19/03/2015 by Siddiqui Fayesal
To write like one would want to write is a fight to the very end of all senses. You read books by authors that you’d like to write like. You write essays imitating, conscientiously or not doesn’t matter, writers that you adore. It can be for a swerve of their metaphors, their knack of bringing to life the dead, their hilarity, their touch of simple brilliance that can make you read a 500 word essay and still not realize what the writer is REALLY talking about. Of course, this last categorization needs to be carefully divided inside one’s head to not let blathering idiots walk away with accolades not worthy of their station.
There are some who use their artistic hand to write botched up accounts veiled under the guise of a huge vocabulary and make no sense whatsoever. There are those who beat around the bush talking about the nanny, her apron and her halitosis in a discourse of theology and still make the reader go madly in love. While there have been many instances when the writer has clear and concise language, a perfect description, not beating around with digression and still not make a difference to the concentration of the reader. He’d rather read a blank wall rather than read the best seller.
Writing comes with practice. I know it. There is enough fodder for the ones who seek merely a story rather than an experience. I really don’t know how to segregate, to each his own I guess, but I don’t understand the ones who don’t keep an eye out for the language. Not that I’m a darn connoisseur or something but doesn’t a well-written passage crinkle one’s eyebrows in a smile? I have, far too many times I might add, read a few articles and novels that have no story as such. It’s only about a guy walking the streets at night, or a prep school rich kid getting kicked out or something that can, technically speaking, be done in a few 1000 words or so.
But what makes them what they are is the way it is written.
The sad part is that the unread will not appreciate it. They wold like to know what the “story” is. A rambling account of a no good school drop-out walking the streets of New York visiting hotels and night clubs, conversing with a prostitute and being with mindless ‘bastards’ will not really make the unread and take note.
But, ask any reader what he thinks about Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye and he’ll salivate at the prospects of having someone discuss the existential crises pervading Holden’s life and his idiosyncratic manner of coping with it. He would look up to you in delight of you would be able to connect to, and answer why, Holden writes a descriptive essay on his brother’s mitt!
Talk about the minority of a storyline and the importance of character building and philosophy and you’re probably sounding like a no good asshole. But, do you think that Harper Lee’s Mockingbird deserved the accolades it has garnered because it had a good story?