Read on Twitter
Absolutely wonderful readings and discussion organised by @networks4nature with @TimDee4 @KathleenJamie
Kathleen Jamie saying that she has no plan when writing was heartening - that her meaning emerges only after it has been written. A very musical approach, I think - sitting
Kathleen Jamie saying that she has no plan when writing was heartening - that her meaning emerges only after it has been written. A very musical approach, I think - sitting
down with an instrument in your hands - not really thinking and just seeing/feeling what emerges. @TimDee4 struck a nerve with me by saying that however far-fatched his linguistic description or the metaphor he applies to birdsong, he will check it back - that language is what
we clothe things in, and that he is conscious of not being exploitative, not forcing them into costumes they wouldn't put on themselves. That's key to nature writing (and to documentary making) and I'm not sure that everyone takes such a loving and careful approach.
Kathleen Jamie spoke of advocacy in that regard, and that is uppermost in my mind when working as an advocate: that my client is speaking through me, not that I am speaking for them. I try to use the language they have used, trying to ensure that I am not interpretating their
situation, just relating it. The meaning (and consequences) of the situation should emerge without the need to dramatise or further obfuscate. And so with nature - we have language which can more or less describe it. That it holds mysteries within can also be described - but does
not need to be explained. I was amused that the panel somewhat dodged the question of transcendence, everyone I've ever seen being led into that area has dodged it - possibly (naturally!) worrying that it might all become a bit fluffy and seemingly pretentious. But maybe that's a
really good question. It is hard to use language, even music sometimes, to depict something that is difficult to describe, be that its physical nature or the effect it produces on us. But that is maybe a question about form and content. We are living in changed times,
most of us have struggled to express how this last year is affecting us. How do we use language to untangle the knotted up skein of our emotions? Isn't the whole meaning of transcendence to remove limitations? There is a pervasive notion that to do that requires the destruction
of the place from which you came, that you must "leave it all behind" but there are things we can't leave behind (our bodies, for example) and so perhaps the better way is to use what we have and find our best way to describe and understand those experiences. I think that idea
throws up a lot of interesting questions and I would love to see a conversation amongst artists of all kind emerge about that.
(The reason I'd like it to be among artists is that it wouldn't end up being a punch up about qualia and epiphenomenalism)
(The reason I'd like it to be among artists is that it wouldn't end up being a punch up about qualia and epiphenomenalism)
