Did And Do They Have Pearls of Wisdom?

By Susan Reichert, Editor-in-Chief for Southern Writers Magazine 

Have you ever wished you could sit down with some authors from the past, you know, the ones that have gone before us? Pick their brains, spend time talking with them, asking questions of how they did this or that?

Madeleine L’Engle said, “You have to write the book that wants to be written. And if the book will be too difficult for grown-ups, then you write it for children." Madeleine L'Engle was an American writer who wrote young adult fiction, including A Wrinkle in Time and its sequels: A Wind in the Door, A Swiftly Tilting Planet, Many Waters and An Acceptable Time.

I like her advice, mainly because sometimes when we are writing it seems we are trying to put a story in a genre, and it just doesn’t fit. Have you ever found yourself in that situation? Obviously at some point in her writing journey Madeline did or she wouldn’t have given that advice. With over 60 books written, she obviously has given us sound guidance. By the way, many of her papers are at Wheaton College in Illinois. So, I would like to sit down with her and discuss many things but especially when do you make that decision to change your direction.

Now one may wonder what Harper Lee’s advice could be, since she wrote one book and it was a long time until the next. But she said, “Any writer worth his salt writes to please himself... It's a self-exploratory operation that is endless. An exorcism of not necessarily his demon, but of his divine discontent.” As we all know she wrote To Kill A Mocking Bird. I would like to sit down and ask her what was in the back of her mind when she was writing this book. I would like to know when she finished and after it was made into a movie and after many years of not publishing, what were her thoughts after it was made into a movie. Was she happy with it? Did she wish she had changed any of the book?

Another author, George Orwell said, “Writing a book is a horrible, exhausting struggle, like a long bout with some painful illness. One would never undertake such a thing if one were not driven on by some demon whom one can neither resist nor understand.” His real name was Eric Arthur Blair, writing under the pen name George Orwell. He was an English novelist, essayist, journalist, and critic. He also said, He who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” One can’t help but wonder after reading his books, where that quote came from. He wrote such books as Nineteen Eighty-Four, Animal Farm, Down and Out in Paris and London, The Road to Wigan Pier, Homage to Catalonia and Burmese Days.

His quote about writing a book is depressing and I want to ask him, why did you write if you were that miserable and in pain? I can honestly say I have never heard an author say that about writing.

We could ask them, why they think their stories resonated with readers? What would they do different? What was the one technique they fill helped them more than any other?

What questions would you like to ask writers from the past? Here are three different people, three different styles–voices and three different writing techniques. Do you by chance find one common thread among their writing?

Look Out

by Gary Fearon, Creative Director, Southern Writers Magazine

If you're a media junkie like I am, you find the comings and goings of popular phrases entertaining.  You've probably noticed that "At the end of the day" has all but replaced "The bottom line" to preface a conclusion.  I often wonder who was the first person to say whatever is the phrase of the day.

Some years ago, a famous magazine editor tried to make "mouseburger" a catch phrase, to describe a woman who had to work extra hard to get noticed.  From the moment I read it in an interview, "mouseburger" seemed so random and ridiculous that I think I actually prayed for it not to catch on. That prayer, I'm happy to report, was answered.  Ironically, just this past week I came across an interview in which an actress said she was a total "fanburger" when she met her acting idol.  I nearly gaggedburger.

A couple of years ago in a previous post, I ranted about the inappropriate use of "So" at the beginning of an answer, as in:

"How did you get interested in writing?"
"So, I did a book report on Mark Twain and..."

Nothing inherently wrong with "so", other than it's a bit premature.  Being a synonym for "therefore", it is best served up after stating some facts first.  Only then, summarizing things with a "So" would make sense.

On a related note, I sometimes use "so" to introduce a brand new subject in conversation.  ("So I was at the bank today and...")  I'm not even sure why it works as a segue, but I do know it's not authorized as such by Merriam-Webster, so I save it for emergencies.

In any event, today I'd like to focus on another word that, in recent months, has become even more abused: the use of "Look" at the beginning of an answer.  For example:

"Why has milk gotten so expensive?"
"Look, it comes down to a number of factors..."

In the context of beginning an explanation, "look" is at least more fitting than "so".   However, it carries with it a tone of condescension or argumentativeness, along the lines of "Look, if you can't do the job, I'll find someone who can". Instructing the listener to "look" is a directive reminiscent of old gangster movies.  ("You ain't goin' nowhere, see?")

Guests on 24-hour news channels start their answers with "look" constantly.  In interview situations, it does lend an air of authority and confidence more than the traditional "Well".  But in most cases, the implication is that they have the definitive facts of a situation when they are merely stating an opinion,

It's no surprise that this trend began with politicians.  When answering a question off the cuff, "Look" is their go-to pause while forming a response.  It was only a matter of time before business people and journalists adopted it.  On the rare occasion when a politician still starts with "Well", it seems comparatively more genuine and trustworthy, not that language has ever been a true barometer of trustworthiness.

One of the concepts in George Orwell's 1984 (published in 1949) was "Newspeak", the government-regulated vocabulary of Oceania.  We're not quite at the stage where our language is controlled by a higher power, but every communication has an agenda of some kind.  As we hear and read, as we speak and write, it's an interesting and educational challenge to keep our eyes open for the con in lexicon.