good evening Hanif and enjoyed seeing the questions and your response - do like the way you have a rough plan and scrap it change it rescue it and so on - the frame is there but the freedom works round it. Today for some reason I (as usual this is a daily exercise) inspected my short stories on the website where they rest to see if anyone had read them - you can tell this by the number at the side - anyway no one had but as I got to the end of them, the latest one has only two reads and is stuck on that. Instead of leaving it and shrugging kind of thing and saying to myself OH WELL. instead of that, I changed the title and changed slightly the cover as this is displayed and who knows might persuade someone to read it - but the point to this long winded thing is that I did something different. You, are doing something different and again I see this as a triumph rising out of the devastating breakdown you went through. me seeing that is not the same as you experiencing it though. Yes the best news ever is Starmer as PM - I am waking up more hopeful thanks to this. I am watching god help me pointless celebrities why on earth when don't like it - the answer is it rained all day and I've watched enough sport to empty my brain. Warm wishes this week from the nowhere village love Maddi x ps the footie tomorrow though - INGERLAND.
My husband, age 83, has been more or less housebound for over four years due to a series of medical conditions, starting with a stroke and ending with some chemotherapy. Nothing so serious as you. But he also had a strong reaction that he did not want to affect my life and kept urging me to go away on my own, which I have done very little. I was very touched by your concern for your partner. Very similar. In the end, I asked if our situations were reversed, would he go - and he said, a bit sheepishly, no. I feel that is Life. And we have been married for 61 years.
Last year, I read 'Rabbit Is Rich' by John Updike. It is the third book in the Rabbit tetralogy that periodically drops in on the former college basketball star Harry 'Rabbit' Angstrom at pivotal moments during his life. Collectively, these four books, along with their novella-length coda, must surely be a strong candidate for great American novel (1960s -1980s era).
'Rabbit is Rich' is penned in the third-person-present, where everything unfolds in the moment. It adds potency to action; to sex and violence. As a reader you are there watching from the sidelines, privy to the innermost thoughts of the characters as they think them. You are there when the completely clueless Harry finds himself in the company of a woman who he has overlooked, but who adores him for the man he is. The danger of writing in this style is that it will expose bad writing. If you do it poorly then it has a tendency to come across as over-developed stage directions.
In my opinion, the only time stereotyping has really produced high art with mass appeal was in The Simpsons where every character in the show is based on a broad stereotype and they are humanised by their experiences and by their interactions with each other. I think the show went off the rails when the writers either lost sight of, or lost faith in, that premise and gave in to virtue signalling and finger wagging.
The TV sitcom 'Love Thy Neighbour', which in the UK, is commonly cited as a benchmark for casual racism, and has to be seen to believed, was before my time. I have a feeling that perhaps afterwards there was a very gradual generational pendulum swing away from that. I grew up watching Play School which was hosted by a broad cast of presenters, among them Floella Benjamin and Derek Griffiths. British society was much more segregated then than it is now. I think that it was very important to have black presenters on that show, not singled out, but just there along with everybody else. Floella has a smile that lights up the world. I can't look at photographs of the Play School team, as they were, or as they are now (those who are still with us) without smiling back. I have nothing but warm feelings towards them.
I vaguely recall Wayne Laryea from Pipkins tangling with the overbearing know-it-all Hartley Hare (imagine if someone exhumed the body of a real-life hare and transformed it into a terrifying hand puppet). The episode where the goldfish dies and the characters go on to discuss death in general made a very strong impression on me. I remember the dapper Terry Sue-Patt, who played Benny in the early years of Grange Hill, and who died tragically at the age of 50. Everyone went to school with a kid like Benny.
