I never learned to write honestly on a daily basis. I'd maybe crank something worthwhile two, maybe three days a year, but I was never one of those
writers
who could do it consistently.
This is something I admired about
Haruki Murakami
, who I couldn't consider a "great" writer, but someone who could write honestly throughout the decades. The most impressive thing about Murakami was that he was honest from the start.
He was approaching 30, or had just met it, had been running a
jazz
bar, holding no grandiose ambitions to write anything himself, let alone become a career novelist. But one sunny afternoon, a moment came to him while drinking a cold
beer
at the Baseball stadium.
His path was contrary to the usual writers', or at least how we like to imagine it: a talented writer who doesn't know how to be honest begins by writing dishonest yet well crafted pieces. Over time they find themselves, and then finally can write honestly.
Murakami's first story was not good from a craft sense. It read more like musings that you might have at the cafe or the bar, that got shoehorned into a story. But none of it felt artificial. I still return to
Hear the Wind Sing
as a study... as an exemplar of how one can do so much, not by being so good, but by being so honest.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. How does it mirrors your mind? Give me an example. Let's say that's the case, what is bad about it? Your writing will be more Hunter S Thompsonesque.
I can't give you a concrete example in the same manner I can't point to one pixel of an image of a person and say that that is the pixel that captures the likeness of the person in that image.
What I can say is that people have a way of perceiving the world, and themselves in it. And the way Thompson navigates the world -- at least in his writing -- mirrors how I do it.
So I chose not to read something that is just a mirror of my everyday existence. I prefer to read things that cause me to see thigns i normally don't in my normal perception. This doesn't qualify Thompson as bad though.
To add onto this, this is why I appreciate Murakami and
Kazuo Ishiguro
so much. They are almost the shadow to my perception.
abrahamKim Ok, I don't know how you came up to this conclusion but from what I've read you so far, your writing is far remote from Mr. Thompson's and if it does something to you, it may only enrich your perspective. Funny, I do the opposite when I stumble upon an author with whom I share a similar worldviews (and ideas). But I understand your point too, you want to expand your horizons.
You are assuming that because my writing (output) is remote from Thompson's that my lived reality (experience) does not match what i interpret from his writing lol
Nobody more cliché to go to for honest writing than Hemingway, but the cliché exists for a reason. Reading the debate here the first thing that came to mind was The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber, which is an exercise in honest writing from beginning to end, title included.
(You'll have to rotate it the right way up) Curious what anybody who reads this thinks, not about the story itself but about the story as 'honest writing'.
I'll check it out again now that I'm older.
I can't give you a concrete example in the same manner I can't point to one pixel of an image of a person and say that that is the pixel that captures the likeness of the person in that image.
What I can say is that people have a way of perceiving the world, and themselves in it. And the way Thompson navigates the world -- at least in his writing -- mirrors how I do it.
So I chose not to read something that is just a mirror of my everyday existence. I prefer to read things that cause me to see thigns i normally don't in my normal perception. This doesn't qualify Thompson as bad though.
To add onto this, this is why I appreciate Murakami and
I will check all mentioned authors out! Thanks.
https://faculty.washington.edu/jdb/303/Hemingway/The%20Short%20Happy%20Life%20of%20Francis%20Macomber.pdf
(You'll have to rotate it the right way up) Curious what anybody who reads this thinks, not about the story itself but about the story as 'honest writing'.