What do you think?
Rate this book
Nonconformity: Writing on Writing
The struggle to write with deep emotion is the subject of this extraordinary book, the previously unpublished credo of one of America's greatest 20th-century writers.
"You don't write a novel out of sheer pity any more than you blow a safe out of a vague longing to be rich," writes Nelson Algren in his only longer work of nonfiction, "A certain ruthlessness and a sense of alienation from society is as essential to creative writing as it is to armed robbery."
Nonconformity is about 20th-century "Never on the earth of man has he lived so tidily as here amidst such psychological disorder." And it is about the trouble writers ask for when they try to describe "Our myths are so many, our vision so dim, our self-deception so deep and our smugness so gross that scarcely any way now remains of reporting the American Century except from behind the billboards . . . [where there] are still . . . defeats in which everything is lost [and] victories that fall close enough to the heart to afford living hope."
In Nonconformity, Algren identifies the essential nature of the writer's relation to society, drawing examples from Dostoyevsky, Chekhov, Twain, and Fitzgerald, as well as utility infielder Leo Durocher and legendary barkeep Martin Dooley. He shares his deepest beliefs about the state of literature and its role in society, along the way painting a chilling portrait of the early 1950s, Joe McCarthy's heyday, when many American writers were blacklisted and ruined for saying similar things to what Algren is saying here.
"You don't write a novel out of sheer pity any more than you blow a safe out of a vague longing to be rich," writes Nelson Algren in his only longer work of nonfiction, "A certain ruthlessness and a sense of alienation from society is as essential to creative writing as it is to armed robbery."
Nonconformity is about 20th-century "Never on the earth of man has he lived so tidily as here amidst such psychological disorder." And it is about the trouble writers ask for when they try to describe "Our myths are so many, our vision so dim, our self-deception so deep and our smugness so gross that scarcely any way now remains of reporting the American Century except from behind the billboards . . . [where there] are still . . . defeats in which everything is lost [and] victories that fall close enough to the heart to afford living hope."
In Nonconformity, Algren identifies the essential nature of the writer's relation to society, drawing examples from Dostoyevsky, Chekhov, Twain, and Fitzgerald, as well as utility infielder Leo Durocher and legendary barkeep Martin Dooley. He shares his deepest beliefs about the state of literature and its role in society, along the way painting a chilling portrait of the early 1950s, Joe McCarthy's heyday, when many American writers were blacklisted and ruined for saying similar things to what Algren is saying here.
- GenresWritingNonfictionEssays
142 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 1996
26 people are currently reading
468 people want to read
About the author
Nelson Algren
65 books286 followersPeople note American writer Nelson Algren for his novels, including
The Man with the Golden Arm
(1949), about the pride and longings of impoverished people.
Born of Swedish-immigrant parents, Nelson Ahlgren Abraham moved at an early age to Chicago. At University of Illinois, he studied journalism. His experiences as a migrant worker during the Depression provided the material for his first Somebody in Boots (1935). Throughout life, Algren identified with the underdog. From 1936 to 1940, the high-point of left-wing ideas on the literary scene of the United States, he served as editor of the project in Illinois. After putting the finishing touches to his second, he in 1942 joined and enlisted for the war. Never Come Morning received universal acclaim and eventually sold more than a million copies.
A dark naturalist style of Algren passionately records the details of trapped urban existence with flashes of melancholy poetry. He characterizes the lowlife drifters, whores, junkies, and barflies of row. He records the bravado of their colloquial language and lays their predicament bare.
Born of Swedish-immigrant parents, Nelson Ahlgren Abraham moved at an early age to Chicago. At University of Illinois, he studied journalism. His experiences as a migrant worker during the Depression provided the material for his first Somebody in Boots (1935). Throughout life, Algren identified with the underdog. From 1936 to 1940, the high-point of left-wing ideas on the literary scene of the United States, he served as editor of the project in Illinois. After putting the finishing touches to his second, he in 1942 joined and enlisted for the war. Never Come Morning received universal acclaim and eventually sold more than a million copies.
A dark naturalist style of Algren passionately records the details of trapped urban existence with flashes of melancholy poetry. He characterizes the lowlife drifters, whores, junkies, and barflies of row. He records the bravado of their colloquial language and lays their predicament bare.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
September 27, 2024
Já aqui confessei que não sou apreciador de ensaio.
Peguei neste "Nonconformity: writing on writing", por razões óbvias, o autor e a temática.
É um daqueles livros que nos deixam pequeninos, que nos apoucam: por mais que nos dediquemos, com afinco, à leitura, há tanta coisa ainda para ler...
Mas não desespero, há que contrariar qualquer desânimo com dedicação, mais dedicação.
Muito bom!
Peguei neste "Nonconformity: writing on writing", por razões óbvias, o autor e a temática.
É um daqueles livros que nos deixam pequeninos, que nos apoucam: por mais que nos dediquemos, com afinco, à leitura, há tanta coisa ainda para ler...
Mas não desespero, há que contrariar qualquer desânimo com dedicação, mais dedicação.
Muito bom!
June 26, 2017
Rough and quick sex with a book. That's what it was like.
The essay “Nonconformity: Writing on Writing” by Nelson Algren, edited by Daniel Simon, is an engaging, energetic read.
Nelson Algren, an American writer who lived in Chicago and died in 1981, was one of Simone de Beauvior’s lovers. He wrote a first draft of the essay “Nonconformity” while he and Simone were in the process of ending their long distance relationship and he was in the process of reuniting with his former wife, Amanda. Daniel Simon, the force behind bringing “Nonconformity” to light, speculates that Algren wrote the essay to prove to Simone that he was worthy of her, a equal to Simone’s husband, Sartre. Ultimately, Simone and Sartre remained loyal to their marriage in spite of their infidelity to each other.
“Nonconformity” was worked on from 1950 - 1953. Doubleday was scheduled to publish it in 1953, but backed out when Algren was accused of being a McCarthy era Communists. Daniel Simon found the manuscript in Algren’s papers at Ohio State University Library in Columbus in 1986 and after ten years of work, had it published in 1996; Algren used many quotes in the manuscript and did not provide sources; it took time and a great amount of research for Simon, C. S. O’Brien and friends to identify the sources in the endnotes. A more complete explanation of the process that finally brought Algren’s essay to publication is described in the Historical Notes and Acknowledgements section (pp. 98-112).
Algren’s essay is about what in his mind literature should be. It’s about the corruption of the novelist – “. . . tribal pressures toward conformity have been brought to bear so ruthlessly upon men and women seeking to work creatively. . . . the young men and women writing today has forgotten the problems of the human heart in conflict with itself . . .” (p. 4) His essay is a response to the 1940s and 50s and the political pressures put on creative people to produce unrealistic, silly content for movies, TV and books.
In Algren’s essay he calls for rigorous, realistic, intelligent writing that challenges the apolitical, romantic, comedy pabulum Hollywood produced and Joe McCarthy and much of the government supported. He circles and circles around the fear instilled in intellectuals by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) and its investigations. Algren was well read, he endlessly quotes writers who support his position and gives examples of those who caved into political and social pressures and produced work without substance.
Algren believed novelists should struggle that their goal shouldn’t be comfort; for once reached the inspiration for good writing is lost. He didn’t believe novelists should travel in packs and that they should avoid living in New York in close proximity to other writers; for doing so tames them, causes them to think the same and take safe writing jobs for Life magazine.
Algren’s essay is multi-disciplinary. It reflects the sociology, politics, literature and popular culture of the time. It’s angry, passionate and cynical. Algren fears governmental interference, its goal to control people’s thoughts and actions and turn citizens back into children, with threats of imprisonment. Government as dictator of taste, brain control for the masses.
Algren believes successful writers should have nastiness and honesty, a mind like that of a criminal. “Compassion is all to the good, but vindictiveness is the verity . . . the organic force in every creative effort . . . that gives shape and color to all dreams.” (p. 33) “A certain ruthlessness and a sense of alienation from society is as essential to creative writing as it is to armed robbery.” (p. 34) He quotes Leo Durocher, “. . . Nice guys finish last.” (p. 34) “If you feel you belong to things as they are, you won’t hold up anybody in the alley no matter how hungry you may get. And you won’t write anything that anyone will read a second time either.” (p. 34)
While it is no longer true of some literature, I find this observation about the 1% relevant and poignant: “The stranger from Mars who spent a day in the public library came away knowing that a few Americans possessed wealth that was virtually incalculable, that a hundred-odd million others had more than just enough. But gained barely an inkling into the lives of those who live their hand-to-mouth hours without friendship or love.” (p. 35)
Algren admired Fyodor Dostoevsky and his focus on criminality, the poor and the dispossessed. He quotes from him frequently to support his point about what should be topics for novelists.
