Writer’s Tip: The Value of Receptivity

A section I read in Jeff Vandermeer’s wonderful “Booklife” last night reminded me of one of the most important lessons I’ve learned through a decade of international travel and cross-cultural work: be receptive to other world views. I cannot emphasize enough how valuable it is for characterization and description to see the world through someone else’s eyes in as unbiased a manner as possible.

From a particular character’s point of view, you might write: “the crisp leaves sparkled in the sun, its rays accentuating the luscious green of their color.”

But what if you went inside the head of someone else who saw the same scene through different eyes. “The leaves’ sheen reflected the sun in blinding ways of blue-tinged light.”

There are people out there who see things very differently than you. And the more you know about how those people see the world, the richer your writing can be.

I remember a conversation I had with a friend in Ghana once, a student of one of my workshops, who insisted that God loves white people more than black people. Hearing a black African state that just blew my mind.

“Why would you think that?”

“Because white people are more blessed.  Look at their countries — wealth, power, success. Everything we wish we had and don’t.”

Another student once asked me what it was like to walk on streets of gold in America. And he literally believed the streets were paved with gold.

I visited an African coastal town once and was mobbed by children wanting to touch my skin. They rarely saw white people, our guide explained, you are like a god to them. Hearing that made me mad. I never wanted anyone holding me to that standard especially when it diminished the esteem which they held for themselves.

In Mexico once, I went to play with a friend’s daughters.  I love kids and playing with them delights me. But in this case I quickly noticed how everyone in the house kept a very close eye on me, and the older daughter kept her distance, only smiling occasionally but rarely actively participating in our game. Later, I was told that in the culture men are not expected to be able to control their natural sexual instincts, so they cannot be trusted with girls. I was horrified. I am no molester. I wouldn’t dream of it. Was that what they thought of me?

I bring these examples up (and I have many more) not to argue the merits or truth of the reasoning but to point out how different their view of the world is than someone from my background and culture.

The world is filled with such peoples of different views and by meeting them, interacting with them, and getting a glimpse of the world through their eyes, my world is richer. It doesn’t matter if their view of the world shocked or offended me. It doesn’t matter if it made me sad or angry. These examples inspired all four in me. What matters is that before I couldn’t imagine viewing the world through such lenses but now I can and as a result, I can now better write characters who view the world through lenses far different from my own.

Many of us meet people every day who see the world differently than we do. Those encounters are opportunities to expand our arsenal by engaging them in dialogue and trying to learn who they are and how they see things.  You don’t have to argue with them or agree with them to do that. In fact, I would urge you to avoid either. You’ll get a more honest perspective if you do. But what you can do is discover, through the powers of observation all writers are urged to cultivate and must to succeed, new ways of thinking and looking at things which can use to enrich your writing and your characters.

That’s why I love foreign films and stories and novels. I’m a much deeper, more well rounded person because of such encounters. And the box in which I place my world has grown much larger many times over as well. Grow your box. Build your arsenal and write better stories. The world will thank you for it…on many levels.

For what it’s worth…

I Believe In Stewardship Not Global Warming

In January 1989, while out in Los Angeles preparing to transfer colleges, I interviewed actor Ted Danson for my college newspaper because he was an alumnus.  During that interview, Danson discussed his passion for the American Ocean’s Campaign (now Oceana), which he’d  founded as an environmental-focused nonprofit to educate the public on saving our damaged oceans.  He recalled the time he’d been on vacation with his family and saw such pollution on a beach that he felt uncomfortable letting his daughters swim.  I recalled times I’d witnessed similar sludge in the Rocky Mountains.  I recalled driving through the Alps and being shocked how well preserved they were by comparison.  That was the moment I first believed mankind’s habit of damaging the environment without concern for the future was a major problem.

So, in a sense, I believed one of the tenets of Global Warming long before that theory existed.  Which is one reason I find it easy to say:  I don’t believe in Global Warming theory.  I believe God created the Earth and gave it to man as a home.  I believe we are here as stewards and we have a responsibility to take care of the gift of our planet and preserve it as a gift to be shared with future generations.  I remember hearing about the destruction of Mangrroves by New Orleans and over in Asia as hurricanes hit and realizing the damage had gotten worse than I’d realized.  And thinking we have to stop this.  And I believe we do.

But that doesn’t mean I believe in all this peudo-science used to justify Global Warming.  Climate changes?  Well, Hammartan winds have been causing strange shifts for decades, so why is it all of a sudden Global Warming?  One of my biggest issues with science as a whole these days is summed up in the article http://slate.me/fo8yGr.  Science has become dominated by people with one dominant worldview and ideology.  How can it truly call itself unbiased, how can the methods truly be subjective when the people asking the questions start from such a similar place?  As a science fiction and fantasy writer, I have marvelled how people who can be so creative and open to endless possibility in their writing can be so close minded in their real world attitudes toward God and other subjects.  Is it really so easy to write off a higher being as the iniator of the Big Bang, when one is so convinced a big bang actually occurred?

