Tag Archives: challenge

A Good Argument

21 Mar

Yesterday on my run, I listened to last week’s episode of This American Life. It’s called “Save the Day,” and the last act is about the Life Raft Debate at a university in Alabama–basically, the students gather once a year, and professors from various disciplines must convince them that, if they were all on a life raft when the world had been obliterated as we know it, their discipline is the one to save. And it had become more about showmanship than good argument over the years. Until the Devil’s Advocate a few years ago–the person who’s job is to say the student shouldn’t save any of the disciplines–pointed out this fact, and told the students they deserved better. They deserved good arguments, not to be coddled or simply entertained. And he pointed out, too, that a good argument doesn’t have to be boring–it can be funny and entertaining but also engaging on an intellectual level.

It reminded me of a moment in The West Wing when President Bartlet says that if nothing else, they will raise the level of public discourse in the country.

Not to get too political, but this is one of the big reasons I voted for Obama. Because he made good arguments. He didn’t pander, didn’t talk down, and didn’t rely on easy catchphrases and showmanship. I felt that he wanted to engage our minds, he wanted us to think, to form our opinions, regardless of whether we agreed with him or not.

I started to think about this blog post right after listening to This American Life yesterday morning, and it seems particularly timely given tonight’s health care debate.

I think however much we all want to be entertained, we also thirst for a good argument, for the debates, the statements, the information that makes us think. And I can tie it all back into books for children and teens, too. (Of course!) One of the reasons I love working on books for young people is that they have that hunger to know and understand things. A good book opens the world and challenges even while it entertains. It doesn’t talk down, but talks to its audience. It holds that audience in high regard. A good book gives everything, and I think that as a result, all of us and our world give everything back in return. We become engaged with ourselves and with each other.

Resolutions

10 Jan

Of course I’ve been thinking about new year’s resolutions. It’s that time, after all, however cliche it might be. I like beginnings, and I like choice. We have this whole new thing that we get to choose how to begin, how to fill . . . well, not to be too Hallmark card-y, but how to live.

A lot of the resolutions that have been bouncing around in my head are personal and uninteresting to anyone who isn’t me. And some are resolutions that I realize I make every year. Not necessarily because I fail to keep them in the previous year, but because I like to remind myself to keep going with them. Nothing’s ever really finished. One of those is not to shy away from making eye contact with people I walk by. (Unless they’re obviously crazy people, clearly.) The other is to continue to work on balancing my friends, my work, my family, and my alone time in a way that makes me feel that I’m doing my best by everyone.

But this year I’m also resolving to make time for some of the books that I own and really, really, really want to read, but haven’t yet. So here’s the list. I wonder how I’ll do!

-The Children’s Book by A. S. Byatt

-Her Fearful Symmetry by Audrey Niffenegger

-Marcelo and the Real World by Francisco X. Stork

-Daughter of the Forest by Juliet Marillier (I promise, Angie, this is the year!)

-Bonk by Mary Roach

-Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (if I wait much longer, I think the shelf life of this one might expire)

-The Inheritance of Loss by Kiran Desai

-Jacob Have I Love by Katherine Paterson

-Ulysses by James Joyce (I read this one nearly 10 years ago in college, and am curious to see how a second time might go.)

Adversaries, take 2. The nicer take.

17 Apr

“This isn’t romance. This isn’t a declaration of love or affirmation of friendship. This is something more.” –Melina Marchetta, Jellicoe Road

It occurred to me after reading the couple of comments on the adversaries post that the same dynamic is important in non-opponent relationships, too. Finishing Jellicoe Road recently also underscored it, as I watched how Taylor and Griggs’s opponentship and relationship unfolded.

The people who a protagonist spends time with, whether as friend, enemy, family, or love, have to be people worth that time for both the character and the reader. The king and queen of Attolia are one of literature’s greatest couples because they challenge each other both as opponents and as lovers. Nick and Norah (of the Infinite Playlist) work because they challenge each other. Mildred and Jacob in Me and the Pumpkin Queen are such great friends because they understand, support, and complement one another. The same with Billy, Tommy, and Ernestine in Tracking Daddy Down. And Toot and Puddle. The most compelling relationships are the ones in which the characters are different, but equal.

Maybe this is the germ of a future conference talk, but I’d love to hear what others have to say.

Adversaries, opponents, archenemies, nemeses

25 Mar

Ever since I went to see Frost/Nixon a few weeks ago, I’ve been thinking about adversarial relationships. (In fiction, of course.) The movie is brilliant all around, and of course, the focus is on a series of confrontations between David Frost and Richard Nixon. Each is trying to get the best of the other, each trying to come out on top. But only one of them can win. They are two very different people, yet also similar in ways, too. They both want to be in the spotlight of their circle. They both crave “ratings” of a sort. They’re both able to captivate other people; they’re both charismatic. And though it seems like Nixon should be able to easily win in this confrontation, Frost, in the end, has equal strength.

That’s what makes for a worthy opponent–someone who is equally strong, or witty, or what-have-you–and I think that often lies in the similarities between two adversaries rather than their differences. Some amount of sympathy for the other is necessary, too. In Frost/Nixon, we can see that Frost does feel for Nixon by the end, and even that Nixon sympathizes with Frost. We couldn’t have had James Reston opposite Nixon because Reston didn’t see Nixon as human; to him, Nixon was purely bad. And we couldn’t have had Frost opposite Jack Brennan because Brennan saw Frost as a joke.

It works the same way in any story, I think. There has to be equal strength, wit, intelligence, and each has to be able to see the other as a person–at least a little bit. Vulnerabilities and flaws in counterpoint to strengths and attributes make characters more interesting and complex, whether they are protagonists or antagonists. The Dark Knight also sparked this thought last summer, during that scene when the Joker outlines how he and Batman aren’t so different deep down. (Which is an admittedly chilling thought.)

Anyone else have great examples of worthy adversaries in books? Harry and Voldemort, obviously. And I’d say the king and queen of Attolia have one that’s breathtaking (and romantic, too!). Blair and Serena in Gossip Girl? Who else?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.