Comp Conundra
Stephen Terry just wrote an interesting blog (which, if you haven't
already seen it,
you can read here.) The thrust of his argument was that if you
set a comp on the subject of departure then you shouldn't award the
prize primarily on the quality of the writing, because you should
instead award it on the basis of emotional truth. An interesting
suggestion, and one that certainly calls for a response.
I think there are three main elements to that response, two of which are routine and the third of which is interesting:
Because - and here's the thing - good writing is ABOVE ALL about accuracy and emotional truth. It's about finding the essence of a moment and distilling it into words. Good writing and emotional truth become about the same thing.
True, good writing is often about hard work and discipline. 'Creative writing' can often be about uprush of feelings and outpouring through the pen. The latter may generate a pleasanter sensation for the writer than the former ... but if the reader is in search of emotional truth - that moment of insight that explains themself to themself - then they'll always find that in the carefully crafted prose. Always.
And that's what we're searching for in this comp. The wonderfully chosen word which makes a scene fall into place, which allows the reader to go away with an (ever so slightly) enlarged understanding of the world and themselves. So, yes, we're writing-elitists and proud to be so!
I think there are three main elements to that response, two of which are routine and the third of which is interesting:
- It's a comp! On a writers' site! Of course we're going to be looking for quality writing.
- We have plenty of comps that call for merriment and invention above all (the last one being a case in point). This one is a little more serious - though as it happens, the theme of departure could just as well be about jumping on a train at Paddington as about anything heavier, so there's no need to get too serious unless you want to. In a way, you can see this as a simple exercise in elegant prose writing with the theme as serious or light as you choose.
Because - and here's the thing - good writing is ABOVE ALL about accuracy and emotional truth. It's about finding the essence of a moment and distilling it into words. Good writing and emotional truth become about the same thing.
True, good writing is often about hard work and discipline. 'Creative writing' can often be about uprush of feelings and outpouring through the pen. The latter may generate a pleasanter sensation for the writer than the former ... but if the reader is in search of emotional truth - that moment of insight that explains themself to themself - then they'll always find that in the carefully crafted prose. Always.
And that's what we're searching for in this comp. The wonderfully chosen word which makes a scene fall into place, which allows the reader to go away with an (ever so slightly) enlarged understanding of the world and themselves. So, yes, we're writing-elitists and proud to be so!
Comments
Subscribe
Visitor counter
Blog Roll Centre
Blog Hints
55 Comments
Say, for example, someone decides to write from the perspective of a five year old child who has just lost a parent through death, or divorce, or something equally traumatic for such a young mind. Alright, so the prose itself may be deliberately crafted into something which represents the child accurately, but this cannot be done without tapping into the heart of the matter and truly understanding - not just empathising with - the child. This requires emotional intelligence and above all, the ability to write and write well. That ability is really quite rare; it's about seeing more than just words on a page. I believe that is what the Cloud celebrates.
I’m interested in the question you raise regarding the purpose that good writing serves. It reminds me of my mother’s birthday, twenty years ago. I knew she loved reading so I decided to buy her a book.
“I will buy her the very best book that money can buy,” I said to myself.
After some investigation I discovered there was a book competition known as the Booker Prize, and the previous winner was called “The Famished Road” by Ben Okri. So I purchased the book and felt very satisfied with myself. For once I had put some thought into my mother’s present. A few weeks after her birthday I questioned her about the book.
“How was the book?”
“Oh, it’s lovely,” she replied.
But on interrogating her about the plot it soon became clear that she had not completed the first chapter, possibly not even the first page. So, on subsequent birthdays I went back to buying her flowers.
This leaves me wondering, Harry, before we ask the question ‘Why write?’ don’t we first have to answer the question ‘Why read?’?
We write from the heart, otherwise what is the point? If we write honestly and to our best ability then the reading will follow. There are many aspiring writers on here and we learn something new everyday which I believe can only better our writing. Entering into these competitions and any other competitions is practice and a good exercise in learning the craft, learning about our strengths and weaknesses.
I've entered into three competitions outside of the cloud and though nervous about strangers reading something so personal to me, I embrace their views and opinions. Whilst we write we always think about the reader anyway, this is part of the process, is it not?
Remember, everyones tastes are different and perhaps you should have looked at what your mother likes to read before going out and buying her the book. My Nan was a Mills & Boon fan and so would not have appreciated any Booker Prize Winner (lol).
