Tag: writing

The same organizing impulse that drives the philosopher has an important, but different, weight for the poet. This impulse outlines, structures, organizes, and makes a poetic work comprehensible and justified; it enhances its effect by filling the verses with meaning, putting everything in its place within the whole. However, a poetic work often needs explosions that amplify the effect of the previous and subsequent harmony, beyond its most obvious expressive effects. For the brief period in which they occur, order must sometimes be suspended, chaos must be allowed; otherwise, the rapture is not complete. Allowing it repeatedly, one realizes that, after all, it is such raptures that leave the greatest mark on a poetic work; therefore, the most memorable are the brief moments when there was a break with what was theoretically intended.

From Lavelle:

D’abord, la douleur n’est pas seulement une simple privation d’être, ou diminution d’être. Il y a en elle un élément positif qui s’incorpore à notre vie et qui la change. Chacun de nous ne songe sans doute qu’à rejeter la douleur au moment où elle l’assaille ; mais quand il fait un retour sur sa vie passée, alors il s’aperçoit que ce sont les douleurs qu’il a éprouvées qui ont exercé sur lui l’action la plus grande ; elles l’ont marqué : elles ont donné à sa vie son sérieux et sa profondeur ; c’est d’elles aussi qu’il a tiré sur le monde où il est appelé à vivre et sur la signification de sa destinée les enseignements les plus essentiels.

Here, Dostoyevsky’s alleged statement that, in order to write well, one must suffer, is justified. Suffering gives weight to words; its experience shapes character and understanding. When experienced intimately, it imposes itself. Therefore, it is not necessary for the reader to have similar experiences to appreciate a work of art: from the human condition exposed with authenticity because it is authentically lived, respect springs forth, which opens the door to identification.

The most enjoyable aspect of writing is the possibility of completely individualizing the process, allowing the subjective element to act as an enhancer. In most occupations, this is not possible, and the effectiveness of the process usually requires objective sequential execution, something that tends to be discouraging over time. But the writer can easily get used to making a cup of coffee or lighting a cigarette before work and effectively witness that, in doing so, ideas begin to flow. In his creative process, there is room for all his quirks, and this produces enormous satisfaction.

Linguistic decorum and literary decorum are different things, although superficially they can be confused. But when analyzed closely, it becomes clear that some authors display a strong manifestation of the former, the latter, both, or neither. And in each specific case, much about the author is revealed by whether or not he possesses them. Taking literature as a whole, which encompasses both good and terrible authors, the most common thing is that a lack of literary decorum is evidence of a lack of culture; however, the same cannot be said for linguistic decorum. What is said and what is represented are two different things, with language being merely an instrument of the latter, which can be employed with greater or lesser intensity, depending on the need and intention. Linguistically, there are impulses that call for extreme expressions; otherwise, a fair representation will not be achieved. But the essence of every work precedes language, and it is only in this essence that the degree of refinement of an author can be measured.