“You don’t write because you want to say something. You write because you have something to say” (F Scott Fitzgerald)
If it’s true that you write because you have something to say, does it follow that if you have something to say, then you write?
No of course not. If you have something to say, then often you ... well ... you simply say it. Though there are times when someone has something to say that has to be written down. It happened to Mr Darcy in Pride and Prejudice. No way would Elizabeth Bennett have waited around for him to insult her family before getting to the truth about Wickham. Though I think it would be hard to pull off such a long letter in a modern novel. There must be examples but I can’t bring one to mind.
How about having a story to tell? Do writers write because they have a story to tell? Fitzgerald seems to imply more than that, a message behind the story, a fundamental truth perhaps.
It’s an interesting quote, and I’m inclined to think that there’s something in it because the alternative is the writer who writes when they have nothing to say at all. Ah... wait a minute... Now I believe I can bring to mind certain books where I would be hard pressed to know what possessed the writer to string the words together.
However, that doesn’t negate the sense behind what Fitzgerald said. In fact it underlines it. It’s worth taking the time to think about what you want to say – not in meticulous detail but in solid overview. Can you sum up your novel in a sentence? If not, are you really clear about what you’re writing about?
Useful food for thought here.
A novel without some sort of message, even if deeply hidden, is a missed opportunity, I think. Of course, the message may never reach the minds of some readers; so much depends on life experience, previous reading, general knowledge etc. But writing without some theme in mind seems a little pointless to me.
ReplyDeleteI agree
Delete