Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

This book has its good points. The editorial review mentions "dynamism," and the lectures are certainly that. Also, when the review argues that this book is a sort of "manifesto" of the author's vision, I wholeheartedly agree. It is nice to read a coherent perspective on writing and the process of artistic creation from a writer that does not sacrifice passion for some kind of mechanistic clarity or something of the sort. However, the ideas are ultimately simplistic. I would even argue that they are harmful ideas if not taken with a grain of salt. I, for one, stop trusting anyone who begins to put a limit on what writing can be. Writing is feelings not thoughts. This is literature, this is non-literature. That sort of thinking. It is another situation where an author has wrestled with himself and the establishment to find a unique voice, but who after becoming "legitimate" would like to close the door on what other voices might sound like. And it doesn't come as any surprise to me that Butler, in his picture of what good literature is composed of, manages to overlook a dimension missing from his own works (let's call it an artistic blindspot.) I think Robert Olen Butler is a very good writer. Particularly in the short story form, he has achieved some moments of brilliance and excellence. But his short stories read like long prose poems. And when he tries to lengthen or elaborate them, they fall apart under their own weight. This is why his books or novella-length works do not operate as well. When I compare his works to those of a greater writer (say, a William Faulkner, a Joseph Conrad, a Henry Miller, a Norman Mailer--and that's no mean company I'm putting him in), I find that what is missing is the intellect (but writers "are not intellectuals"!) Yes, there's a dimension of ideas that exists in all of those authors' works that is missing in Butler's works. His argument, of course, is that that dimension doesn't exist for any purpose but to illuminate some system of emotions that is in play within the work, that a work is ultimately only for the expression of some unique emotion. It doesn't surprise me, then, that his work is exceptionally powerful in one direction, but it falls flat in a number of other ways. His most successful work, A Good Scent from a Strange Mountain, benefitted greatly from its timely political setting and topic. In a sense, Butler could do what he does best, simply represent the emotional movement of characters, and the profundity of the period and the larger issue at stake helped to make up for and in some ways substitute for the lack of this other dimension. In any case, for a new writer to take Butler's ideas in this book as gospel would be to limit him or herself greatly. An older writer could probably better benefit from the collected lectures. A pleasant enough read if you remember to hold it at arm's length and to eye it critically. No, I wouldn't say this author has found the way.