It was during my time as undergraduate, in my first creative
writing course, Intro to Creative Writing, that I learned some topics may be
off-limits. Our TA, in an effort to help us come up with a story, told us to
“Write what you know.” And that I did. I knocked out a 16-page short story
inspired by personal events my family and I at the time were in the process, of
well, processing. It was a relatable subject, something that I felt a reader
could latch on to. In my effort to make those real circumstances less real and
more fictive, I changed the names of every real person involved. To make sure I
had a solid, error-free, fiction piece to submit to the workshop, I asked my
mother, one of the “characters” who I portray in my story, to proofread my
work. She gladly obliged.
Five years later, I am realizing sometimes you can’t always
write what you know. But, I still do it. I find it difficult to find that
balance of crafting original characters and moments in a work that does not
somehow slightly taste of the very real and original people in my life. In the
space of those five years as an undergraduate and now graduate, my mother has
not volunteered to read a piece of my writing. The two exceptions being poems
that do not refernce her. Her issue, which I failed to take into consideration,
was not only the personal subject matter of the story but also her
representation in it.
Much of what I know is family. Much of what I write about is family. Within these past two years in the MFA program, I’ve been thinking about how to tackle this dilemna:
As writers, do we have free range to write on all and any
transgressions/memories/experiences we are directly or indirectly involved with?
As a writer, is calling yourself a “storyteller” a liable
pass to translate these intimate moments to public narrative? By doing this, am
I capturing moments or exploiting particular situations and people involved?
I’m not sure entirely how to differentiate this, yet.
Maybe time makes the difference. I often find myself in it,
in a scene, but it’s not really a scene, it is my life. Needless to say, I am
in that particular moment and I think how the events unfolding around me would
make for a great short story. I then go on to conjur up that story still
present in the ongoing event. This is problematic in the sense that this is me
almost certainly “living to write”.
I think this might be where we can differentiate. Maybe as
long as these moments and experiences are organic and not procured by a writer
intent on experiencing moments for writing material then it can be okay, no?
As a writer, I don’t want to commit forgery and write a shell
of a personality. If I am going to capture those initmacies around me it is my
onus to ensure I respect the personalities I am inspired by. But then who says
these very real people want themselves replicateed at all? They haven’t signed
their experiences and personalities away to me on loan.
By borrowing from reality, I can’t help but think that I am,
at times, trivializing these experiences for my gain, for my “art”.
By
changing names and avoiding truths does the retelling of these personal
moments, whether fiction or nonfiction, become a façade, a plastic rendition of
what was?
That sounds a bit pretentious. I’m still trying to work this
out, clearly. I write what I know. And I’d like to write more of what I don’t
know and have yet to experience. I’d like to write something my mother might
not be concerned with. She is, after all, what I know. I’d rather not take what
is not mine, but more often than not I am drawn to write what is familiar, what
is close. I am still trying to figure this all out, so bear with me.
Janine Shand is a second-year MFA student studying fiction.
She dabbles in prose but mainly writes fiction that reads like nonfiction. That
is her dilemma.
This is a seriously thought provoking piece.
ReplyDelete