Of late my development as a writer has fed into my development as a person. I discovered lately that I am a stubborn contrarian. Not that I didn’t already know that I was both of those things. I am a man at the mid-point of life, so no one need worry that I was oblivious of my essential nature. What I had done incorrectly was that I had mischaracterized those two items.
I had assumed the two items were just character flaws that I had. I was led to believe that nothing good comes character flaws. The notion that these had to be obviated before good things could happen both personally or with my writing was a flawed one. It was a poor assumption that led to much frustration for me.
Somewhere around the time I started watching Game of Thrones on HBO, I encountered a different twist on this idea. Tryeon Lannister shares his view on the limitations dealt to us in life in the first episode. He tells John Snow to own his limitation (being a bastard). He tells him to own it so definitely so completely that it functions like a suit of armor. It removes the ability of others to use the limitation against you ever.
It took some time for this to percolate within me for this to occur as being applicable for me. My process on the subject starts with hearing the item, recognizing the truth, and letting it go for at least awhile. Somewhere along the way it comes back to me as being applicable to me in some fashion. From there it takes me time to review it and see the what, where, and how before I can allow the truth to make a change.
In this particular instance, it took time for me to put together that my frustration with my writing could be directly tied to my contrarian nature and my stubbornness. I was trying to play by the rules of writing, and in doing so it was causing me a form of difficult dissonance. I did not understand this disconnect between my writing, and how much I was not enjoying it. I was frustrated and that frustration bled into every project I worked on. And it was the same frustration each time.
Somewhere along the way I re-read the narrative of David and Goliath in the Bible, and something struck me. In the narrative there is a point where Saul gives David his armor to use. David’s response is to say, ‘I can’t use this”. David then reverts to being himself, selects weapons for use in the battle to come that are in accordance with the essential nature of who David is. The result is that in being true to himself, David is then triumphant over Goliath.
Now allow me to admit that I am aware that I am not David. I am aware that I am not confronted by a massive army intent on the destruction of my people whose champion is a massive giant. I get that my writing is specific to me, the triumph of my writing will have a limited impact. In short, I do not mean to in the course of relating my discovery to imply some grandiose vision of myself and my future. Rather I mean only to share the discovery as it relates to me and my writing.
The ways in which this hit me were subtle and simple. I was struck that I was writing using the rules and standards of other people. In the course of this, it was frustrating me and causing my stubborn nature and my contrarian side to act up, sometimes rather unproductively. It caused a certain degree of fundamental angst that when I used the tropes and story arch archetypes, that I would follow the rules and give the A +B = C response in writing, when I would have rather said A + B = purple.
The key item I discovered along the way is that I need first and foremost to be true to myself. I should write in a fashion that is true to the essential nature of me. I should listen when the angst happens and take it seriously as a sign that something in the product of my writing is not true to me. This puts the angst in the position of being the canary in the mine that acts as a warning mechanism. It becomes the fire alarm as it were.
This discovery really boils down as follows… I intend to write as I will. I intend to be potentially the only person happy with my work product. If that limits the marketability of the resulting product then so be it. Some would construe this as a declaration of madness, and it could be viewed from that perspective. However, I intend it to function as my throwing down the gauntlet. I intend it to say that I am aim to misbehave. If you come to my writing and you as a reader are expecting someone that writes according to the rules and follows the dictates of tradition and genre tropes, then you should find someone else to read.
I do not intend and will not allow myself to be bound up in the iron maiden torture box that prevents the writer from deviating from expectation. I will seek and you as the reader should expect me to write according to the dictates of my imagination and the sum total of my conscience such as it is. This means when you expect that a story arc will pay off in a particular fashion, I will not do so just because it is the expectation that I do so. Rather it will result in a fashion solely of my own desire, if that pays off according to expectation great. If not, then at least you have been warned at the outset.
I had assumed the two items were just character flaws that I had. I was led to believe that nothing good comes character flaws. The notion that these had to be obviated before good things could happen both personally or with my writing was a flawed one. It was a poor assumption that led to much frustration for me.
Somewhere around the time I started watching Game of Thrones on HBO, I encountered a different twist on this idea. Tryeon Lannister shares his view on the limitations dealt to us in life in the first episode. He tells John Snow to own his limitation (being a bastard). He tells him to own it so definitely so completely that it functions like a suit of armor. It removes the ability of others to use the limitation against you ever.
It took some time for this to percolate within me for this to occur as being applicable for me. My process on the subject starts with hearing the item, recognizing the truth, and letting it go for at least awhile. Somewhere along the way it comes back to me as being applicable to me in some fashion. From there it takes me time to review it and see the what, where, and how before I can allow the truth to make a change.
In this particular instance, it took time for me to put together that my frustration with my writing could be directly tied to my contrarian nature and my stubbornness. I was trying to play by the rules of writing, and in doing so it was causing me a form of difficult dissonance. I did not understand this disconnect between my writing, and how much I was not enjoying it. I was frustrated and that frustration bled into every project I worked on. And it was the same frustration each time.
Somewhere along the way I re-read the narrative of David and Goliath in the Bible, and something struck me. In the narrative there is a point where Saul gives David his armor to use. David’s response is to say, ‘I can’t use this”. David then reverts to being himself, selects weapons for use in the battle to come that are in accordance with the essential nature of who David is. The result is that in being true to himself, David is then triumphant over Goliath.
Now allow me to admit that I am aware that I am not David. I am aware that I am not confronted by a massive army intent on the destruction of my people whose champion is a massive giant. I get that my writing is specific to me, the triumph of my writing will have a limited impact. In short, I do not mean to in the course of relating my discovery to imply some grandiose vision of myself and my future. Rather I mean only to share the discovery as it relates to me and my writing.
The ways in which this hit me were subtle and simple. I was struck that I was writing using the rules and standards of other people. In the course of this, it was frustrating me and causing my stubborn nature and my contrarian side to act up, sometimes rather unproductively. It caused a certain degree of fundamental angst that when I used the tropes and story arch archetypes, that I would follow the rules and give the A +B = C response in writing, when I would have rather said A + B = purple.
The key item I discovered along the way is that I need first and foremost to be true to myself. I should write in a fashion that is true to the essential nature of me. I should listen when the angst happens and take it seriously as a sign that something in the product of my writing is not true to me. This puts the angst in the position of being the canary in the mine that acts as a warning mechanism. It becomes the fire alarm as it were.
This discovery really boils down as follows… I intend to write as I will. I intend to be potentially the only person happy with my work product. If that limits the marketability of the resulting product then so be it. Some would construe this as a declaration of madness, and it could be viewed from that perspective. However, I intend it to function as my throwing down the gauntlet. I intend it to say that I am aim to misbehave. If you come to my writing and you as a reader are expecting someone that writes according to the rules and follows the dictates of tradition and genre tropes, then you should find someone else to read.
I do not intend and will not allow myself to be bound up in the iron maiden torture box that prevents the writer from deviating from expectation. I will seek and you as the reader should expect me to write according to the dictates of my imagination and the sum total of my conscience such as it is. This means when you expect that a story arc will pay off in a particular fashion, I will not do so just because it is the expectation that I do so. Rather it will result in a fashion solely of my own desire, if that pays off according to expectation great. If not, then at least you have been warned at the outset.
RSS Feed
