
Writing is a form of therapy; sometimes I wonder how all those, who do not write, compose, or paint can manage to escape the madness, the melancholia, the panic fear, which is inherent in a human condition.
British author Graham Greene expressed the forementioned quote to highlight the importance of writing and its therapeutic values. I recently came to think about what literary works say about their creators. Usually it’s critics and essayists that deal with the artist’s life and try to connect the dots relating every character or event in a novel to the life of the writer and the causes that sparked it, but I guess the casual reader does not bother too much about it and enjoys the plot for what it is.
It doesn’t matter really.
Because what is important is that the writers themselves find it therapeutic. Whenever the writers project their ideas onto paper, they free themselves of the ‘burden‘ an imaginary world creates upon its materialisation. However, what really helps is reading the produce of our writings afterwards. It is only then that we are capable of seeing where some parts of our plot came from. I am sure that even the plot a writer finds most detached from their life experiences hides a small detail that, with further analysis, brings out issues; as debris left wandering in the subconscious mind. It’s like a translation and a paraphrases altogether, afterall. The words are obviously different, but the core is one. One can trace details of a writer’s personal experience, as one might say of James Joyce‘s “Dubliners” or “Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man“, which clearly recall Joyce’s view on his life: these can be filed under ‘autobiographical‘ or ‘semi-autobiographical‘ works and surely that is the kind of personal connection which is clearer to decode, once the reader knows the writer’s personal life.
But what about other books, other authors where such assumptions can not be gathered in such simple manners? Of course, symbolism seems to answer this purpose perfectly. One might argue that it can both be used consciously and unconsciously, and this is right. Critics spend hours of work trying to decode one book or another, trying to connect objects, characters, plots and twists with a writer’s purpose and sometimes finding the link between fiction and real life. That is the sort of connection that I’m trying to underline here. It is by doing that on purpose (or again, unconsciously) that a writer let go of their imagination and free their mind. Ergo, writing not only represents a great medium to express oneself, but it is certainly a form of therapy.
As an English major, I learned to consider a piece of literature as its own world. You almost have to forget that there is an author, that the author has a life that can be linked to the novel. Essentially, a writer’s work and a writer’s life do not have some supplementary relationship; one is not a link to the other. I agree that writing is therapeutic, but when analyzing literature I don’t know that we should be wondering what provoked the writer to express something or use a certain technique; rather, we should wonder what provoked a character to say or think or feel such a thing.
A work of fiction is not a writer’s memoir.
True, and I consider these works as pieces of art which can stand on their feet.
But as a writer, you have to wonder what your novel tells about you, so ultimately you end up wondering about it the other way around, that is books leading up to their authors’ lives.
Artistically, I do not wonder about these things. I see the structure of the novel, I fall in love or despise characters, but in the perspective of writing as a healing / psychological process, the writer and its creation are strongly tied.
Hmm, I think that this can be true and false as well. If I’ve been working on a story for a while and I have a character I like but I determined he had to die for the sake of the plot-line it’s not every therapeutic.
But, most of the time I do forget about what’s going on around me when I write and lose myself in the world I have created and it’s here that I agree with Very Becoming in that fiction writing is used to create a world, it’s not a reflection of me, it’s a world I created that has its own life just like ours.
But that doesn’t detract from the therapeutic qualities of the writing at all.
I agree. See, it’s not possible to draw definite lines and claim where a writer’s personal reflection ends and my fictional world begins. This is the beauty of writing!
I am no writer, but find this topic very intriguing. I wonder, do you feel there’s the same therapy value going on in non-fiction writing as well? I sense there is.
Definitely. Yes! Our thoughts, our written or spoken words are all a world of its own, so I believe even an article can make you understand what the writer is going through. Though sometimes it takes focus, and others it doesn’t. And yes, it should have therapeutic value aswell.
Cause my point is to show that therapy is almost if not always associated with writing. Sometimes it’s plain visible, others it’s up to critics and readers to catch and find between the lines.
Thank you for the background! As I say this subject fascinates me. When I do write it’s like disappearing behind a velvet curtain. The colour changes according to my mood. Time enters another dimension and when you come out the other side…voila’. You’re in a different space. Hopefully a better one but no guarantees…Sound familar?
I can definitely relate to that! It’s our world and everyone is entitled their own world!
Pingback: I have not studied Dr Freud | sub rosa