And the arguments I’ve heard and data I’ve read on Global Warming just prove this to me.  Anyone who even remotely questions the theory is labelled “irrational” or “ignorant.”  What happened to healthy skepticism in science?  Some legitimate questions have been raised about the data and I don’t think true, dedicated scientists of integrity would discount them so quickly.  There’s no doubt, in my mind, that mankind’s activities are harming the environment.  Corporations and governments and others have built for years, destroying habitat and natural resources, without any regard for long term impact.  We’ve known most of my life that oil was not unlimited, that it one day might run out.  The fact that it hasn’t yet, doesn’t change my concern that our dependence on fossil fuels is a long term concern.  In the same way, I can believe that the Earth’s other rich resources have limits. And one has only to read the Wildlife Foundations endangered species lists to figure out  the damage done to the animal kingdom.

Is it really possible for anyone to believe significant damage hasn’t been done to the environment by man?  Not a rational person, no, but rational people still don’t have to believe in Global Warming to be rational.  Sorry folks.  The very suggestion that they do is completely irrational.  This is science, remember?  It’s based on hypothesis which form theories.  In essence, educated guesses, at least until definitive proof exists.  And while definitive proof exists of environmental damage by man, Global Warming theory has not been definitively proven.  So I remain skeptical.

The need for stewardship, however, is obvious.  It occurs not only in personal finance or use of office supplies (particularly witnessed by those responsible for the relevant budgets) but in the face of rising gas prices.  It’s not really a big stretch to apply the concept to other areas as well, such as the environment.  As farmers, my family often spoke of good stewardship of their land.  Land is valuable and to survive, farmers must make the most of every parcel.  Perhaps city folk have a harder time grasping this prospect, but I don’t think it’s that hard.  We have to take care of everything we own if we want it to last.  I learned that every time a childhood toy broke and couldn’t be repaired.

So here I am, proponent of stewardship but Global Warming skeptic. And I am a rational person, despite being a science fiction and fantasy writer.  I have great faith in science and great faith in religion, and I have great faith in human kind.

For what it’s worth…

Importance of Critical Thinking

I saw a hilarious demonstration of how some people are so biased, they refuse to think things through critically when Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg got so mad at something Bill O’Reilly said that they walked off the set.  O’Reilly quoted a poll which showed that the majority of 9/11 families and Americans don’t want the Muslim Community Center built near Ground Zero because it’s inappropriate.  They asked why it was inappropriate and he said “Because Muslims attacked on 9/11.”  This infuriated them.  Why?  They hold themselves up as informed thinkers, well educated people who should be listened to.  Aren’t they then aware of the fact that most Americans do not distinguish between the terms Muslims and Muslim extremists?  In fact, extremists of any kind are regularly lumped in with non-extremists of all worldviews.  Because I am a Christian who is anti-abortion, I am automatically judged in favor of bombing abortion clinics.  Because I am a Christian who is against redefining the term “marriage” for gays, I am a gaybasher.  They miss the fact I support civil unions for all and full rights for gay partners. I just consider marriage a sacred religious rite. Similarly, the good, decent every day Muslims who find the 9/11 attacks and all Muslim terrorism abhorrent are lumped in with the extremists.  No, it’s not right, but it’s a fact.  Another fact:  if it were Christians in the poll, they wouldn’t have walked off.

All this goes to show how little critical thinking people do these days, even supposedly smart people.  I went to school with both gays and Muslims.  Several close friends in those groups.  Growing up in a small Kansas city, I had not been aware of knowing anyone from those groups, so my friendships with them opened my eyes.  I have also traveled all over the world studying cultures and peoples and worldviews and how they differ.  I have tried to live among them and dig in to see the world through their eyes so I might begin to understand who they are.  This has taught me to think through everything.  My common sense and powers of observation both tell me all Muslims are no more extremists than all Christians.  After all, some 60 Muslim families lost loved ones at the World Trade Center.  But the mass public doesn’t have experiences like mine to pull from.  When they hear charismatic or confident known people make statements, they believe them.  When someone tells them Muslims are evil, they buy it.  All Muslims are evil terrorists.  Others buy that all Christians are abortion clinic bombers and gaybashers.  But a small amount of critical thought, study, and observation can prove those assumptions false.

The poll reflected mass opinion, not informed opinion.  So to get upset by O’Reilly explaining the reasoning is a display of ignorance on Goldberg and Behar’s part.  I am just as offended by the idea the majority of the public assume all Muslims are terrorists as they are, but unfortunately, that’s the way it is, and getting mad and walking off does nothing to change it.  Instead, they should have dialogued about why that’s a misconception and why people need to reeducate themselves.  They missed an opportunity to counter the statements off the poll and O’Reilly with common sense, either because they don’t care about common sense or have none.  And that’s a sad statement on the state of our country.  No wonder things are so antogonistic these days.  No wonder people are feeling pulled apart.  Until we all start thinking critically, questioning everything we hear, say, do, read, etc., we will continue to feel pulled apart.  Part of being informed is taking the time to educate yourself on the issues and the facts.  If you can’t be bothered, you can’t really claim to be informed.

For what it’s worth…