MFA vs NYC: The Two Cultures of American Fiction

I first heard about this book some years back, when I moved to NYC for my first job in publishing and was thinking about applying for an MFA. Every once in a while, I’d come across it in a bookstore, but never felt it was a very urgent read.Cut to this year, as I’m planning to begin the exciting and heart wrenching process of applying to MFAs, and this book became a VERY urgent read for me.Aside from Chad Harbach’s title essay, “MFA vs. NYC,”this book features 18 more from various authors, some written for the collection, and others reprinted from previous publications. The essays are broken up into thematic sections: “MFA,” “NYC,” “The Teaching Game,” “Views on the program era,” and “The Great Beyond.” The collection didn’t turn out to be exactly what I expected, but I found almost every piece very entertaining and helpful regardless.I at first thought the MFA vs. NYC debate was about whether or not it’s better for emerging writers to go to an MFA to pursue their writing, or to move to NYC to steep in publishing culture and make connections (something of great interest to me since I ALREADY live in NYC and am not sure whether it’d be worth leaving just for an MFA). The title essay was instead about making a living as a writer—either as an MFA professor, mostly making your money from teaching and publishing a book every once in a while that mainly sells to MFA students, or as a writer who publishes books with major publishers, which provides the potential for a very large audience, but not much stability or guarantee of any real outcome. And of course there are writers who hit the sweet spot of both cultures (George Saunders, for one). I’d somehow never thought of it like that before, so that was pretty eye-opening.The other pieces varied a lot (my favorites are listed below). But the main thing I took away from this particular collection is that getting an MFA can make a big difference in your career trajectory as a writer, at least in the beginning. There were a few essays and advice snippets that essentially asserted that agents and publicists pay attention to the stamp of approval an MFA gives someone. Though that’s not a guarantee at all. It just might get you a finger through the door, but there’s always the possibility of it slamming shut on that finger. Still, many of the essay authors viewed MFAs in a positive light. Ones who had completed MFAs even said that their experience at the programs changed their lives (in a good way, even if it wasn’t directly getting them published). In general. Of course, there were some stories that talked of struggle too and extreme insecurity/imposter syndrome that seemed to still be present for many of them, no matter how much they’d accomplished. So it was nice and I hear these writers’ honest thoughts about it all.Here are my favorite essays of the bunch:“A Mini-Manifesto” by George Saunders (It was a mini-manifesto indeed and was very much in favor of pursuing an MFA, preferably at Syracuse, in his humble opinion.)“The Pyramid Scheme” by Eric Bennet (On the origins of the Iowa Writers’ Workshop and how the CIA funded it in its early days so they could have international writers in from communist countries enroll in the program, in hopes that these writers would come to prefer capitalism and then influence their home countries with their subconsciously capitalist-tinged writings.)“My Parade” by Alexander Chee (On his experience as a student at the Iowa Writers’ Workshop—when he got in, and his boyfriend didn’t.)“How to be Popular” by Melissa Flashman (On needing to be an expert in the ever-shifting business of “cool” as a literary agent.)“Nine Lives” by Jynne Martin (A great insight on what it’s like to be a book publicist who really cares about their books and authors.)

The only essay that really says something in this book is the obne by Chad Harbachy himself. The title of the anthology suggests a false dichotomy, namely that the writing that really counts nowadays is largely divided between the NYC agents and publishing houses, and the MFA degree programs in colleges and universities. It is hard to believe that an advanced nation with a population of over 300 million should have so narrow a range of choices. For example: What about the very thriving poetry scene in and around the Bay area of San Francisco, with its dozens of literary bookstores and coffee shops, and as many readings per week? What about the hundreds of small presses around the country, many of them of very high quality? What about all the new options for self-publishing? I myself have a website on which dozens of my articles, essays, works of fiction appear. Two of my novels are Kindle E-Mail books. Otherwise I have published in Europe. I dont consider either NYC or the MFA as viable options. I, also, was "educated" in this false notion, in college, that the only "scenes" in American literature were in NYC or the universities. It's taken me years to realize how wrong this is. In addition, apart from Mr. Hudson's essay, the writing in this anthology is, by and large, mediocre.

