Confessions of an Analogian Writing for the Webs

November 5, 2012 | 24 7 min read

I have to wonder how it happened. In early 2009, I wrote on my newly-minted blog:

It’s a pretty weird time on the planet — the economics of everything, the tools of mass communication, the rise (rise? emergence? triumph? hard to say…) of self-publishing and DIY arts production and distribution. Everything’s spinning and turning — exhilaratingly for some, nauseatingly for others.

I was leaning toward nausea at the time. In all things, I was analog. I worked slowly, and I liked material, concrete things. Like books, pens, paper. My first novel was a year from release, and I’d been told, by everyone I knew in the literary world, that I should start a blog. Reluctantly, awkwardly, I did.

coverIn 2010, in an essay for the anthology The Late American Novel, I wrote:

Realistically: the printed book, in hard cover at the least, may well go by the wayside. By all accounts, digital technologies and the market are pushing print, as we know it, to the margins […] All this may well be the reality of the moment […] My hope, on the other hand is that the above trajectory is not a foregone conclusion; or if it is, not a permanent one.

I also wrote that I hoped the pendulum swing toward digital would swing back, to a future time where “Those of us who write will write better books. We’ll pare back on blog-blabbing, will be freer from self-consciousness, quieter in our heads, slower and less distracted, more imaginatively limber and inventive.”

It is now the dusk of 2012, and I am going on my fourth year writing regularly for a major online literary site — the one you are reading right now. And in a few weeks, I will be involved in launching yet another digital literary venture… but more on that in a moment.

How did it happen? Mine is an unlikely Web byline, and yet, more often than I ever would have imagined, I have been “recognized,” at a party, or in an email exchange, even at an artists’ colony, for my essays and reviews at The Millions. You’re the one who wrote that piece about

Seriously? I think. You read that? Part of me is still in 2009, dizzy and disoriented from all the spinning and turning.

Back then, along with being told to start a blog, I was told to read blogs. At the time, I still had a paper subscription to the NY Times, and an iBook that had maxed out on hard-drive space (and thus loaded Web pages very slowly). I can’t remember exactly how I started: there was maybe one literary blog I knew about, so I poked around there. That blog led to another blog, and that to another. About a week into my explorations, I landed at The Millions. This was back when the format was still a single post daily, in vertical scroll. I found myself revisiting the site: something about it clicked (so to speak), it seemed to me both erudite and unpretentious, a place where I could hang out for a while. The content was interesting but not overwhelming, the pace of it rigorous but unhurried. It was the first blog on which I ever commented.

I kept coming back. I didn’t bother reading other blogs; I thought, okay, I’ll just stick with this one, it’s what I can do. About a month into my new and exciting blog life, I posted something on my own blog about former New Yorker staff writer Dan Baum’s Twitter-essay, wherein he had described (in Tweets) being fired by David Remnick. I didn’t really know what Twitter was (I still don’t have an account), but I’d read the essay (via The Millions?) and was intrigued. It took me about a month, however, to get some thoughts together; which was, and still is, typical of me, i.e., I may have joined the digital commentariat, but no form of technology was going to make me a faster thinker. I was no breaking-news journalist.

Nonetheless, within an hour of posting, a comment appeared — from Dan Baum. I stared at it. Really? This was my first experience with actual social networking. He wrote: Sonya, a lot of words have been spilled about my New Yorker twitterpost, but this one was the best. Thank you. I remember the rush, that thrill of being winked at from across a crowded (cyber) room. In that moment, I got it — what all this fuss about social networking was about. Give the tools a try, just be yourself; write what you care about. Weird things will start to happen, some of them might be good.

Even weirder: Baum tweeted my post, and instantly, my little blog of 50 daily visitors was flooded with close to 1,000 visitors. I felt like a crowd had just burst into my home, where I hadn’t vacuumed or done the dishes, and I was wearing an ugly bathrobe.

But the light bulbs started to go on. I wrote first to Dan Baum, to thank him for his comment (and confirm it was in fact him); he was gracious and friendly. Then, I wrote to the editor of The Millions:

Dear Max,

I’m a novelist/blogger/fiction teacher and frequent reader of The Millions.

I recently posted on my blog a response to Dan Baum’s much-read Twitterpost about the New Yorker, and then received this comment from Dan Baum himself.

I copied and pasted the comment, then suggested that the readers of The Millions might be interested in the post as “a curiosity.” To which Max replied:

Very cool! I’ll throw a link into our next roundup


Emboldened, I wrote back, asked Max if by chance I might write for The Millions sometime. He replied that I should submit a draft of something, which I did. He worked with me on editing it, then published it, then a few others. After a couple of months of guest posting, I became a staff writer.

