"A writer should be invisible."
YES. As a reader, if I choose to know more about the writer after I've read their work, then I know where to look. Google. Knowing more about the writer will undeniably affect how you read what they've written. Knowing that John Cheever was a sexually confused alcoholic has a huge bearing on how I read his work. The same can be said for Emily Dickinson, and knowing that she was a social recluse who hated having her work edited. I see so many more layers to their writings, and I can't help but see parts of them reflected there too. I like to maintain an air of ignorance about the writer, because it changes how I read their work. Having said this, I think this only applies if you're given their life stories before you've read their piece. Had I not known about Cheever's alcoholism before reading 'The Swimmer', I would have read it differently. However - and this is a big however - as I mentioned in a previous blog post, knowing that the writer has experienced what the character has experienced does add a depth and credibility to the work.
So now that I've contradicted everything I've said before, I'm going to stop writing.
I agree with both sides of you arguement Sara, I think that if the author has experienced what they put into their writing it adds a sense of sencerity to their work. Having said that I think that it is important that the reader does not get too involved in knowledge of the author before they read the work as it may prohibit them forming their own understanding and interpretation.
ReplyDelete