Sharing
is akin to teaching, but I wanted to handle it separately in this
series on "Why I Write" because I wanted to underline that not all an artist shares with the reader is knowledge.
When
writing non-fiction only the fact and analysis count, but when writing
fiction emotions, intuition, and dreams count too. An novelist shares
with the reader a wide spectrum of precious, personal feelings --
feelings about people, ideas and things.
All
my novels reflect my personal experience with life. This isn't about
facts but about world-view -- my understanding of human nature, of
politics, of marketing and parenting, of love and hate etc. etc. These
subjective components are largely what make it possible for two authors
to write about an identical subject and produce startlingly different
works. Schiller's Joan of Arc is different from George Bernard Shaw's.
Which one you like best will largely depend on your world view, which of
the writers strikes a cord with your soul, not your mind.
Teaching
is all about passing on facts and knowledge, whereas sharing is about
opening one's heart to the readers and showing them how you see the
world. Looked at another way, the information that is taught belongs in
the realm of plot and setting; the philosophy and worldview that is shared belongs to the realm of theme and character development.
Let me take an example from Rebels against Tyranny.
It is a fact that Emperor Frederick II held two of the Lord of Beirut's
sons hostage for their father's good behavior. Beirut seized two royal
castles anyway and used these to bargain a truce with the Emperor. When
the Emperor released the hostages, including Beirut's sons, the latter
had been badly mishandled. Those are the facts of the
case, but there many -- all justifiable and plausible interpretations --
of what the characters felt about the events. Was Beirut callous and
indifferent to what might befall his sons? Did they blame him -- or the
Emperor -- for their maltreatment? And just how did two youths raised in
luxury and privilege respond to abruptly being prisoners, and abused ones at that? I postulate, based not on evidence but intuition, that
the experience would have had a profound impact on their character.
Or
another example, we know that the Lusignans invited Franks who had
lost their lands and livelihoods in the wake of the disaster at Hattin
to re-settle on the Island of Cyprus. The historical record says nothing
about how these immigrants were received by the native population. My
descriptions are based not on evidence and facts but on my experience of
waves of immigration by peoples with a different faith (or race,
ethnicity etc) in today's world. The discussions in The Last Crusader Kingdom
about how to ease tensions between the groups are not founded in
learned facts but in my personal exposure to contemporary events.
My most recent novels focus on WWII and the stresses faced both by airmen fighting the war and those they loved, who lived in constant fear of loss. Again, the facts are easy to find and describe; it is the emotions that require more than research.
Writing a good novel requires empathy for one's characters -- but that is rarely attained without the permission and complicity of the latter. Which is why novels need to be written from the heart as well as the head.
Well said, Professor!
ReplyDelete