zigzackly's omnium-gatherum *

Quid quid latine dictum sit, altum videtur

Reactions, suggestions, any kind of feedback is always welcome.

Recent Posts
More on Esha..
The World Game
..read the credits in a style of my choosing..
Tenzin Tsundue
And on the drums..
Contextual pop-ups
Caferati Listings Edition 2 is out
Powered by blogging
Once upon a star..

D Mervin Ffingir writes, and having writ, moves on:
September 2003 | December 2003 | January 2004 | February 2004 | March 2004 | April 2004 | May 2004 | June 2004 | July 2004 | August 2004 | September 2004 | October 2004 | November 2004 | December 2004 | January 2005 | February 2005 | March 2005 | April 2005 | May 2005 | June 2005 | July 2005 | August 2005 | September 2005 | October 2005 | November 2005 | December 2005 | January 2006 | February 2006 | March 2006 | April 2006 | May 2006 | June 2006 | July 2006 | August 2006 | September 2006 | October 2006 | November 2006 | December 2006 | January 2007 | February 2007 | March 2007 | April 2007 | May 2007 | June 2007 | July 2007 | August 2007 | September 2007 | October 2007 | November 2007 | December 2007 | January 2008 | February 2008 | March 2008 | April 2008 | May 2008 | June 2008 | July 2008 | August 2008 | November 2008 | December 2008 | January 2009 | March 2009 | April 2009 | May 2009 | June 2009 | July 2009 | August 2009 | September 2009 | November 2009 | December 2009 | January 2010 | February 2010 | March 2010 | June 2010 | July 2010 | August 2010 | October 2010 | November 2010 | December 2010 | January 2011 | February 2011 | March 2011 | April 2011 | May 2011 | August 2011 | September 2011 | December 2011 | February 2012 | March 2012 | August 2012 | December 2012 | April 2013 | August 2013 | November 2013 | April 2014 | July 2014 | August 2014 | December 2014 | February 2015 | May 2015 | June 2015 | July 2015 | August 2015 | September 2015 | November 2015 | April 2016 | July 2016 | October 2016 |

Friday, November 24, 2006
Trading Places - an open writing exercise 

Silly us. We forgot to cross-post this here.

As writers, we frequently use our passion for—and skill with—words in support of the causes and values we believe in strongly. We write strongly-worded essays, earnest poems, emotional protest songs, petitions to governments, sermonising emails, vituperative blog posts..

But how often do we take the time to really understand the other side of the debate? To get into the skins of those misguided souls who hold views diametrically opposed to ours?

This exercise seeks to get you to do just that. You may find that there are valid points on both sides of the line in the sand. You may find flaws in your own logic. Insh'allah, you will find a middle ground, a space where conversations can happen, not shouting matches and exchanging insults.

But that's not the only reason why you should try this exercise. It could also help you with your craft. When you write about a negative character (-: one evidently very unlike the rational, kind, sweetness-and-light-spreading person you are :-) this could help you give that character depth, it could get your reader to see that world view as valid, it could make your writing more convincing.

So here are the guidelines.

Pick a topic on which you have very strong views. Write about it. From the other side of the fence. No restictions on genre or style. It could be a poem extolling child labour. A monologue from a necrophiliac. An essay in favour of stronger government controls if you're a libertarian (or a paean to free markets of you're not). A short story where the protagonist is a violent sociopath. And so on.

If you are a Caferati member, do come and leave your piece in the exercise thread, and come back here to leave a link to the post (that's the one you get when you click on the "#" symbol next to your post title) in the comments.

For those of you who are not part of Caferati (hmph): if you have your own web space, post it there, with a link to this post, and come leave a link and a small introduction to the piece here, in the comments.

And if you do not own online real estate, please feel free to post your entire contribution here in the comments.

I'll update this post with direct links as well.

Added on 20th November

The idea is to write postively about something you'd normally write negatively about.

To stretch your imagination to encompass a world view that you despise, ridicule or just don't believe in.

To write convincingly from the perspective of a person who is very unlike you.

Some examples.

Are you anti-terrorism? Then you could try writing something that glorifies it. Perhaps a story about how terrorists are created, from the point of view of a young adult who has just become one. Maybe it's a poem that invites participation in a violent revolution.

If you're in favour of a government banning XYZ television channel, then your piece could make the case against government control. It could be an essay. It could be a piece of flash fiction that dramatises the point.

Are you homophobic? Write a letter to the Prime Minister asking for legislation to legalise gay marriage.

Do you think the moderators of this forum are power-mad despots? Then your piece could be a hymn sung by a fictional - yet entirely believable - person who lights agarbattis in front of our photographs every day, thrice a day.

No, don't write both sides of the story. Write only the side that is, in your opinion, diametrically opposite to the one you'd support normally write in favour of. We will take it on trust that the point of view you espouse in this exercise is something you genuinely don't believe in, subscribe to, or endorse.

Here's an example, a love story by Pawan Sony that I'm (-: reasonably :-) sure is not a fictionalisation of his real life preferences.

Clearer now, I hope?

P.S. I'd particularly welcome feedback from those who choose to participate in this exercise. It would be interesting to hear how easy or difficult it was for you. And whether this altered your thinking in any way.

Please go to the original post to participate. Comments welcome here, though.

Blogged for thee by @ 3:59 am | 3 Comments | Post a Comment | Link Love? |

3 Noble Readers have commented.

  On Friday, 24 November 2006 at 17:48:00 GMT+5:30, the Hon'ble Blogger Chronicus Skepticus said...

Done (but completely unsuccessfully, I think)!

I have to say, I had no idea that playing devils advocate was so darned difficult! It queased me out that I could think that way...

I don't think it changed the way I feel about the burqa, but maybe I understand it a *little* now.

  On Friday, 24 November 2006 at 23:20:00 GMT+5:30, the Hon'ble Blogger zigzackly said...


Looks good, that. A nice take.

Yes, difficult, isn't it? And if you understood the burqa a bit more than you did when you started, well, mission accomplished. :)

  On Wednesday, 29 November 2006 at 20:26:00 GMT+5:30, the Hon'ble Blogger Pavan said...

What if I felt very strongly about the importance of writing and arguing convincingly through impeccable logic, relevant examples and a coherent summing up of facts and opinions? It would then be one hell of an exercise to argue convincingly about the importance of being drab and incoherent, wouldn't it?

Just a wacky thought, but it could belong in the Monty Python-esque halls of fame if done well!

Post a Comment

Kind souls who have linked to this post include:

Create a Link

< < Home < <

Note: [*] = The site linked to requires registration.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons License.