I don't know a whole lot about Charles Caleb Colton. I have stumbled upon several quotes of his over the years and found them insightful. I read just a small biography of him, very small, that says he was well known for his eccentric behavior. Interestingly no mention of what those behaviors were. I haven't pursued that any further. I'm not really that interested in that portion of his life, I just like his writings, at least what I have read so far anyway. Yes, I have found it possible to admire people that have flaws. That's assuming being eccentric is a flaw. We do tend to think of it that way. Well, being eccentric is being different, and we don't like different do we? Well, sometimes we do, sometimes we crave something different. But if you like it, it is no longer eccentric. Another one of those paradoxes we all face, but few see.
Yesterday I ran across another passage written by Charles Caleb Colton. I posted it to Facebook saying how it could also relate to some Facebook postings I read by others. " Many books require no thought from those who read them, and for a very simple reason, they made no such demand upon those who wrote them. " I immediately understood that sentiment. Such a concise statement of fact. I couldn't help but think how some of my writings required little to no thought, and others I expended a great deal of thought composing. My most popular writings? The ones that are just little stories or remembrances, not requiring much thought to put to paper. Others I have written require thought from the reader to arrive at a conclusion. Personally I prefer the later ones.
I have spoken about writing a book. It is something I have started, stopped and started again a few times. The difficulty lies in deciding just what the story is. Now having read Charles C Coltons' statement about books requiring no thought from the author I gained another perspective. Am I writing this book to entertain, or to inform? Is that what I have been missing? I don't believe there is much about my life that is entertaining, certainly not an entire books worth. My life would have to be the backstory however, to provide context. That leaves me with providing insight, to generate thought from the reader. But why should anyone entertain what I have to say? I'm not famous, or highly " educated " by the standards of academia. I know this, I don't want to simply repeat what others have said, or what I have been taught to say. I want to present what I have learned. The challenge lies in saying that in a way you haven't heard it before. Isn't that the job of an author?
I think the writing of a book comes with expectations. The first expectation is a simple one, that people will read it. It is that expectation that determines the type of book written. Should I write to entertain or write to inform. To inform is nothing more than to present information, although we often think of it differently. We often think to be informed is just to be told facts that we should immediately believe and adopt. I make an effort to not do that but to take in the information provided, compare it against my own, and decide from there. Not all information is fact. Perception and opinion, regardless of fact, often chooses the path we take. That's the human condition. The second expectation is success. If you don't believe you will be successful, why write it in the first place? I think that is part of my problem. I haven't determined what success to expect. Or I haven't decided to settle for the "success" I do expect. What I have written so far is a sort of self help book. The only one it has helped is myself! Isn't that the purpose of a self help book though? If I write to help you then wouldn't that be an instruction manual?
Someone said, " if you want to know what you believe, write. " I have found that to be quite true, although not always pleasant. It is a great way to organize your thoughts though. Maybe that's true for me because my thoughts have always been random. Focus Grasshopper, Focus. I do believe what I want to write is something that requires the reader to think. That has always been the best part of a book for me. Yes, I've read a good number of novels by Stephen King and Louis L 'Amour solely to be entertained. None of them required much thought from me to understand the story. King just uses his imagination and L'Amour used a lot of research to set his novels up. Popular authors, you bet they are. More recently J.K. Rowling has enjoyed great success. I admit to not having read or seen a single Harry Potter book or movie. Something about wizards. Apparently quite entertaining. An amusement. I don't want to settle for amusing. See, I learned something just by writing it down. Amusing is such a transient state. I'm hoping for something a bit more permanent, enduring even. A bar set too high?
No comments:
Post a Comment