Snowed in today, home from work and writing. Which means, of course, staring out the window at the endless snow blanketing cars, rooftops, trees. I have not found much time to write lately, so I am grateful. I met with my writers' group again last Sunday, submitted a sample chapter from the book that they critiqued. It was like open heart surgery. I'm not sure I was/am ready, should probably have considered the possibility that it was a terrible idea, although I think the input will prove helpful in the long run.

I have considered sharing some novel excerpts on my blog, but I figure the writing is much too young, and I would much rather talk about my writing than share the actual writing itself. Furthermore, it's really important to establish a safe space within which to share. The internet is kind of like a bus station and I would never write in public. (Funny story, I once rented a room from a writer who did an art installation in which he lived/wrote a novel in a gallery for a month before an audience. Interesting.)

Thanks for the comments on the previous blog. I am glad some folks agree with me, but I wanted to be clear about something. To borrow a phrase from my women writer's workshop, I will say that Uwem Akpan's book "didn't work for me." It worked for Oprah and, doubtless, millions of others, just not me. That doesn't make it a bad book not worth reading, it just makes it a book I didn't enjoy. I'm not telling you not to buy it, I'm encouraging you to read it and decide for yourself.

There are no good or bad books. People who say that there are usually have an agenda. I think that each book represents a writer's effort and courage to impart their view of the real or imaginary world. That makes the experience of reading infinitely valuable, allowing us to tap into our shared humanity even if a particular book falls short of our expectations.

Some people question Oprah's choices, and I'm occasionally among them, but I think her choices are valid even though she may not pick the books that I would. What she says is, Hey, this book really worked for me and I think you should read it. So we all go out and buy it, then decide for ourselves whether it works for us or not. (Without her, I would never have known that there was a Jesuit priest from Ikot Ekpene with an MFA who writes short stories! Amazing.) She gets us reading and I think it's a very good thing.

If we acknowledge the prevalence of poverty p*rn and other such literary trends, the answer is not that so-and-so's book should not be published or read, it is for us to read and write more, to language ourselves, to create more alternatives. Bit by bit we will dispel the myths and understand each other better.

I think it can be really dangerous for people (myself included, of course) to criticize what they haven't labored to produce. Making art is not an easy, impartial, or democratic process. It is personal, subjective, emotional, and largely biased by a singular point-of-view. You can't any more criticize it than you can a human being for having a different perspective than your own.

That said, when we look at the larger patterns of mainstream media, the stereotypical perspectives promoted and advanced, we might criticize the powers for their choices. And I definitely think that's valid. But respect should always be paid to the artists.

The courage it takes to write even one word deserves a measure of respect. (And I should have given the man props for being an Akwa Ibomite!) I think his writing is important even if it doesn't work for me. I would be interested in following him over time.

Am I making sense? I hope so. I will try to be more constructive in the future.