other culture or country. Ways in which one could make a story uniquely British would be for example to have characters drinking tea, a small but definitive aspect of British culture. 

Consequently I do not so much want to write a narrative that is uniquely identifiable with a culture, as much as I feel it can be the logical thing to do. If you’re writing a story set in America you will want to give it as much authenticity as you can, so that it feels like the story has to have taken place in the location you’ve set. That you couldn’t simply pick up the characters and drop them into a different country without losing major aspects of the story and characters in the process.

Is there any place for the 'truth' in writing?

What is truth? There is the truth of the world i.e. what we acknowledge as facts, the truth of the writer in their work, or the truth that the writer has designated as true within the context of the fictional world they have created. Beyond these categories we approach the question of the existence of truth itself. What we as human beings can know of it when our truths are denoted by language we ourselves created to understand the world.

In writing the truth can be sacrificed for a stronger narrative, in the same way, the truth can be used to great effect to strengthen the narrative. The relative nature of the usefulness of truth depends entirely on the context of its inclusion. For example John Cheever’s stories seek to emulate life, to tell a story that may be fiction but is true insofar as it has realistic characters acting in realistic ways. To negate this truth in favour of, for example exaggerated emotion may damage the story creating an experience less realistic and therefore less powerful for the reader.

The truth even when included can be lost upon an audience who cannot find it buried beneath layers of subtly and metaphor. Thus truth can ultimately become subjective to the audiences’ interpretation of it, for as Nietzsche says: ‘There are no facts, only interpretations.’ This can be seen especially in the works of Emily Dickinson, being a poet she dresses up truths in metaphors that require interpretation on the part of the reader. Because she never defines what the truth of her poems are, the reader will never know with absolute certainty the truth behind her poems.

How is it I became a writer?

Unlike Cheever (at least so far) there is no necessity forcing me to write, it is something I simply slipped into, a little short story here, a poem there and before I knew it I was considering a creative writing course at university.

Still my writings meandered a lot, it is hard to say when you have become a writer, are you a writer when you are simply writing the openings to stories, which are immediately forgotten like a magpie in a jewellery shop? Or is it when you have realised that you are by definition a writer and you feel the inherent purpose that comes with it?

For example Margaret Atwood stated that; ‘most people secretly believe they themselves have a book in them, which they would write if they could only find the time.’ I prescribe to the first part of the statement, I am a writer because I have realised this is so and with due willpower have made the time, for I have stories within me and I fully intend to make them see the light of day. 

Thus I would say I became a writer simply through the enjoyment of writing, yet I define myself as a writer because I have given my writing purpose beyond the simple pleasure derived from it. That is the want to be published, because being able to share my work with an audience brings me greater pleasure still.