I’ve spent a lot of my life trying to distill words. My first short story was written in fifth grade, and it was “published” in the school newspaper. My first finished book was in Freshman year of high school. My focus is, and has been, understanding communication. And, furthermore, understanding communication in its purest form.
That stated, we speak in symbol. The majority of this society studies in a capitalistic symbol-base, with items and materials being ways to judge worth and success. We are desensitized by the overabundance and overuse of “symbol.” Some people are invariably wondering what exactly I mean by symbol.
Symbol is the basest of discussion. If you say, write, or draw a picture of a bird, I connect the symbol attributing something entirely unlike a living, breathing thing to the thing it represents. The color, shape, and other identifying properties of the bird are (no pun intended) up in the air, to be drawn, spoken, or written as further description.
The bird becomes as real as we imagine it to be. Some people think cardinal in flight when they read the word “bird.” Some people simply see it as an identifying noun without description, and are content to leave it, simply, as a word. Still others tend to create an environment for that bird, with a canopy of fluffy clouds and/or a nest. The more effort someone puts into the environment of that bird, the more “creative” their “imagination” is, and usually the more artistic the person is.
We all see the world in different ways. In this society the overstimulation of symbol leaves so many people desensitized to the effort put into the environment of a word that they are content to simply watch. Any business worth its salt has a symbol to go with their name. Sometimes, the title is their symbol. It allows an easier recall for the observer when later he or she is thinking of something the business creates.
Think McDonald’s, for example. Golden Arches, Big Mac, Quarter Pounder, Fries, Ba-da-ba-ba-ba I’m Lovin’ It, Did Somebody Say McDonald’s? An entire environment of words were created by an advertising company to cushion the name of the business as representation. The same is said for any company, to varying degrees.
This removes the effort of the individual. In this case let’s call him the “consumer” (cause let’s face it… anyone living in America is a consumer). The advertising agencies, businesses, create a “model,” invoke an emotional reaction through dynamic images and/or emotion and/or catchy phrasing, and pull the consumer into a complicating web of stimuli.
Interestingly enough, watching a McDonald’s commercial is not considered having a “creative imagination.” It’s simply watching, even though the observer is doing exactly what someone would do for the word “bird.”
What does that mean for a writer? It means everything exists in panorama, and everything exists with a mosaic of connective tissue-words. It’s a painting that creates ease and comfort within it for the consumer. In fact, if the “imagination” of the “creative” thinker were to allow it, these symbol-words are momentums contained within themselves, with their own forward movement. To simplify, if given enough time and tissue-words, these symbols become themselves creatures similar to cardinal.
They become, in essence, a living thing but not. An ethereal being made by people, for people.
That being said, let’s go a bit deeper, and make a seemingly unconnected jump between capitalism and religion. What is organized religion but a very, very old business model? If we remove the possibility that God is Real (taken from a Catholic, or Christian standpoint at least), we are left with a business model entirely similar to that of fortune 500 companies. Why is this so similar? What does a business model have to do with God? It is a combination of symbols-to-mosaics of thought, with so much connective tissue it becomes a multi-celled organism so complex and complicated, it truly does become a god in and of itself.
When I say Crucifix, do you not have a similar reaction to when I say Nike?
This isn’t an article with a religious slant. It’s an observation of similarities between my personal need to distill things to symbols, and organizations’ need to inflate symbols into things. It turns into a mire of mosaics. A swamp. Overstimulation.
As a writer, this is incredibly important to me. American readers are not used to reading for themselves (take the recent trend of popular, “accessible” books, for example). My writing is not accessible, as society would have it. Perhaps it is intricate like Faulkner. Perhaps it is charged like Dante or Milton. Perhaps it is something entirely new and unseen. Yet, it is not accessible. Why?
My brother recently told me, “You’re using words to cover up the story.” It’s a beautiful simplification to a dilemma I’ve had since entering College: how do I tell a story in the way it’s supposed to be understood, multi-layered and complex? I’m not telling the story by explaining the connective tissue-words in detail. I’m doing something much more complex and difficult: I’m giving symbol-words without the tissue, requiring the reader to connect the dots himself. Why cause this frustration when it inevitably requires a re-wiring of perception? Why alienate myself from the “accessible” writing? I am entirely capable of creating a flowing work with all sorts of symbol-creatures running around the heads of round and flat characters, with the meat and guts of invention carefully tucked away in “distilled” prose. With a single, direct, forward moving line.
In the future, I will. But for now, I distill.
Publishing companies will want a finished product. This is pure and simple. Clearly simple, in fact, given my framework of a “business model.” The companies will wish for the writer of an article or book to have created a symbol in and of itself, a creature similar to the bird. Contained and direct and explosively complete. “Just Do It” in a story. Crisp, clear, finished, and progressively unnatural. They want it as accessible as possible to connect to as many of the population as possible. Which, from a business perspective, is exactly what they should be seeking.
Unfortunately this weeds out many visionary writers, and makes the innovators difficult to find publication. We, a people of symbol, are being given the finished product without working to attain it for ourselves.
This makes us incredibly powerless to the gods of industry.