dear authors
dear authors,
first of all, thank you. if not for you i could not continue with my habit, nay addiction, of book-eating. writing is a solitary profession and i appreciate what you have sacrificed, learned, and evoked from yourself in putting things to paper.
i only realized, when voicing this to my equally bookish friend recently, that i have come--albeit unconsciously--to expect three main things from you. call it reader-author trust if you will, namely: 1) structure 2) rhythm and 3) reference. it's because of your mastery that, when done well, these serve the body of work rather than distract from it.
structure i love it when i can tell you have something on which to hang your words. it matters not whether it comes to you beforehand or afterwards in your process, point being it's there. it doesn't have to scream "structure" either because you know the tone you're going for. you're teaching. we're having coffee. you want to make us laugh. if you ramble it's because you had every intention of rambling and there's a reason for it. even if the structure is the intention to have no structure at least that too was planned and i find that reassuring. because, frankly, if it's not there i will make up a structure for it myself and then i've ceased to be blissfully immersed in your narrative and am instead grasping for scaffolding. chapters, subtitles, story-within-a-story, part one/part two, short essay collections, flashbacks, les belles lettres, recipes, even characters who dream in poetry. for anything that's a good clothes-on-hanger fit for what you have to say, you have my most humble thanks.
rhythm a good book, as you know, has rhythm. it could be unexpected genius like jazz (see also brian doyle) or a more predictable two-step. but only you can provide the cadence of your voice. like a windmill, it's fitting to speed up or slow down according to the particular wind guiding your book's direction. i read something recently that was going back and forth between concrete objects and philosophical connections to those objects. and it was going on with this great musical meter and the author and i were dancing until they, who shall remain nameless, tried to get way too "artsy" in what i can only call a spasmatic fit of hallucinogenic phraseology moves that left my eyebrows stuck in an upright position. what are they talking about?! i said out loud. i forgive them because this is a masterful author and i can only believe they meant to do this. maybe they meant to do the macarena. and the waltz? well, they were only kidding about that. but i was really into the waltz. i just thought other readers might get lost too or perhaps i simply lack the dance skills to keep up. believe me, i can make connections out of anything or nothing at all, but in this case i was completely lost. it wasn't a good or necessary break in rhythm, at least for me. i can tango if you ask me to. charleston unexpectedly? ok, i'll be flexible. but it was more like suddenly being flung from the dance floor altogether. some readers may like that. again, just my opinion, but i trusted them not to lose me! (it was with a wary brow that i continued the next chapter.) so thank you for keeping time for us and for saying things simply if that's what the music calls for. *ockham's razor and all that...
reference assuming intelligence on the part of your readers is kind. dropping in french or latin phrases, cool. (*speaking of which, before i get too far i should reference my own aforementioned use of ockham's--sometimes also spelled occam's--razor as the premise that the simplest answer is probably right). somewhere, though, i want to know what you mean or at least where to find it because chances are i might have been sick the day they covered that in french class, plus i never took latin. i like new words and yes, i can look them up. and every historic allusion has it's time. you don't have to hold my hand parenthetically, but it is nice to know that somewhere at the bottom of the page or in the back i can look up said reference. in bigger terms, honesty is appealing in terms of why you feel the need to share certain things with us. not only how do you use references , but what is your reference point? it may be to help yourself process a life event, to comfort, to create an escape, or because you are fascinated by something you learned and want to teach. there are personal journals destined to be books (see also famous annes, as in frank and lindbergh). and sometimes, honestly, i think there are books that should have just stayed personal journals. (perhaps social media has clouded the filter of public vs. private consumption?) at any rate, thank you for circling back to something if you take the time to draw special attention to it in the first place.
and of the writing gospel these three remain: structure, rhythm and reference.
but the greatest of these is still love.
sincerely,
an alert and grateful reader
first of all, thank you. if not for you i could not continue with my habit, nay addiction, of book-eating. writing is a solitary profession and i appreciate what you have sacrificed, learned, and evoked from yourself in putting things to paper.
