Have you heard that saying, 'If you see something, say something'? It's common in the US these days. What it means is, 'If someone is being mistreated, and you become aware of it, speak out against it.' This goes for everything from official misconduct to bad-tempered people saying hurtful things to one another.

Writers should take this saying to heart. It's fine to be interested in what we're interested in – our favourite themes and topics – but we also have a responsibility to ourselves and our readers, present and future. That responsibility includes being honest with the world about what we're seeing in our own time and place.

Is the world going along just fine? Or are there things that need improvement? Do you see suffering? Injustice? Approaching disaster? Be aware of it. It should inform your writing.

I'm not saying you need to write diatribes. Or pamphlets. Or claim to have answers you don't have. Far from it. The worst writing in the world is the kind of screed that screams, 'Listen to me, people! I know what to do! If you don't follow me, you're part of the problem!' I think we can all see what's wrong with that. Robbie Stamp is right: he's registered the domain name homohumilis. That's a good thought; humility needs to be our starting point.

And we need to get down to brass tacks when we write about problems. Back in the day, I used to teach English to Greek kids who were preparing to take the Cambridge Lower examination. The kids knew they'd have to write an essay. My boss wanted them all to memorise a template for writing about 'world peace'. The template was full of meaningless, but noble-sounding drivel. She was naïve enough to think this would impress the jaded exam graders. Seriously. The other master essay was in answer to the question, 'Describe your national dish and tell how to make it.' I'll bet those examiners could cook bean soup in their sleep.

We need to do better than platitudes and pretend-knowledge. We need to be humble in offering our bits and bobs and pieces of the puzzle. And we need to be clever in how we present our offerings. Here are a few suggestions from me.

• Find a time in the past where something happened that reminds you of what's happening now. Describe it in such a way that people can see the parallels. Don't say anything. Let them figure it out. Suggest why you think these things happen, but be as subtle about it as you can. Make the reader feel clever for guessing.
• Write a speculative fiction piece, but don't use a reductio ad absurdum. Using that tired, old idea of 'everybody did this, look, what a catastrophe' is worn-out and tedious. Also, readers will turn on you fast. They've become bored by that technique. Instead, suggest a more subtle form of analogy. In another, imaginary society, did they do things a little bit differently? Did it work at least partway? What problems did they encounter? Remember: the time of the Star Trek-style shopping-mall planet has come and gone. You'll have to work harder to get this one to stick.
• Create a character who is out of step with his/her time and place. Explain why. Show the action from their point of view. Make their reasoning clear enough that the reader can see the logic in what they think, also the cracks and flaws. Take the story somewhere interesting. You don't have to solve the problems. Just let people see them.
• You believe your outlook is basically sunny and 'positive'? (You may be alone in that belief.) There's still room for you to acknowledge the absurdity of your space-time. Trust me, it's absurd, even if you don't see it right away. (Have you been reading Bluebottle's comic?)

'No man is an island,' declared Donne. No one lives in a bubble. Not even those guys up on the ISS. Everybody's a part of the whole. If there are random explosions in the night in Philadelphia, it eventually affects you, even if you don't know about it, or, knowing, don’t acknowledge it. Stick your head out of the gopher hole occasionally. If you were king of the world, you couldn't fix all this mess. You certainly aren't expected to have all the right answers. But whether you like it or not, your writing is a part of this time. Try to include what you know in the most useful way possible.

Homework

Watch this video adaptation of Bertolt Brecht's 'If Sharks Were Men'. See how nice I am? I found a video. In English. So you don't have to mess with Google Translate.

Notice how Brecht managed to share his observations of human political behaviour in a way that is enlightening, but giving the audience the distance to appreciate them. Notice that he doesn't leave wiggle room by particularising and allowing people to avoid thinking about injustice. Notice that if somebody read that poem in 1948, and yelled, 'Don't criticise our government!', Brecht could cheerfully point out that he hadn't. He hadn't said anything about capitalism, or communism, or organised religion, or anything like that. He was just telling a story. About sharks and little fishes.

Knowing that the reader will fill in the blanks, my friends, relies on the same principle that makes visual art work: pareidolia. Your mind's eye can't stop seeing the pattern. Brecht works really well when he does things like this. Well enough that I almost forgive him for Der Jasager und der Neinsager. Almost. I used to have a lot of upset students about that one.

Writing Right with Dmitri Archive

Dmitri Gheorgheni

22.06.20 Front Page

Back Issue Page