What I'm saying is, a reader must have talent. Quite a lot of talent, actually, because even the most talented reader will find much of the land of literature tricky terrain. For how many of us feel the world to be as Kafka felt it, too impossibly foreshortened to ride from one village to the next? Or can imagine a world without nouns, as Borges did? How many are willing to be as emotionally generous as Dickens, or to take religious faith as seriously as did Graham Greene? Who among us have Zora Neale Hurston's capacity for joy or Douglas Coupland's strong stomach for the future? Who has the delicacy to tease out Flaubert's faintest nuance, or the patience and the will to follow David Foster Wallace down his intricate recursive spirals of thought? The skills that it takes to write it are required to read it. Readers fail writers just as often as writers fail readers. Readers fail when they allow themselves to believe the old mantra that fiction is the thing you relate to and writers the amenable people you seek out when you want to have your own version of the world confirmed and reinforced. That is certainly one of the many things fiction can do, but it's a conjurer's trick within a far deeper magic. To become better readers and writers we have to ask of each other a little bit more.
What Makes a Good writer? Is Writing An
COMMUNITY REFLECTIONS
SHARE YOUR REFLECTION
3 PAST RESPONSES
Fine, thoughtful piece by Zadie Smith. However, I'm not sure I believe, or want to believe, that "Reading, done properly, is every bit as tough as writing." Yes, it takes great attention and even well-focused repetition to comprehend what a good writer is trying to say. But the conception and writing and re-writing, and re-writing again is, I think, so much "tougher" than even the best reading. But what the hell do I know.
Both writer and reader must firstly, before any talent, have "heart".
It is true that a reader must have talent