Seanin - So eloquent and accurate as always.
Ron, it can be very hard to pick the right book for a gift. I've been bought books that didn't really chime with me, and I'm sure I've been guilty of giving them as well, though I always try and match a gift to what I know about the recipient's preferences. But I'm not sure I quite understand what you're getting at the question 'why read'. Surely, as writers, we're already keen readers? And isn't it knowledge of the power reading can have that - at least in part - feeds our desire to write?
Now, I may well come under fire for saying this, but I'm not really a follower of books that have been awarded prizes. There are some highly celebrated authors out there that I can't stand - Salman Rushdie being one - and after reading the first few pages of a book, I sigh, put it down and go in search of something else.
When it comes to the question of reading, it's not about the hype (and God knows there's enough of that to propel every aircraft in international airspace), it's about the element of choice. Literature is the one art form that is accessible to everyone.
I could understand with your point if you had said, "why read fiction?"
I also come across well-crafted writing which has no emotional truth at the centre: it's like a love song written by a computer, manipulating all the required elements but with nothing vivid and authentic, odd, surprising. Like the verse in a greetings card, which rhymes and scans neatly but does nothing to bring what it says alive.
It's my job to give the writers-from-the-heart better tools, so that their truth comes across fresh and alive and new, not tired and blurred by cliché or second-hand language or dullness. It's my job to help the competent-but-dead towards ways to find truth, and courage to work with it.
And yes, I do think that the quality of the writing should be important in a competition: uncrafted splurge is for the therapy group or the journal or the first draft, not a goal for a finished piece of writing. But the reason that something doesn't seem emotionally true may be because it's truth badly written, or because it's well-written un-truth, or it may be because it just doesn't speak to the person reading it at that moment: a view of the desert, for a lakes-and-mountains lover, for example...
I wonder if everyone agrees?
Anyway, as Kiki points out, this blog is about writing.
I like the comps because I'm finding it a struggle to write at the moment. My script characters have done a runner, and I can't think of anything to write about, so it's great to be set these challenges, not for practice (although I will admit I look at my writing as practice as I'm still learning) but as an opportunity to write something.
And I agree with you; it's the opposite of cluttering up a thrilling story with annoying verbiage, such that there's nobody left awake to appreciate it. We've all done that - especially at the beginning of our writing careers, and from time to time, a fair way into it (I speak personally, of course).
On that score. teriffic idea Minxie. Perhaps a tad narrow for individuality, but how about it. Describe a single everyday item of furniture from your house and make it captivating. Not just a pine chair, but everyday furniture. Harry, whadayasay? Next month??
Certainly when judging a comp you try to balance your judgement of what the story's saying, and how its saying it. Never easy.
At least the competition on here is free to enter, you have to pay everywhere else!!
Or, as AlanP says, it could be about any household object. I have a rather nice red vase I'm looking at as I type!
Emma - The chair could be a murder weapon and the room painted white to conceal the blood stains! Also, you're right, it can't be easy to judge the comps, as well as time consuming, so we shouldn't forget that someone is doing that for us, and for free too!
I love how the Cloud blogs morph from cloud to cloud - We start off talking about this months comp and are already discussing the next one... lol ;)
I also agree that a competition on a writing site should specify that it's well written- that isn't to say that all of the entries will be well written though. But that's the point of a competition isn't? The best pieces will win, the others- like mine will just be written in the hoe that someone will read it and appreciate that I had something to say.
Like you, I definately read and comment / try and help on more work than I write and submit, but when I do put anything up I know that I have tried my hardest and submit to the best of my ability, the same as almost everyone else; and this is the point.
So, when it comes down to it (if you read everyones comments) we all concur. We try to be honest and write from the heart even if it's clunky (because we are learning. Well those that aren't published).
I still say that there are some amazing pieces of writing on there and i'm glad i'm not the judge!
Given that nobody here cares for Salman Rushdie's writing, I'm now wondering what this month's competition is guiding us towards. A hundred words works well, but how is it applied within a novel? Is it like having a really sickly dessert. A couple of spoonfuls are lovely, but a whole bowlful would make you vomit?
I don't like Salman Rushdie either, but that's a personal choice as I find him quite cold. I think comps aren't there to guide us, just to give us an idea. We guide ourselves. We know what we know, not what others tell us we know, and that's what we should write. If we want to write something we know nothing about, we need to put in time and effort into researching that, like I say, to give it justice.
