Young writers accused of trifling with their art

By Sori Siregar

JAKARTA (JP): It appears more people read short stories than novels. They are circulated widely in newspapers and magazines, and it does not take long to read them. A story can be read in a half hour at the most.

But the shorter time necessary to read a story does not necessarily mean it is better. Granted, popular short stories are written solely for the purpose of entertaining readers.

This is not the case with "serious" creative short stories, such as those submitted to select media of literary magazines and journals. In these stories, entertaining readers is not a main ingredient. Writers are more obsessed with messages, ideas, philosophy or novelties.

A frequent short-story reader will recognize a variety of themes. Some young writers define themselves by their different literary styles from their predecessors. They may do this to show that they are separate from other writers, or just to boost the numbers of writers.

They want to create an original work which will make them writers of note. This is why they struggle with experimental works, some of which have been published in the media, particularly literary magazines.

How far will they go to reach their target? Observers are divided.

Several critics have dismissed the young writers for accomplishing nothing of note, and accused them of toying with the meaning of experimentation.

Their target, say their detractors, is to create works viewed as weird, unique or novel. Surrealism, absurdism or irrationalism -- not new in literary genre -- are embraced enthusiastically as a smokescreen for their real talents

Putu Wijaya was not joking when he said 15 years ago: "I don't believe in these experimental writers except for Danarto."

As a dedicated reader of short stories, I share Putu Wijaya's view. It must be admitted that nobody could compare to Danarto, particularly in his surrealistic short story collection, Godlob.

Iwan Simatupang, who died in 1970, is a surprisingly important writer. Irrationalism is deeply felt in his works. He beautifully depicts troubled people whose history, identity and direction always hangs under a question mark. Readers of Iwan's works meet alien characters from a strange world.

Danarto and Putu Wijaya followed with "specific uniqueness" in their works. People might term them as writers delving seriously into the essence of surrealism, existentialism or absurdism. Whatever the terminology, it is undeniable that their fiction has a marvelous quality.

The achievements of these three great writers might give their younger counterparts the idea they must do something out of the ordinary to become successful. They forget that the quality of a fictional piece or short story has nothing to do with style.

"The greater the motivation offered by a short story, the better it will be from other stories," said Joseph A. Rogers, James E. Cronin and Maurice B. McNamee in their book, Literary Types And Themes.

"Style is character," American novelist Norman Mailer once said. If that is true, quasi style would never last long. A writer would change to a new style if dissatisfied by another type.

This is the trend among young contemporary writers. They argue that a writer should not stick to a single style. To our surprise, they often confuse style and genre.

If the lexicon or literary scene really matters, young writers should be honest with themselves. Writing literary works is comparable to magic and trickery, according to Angus Wilson, a confidence trick to make people believe in something that is untrue.

Self-honesty makes the process of producing literary works much easier. The message, idea and philosophy should be readily understood by readers.

Of course, quality should be pursued seriously. Once these writers have made worthy contributions, their names will receive rightful recognition in literary circles.