Contrafactual lit crit. What would CAS's writing have been like if he'd had children? More "positive"...? Less "necrocentric"...? Better? Worse? Or just... DIFFERENT?

Quote:

Cyril Connolly, "Enemies of Promise"
There is no more sombre enemy of good art than the pram in the hall.

To have children was not his cosmic destiny. That would not have been CAS, but a completely different person.

Generally though, artists having children might perhaps steer their work into being more socially conformist, and children also increase their need for commercial success thus sacrificing some of their ideals if that means it can sell more.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 22 Jun 11 | 09:19AM by Knygatin.

No one could accuse CAS of being socially conformist, but he did have a need for financial success. As I understand it, one of the main reasons he began writing for the pulps was because he needed to provide for his ailing parents. What I find fascinating about Smith's situation is the tension between his artistic and commercial goals.

His correspondence with colleagues is littered with complaints about the demands and vagaries of editors (Farnsworth Wright and David Lasser, to name only two) and his concomitant exasperation at being asked to insert more scenes of 'ekshun' and chaste romance. He would revise his stories, but only up to a point--beyond that he would not go.

Given his situation, who could blame him for grinding out formula stories that the editors would snatch up? (Well, HPL would have, but I think most people would be more understanding--REH, for one). When you have a family to support, you do what you have to. Smith was certainly capable of analyzing the Amazing Stories 'formula' and writing to spec. But he refused to prostitute his talent this way.

He must have been tempted. When I think of the pressures he was under I'm surprised he avoided a nervous breakdown.

Ian McEwan is a particularly amusing case in point. Before he had children, he wrote bleak, nasty stuff like THE CEMENT GARDEN and THE COMFORT OF STRANGERS. After his first child, his writing immediately became cloyingly sentimental.

It's amusing to read CAS's late letters in which he mentions his role as a step-parent.

I must slightly disagree with Connolly, by the way. By far the worst enemy of good art, today, at least, is the drudgery and grind of regular, salaried employment.

As to the affect of children on one's art - the answer seems to vary with the temperament of the artist - Bach, for example had 17 children, some of whom lived, and were supported by his wage as organist/choir master - others, like Michelangelo, were constantly begging for money from the "patron" - some, like Hart Crane were complete SOB's to the persons who supported them - One sociological factor you may not be aware of is that after the depression of "29, young persons were vigorously discouraged from producing the large families of their parents' traditional output.
My own mother's comment was, " You could be forgiven for one - more than that you were a pariah" - which accounts for the 12 years between my brother and myself - greater financial security before breeding was the goal of the parents of the "pre-baby-boom" generation.

Absquatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I must slightly disagree with Connolly, by the
> way. By far the worst enemy of good art, today, at
> least, is the drudgery and grind of regular,
> salaried employment.

Lovecraft himself couldn't have put it better, but if you are referring to writers having a stable source of income from day jobs I am not at all sure that I agree. One can argue that having a certain measure of financial security frees a writer from having to engage in hackwork to make the month's rent. Fritz Leiber was an associate editor for Science Digest magazine. Roger Zelazny had a position with the Social Security Administration. Gene Wolfe toiled for an insurance company (I believe--can't find the reference). These jobs don't seem to have affected the quality of their prose (the quantity is another matter).

All generalizations have their limitations, of course (including this one), but I would stand by my statement regarding art and employment, as a general rule. It's also a matter of temperament, of course. Some would bear it better than others. I'd wager, however, that for every Wallace Stevens, who could labor by day as an insurance executive and still write reams of poetry, there are a thousand Stefan Grabinskis. Grabinski bitterly resented having to work at his teaching job for a living, and felt, no doubt rightly, that it drained energy that would have been better spent in creative efforts.

At any rate, I don't think that the likes of Lovecraft and CAS--infinitely greater artists than Leiber or Wolfe, in my opinion--had the temperament to support regimented daily schedules or office work, and I have no doubt that doing such work would have harmed their artistic productivity. Somewhere, I think, CAS also contrasts the U.S. unfavorably with Europe with respect to its treatment of artists.

I think that the type of job and attitude of an author towards the job could be factors, especially if the job doesn't really interest or engage the author's intellect or temperment. Colin Wilson said that he enjoyed the repetitive routine of working in a factory because it left his mind free to think.

