Lena Dunham, she of the $3.5 million book deal, thinks writing for money is “weird.”
This statement comes at the beginning of an essay she penned for the published screenplay for Judd Apatow’s This is 40, 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? That’s deemed “a weird plan.”
On one hand, this statement makes complete sense. Most writers barely make a dime from writing, something a cursory look at the Who Pays Tumblr can demonstrate. Going into the field to make a few shekels is about an effective a strategy as moving to Casablanca for the waters, despite the fact that, once upon a time, Charles Dickens not only wrote for money, he was pilloried by critics for doing just that.
On the other hand, people do need to pay the rent, and it isn’t exactly nice to discover that someone who is earning $3.5 million for her musings is so clueless about the things the rest of the world often needs to take on to get by like, say, corporate writing gigs or staff positions on television programs on that can kindly be described as less profound than Girls. It gives ammunition to all of those critics, formerly thought of as humorless, who pointed out the absurdity of presenting Dunham’s Girls as a generational statement as if all Millennials come from a privileged, artistic background. They just need space, time and an understanding boss so they can find their way in the world after their well-off parents pull the financial plug.
Let me be clear: Dunham’s Hannah, the autobiographical character she created for Girls, does not suffer from a permanent shortage of funds. She could be better described as having a cash-flow problem, which is not the same thing at all. This is the sort of situation that gives one the freedom to say writing for money is ”weird.”
Here’s hoping the next season of Girls takes this issue on.
Related on Forbes: