Even in this muddled
day and age, the poet William Shakespeare continues to be held
in high affection for many reasons. And
it is no difficult task to cite a couple.
He was a great
story-teller, creating stunning poetry of otherwise dreary real events that figured
prominently in our history. Secondly,
the English language he wrote in was substantially enhanced by him via his prodigious
skills as a wordsmith, creating over a thousand new words which have been zealously
added to the lexicon. With his
contributions he truly enriched the language in very significant ways.
One could then
delve into the frame of mind he wrote his immortal pieces. Did he write for his own satisfaction and
appreciation, or pride, displaying phenomenal skills not enjoyed by many? In other words, did he write to express and
pursue his deep passions for writing to enable him to see how far and how deeply
he could develop such skills? And in the
process also revel in having produced notable pieces of art. The utter joys of the beaming artisan in
front of his own creation!
We are quite
conversant with the intimate connections of literature with mysticism,
embodying in both the author’s grand vision and ambitions, his consuming
restlessness and dissatisfaction with life as lived. Though he also finds joys and delight at the
creative discoveries of his own handiwork.
Or did he write
pursuing commercial ends? Did he live an
opulent style producing those beautiful poetic works? This is highly doubtful, as well as I suppose
for most noted writers of the past eras.
Or did he write
essentially so other people would be able to read them and understand for the
reasons he wrote them? His many poetic
works are truly beautiful uses of the written word. But can we be certain that
our own interpretation of each of them jibes with the author’s? How can we tell with certainty? Or maybe just possibly?
One likes to
believe that one other plausible reason he may have written his works in the
ways he did was because he also wanted to find how people would comprehend him
writing in the very unique and novel style that he had developed. Like a riddle, he wanted to find out if
indeed they could understand them for the same reasons he wrote them, writing
in his own most personal and unusual style.
A style so unique and different from others, one could say he was
peerless and thus stood alone in that one particular sphere. And for this matter then, maybe every other
poet of note and consequence also wrote with this one thing in mind, in a style
so personal and unique there is no other like it.
In the realm of
oral language, we talk about professionals who engage in the exposition and
interpretation of body language, analyzing speech in the context of or in
relation to their body movements. Couldn’t
one also use that to analyze the written works of poets and writers and derive
some sense of why and how they wrote their works? In other words, did their words as written
convey any sense of purpose why they wrote them, or even whether their words
reveal their mental state? Many say that
Edgar Allan Poe’s dark life somehow spilled over to his body of works. Dark and dreary as we are inclined to feel in
his notable works.
Or it could be as
cut and dried as we are told that the reason El Greco painted the way he did
was because he may have had problems of his vision making him see real images
in odd symmetry.
The point to
convey is that we cannot discount the fact that certain people may write for
the purpose of trying to find out if their intended readers could comprehend
their writings the way they were intended to.
It is also
possible that people write in such a way that they can hide their true purposes
for their work, as an exercise of shielding their own privacy with regard to
certain things. Thus, those people write
stuff though available to the public but intended secretively only for their
own personal purposes.
Thus, for those of
us who write on a regular basis, and more than just weaving together several
sentences at a time, but at least writing regularly essay length treatises, we
can ask ourselves that question. How and
for what reason do we write?
I once wrote a very
mundane piece on the local traffic and had primarily wanted to eschew actual
conditions in unrealistic ways to depict how bad and frustrating traffic was to
me personally. So a piece written with so much irony and tongue-in-check. Or maybe even oozing a bit with sarcasm.
One perceptive anonymous
commenter expressed that my attempt showed I was trying too hard so much so
that the piece had instead totally failed as a serious commentary of a
real-life situation. In honesty, I took
the critique graciously for truly I believe I can learn even more listening to
those who read my pieces. It was the
anonymity that did not sit well with me, because it implied I could not take
any criticism and would thus be irked.
But this was not the case.
Anyway, this is
one clear instance when the reason one writes a piece is at cross-purposes with
those who read it. And I as the author
could definitely say that the reader missed the point. This illustrates the case I am trying to
hypothesize regarding intended reasons why a piece is written. And could only be known by the author. Thus, possibly in an obtuse way, the author
may be hiding the real purposes why he wrote.
I do at times
write to test how or how deeply the reader would understand what I can trying
to convey. Thus, while it may not be too
easily discernible upon first blush, the wished-for hope is that a serious
rereading of the piece could expose the deeper intent embedded in the piece.
A piece written very
straightforwardly or too declaratively may appear too blunt, or too rude, for
those targeted. The circumspection could
help soften the at times caustic message.
