So I’m leafing through Stephen King’s ON WRITING book, realizing that I’ve read much more of his non fiction than I have of his fiction, and I come to a place in his text that I can really empathize with.
He talks about people getting mad at him because of things his characters do, say, or think. Maybe a character is racist or swears or clubs people with dead cats. Somehow, people get offended and angry – as if these characters were the mouthpiece of the author. But their not. They are characters that come into the story…they have to live and breath a little and the author has to let them do what they do…or they don’t breath and they die and they become 2 dimensional.
It’s the author’s job to be honest, and present (in fiction) what that person would actually say. People don’t say “oh beans” when they hit their finger with a hammer. They say “Oh shit!!!”
In his words:
“The point is to let each character speak freely, without regard to what the Legion of Decency or the Christian Ladies’ Reading Circle may approve of. To do otherwise would be cowardly as well as dishonest, and believe me, writing fiction in America as we enter the twenty-first century is no job for intellectual cowards. There are lost of would-be censors out there, and although they may have different agendas, they all want basically the same thing: for you to see the world they see . . . or to at least shut up about what you do see that’s different. They are agents of the status quo. Not necessarily bad guys, but dangerous guys if you happen to believe in intellectual freedom.”
oh wow…unfortunately, writers are not obliged to be spellers…that is what the proofreaders are for…sure it is kind of funny to see the mistakes…but we all make them…
“I wouldn’t comment on this, but it’s no the first time I’ve come across such mistakes in your writing.”
“I don’t know if you care or not what people think of your jour journal entries,”
now, i’m not trying to be a bitch, or anything…but it seems to me that when one fancies oneself a connoisseur of finding others’ typographical errors, one would generally not make them in one’s reponse…oh well, that’s just me…
I blame this entirely on my crappy touchpad mouse!
It is funny. Speaking of funny language blunders, I highly recomend the book Anguished English. Hilarious!
Josh is an author. A good author. I find this comment offensive.
Your sentences are simple. They say very little. You give no support.
Your comment and the style in which it was written reminds me of early elementary school. Damn, I miss those stories… See Spot run. Run, Spot! Run!
Precarious Assumptions
Actually puppet, support is implied in the statement. When one makes the fairly subjective comment that “his writing is good” – the support is presumably in the written work. That is the point of the statement. Sure, one would have to find said work, but since this is just a friendly internet journal, we can forgive the writer for not giving an exhaustive Works Cited list with every greeting, how-are-you, and comment.
With that out of the way – the rest of your exercise (and we do exercises so that someday, we can make those little muscles work) in sarcasm, wherein you make the vague allusion that the preceding comment (and the beautiful, brilliant MENSA girl who made it) is somehow sub-par – rests (as precariously as a hippo, with Parkinson’s, on a high wire) on the assumption that short and “simple” sentences are somehow bad or say very little.
This confusion comes from not knowing the difference between “message” and “meta-message.”
“Message” is the text, the words you say or write. “Meta-message” is the meaning underneath. Often the two are not same. For example, I could see someone drop a grenade blowing off their foot. I might turn to them, as they bleed and cry, and say, “Nice one!” By the tone of my voice, I actually mean “You clumsy fool, you blew off your foot and isn’t that hilarious!?”
You can also pack a lot of meta-message into a message. Poetry, itself, is condensed meaning in as few words as possible.
It’s easy, at a premature stage of linguistic skill, to think that a word is measured in its syllables and a sentence’s worth is in its length. That’s one of the steps in writing maturity. We start by learning to read and write in short, simple sentences. See Spot. See Spot run. Then, we add multi-syllabic words to our vocabulary. We learn complex sentences. Then…we make our words as long as possible, our sentences as complex as they can be.
We lengthen.
We complexify (I just made up a word…but since we’re talking about children’s books, I thought I’d pay homage to Dr. Sues).
But, down the road, some of us realize what a messy sludge that makes in the mouth. It is nauseating. There is a realization that short, punchy sentences carry a work through, that meaning can be hidden in a few words. We return to “See Spot.”
It’s a sign of writing maturity (it’s a very recognizable stage). You suddenly realize that while literature is filled with fantastic, long sentences and Romance Language words of many syllables (and how I love how those tickle my tongue), the sentences that hit home are short, with single syllable, Germanic style words.
“Call me Ishmael.”
“My kingdom for a horse!”
“To be or not to be?”
“Quoth the Raven, ‘Nevermore.’” (actually…you can condense that whole poem’s meaning down to the one word, “nevermore”)
Learning to save your big words and sentences and when to punch the reader with shortness, is a lesson in good writing and is far harder to explain or learn than writing really, really, really, really, really, long sentences.
The other thing I noticed in your comment is mistaking insults as cleverness. It would seem that “biting” comments are what passes for wit these days. You see it everywhere, in political books (which are really one side insulting the other…rather than talking about ANYTHING), in “hard edged” news shows, on playgrounds, and behind the safe anonymity of internet comments. Now don’t get me wrong, a person can make scathing comments that are witty, but lately, people just seem to find it easier to take out the wit and just throw the insults. It’s the shrill sarcasm of adolescent kids in black eyeliner – like the shrieking of harpies off the blood stained cave walls, kicking up a miasma of rank breath, dust, keening cacophony, and very little creative intelligence.
Your comment, and the style in which it was written, reminds me of early adolescence – dark clothing optional (but recommended), disinterested frown, and too-too tragically hip witty sarcasm (sans wit).