Algren has rigorous standards for how people should live their lives. Most do not live up to his expectations: “. . . the spiritual desolation of men and women made incapable of using themselves for anything more satisfying than the promotion of chewing gum . . .” (p. 45)
Excerpts not included in the original essay are inserted between some chapters. The excerpt from Simone de Beauvoir’s “America Day by Day” on pp 52-53, for example, is included to support other references Algren makes to de Beauvoir. Algren met de Beauvoir during her four-month trip around the United States. The excerpt is a description of the Bowery of Chicago, an area of the city Algren showed her.
Algren knows the Bowery well. In the middle of his essay he includes dialogue from Bowery-like characters, “morally corrupt” addicts – cats –scraping together an existence and challenging the desires of cops and squares – the middle class. Some of the dialogue in included in “Entrapment,” a novel Algren never finished. After this section he goes on about the legal system and who is really “guilty” of what? Further demonstrating his identification with the poor.
Algren ends with a rant condemning the American people for their complacency and primary goal: to make enough money to be comfortable. This and government controls are the reasons for hapless novels with unsubstantial narratives.
In the Afterword on pages 81-97, Daniel Simon profiles Algren and analyzes his work and intellect, putting them in context. He also questions why more attention hasn’t been paid Algren’s work. Algren had ten books published. He received the first National Book Award for “Man with the Golden Arm” in 1950, which was his last book to be published. It appears as though the paranoia of the McCarthy Era destroyed his spirit and will to publish.
The essay “Nonconformity: Writing on Writing” by Nelson Algren, edited by Daniel Simon, is an engaging, energetic read.
Nelson Algren, an American writer who lived in Chicago and died in 1981, was one of Simone de Beauvior’s lovers. He wrote a first draft of the essay “Nonconformity” while he and Simone were in the process of ending their long distance relationship and he was in the process of reuniting with his former wife, Amanda. Daniel Simon, the force behind bringing “Nonconformity” to light, speculates that Algren wrote the essay to prove to Simone that he was worthy of her, a equal to Simone’s husband, Sartre. Ultimately, Simone and Sartre remained loyal to their marriage in spite of their infidelity to each other.
“Nonconformity” was worked on from 1950 - 1953. Doubleday was scheduled to publish it in 1953, but backed out when Algren was accused of being a McCarthy era Communists. Daniel Simon found the manuscript in Algren’s papers at Ohio State University Library in Columbus in 1986 and after ten years of work, had it published in 1996; Algren used many quotes in the manuscript and did not provide sources; it took time and a great amount of research for Simon, C. S. O’Brien and friends to identify the sources in the endnotes. A more complete explanation of the process that finally brought Algren’s essay to publication is described in the Historical Notes and Acknowledgements section (pp. 98-112).
Algren’s essay is about what in his mind literature should be. It’s about the corruption of the novelist – “. . . tribal pressures toward conformity have been brought to bear so ruthlessly upon men and women seeking to work creatively. . . . the young men and women writing today has forgotten the problems of the human heart in conflict with itself . . .” (p. 4) His essay is a response to the 1940s and 50s and the political pressures put on creative people to produce unrealistic, silly content for movies, TV and books.
In Algren’s essay he calls for rigorous, realistic, intelligent writing that challenges the apolitical, romantic, comedy pabulum Hollywood produced and Joe McCarthy and much of the government supported. He circles and circles around the fear instilled in intellectuals by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) and its investigations. Algren was well read, he endlessly quotes writers who support his position and gives examples of those who caved into political and social pressures and produced work without substance.
Algren believed novelists should struggle that their goal shouldn’t be comfort; for once reached the inspiration for good writing is lost. He didn’t believe novelists should travel in packs and that they should avoid living in New York in close proximity to other writers; for doing so tames them, causes them to think the same and take safe writing jobs for Life magazine.
Algren’s essay is multi-disciplinary. It reflects the sociology, politics, literature and popular culture of the time. It’s angry, passionate and cynical. Algren fears governmental interference, its goal to control people’s thoughts and actions and turn citizens back into children, with threats of imprisonment. Government as dictator of taste, brain control for the masses.
