Mer om Oates

 

pict0274

 

Under tiden som jag lÀst Blonde har jag blivit mer och mer intresserad av hur Joyce Carol Oates arbetade nÀr hon skrev Blonde, bÄde vad det gÀller skrivprocessen och research. Nedan finns information angÄende detta plockat frÄn olika kÀllor pÄ nÀtet.

_______________________________

Delar av en intervju gjord av Greg Johnson , frÄn hemsidan http://jco.usfca.edu/

 

Could you describe your writing process as this novel evolved?

Oates: With a novel of such length, it was necessary to keep the narrative voice consistent and fluid. I was continually going back and rewriting, and when I entered the last phase of about 200 pages, I began simultaneously to rewrite the novel from the first page to about page 300, to assure this consistency of voice. (Though the voice changes, too, as Norma Jeans ages.) Actually, I recommend this technique for all novelists, even with shorter work. It’s akin to aerating soil, if you’re a gardener.

 

Were you concerned that the glare of Marilyn Monroe’s celebrity and myth might divert attention from your artistic goals? What was the advantage to you, as a writer, of using the skeletal reality of her life, instead of creating a wholly fictional actress-character to dramatize the “spiritual/poetic truth” you sought?

Oates: I’d hoped to evoke a poetic, spiritual, “inner” truth by selecting incidents, images, representative figures from the life, and had absolutely no interest in a purely biographical or historic book. Pre-publication responses and interviews so far have indicated quite sympathetic and intelligent readings of the novel. Of course, there will be others, but angry or dismissive reviews can happen to us regardless of what we write, whether purely fiction or fiction based upon history. The writer may as well pursue his or her vision, and not be distracted by how others will respond in their myriad and unpredictable ways.

 

You did considerable research into Monroe’s life and into the art of acting. Did you come to see parallels between acting and writing? Did you develop a sense of kinship with Monroe as you wrote the novel?

Oates: Not “considerable research” compared to my biographer/scholar friends. Rather, I created an outline or skeleton of the “life,” collated with the “life of the time.” (“Blonde” is also a political novel, in part. The rise of Red Scare paranoia, the betrayals and back-stabbings in Hollywood; the assumptions of what we might call Cold War theology: we are God’s nation, the Soviet Union belongs to Satan.) All of my longer novels are political, but not obtrusively so, I hope.

Theater/acting fascinate, as a phenomenon of human experience. Why do we wish to “believe” the actor in performance, why are we moved to true emotions in a context which we know is artificial? Since 1990 I’ve been involved quite actively in theater, and have come to greatly admire both directors and actors. Norma Jeane seems to have been a naturally gifted actress because, perhaps, she so lacked an inner core of identity. “I guess I never believed that I deserved to live. The way other people do. I needed to justify my life.” These were words of Norma Jeane’s I affixed to the wall beside my desk. How many of us, I wonder, feel exactly the same way!

What concerns did you have in dealing with living people—for example, Monroe’s third husband, the playwright Arthur Miller—in a fictional context? Did you contact or interview Miller, or anyone else who knew Monroe?

Oates: No, I didn’t interview anyone about “Marilyn Monroe.” It was not “Marilyn Monroe” about whom I wrote. Norma Jeane marries mythic individuals, not “historic” figures. Her husbands include the Ex-Athlete and the Playwright. (If I wanted to write about Joe DiMaggio and Arthur Miller, I would need to write about these complex men in a different mode. Though, in fact, the Playwright is presented from the inside, often. It’s clear that I identify with the Playwright, and that he becomes, eventually, the voice of conscience in the latter part of the novel. But I certainly didn’t read Arthur Miller’s memoir or any interviews with him about “Monroe.”)

 

 __________________________________________________

Om den research Oates gjorde innan hon skrev Blonde kan man lÀsa i en atrikel frÄn CNN.com, publicerad den 27 april 2000.

“The book is not a biography, Oates makes clear in the preface. But she did read three biographies (“Legend: The Life and Death of Marilyn Monroe,” “Goddess: The Secret Lives of Marilyn Monroe,” and “Marilyn Monroe: A Life of the Actress”) as well as watch all of Monroe’s movies on video during her research.

Oates invents conversations, meetings, poetry, and mixes them with real events, people and facts.”

_____________________________________________________

Mailintervju med joyce Carol Oates gjord av Cecilia Gustavsson, publicerad den 13 maj 2009.