I do enjoy black clothing though…
Re: Precarious Assumptions
For example, I could see someone drop a grenade blowing off their foot. I might turn to them, as they bleed and cry, and say, “Nice one!” By the tone of my voice, I actually mean “You clumsy fool, you blew off your foot and isn’t that hilarious!?”
Wow. Now that’s humour. 🙂
Re: Precarious Assumptions
It seems as though you were waiting a long time to say that. I’m glad my comment gave you the chance to let it all out.
Thank you kindly.
I would like to add my two cents here, as well.
I have noticed these mistakes before in Josh’s posts, but I have never cared. That is very strange for me because I am the stickler of sticklers when it comes to grammar, spelling, and the like. I am, after all, a writing major.
But I study writing for a very different reason than Josh studies writing. I have the ability to read others’ writing, give suggestions on context, flow, consistency, and for the lower order concerns of grammar and spelling. Josh has the ability to create three-dimensional characters, strange and bizarre yet utterly real circumstances, and beautiful strings of prose that I could gobble up with a spoon. Mmm, mmmm, prose. I love reading what he writes about his daily life, even, because…well, because he’s a great writer. It is for the same reason that I love reading what Stephen King has to say about his own life. (Don’t you love that book, Josh?)
There are people like Josh… those who create, imagine, and make magic from blank pages.
Then there are people like me (and perhaps you)…those who can take a red pen to works of genius and make them “correct,” but can never themselves create something that leaves others in awe, waiting with bated breath for the next sentence.
And I don’t resent people that can do that, because they will give me a job one day. They create, I correct. It’s the circle of life.
I agree that Josh’s work is great. It’s just because of the person I am (also a stickler for grammar, spelling, and the like) that it makes it more difficult for me to enjoy that work when it has errors of that sort. Others may feel the same way, and I think he would do well to consider that, as even proofreaders are prone to miss something. The less there is to miss, the better.
Thank you.
No harm, no foul. No need to erase your comments. This is an open forum here.
I just didn’t want you to get the wrong impression.
Jobs aplenty. Thank God you’ll be there (I got it right this time) to fix things 🙂
Thanks for the kind words – gobbling it up with a spoon tickles me in particular.
And now a word from the lord of the manor…
Wow. Look at all this that happened over my little grammar boo-boos.
Meldawen – writing critiques are pretty standard for me. I don’t bruise. You didn’t need to delete your comments (nor do you need to censor them in the future).
I guess I should reply by saying that, while I do “fancy” myself a writer, I never solicited anyone to take me seriously on this journal. I just throw words up here. If they want to take me seriously, that’s great, but it was never expected and therefore, not really necessary for anyone to say how hard a time in taking me seriously they’re having. It’s a non-issue.
I try not to take myself too seriously (and don’t trust any person or institution that does).
It’s like if I was sitting in my bathrobe (I LOVE doing that!), in my living room, and some suit barged in and said, “How do you expect me to give you a job, dressed like that?”
“I…uh…didn’t ask for a job.”
This journal is my living room. I let my hair down. I sometimes dance naked. It’s raw and unrehearsed…but that’s what it’s meant to be. It’s my journal (why a writer would receive double standards for how he treats his journal…as apposed to the rest of the human race, I am not sure).
My weakness is certainly spelling and grammar. A bigger part of the mess is that my fingers move very fast on the key board, and that leads to wrong uses of “their” and “there” and “they’re.” I’m good at higher order concerns. I sometimes lax at lower order concerns…but hey…even Einstein was balls at math.
Creative integrity is not an excuse or a crutch, but it is what I’m concerned with. Trust me, the written works that go to publishers and contests (and sometimes even get published and awarded prizes) is much more thoroughly corrected. My journal, sometimes gets a once over and a comb through it. But mostly it’s just raw words.
But again, now harm or foul. It’s really a happy set of comments for me. While I never, ever get sad about comments on my grammar – I get ginormously happy when I see my friends crawl out of the wood work to defend me from any threat (perceived or real). THANKS GUYS!!! 🙂
Keep reading. Keep comenting.
😉
Re: And now a word from the lord of the manor…
I don’t think we crawled out of the wood work to defend you, right guys? We’ll be your first line of defense at all times. Even if you don’t want or need it. And you’re our first line too. Nice how that works.
Re: And now a word from the lord of the manor…
I’m glad you’re not offended. I deleted my comments because I realized that I was kinda cranky when I wrote them and was thus not coming off as constructive as I’d intended. I do enjoy your work, and I understand better after your explanation. I certainly know what it is to just type as fast as you can to keep up with your brain, and damn the rules of the English language. 🙂
Re: And now a word from the lord of the manor…
Hey – I want to make peace too. I get really defensive of my friends and I jumped at you because of that. I hope you understand.
Re: And now a word from the lord of the manor…
No worries. All is well on my side of the fence. 🙂
I’m reposting these to remove unnecessary remarks…
I’d like to make a comment about the actual post itself if I may. It seems there was a little tirade into grammar and spelling in LJ posts… pointless discussion. On the other hand, Josh, I whole-heartedly agree with the content of your post.
I read a lot and used to write a lot, and frankly, you’re supposed to hate some characters for what they do – especially when they’re the bad-guy. This not only fleshes them out, but helps you the reader feel so much better whence the character’s comeuppance is upon them. When it’s the good-guy that does the pseudo-nasty things, it help to add realism to the character. Contrary to fairy-tales, there aren’t all these perfect, flawless do-gooders out there.
In short, love the post.