Creative Writing

To the Editors of The Crimson:

Although Steven Schorr's article on creative writing at Harvard was better than I expected it to be, his subacidity led to several impressions which I would like to briefly but fully dispel.

Admittance to Option III is "convenient" but not all that important. The reporter's niggling question--Would Eliot have gotten in? Would Lowell?--is a ridiculous one. Lowell was refused by the Advocate when he comped many years ago; nothing aborts relentless talent. The option's selection committee includes Robert Fitzgerald, Monroe Engel, William Alfred, Alexander Theroux, John Batki and Jane Shore--and if you agree with Schorr's insinuation that they are incapable of responding to all types of writing, take a minute to check their remarkable and diverse credentials--and they do not judge a writer against another writer, but rather against the writer's own theories, intentions and standards. Just as the publishing community is rife with anecdotes about books that were repeatedly rejected going on to become classics, so too the writing field spurns many of its future greats. The committee's academic credentials minimize the subjectivity involved in selection, but selection must occur, and it is a subjective act. How many of us have friends of equal or better academic stature who didn't get into Harvard? Is that "fair?" And finally, where did they end up that is so much worse? Princeton? Yale? Stanford? Although Option III is limited, there are almost a dozen open writing courses here, two newspapers, three magazines, one publishing house, and then there's the whole publishing world outside. Some of my friends did not get into Option III, but two years from now, they will be no farther "behind." If you're a real writer, not getting into Option III is meaningless. Writing is egocentric yet painful, and believing in oneself is all.

To those who feel spurned by writing in general here: do you feel you deserve a place in the creative writing program? Option III people and other serious writers read voraciously, write every day, spend much time on non-graded work, and suffer the pains of having personal, creative work rejected and criticized--a pain the lowly-graded term paper only approximates. I myself feel excluded from many courses outside my major; Harvard's hopes of liberal education aside, there is a degree of specialization and competency here which necessitates some form of selection. If Schorr's article does nothing else, it reminds us that the creative writing program is fortunate to have a staff and a building; what about music, art, dance, theatre? Giving academic credit for creative work is a delicate matter, especially at so intensely an academic institution as Harvard; while I advocate even further gains for crediting creative work, I understand and wholly sympathize with the Administration's reluctance and scruplousness. Marc Granetz '78