Two years ago, at a panel on publishing that I coordinated for the creative writing students at Columbia University, someone asked how important did the panelists think blogging and social networking were for one’s literary career. A couple of the panelists said that they thought it was very important, that these days authors were more responsible than ever for their own publicity, not to mention connecting with editors and agents, and that social networking was the way to do that. One of the panelists, a well-published fiction writer, offered an opposing view: “That stuff can be very distracting,” she said. “If you’d rather focus your energy and time on your novel or stories, you should do that.” Afterwards, I thanked the panelist for her words. “The students need to hear that,” I said to her. “That no matter what, their creative work is most important.”

At the same panel the following year, which I also moderated, a published writer in attendance asked if the panelists had any thoughts for someone who didn’t write short-form. “It seems like a lot of publishing connections get made through blog-writing, but what if you’re really a long-form writer, and you’re working on a book, and that’s really all you’re doing?” I found myself interjecting thus: “I’m that kind of writer, as well. In an ideal world, I would be living in the woods, writing novels and long stories and nothing else. But at some point, I realized that I didn’t have that luxury; that it was a good idea to take advantage of all these outlets for short-form publishing.”

My reactions to these two authors are not in direct opposition, but the nuances have shifted. I still believe that long-form creative writers must determine and do what works best for them; to learn what is distracting versus what is nourishing; to make choices that get them to finish and publish their books. Over the past few years, there have been moments when I’ve considered ceasing to write for The Millions, so that, in addition to teaching (where I earn my living) I can focus exclusively on fiction. But I’ve come to realize that, for me, engaging in both long-form and short-form, analog and digital, work well together.

Strictly speaking, yes, the time I spend writing for online publication is time not spent writing my second novel; and yet it is still, for me, time spent nourishing my writing life. There is, it would seem — needs to be for most of us in this publishing environment — more to the writing life than manuscript word counts and book deals. One must be mindful of the stamina, and the supportive community, required for the long haul of long-form literary writing; which is, even in the case of relative “success,” increasingly divorced from a viable livelihood and voluminous readership. Being able to write and publish short-form work, on a somewhat regular basis, has energized me to keep showing up at my fiction desk (mornings, no internet), which is, more accurately — and perhaps appropriately in light of this notion of complementary activities — not really a desk at all, but a spiral-bound notebook in which I write long-hand.

I should say, too, that I spend relatively little time on either Facebook or Twitter. If a Tweet is 140 characters, and this essay is 11,000 characters, then you could say that this is what I do every month, alongside novel writing, in lieu of 80 Tweets.

Writing short essays and reviews are also a way for me to think. This past summer, I worked for two solid months on a long piece about psychic homelessness, i.e., geographic mobility, an unstable sense of place. The piece ranged and roamed, encompassing the essays of Emerson, the novels of Wendell Berry, the memoirs of Kathleen Norris, Jimmy Carter, and Donald Hall, the “anxiety of influence,” reflections on my marriage and divorce, meditations on the legacy of immigration, questions of social class… it was a mess, and I trashed it, heavy with a sense of failure. This fall, I’ve had a chance to resurrect the piece — fragments of it, that is — in short form, in an online column at The Common, called “Annals of Mobility.” I can think out the issues one at a time and, perhaps a year from now, look at them in the aggregate and understand what it is I feel and have wanted to say. In this way, ironically, Web writing has slowed me down and allowed me to take my time with a complex idea.

Which brings me to Bloom.

In September 2011, The Millions graciously allowed me a platform for highlighting a group of authors, and, perhaps more significantly, a varied way of looking at and engaging in the writing life — that of zig-zag paths, a slower pace, living multiple lives; and ultimately “succeeding,” one way or another, in one’s own good time. I am referring to the “Post-40 Bloomers” series, which I’ve been honored to write and edit over the past year.

In a few weeks, you’ll be hearing about Bloom — a new site, originating from “Post-40 Bloomers,” carrying on and expanding the series, with support from The Millions. Instead of monthly, you’ll read about a “Bloomer” weekly, along with other great features related to later-life blooming. So far, Bloom is scheduled to feature Donald Ray Pollock, Peter Ferry, Deborah Eisenberg, Bram Stoker, W.M. Spackman, Kate Chopin, Shannon Cain, Karl Marlantes, George Eliot, Samuel Richardson, Penelope Fitzgerald, Joseph Kanon, Pauline Chen… this exciting list goes on and on.

The irony of it all delights and humbles me. Bloom is about taking one’s time, sometimes off the beaten path. We’re claiming the technology of fast-and-instant and using it to talk about the many different ways of living, working, creating — fast, slow, direct, indirect, prolific, sparse. I won’t be moderating that publishing panel again this year, but if I were, I would say to the anxious student who asks about blogging and digital publishing — who is worried about money and family, his messy creative process, and his prospects for literary “success” — I would say to him: Just be yourself. You will bloom in good time.