As for sickly desserts... If you've ever actually eaten a bowlful, you'd know how sour they actually are ! Nobody eats them without having the starter and main course first ! Same as all of us - some are lucky enough to avoid throwing up, that's all... :]
1) Having read several of his books, including the above mentioned titles and Shame - but never finishing any of them bar SV - I just found that even turning a page sucked the energy from me. I felt like I was hacking at concrete. To put it simply, his writing just didn't 'do it' for me.
2) I did read most of Shame of my own accord, and hated it. But then when I went to university, I had to read and study Satanic Verses. I did as I was told, with loathing. Still, I tried very hard indeed to cite exactly why I couldn't just get into the damn stuff, and as a result chose to try Midnight's Children. Same thing happened. So, I accepted that I was going to approach my academic assignments from a more critical perspective, and set about this in an informed manner. Big mistake.
My tutor, who had some sort of God-complex, absolutely despised me for having an opinion that differed to everyone else's. In truth, it's not that my opinion was any different; it's that nobody else wanted to stand up to the dictator at the top of the room and be honest.
Now, let me just point out that in my essays, I did acknowledge his ability, I acknowledged how highly acclaimed he is and I made references to the technical aspects of his writing that might qualify him for such adoration, should the reader consider such criteria important. But I didn't, so I challenged it. I wasn't arrogant, nor was I ignorant. I did my research, I planned my work, I responded to discussions with composition and respect. I just didn't agree with the insane level of worship that was being levelled at the man because I didn't feel that his work warranted it.
In return, my tutor refused to mark my essays on Rushdie. In fact, he refused to even accept my presence in class. I ended up having to take a complaint further than I liked, because having a mind that I like to make up of my own accord meant that for him, I had no right to be in his tutorials. This went on to play an integral part in me leaving university.
So, Rushdie, for all of his admirable themes, resulted in me having my own right to expression stamped out in a very public manner. Of course, it wasn't his fault; I know that. But I didn't like his work even before university, and unfortunately for Rushdie, the power of association is an underestimated force and every time I'm asked to pass comment on his work, I immediately think of the pompous bastard who cut a fat chunk out of my year's work and thoroughly enjoyed severing my sentences mid-syllable. I separate the two annoyances, naturally, but I do have a strong aversion to anything that garners such incredible hype without deserving it. And in my opinion, for me, Rushdie does not deserve it.
In answer to your last post, emotional truth is many things. It's writing truthfully in a way that evokes emotion. It's emotional intelligence. It's empathy. It's the deliverance of raw honesty even if the words hurt. It's about using as few words as possible to convey something enormous.
As for this month's competition, I'm not sure what relevance it's direction has to Rushdie. The word limit isn't about being frugal with the content; it serves to push your boundaries and see what you can produce within a tight constraint. Oh, and then there's the fact that expecting anyone to trawl through multiple 1500-word entries for the purposes of a monthly competition is asking a little too much.
'How is it applied within a novel?' - I really have no idea what you mean by this. It's a flash fiction/non-fiction writing competition and it isn't designed to be applied within a novel. Unless you want to, in which event take it to Critiques and see if anyone vomits.
Seanin, what a terrible, soul-crushing experience you wnet through at uni. What a horrid and ignorant tutor you describe. Take the one good thing out of it all: the tutor sounds like a marvellous type to base one of your vilainous characters on in some subsequent novel :-)
Btw, just for the record, I don't read for the love of words and the exquisitely turned phrase. I read for the love of a good story. If there is some excellent writing included in the telling, I guess I appreciate that as much as the next reader, but as long as it is competently written that's good enough for me, if it tells a great story.
" Literature is the one art form that is accessible to everyone." - you know, not everyone can read. Wouldn't drawing be more accesible to everyone? Or singing (that's a form of art right)? I just can't say I agree with your statement here.
As it happens I rather enjoyed Midnight's children. I thought the Narrator was a pompus ass, sure, but I also thought he was amusingly inaccurate, and having read up on some of the history at the time found Rushdies skillmanship rather impressive. Then again, I was reading from the perspective of a english student who needed to find themes for his next essay, not as a casual reader.
I am sad to hear that your tutor was so narrow in his viewpoint.
"If that means writing about something that you haven't experienced personally, then you need to speak to people who have experienced it so you can understand and do it justice, and if you can't, simply don't try?" - I've written plenty of things that I have not personally experienced. I mean... I'm sure I could write them better if I HAD experienced them, and I'd like that, but isn't that the power of the human mind- to understand things it has not experienced first hand?
