Mad Dog and Glory
7th January 2005, 04:58 PM
The expression comes from a website which lists TV shows that were good, and then turned bad, and seeks to pinpoint the exact moment where it all went wrong.
The same is true for writers. How often have you read the first few novels by a writer that were so good, you were almost counting the days until the next one came out? Then it when it did, it turned out to be rubbish.
I would like to nominate two writers whose novels I loved (in the first case) and admired (in the second case) that when they brought out a novel I didn't like, it almost felt like a betrayal.
They are John Irving and Martin Amis.
John Irving never managed to repeat the glories of The World According To Garp and The Hotel New Hampshire, and I liked A Prayer For Owen Meany and even The Cider House Rules (terrible sentimental film), but for me he jumped the shark with A Son Of The Circus, which I couldn't even finish. I've read all his novels since, but with increasing disenchantment, and will undoubtedly read the next one.
Martin Amis was so brilliant in his first few novels that every sentence left you feeling an awkward mix of awe and jealousy, and then he brought out London Fields. Again, I couldn't finish it. He had seemed not only to lose touch with the real world, but with his invented world, and the characters in it. He seemed to have turned into a pale parody of himself.
Here are a few theories about why good writers go bad:
1) Because they only had a limited number of things to say, and once they've said them, they keep saying them over and over again.
2) Because once they succeed, the hunger and the fire in the belly are gone.
3) Because they lose touch with what made them writers in the first place. They have celebrity friends, go to literary parties, award ceremonies, and move further and further away from the characters who people their books/scripts. Basically, they no longer know those kind of people.
4) Because they believe they no longer have anything to learn. If you reach this stage, your work can only suffer - and you are destined to repeat yourself. So any writer who stops reading, and who isn't interested in what else is out there, can only stand still, and if you stand still for too long you inevitably go backwards.
The same is true for writers. How often have you read the first few novels by a writer that were so good, you were almost counting the days until the next one came out? Then it when it did, it turned out to be rubbish.
I would like to nominate two writers whose novels I loved (in the first case) and admired (in the second case) that when they brought out a novel I didn't like, it almost felt like a betrayal.
They are John Irving and Martin Amis.
John Irving never managed to repeat the glories of The World According To Garp and The Hotel New Hampshire, and I liked A Prayer For Owen Meany and even The Cider House Rules (terrible sentimental film), but for me he jumped the shark with A Son Of The Circus, which I couldn't even finish. I've read all his novels since, but with increasing disenchantment, and will undoubtedly read the next one.
Martin Amis was so brilliant in his first few novels that every sentence left you feeling an awkward mix of awe and jealousy, and then he brought out London Fields. Again, I couldn't finish it. He had seemed not only to lose touch with the real world, but with his invented world, and the characters in it. He seemed to have turned into a pale parody of himself.
Here are a few theories about why good writers go bad:
1) Because they only had a limited number of things to say, and once they've said them, they keep saying them over and over again.
2) Because once they succeed, the hunger and the fire in the belly are gone.
3) Because they lose touch with what made them writers in the first place. They have celebrity friends, go to literary parties, award ceremonies, and move further and further away from the characters who people their books/scripts. Basically, they no longer know those kind of people.
4) Because they believe they no longer have anything to learn. If you reach this stage, your work can only suffer - and you are destined to repeat yourself. So any writer who stops reading, and who isn't interested in what else is out there, can only stand still, and if you stand still for too long you inevitably go backwards.