Algren believes successful writers should have nastiness and honesty, a mind like that of a criminal. “Compassion is all to the good, but vindictiveness is the verity . . . the organic force in every creative effort . . . that gives shape and color to all dreams.” (p. 33) “A certain ruthlessness and a sense of alienation from society is as essential to creative writing as it is to armed robbery.” (p. 34) He quotes Leo Durocher, “. . . Nice guys finish last.” (p. 34) “If you feel you belong to things as they are, you won’t hold up anybody in the alley no matter how hungry you may get. And you won’t write anything that anyone will read a second time either.” (p. 34)
While it is no longer true of some literature, I find this observation about the 1% relevant and poignant: “The stranger from Mars who spent a day in the public library came away knowing that a few Americans possessed wealth that was virtually incalculable, that a hundred-odd million others had more than just enough. But gained barely an inkling into the lives of those who live their hand-to-mouth hours without friendship or love.” (p. 35)
Algren admired Fyodor Dostoevsky and his focus on criminality, the poor and the dispossessed. He quotes from him frequently to support his point about what should be topics for novelists.
Algren has rigorous standards for how people should live their lives. Most do not live up to his expectations: “. . . the spiritual desolation of men and women made incapable of using themselves for anything more satisfying than the promotion of chewing gum . . .” (p. 45)
Excerpts not included in the original essay are inserted between some chapters. The excerpt from Simone de Beauvoir’s “America Day by Day” on pp 52-53, for example, is included to support other references Algren makes to de Beauvoir. Algren met de Beauvoir during her four-month trip around the United States. The excerpt is a description of the Bowery of Chicago, an area of the city Algren showed her.
Algren knows the Bowery well. In the middle of his essay he includes dialogue from Bowery-like characters, “morally corrupt” addicts – cats –scraping together an existence and challenging the desires of cops and squares – the middle class. Some of the dialogue in included in “Entrapment,” a novel Algren never finished. After this section he goes on about the legal system and who is really “guilty” of what? Further demonstrating his identification with the poor.
Algren ends with a rant condemning the American people for their complacency and primary goal: to make enough money to be comfortable. This and government controls are the reasons for hapless novels with unsubstantial narratives.
In the Afterword on pages 81-97, Daniel Simon profiles Algren and analyzes his work and intellect, putting them in context. He also questions why more attention hasn’t been paid Algren’s work. Algren had ten books published. He received the first National Book Award for “Man with the Golden Arm” in 1950, which was his last book to be published. It appears as though the paranoia of the McCarthy Era destroyed his spirit and will to publish.
October 11, 2007
How can I strongly recommend a book to which I also gave "three stars"? It's easy: I strongly recommend this book. Bam!
A very brief book, an essay really, wherein he discusses the writer's craft in light of the crisis of McCarthyism going on at the time. This is not what I'd expected, as I expected more of an autobiography of techniques and attitudes toward the writing process. That was my assumption based upon very little information.
It is amazing (and a bit scary) just how applicable his comments and descriptions of the political and moral climate of those times applies to our own.
It won't take you long to read, so why not?
A very brief book, an essay really, wherein he discusses the writer's craft in light of the crisis of McCarthyism going on at the time. This is not what I'd expected, as I expected more of an autobiography of techniques and attitudes toward the writing process. That was my assumption based upon very little information.
It is amazing (and a bit scary) just how applicable his comments and descriptions of the political and moral climate of those times applies to our own.
It won't take you long to read, so why not?
April 18, 2011
I had to read this a second time for it to fully sink in, and a few of the passages seemed to wander off point, but there's no denying the passion and intellect behind this unique manifesto. Algren decries the hollowness and complacency of mid-Twentieth Century America, and urges writers to look beyond the comfortable mainstream to get at the true heart of the country - the lower classes, the down and out, the marginalized who forever fail to profit from the prosperity of the well-off. Readers of Algren's fiction will recognize many of his familiar narratives themes here. Definitely recommended.
January 16, 2015
Required reading for anyone who wants to write or to understand the writing process. Excellent essay.
February 28, 2019
Overall a pretty teasing read that gives insights into Nelson's writing and entourage. If one starts first with this book, it's a little bit hard to wrap one's head around as it's a fragmented compilation. Regardless, writing quality and style are equally stupendous.