A pivotal programme that I never hear anyone talk about is The Lenny Henry Show. The morning after the first episode aired there was this wave of enthusiasm like nothing I had experienced before, or have since. Kids in the playground were practically falling over themselves imitating Henry, reliving his funniest moments. I suspect that a lot of the humour on that show will not have aged well – I recall a musical spoof of the Thriller video where it was strongly implied that Michael Jackson was suffering from bulimia. Henry was at his best when he positioned himself in the role of older brother. He had this great bit about attempting to conceal the fact that he was drunk from his mother. None of us had touched a drop of alcohol but we all knew the futility of attempting to hide something from your parents. Humour like that crosses all kinds of social barriers.
Another thing Henry did that was new to me, was he would have these character like Deakus – an elderly Jamaican man – who were caricatures but, unlike the cruel imitations of black and asian people that you would sometimes see on the street, they were were grounded in reality. They were probably based on adults Henry knew. It was my introduction to observational comedy.
Why does any of this matter? It matters because it is very easy to dehumanise or be prejudiced towards different races, or cultures, or demographics when you either don't encounter them as individuals or only interact with them from a distance. Television, when it began to chip away at these boundaries, was a gateway to a wider world. I am certain that it brought us closer and can continue to do so.
"Writing tends to take this form, if you are lucky." Or diligent. All good writing has structure, and it's all the same. Lead sentence, descriptive sentence, counter sentence, and propositional sentence. Now next paragraph.
But this is just paint by numbers. The skillful writer manipulates this formula, but the underlying structure is always there, and can be uncovered through careful analysis. The unskillful writer has no idea rules exist. No amount of investigation uncovers structure. That's why it's hard to read unskillful writers.
I have been enjoying your blog and I have pre-ordered your book, but I must confess that I find your confidence in the Prime Ministership of Keir Starmer is disappointing. Starmer was in charge of the Crown Prosecution Service when Julian Assange was being pursued and instructed the Swedish prosecutors that they had better not dare to get "cold feet" in their persecution of Julian. That is a crime in my eyes already. Starmer is a right-wing, Zionist supporter as well, which puts him permanently beyond the pale.
good evening Hanif and enjoyed seeing the questions and your response - do like the way you have a rough plan and scrap it change it rescue it and so on - the frame is there but the freedom works round it. Today for some reason I (as usual this is a daily exercise) inspected my short stories on the website where they rest to see if anyone had read them - you can tell this by the number at the side - anyway no one had but as I got to the end of them, the latest one has only two reads and is stuck on that. Instead of leaving it and shrugging kind of thing and saying to myself OH WELL. instead of that, I changed the title and changed slightly the cover as this is displayed and who knows might persuade someone to read it - but the point to this long winded thing is that I did something different. You, are doing something different and again I see this as a triumph rising out of the devastating breakdown you went through. me seeing that is not the same as you experiencing it though. Yes the best news ever is Starmer as PM - I am waking up more hopeful thanks to this. I am watching god help me pointless celebrities why on earth when don't like it - the answer is it rained all day and I've watched enough sport to empty my brain. Warm wishes this week from the nowhere village love Maddi x ps the footie tomorrow though - INGERLAND.
My husband, age 83, has been more or less housebound for over four years due to a series of medical conditions, starting with a stroke and ending with some chemotherapy. Nothing so serious as you. But he also had a strong reaction that he did not want to affect my life and kept urging me to go away on my own, which I have done very little. I was very touched by your concern for your partner. Very similar. In the end, I asked if our situations were reversed, would he go - and he said, a bit sheepishly, no. I feel that is Life. And we have been married for 61 years.
Your comments in response to our questions/prompts are quite helpful; thanks for taking our questions and your thoughtful commentary.
Thank you for answering my question. I'm so happy that your reply was exactly what I hoped for.
This is truly insightful. Dear Kureishi/Carly, how do we get in touch with you via email?
Cheers,
HB
Last year, I read 'Rabbit Is Rich' by John Updike. It is the third book in the Rabbit tetralogy that periodically drops in on the former college basketball star Harry 'Rabbit' Angstrom at pivotal moments during his life. Collectively, these four books, along with their novella-length coda, must surely be a strong candidate for great American novel (1960s -1980s era).
