down the writer's path

Arthur Plotnik chats about the writing process

Day 2 in Down the Writer's Path's series with Arthur Plotnik. This segment is part of an interview with Arthur Plotnik, author of the newly released, Spunk & Bite: A Writer’s Guide to Punchier, More Engaging Language & Style by Briget Ganske, Spring 2006 and posted with their permission.

Describe your writing process. Do you write everyday? Do you plan or plot things out?

I wish I could say I write naked from midnight to dawn, supine in a bathtub filled with nasturtiums or newts or something---but no such exotica here. Otherwise, is anyone interested?

Well, if so: I am dully disciplined, up early most days and at the keyboard from 8:30 to six, with breaks for websurfing, lunch, and a walking errand or two. I am blessed with my own small study, where I work pleasantly aware of my artist wife painting in an adjacent room. (Hey—maybe I do live the writer’s dream.)

I write slowly, agonizing over words, cursed by an editorial mindset that prevents freeflow. I rely on the reference books and literary collection that surrounds me, as well as search engines. (I look with astonishment, perhaps envy, at would-be writers laptopping away in cafes.) When I find myself blocked, I play some jazz on our out-of-tune piano, thus abusing a different part of the brain. In good weather, I’ll take a half day off here and there to bike or walk or maybe play golf with wisecracking codgers on the city courses. And a big trip now and then.

I have trouble outlining. It’s so boring. It feels better to surprise myself with what comes next, then sweat through the transitions and reshaping. But I keep resolving to outline; I’m sure it would make things easier and keep first drafts from running absurdly long. I’m better at simply listing the elements I want to include, even if half end up not making it. My advice: If it’s within your personality, outline, especially under tight deadlines.

When you write do you always have a certain audience in mind?

It depends. In occasional forays into poetry, I write only for the words. “We are the words that tell who we are,” said poet Eduardo Galeano. For my columns and books on writing, I imagine an audience craving refreshment from nuts-and-bolts lessons or inspirational pablum—an audience that will welcome entertainment, even sarcasm, along with good advice. For niche writing I try to gauge the niche reader’s knowledge and tastes; for example, in my discursive guide The Urban Tree Book, I pulled back on the farcical stuff and indulged in the tree-adulation I shared with the intended audience.

Audiences are so segmented, diverse even within a segment. Is there any general reader? The closest might be the reader of non-genre fiction, and when I try my hand at such writing I don’t think of audience. The story rules. I’ve published some (legitimate) fiction, but have three novels sitting in drawers. Should I have pegged them to readers I don’t care about? That would have required some serious dough up front, and no one was offering.

There is that school of thought that says write to please yourself. And writers like John Updike picture a certain typical reader. But if you want to publish, ultimately you have to please an editor, and an editor’s job is to please an audience, sometimes the widest audience possible. There will be revisions that conflict with your integrity. It will come down to balancing values: what you want to be, what you want achieve, what you want to earn.
--
Come back tomorrow to read Plotnik's answer to the great question: Why write? Haven't picked up your copy of Spunk & Bite? Why not grab a copy and punch up your language? You might also want to check out Art's website, Spunky's Blogrr, and, Plotnik's official bio. If you haven't already, read my review of The Elements of Authorship then return for more soundbites from the Great Plotnik!

Does Arthur Plotnik take on the revered Strunk and White?

This interview is part of a series featuring an interview with Arthur Plotnik, author of the newly released, Spunk & Bite: A Writer’s Guide to Punchier, More Engaging Language & Style by Briget Ganske, Spring 2006 and posted with their permission.

Where did you get the idea for Spunk and Bite? Have you always been disappointed with Strunk and White's The Elements of Style?

I was drunk on Strunk and White when I first read it and became a loyal disciple. And I still take a cold shower now and then in its good advice on clarity and concision. My problem is not so much with its few outdated rules as with E. B. White’s inhibiting advice in his chapter on style. A breezy, daring stylist himself, he advised a conservative approach for everyone else. But today’s frenetic media environment—the competition for attention—demands something more; namely, the expressiveness that I describe and coach in Spunk & Bite.

