Elizabeth Clementson's "Down with MFAs" guest column on MobyLives (down the left-hand side of the main page) has sparked vigorous disagreement from various MFA-holding readers, as well as a plaudit or two.
It seems that many people feel that what they learned from their MFA programs was indeed worth the money. And even though "writing by committee" doesn't sound all that swell, if the program teaches you how to harness the horses and drive them, and instructs you how to kill your darlings effectively, then it seems a possible, if financially inefficient, way to get there. I doubt many of the students in these programs come to the table with a perfect Ulysses or To Kill a Mockingbird that cannot be improved upon. I also wonder whether assigning the blame for commercial "plotlines" to the MFA workshop teaching method isn't a bit misplaced, since much "literary" fiction these days doesn't seem too concerned with presenting a story - for many people, that's what makes it seem "literary" in the first place.
All that aside, though, being saddled with $70,000 of debt and the dubious notion that you can take care of it with your first big advance doesn't sound like a wonderful way to begin a literary career. (Of course, if writing is merely a sideline to your teaching job, that's another story: one letter-writer, in defending the institution of the MFA, insists nonetheless that it's only worth it if you get it for free, as many who are already in the academic racket can apparently do.)
As for what the world looks like when you actually have an MFA? Well, my impression from idle, unscientific, wholly cursory, and more or less unsubstantiatable observation of publishing folks is that people with MFAs have a slight disadvantage in one way, in that everyone assumes that anyone who has one will be insufferable, difficult, or otherwise annoying. Journalists tend to roll their eyes in pretty much the same manner when it comes to J-school degrees. So maybe that should be factored into the cost-benefit analysis in some way.
Posted by Dr. Frank at June 23, 2005 04:44 PM | TrackBackmy band's breaking up so that our lead singer/songwriter can get his mfa. i told him it was a mistake, and he said it's something i wouldn't understand because i don't "appreciate fine literature." ha!
i make it my life goal to out mfa's as a load of crap- but then i'm that bitter.
Posted by: kendra at June 23, 2005 06:09 PMWait, I thought you took an MFA program so you could teach in an MFA program. No one ever said you'd have to *publish* anything. In fact, it's probably the only subject you can be a tenured professor in these days and *not* publish or perish...
I have an MFA from a Creative Writing program. I won't get into whether or not it was worth it for me cost-wise, etc. I'll just say that I enjoyed my time there, and I learned a lot, and read a lot of good books I would otherwise have not read. As far as the "writing by committee" argument that constantly comes up, I'll just say that being "workshopped" is really no different from any other kind of criticism — some advice you take, some you disregard. Perhaps the best thing about it was that it teaches you not to be so precious about your work. When it got annoying was when you realized someone was quoting "rules" at you, and that they had approached your piece with a check list, rather than actually reading the damn thing.
Posted by: Mikes at June 24, 2005 10:40 PM