This is a very interesting book for anyone seeking to write. The writer's world has changed dramatically over the past decade, and this book outlines those changes. The creative lifestyle is not what you might imagine, esp. in the digital age. Poverty, disrespect and struggle are not to be romanticized. Yet... One can still have a vibrant & interesting life as a writer. Get a degree, or certificate, that pays decently but doesn't deplete your creativity. Reconsider the move to NYC, as it's not necessary to publish. Write at night, or on weekends. Discipline, as well as the speed of the computer, makes this possible. Besides, a decent job with a fun scene will inspire the writer to write better stories. An MFA is fine, but is the debt worth it? Do you really want to work in the underpaid/disrespected world of academia? This books allows you to answer these questions as you move forward. It makes me grateful for my science degree, even as I pen words late at night in the garret.

Wow, I wish I had read this before my MFA program. I heard instructors make snarky remarks about the book, but was too busy to read it until after I completed my degree. Now, I understand. In a nutshelll, the MFA programs are self-licking ice cream cones. My instructors were always snarky about publishing for money -- considering it "vulgar" to be concerned with that. Writing should be "art," they implored. Now I understand. Those who can't (publish in NYC), teach. Teach MFA programs to create more teachers for MFA programs. Invaluable read.

This is quite a book if you are an aspiring writer, or effectively a writer, in the USA. It is formed by essays from writers from the two main groups that compose American fiction-writing: those who pursue MFAs (and end up teaching on the same programs) and those who skip the academic path and go straight to work on publishing houses, part-time jobs, waiting tables, etc, until they make it as full-time writers. These groups have different views, plans and lifestyles, but the common goal of making it as writers, and the book highlights the limitations of both paths, the advantages, and give aspiring writers an in-depth look into what they have expecting them.

If you are a writer--or you just like knowing about writers--this is a very good discussion of what it's like to study writing, to struggle to publish, to "be" a writer. It is totally contemporary and represents a wide range of sensibilities/artists.

So You Want to Be a Writer? For British readers, the title of Harbach’s volume may need explanation. The Master of Fine Arts degree (MFA) is the standard terminal degree in creative writing programmes in the American university system. In Britain the equivalent would be an MA or sometimes an MLitt or other alphabetical designation. The opposition in the title, MFA vs NYC, refers to two different routes to being a writer, and two different destinations or identities for that. The MFA is the academic route that, via completion of the master’s programme and, typically, publication of short stories in little or not so little magazines, online and/or print, may lead to the fragile stability of a teaching position in a writing programme, with its regular pay and benefits and the requirement to continue publishing. The other route is, possibly literally, to move to New York or some other location not dominated by the university and try to succeed as a writer via contact with or working in “Manhattan’s trade publishing industry” (3). Obviously, there are connections and exchanges between these two spheres. MFA vs NYC is a collection of essays by writers and teachers about the experience and various outcomes of these two differing but related choices, including such crucial issues as money, agents, and what the devotion of time and other resources to the effort to write can do to the individual’s life. All but one of the essays are written in a very readable style, whether tending to the literary or the colloquial. The only exception, predictably, is Fredric Jameson’s discussion of Mark McGurl’s 2009 book The Program Era about the relation between American fiction and the university system. Jameson’s essay is worth reading but the style is tainted by the dialect of academe, not fully compatible with clarity. Overall, though, the volume is extremely readable and, with its vivid emphasis on personal experience, speaks directly to both writers and wannabes. There is also frequent mention of relevant websites, magazines, short stories and full-length books, information useful to anyone involved in writing. MFA vs NYC is both realistic and encouraging for its possible audience, neither understating the difficulties nor overstating the successes for those committed to the pursuit of that challenging vocation and identity: the writer. I recommend the book as essential reading for all those, on either side of the Atlantic, who want to write.

I found this to be a useful and unbiased insight into both mfa programs and the broader publishing industry.