Dear Organfriends,
Thanks for your prompt answers on my plea for breakthroughs into the
rhythm world.
Winfried asked me to say something about my fascination with rhythm in
writing and, sure, it's something I love to talk about.
I'm a writer. Free-lance writer, trainer, consultant, etc, to make a
living, but I'm really a fiction writer and would-be creative writing
teacher. I taught one course, once, but my theory was still very young and
I felt it needed more work.
Within creative writing, I don't like either the
American-50-techniques-and-you're-a-writer approach, nor the
European-can't-be-taught-only-learned attitude. I think art and writing
can be taught: you can't teach an art student to be a Picasso, but you
sure can teach him to hold the brush and get him to perceive how he can
make some effects with it. More, maybe you can unblock his creativity, get
him tools to work with.
I always say that rhythm is 70% of writing. Why? There is a common
misconception that writing, particularly creative writing, is mostly about
words. This is a dangerous misconception. In fact, writing is about
images. First, about the ability to put together a coherent set of images
and then about the ability to represent those images through text. Even in
text, words are only one of the components you can use. Contexts, forms,
games, can be used beyond the simple view of words as carriers of meaning.
(Curiously, once most people can already put together some kind of a
coherent set of images, we should start by the teachings of
representation.)
Now, images, be it theoretical or narrative, work within a movement frame.
A pattern. In creative writing this is very important, because we are not
trying to create a rational response, but an emotional one. As I said in
my last message, my work is to pick up a «willing reader»(one that wants
to read, to be carried away) and transform him/her in a «feeling reader».
For this, I can't use only rational representations. For instance, if I'm
trying to describe a dramatic discussion between two characters, the
succession of actions and reactions has to be increasingly fast as the
intensity of the fight increases. If I can't control the rhythm, meaning,
the rate at which the reader is reading, I will not be able to transmit
the urgency of the action-reaction-reaction-reaction set. Jack Kerouak
once described a rail worker late to catch the train and did it in three
or four pages with one single paragraph. if he had made the mistake of
creating a bottleneck in the middle, a spot were the reader would slow
down the reading, the urgency and the anxiety of the rail worker running
after the train would have been lost.
Many would-be writers get discouraged from writing because they thought of
something to write and then they could not put it into words as they
thought it. This is because they were under the idea that writing is about
words. Just think: how many of you fellow learners can actually describe
in writing how you brushed your teeth this morning and be satisfied with
it? And I bet your difficulties won't come from the words you will use,
but by the succession of the images and how you can transmit the rhythm of
your movements.
Now, I also think that we have the same problem in writing communication
in an organization. Most of the times we have problems transmiting our
feelings in our writings even though it is an ilusion to believe that we
can do without our feelings. Transmiting urgency or trust or tranquility
or commitment in a letter to a customer or a supplier, is many times
mismanaged, I believe, because the rhythm was ignored. What we could call
the «spectral side of the picture», was lost.
There's much more to it, but for now, think that's it. That's why I'm
looking for a theory of rhythm. Makes sense? Glad for your help.
Saudades,
Bruno
--"Bruno Martins Soares" <bmartins.soares@mail.EUnet.pt>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>