Mr. Rosse's A Published Author's Lament: Thoughts and Review

If I may make an observation regarding Mr. Rosse's story titled A Published Author's Lament: in my opinion, one of the wonderful and valuable things about Mr. Rosse's story is that it puts a human face on the whole writer-publisher-editor world; a world that in my opinion takes itself too seriously.

I recently wrote a comedic-facetious story on the writer-publisher-editor world and submitted it to a website. It was rejected as not being 'respectful' enough. Well, that was kinda the point. Sound, and light, and make-up, and marketing are all important; but what is behind the curtain? I always opt, no exception, for having all of the cards on the table regarding social issues. One of those cards ought to be a sense-of-humor card. My experience is that people do not like this.

The reason I keep pressing my thumbs against the eyeballs of the writer-publisher-editor issues is because I demand intellectual rigor. There is no writing by any author of any kind or under any circumstances that could not be improved by an editor? None? Never? Ever? There are no historical examples? No contemporary cases can even exist? You are kidding right? Is this the unintellectual nonsense that you teach your children? No exceptions exist? There are no special circumstances? There are no special humans? Exceptions are not interesting or worth studying? Exceptions do not make the subject and the world a more interesting place?

Pol Pot tried to do this in Cambodia--eliminate every exceptional circumstance, idea, or person. What was the result? Can you imagine Mr. Pot saying there are no (NO) exceptions to the idea that an editor is always (ALWAYS) needed? I can. I can easily imagine him saying this. I try to pick better companions and more intellectually stimulating ideas with which to fill up my life. I also consciously try to make historical and contemporary times more interesting. I know exceptions exist. Every writer, no exceptions, since the dawn of writing 6000 years ago would have been improved with an editor? Every one? You simply have to be kidding. As a charity I'll assign this idea of yours to the humor category. You can not be this stupid.

General rules make life manageable. But exceptions count also. It is all part of the equation of life. Most of post-WWII science sold a seamless universal idea that the speed of light was constant. Well, guess what? It isn't constant. Recent measurements show that the speed of light can change based on gravitational influences. Did contemporary scientists deny the exceptions? Did they fire off frothing emails? Did they burn the new discoverers at the stake? No and no and no. They embraced the exceptions happily. New information. A more interesting world. More smiles and happiness from the equation of life. All writing no exception from the beginning of time would have benefited from a 26 year old editor graduate of Chulalongkorn University? You are kidding--right? Meet me at my deathbed with this idea. I want to smile on the way to heaven.

Wouldn't our lives be more fun if we didn't deny exceptions but celebrated them? Exceptions don't negate general rules--so why are we so anxious to deny exceptions? From whence this need to homogenize? Who are the exceptional authors who did not require editing? Who are the real writers--the diamond cutters of literary history? I think considering this in a serious way and trying to make a list would be fascinating. I do not believe it has ever been done or attempted. In my particular case, I do not accept that my writing would benefit from editing. I believe that I produce diamonds. Well, there are only two possibilities here. Either I am correct or I am incorrect. Why can't I hold this point of view? It is my life. It is my mind. Why are others so anxious to take this idea away from me? Do these individuals also make it a practice to go to other people and disabuse them of every unpopular idea they have? The fact that a writer believes that his writing could not be improved by an editor--that everytime he hits the SEND button he is sending another diamond is an interesting idea. Has this idea been dealt with in an interesting way by others? You ought to see my emails.

Suppose it turns out that I am correct? Wouldn't that be really interesting and fun? Or are we no longer interested in interesting things--just interested in pulling others down in the mud we are in? You say an editor helped you (your description) get your writing from not that special to pretty good? I believe you but what does that experience have to do with me? Since when are you the measure of my life? Think.

The need for editors as a seamless literary fascist law of social physics is the current idea-de-century. Offering views on the subject that require open minded thinking brings me emails full of froth as if from rabid raccoons. Are these angry judgemental emailers upset with my views on writer-publisher-editor subjects? No, not really. They are angry because I am not marching in lock step with others. How dare I have minority points-of-view integral to my own persona and express them publically? Who the hell do I think I am? One of the lessons of the Internet for me is that many men have no interest in freedom of ideas. It isn't the opposable thumb that makes them human--it is the trigger finger. Since 1499 has even one human suggested that Michelangelo's sculpture La Pieta could have been improved with editing? No. No human is this stupid. Have you ever heard one person suggest that Picasso's painting Guernica would have been better if someone stood by him and made suggestions? "Hey Pablo, smear in a little more burnt sienna and royal blue here." Mozart anyone? There are exceptional acts by exceptional people. To my knowledge only the world of writing-publishing-editing is promoting the idea that exceptional acts and exceptional individuals do not exist. Silly. And some of these exceptional people are islands. Human islands do exist and it is a very good thing. God knows how many hundreds of years we might have been set back if people had messed with Newton when he was thinking thoughts and doing math.

I have read both of Mr. Rosse's books more than once and I enjoyed them both. I highly recommend them for Mothership bathtub reading between falling in love with teeruks from the Rainbow bar. I disagree with him on trivial subjects but his writing (stories) improved my life for the time it took to read them and to reflect on them later. His strength, in my opinion, is content. Stories that are interesting stories. Required to do so, I could not describe his style or technique. Mr. Rosse is more academically knowledgeable about writing than I am. Perhaps he could tell us into what stylistic category his writing falls. I would learn something. There is little idiosyncratic branding. In other words, the things I do and get pilloried for, he has chosen not to do. Different people--different choices made. Writing effectively (the reader keeps turning the pages) without hooks of style, or passion, or technique, or branding can be difficult. The only thing left is the story compellingly presented. Mr. Rosse knows how to do this.

I recommend Mr. Rosse's books.

© Dana. All rights reserved by the author.