Hi Stephen,
I stumbled onto your port on the list of Rising Stars, and the description of this piece caught my attention. I am sorry to hear about your stroke. I'm sure you're not here looking for sympathy, but I can imagine the frustration of having to give up any beloved hobby or form of art. Glad you can still write, though!
This is a well-written piece, but it is the subject that I'm more interested in and would like to expand on, if you don't mind. Many instructors and published authors would have us believe that good writing should be invisible, should not draw attention to itself. It has been said that whenever you have an "ah" moment, as you so accurately described it, you should immediately remove the phrase or word which caused it, because otherwise you are interefering with the telling of the story In other words, writing should be purely functional. Tell the story and stop trying to impress people.
I agree with this in some respects, as many authors can get carried away by their own words, swept up in the thrill of creation and losing the focus on what is most important, namely the story. On the other hand, if writing is an art, then it should not serve merely as a vehicle for a good story but should evoke emotions in itself. An artist doesn't paint a meadow to show the world what a meadow looks like, after all. He imprints it with his own style, his viewpoint and his emotions. The whole idea of "invisible writing" suggests that the best writing is the simplest, most straightfoward way of telling the story. This suggests that if you can identify a writer by his or her style, the writing isn't truly invisible.
Anyway, enough rambling. I like your point about validation. I entered a story into a contest, and I wouldn't show it to anyone until I won the contest? Why? Because once it was awarded first place, it was no longer just some silly story. It had been validated and given approval. A question; do any of us really "write for ourselves"? People always tell me that I shouldn't worry about getting published, that I should be doing it for myself. But is art not rendered meaningless if it is not shared? Stephen King likened this sharing to a psychic link between author and reader. It is definitely not too high to aim.
If I may be permitted to suggest an edit:
In the verification of others, there is, if not validity than a shared sense of humanity, of being alive. Perhaps this is too great an objective but to aim high is what art is about, is it not?
"Than" should be "then", and I think you need to shift some commas:
In the verification of others there is, if not validity, then a shared sense of humanity, of being alive. Perhaps this is too great an objective but to aim high is what art is about, is it not?
|
|