I've just finished watching the NWS interview, which was fantastic, and I recommend it to everyone. I tried to transcribe some of the parts that were most interesting/compelling. My apologies for any mistakes. Most of the entries have time stamps, so you can go listen to the corresponding part of the interview.
Quotes from the NWS George Saunders interview (May 5, 2022)
# (On his literary ambitions; ~10:30)
I have aesthetic ambition that’s quite strong, because I’ve realized how hard it is, how unlikely it is to write a good story, and how little time I have left.
#(On GS’s advice to students; ~12:40)
I tell my students, the only thing you really have to offer is you, amplified. Your choices, your quirky relation to language, and your interests... If I can really concentrate on those choices, the results will be interesting to another person. … If you go deeply into your own preferences, it ends up being more universal than less.
# (On being able to put into words one’s literary taste; ~14:35)
It really kind of doesn’t matter what you think; it matters what you do. … It matters what you do even on the smallest level.
[KS: This reminds me of Carl Jung’s saying: “You are not what you say you’ll do; you are what you do.” – I find this very useful to kick me off my butt, to actually get down to work.]
# (On the muse; ~15:07)
The muse comes to you through your right hand.
The muse really likes you to be paying attention and making small decisions.
That’s been a comfort in writer’s block and not getting in your own way. Maybe this thing they call art is just a matter of thousands of micro-decisions that you make over a long period of time. The thing that accumulates is actually what you believe. And then it’s going to be more complex than this thing you could have pre-imagined by many many miles.
# (On the parallels between storytelling and neuroscience; ~16:33)
Story telling is, first of all, exactly what the brain does. It’s literally the fundamental neurological processes: making a rough draft of a situation, then amending it and editing it, via sensory input. That’s what we do in writing stories. It’s exactly what we do as human beings in every instance.
# (On talent vs work; 19:10)
You do the work to find out if you “have it”.
You do the work to find out what you’ve got.
# (On the necessity of each line earning its place and serving the purpose. 25:40)
The writer has the next line, to either convince you or screw everything up. That’s really how it works. It’s a linear-temporal phenomenon, a line at a time: you believe or you don’t. That was really big for me when I realized that.
#(On the value of working on multiple pieces simultaneously; ~32:00)
In a perfect world, I’ve got two or three stories going on at once. That way, I can work on the one I feel happiest about…and I can avoid working on the one that…I hate. So if I have some choices, I can go where the energy is. And sometimes, you solve a problem in one story, but your subconscious doesn’t know you’re on a different story, so it’s solving a lot of problems at once.
I think to try to treat your talent like a really beautiful tiger that’s in your garage… You want to be careful with it, you want to challenge it, you want to think of it as something separate from yourself. You’re not your talent. You’re the holder of it for this lifetime, but you have to learn to work with it, and trick it, assuage it, and outsmart it. So having a few stories to work on is helpful.
# (On the art and craft of revision; ~46:20)
As you’re revising, your ability to see it fresh fades. So whatever method of revision you choose should somehow help you see your piece fresh every time.
All these things are kind of like self-gaming; you’re trying to find an editing method that will help you to outsmart yourself.
[KS comment: I sometimes read stories sentence-by-sentence in reverse to force myself to read more slowly, and find problems that way. Another thing that works for me is reading aloud; awkward language becomes (painfully) obvious.]
#(Following the metaphor of a kite: sometimes you have to let the kite go, and at other times you have to take hold of the string and pull it; ~53:15)
Anyone who wants to be a writer, when they really want to do it, they’re really scared they won’t be able to, they’re aware of how subjective it is. And so, in that mindset, you always seek a method, don’t you? That’s what you want. You want to be able to write out three holy items and live by them. But the one holy item is the kite on a string: you do it how you have to do it at that moment. And unfortunately, you can’t phone it in, there’s no auto-pilot.
You have to become comfortable in being unmoored, in having second-by-second judgments and not over-arching ones. … to be able to say, Oh yeah, I can do that. I can actually be uncertain for three hours. I can be in an exploratory mindset instead of a lecturing mindset. Then you go out into the world and go back to your usual way of thinking.
[KS: reminiscent of Jung’s words on the importance of play. “The creation of something new is not accomplished by the intellect but by the play instinct acting from inner necessity. The creative mind plays with the objects it loves.”]
