First, I'll tell you somethin' for nothin' -- perfection is overrated. The sooner we accept that, the happier we'll be. Aiming to be better, doing the best you can, even trying for perfection, all good habits. But if we expect perfection (in ourselves or others) we should also expect disappointment. Besides, perfection is boring: bumps and dents and a barnacle or two are just what make life interesting. And tolerable. Before you think I'm auditioning to be a self-help writer, here's where I'm going with this: let's not expect perfection from authors, even our favorite writers. Lets be tolerant of a few weak spots, give authors the room they need to experiment, to try new things. Give writers the freedom to fail. Even the greatest writers have flaws; let's concede that there are few perfect books. Artists need to reach for something they can't quite grasp. If we judge too harshly, the alternative is repetition, the same old thing, and the disappearance of daring. A little tolerance goes a long way.
Next: Don't mess with my reading! The last thing I want is sanitized fiction. I don't want anyone shutting down an author who dares write a hateful character. The word of the day is "problematic." Tell me a book or author is "problematic," and I'll still have to decide for myself: no one's doing my thinking for me. I have to reach my own wrong opinions. I want a few bigots, jerks, some nasty jokers, and few generally ignorant idiots in my books. We can't ignore the bad elements of life and we can't fight bigotry and prejudice if we don't identify it. Every year during "Banned Books Week" we hear about all the books that people were told not to read because they were "problematic." Social media bullying is the new "Banned Books Week." Everybody who discriminates (including railing against some hapless author) thinks they're doing it for a good reason. Next time you hear a book is "problematic," don't let that stop you if it's a book you want to read. You may learn there's a vast chasm between representation and endorsement, and context is everything. Today some readers are more interested in finding some trivial way in which a book is less culturally sensitive than they judge it should be, than in trying to learn what the book is saying. Some are competing to be the most culturally sensitive -- the world is culturally insensitive and that's going to creep into books. I really don't want either Big Brother or those who are "more sensitive than thou," to be the mama bird that predigests my reading for me. Whew! Rant over.
Finally, I want to mention that rare intersection of the Venn diagram that is educational and entertaining, which is The Cartoon History of the Universe by Larry Gonick. The series is up to three volumes now (hey, it's big subject). I've read the first two volumes and learned more than I'd like to admit. Graphic history is cool. Gonick has published graphic histories in a variety of areas; if the others are anything like what I've read, they're awesome. These books are perfect for teenagers (older teenagers for parents who turn a blind eye to the world we live in) and all adults. But even more than simply imparting knowledge, graphic histories also have the potential for inspiring interest, passion even, in the subject matter and learning in general. One good graphic history could turn you, or your aimless, unmotivated, slacker child, into a college-bound future scientist of the world. Go for it! 🐢
No comments:
Post a Comment