Brandt's essay examines the complexities of reading and writing, both as independent subjects and in relation to each other. The comparisons and connections she makes between the subjects are vast, but what I find most intriguing are the questions what is good writing, and who is a writer?
When we study writing, we analyze it, dissect it and find its beauty and truth; we come to revere it. In my opinion, any writing that illuminates a truth is successful. I cannot be the judge of whether a piece of writing is good or not. Writing has so many faces: it can be angry, young, naïve, informed, intellectual, academic, political..I don't believe that any writing can be "bad". As long as it is truthful and expresses something with which others can identify, then I feel it is "good". Or at the very least, successful.
When we talk about writing in an intellectual context, I think we often discuss it as though writing belongs to an exclusive, elite group of people who possess secrets that enable them to express themselves eloquently and uniquely. Ernest Hemingway is a writer. Joyce Carol Oates is a writer. What about that high school student who scribbles song lyrics on her assigments, or the scientist who writes about his findings? I think they're writers too. For me the definition of a writer is anyone who has a passion and, upon seeing empty space, feels compelled to fill it with the knowledge and truth of what they know.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Your note about looking at writing as a democratic practice -- or one that belongs to everyone-- is interesting.
ReplyDelete