Lena Dunham, In Context

Lena Dunham, In Context The literary Twittersphere blew up (as it is wont to do) yesterday when Forbes published a piece by Helaine Olen titled Lena Dunham Doesnt Write For Money And She Doesnt Think You Should Either.  The piece skewered Dunhams intro to the published screenplay of This Is 40. This is not the first time Olen has tackled Dunham on Forbes, but it is the least flattering. The piece describes Dunhams essay as a work where Dunham ponders the many reasons people write which include glory and the ability to use the keyboard to figure things out. As for filthy lucre? Thats deemed a weird plan.' Those are damning soundbites out of context. I got my hands on the three page preface Olen quoted from, and in context those words take on very different meaning. The first three paragraphs of Dunhams piece read as follows: There are many reasons to write. Some of us write for glory- to spite the people who stuffed us in lockers, to remind the lovers who didnt love us just what theyre missing out on, to alter history and have future generations sing our names. Others write for money (probably a weird plan, even when it does work out). But some of us, as Judd reminded me in a recent e-mail,write to figure something out.' The rest of the piece is an ode to her mentor Judd Apatow, but Olen isnt interested in Lena Dunhams essay as a whole, or even her complete sentences. No, what she wants to talk about is Dunhams choice of the word weird. As Olen puts it people do need to pay the rent and it isnt exactly nice to discover that someone who is earning $3.5 million for their musings is so clueless about the things the rest of the world often needs to get by Thats, of course, not at all what Dunham said. She said its probably a weird plan to write for money even when it does work out. Shes acknowledging the fact that its not a guarantee that a career in writing will be a lucrative one, just as shes acknowledging that yes, thing have worked out for her. Shes not clueless, shes stating a fact. Shes not being privileged, shes being honest. Oh, and hey, did you catch that reference to Dunhams $3.5 million book deal? Because the resentment regarding that deal feels like its written all over this piece in invisible ink. The central argument of Olens work purports to be that Dunham is clueless about the ways of the world, but I cant help but feel that beneath that is anger that Dunham has been handsomely rewarded for her creative endeavors and Olen doesnt take kindly to being given writing advice by a writer she  seems to believe  is clueless. Like I said, Olen has been kinder about Dunhams success in the past. In another piece she stated, I am thrilled that Lena Dunham, the creator and star of HBO’s Girls, has received a more than $3.5 million advance from Random House for her proposed book of semi-comedic essays Not That Kind of Girl: A Young Woman Tells You What She’s Learned. She’s funny, smart, thoughtful and talented. Good on her. Wow, things  change fast on these here  interwebs. Hold onto your hat or youll lose it in this maelstrom of 0s and 1s. So why is Dunham in the doghouse with Olen? And why was Twitter so jazzed to jump on the hater bandwagon when most of the Twitter-handle-owners in question had not read Dunhams essay, but only Olens misleading rant against it? I think there are still a lot of people, whether they are okay admitting to themselves or not, that have a lot of anger toward a young woman with as much agency in the entertainment industry (and now publishing world)  as Dunham. I think that leads to articles that misrepresent her work, and a conversation on social media that has more vitriol than actual fact. Because lets be real, no one gives the Foer boys this much grief for the 7-figure book deals they struck in their twenties.  I feel like  because of this book deal, the internet is hovering over Dunham, just waiting for her to make a wrong move so that they  can take away the  credibility an author receives when she  makes this kind of flashy splash in the publishing world. Whats the takeaway? The takeaway is Lena Dunham did not run over your dog with an SUV. She  did not kidnap your  parents and  transport them to a cave in the middle of nowhere to pull out their fingernails. She did not club the baby seal population of Canada  and she is not currently aiding extraterrestrial warlords in a plot to enslave the human race. She is a young woman who has garnered success and notoriety  because of her mind. Thats allowed. Shes allowed to have opinions on writing, not because she has a six-figure deal, but because shes a writer and writers are allowed to have opinions about their craft. And if theres going to be anger, let it be for something she actually said, not butchered and out-of-context quotes. Thats shouldnt pass for journalism, nor should it pass for viable Twitter dialogue. Stepping off my soapbox now. Steinkellner out! Sign up to Today In Books to receive  daily news and miscellany from the world of books. Thank you for signing up! Keep an eye on your inbox.