# (On using multiple points-of-view; question posed: how does GS think of POV. Does GS start with a clear idea in mind?
A story has a certain economy. It should be in one POV and I should be in one timeframe, a continuous timeframe. That’s the baseline. Then a story will sometimes say, Hey, I’m sorry, I need a flashback. And you kind of go, Well, we’re not really doing that. But the story goes, No, no, trust me. Then you go, Okay, I’ll try it. [The same thing with POV]. You start with one person, and then at some point there will be a pressing need for the other POV, and then you begrudgingly let it in. And then the trick is to distinguish that voice from the first one. The trick is to say, that is a luxury we can’t indulge. Unless we have to.
Experimentation in general. It’s best if it’s earned. … Then it’s not felt as an indulgence, or a defiant act. It’s felt as organic to what you’re trying to accomplish.
# (On Story Club; 1:05:48)
Substack approached me about three years ago…At that time I had no desire to be an opinion person. But then the Russian book came out and there was this wave…I got so many emails from people. It was different from the response I get from a fiction book. … There was something just really lovely about that, that I had brought people into this conversation…It’s such a lovely, friendly, cordial, smart group. … It’s very much like teaching a class. … a pure pleasure.
Thanks so much for the info & link. Is there anyway we can watch the chat? Was it recorded? It was unfortunately too late (or early?) for my time zone in Switzerland.
If no one recorded, can anyone record the next chat?
Just mentioning that there's a line in "A Swim In A Pond In The Rain" which I think is great (of course the whole book is great). Pg. 358: "In a story, attribute must meet adversity." Reminds me of the old saw about "Othello" and "Hamlet" which goes something like "Put Othello in the plot of Hamlet and you have no play, put Hamlet in the plot of Othello and you have no play." I really like "attribute must meet adversity"... pithy, useful, insightful.
Thanks for letting us know! I'll be there on Wednesday. I love Audrey Niffenegger too--The Time Traveler's Wife made me bawl when I was newly married. :)
I've just finished watching the NWS interview, which was fantastic, and I recommend it to everyone. I tried to transcribe some of the parts that were most interesting/compelling. My apologies for any mistakes. Most of the entries have time stamps, so you can go listen to the corresponding part of the interview.
Quotes from the NWS George Saunders interview (May 5, 2022)
# (On his literary ambitions; ~10:30)
I have aesthetic ambition that’s quite strong, because I’ve realized how hard it is, how unlikely it is to write a good story, and how little time I have left.
#(On GS’s advice to students; ~12:40)
I tell my students, the only thing you really have to offer is you, amplified. Your choices, your quirky relation to language, and your interests... If I can really concentrate on those choices, the results will be interesting to another person. … If you go deeply into your own preferences, it ends up being more universal than less.
# (On being able to put into words one’s literary taste; ~14:35)
It really kind of doesn’t matter what you think; it matters what you do. … It matters what you do even on the smallest level.
[KS: This reminds me of Carl Jung’s saying: “You are not what you say you’ll do; you are what you do.” – I find this very useful to kick me off my butt, to actually get down to work.]
# (On the muse; ~15:07)
The muse comes to you through your right hand.
The muse really likes you to be paying attention and making small decisions.
That’s been a comfort in writer’s block and not getting in your own way. Maybe this thing they call art is just a matter of thousands of micro-decisions that you make over a long period of time. The thing that accumulates is actually what you believe. And then it’s going to be more complex than this thing you could have pre-imagined by many many miles.
# (On the parallels between storytelling and neuroscience; ~16:33)
Story telling is, first of all, exactly what the brain does. It’s literally the fundamental neurological processes: making a rough draft of a situation, then amending it and editing it, via sensory input. That’s what we do in writing stories. It’s exactly what we do as human beings in every instance.
# (On talent vs work; 19:10)
You do the work to find out if you “have it”.
You do the work to find out what you’ve got.
# (On the necessity of each line earning its place and serving the purpose. 25:40)
The writer has the next line, to either convince you or screw everything up. That’s really how it works. It’s a linear-temporal phenomenon, a line at a time: you believe or you don’t. That was really big for me when I realized that.
#(On the value of working on multiple pieces simultaneously; ~32:00)
In a perfect world, I’ve got two or three stories going on at once. That way, I can work on the one I feel happiest about…and I can avoid working on the one that…I hate. So if I have some choices, I can go where the energy is. And sometimes, you solve a problem in one story, but your subconscious doesn’t know you’re on a different story, so it’s solving a lot of problems at once.
I think to try to treat your talent like a really beautiful tiger that’s in your garage… You want to be careful with it, you want to challenge it, you want to think of it as something separate from yourself. You’re not your talent. You’re the holder of it for this lifetime, but you have to learn to work with it, and trick it, assuage it, and outsmart it. So having a few stories to work on is helpful.
