|
To Tinkerbell Or Not
To Tinkerbell
_______________________
Real or Fanciful? What's Your
Writing Style?
When you pick up a pen or begin to type, what sort of a vision
do you have for what you'll be writing?
I know a lot of poets who jump right into fantasy, or who rely
very heavily upon mythology and its 'creatures', so what
is
finally produced is a ribbon of fancy: beautiful lines-- often
with metaphoric meaning that's brought to bear on real
life and its dilemmas, but they use symbolism to get
there-- or they choose characters from
folk legend or myth.
And what is wrong with that? Nothing whatsoever-- it comes
down to preference and taste-- and what one enjoys reading
or writing about, and certainly how it's presented.
A writer in this vein could no more relate to Charles Bukowski
than rollerball, because writers of realism tend to slug it out
in arenas that are much more hard-hitting-- and present more
unvarnished, blunt-edged ugliness than such
a writer might find tolerable.
In this, as in all things, I do think a balance between the two
is the best route available to reaching most readers. (Even Bukowski
had his 'flights of fancy', and a reliance at times on purely
lovely language, and when he did this, no one could
touch him for poignancy.)
there's a bluebird in my heart that
wants to get out
but I'm too tough for him,
I say, stay in there, I'm not going
to let anybody see
you.
there's a bluebird in my heart that
wants to get out
but I pour whiskey on him and inhale
cigarette smoke
and the whores and the bartenders
and the grocery clerks
never know that
he's
in there.
there's a bluebird in my heart that
wants to get out
but I'm too tough for him,
I say,
stay down, do you want to mess
me up?
you want to screw up the
works?
you want to blow my book sales in
Europe?
there's a bluebird in my heart that
wants to get out
but I'm too clever, I only let him out
at night sometimes
when everybody's asleep.
I say, I know that you're there,
so don't be
sad.
then I put him back,
but he's singing a little
in there, I haven't quite let him
die
and we sleep together like
that
with our
secret pact
and it's nice enough to
make a man
weep, but I don't
weep, do
you?
|
|
In that poem, Bukowski is acknowledging that he was known
for a raunchier street style of writing. He'd saddled himself
with that 'poet-image' almost boastfully, but this is also a man
who loved classical music....and cats. I believe this is a man
who probably cried easily. And hated it.
And where is this Bukowski stuff leading?
I mean to say that both things can be present in the same
writer. It's only in the imbalance of one over the other that
true stereotype comes into play. By all means....write about Icarus
and Psyche, and the wee people if you've a mind to -- just
remember that people are strands of many threads. Too much
symbolism, too many flights of fancy, and you've
gone over to the
Tinkerbells: realists will sigh and pass on by. Write your
fairies if you must, but remember.....those creatures
are close, commiserating friends of the simple rat or mole,
creatures who live in detritus. They get their feet dirty--
their hair needs washing; their make-up smears
when they cry. Pay attention to details and make it
human, and it will breathe. Even fairies...
Make them real
and you can't go wrong.
Main Page
This site sponsered by
|
|