The idea for the book grew out of an early column I wrote called “E. B. Whitewashed,” but I’d say only 5-10 percent of the book crosses swords with Strunk and White. Most of the text takes stock of the liveliest expression today and what makes it lively. And—with an attempt at exemplary liveliness—I prompt writers to experiment with these ideas and techniques.

How do you measure the success of your own writing? Or, how do you know when you have written something good?

My mentor, Longinus of the third century, said that judgment is the last outgrowth of experience. If I were inexperienced, I’d rely more on the brutality of friends and strangers to give me honest appraisals. The Internet has made that process a bit easier. But now I feel about 80-percent confident as my own appraiser. For works I want to publish, I try to tell readers something they didn’t know, and tell it in a style that refreshes them from everyday drivel, from the fug—the stale air–of the commonplace. I have a good sense of when I’ve pulled it off, when I’ve written something with spunk and bite, so to speak.

The remaining 20 percent of a judgment comes from feedback, of course, and I bristle as much as anyone at negative feedback. But I try to listen. When someone I know praises a work, I often try to reread the work in their persona, getting the outsider’s view of what worked. Or just reveling in the experience.

How do you know when you are finished with a piece of writing?

When, in the black-leather guise of a merciless self-editor, I’ve beaten and burned everything predictable, labored, or lazy, then seen to it that what remains is fresh, stimulating, inventive, and quick-witted.

Good writing is bad writing revised. I revise those wayward drafts until they cry for mercy. If the authorities ever saw how I beat my sentences, they’d put them in foster homes and throw me in a cell.

How much time do you spend revising and editing versus actually writing?

It’s all actual writing; there’s no dividing line, especially with the ease of digital editing. There is actual talk, and what you would have said to someone if you had it to say over. But in writing, you always have it to say over—until it’s exactly what you wanted to say. That’s the beauty of the written word.
--
Come back tomorrow to hear Plotnik offer up his writing process, and if you haven't picked up a copy of Spunk & Bite why not grab a copy and punch up your language today? You might also want to check out Art's website, Spunky's Blogrr, and, Plotnik's official bio. If you haven't already, read my review of The Elements of Authorship then return for more soundbites from the Great Plotnik!

Get a little Spunk & Bite with an interview with Art Plotnik

Why is language or style so important to writers? Well, according to Arthur Plotnik, "Most editors become editors because of a special infatuation with language...all else being equal, the masterly, distinctive use of language lifts an editor's (or agent's) heart. It means that the writing, as is, will please critics; that it will deliver on a promise to readers."

I don't know about you, but staying true to the reader is my number one goal. Arthur Plotnik is the author of the new Spunk & Bite: A writer's guide to punchier, more engaging language & style, a terrific new book that is bound to provide inspiration while giving you a stimulating and often humorous read. While he's a great teacher, Plotnik does even more: He leads by example. Try his opening paragraph:

"Sometimes when I'm digging for the right word, I long for a terrier-like acuity, a canine's sensory gifts applied to language. Imagine if dogs ever figured out how to write--how to put that spunkiness and bite of theirs into literature. Think of those olfactory superpowers attuned to sniffing out metaphors or tracking, not the bone mot, but the bon mot. We dry-and-fleshy-nosed writers could be in big trouble."

If Plotniks's name resounds with a familiar clang, maybe you encountered the Grand Master of Punctuation and Style in one of his earlier books such as The Elements of Editing or The Elements of Expression: Putting Thoughts into Words. If you're a librarian, perhaps you went a few rounds with the master during his tenure as editor of the American Library Association's magazine, American Libraries. I first encountered the master a few years ago when I read and reviewed The Elements of Authorship.

As a young writer, Plotnik studied under Philip Roth and Vance Bourjaily at the Iowa Writers Workshop. Not a bad start. If you have the time, check out Art's website, Spunky's Blogrr, and, if you want to know more about the man, check out his official bio. And don't forget to return for more tidbits and soundbites from the Great Plotnik!