A Rich Confession
Frank Rich, announcing his departure from the New York Times, writes in part:
When I felt frustrated by churning out a standard-length Op-Ed column after a few years, The Times went out of its way to accommodate me by giving me more space, all the better for trying to connect more dots. It was fated that I would one day find myself eager to break out of that box too. I have always wanted to keep growing as a writer, not run in place. My latest bout of restlessness had nothing to do with the tumultuous upheavals of the news business in the digital era. It was an old-media mission I started to chafe at — opinion writing within the constraints of newspaper deadlines and formats.
[William] Safire, a master of the form, was fond of likening column writing to standing under a windmill: No sooner did you feel relief that you had ducked a blade than you looked up and saw a new one coming down. He thrived on this, but after 17 years I didn’t like what the relentless production of a newspaper column was doing to my writing. That routine can push you to have stronger opinions than you actually have, or contrived opinions about subjects you may not care deeply about, or to run roughshod over nuance to reach an unambiguous conclusion. Believe it or not, an opinion writer can sometimes get sick of his own voice.
The rest is here.
Frank Rich was always a better theater critic than political commentator.
I will miss (pace Mr. F’s usual one sided view) Frank Rich’s weekly op-ed. He represented a powerful weekly voice for left.
I found the reference at the end to the finale of Sunday in the Park with George “Move On” to offer not only an explanation of personal motive, but also a call of being continually perspective to his readers.
Isn’t that ever so true that deadlines make writers make up things whether it is facts or opinion? The deadline is the biter to catch the conscience of the writer. No doubt deadlines are necessary. But sometimes at great cost.
Agree with Rich that there nothing like the NY Times in journalism. This is why so many who color the news do not like the Times.
“run roughshod over nuance to reach an unambiguous conclusion. ”
And he was so superlative on that metric too . . . .
A fine sign-off. I’d largely agree with his self-criticism, but how many people are capable of writing a critique of themselves that their critics can agree with? Not many of us, I suspect.
Bill M wrote: “Isn’t that ever so true that deadlines make writers make up things whether it is facts or opinion?”
I say: “No.” If a writer is going to make something up, deadlines aren’t likely to be the cause, I’d say. A quest to get ahead, ambition, competition, greed, whatever. But such vices work under a deadline of 10 minutes or 10 years, and can afflict authors and academics as well as journalists.
The daily or weekly deadline is arguably a boon to accuracy; you don’t try to say or claim more than you can, and there’s always tomorrow to get another crack at it.
That said, being a columnist is a very very hard thing to do. Most anyone can write a good column or two or three. Doing it twice a week or even weekly is hard to do well.
“Believe it or not, an opinion writer can sometimes get sick of his own voice.”
Years after everyone else has.
I can relate to Rich’s column esp the image of the windmill, in regard to having to prepare a homily each week. I just wish I could be half as insighful or engaging as Rich, even when I disagreed with him.
For me, the hardest thing is eight hundred words. To come in at the right angle, so that you finish the idea at about the same time you run out of words. If you get it wrong, you can’t just lop off the bottom; you have to start all over and come in at a different angle.
I second David’s point. I have no idea how people do these once a week.
Cathy:
you are right! the late Cyril Connolly who wrote the weekly book review leader for the Times of London once described his task as the “tyranny of the 800 words.”
In the journo dodge it’s said that writing short is much harder than writing long, and I think that applies to many arenas of writing.
That said, some of the best writing is short writing, though it doesn’t seem as valued anymore, or is that my imagination? Short stories and novellas seem to get short shrift while Frazenesque tomes are the rage. I think that may also be a function of editing, as really condensing an idea into 800 words requires work at the front and back end.
Joe Klein had a nice column on David Broder, who died last week, and said he was a better reporter than columnist, in part because he didn’t have the bit of “wickedness” a columnist requires. I like that idea, and it gets to the idea of a column as something that has to pierce to the heart at some point.
Broder was IMO a great centrist and also spent much time, even in his last years, out talking to people.
The tributes to him on last Friday’s Washington Week show him to be a demanding but deeply helpful mentor to a number of today’s reporters.
But their numbers are declining, I fear!
Good political commentary has an edge that’s different.
Again, despite some of the brief diparragements from the right here, Rich was an excellent craftman for the left’s point of view.
I would add, apropos of Broder and Bob’s comment, that I think the best columnists remain good reporters, writers who get out and talk to people, hoi polloi and power brokers alike. Joe Klein is strong that way, and Bob Herbert and Kristof at the NYT.
To David G and the professional journalists on the list – would you recommend that an aspiring student pursue the profession? One of my children seems to have some talent and interest, but is worried that the employment opportunities, especially in print journalism, will be too tough going forward.
David Broder’s lack of wickedness is part of what made him so refreshing to read. There never seemed to be an angle or ulterior motive to have to filter out.
The short story is alive and well in fiction MFA programs throughout the country. Short-story collections never sold very well (always less well than novels), and now that doesn’t matter, since accomplished short-story writers can get a job teaching creative writing. The column also continues to thrive, though it is quickly being outpaced by its spoiled stepchild, the blog post. The only short form that’s in real trouble is the old-fashioned essay, which nowadays has to be disguised as a review.
Bob Nunz mentioned the tributes to David Broder on Washington Week. Here are the links:
http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/content/radar-march-9-2011
http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/content/rest-peace-david-broder
David Gibson said, “I think the best columnists remain good reporters, writers who get out and talk to people, hoi polloi and power brokers alike.” David gave a couple of examples. I’d like to give another: Murray Kempton.
When I was living in New York City in the 60s and 70s, I always read his columns. Then I went off to El Salvador to cover the war there. The heaviest fighting in the war took place in November, 1989, when the guerrillas launched an offensive that included bringing the war to the capital city for the first time. The offensive began on November 11. So who do you think strolled into the press hotel on the night of November 12? Murray Kempton. He was 71, but that didn’t stop him from going out and reporting – which in this case meant covering the fighting. He wrote four extraordinary pieces about that period. They’re reprinted in Rebellions, Perversities and Main Events, an excellent anthology of his writings.
j.a.m. said: “Believe it or not, an opinion writer can sometimes get sick of his own voice.”
Years after everyone else has.
But j.a.m., you have been posting here for just a short time – and it didn’t take us years in your case!
How dare I speak for others. ” — and it didn’t take ME years in your case!”