We Writers Listen to Donald Maass and Others. We Do Our Research
I follow a blog for writers that is blessed occasionally with a piece by literary agent and author for writers, Donald Maass. He offers insights into the writing process, but he also lives in the real world. So in answer to a writer’s post he wrote: (Note: the response has been edited) Stories do not require a consensus. They do not legislate. Their purpose is to persuade. But persuade us of what? And how?
In a novel, (or screen play, script that becomes a film) to prove others wrong, it is first necessary to acknowledge that they may be right. Thus,
- create characters who represent divergent ways of thinking and doing–actually opposing ideas are represented by opposing characters. (Brilliant and basic. Every television drama presents tension–because people with differing points of view are interacting.)
- create characters to be strong, as each must face his or her weaknesses. (As writers, our characters often face what we are afraid of). As readers, we will not be moved unless we see humanity first. The character must fail. And then to persuade us to change, the character must change because of the failure. In other words, they see the light.
Maass states:
- Writers must create antagonists whose case is excellent, and heroes who are flawed.
- But in order to truly be a hero, those characters must learn and then change.
- Thus, the power of storytelling to change us (the reader) lies in the courage writers summon to see things as others do. It depends on creating heroes who are flawed and must learn. Most of all, it requires that authors humble themselves, writing not out of resentment, but out of twined compassion and conviction about what is right.
- ( I think that is brilliant.)
Maass asks: What is the bell you will ring in your writing? What clear and simple truth does it sound? Words are strong when you know their purpose. Stories speak loudest when the storyteller first listens.
OKAY, I AM LISTENING
Writers speak through their characters. They use their so-flawed-ideas and their closer-to-perfect ideas. Both are on the page!
My novel-in-progress presents a crack in the foundation of a marriage: one of the partners decides to forget an initial pledge to be compassionate in life and help others. He is turning away. She is not. But that doesn’t make her an angel. Maybe she is going overboard, and thus wrong in her belief that she can change people through empathy and compassion. It helps me to grapple with my own fears and insecurities, while getting into the skin of my characters.
FINDING COMPASSION THROUGH SELF-TENSION
Recently, Erin Aubry Kaplan published a piece in the LA TIMES, entitled A New Reckoning for Whiteness. And I found a connection between the hero of any novel or story wrestling with his or her flawed-ness, before becoming a hero-again. And thus, I am wrestling with my own lived life. Kaplan writes that our current president’s “both-sides” problem just might make some citizens grapple with a crucial question: What does it mean to be white? Or, what does it really mean?
It was a hard piece to read. But necessary. Kaplan asks: “It (the question) requires individual answers to intimate questions: How do I feel as a white person? What advantages do I take for granted based on my skin color? How do I see nonwhites? Or do I see them at all?”
Kaplan writes that if white people struggle with these questions, she has struggled with similar ones all her life: “What sort of black person are you? Middle class or ghetto, articulate or down-home, educated or irrational, bourgeoisie or radical?”
She writes that currently, “no one can indulge in the illusion of togetherness. He’s (POTUS 45& 47) disrupting a surface that needs to be disrupted, for good.” (or for The good)
She’s saying that in order to write the best American story, each of our “characters” has to look and acknowledge our flaws, before we can go back to believing in the “prefect union” we so desire. And thus (if we do) we become the heroes of our story. Reading the entire article and seeing the whole of her argument, might be disruptive — but then, now we are becoming used to that EVERY SINGLE DAY.
Thus, I have been examining my whiteness. Yes, I benefited from living in a middle class Chicago neighborhood, attending private schools. I knew few black people growing up. My high school was integrated, but barely. Did I make an attempt to befriend my fellow black students? Again, barely. Maybe I felt myself absolved by the literature I was reading and analyzing, CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY. Big deal.
When Martin Luther King was assassinated, black students referred to themselves as the “worms in our apple.” By the time I was teaching in an integrated high school that pulled from neighborhoods of poor whites and blacks–I was more awake. (I don’t like that term, but it works.) I did fight to stay awake, but even now, I wouldn’t give myself an A plus. And my Conclusion…..as a writer:
I must read widely, question my beliefs, work toward openness. As a citizen, I must do the same, use my brain to see lies, prejudice, rule-breaking, downright evil. AGAIN, we find ourselves in a time that requires QUESTIONING. Writers, teachers, parents, leaders…we cannot accept the status quo. We must believe in what Maass suggests above: it requires authors to humble themselves, writing not out of resentment, but out of twined compassion and conviction about what is right.
Or another way to say it: WHEN YOU WRITE, OPEN YOUR HEART AS WELL AS YOUR EYES.
Erin Aubry Kaplan