Wrizzit
For everything, down to the scribbles.
What is your contract with the reader? Have you thought about that? I have been for the past year or so after I felt like storytelling and “writerly intention” became two different things. Considering we are stealing bits of time from strangers, it seems prudent to have some agreement with them about the exchange. Here’s what I’ve come up with so far: • I won’t waste your time with things that don’t move story. • I won’t force you to read a shittier version of something you could find somewhere else. • I won’t lie to you, but I might deceive you. • I may turn your stomach, but it will be for a purpose. • I will reward you for spending time with my art. Nothing like adding another rubric or failure to the pile, but if you alienate your reader then you’re just writing for yourself.
7
Comments (2)
Sign in to comment.
I would agree with all except maybe the first criterion, depending on the meaning exactly. People have a tendency to understand story as "plot" and so therefore things which don't move the plot forward are a waste of time. This is not my opinion. There are many things besides plot or story that can engage a reader - description, character, reflection, lyrical asides, mythical resonances. Some masterful stories - thinking of Melville, Ballard, Kafka, Borges - have no perceptible plot at all.
1
That’s a great observations, and a good aspect to push back on. I agree that “story” is a little weak here. There are a lot of aspects to the rhetorical situation that contribute to the overall success of the piece. If you had to revise that tenet, how would you do so?