Returning to Franzenfreude:
Who’s Really Going to Write the Great American Novel?
by Sweetman
Weighing in on the Franzenfreude
debate late allowed me the liberty to digest the facts and sort through
the opinions flying around the media and literary twitter blitz
regarding Jonathan Franzen’s novel Freedom. The debate itself seems to have done far more in the name of literature than in advancing any one literary career.
Franzen and his epic novel, Freedom, were the literary darlings of the summer of 2010. President Obama got a signed copy to take on his Martha’s Vineyard vacation. Bookstores, advertising the novel’s release day, allowed Franzenphiles to sign up for a copy beforehand (with midnight distribution to fans who dressed up as the Berglunds?). Then came, not one, but two glowing, writhing with praise reviews from The New York Times Book Review. He appeared on the cover of TIME, the first author to grace the cover in over ten years. He and Oprah made up and she announced Freedom had secured a spot in her book club after declaring it “a masterpiece.” Would anyone have blinked if he was captured on a smart phone walking on water?
Someone had to throw some cold water on that Franzen Lovefest. Enter Jodi Picoult, possibly still simmering from Janet Maslin’s 2008 scathing review of Picoult’s novel Change of Heart. Maslin accused Picoult of “not even breaking sweat while researching her agonizing topic” (the death penalty) and somehow made the fact that her bestseller topped both hardcover and paperback best-seller lists seem like a shameful disease. Ouch.
When the summer of Franzen Love entered into its second week, Picoult tossed her ice cold bucket of water with this tweet:
Who’s Really Going to Write the Great American Novel?
by Sweetman
Franzen and his epic novel, Freedom, were the literary darlings of the summer of 2010. President Obama got a signed copy to take on his Martha’s Vineyard vacation. Bookstores, advertising the novel’s release day, allowed Franzenphiles to sign up for a copy beforehand (with midnight distribution to fans who dressed up as the Berglunds?). Then came, not one, but two glowing, writhing with praise reviews from The New York Times Book Review. He appeared on the cover of TIME, the first author to grace the cover in over ten years. He and Oprah made up and she announced Freedom had secured a spot in her book club after declaring it “a masterpiece.” Would anyone have blinked if he was captured on a smart phone walking on water?
Someone had to throw some cold water on that Franzen Lovefest. Enter Jodi Picoult, possibly still simmering from Janet Maslin’s 2008 scathing review of Picoult’s novel Change of Heart. Maslin accused Picoult of “not even breaking sweat while researching her agonizing topic” (the death penalty) and somehow made the fact that her bestseller topped both hardcover and paperback best-seller lists seem like a shameful disease. Ouch.
When the summer of Franzen Love entered into its second week, Picoult tossed her ice cold bucket of water with this tweet:
NYT
raved about Franzen’s new book. Is anyone shocked? Would love to see
the NYT rave about authors
who aren’t white male literary darlings.
who aren’t white male literary darlings.
Jennifer Weiner, author of Good in Bed and In Her Shoes
quickly tweeted in, opining that women authors who write about family,
relationships, love, loss and shopping are quickly categorized in “Chick
Lit” or “Romance” and labeled “popular” which, (while the dream of many
high school girl and boy), is the proverbial end of a literary career
for woman authors who strive to being taken seriously by the critics.
Thus launched the heated debate: female authors are summarily categorized to popular but menial shelves while male authors who write of serious topics (which could include relationships, family love, loss and shopping) are funneled onto the fast track of “Critically Acclaimed” and placed on The Literary Pedestal of Eternal Adoration--pedestals apparently gifted to (according to Picoult) “white males with MFAs from Brooklyn”.
The debate took a life of its own. Freedom was soon the platform for the disparity of representation between male and female authors in the Times, as well as representing the menial categorization of women writers into trivial categories while male writers of equal or lesser caliber are escorted to the realm of literary, noteworthy and serious.
Accusations of male author favoritism in the Times had solid facts to back the argument: from June 2009 to August 2010 the Times
reviewed 545 fiction books, 62% written by male authors, 38% female
authors. What’s more damning in favor of male darlings in the Times reviews are incredible disparity of double fiction reviews in the same time frame: 72% favoring men over 28% women writers. Could the Times refute
this damning hard statistical evidence? Did they want to? If not, why
not? In case no one noticed, we’re still waiting for that answer.
