How
is 'Looking around' part of the writing
frame of mind?
The concept of
this chapter is that we learn to pay attention and then communicate that
through writing. It struck me when Lamott said that it is the job of the writer
to present a viewpoint clearly, to see people as they really are and to do that
'we have to know who we are in the most compassionate possible sense. I think that the compassion we show others
gives us a perception of how they are deep down, not just the superficial
analysis that we usually make. Of course
to have compassion it works best if we practice that all the time, so that we
perceive it all the time in others, not just when we need to access information for writing. Our compassion
can only be fully felt if we have compassion for ourselves though. It also rings very true when Lamott notes
that the conscious mind blocks the feeling of oneness. Feeling too much slows us down and so we
apply our conscious but it distances us from our intuitions and instincts of
compassion. Since we cannot effectively
walk around feeling, crying and emoting over all the things that could
potentially move us, she suggests we have 'reverence,' and to think of it as
'awe' and 'presence' in the world. This
is important when studying acting too, come to think of it-it helps in personal
relationships too. It seems it would be
a good general rule to follow whenever we have the energy and enough attention
to apply it. I also liked the idea that
we can see 'a sign of God' and 'holiness... inevitable grace' in the world,
though I think that the spiritual aspect can be hard to capture and illusive.
Do
you agree with the Moral Point of View?
Lamott's
explanation of the 'moral point of view' clears up an issue that I often wonder
about. Lamott says that if we start stories and don't finish them we can then
ask ourselves if it is really meaningful to us, or, perhaps we are not invested
in what we are writing. I think that is
a valuable thought but I also think that sometimes we (or I) do not face our
feeling on a subject and try to slide by on the 'folk saying' that she mentions
in the chapter on broccoli. It also clears up confusion that I feel about
stating my opinion or evaluation of something.
I hesitate to pronounce myself an authority on anything, surely someone
else knows more. But I can tell you my point of view, my specific feelings of
compassion and describe an aspect that I think I have noticed that has not been
explained with quite the feeling that I have about it. When I read last pages of the chapter that
say, 'a moral position is not a message, it is a passionate caring inside you,
I think that I can do that. I may not be
the ultimate authority on anything but I can be passionate and I can care in my
own special way. Lamott says to write
about the things that are important to us-love, death, sex and survival- I am
not an authority on any of those items, but I can say what, in those
elements, has struck my compassion.
What
is the thing that the author calls 'broccoli'
Broccoli,
according to Lamott, is the stultifying of our intuitions, our higher selves
that we silence with clichè and unoriginal thinking. It is the 'moment of real
feeling and insight... that is real and ripe with possibilities'. 'Broccoli' is self conscious dousing of that
flame. We were trained to do this because we were 'corrected, humiliated, or
punished' as children for saying what we
felt intuitively. It makes me aware of
being compassionate again, with myself, with others, to be encouraging with
others.l
No comments:
Post a Comment