"A novel's whole pattern is rarely apparent at the outset of writing, or even at the end; that is when the writer finds out what a novel is about, and the job becomes one of understanding and deepening or sharpening what is already written. That is finding the theme"
About this Quote
Johnson demystifies the novelist-as-architect fantasy and replaces it with something messier, more honest: the novelist as reader of her own work. The line lands as a quiet rebuke to the workshop fetish for outlining and “knowing your theme” upfront. In her framing, theme isn’t a prepackaged message you parachute into Chapter One; it’s the pattern that accretes while you chase scenes, voices, and contradictions. The real craft begins after the supposed finish, when you recognize what the book has been trying to say behind your back.
There’s a bracing humility in “that is when the writer finds out what a novel is about.” It implies intention is partly retrospective, that imagination produces meaning before consciousness can name it. The subtext: if you can articulate your theme too early, you might be writing propaganda, or at least something airless. Johnson defends the novel as a form built for discovery, for ambivalence, for the way motives mutate when they’re put under narrative pressure.
Her final pivot - “understanding and deepening or sharpening what is already written” - also sneaks in a rigorous standard. Theme isn’t a vibe; it’s an editorial task. You read your draft for its emerging gravitational center, then you revise to make that center inevitable: cutting what dilutes it, amplifying the scenes that expose it, adjusting tone so the book’s implicit argument becomes legible without turning into a lecture.
Contextually, it’s advice from a mid- to late-20th-century novelist who came up in an era suspicious of grand authorial control, but still devoted to technique. Johnson makes theme sound less like inspiration and more like a diagnosis - and a disciplined cure.
There’s a bracing humility in “that is when the writer finds out what a novel is about.” It implies intention is partly retrospective, that imagination produces meaning before consciousness can name it. The subtext: if you can articulate your theme too early, you might be writing propaganda, or at least something airless. Johnson defends the novel as a form built for discovery, for ambivalence, for the way motives mutate when they’re put under narrative pressure.
Her final pivot - “understanding and deepening or sharpening what is already written” - also sneaks in a rigorous standard. Theme isn’t a vibe; it’s an editorial task. You read your draft for its emerging gravitational center, then you revise to make that center inevitable: cutting what dilutes it, amplifying the scenes that expose it, adjusting tone so the book’s implicit argument becomes legible without turning into a lecture.
Contextually, it’s advice from a mid- to late-20th-century novelist who came up in an era suspicious of grand authorial control, but still devoted to technique. Johnson makes theme sound less like inspiration and more like a diagnosis - and a disciplined cure.
Quote Details
| Topic | Writing |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Diane
Add to List