Wow... I seem to be disagreeing with alot of people today. How odd.
'Btw, just for the record, I don't read for the love of words and the exquisitely turned phrase. I read for the love of a good story. If there is some excellent writing included in the telling, I guess I appreciate that as much as the next reader, but as long as it is competently written that's good enough for me, if it tells a great story.'
Exactly my point.
And fair enough if not everyone reads for a love of words - that's reasonable. But where would your story be without the words to tell it? Where would your film be without the words to write it, narrate it, and give your characters their voices? It still involves words, and that's what I was getting at. Not a love of words for the sake of reading them, but for the sake of what they *do* and the effect they have, regardless of what medium you experience them in.
Also, Babblefish, while at uni I did have to read Rushdie from the perspective of an English student, which I did to the best of my ability. I was anything but a casual reader, especially when I found myself totally baffled as to why I couldn't enjoy his work. But then again, I've come across many 'great writers' in my time with whom I felt no affinity. The Bronte sisters for example - absolutely not my cup of tea. But as with Rushdie, I approached my essays with the mature attitude of a student who loves their subject, and constructed my criticism intelligently. Thankfully that teacher wasn't anything like the aforementioned tutor; she appreciated a student who could think, rather than regurgitate.
As to the comp, well I've entered. Several times, actually because I found the theme evoked a hell of a lot of thought - I loved it. To me it wasn't about whether someone thinks my writing is worthy of winning. I just like to sit down with a theme, a hundred words to spare and seeing what I can come up with.
In terms of the relevance to Rushdie I suppose I was thinking about how important fancy prose is within a story. As one of the world's greatest writers, he would probably do quite well in this month's competition, and yet not many of us have enjoyed reading his books.
In terms of what constitutes good writing I remember that YouWriteOn break it down into eight categories:
Characters
Plot
Pace & Structure
Use of Language
Narrative voice
Dialogue
Settings
Themes & Ideas
So according to them, good 'use of language' is only one element in good writing.
Having said that, I do think this month's comp is a useful exercise and I agree with Tony that this skill is not used enough in writing novels. We seem to be brain-washed into thinking that a novel has to be 80,000 words or so, and perhaps this leads to shoddiness. I remember reading a book called "Mr Pip" which was relatively short and yet I didn't feel short-changed. Books of short stories usually have far fewer words but can be equally satisfying. So I think one positive message from this month's comp is that we should concentrate on quality rather than quantity.
Speaking for myself; this theme definately evoked hidden TRUTHFUL emotions.
I have personal love for flash fiction and short stories, it teaches you to be economical with your words and clever with your grammar. Do you really expect someone as busy as Harry to read through however many 1000-3000 word stories???
This is only the second competition I have entered on here as I am always nervous of others reading my work. That barrier is being broken down by some wonderful patient and considerate authors on here. I respect anyone who "has a go"; someone who doesn't just make a lot of noise but uses their voice for a purpose.
There seems to be a lot of negativity from certain individuals. Also it's turning into an debate site or a book review site, it's a writers' forum and I think we should all be supporting eachother with that.
Booooo i'm moaning now. We are a talented bunch so lets get scribbling dudes :) HAPPY DAYS
Salman Rushdie - I loved 'Midnight's Children' when it came out - perpetual storytelling - teeming population - wit and ingenuity. I was in Zimbabwe when 'Satanic Verses' came out, and the kids I taught were furious. From their point of view, a rich westerner was insulting poorer people. They didn't see any cultural complexity, they just saw the endless insult the west inflicts on everyone else (you know, invading their countries - Suez, Iraq, all the past messing around in Iran). People just want respect. They felt disrespected.
Keats: 'Beauty is truth, truth beauty' - solve that one, folks! It's true, but I'd have a job specifying how.
Love of words: hmm. Maybe this is worth a blog on its own. Now I've arrived at semi-senility I find myself constantly searching for words. From this I deduce that the impression comes before the word. It's like there's a cloud somewhere in the mind and maybe it'll resolve into a word and maybe it won't. My point is, I have a love of meaning. If words will do the trick, great. But very often they won't, either because I can't find the buggers or because they weren't there in the first place. (Most notorious example: love. How many contradictory meanings does that poor old word have to bear?)
Click here to sign up now.