# (On the art and craft of revision; ~46:20)
As you’re revising, your ability to see it fresh fades. So whatever method of revision you choose should somehow help you see your piece fresh every time.
All these things are kind of like self-gaming; you’re trying to find an editing method that will help you to outsmart yourself.
[KS comment: I sometimes read stories sentence-by-sentence in reverse to force myself to read more slowly, and find problems that way. Another thing that works for me is reading aloud; awkward language becomes (painfully) obvious.]
#(Following the metaphor of a kite: sometimes you have to let the kite go, and at other times you have to take hold of the string and pull it; ~53:15)
Anyone who wants to be a writer, when they really want to do it, they’re really scared they won’t be able to, they’re aware of how subjective it is. And so, in that mindset, you always seek a method, don’t you? That’s what you want. You want to be able to write out three holy items and live by them. But the one holy item is the kite on a string: you do it how you have to do it at that moment. And unfortunately, you can’t phone it in, there’s no auto-pilot.
You have to become comfortable in being unmoored, in having second-by-second judgments and not over-arching ones. … to be able to say, Oh yeah, I can do that. I can actually be uncertain for three hours. I can be in an exploratory mindset instead of a lecturing mindset. Then you go out into the world and go back to your usual way of thinking.
[KS: reminiscent of Jung’s words on the importance of play. “The creation of something new is not accomplished by the intellect but by the play instinct acting from inner necessity. The creative mind plays with the objects it loves.”]
# (On using multiple points-of-view; question posed: how does GS think of POV. Does GS start with a clear idea in mind?
A story has a certain economy. It should be in one POV and I should be in one timeframe, a continuous timeframe. That’s the baseline. Then a story will sometimes say, Hey, I’m sorry, I need a flashback. And you kind of go, Well, we’re not really doing that. But the story goes, No, no, trust me. Then you go, Okay, I’ll try it. [The same thing with POV]. You start with one person, and then at some point there will be a pressing need for the other POV, and then you begrudgingly let it in. And then the trick is to distinguish that voice from the first one. The trick is to say, that is a luxury we can’t indulge. Unless we have to.
Experimentation in general. It’s best if it’s earned. … Then it’s not felt as an indulgence, or a defiant act. It’s felt as organic to what you’re trying to accomplish.
# (On Story Club; 1:05:48)
Substack approached me about three years ago…At that time I had no desire to be an opinion person. But then the Russian book came out and there was this wave…I got so many emails from people. It was different from the response I get from a fiction book. … There was something just really lovely about that, that I had brought people into this conversation…It’s such a lovely, friendly, cordial, smart group. … It’s very much like teaching a class. … a pure pleasure.
Wish I could join you George, but that’s midnight in the UK and at my age I’m no longer a night owl.
Yay for an exercise💞 Honestly, this club has kept me writing. Congrats on the publicity.
Thanks so much for the info & link. Is there anyway we can watch the chat? Was it recorded? It was unfortunately too late (or early?) for my time zone in Switzerland.
If no one recorded, can anyone record the next chat?
Just mentioning that there's a line in "A Swim In A Pond In The Rain" which I think is great (of course the whole book is great). Pg. 358: "In a story, attribute must meet adversity." Reminds me of the old saw about "Othello" and "Hamlet" which goes something like "Put Othello in the plot of Hamlet and you have no play, put Hamlet in the plot of Othello and you have no play." I really like "attribute must meet adversity"... pithy, useful, insightful.
Thanks for letting us know! I'll be there on Wednesday. I love Audrey Niffenegger too--The Time Traveler's Wife made me bawl when I was newly married. :)
Here's a link to the NWS discussion from yesterday:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yUgiRYijP4
I missed both of these as I was traveling. I would have loved to attend. Please keep us posted about future engagements!
It would be lovely to join this session, George..but I’m in Ireland and our clocks don’t synchronise!
Such a shame!
Is there a way the talk could be re-played or did it have to go out live at that time only?
Very much enjoying your course.. well worth participating!
Super fun to watch you in person. You looked like you were sitting in a futuristic cell in the middle of nowhere.
Just watched tonight, George! Thank you for letting us know this was happening. :)
Hope you make new readers and friends through this and all your writing and efforts, George.
Congrats on your book coming out! ^_^
Hope to be awake at 2 and 1 am in Rome. I'll try my best!
I there were a couple of virtual events around your craft book. I live in India :(
Never mind. Jumped gun...