Across the globe, thousands of people will be finishing tentative drafts of novels as we near the end of November. This may seem pretty startling to some (which perhaps it should), but it\u2019s all because we\u2019re entering the home stretch of National Novel Writing Month. This event, now in its 11th year, challenges your everyday person to write a novel in just 30 days\u2019 time.<\/p>\n
If that sounds kind of insane, that seems to be the point. The organizers of National Novel Writing Month treat the endeavor as more of a challenge, like a hot dog eating contest, more than they do an urgent drive to create significant literature in 30 days\u2019 time. The National Novel Writing Month website (which has been distastefully abbreviated to NaNoWriMo.com … was it made up by Michael Scott?) is supportive of using the novel-writing process as therapy. The message is, if you can finish a novel in 30 days, you can do anything<\/i>. Although that\u2019s pretty dorky, I\u2019m okay with the sentiment of that.<\/p>\n
However, this particular National Novel Writing Month has been fraught with controversy. The key player in this whole affair is Laura Miller, a co-founder and senior writer at Salon<\/a><\/i>. She, in a manner rather typical of anyone who writes for Salon,<\/em> assailed its participants as self-indulgent, naive, and generally incapable of good writing in any capacity.<\/a> <\/p>\n <\/p>\n The controversy stirred up by Miller has filled the month with National Novel Writing Month commentary of all kinds.The Atlantic<\/em> offered a pretty thorough rebuttal<\/a>. On the other hand, HTMLGIANT<\/i> decided to offer a more realistic calendar for writing a novel in a month<\/a>. Regardless of what people think about National Novel Writing Month, the common thread seems to be that there\u2019s a limit to how much faith to put behind an unrevised manuscript cobbled together in a month\u2019s time. Even National Novel Writing Month\u2019s official website admits this<\/a>.<\/p>\n If everyone can agree on that, there\u2019s not much left to argue about when it comes to participating, right? If you start on a novel knowing it\u2019s quite unlikely to be a sterling product, you\u2019re doing it for the novelty or for the challenge.<\/p>\n I\u2019m not participating in National Novel Writing Month. Even if I had the time, I think it\u2019s a frivolous experiment. However, I want to defend National Novel Writing Month against Miller\u2019s claims, which are misleading and unnecessarily hurtful. In particular, there are three particular points Miller makes that have wider implications in the realm of writing and publishing. Miller\u2019s article is symptomatic of an increasing hostility towards the act of writing altogether from within the industry itself. Here are the arguments she makes, and my objections to them:<\/p>\n 1. National Novel Writing Month unleashes the hounds of hell on publishing houses, literary journals, and agents.<\/strong><\/p>\n Miller writes, “it’s clear thatNaNoWriMo winners frequently ignore official advice about the importance of revision; editors and agents are already flinching in anticipation of the slapdash manuscripts they’ll shortly receive.” She later enumerates horror stories of publishers being bombarded with quadrillions of query letters and manuscript submissions of abysmal quality. All of this terrible literature is let loose upon the world.<\/p>\n How melodramatic.<\/p>\n There\u2019s surely some truth that some publishers get awful National Novel Writing Month manuscripts that are likely to cause some Raiders of the Lost Ark<\/i>-type face-melting. However, consider this: If you aren\u2019t aware, either from common sense or from all the admonition on the web, that a novel written in 30 days is going to be in pretty rough shape, you probably aren\u2019t capable of producing a great work of literature any time soon.<\/p>\n National Novel Writing Month doesn\u2019t cultivate deficient writers to the extent Miller suggests, because most of these people were going to toil on awful manuscripts and send them out for publication anyway. If anything, a few solidly placed rejection letters will be enough to eliminate their delusions.<\/p>\n Am I supposed to feel sorry for publishers because November is a busy month full of terrible manuscript submissions? I hope not, because I don\u2019t. Anyone who\u2019s worked in publishing, or even known someone who worked in publishing once, or known anyone who dated anyone who was roommates with someone who later worked in publishing can tell you: sorting through awful manuscripts is part of the day-to-day operations of any publisher, regardless of circulation or medium.<\/p>\n Rejecting a manuscript is pretty easy. If you start reading it, and it\u2018s terrible, send a rejection letter. It\u2019s not like they\u2019re personalized. Regardless of what anyone tells you, no publisher reads through the entirety of every single manuscript, especially if it is apparent immediately that it\u2019s garbage. If November is a marginally worse month for them, boo-hoo. I\u2019m sure Target cashiers have it worse on Black Friday.<\/p>\n 2. National Novel Writing Month reinforces self-indulgent writing, instead of selfless reading (whatever that is).<\/b><\/p>\n I kid you not; Miller refers to the act of reading as \u201cselfless.\u201d This is a woman who gets paid to have her book reviews read across the country. Let me shed a tear for how much she\u2019s sacrificed. Move over Gandhi; here comes Laura Miller!<\/p>\n Reading is just as selfish as writing; I don\u2019t read books as an act of charity, but rather because I want to have my emotions evoked and I want to be entertained. Reading is simply not a selfless activity. <\/p>\n Miller says that, because of influences like National Novel Writing Month, everyone\u2019s writing and no one\u2019s reading. If writers truly cared about literature, she implies, we\u2019d all put aside our aspirations to write publishable material and just read book after book until we\u2019re sufficiently remediated. By writing, we\u2019re just creating more junk in a community that has too much junk anyway.<\/p>\n People aren\u2019t reading books in America, true, but is it the fault of aspiring writers? Well, let\u2019s see. The best-sellers of 2010 have been Eat, Pray, Love<\/i> and some bullshit by Dan Brown. Who\u2019s reading that garbage for its tremendous insight? The general American public. How about the increasing amount of courses colleges and universities have been offering on fundamental English reading and writing skills? Are writers in those classes? <\/p>\n Indeed, American literacy and cultural awareness is not at a high point. But really, was great literature ever a high priority in the lives of the public? If it weren\u2019t for high school English classes, I doubt most people would have even pretended to read The Scarlet Letter<\/i> or The Great Gatsby<\/i>.<\/p>\n If you aren\u2019t an avid reader, what gives you the idea to write books in the first place? I started writing because I was envious of the power great literature had over the people who actually appreciated it. Anyone who doesn\u2019t understand the crucial connection between reading and writing is the same type of person mentioned earlier who is going to send out nauseous Sailor Moon fanfic manuscripts, regardless of circumstance. Increased reading isn\u2019t going to help as much as a little self-awareness will.<\/p>\n