I could have titled this “Beautiful Beyond Words.” I’m curious what you would make of that phrase if you saw it in a book. I’m afraid I interpret it as:
- the writer doesn’t fully understand what s/he wants to say
- the writer has no imagination
- the writer has limited language skill
- the writer has not explored the experience sufficiently to have found the essence of it
- the writer was awed beyond words – in which case it’s time to digest the experience before trying to communicate it. It is possible to talk about magnificence, but “Wow” is only useful when the people present are all equally stoned.
- the writer was stoned – in which case I suggest coming down before writing
I actually was given a manuscript recently that used the phrase “beautiful beyond words” as an attempt to describe an experience. If it had been the words of a character in the story, it might have served to convey some aspects of the character. All of my interpretations of the writer above would then be applied to understanding the character (rather than the writer).
My clients find the comment “Write direct” in the margin of a markup when they’ve said things like:
- He finds (that his stomach is tied in knots)
- She feels (the wind caressing her nakedness)
- It seems (as if the world is tilting)
Try this instead:
- His stomach is tied in knots. He doubles over to protect his vulnerability, though Dr. Carlton knows it’s his belief system that has been attacked.
- The wind caresses her nakedness. She throws her arms back and breathes deeply to offer it more skin.
- His world is tilting. Eric grabs the edge of the yellow formica table for balance, but her vituperation knows no compassion.
If you are doing a good job of generating the reader’s empathic response to the characters or situation, you don’t need to tell her that the character notices an experience. You describe the situation directly and trust that she will understand how it feels to the character.
That said, there are times when a character’s experience is not predictable. Then it’s appropriate to specify: When she summoned the strength to touch it, she found that the green slime comforted her – the way her grandmother’s jellyfish stew had calmed her after her parents’ accident.
When you are watching a film there is no way to know what a character’s experience is unless he tells another character or turns to the audience to comment. I can see Woody Allen – or other cartoon characters – breaking the action to do that. In a book or film this can be done more gracefully by revealing the outcome to the audience before portraying the action that led up to it – unless not breaking the action would generate empathy for the “wrong” character.
In that way film completely relies on the audience’s predictable empathic response, since the medium does not generally specify the inner experience of the characters. Some filmmakers and writers try to play with the predictable by offering information that is likely to generate a certain understanding, but then later show it as a misinterpretation of the information. The great scene that plays with that is in American Beauty when the neighbor sees the boyfriend and the father moving in such a way that he interprets as oral sex – a misinterpretation that leads to the painful denouement of the film. The audience is likely to misinterpret the scene as well, thus reflecting our own assumptions to us. That’s brilliant filmmaking – making us look at our misassumptions.
See how rich and powerful good writing can be?
* * *
I’ve just finished reading Eve Ensler’s memoir, In the Body of the World. It ranks among the must-read books of our era for its content – and is exquisitely and efficiently written. I’ll have more to say about it soon.
In the meantime, delight in the process.
Download PDF: DCC_Nightmare #5- Writers Whose Words Say Nothing