The Value of MFA Programs

It really says something that the comments to this interview on Salon between Curtis Sittenfeld and Iowa Writers Workshop Director Lan Samantha Chang are far more interesting and honest-sounding than the interview itself. I don’t mean to beat on MFA programs (I know plenty of people who are good writers and had great experiences); it’s just that this interview sounds wholly canned. There are plenty of pros and cons to getting a Creative Writing MFA, so if you’ve got the people and the venue to explore them . . . why not do it?

For instance:

Do you think, “Fine. Criticize MFAs. Who cares?”

No. It’s so fascinating to me that smart people waste, or spend, an enormous amount of effort criticizing people who love to read and write. You know?

I mean, people enter the MFA system, and some of them are paying money to do so, because they love to read and write. Bottom line. That’s not a sin to me. I feel that people have a lot of reasons for pursuing an MFA and they’re not all the reasons that the critics of the MFA program would necessarily accept and understand. For example, I think when you go to an MFA program, it gives you a different orientation toward time, generally.

How so?

You have time to think and to pursue something that you love. That’s pretty basic. I mean, if the program is supporting you, which I think it should. I think an MFA program should fund its students.

Versus:

It’s not that MFA programs are a bad thing exactly, but they do have a tendency to become a bit insular, both in the writing that comes out of them and in what gets published. The poetry world is especially guilty of publishing to and with the same set of writers, and it concerns me that some very talented people are going by the wayside as a result.

As an avid reader and a professional person who works with literature for a living, I can usually spot pieces that come out of an MFA program pretty easily, especially short stories. They often have a sameness that is worrisome.

Again, I’m not saying all MFA programs are bad. Often, schooling can help a good writer become a better writer. No one can teach greatness, of course.

What I am saying is that it’s very, very easy to get faddish, lazy, or fall into bad habits, and it’s very easy for cronyism to spring up as well. I wish some of these programs would be more wary about that.

More from Conversational Reading:

  1. Writing Myths Over at Poets & Writers, there’s a pretty good list (with commentary) of myths writers "live by, but shouldn’t." Of the myths listed, these are...
  2. Javier Marias Is a Sexy Author I'd like to introduce the first in a new series of ebooks published under the auspices of The Quarterly Conversation. The book is called, Lady...
  3. The Real Cuckoo’s Nest Nice review of The Program Era: Postwar Fiction and the Rise of Creative Writing in the current Bookforum. The book details how the MFA has...
  4. Sebald Interview Even though it’s ten years old, I thought I’d link to this Sebald interview since it has been making the rounds. (By which I mean,...
  5. Generational Differences Lauren has a pretty good take on the Mavis Gallant interview in the current Granta: What I found most interesting about their conversation was the...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.


Criticism Isn't Free


CR is dedicated to thoughtful, in-depth criticism without regard to what's commercially appealing. It takes tens of hours each month to provide this. Please help make this sort of writing sustainable, either with a subscription or a one-time donation. Thank you!





1 Comment

Got Something To Say:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

[…] good comments to this article too. Again of far greater interest and less bullshitty than that Salon interview with the IWW’s current head. You Might Also Like:Jeanette Winterson at The Quarterly […]

Shop though these links = Support this site

Copyright © 2015. Powered by WordPress & Romangie Theme.