A reflection on the writing process

James Agee died before he finished his novel, A Death in the Family. He wrote the first draft, in various parts, but had not finished editing his work when he passed away. He had enough admirers among his writing friends that they banded together to finish his work. They edited his novel, but took care to leave his original words intact. They also inserted certain portions that were not part of the original manuscript in the places they seemed best to fit. In some portions of the book, these pieces fit. In others, one cannot guess at the intent of the author, only that he was experimenting with a voice or tone that he might have altered or somehow fit into the novel had he not died beforehand.

Although I generally object to posthumous publications -- the idea of someone publishing a work I never completed is frightening to me, and I imagine many writers; we can't all be Emily Dickinson -- reading "A Death in the Family" is an education. For any writer, it is a thrill to see another writer's process; although we so rarely share this side of our lives because it is the most terrifying, boring, exhausting and essential part of our work. But to read a manuscript that will always sit without the author's final touch shows me that the writing process was not so different for Agee than it is for me and many other writers. The essential plot is there, but there are also sideliness, digressions, stories that never go anywhere. Agee may have intended to tie them up; he may have intended to cut them, forever, from the literary world. We will never know.

Now, Agee is such a fine writer that it is easy to overlook these portions. Also, his death provides an easy excuse. "Certainly, he would have cut these if he could have," we murmur at points that do not suit, that do not please. But the publication of his book without that final draft means we are privy to all the possibilities of the manuscript. It might have gone this way. It might have gone that. It might have been a fine book. It might have been great.

My instinct is that the novel would have been great, but to never know seems to me that Agee cheated the system. When an author allows a work to be published at a specific point, it leaves her open to our judgment. We criticize her choices, her mistakes, the weak points. But with Agee, we simply cannot know what to criticize because the author did not have the final choice. He may have intended so many changes, but given to us in this form, who among us can fault the novel or the writer when a set of now-nameless editors had that final say? Ultimately, we can only speculate. We can only say what we would have cut. But to critique the novel of a writer who never had that final choice seems impermissible and petty. "He died. We cannot criticize him for that."

Literary Cat Fight

Apparently Kakutani insulted Franzen's work, so Franzen insulted Kakutani. It's lovely that critics and writers have such a healthy working relationship.