T.C. Boyle is a remarkably entertaining writer, and I don’t mean that pejoratively at all – no nasty connotations like only entertaining, or entertaining to the detriment of style or plot. No, he just writes stories that are word/plot candy, and I stay up late gorging myself on them. Last night I was reading Tooth and Claw, his latest collection of short fiction (although the man is so prolific, he probably has two more books coming out of the chute – I don’t know how he puts out a book every single year, and teaches, and spends time with his family). Once I list a couple of the short stories summaries, you’ll realize two things: that Boyle writes about everywhere, everyone, and everything – he is, in essence, unlimited in his short story scope – and that the premises are very high concept – you could nearly sell a screenplay off one of them.
-An ardent sunscreen proponent who also wants to put dark glasses on all humans and animals
-A woman who “becomes” a dog in order to study them – Interspersed with the story of two wolf children
-A man wins an African lynx in a Bar game, tries to keep it in his apartment
-Radio announcer breaks the world record for the most days without sleep
Boyle’s often praised for his short story abilities, and sometimes this praise includes the caveat that he’s more of a short story writer than a novelist, which is misleading. He’s quite a good novelist – look at Drop City or the Tortilla Curtain – but sometimes a novel misfires – I found the pacing far too slow in The Inner Circle. That said, he rarely writes a short story that is unlikeable. Or rather, at least with a short story, you don’t online pharmacy generic have to stay with it very long, so if it’s not your favorite topic things won’t drag. His talent with short stories is to take a interesting premise and write a tight, fast-moving narrative to propel it along. That’s what makes his stories entertaining (if you want a heavy dose of them, buy his 704 page collected work: T.C. Boyle Stories).
To end this post, I’d like to weigh in on the MFA discussions that crop up perenially by mentioning that I studied under Boyle. He teaches ungraduate and graduate writing workshops at USC, and the way that he conducts the class helps avoid some of the pitfalls of workshops. Often in posts I find people complaining about fellow workshoppers – how a workshop takes all the energy out of a story – and they’re right (Here’s my rule – never listen to 80% of the people reading your story. Determining who comprises the 20% is the hard part). But writers don’t complain often about professors, who set the tone for the critique. A misleading professor gives you advice on their version of the story, or how to change the story to reflect their narrative sensibilities, while a good one works with the premise you’ve created. Good ole Coraghessan (the C. in T.C.) isn’t invasive, and he doesn’t try to shape your story into the one he would like to tell. He’s remarkable hands-off, often deferring judgment to the class, but when he does offer advice, at least in my experience, he’s trying to smooth out the arc of the piece presented, not trying to radically alter it.
So, if you find a professor who works with your stories and practice the 80% rule, your work shouldn’t take on “workshopped” characteristics.
