So this morning I followed a series of links around the internet about John Updike’s archive, and what may or may not be gleaned from it.
That question aside, a lot of people are pointing out that this whole concept of a writer’s archive of materials is becoming obsolete in the digital age. Says Adam Begley in the nytimes, “Updike’s archive may be the last great paper trail… Anyone interested in how a great writer works will find here as full an explanation as we’re likely to get.”
Ruth Franklin further comments in The New Republic that “the computer discourages the keeping of archives, at least in their traditional form. If Updike had been working in Word, he might have left no trace of the numerous emendations to the opening airport scene of Rabbit at Rest.”
Mark Athitakis then follows up by suggesting that in the future, writer’s archive’s might consist of their twitter posts and facebook “likes”.
This seems like an excessively grim prediction. The idea that technology has obscured the “trace” of the working writer is baffling to me. Why should the fact of working in Word mean that writers don’t save their drafts, false starts, and excisions?
I can only speak of my own process, but for this most recent book alone, I have accumulated:
- Two notebooks (yes, real paper) worth of outlining, character sketches, problem-solving, etc.
- A folder full of photos I took to help me visualize the clothing and living spaces of my characters
- A file of links to articles and images from around the web that spurred bits and pieces of my story. And perhaps most strikingly,
- 123 individual files, including drafts at all stages, notes, dead-ended experiments, lists of words, ideas, concepts, places, and chunks of history I wanted to incorporate into the text, comments from critique partners, drafts of query letters, ever line I ever cut from the book but thought I might want to re-use later (I revive dead snippets all the time), paragraphs from other books I want to refer to for inspiration, lists of songs I found relevant while writing, excel sheets tracking character and theme development, and God only knows what other detritus.
And this is to say nothing of the vast number of emails, forum posts, and online journal entries I have racked up in the name of this enterprise. Egotist that I am, even I can’t imagine that any biographer would ever be compelled to sort through it all. And this is all for only one book!
I know not all writers work this way. I have some (very successful) friends who simply open up a fresh document, start writing, and from then on all their work is done in that one file, so there is indeed no record of their process. But even before computers, there were writers who burned their early drafts, or trashed all their notes the minute the book was sold. Has so much really changed? I’d say that the biggest change is that at least an electronic archive can be searched for relevant details as easily as hitting Ctrl+F.
How about you? When you’re famous and dead, will you have left anything behind for students of your work to sift through?
- I have many many files titled with numbers and letters, but the date thing seems to be working better for ...
- lol, that is a good idea. I have like, KISS THE MORNING STAR FROM SARAH, and KISS THE MORNING ...
- I have just counted: KtMS folder has 87 files, and my "NOTES AND STUFF" file is basically a bunch ...