i only realized, when voicing this to my equally bookish friend recently, that i have come--albeit unconsciously--to expect three main things from you. call it reader-author trust if you will, namely: 1) structure 2) rhythm and 3) reference. it's because of your mastery that, when done well, these serve the body of work rather than distract from it.
structure i love it when i can tell you have something on which to hang your words. it matters not whether it comes to you beforehand or afterwards in your process, point being it's there. it doesn't have to scream "structure" either because you know the tone you're going for. you're teaching. we're having coffee. you want to make us laugh. if you ramble it's because you had every intention of rambling and there's a reason for it. even if the structure is the intention to have no structure at least that too was planned and i find that reassuring. because, frankly, if it's not there i will make up a structure for it myself and then i've ceased to be blissfully immersed in your narrative and am instead grasping for scaffolding. chapters, subtitles, story-within-a-story, part one/part two, short essay collections, flashbacks, les belles lettres, recipes, even characters who dream in poetry. for anything that's a good clothes-on-hanger fit for what you have to say, you have my most humble thanks.
rhythm a good book, as you know, has rhythm. it could be unexpected genius like jazz (see also brian doyle) or a more predictable two-step. but only you can provide the cadence of your voice. like a windmill, it's fitting to speed up or slow down according to the particular wind guiding your book's direction. i read something recently that was going back and forth between concrete objects and philosophical connections to those objects. and it was going on with this great musical meter and the author and i were dancing until they, who shall remain nameless, tried to get way too "artsy" in what i can only call a spasmatic fit of hallucinogenic phraseology moves that left my eyebrows stuck in an upright position. what are they talking about?! i said out loud. i forgive them because this is a masterful author and i can only believe they meant to do this. maybe they meant to do the macarena. and the waltz? well, they were only kidding about that. but i was really into the waltz. i just thought other readers might get lost too or perhaps i simply lack the dance skills to keep up. believe me, i can make connections out of anything or nothing at all, but in this case i was completely lost. it wasn't a good or necessary break in rhythm, at least for me. i can tango if you ask me to. charleston unexpectedly? ok, i'll be flexible. but it was more like suddenly being flung from the dance floor altogether. some readers may like that. again, just my opinion, but i trusted them not to lose me! (it was with a wary brow that i continued the next chapter.) so thank you for keeping time for us and for saying things simply if that's what the music calls for. *ockham's razor and all that...
reference assuming intelligence on the part of your readers is kind. dropping in french or latin phrases, cool. (*speaking of which, before i get too far i should reference my own aforementioned use of ockham's--sometimes also spelled occam's--razor as the premise that the simplest answer is probably right). somewhere, though, i want to know what you mean or at least where to find it because chances are i might have been sick the day they covered that in french class, plus i never took latin. i like new words and yes, i can look them up. and every historic allusion has it's time. you don't have to hold my hand parenthetically, but it is nice to know that somewhere at the bottom of the page or in the back i can look up said reference. in bigger terms, honesty is appealing in terms of why you feel the need to share certain things with us. not only how do you use references , but what is your reference point? it may be to help yourself process a life event, to comfort, to create an escape, or because you are fascinated by something you learned and want to teach. there are personal journals destined to be books (see also famous annes, as in frank and lindbergh). and sometimes, honestly, i think there are books that should have just stayed personal journals. (perhaps social media has clouded the filter of public vs. private consumption?) at any rate, thank you for circling back to something if you take the time to draw special attention to it in the first place.
and of the writing gospel these three remain: structure, rhythm and reference.
but the greatest of these is still love.
sincerely,
an alert and grateful reader
You. Are. Brilliant.
ReplyDeleteThis should be published in the New Yorker or some such thing.
Love, An Alert Reader xox
dearest alert reader, brilliance shines only as bright as the company it is privileged to keep!
ReplyDelete