writer of all sorts of things
THANK GOD!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have been playing “Sun is Shining” by Bob Marley all day in hopes of this….
I have been willing to take enormous risks with characters I create in the novels I write. I allow my characters to go places I wouldn’t go, do things I wouldn’t do, say things I wouldn’t say, think things I would never think. This allows me a certain screen, a filter of denial, so that when my characters think or do or say certain things that I have thought, said, or done–but which I haven’t widely acknowledged to my friends and family–I can pretend it’s just the character, not me at all. And in some senses, that is true–none of my characters are me at all, they are just composites of things I have done or imagined, or things people I know have done or imagined. And when I talk to people about it, I can stress the fact that some of those things are imagined, and I can hide behind that fact.
But non-fiction is different, scarier. I feel more vulnerable. Many times, I’ve written blog posts that I never publish. Many times, I’ve written blog posts, posted them, and then, after sweating out a 3 a.m. panic attack, gotten up and revised them, taking out the parts that reveal too much about me.
I’m never worried about the fact that strangers might read those posts. It’s the people I know and love–the people who know and love me–that I have in mind when I revise those posts.
Sometimes, I’m not sure if I’m protecting myself, or protecting them.
Now that I am working on a nonfiction book, I am facing this problem in a real way. How do I create myself as a character within the book? How do I learn to be real, and truthful, and honest, without offending the people I love, without panicking at 3 a.m. every night I write?
I am by nature a very private person. That’s certainly part of it.
But there’s more to it than that. I like to think I generally tell the truth, that I don’t lie about what I think or have done. But it’s true that I often omit things that I know or have experienced, or withhold information and opinions, when I know it won’t sit well with the person I’m talking to. So on occasions I nurture certain illusions or, perhaps, I simply don’t confirm suspicions. I reveal certain things to some people, and certain other things to other people, and keep some things altogether secret. I don’t do this because I don’t trust people. Nor do I see myself as a chameleon. Sometimes I keep my mouth shut out of respect for the other person. What’s the point in saying what I really think if it means we’ll have a huge disagreement, or if I know it will make the other person judge me? So sometimes, it’s out of a desire to protect myself, to protect the things I cherish, knowing that other people won’t cherish my deeply held convictions even if they cherish me. I recognize intuitively that there is a difference between loving me and loving my deeply held convictions; so if I withhold the conviction from scrutiny, it isn’t a desire to withhold myself from that person but to prevent ugliness and tension.
But still…how to manage that in my non-fiction?
Chris just came back from the polls, having cast his ballot (though they had no record of his registration so his vote, like perhaps thousands of votes around the country, was “provisional”). He brought me a sticker so I could go get my free Starbucks coffee.
It’s not that I didn’t vote–it’s just that I voted two weeks ago, through California’s special Vote Through the Mail program, a program I love because it allows me to sit down at leisure, in front of a computer, and decide with knowledge and foresight (sort of) which propositions I’m voting “yes” on and which I’m voting “no” on. I don’t know if other states have so many propositions, but we sure do.
And now the excitement begins. Which devil do we get? Do we get the smooth-talking, intelligent-sounding, polished devil? Or do we get the blustery, red-faced, looks-like-he’s-about-to-keel-over-and-die devil? Apologies to all of you who love one of those devils! I belong to the Green Party, with its platform of grassroots democracy, decentralized local politcs, and (best of all!) non-violence. It would be great to get two women, and two women of color no less, into the White House! Maybe I just love the underdog, and sorry, folks, McCain is no underdog.
Still, I actually got a huge lump in my throat the other day when I was listening to This American Life talk about the good work going on in combating racism during this election. Regardless of what you think about Obama, and some pretty terrible lies are being spread around about him, one of the very good things that has come out during this election is the fact that some folks have been facing their internal racism, confronting it, and dealing with it in order to move on and vote for who they believe to be the best candidate. I heard somebody say recently that racism in America has been alive for 200 years, and it’s only got a 50-year-scab on it (dating back to the Civil Rights movement.) I hope that if Obama wins, he is able to bring some healing to the racial wounds that are still occuring daily in this country.
 Well, I have been taken to task. My memory is not pristine, or perhaps it’s simply self-serving. (Hmmm….that’s something that clearly puts me in a class of one!). I have received a message from the graduate student I named “Bill” in my post of a few days ago, suggesting that perhaps I have misrepresented what he meant to say lo, these many years ago.
So straight from the horse’s mouth, here is the clarification. And “Bill,” I apologize that I misrepresented your argument!
“I feel the need to respond to what I think is a mischaracterization of a disagreement we had. We had an argument about class inequality and poverty in the US and throughout the world and I made the point in 1999-2000 (don’t remember when) that ‘rates of infant mortality in parts of NYC were higher than parts of Bangladesh.’ Not everywhere. My argument was never that there is more poverty in the US. If that is how I sounded, then I failed to make my point clearly, or you chose to cherry pick what you wanted to hear from me. This resulted in a broader argument about class divisions; I made the point (or hoped to have made the point) that the major divisions are not between nations but between classes. BTW, one of the richest people in the world lives in Mexico, surrounded by immense poverty. There are ruling classes throughout Africa, Asia, Latin America and they are shielded from the masses of folks living in poverty. The US has a much higher percentage of its population living in the middle class, but the people at the bottom of any country suffer. Of course, there are more poor people in the so-called developing world. Have you read Mike Davis’s book Planet of Slums? And indeed, I have been out of the US, both before and after this discussion. But this fact obviously didn’t serve your interests. Sorry that I’m so ‘ideological’ but I will continue to speak out against class inequality wherever it exists. Source. And again, I *never* said there was proportionally more poverty in the US than in the developing world. This is silly, and I would like to be on the record about what I actually said. Anyway, what is the point of all this? Would it be wise to tell someone who just lost their home and their job in Detroit, hey, well at least you don’t live in the slums of India?”
Touche, “Bill”! And I wholly agree with the final point, if not at least some of the previous points! So I do not know if I am wholly wrong in my memory of our conversation, or only partially wrong, but regardless, “Bill” certainly meant to make a different point than the one I carried away with me all these years, and I feel obligated to set the record straight.
With best wishes, “Bill,” and my hope is that, regardless of the multiple paths we humans take to eradicate poverty, that we are (all of us) ultimately successful.
ONE FINAL NOTE
After I asked “Bill” if I could post the previous letter, he responded: “Hi Jessica, Thank you for your kind words and fairness here. Indeed, I think we are on the same page regarding poverty. And that would be fine if you posted the comment. One final problem: couldn’t you have thought of a more imaginative name than ‘Bill’? You’re a creative writer, correct? Best wishes, ‘Bill’”
Gaack! Low blow! Going where it hurts! My response? “Wait! But ‘Bill’ is a name for the common man! I could have gone with Lothario or Romeo, but “Bill” seemed so much more of the masses! 
”
Hope this sets the record straight.
Ken Waldman, Catalyst Book Press’s first author, will be playing West Coast Live today, sometime between 10 a.m. and 12 p.m. PST. Stations around the country air it so if you want to hear Alaska’s Fiddling Poet play, here’s a list of radio stations near you.
