I noticed in America that if you write a book of any kind, you're made to be the representative of all the issues that might surround it.
Interpretation
A single authorβs work often leads to them being seen as a spokesperson for broader societal issues.
In this quote, Zadie Smith reflects on the expectation placed upon authors, particularly in America, to address and represent a wide array of controversies and societal discussions through their work. It highlights the pressure that comes with writing and the responsibility authors may feel to engage with complex themes beyond their narratives, illustrating the intersection of literature and social discourse.
In practice
This quote can be used in a literary discussion about the expectations placed on authors.
Because immigrants have always been particularly prone to repetition - it's something to do with that experience of moving from West to East or East to West or from island to island. Even when you arrive, you're still going back and forth; your children are going round and round. There's no proper term for it - original sin seems too harsh; maybe original trauma would be better.
You know, you don't expect everyone to be as educated as everyone else or have the same achievements, but you expect at least to be offered at least some of the opportunities, and libraries are the most simple and the most open way to give people access to books.
He did not consider if or how or why he loved them. They were just love: they were the first evidence he ever had of love, and they would be the last confirmation of love when everything else fell away.
We cannot be all the writers all the time. We can only be who we are. Which leads me to my second point: writers do not write what they want, they write what they can.
I think of reading like a balanced diet; if your sentences are too baggy, too baroque, cut back on fatty Foster Wallace, say, and pick up Kafka as roughage.
I never attended a creative writing class in my life. I have a horror of them.
Not every novel that wants to be a tragedy gets to be one.
I don't believe chance can play a role in my literature.
Sometimes I sensed that the books I read in rapid succession had set up some sort of murmur among themselves, transforming my head into an orchestra pit where different musical instruments sounded out, and I would realize that I could endure this life because of these musicales going on in my head.
The problem with fiction, it has to be plausible. That's not true with non-fiction.
We read Charlotte Bronte not for exquisite observation of character - her characters are vigorous and elementary; not for comedy - hers is grim and crude; not for a philosophic view of life - hers is that of a country parson's daughter; but for her poetry. Probably that is so with all writers who have, as she has, an overpowering personality, so that, as we say in real life, they have only to open the door to make themselves felt.
Put simply the novel stands between us and the hardening concept of statistical man. There is no other medium in which we can live for so long and so intimately with a character. That is the service a novel renders.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.