Vad vill du framför allt sÀga med ditt författarskap?
– NĂ„got av det viktigaste Ă€r att vĂ€cka mĂ€nsklig sympati. Att skapa pĂ„hittade vĂ€rldar  som visar respekt för komplexiteten hos den mĂ€nskliga sjĂ€len. Detta inom estetiska strukturer som jag hoppas Ă€r poetiska, ofta experimentella och – hoppas jag – originella.
Vilken roman Àr du mest nöjd med?
– Alla Ă€r nĂ€ra mitt hjĂ€rta förstĂ„s. Men jag kĂ€nner mig sĂ€rskilt nĂ€ra “DödgrĂ€varens dotter”, eftersom den Ă€r en bit av min egen familjehistoria, omfantiserad till en sorts myt. Jag kĂ€nner ocksĂ„ extra för “Blonde” och för “Fallen”,  den senare utspelar sig nĂ€ra mitt barndomshem.
Hur fÄr du idéer till dina karaktÀrer?
– “KaraktĂ€rerna” kĂ€nns mycket verkliga för mig, knappt pĂ„hittade. Kanske kommer de till författare frĂ„n fantasins kungarike, ungefĂ€r som vĂ„ra omedvetna drömmar.
Du verkar ha en förmĂ„ga att sĂ€tta dig in i de mest skilda mĂ€nniskors personligheter – hur kommer det sig?
– Jag kĂ€nner en naturlig samhörighet med andra, ofta ren identifikation. Speciellt med ungdomar, i deras kaos av konflikter med vuxna och auktoriteter. Jag ger gĂ€rna röst till individer som Ă€r vĂ€ldigt annorlunda Ă€n jag sjĂ€lv.
Du har skrivit mycket om vÄld, psykiskt, fysiskt och sexuellt. Varför?
– Jag skriver egentligen aldrig om vĂ„ldet i sig sjĂ€lvt, utan om efterdyningarna av extrema hĂ€ndelser, som fĂ„r mĂ€nniskor att testa sin styrka och integritet. Ofta handlar det om kvinnor och flickor som överlevt vĂ„ldsamma hĂ€ndelser. Jag skriver inte om mĂ€nniskor som bara Ă€r offer, som har gett upp hoppet.
  Hon tar sin senaste roman pĂ„ svenska, “DödgrĂ€varens dotter”, som exempel: En ung kvinna (Joyces farmor) har en tragisk, vĂ„ldsam barndom och ungdom, men lyckas till slut finna en snĂ€ll, god man och bli mor till en pojke som blir konsertpianist.
Varför har du skrivit dagbok?
– Det Ă€r en sorts livlina, en förbindelse med mina tidigare jag genom Ă„ren. Det vore otĂ€nkbart att inte skriva dagbok. Det Ă€r en form av intensiv meditation. En plats dĂ€r, nĂ€r man en gĂ„ng trĂ€tt in i detta heliga, allt som Ă€r autentisk tom en sjĂ€lv avslöjas.
Har du förÀndrats mycket genom Ären?
– Ärligt talat sĂ„ har jag inte förĂ€ndrats sĂ„ mycket inuti. Inte heller nĂ€r det gĂ€ller mitt dagliga liv – mitt undervisande, mitt arbetsschema, mitt ganska lugna sociala liv. Den stora förĂ€ndringen Ă€r förlusten av min make Raymond Smith efter 48 Ă„r av vĂ€ldigt nĂ€ra Ă€ktenskap. Förlusten har slitit mitt liv i tvĂ„. Det har varit mycket svĂ„rare att koncenterera sig, sĂ„ jag mĂ„ste arbeta hĂ„rdare under lĂ€ngre tid nu.
– Att Raymond dog sĂ„ abrupt (i en sjukhusrelaterad infektion) var mycket chockerande och jag har inte hĂ€mtat mig Ă€nnu. Att skriva och undervisa Ă€r en stor tröst.
Vilka Àr fördelarna med att ha blivit Àldre, som författare?
– Att jag inte lĂ„ter mig nedslĂ„s lika lĂ€tt. Jag vet att de första sex veckornas arbete Ă€r svĂ„ra och ofta deprimerande. Men ocksĂ„ att – om jag fortsĂ€tter – sĂ„ blir det mycket mer tillfredsstĂ€llande, och jag blir allt mer upprymd.
Vad gör du nÀr du inte arbetar?
– Jag Ă€lskar att lĂ€sa förstĂ„s. Att fotvandra, cykla, gĂ„ pĂ„ teater och film.