The stories of old, provided reference points for historians. They highlighted cultural and environmental contexts and helped put the audience in that time and place. That is why we relate to those stories. It is also the reason that we so readily refer to historic stories to inform the present and future. I am not sure we always learn from history, but we certainly do tend to take history into account as we go forward.
Similarly, your story must not be out of touch with your current culture else it will never find an audience. The people that spoke then spoke to “then-audiences”, but we speak now and should address “now-audiences”.
Does that demand a contemporary style of writing? I don’t think that ever limited timeless stories, but try and read something written a century ago and you will be bored out of your skull. We must at least speak in the vernacular of our culture and use examples and illustrations that they can relate to. Someone tried to translate the bible into a lesser African language and came to the concept “white as snow”. There was no way to translate that idea into the culture, so they chose something more relevant – perhaps “as white as the down-feathers of a goose” or “as white as the white of your eyes when you bump into a lion in the forest”.Don’t borrow ideas or pretend to be something you are not – that will rob your story of its soul. Tell it from the heart and relate your real world experiences and how God has been relevant to you in those experiences. Also layer in the real world witnesses of those around you. Be relevant.
Relevance also relates to the need to convey your real experiences to your audience.
Relevance also relates to the need to convey your real experiences to your audience.
I also believe in being accessible. I don't have a natually casual style of writing, because I love good use of the English language. That could distance me from my audience, but if that were true then Moses, David and the writers of the gospels would be irrelevant today. Sure we enhanced their accessibility by modernising the King James style of writing, but that is not what makes their stories so accessible to us. The secrets to their writings included the use of real people in real circumstances, who wrote what God dared not write Himself for fear of not being understandable to the common man. Also, God wrote through them by casting their lives into journeys and crises that helped to bring such relevant commentaries. They also used everyday examples and situations to reference their stories. Their stories cut across cultures, genders, age and all kinds of potential sterotypes, to ensure that the bible would transcend time and the comings and goings of peoples.
There are so many cues in that for you. Use everyday analogies and examples. Speak about the kind of issues that touch the real lives of people. Broaden your audience by identifying with people from diverse cultures, genders and age-groups. Reference your context - describe places, events, historic moments, the textures of your reference culture and anything else that brings your referenced world to your audience. Take them there, let them smell, feel, taste and touch real contexts, by enriching your narrative.
I would also avoid contentious subjects, although I am often controversial. There is a difference. I avoid subjects that are known to polarise and upset people, especially audience or advocates (people who influence audiences, like leaders, pastors, etc) - what can I add to an already inflamed and well debated issue, other than to tarnish my own brand. I also avoid subjects that I am not qualified to comment on, or at least, if I do engage such topics I do so unpretentiously (as a layman). Your brand is precious and can take ages to build - so don't ruin it by being contentious. However, if controversial ideas can stimulate debate and get people talking, that can be very useful to audience building. Its a fine line.
Be authentic. I watched a few episodes of the iconic US reality show, "Pop Idols" and heard the judges repeatedly insist on two vital points that only few (normally the winners), ever grasped. They constantly criticised song choice, inferring that singers were punching above their weights, were not showcasing their real voices or did not seem authentic. The second point made to the singers, was to know who they were and build their identity through the show, although time and again they ended up trying to be someone else. In a nutshell they were being advised to be real, authentic and consistent to their own heartbeats. The last point had is more of an observation than something that judges said - winners were often simply accessible, pleasant, pliable, willing to learn and always in touch with their public. Losers though nothing of singing fringe music to conservative US audiences and whenever they did I correctly predicted their falls.
If all that advice is relevant to musicians, it is as true, if not more so, to writers. It burns emotional and creative energy to mimic others (I generally don't read other Christian books, so I can be real to myself and never feel bad when I see my own thoughts in others' works), but we will find a deep, endless vein of energy and passion in doing what God has called us and shaped us to do and be.
(c) Peter Eleazar @ www.4u2live.net
Image source: Calvin & Hobbes
No comments:
Post a Comment