Those of us who write, do so for a variety of reasons. I know of people
who write entirely from a desire to make money. Others are driven to write
about themselves, to tell the world about their exciting, boring, amazing,
average, fantastic or mundane lives. Many are looking to put ideas into words,
to explain to the world why things are as they are. Some are impelled by a deep
desire to put things right, to educate those they see as unaware of what they
believe to be important factors. And some simply love the idea of telling
stories; entertaining, moving, amusing, scaring, arousing or exciting their
readers.
Johnson famously said that anyone who wrote other than for money was a
blockhead. I must be a blockhead, then. Money has never been a driver for me, in
writing or any other aspect of my life. It’s a necessary evil, of course, in
the commercial world we inhabit, but, as a driver, it’s empty and unfulfilling.
So, I’m happy if my books sell. But I’m happier still if people enjoy what I’ve
written.
I belong to that last class of writers in the first paragraph. But, and
it’s an important ‘but’, I’m also compelled to write. There is deep within me
the need to write. In fact, if I don’t write, don’t create something, on a
regular basis, I feel unwell and unsettled. It’s as if my creative needs begin
to pile up and block my channels to good health. I always feel better when I’ve
written something new. So, I guess you could say that I write because I have
to. But that doesn’t mean I see it as a duty or a chore.
I love words; always have. I love the way they can be played with to
bring about so many different reactions. I hate the misuse of words, the easy
option that results in cliché. Because I love words, as a tool and a means of
expressing and conveying emotion, I also read, of course. Frankly, any writer
who doesn’t read is doing both himself and his readers a disservice. How can
any craftsman improve without input from others?
My imagination is my greatest asset; it’s a thing almost apart from me,
feeding me with ideas and characters, situations and plots almost without any
conscious direction, it seems. Imagination is what forms the core of my
stories. But, as is always the case with anything of worth, there’s more than
one component involved in the making of my tales. I have drives that are formed
from a combination of my experiences, education, up-bringing, moral stance, interests
and relationships. Those with well-developed perceptual powers will be aware
that I care very much about justice, real love, fairness, intelligence,
creativity and talent. As a corollary, I naturally loathe injustice,
superficial attraction, ignorance, destructive force and dullness. These
aspects inform my writing.
But, I write mostly to entertain and amuse my readers. I want to move,
excite, shock, scare, arouse, anger, surprise, divert, cheer, sadden, jolt,
soothe and amaze. Of course, having a proselytising nature (many of those who
know me say I should have been a teacher), I also want to educate and persuade.
In my early writing, this desire to convert readers to my point of view
overrode the entertainment in my work. It took time for me to realise that
readers of fiction don’t want to be lectured. A writer has to be far more
subtle than the preacher standing in the pulpit before a congregation willing
to swallow his message. So, I now keep the themes that drive me as just that;
themes.
I’m fortunate in that I have a clever and honest wife who quickly spots
any movement toward my urge to preach. And my writing group, made up of
talented professional writers, never allow me to get away with anything that
even sniffs of the soapbox. I remain blissfully unaware of the times I use
language that might be considered pompous or even condescending. Because I left
school at 16 with few formal qualifications, I assume that my knowledge of
English is pretty average but, apparently, I sometimes use language in a way that certain readers might find difficult. It’s not deliberate, but stems from a desire to
combine accuracy with a concise style. So, sometimes, the intervention of my
chosen critics helps overcome a tendency to use language that might otherwise
be seen as ‘clever’, never an intention but sometimes an outcome.
So, I write out of an almost physical need combined with a love of words
and of the power of story to convey emotion. What drives you to write? I’d love
to know. Please go to the trouble of commenting. It’s really very easy.
6 comments:
I believe the desire is inbuilt and unstoppable. Don't you find that stories develop from the strangest of things? A man sat on a park bench this morning while I walked the dog. By the time I walked out of the park, the plot for a short was there in its entirety. Yes, I'd love to make some money, but the plain fact is I can't not write.
You and I both fall into the final category Stuart. I am never more happy than when someone else is reading something I spent months, sometime years, creating.
Writing is a passion. No, more than that. It is an addiction. :)
Thanks for your responses, Silversongbird and Jack. Your story of the man on the bench reminds me of a similar incident, ostensibly with no real potential, that quickly developed into a really great story. Like both of you, I'm incapable of not writing. And, in common with both of you, I'm not driven primarily by a wish for money (though it would be a useful aspect of my writing, as it would give me more time to spend actually writing, of course). We all, it seems, write from a combination of passion and compulsion: qualities, I believe, that make us creative artists as opposed to business-driven opportunists. Good luck with your writing.
Well - good exercise. Here's a handful of the words I could write ;)
There's a beautiful and bizarre phenomenon in Physics, known as Quantum Entanglement. Quantum entanglement describes two separate subatomic particles which have at some time in the past come into close contact with each other, and are eternally altered to carry information about the other particle within them. Einstein called it the "spooky" effect and didn't like it much because he couldn't explain it; people are still trying. But it's one of the reasons why physicists believe that information is never lost, and part of some theories (not all) about how to build a quantum computer. Quantumly entangled particles behave in extraordinary ways, expressing aspects of each other's physical state regardless of the distance between them (see here: http://www.davidjarvis.ca/entanglement/)
I write because I don't have a choice, like a lot of people. I sometimes think of all the ways in which people and creatures and rocks and stars are entangled with each other, without knowing or understanding it; and I wonder how many voices there are contained within my one. That's just the tip of my iceberg of wondering.
- Kate Fraser
Einstein didn't like it because the two particles could be the other side of the universe and they "flip" at the same time, which - apparently - isn't possible.
The problem with particle physics, as with astrophysics, for me anyway, is that much of what is put forward as theory is counter-intuitive. I find it difficult to understand, simply because I find it difficult to accept. So much of what is 'understood' is, in fact, not understood at all but the subject of hypothesis. I'm fascinated and amazed by the science, but the maths that describes it is so far beyond me that I'm unable to absorb it.
But I like your thinking, Kate; how much of what we write is actually initiated by our own imaginations and how much originates beyond our personal spheres?
And, Silversongbird, I sympathise with the genius: he was the one, after all, who said that if you couldn't explain it simply, you didn't understand it yourself. A point we should all use to learn from.
Post a Comment