Maud Newton alerts us to this Paris Review interview with her longtime favorite, Marilynne Robinson.
INTERVIEWER Do you plot your novels?
ROBINSON I really don’t. There was a frame, of course, for Home, because it had to be symbiotic with Gilead. Aside from that, no. I feel strongly that action is generated out of character. And I don’t give anything a higher priority than character. The one consistent thing among my novels is that there’s a character who stays in my mind. It’s a character with complexity that I want to know better.
We've all got those authors, haven't we, whom know we are expected to read, whom we know await discovery like a jewel in a box, who loom large on that shelf of "Great Books We Haven't Read" - and then comes the day when we pick up the book in question and, no matter how prepared we are for greatness, proceed to have our heads ripped from our shoulders. That's more or less how we feel two chapters into Housekeeping, which we have finally picked up. It's everything you've heard, and what the hell were we waiting for?
Gilead is a truly beautiful thing. In fact, I'm looking at it on my shelf right now and I might just spend a few moments with it.
Posted by: JW | October 01, 2008 at 05:01 PM
It's inspiring to hear that Robinson doesn't plot her novels out, because I remember "Housekeeping" so much better than I remember most novels with "bigger" plots...
Posted by: Kit Stolz | October 01, 2008 at 10:20 PM
I heart Housekeeping. It haunted me.
Posted by: LiteraryMinded | October 02, 2008 at 04:35 AM
Housekeeping is a masterpiece -- utterly original.
Posted by: Karen | October 02, 2008 at 06:51 AM
I read the excerpt of Gilead in the New Yorker and was stunned by its beauty, but for me the book didn't measure up. I am more curious about Robinson's thoughts on writing than I am about Housekeeping or Home.
Posted by: Carolyn | October 02, 2008 at 07:11 AM
This interview comment seems to rightly impact you, TEV, since character is likewise the aspect of your own novel that stands out. Like him or not, Harry is someone I think about, that I, in my imagination, have been using as a kind of playground to work out issues pertaining to moral grown and possibility in the human condition. I'm not sure that his character generates plot in your novel--your own structure is much more formalized, say, than a Gilead or a Housekeeping. Yet you share with Robinson this committment to exploring a person--you more exploring how sin/failure works on character, I think, than her, even if she is a more religious writer. The absolute weakness, moral and otherwise, and self-delusion of Harry seems right on. I wanted to tell you that I read it last weekend, and that I've been thinking about it, your novel, I mean.
Posted by: Tiffany Kriner | October 02, 2008 at 09:17 AM
I had problems with Gilead, which I talked about when I guested here a couple of years back. You can't fault the writing, but ... Housekeeping is special, though. Caroline, you should give it a go.
Posted by: Karen | October 02, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Tiffany, what you say is true: Mark only uses plot when he's making brownies.
Posted by: Jim | October 02, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Agreed. I finished Housekeeping last week, and it blew me away. It's the first novel I've ever thought might actually be perfect. (Which is not to say it's my favorite, though it is currently among my favorites.)
I wish I'd enjoyed Gilead as much. I got fifty pages into that one and set it down. I just couldn't get into it. That was a couple of years ago, though, and tastes change. It's possibly I'll revisit it one of these days.
Posted by: Cari | October 03, 2008 at 02:30 PM