3
A Delicate Exposition
Originally (this goes back a very long way), I would take the raw material [which in previous ages would have been the stuff of visions and prophecies (however accurate or inaccurate) or in more recent times would have been the stuff of a burgeoning psychology (however accurate or inaccurate)] and I would have reworked it excessively, slowly transforming it from it's idiosyncratic state into an ordinary product conforming to consensual expectations, replacing the more bizarre and (apparently) alogical fragments with similar, but more "normal" images and/or ideas. The result would be art consistent with mainstream standards--and just as boring.
Then, as I became immersed in a developing postmod culture, as I began to loosen my grip on an overly controlled technique, I began to allow the odd ideas and images to remain, to stand for what they were in and of themselves, or for what they themselves stood for. Still, though, I reworked the art, especially for standards of grammar and punctuation, and to maintain, at least, an internal consistency.
But then, as I began to recognize an erratic universe for what it was, caught in the throes of entropy,
2 I loosened even further my childhood-developed grip, by allowing the apparent wayward, accidentally-encountered (if anything is really ever accidental) elements to account for themselves, devoid of a necessity for explanation and/or justification or rationalization. (So why am I doing it now? Insecurity. Self-doubt.)
I would consider myself a reporter, of the human condition in general and my own in particular, except that I am criticized (correctly) for exaggerating. Exaggeration is a fundamental key to fiction. You start with literal truth, such as factual information on the human condition and typical human stories. You exaggerate the facts into generalizations about human nature and the stories into plots with structure and resolutions. And you end up with fiction.
Often, I exaggerate my own and others' facts and stories. Everyone does this--all but the most meticulously honest people (who tend to be so self-righteous as to be boors). As humans, we are subject to the whims of id and ego. We want to be honest (superego), but we want to look good (ego) in order to attract people to us so that we may satisfy our base desires (id). Therefore, to be honest, we tell the truth, but to make ourselves look good, we exaggerate it. We are all fiction writers of the facts of our own lives and those of others who relate to us. Mostly, we tell these exaggerations only to ourselves, allowing others to assume what and how we are through our behavior, which we allow to be dictated by the exaggerated self we have convinced ourselves we are. In a few small instances, we communicate exaggerations directly, via words, often attempting to further convince ourselves as much as others that we are who we would, rather, like to be. (This is what I'm trying to do now, and almost every time I write. I'm trying to tell the truth without exaggerating, but between the lines, I'm unconsciously exaggerating so that you will think the better of me as you read these words.)
My exaggerated and therefore fictive self is presented in my work (especially in my fiction, but certainly as well in my "autobiographical" stuff). I try to show you a side of myself I want you to see. I would never write--or at least show you--stuff I felt was (too) embarrassing. For that stuff, if I write it, if I even allow myself to know it, you will have to wait until I am dead and then convince the executor of my estate to show you my unpublished journals. And even then, you will only get a glimpse of the non-fictive me. The greater bulk of what I am is never written, even if I would want it to be. I am an artist, not a machine. There are not enough hours in the century. And I keep most of it well hidden, even, as I said, from my own self, while exaggerating the rest of it, to make myself look good, to both you and me.
So, I am a fiction writer, no matter how much I try not to be. (Virginia Wolf said that we start out as fiction writers and develop into autobiographers. But do we ever really leave the fiction behind? I don't think so. We only change our format or our genre. It's all fiction.) I create stories composed of more or less true and exaggerated facts strung together in (often feeble) plots. This is my work, my website, and my life. We all do this same thing, more or less. But I am more honest (he thinks) about it, maybe, because I see glimpses of the truth of human nature, that we exaggerate ourselves, and I tell you of it here (and admit to it myself), so that you (and I) might see through the facade to the "truth" that lies beneath. To do this, you must decide which elements are facts, which are exaggerations, which "true" and exaggerated facts are mine and which belong to someone else, which parts of me are the real me and which have been borrowed, how long ago those parts that were borrowed were borrowed, last week, last year, ten years ago, in childhood when I formed my basic personality, how those parts were borrowed, via psychological conditioning, psychically, in dreams and visions, intentionally as a part of an ego plan still remembered or long since forgotten, as when, for example, I might have admired and thus emulated people or fictive personas (writers, artists, movie actors, celebrities, idols, etc.) because I wanted to be like them. And when you make these decisions about the "facts" that comprise my (overall) story, keep in mind: everyone does this, not just me. You do it to and for yourself as well. This is the code we create. This is the code we must break (through) if we are to understand any person (or ourselves). Don't just read a given text (every person is a text) and take it for granted that what you are reading is factual. Find the exaggerations and follow them into the depths of the psyche, see how it functions, and examine the psychology thus revealed. This is where the truth lies, not in facts, but in the inner vision. Exaggeration is a tool, one side of a two-fold process for getting at the truth, the other side being interpretation of the code that it creates.
I also use de-exaggeration as a writing technique. I de-emphasize my strengths and pretend to a naiveté I do not really have. It's an anti-ego, or a low self-esteem thing. Or else this is just another exaggeration made to make me look like something I am not.
People think that I am not a lot of things.
I'm not.
|
