“I
only achieve simplicity with enormous effort.”
Clarice Lispector,
Brazilian author and columnist
“Clutter
is the disease of American writing. We are a society strangling in unnecessary
words, circular constructions, pompous frills and meaningless jargon.”
William Zinsser,
American journalist and writer
A couple of weeks ago,
I reflected upon the above Lispector and Zinsser’s quotes. My immediate
reaction was that words are weird. We drive
on parkways and park in driveways. We send shipments by car and cargo by
ship. We buy a TV set but only receive
one television. We pronounce “school” with a “k”, but
pronounce “change” with a “cha”. Both
etymology and history provide clues to these ironies, but only
the most learned delve to those depths. And I wondered, “Do even the most
learned understand why a wise man is considered smart whereas a wise guy is a
fool?”
I considered, too, many
other mysteries of life. Why does a man wanting to attract a woman wear cologne
scented like a dead rat, when chocolate around his neck would be a more
successful strategy? And why are we compelled to touch the bench with the “wet
paint” sign attached to it, as if we need proof that the sign is not lying to
us? And why is it that men beating on one another is considered bonding, while
women doing the same is called a catfight? Does our writing become pompously
frilly or filled with circular constructions when we try to explain the
unexplainable?
As writers, we are
told to write simply but life is anything but simple. If the admonition is to
“show, not tell,” shouldn’t complicated lives be revealed through complex
sentences? Writers’ minds are cluttered
with thoughts, ideas, stories clamoring to get out. Our filing cabinets
overflow with half-finished novels, poems and narratives; and sticky notes line
the edges of our desks and counter-tops, keeping safe the brainstorms we had in
the middle of the night. If our lives are so untidy, is it even possible to
write without the cloudiness Zinsser calls a
disease?
We are told to write
what we know. What we know is that chaos and beauty co-exist, and self-control
wars with the desire to throw off the shackles of boundaries; love, joy and
peace are marred by suffering, misery, and doubt; and the rational and
illogical work together side by side. Who can capture such things with
simplicity?
Yet, simplicity
continues to be the aim. Even within one particular faith tradition, an age-old
story has been handed down through the generations about an audience waiting
with bated breath to hear what a very old disciple had to say. He shuffled
center stage, said, “Love one another,” and sat down.
Three words to capture
a lifetime of living and ministry? Is
this how a writer is to write? Paring
down our thoughts to their barest essence? But then, what becomes of the story
from which the grain was gleaned? And what to do with the absurd? When a
character asks, “If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from
morons?” do we simply let the question speak for itself? If Lispector speaks the truth about
simplicity taking enormous effort, can we be blamed for wanting to write the
easy way?
We’re warned not to use
a paragraph where a word will do, but who today knows what a bibble is? Are
writers to refrain from its use because no one knows its meaning? Or rather, can we write an amusing, lengthy
anecdote about a man slurping and spilling his soup and smacking his lips in
appreciation as he sips his toddy afterwards?
In a world of
complexity, can we embrace the use of weird words, circular construction and
pompous frill when needed, while also appreciating the need to weed out
unnecessary words? Let’s not limit
writers to always saying what they mean and never meaning what they say. Let’s
allow writing to simply be what it needs to be, whether complex or simple, as long
as it remains true to writer and reader.
Paula Castner
Paula Castner
No comments:
Post a Comment