Recently in Interviews Category

I wanted to "sit down" with Athol Dickson and discuss the craft of writing a little bit. He kindly agreed. This is our conversation.

J. Brisbin (J): One of the things that really interests me about your development as a writer is your (can I say "Fine"?) Art and Architecture background. I personally see myself as an "artist" even though I’m really not; not in a classical sense, anyway. I hope to demonstrate artistic merit in my writing, but I’m not Rembrandt, nor will I ever be able to execute the form at that level (though all writers probably think of themselves of at least being capable of having that level of mastery...if they wanted to...but of course the reason they’re not masters is because they don’t really want to be...but I digress). You’ve talked a lot about the "craft" of writing. Is your sense of what makes good writing informed by that artistic background? Is the study of Art helpful to writers, even though it may not seem directly related?
 
Athol Dickson (AD): The idea of "the craft of writing" can be unpacked in different ways. Not all of them relate to art. To me at least, it can call up thoughts of craftsmanship in the sense of correct structure, grammar, spelling and so forth. That is not what I mean by "art". It can be about communication in the sense of the accurate transfer of facts from mind to mind. That is not art, either. It can even imply a transfer of emotions, which are accurate to the extent that the reader ends up feeling exactly as the author hoped she would. But while we’re getting closer to art, we’re still not quite there. With the understanding that our discussion is limited to fiction, the craft of writing begins to be informed by art when it enters into something much less easily explained. For me, "art" is any form of expression that intentionally explores an ineffable aspect of the human condition. The word "ineffable" in my personal definition is the key that separates "art" from "craft." An articulate conversation or the numbers on a clock may involve correct and accurate communication, but they are not necessarily art. When one angry driver expresses his emotions by rudely cutting off another driver in traffic, he may transfer his emotion very precisely, but that too is not art. (These examples could be portals into artistic expression, but in the interest of communication we must draw the line somewhere, otherwise "art" becomes synonymous with "everything" and looses practical value as a concept. One cannot really think of "everything," nor can one apply it to one’s work in practical terms.)
 

Since his book (Re)Thinking Worldview is coming out on October 12th, I asked J. Mark Bertrand if he would mind talking to me about a wide range of topics. He kindly agreed. This is our conversation:

J. Brisbin (J): We post-moderns are forced to deal with a steadily-increasing amount of information every day. Much of it an everyday Johnane (politically-correct cross between a John and Jane…nevermind) would not have had access to a few generations ago. Discussing something as intricate as Worldview would have been conversation fodder for intellectuals and philosophers. Yet here we are, normal working stiffs, talking about it.

J. Mark Bertrand (JMB): You mean "talking" about it. We're still using the old terminology, but the process, as you say, has changed.