'Rabbit is Rich' is penned in the third-person-present, where everything unfolds in the moment. It adds potency to action; to sex and violence. As a reader you are there watching from the sidelines, privy to the innermost thoughts of the characters as they think them. You are there when the completely clueless Harry finds himself in the company of a woman who he has overlooked, but who adores him for the man he is. The danger of writing in this style is that it will expose bad writing. If you do it poorly then it has a tendency to come across as over-developed stage directions.
In my opinion, the only time stereotyping has really produced high art with mass appeal was in The Simpsons where every character in the show is based on a broad stereotype and they are humanised by their experiences and by their interactions with each other. I think the show went off the rails when the writers either lost sight of, or lost faith in, that premise and gave in to virtue signalling and finger wagging.
The TV sitcom 'Love Thy Neighbour', which in the UK, is commonly cited as a benchmark for casual racism, and has to be seen to believed, was before my time. I have a feeling that perhaps afterwards there was a very gradual generational pendulum swing away from that. I grew up watching Play School which was hosted by a broad cast of presenters, among them Floella Benjamin and Derek Griffiths. British society was much more segregated then than it is now. I think that it was very important to have black presenters on that show, not singled out, but just there along with everybody else. Floella has a smile that lights up the world. I can't look at photographs of the Play School team, as they were, or as they are now (those who are still with us) without smiling back. I have nothing but warm feelings towards them.
I vaguely recall Wayne Laryea from Pipkins tangling with the overbearing know-it-all Hartley Hare (imagine if someone exhumed the body of a real-life hare and transformed it into a terrifying hand puppet). The episode where the goldfish dies and the characters go on to discuss death in general made a very strong impression on me. I remember the dapper Terry Sue-Patt, who played Benny in the early years of Grange Hill, and who died tragically at the age of 50. Everyone went to school with a kid like Benny.
A pivotal programme that I never hear anyone talk about is The Lenny Henry Show. The morning after the first episode aired there was this wave of enthusiasm like nothing I had experienced before, or have since. Kids in the playground were practically falling over themselves imitating Henry, reliving his funniest moments. I suspect that a lot of the humour on that show will not have aged well – I recall a musical spoof of the Thriller video where it was strongly implied that Michael Jackson was suffering from bulimia. Henry was at his best when he positioned himself in the role of older brother. He had this great bit about attempting to conceal the fact that he was drunk from his mother. None of us had touched a drop of alcohol but we all knew the futility of attempting to hide something from your parents. Humour like that crosses all kinds of social barriers.
Another thing Henry did that was new to me, was he would have these character like Deakus – an elderly Jamaican man – who were caricatures but, unlike the cruel imitations of black and asian people that you would sometimes see on the street, they were were grounded in reality. They were probably based on adults Henry knew. It was my introduction to observational comedy.
Why does any of this matter? It matters because it is very easy to dehumanise or be prejudiced towards different races, or cultures, or demographics when you either don't encounter them as individuals or only interact with them from a distance. Television, when it began to chip away at these boundaries, was a gateway to a wider world. I am certain that it brought us closer and can continue to do so.
"Writing tends to take this form, if you are lucky." Or diligent. All good writing has structure, and it's all the same. Lead sentence, descriptive sentence, counter sentence, and propositional sentence. Now next paragraph.
But this is just paint by numbers. The skillful writer manipulates this formula, but the underlying structure is always there, and can be uncovered through careful analysis. The unskillful writer has no idea rules exist. No amount of investigation uncovers structure. That's why it's hard to read unskillful writers.
Carlo*
I have been enjoying your blog and I have pre-ordered your book, but I must confess that I find your confidence in the Prime Ministership of Keir Starmer is disappointing. Starmer was in charge of the Crown Prosecution Service when Julian Assange was being pursued and instructed the Swedish prosecutors that they had better not dare to get "cold feet" in their persecution of Julian. That is a crime in my eyes already. Starmer is a right-wing, Zionist supporter as well, which puts him permanently beyond the pale.