10.30 Writing journals as documentation of an automatic self, more (un)truth and short essays

We started class with an exercise where you read through what you've written in your journal from two different perspectives.  You started out looking for patterns in content: what did your write about the most in terms of focus? were there repeated words? did much of your writing come back to the same places, people, ideas, actions?  Next you looked through your writing in terms of dominant emotion: was the writing predominantly curious? happy? sad? angry? grounded in a sense of loss?  Once you had a sense of these to features of your journal so far, you looked for correlations= how does the dominant subject material connect to, support, interact with, play out in terms of (etc) the dominant emotion?

This exercise was about looking at the snapshots of yourself on the page (your writing self, the self you have written onto the page) and looking for patterns in who that self is.  Noticing those patterns can give you information about strengths, interests, (unconscious) tendencies and overlooked possibilities associated with your writing, and it provides an opportunity to consciously step into a new perspective, writing style, emotional frame, or. . .. We concluded this exercise by writing something different.  You could write about the dominant content from a different emotion, or vice versa, or anything else. 

The rationale for this exercise comes from psychological research both about "loops" or "ruts" (as we discussed last week) and findings that we can "language" our way out of those loops by consciously noticing our language patterns, and amending/adapting/revising/opening them to something else.  Research has shown that in many ways, we become both who and "how" we say we are.    So see what you want to do with that one.

The great debate: When is it OK to alter the “truth” in CNF
.You were arbitrarily assigned as advocates of truthtelling and wanton lying in creative nonfiction.  The debate played out in terms of the following issues (which I have paired).

On the side of artistic license and bending the truth:
1.Liars: CNF by definition includes the use of art and dramatic presentation; this will necessarily deviate from the literal "truth" of "what happened".
Truthtellers: CNF as a genre identifies itself as accountable for what happened; when it cannot be accountable, it obliged to acknowledge (rather than cover up) its shortcomins. That is the contract with the reader for this genre, and genre matters.

2.Liars: Innocent + appealing "untruths" are harmless: CNF centers on a core truth= a central event /idea that the author experiences/explores.  This "truth" is the basis for the CNF contract, not the "details".White lies don’t hurt anyone because they do not change the bigger picture.  The truth of the experience remains true + the same even when details are changed.

Truthtellers: if changes are necessary, they need to be acknowledged because changing details DOES change the core truth.  The truth is in the details.

3. Liars:Truth is always partial:something always is edited out, and something is always added.
Truthtellers: intentional misrepresentation is different from necessary partiality.

4.Liars: Truth is never "T"ruth, but truth; it is always invested in someone's perspective.
Truthtellers:  Telling small "t" requires truthfulness about perspective.  Altering or obscuring the source of information violates the CNF contract.

I didn't get all of this - but that is the idea.  I think our conclusion is that where a writer stands with respect to telling "truth" to her/his readers is a personal decision, and is about how a writer defines his/her integrity.  We did not get into the standards of "truth" expected for different subgenres of CNF, such as literary journalism, travel writing, and so on.  Within these subgenres I am guessing, as readers and writers, we would have had specific, genre driven expectations about what should be literally true, and what could be artistically true (the Daisy piece raised many of these questions).  So I think that is that.

Short essays and Long essays
The assignment sheet for the short essays is posted to the right, so you can get started on that.  We will be workshopping/talking about some of your ideas for short essays in class next week.  Long essays, final revised drafts, are due by next class.

For next week

Read:  Lord, "I met a man," p. 115; Braner, "Soundtrack," p. 29;  McNight, "Mother's Day," p 120;  look around Mike Steinberg's blog http://www.mjsteinberg.net/blog.htm (don't forget to read the comments), Bresland, "Les Cruel Shoes," p. 31 (read it first in your book - and then check out http://www.blackbird.vcu.edu/v4n1/gallery/bresland/shoes.htm  you will need realplayer - free downlad) 

Blog 9: Final Long essay

 

Thanks for the good class.  Your debate was awesome.  See you next week.