Instead of fading away after the usual three-day wonder of any hot topic, the argument gathered steam. Jennifer Weiner came up with the twitter hash tag #Franzenfreude: taking pain in the multiple and copious reviews being showered on Jonathan Franzen, a play on the German word schadenfreude, which describes a delight in the misfortune of others. Despite the fact the Franzenfreude literally translates as “taking joy in Franzen”, the Twitter scene exploded with debate over the inequity and categorization of women authors who have the audacity to aspire to literary success instead of finding satisfaction in their designated places as authors of Chick Lit, Romance, Shopping & Society.
The 2010 Summer of Franzenfreude was a terrific summer for books, reading, writing and authors. The debate brought literature to the forefront of America’s nanosecond attention span but one voice was missing from the fracas: What did Jonathan Franzen think as the eye of the proverbial storm?
Not a whole lot. He embarked on a disastrous European tour of Freedom and made headlines for trying to put a good face on a terrible mess. The European edition of Freedom was printed from a typo-laden early draft of the novel. Then his glasses were kidnapped and held ransom for about 30 minutes during what was intended to be a book signing event but ended up as a lecture/apology because the all copies of Freedom were on their way to the pulp factory. Franzen had his hands full. It was obvious he didn’t have the time or inclination to weigh in on the trials of popularity vs. literary works of fiction. Besides, wasn’t it obvious that Franzen, in his understated and sometimes bumbling way, had found the magic formula to conquer both the literary and popular fiction worlds?
Jonathan Franzen is devoted to his craft. He wants to write The Great American Novel, a daunting task in an era that is losing its love and appreciation for the novel and any long form writing. However, none of the odds against his dream seem to deaden his desire or passion for his craft. He’s a driven nerd who often appears surprised by the world around him and the attention he gets. If what he states is true about his writing habit (TIME described his writer’s room in such austere terms, including every outlet to any media access physically disabled, that a prison cell came to mind with), no wonder he looks a little puzzled at all the hype.
As for who’s directing his publicity machine, if it’s Franzen, the man is a genius. His 2001 declined invitation to gush about his novel The Corrections on Oprah’s couch - an opportunity that had historically launched authors from obscurity to stardom - was initially heralded as the end of Franzen’s career but actually placed him in the ethereal realm of Literary Genius. His explanation to Terry Gross of NPRs Fresh Air was neither self-deprecating nor apologetic: “I see this as my book, my creation.” His book tours are on the scholarly side with little hype, glitz or glamour. Even when newsworthy circumstances like the incorrect manuscript or his glasses as the object of a police helicopter chase, Franzen seems to take it all in the stride of a man who has a bigger purpose in life. He’s something like an author superhero.
Prod and poke as much as we try, we just can’t jab this man into the kind of response Picoult and Weiner may have been fishing for when the argument began. In a mid-September interview with The Guardian, Franzen agreed with Weiner and Picoult about favoritism shown towards "white male literary darlings" in this statement:
Thus launched the heated debate: female authors are summarily categorized to popular but menial shelves while male authors who write of serious topics (which could include relationships, family love, loss and shopping) are funneled onto the fast track of “Critically Acclaimed” and placed on The Literary Pedestal of Eternal Adoration--pedestals apparently gifted to (according to Picoult) “white males with MFAs from Brooklyn”.
The debate took a life of its own. Freedom was soon the platform for the disparity of representation between male and female authors in the Times, as well as representing the menial categorization of women writers into trivial categories while male writers of equal or lesser caliber are escorted to the realm of literary, noteworthy and serious.
Instead of fading away after the usual three-day wonder of any hot topic, the argument gathered steam. Jennifer Weiner came up with the twitter hash tag #Franzenfreude: taking pain in the multiple and copious reviews being showered on Jonathan Franzen, a play on the German word schadenfreude, which describes a delight in the misfortune of others. Despite the fact the Franzenfreude literally translates as “taking joy in Franzen”, the Twitter scene exploded with debate over the inequity and categorization of women authors who have the audacity to aspire to literary success instead of finding satisfaction in their designated places as authors of Chick Lit, Romance, Shopping & Society.
The 2010 Summer of Franzenfreude was a terrific summer for books, reading, writing and authors. The debate brought literature to the forefront of America’s nanosecond attention span but one voice was missing from the fracas: What did Jonathan Franzen think as the eye of the proverbial storm?
Not a whole lot. He embarked on a disastrous European tour of Freedom and made headlines for trying to put a good face on a terrible mess. The European edition of Freedom was printed from a typo-laden early draft of the novel. Then his glasses were kidnapped and held ransom for about 30 minutes during what was intended to be a book signing event but ended up as a lecture/apology because the all copies of Freedom were on their way to the pulp factory. Franzen had his hands full. It was obvious he didn’t have the time or inclination to weigh in on the trials of popularity vs. literary works of fiction. Besides, wasn’t it obvious that Franzen, in his understated and sometimes bumbling way, had found the magic formula to conquer both the literary and popular fiction worlds?
Jonathan Franzen is devoted to his craft. He wants to write The Great American Novel, a daunting task in an era that is losing its love and appreciation for the novel and any long form writing. However, none of the odds against his dream seem to deaden his desire or passion for his craft. He’s a driven nerd who often appears surprised by the world around him and the attention he gets. If what he states is true about his writing habit (TIME described his writer’s room in such austere terms, including every outlet to any media access physically disabled, that a prison cell came to mind with), no wonder he looks a little puzzled at all the hype.
As for who’s directing his publicity machine, if it’s Franzen, the man is a genius. His 2001 declined invitation to gush about his novel The Corrections on Oprah’s couch - an opportunity that had historically launched authors from obscurity to stardom - was initially heralded as the end of Franzen’s career but actually placed him in the ethereal realm of Literary Genius. His explanation to Terry Gross of NPRs Fresh Air was neither self-deprecating nor apologetic: “I see this as my book, my creation.” His book tours are on the scholarly side with little hype, glitz or glamour. Even when newsworthy circumstances like the incorrect manuscript or his glasses as the object of a police helicopter chase, Franzen seems to take it all in the stride of a man who has a bigger purpose in life. He’s something like an author superhero.
Prod and poke as much as we try, we just can’t jab this man into the kind of response Picoult and Weiner may have been fishing for when the argument began. In a mid-September interview with The Guardian, Franzen agreed with Weiner and Picoult about favoritism shown towards "white male literary darlings" in this statement:
The
categories by which we value fiction are skewed male, and this creates a
very destructive disconnect
between the critical establishment and the predominantly female readership of novels. That's inarguable.
between the critical establishment and the predominantly female readership of novels. That's inarguable.
It has been reported that in interviews, Franzen blinks and sighs before delivering his answers, mannerisms that indicate thoughtfulness toward the questions at hand and a lack of preparation. Could that actually mean Franzen had no awareness of Franzenfreude prior to his Freedom European tour? Possibly, but it may be more accurate that he was aware but it simply didn’t mattered all that much. We live in an era where each moment of media attention is an opportunity for advancement and we’ve seen the decline and fall of talent in favor of remaining in the spotlight. Thankfully, either the spotlight isn’t a place where Franzen likes to stay very long or (hopefully) he’s got better things to do, like write, than linger over-long in media hype.
Jonathan Franzen, novelist and essayist, has written four novels about Americans from middle America trying to live the American Dream - and he’s written them well. Each one is critically better than the last. The Corrections and Freedom each contain elements to stand the trial of time and may uphold his dream of having written The Great American Novel. His essays are equally masterful and topically relevant to the decline of literary fiction today. He is relatively young, born in 1959, and is still writing, which is a very good thing. He was the literary superhero of 2010 for returning books and reading back to the mainstream of American culture. And no tweet-bashing, German word trickery, or printing debacle is going to shove him off any time soon.
As for the disparity of critical favor of woman writers vs. male writers? Sadly, since when is literature any different from the rest of the world? I am certain neither Picoult and Weiner would want some sort of Equal Opportunity representation format for NYTRB or any other literary review. Franzenfreude breathed life and soul into the giant elephant-in-the-literary-scene that male authors are treated differently from female authors and that differently frequently means better.
So what are we going to do about it now?
