When the Second Book Departs: What a Change in Form Reveals

Explore This Topic

My Reading Note

The first Didion I ever read was an essay about keeping a notebook, collected in her second book Slouching Towards Bethlehem. Because that was the only book written by her that I had at the time, I initially assumed her career had started there. When I finally read Run River (her first book), I encountered a novelist already writing like the essayist I knew: the voice was fully formed from the start, with her second book making better use of it.

Joan Didion published a novel first. Run River (1963) is set among the ranch families of the Sacramento Valley, a world of pioneer traditions and postwar sprawl, and it follows a marriage coming apart. Five years later came Slouching Towards Bethlehem (1968), a collection of essays that place California at the center of a wider 1960s America: Haight-Ashbury, the wedding industry in Las Vegas, an aging John Wayne. The form changed, but the subject did not. Didion had been writing about the postwar West all along, and in the essays she went on writing about it.

A second book may depart in subject—as when a novelist turns to history or a memoirist turns to fiction—but Didion’s shift is subtler than a change of topic. She did not leave California behind; she left the novel as the container for what she wanted to say about the world centered there. The essays brought her closer to the evidence: rather than invent characters to represent that world, she wrote about the people and places she actually saw.

“On Keeping a Notebook” is the essay I was referring to. It remains the one I would hand to anyone who thinks Didion is cold. The notebook she describes is not a diary of feelings; it is a place for fragments—overheard lines, descriptions of people, details she cannot yet explain. That restraint can read as coldness, but it is also what lets the entries remain exact.

When Didion changes form for her second book, she is not abandoning her original subject; she is discovering what the essay allows California and the world around it to become. Her move from novel to essay belongs to a larger pattern: James Baldwin likewise turns from the novel to the essay, while Richard Wright moves from a collection of novellas to a single novel. For each case, the new form does not discard an earlier concern but gives it a different scale and relation to evidence.

What Counts as a Departure

A departure, for the purposes of this essay, is a second book that changes form while continuing to pursue the concern of the first. The writer does not simply discover a new subject or a new style; the second book asks to be read under different conditions. For instance, Didion’s move from Run River, which is a novel, to Slouching Towards Bethlehem, a collection of essays, shows what those different conditions can mean.

Every form makes a different kind of truth available to a writer. Fiction can invent characters and arrange events around its central concern, while the essay typically works through the writer’s attention to actual events, reading, or experience. A collection of stories can approach a concern in separate episodes; a novel gives it continuity and scale. A change of form therefore changes what the second book treats as material, how much it must explain, and how directly it addresses the reader.

I like Didion’s essays more than Baldwin’s, though I would not say they are better. Baldwin is out to change your mind, whereas Didion just shows you what she saw. Changing a mind is the harder thing to do, and that is why I read Baldwin. What I am keen to learn from Didion is her craft: how she picks a detail and lets it sit there without explaining it.

The argument of this essay is that such a change of form can allow a writer to pursue an earlier concern more directly. The three writers considered below show whether their second books fulfilled that possibility.

Didion: From Run River to Slouching Towards Bethlehem

Didion’s move from novel to essay shows what a departure can accomplish. Slouching Towards Bethlehem, for instance, does not argue that California had changed since Run River; it shows that change through what Didion personally encounters. The essays move through places and situations that already exist, allowing the details of a scene to carry the argument. Rather than inventing a family or a ranch to dramatize a condition, Didion begins with what is already there.

Yet the move to the essay also imposed limits. Run River could follow a family across time; a marriage and a ranch could carry the consequences of decisions made years before. Its characters could remain partly opaque because the novel did not need to give them a single account. The essays, by contrast, depend on Didion’s presence: she selects the scene, attends to its particulars, and decides where the account begins and ends.

The two books therefore represent different answers to the same concern. Run River asks how a family inherits the consequences of its own history; Slouching Towards Bethlehem asks what can be learned from the California Didion found around her. The novel allows that question to unfold through invented lives, while the essay allows it to emerge from particular encounters. Didion’s departure was not a rejection of fiction but a recognition that the concern had changed its form.

Play It As It Lays is the Didion I recommend to readers who have only read her essays. It is shorter than Run River, and its flat prose suits the Los Angeles it describes. Readers who admire the control of the essays will find the same control here, brought to bear on a woman who is losing everything.

Baldwin: From Go Tell It on the Mountain to Notes of a Native Son

Baldwin’s move from novel to essay parallels Didion’s departure, though it occurs in a different historical and personal context. Go Tell It on the Mountain (1953) treats the religious and family life of a Harlem household through invented characters, while Notes of a Native Son (1955) turns to the conditions Baldwin encountered as a Black writer in America and Europe. The departure therefore does not replace one concern with another; in this case, it changes the form through which Baldwin can pursue it.

The change in form, in Baldwin’s case, altered the relationship between writer and material. In the novel, Baldwin can stand at a distance from John Grimes and allow the boy’s anger, fear, and religious awakening to develop through scenes that no single voice controls. In the essays, Baldwin cannot make that separation. He is at once the observer of racism and one of the people it addresses, and the prose has to carry that dual position.

I have read “Notes of a Native Son” more times than any other essay in this book, and I still flinch at the passage about his father’s funeral. Baldwin’s admirers sometimes talk as though the essays were inevitable. They read to me like something he had to force himself to write.

Yet the essays do not simply abandon the novel’s territory. Notes of a Native Son retains the novel’s interest in family, the past, and the ways earlier lives continue to affect the present, but it brings those subjects into contact with history that Baldwin did not invent. The essay thus becomes the form in which that inheritance can be examined alongside the history that produced it.

Wright: From Uncle Tom’s Children to Native Son

Wright’s departure differs from Didion’s and Baldwin’s because it remains within fiction. After the linked stories of Uncle Tom’s Children (1938), Wright turns in Native Son (1940) to a single novel centered on Bigger Thomas. The earlier book approaches racism through separate episodes; the later one gives that concern a continuous narrative, following Bigger through segregated Chicago and towards an act of violence.

Native Son makes that shift consequential. By giving Bigger Thomas a continuous narrative, Wright turns the separate injustices of Uncle Tom’s Children into accumulating pressure. Fear and confinement build across the novel until Bigger’s violence seems both terrible and overdetermined. The form changes the question from what racism does to a person to how a life becomes trapped within its conditions.

Wright’s second book also changed his position as a writer. Native Son carried the concerns of Uncle Tom’s Children beyond the regional and episodic frame of the earlier collection, making them part of a national argument about race and responsibility. The novel’s controversy showed that a formal change could alter not only what a writer could say but also who would be forced to hear it.

Native Son is the book in this essay that has aged least comfortably for me. The violence still lands, but the courtroom speeches at the end read now as the novel explaining itself, and I find myself wishing Wright had trusted Bigger’s story to do the work.

The Formal Consequences of Departure

Didion and Baldwin each began as novelists before moving to the essay. Wright, however, began with a collection of novellas before expanding into the sustained social novel of Native Son. Across these second books, a change in form altered what each writer’s earliest concerns could become.

Didion turns to the essay in order to encounter the world directly, and California becomes one of the places where that encounter is most concentrated. Baldwin turns to the same form for a different reason: it allows him to write as a Black man who is both a critic of racism and one of its targets. Wright, meanwhile, remains within fiction: the linked narratives of Uncle Tom’s Children give way to the governing architecture of a longer novel, and the racial history once divided among discrete stories now unfolds through a single fictional world.

I notice that most accounts of a writer’s development treat a change of form as a stage in a career. Writing this piece has made me less sure it is a stage than a reckoning. When I reread Didion after Baldwin and Wright, I stopped seeing their second books as evidence of professional progress. They felt more like attempts to answer a question the first book had left unfinished.

These changes show that form is never neutral. The essay gives Didion and Baldwin different kinds of immediacy—one geographic and observational, the other personal and political. The novel, by contrast, gives Wright room to develop his material at greater length and with greater structural ambition. A second book may therefore change a writer’s relationship to fact or to scale.

The next article in this series shifts from questions of form to questions of time. It examines the long gaps between the first and second books in the careers of Junot Díaz, Jeffrey Eugenides, and Edward P. Jones, and asks how those intervening years became part of the story of the work that followed.

The Year of Magical Thinking by Joan Didion: A Deep Literary Analysis

Series • 10 min read

How Does Voice Relate to Form? Three Orientations of a Writer’s Style

Essay • 13 min read

The two older posts on the site extend this essay’s interest in what a change of form can do. The analysis of The Year of Magical Thinking follows Didion into her later nonfiction, where the flat prose described here becomes the instrument for a book about grief, and it shows what she did with the essay once she had been writing it for decades. The piece on “Voice and Form” takes up the question this essay has been asking throughout by separating a change of form from a change of voice.