Skip to main content

They Linger On

I realized this week that I've given up on my early stories. I've been writing since I was in fifth grade, but I hit my stride in high school, churning out story after story, some short but with several longer works each clocking in at around two hundred pages typed. While I knew that the writing itself was not the best, I cared deeply about some of the characters I created, and the stories mattered to me. They matter still. I always thought that I would go back and take up the storylines again, re-write them to be worthy of being published. Slowly that thought has eroded away, and now I no longer want to revisit them. Writing them was practice. Even if I were to become a wildly-successful novelist, those early stories should never see the light of day. I wouldn't want them to, for that matter, as they do not represent my best efforts. These stories are alive only to me, and just barely at that. I wonder how many other stories share the same fate--to have their author spend hours and hours on them only to leave them in the end, quietly sitting in a desk drawer, a forgotten file, an old floppy disk somewhere?

The world must be littered with these dead stories. Stories envisioned in the mind of an author but never written down. Stories written but unpublished, ones that few beyond the author have seen. Mostly, this is for the best. Just as I would really prefer my earlier writing remain unseen, some well-known authors feel the same. Brandon Sanderson wrote, by his estimate, at least five novels before he felt he was a strong enough writer to seek publication. The second novel of Terry Brooks remains unpublished, and never will be, as many elements of it were incorporated into a later, published work. Yet sometimes, this is nothing short of a tragedy, as even unpolished stories, released after the death of the author, are nothing short of marvelous. I think of the essays of Marina Keegan, drafts of my great-grandmother's poems, and over forty years of previously unpublished works and notes by Tolkien. These stories, not quite finished, some in very early stages, still manage to be moving by turns, the author's death all the more tragic because of that lost promise, that last story never fully finished. The younger the author, the more true this seems to be. Sometimes the stories are all the more haunting in considering the death of the author. 

Even if they are never published at all, these dead stories were not wastes of effort. Each time we write we engage in a little act of creation, a chance to say something new, something that only we can say. Each story is a strike against the blank page that mocks us, the writer's block that tries to stop us in our tracks. Whether the story is alive or dead, I believe that each work we write contains a piece of us, a little soul-shard that goes out into the world and stays long after we're gone. This is one of the few measures of immortality we may hope for; in putting words to paper, we freeze a moment in time. Even centuries may pass, but the voice of an author is preserved and can be heard again afresh when their words are read. We ourselves must die, eventually, but what we write lingers on.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...

How I Left Creationism

There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...

The Hovinds...Still Poking at Straw Men

Kent Hovind, the false "Dr. Dino", and his ilk are at it again. In a new article on his website, Hovind (or whoever authored the piece, perhaps his son) claims that while creationists have no problems using miracles to explain events (a habit that perpetually makes them unfit to do real science), evolutionists criticize them for it, even though, in Hovind's mind, they rely on miracles just as much to explain their "religion" of descent through natural selection. This is, at its core, demonstrably nonsense. He claims that a "miracle" is needed to make stars and planets form out of gas, a supposed violation of Boyle's Law because there was no "outside force" acting on the gas and dust. How about gravity, Dr. Dino? That would certainly explain it, no miracles needed here. This attack is a non-sequitur. The objection has everything to do with astronomy and cosmology and nothing to do with evolution, which is the development of new species o...