Image via aussiegall/Flickr

is author of the novels Long for This World (Scribner 2010) and The Loved Ones (Relegation Books 2016), which was a selection for Kirkus Best Fiction 2016, Indie Next List, Library Journal Best Indie Fiction, TNB Book Club, Buzzfeed Books Recommends, and Writer's Bone Best 30 Books 2016. She is deputy director at Film Forum, a nonprofit cinema in New York City, and she teaches media & film studies at Skidmore College and fiction writing in Warren Wilson College's MFA program. Learn more about Sonya here.


  1. An immensely enjoyable “short-form” piece. Nurturing the writerly soul is so important, and concur with you that being a part of the present “bloom” of sorts on the internet, sitting dutifully in front of the computer and filling up the empty screen with words, words, words and sending them off into the depths of the world wide fulfilling in curious ways and it does inspire one to “show up” at the fiction desk and pound away whenever possible.

    This somehow reminded me of Édouard Levé’s essay on the Paris Review:
    “I do not write memoirs. I do not write novels. I do not write short stories. I do not write plays. I do not write poems. I do not write mysteries. I do not write science fiction. I write fragments. I do not tell stories from things I’ve read or movies I’ve seen, I describe impressions, I make judgments.”

    Don’t fragments form a full sphere? They do indeed.

    Thanks for a lovely read!

  2. Ms. Chung. Thank you, thank you, thank you! It is strange for me to leave comments on web-pages, because that is how wary and blumbering I am on the internet — I mostly tend to read, appreciate pages, pass them on through email to a couple of people, or tweet about them if I really want to share; but I HAD to respond now.

    Social networking is so overwhelming, especially for shy writers, and so necessary that it’s practically crippling. That last “Be Yourself” puts many doubts to rest.

  3. Thanks so mcuh Great essay and very enlightening. Where can I sign up for your Bloom series? I write short fiction, blog, and then I started long form and now have written my second novel.
    I can identify. I also think each form of writing is connected and leads to another form.
    Johanna van Zanten

  4. I really enjoyed reading this. It’s definitely a much needed perspective. As someone who also enjoys taking their time as a writer and also someone who enjoys living life and having experiences rather than being on the fast track to literary success, I appreciate this very much. Luckily we’re in a profession where you (hopefully) get better over time and aren’t as devalued as you age. I also agree that it helps to keep your name “out there” through both social media and perhaps article/essay writing, but not so much that your core passion suffers. I’m working on both a novel and short story collection and that’s where most of my energy goes these days, but it’s also nice to have the satisfaction of having an article (and byline) in a national/international/online publication every once in a while to get that sense of accomplishment while working on my passion projects. Thanks so much for this piece.

  5. Thanks for this encouraging piece. A few years ago, I decided that I was going to keep writing no matter if anyone paid any attention. I still have a bit of resistance to the self promotional and social networking aspects of writing as a career, which makes the above thought seem a lot more of a foregone conclusion at times than I’d like it to be. So excuse me if I try a bit here, with a relevant post on my pet topic:

  6. I was really intrigued by your description of ambivalence about our instant-message media; I can relate. I’ve also enjoyed the “Post-40 Bloomers” series and with you the very best with Bloom.

  7. A timely post as I both blog and work on my novels. It’s a juggling act that often leaves me with too many balls in the air and little time to catch them. I too look forward to reading Bloom. I’m a very late bloomer when it comes to writing so I appreciate that you’re acknowledging those who come to writing late in life.

  8. I tweeted your quote and gave you credit with a shout out to your new project- “We’re claiming the technology of fast-and-instant and using it to talk about the many different ways of living, working, creating — fast, slow, direct, indirect, prolific, sparse.” Of course I had to condense it, but your thoughts are poignant-thank you! Paula Speer White- PraeluceoPrint on Twitter

  9. Wow. What does a published author over 80 years with a manuscript in the ‘got to get it done’ mode to do while caught up in the Facebook/Twitter world. Reading about all the young scribes relating the road to success stories is exciting and even self satisfying. That is especially true if the elder can boast some success as a writer and author. Once in the 70-90 age range memory, ambition and stamina play a part in a writer’s ability to complete projects. Therefore time becomes an essence and also an item in short supply.
    Decorating the house inside and out for Christmas, helping a spouse to prepare for the day when the kids,grandchildren and others visit for Christmas celebrations adds to the frustration. With political issues jamming the media and opinions formed over years of participation and observing as a news editor comments on that dreaded social media is almost mandatory.
    The fact that generational change is and has been taking place necessitating a change of subject matter and story line is a concern. Can we as authors still relate to the lifestyle of current and even recent generations with readable story lines and plots? Maybe what’s needed is a post 70 or 80 forum for elders in the trade. Something along the lines of passing along the years of frustration arising when the story material is still rattling around while the time and energy and confidence to author another readable and salable book is still relevant.

  10. I too found your essay via Jane Friedman’s FB page. I am definitely post-40 and look forward to checking out Bloom. I also admire the way you take your time, explored blogging and social media, and did it your way. I’ll be looking for your byline.

Add Your Comment:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.