Thanx 4 replies 2 thread. I'll try n put in my own 2c l8r.

Jojo Lapin X Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ian McEwan is a particularly amusing case in
> point. Before he had children, he wrote bleak,
> nasty stuff like THE CEMENT GARDEN and THE COMFORT
> OF STRANGERS. After his first child, his writing
> immediately became cloyingly sentimental.


Yup. As some1 with a long interest in (tho' NOT knowledge of) evo-psych (evolutionary-psychology)... it seems 2 me that it's highly possible that hom sap is evolved such that the fact of having children sets off a CASCADE of (irreversible? at least in the short tmer?) neurological changes in the parent-'s/-s' brain/s. Hence McEwan's mushiness. Maybe mediated thru chemicals/pheromones released by offspring. Don't think CAS's writing would have been improved by whatever-it-is.

I've never read McEwan, so I can't comment on the 'mushiness' quotient in his fiction. I can say that I haven't really noticed this tendency in other writers; i.e. to 'wimp out' upon becoming a parent. In particular, I'm thinking of Fritz Leiber. Roger Zelazny and Ramsey Campbell. Their post-tot stories are not markedly more sentimental than their pre-tot ones.

Of course, as always, it depends on the writer. If you will permit me to generalize (in my turn), parenthood helps you see children as people in their own right (or at least, people-in-the-becoming) rather than distractions or annoyances ("Blast those neighborhood brats! How's a writer supposed to write amidst all this racket?") Empathy is a useful tool for any writer.

I regret that we have no stories from CAS reflecting his experiences as a step-father. As someone who well remembered what it felt like to be a lonely, somewhat alienated child I am sure he would have had much to tell us.

I can tell you from first hand observation that "step-fatherhood" was not the title he adopted nor conceived - he married a middle-aged, highly artsy woman who happened to have a couple of kids - they were already well established in their independence of their mom - Clark took no hand in management, supervision, feeding and care of the rarely resident barbarians - there was no opportunity for reflection on points of empathy - these kids were acting on their own agendae by the time he arrived, and it was by no means lonely - both kids were very active with their friends and such activities as society allowed them to get away with - Carol was very proud of both - but it was their self-reliance (a necessity in the situation) and independence that assured her they would make it.
I think had Clark lived long enough he would have come to enjoy the boy who has distinguished himself as an intellect. I don't know the outcome for the girl well enough to comment from that perspective.

Quote:

I regret that we have no stories from CAS reflecting his experiences as a step-father.

Well, we do actually have at least one brief anecdote.

Here's the relevant quotation from the CAS letter that I mentioned, above. The experience he relates may not be representative, but it is, I think, indicative:

"Carol's children, two boys, thirteen and fourteen, respectively, and a sixteen year old girl, were violently opposed to me at the start, but have now become reconciled. Unruly puppies, all of them, but we get on, and oddly enough, they seem to obey me better than they do their mother when I am forced to exert authority. I must pause to chuckle over finding myself in a parental position--surely the last thing I ever bargained for, and more fantastic even than legal marriage".


--CAS, letter to Donald Wandrei, August 12, 1955.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 20 Jul 11 | 05:47PM by Absquatch.

I imagine that male writers with children would write lots of action stories. In my limited experience, men often encourage children - especially boys - to take risks and to go on "adventures."

Consider the dedication of The Wizard by H. R. Haggard:

Quote:

DEDICATION
To the Memory of the Child
Nada Burnham,

who "bound all to her" and, while her father cut his way through the hordes of the Ingobo Regiment, perished of the hardships of war at Buluwayo on 19th May, 1896, I dedicate these tales—and more particularly the last, that of a Faith which triumphed over savagery and death.

H. Rider Haggard.

The whole story is about facing peril with positive enthusiasm and enduring pain with stoic calm.

Consider, also, that Kipling glorified violence, until his son died in military service.

[en.wikipedia.org]

Wyss, the original author of the Swiss Family Robinson, wrote adventure stories to teach his children.

Wyss, Haggard, and Kipling are perhaps unrepresentative examples. I have little knowledge of literature - perhaps, for example, Gabriel Garcia Marques has three sons and is a vehement pacifist.

One of the most non-violent adventure writers ever, Arthur Conan Doyle, had several children.

On the other hand, there are many writers who had no children and who produced a very copious literary output.