A True Challenge

As one beginning to write seriously, in hope of discovering whether my talent is useless, worthy of publication, or lucrative, I am engaged in constant discovery. My most recent breakthrough has been to identify one of the great mysteries of good writing. I have a good understanding of the rules and a head for when to bend or break them. My vocabulary is sufficient, and I possess the discipline to use unusual words only where they fit best. I am confident enough to push forward yet humble enough to seek constant improvement from within and without. Among my shortcomings, though, is the lack of an instinct for what is bold versus what is hackneyed.

The two are often distinguished by the finest of lines. The same turn of phrase may be hackneyed in one context yet bold in another. The context may be formality: The journalist can take fewer liberties than the novelist, who can take fewer than the poet. The context may also be genre. The same degree of liberties may exist from one to the next, but each has its own flavor of boldness. Inextricably linked to these contexts is another: audience. The difference between freshness and garbage is ultimately determined by perception and reception. If one's readers think it stinks, then it stinks. Finally (perhaps distressingly), recognition has become another gauge. A prolific author may come to define what is bold. A passage written by a literary giant may be received as bold. The same passage, were it written by a newcomer, might be considered trite. Perhaps established authors have earned that much leniency - I don't mean to imply that the quality of their work suffers. My theory regarding this is that editors become more reluctant to strike down dangerous phrases as authors gain prominence. No writer is perfect, and as fewer changes are recommended more "mistakes" make it to the public. Also contributing to this effect is the reluctance of readers to acept a new voice. Those with a name are more readily trusted to mold the language in the right ways. This is not a criticism, but an observation of an inevitible result of Western thought. Skepticism is prized, so credibility must be earned.

As a reader and as a writer, I have recently encountered perhaps two dozen passages that are either bold or hackneyed, but whose classification eludes me. This is a notable stumbling block, because ordinarily I find reading to be the cure for a difficulty with writing. My method thus far has been to simply include the questionable content, mark it for later editing, and move on. This will do for now, but eventually I must make the decisions. I have decided, though, that rather than allow frustration to settle I will view this with excitement. Understanding this challenge is a positive step in my writing, and I am optimistic that mastery of the situation will come.