Edit: Gave a couple of chapters another read. Since this book does not correspond in its similarity, nor in its form, nor in its kind with other short essays/books, the term nonconformity is quite fitting.
Edit: Gave a couple of chapters another read. Since this book does not correspond in its similarity, nor in its form, nor in its kind with other short essays/books, the term nonconformity is quite fitting.
December 9, 2022
An interesting if somewhat rambling essay on the state of writing in Algren's heyday. Some great lines (particularly his discussion of the American writer's mission, which he relates to that of someone relating the great misery and confusion at the bottom-barrel of society) amidst a fair bit of filler. The essay about how he wound up in Hollywood in the appendix is fun, and connects with the earlier material in which he compares his disillusionment with F. Scott Fitzgerald's (despite the two writing about different strata of society, etc.). Nothing all too memorable, and certainly not as good as his long essay on Chicago, but the man can turn a phrase. At some point - next year, I'd imagine - I'll read The Man with the Golden Arm.
March 15, 2017
The truth laid out in gorgeous, succinct sentences.
December 13, 2019
Posits that rarefied air is not conducive to great writing.
Story checks out.
Story checks out.
August 8, 2025
Quizá uno de esos libros de ensayos a los que hay que volver después de ampliar la bibliografía interna. Mientras que muchos ubicamos a muchos de los autores o, incluso, al autor mismo, también hay otros ejemplos y reflexiones de Algren que nos toman desprevenidos si no hemos leído a alguno de los autores que, sin perdón o preocupación por la respuesta, Algren disecciona para mostrarse como lo que fue: uno de los grandes autores de la literatura norteamericana del siglo XX, más importante —para mi— que varios mucho más famosos. El problema de Algren fue, como de muchos genios, que convivió con muchos de los otros que crean ese partenón que llamamos "Literatura Norteamericana del siglo XX": Ernest Hemingway, John Steinbeck y William Faulkner. Pero este libro sin duda debería ser base para cualquiera que guste de sentarse en este mundo obsesivo de crear historias, de entender la acción de escribir como algo más que vomitar palabras. Escribir es para Algren, la forma de arte que defendió y de la que vivió en sus propias reglas.
May 14, 2025
Algren was a good, old-school, old-fashioned Marxist.
Kind of endearing in our current era of decline.
This is a fun to read and feels almost like an Algren "commonplace book".
References, both high and low, it adds an extra dimension I never knew
Kind of endearing in our current era of decline.
This is a fun to read and feels almost like an Algren "commonplace book".
References, both high and low, it adds an extra dimension I never knew
June 26, 2024
Don’t read the one with the afterword. It’s a bunch of gossip. Let the work stand by itself in all its political incorrectness.
December 9, 2018
An Unfinished Remark
It's a good treatise. A very serious one relevant not just to his time but ours like right now as yours truly is writing this. It is relevant that writers even in every genre should never give in to the call of conformity. To do so would be to lose oneself. Even artists are no exception, something Algren should have mentioned in my humble opinion if it had ever crossed his mind. This part is one this reader considered as an unfinished remark.
It's a good treatise. A very serious one relevant not just to his time but ours like right now as yours truly is writing this. It is relevant that writers even in every genre should never give in to the call of conformity. To do so would be to lose oneself. Even artists are no exception, something Algren should have mentioned in my humble opinion if it had ever crossed his mind. This part is one this reader considered as an unfinished remark.
February 23, 2016
When a friend loans me a book, I will sometimes send them passages from the book that specifically resonated with me just to see if those words had the same impact on the other person. I could not do that with this book because almost every page had something startling and beautiful on it.
November 18, 2016
Recommended along with :
Edgar Allan Poe: The Philosophy of Composition
Umberto Eco: Postscript to the Name of the Rose
Larry McMurtry; Walter Benjamin at the Dairy Queen
I'm waiting for Marilynne Robinson to pen something similar, but sadly she probably won't.
July 18, 2009
A really excellent essay about writing, and more largely about the artist and society. It made me want to read more of Algren's work.
January 2, 2011
Fearless advice for writers, composed in the perilous context of McCarthy's America, but timeless in its wisdom.
January 17, 2014
This would have been mind blowing...if I was 15 and it was the era of McCarthyism, but...
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews