One True Thing
Writing can be a dangerous act. It also can be entertaining. Sometimes it’s boring, frustrating, and seems pointless. Then again it can be heroic and enlightening. Many times, it’s all the above. That sounds like chaos, doesn’t it? So why do it? That’s a fair question with an unsatisfactory answer.
I have read of authors who claim they might fall to pieces mentally and physically if they couldn’t write. Some even talk about taking their own lives if something happened and the words did not pour out of their head onto paper. Some have done just that. That sort of passion and focus might be necessary to be successful, at least commercially. It also gives some insight as to why so many writers seem a bit distracted and unconventional when you meet them. Their focus is somewhere else rather than the here and now.
If an all-consuming desire is needed to write something someone would pay to read, unfortunately for my bank account, I do not have that sort of passion. But what if you aren’t interested in great commercial success? What if you write because you just want the permanence of your thoughts down on paper? Maybe you could make just enough money to support your fly fishing or bird dog habit? I may be alone on this but that would be fantastic.
I told you the answer as to why write would not be satisfactory but stick with me!
The author of Thicker Than Soup, Kathryn Joyce said that “We all have a book in us. The first step is to recognize that. Writing it is a whole new journey.”
The late curmudgeon Christopher Hitchens said, “Everyone has a book in them and that, in most cases, is where it should stay.”
Two points of view that couldn’t be farther apart by two successful writers. One encourages the other discourages. Yin and Yang. Light and dark. Which one sways you? I tell you for a fact that people who want to write will always be drawn to the light. The ones who are struggling with their writing will descend into the abyss, convinced Mr. Hitchens is speaking about them.
These two people however are speaking about books. Writing isn’t always about books. It could be a short story or poetry. It might be a blog post or some other social media dissertation. Whatever it is, an outline or plan is not necessary. No one even must read it if that’s what you want. It doesn’t even have to be coherent at first. But it must, as Hemingway would have said, be true. With apologies to Papa, I would add that what you write must be true, at least to you. There is a difference between truth and what you think is the truth.
I am not a good writer which is one of the reasons I read books on writing. The authors are people whose work I admire, and I do pick up some tips and advice I find helpful. If I’m being honest, I also hope to magically gain some talent via ocular osmosis. That’s one thing so many writers purposefully forget or ignore. Innate talent is needed to produce art. A writer can learn the techniques and skills needed to produce a novel or poetry from books, school, and mentors. But it takes talent, or at least a good editor, to coalesce raw ideas with craftmanship and turn out something that makes a reader feel or emote the way the author intends.
Where does talent come from? I don’t think anyone knows. We have all heard that practice makes perfect and that the more you practice the luckier you get. True enough but usually the people who express these sentiments are very talented in the first place. The practice enhanced their abilities which were already substantial. In other words, if you can’t walk and chew gum at the same time you can’t practice your way into being a professional golfer. Maybe you just work on your game and play because you enjoy it no matter how bad your swing is.
There are people who conclude that because they desire to be talented, that the desire makes them talented. You find them at writers’ groups or on-line. They consistently know what’s wrong with any written work presented to them yet rarely present their work to the group. Should they produce something for the group they present it with a caveat. It’s the “first draft of a work in progress to make a critique pointless” ploy. They aren’t really writers frankly but they like the thought that they are. They live in a feed back loop that consists of critiquing other people’s work, reading about writing and then using the knowledge to critique the next person’s work. All in the name of “mentoring”.
Some authors feel that the total unique experience and emotion of their lives, in other words “Their Truth”, can be substituted for talent in that their story is so compelling that readers will be unable to resist its pull. The frustrating thing about these sorts is that if manipulated properly in the media, these people can be passed off as having ability.
Think of all the children’s books written by celebrity types who just had a child. Their experience, often quite dramatic and life threatening, is explained to the audience as unique in the realm of childbearing and rearing. The celebrity realized the stories they made up for their children were so much better than the ordinary works available. The stories in their new book will educate your child and promote the right sort of thinking about whatever cause the celebrity is supporting.
The worst of all in my opinion and of course the ones who wouldn’t know writing talent if it bit them, are the people who use ghost writers but claim to be bestselling authors. Ghost writers are not the problem. My wife is one. It’s a difficult occupation because you are writing down someone else’s story that you have gotten through interviews. Once you write them down in a logical order while also making them interesting you must give them back to the subject for editing and that, as you can imagine, can be challenging.
Now, books coming out from former Trump administration people leave me cold. These “tell all” political books have become the trend over the past several administrations. I think the same thing about all them. Where was all this knowledge back when it would have been useful? I understand that talking out loud about big moments, especially negative ones, means the end of your White House career but is that a good excuse? In the Trump administrations case, he central idea behind these books seems to be how utterly insane and problematic the administration was. They also explain how the authors saved us from the administration. I get the feeling that the money from the books is considered a reward for the authors heroism. Fortunately, so many of these type books, both pro and con, fail at the bookstores. So, its possible that a goal of making money for your literary work might not be a good one.
Memoirs or biographies are my weak spot. When well written, they are full of information and the goings on in someone’s brain during important moments. For example, Ulysses Grant’s auto biography is quite good. Written as he was dying, it was his last chance to make some money for his family. He pulls no punches and just lays out the facts of his life with no justification or whining. You come away understanding the man much better. With all his faults and failings Grant saved the Union and abolished slavery as much as any man including Lincoln. Yet he didn’t have the need to remind us of it in his memoir. He just told the story.
He wrote to provide for his family after his death. That’s a good reason to write, isn’t it?
Grant’s counterpart, Robert E. Lee did not write anything about himself, or wartime experiences and it is a tragedy. I don’t know why he never set his life down on paper. I do know he once said that he regretted having a military education. Considering his career in total, that says a lot about the mindset of the man, at least post war. How I wish he would have told us about his life and times. Why he did what he did. It might well have changed a lot about post-Civil War America by eliminating so much myth making. Perhaps it would have stopped the narrative of the valiant gray knight, mounted on his faithful horse Traveler, fighting for the “Lost Cause” against all odds, which in turn might have changed some of the Southern mindset during Reconstruction and eventually Jim Crow.
Or maybe not. History, like writing, is like that. Guessing about what might have been is fun and even instructive but can also be perilous when it comes to the truth. If you mix reality with what might have been, even a little, you damage truth. Add to it the narrative of your part in the story, justifying your actions, portraying yourself as the hero and truth can disappear entirely. Remember what I said about writing being dangerous? This is an example.
I’m convinced that the term” My Truth” was spawned by this mindset and it’s pedantic thinking. There is only truth. It happened or it didn’t. Truth belongs to no one. “My Truth” is an interpretation of reality and it’s personal one at that. This is not something I would put much faith in because I know what people are like. They will usually interpret events to put themselves in the best possible light.
On the other hand, if all you need to write is “one true thing” and its true to you… Oh boy. See how weird writers are?
So, why do we write? The short answer is that it depends on who is writing. But in addition, I think that more importantly, human beings have an innate need to express themselves artistically and writing is just one way to do it. There are so many others from painting to cooking to knitting. Anything you do that gives you creative satisfaction or makes others smile is worth the effort. Even if it brings a few tears of joy or sadness it still is worth the doing.
What creative or artistic thing do you do? Don’t automatically dismiss it. Think about it if you aren’t sure. I’d love to hear about it.