To Strengthen the Mind

In Mark Edmundson’s book Why Write? he gives over twenty reasons why a person should write in his obnoxiously opinioned and judgmental chapters. One chapter, in particular, is a person should write to strengthen his or her mind. To sum up his chapter, Edmundson claims that the mind is a muscle in our bodies that must be used frequently like any other muscle to perform at the best of its ability. Writing and meaningful conversations are two ways that can make the mind stronger and cause us to truly think, rather than flowing along a stream of consciousness. We use our minds to get what we want out of life and to push our desires forward. Discovering hidden truths about the universe, giving the stream of consciousness form and shape, and making coherent sense are all things that an individual can gain from thinking by using writing as the tool to achieve these mental advancements. We can create a new and stronger mind through writing and reading, equivalent to that of a bigger person losing massive amounts of weight through diet and exercise. Reading and writing are interchangeable and essential in strengthening the mind, but only read books that are on your diet to become a genius writer as opposed to books that are the equivalent of donuts and skittles on your cheat day. According to Edmundson, some books, mostly written by white males such as Whitman, Emerson, and Melville, are better for your mind than other books, so only stick to reading these classic novels and poems in order to strengthen your mind. Edmundson assumes that inherently energetic people will often succumb to a lazy side because they feel there is nothing that is really ever worth doing, but writing can keep these said people from succumbing to their laziness. The reason being is that writing is worth doing. Write for the feel of your fingertips hitting the keyboard. Write for the pen to be molded into your palm. Write to write, and your mind will naturally be strengthened. 

Writers have many different methods to perfect their writing processes. Some writers have to drink an entire pot of coffee before they can sit down at their desks. Others have to jog on place for two minutes and run a mile outside before they can form a single word on their writing projects. What is one striking difference between Stephen King’s and Margaret Mitchell’s writing processes? While I do not know the specifics of each author’s writing process such as whether or not either of them required coffee before writing, I do see a difference in their process of the amount of novels that they produced or are still producing. Stephen King has written a plethora of novels with many of them receiving coveted awards. Margaret Mitchell only wrote one great work. The two writers have a difference of quantity versus quality.

Many writers today compromise their quality for quantity. Edmundson encourages in his chapter to write and write never ceasing to achieve true strength of the mind, but writing just for writing’s sake can take away the quality of what the words are saying and the meanings intended behind the words. Take, for example, Stephen King. He has had some instant hits that took him to superstar level in the writing world, and because of his fame, people wanted more works from him. He writes on a contract now for money. He must write a set number of novels in a certain amount of time to be paid for his work and make a living off a career of being an author. He averages about a novel and a half a year, which, realistically speaking for any human with set deadlines, some of those novels have to be written at the last minute or at least in a time crunch for King to be available to fulfill his quota of written books for the year. Stephen King said himself that the best kind of book has “characters that are deep...they must have thickness” (Janeczko 10). If an author is writing books that required a thick, deep character to stand out to the audience, does the author not need some time to develop this character? Furthermore, not every character could possibly be unique when an author is under a time crunch. Sure, an author could have a creative stroke of genius every now and then while writing a novel, but some characters may just be recycled personas from an earlier plot line that have a similar atmosphere and feel.

 I know that in my own writing, the papers that I type at the last minute are not great. In fact, they suck. I realize this undisputable fact, but the paper must be turned in to my professor in all of its unedited glory because there was a strict deadline for when the paper was to be due. For example, I wrote a paper once for a professor who will not be mentioned about a comparison of the Iroquois women to the early British female settlers. This paper was required to be a ten-page research paper that used at least ten secondary sources, and the assignment was given to me at the beginning of the semester to be due a month before the class ended. I thought that deadline would give me plenty of time to work on the paper and make it great. I checked out my sources from the library a few weeks later when I had done some preliminary research, but, then, I procrastinated. I waited until the day before it was due to write my ten-page research paper because I literally have no motivation. The paper was basically somewhat related words on a page that fulfilled a quota. I earned the grade I deserved on that paper, not the grade I wanted., but what did I expect after waiting until the literal last opportunity to write the paper? It is impossible for me to believe that Stephen King writes top quality books every time he lifts his pen to the parchment. In fact, I know this to be true because I have read some of his work. Some of his novels are genius while others are crap. Instead of urging people to be constantly writing to strength their mind like Edmundson does, I encourage those same people to take the time to write, and write something worth reading.

Margaret Mitchell, on the other hand, is an example of an author who had one, great quality work that catapulted her into literary stardom forever with her book, Gone with the Wind. This novel is a classic that is recommended by thousands as a book to read before you die. Many high schools require that their students read Gone with the Wind as part of an upper-level English class. Mitchell was only forty-eight when she died after being hit by a drunk driver while crossing the street, but that age still would hypothetically had given her enough time to write a second great novel. Instead, she chose to write one great, high-quality book and leave her stamp on the world. She did not want to sacrifice her quality of work for the quantity of novels that she could churn out.

In my personal experience, I have a friend that I will call Lee, who wrote a great work of fiction. She did not go on to win any prizes for her work as Mitchell did, but Lee’s novel was her pride and joy, the apple of her eye. Since writing the book, she has refused to pen another masterpiece because she is scared that the second novel will never be as great as the first one was. It would be like the younger sibling who can never live up to the expectations that the parents have placed for him or her because the older sibling had set such high standards. Lee chooses to write quality books as Mitchell did over a quantity of average novels with one or two greats works added to the mix.

William Faulkner makes an interesting argument whether he realizes it or not for both sides of the debate. To describe his writing process, Faulkner once said, “I write only when inspiration strikes. Fortunately, it strikes every morning at nine o’clock sharp.” His argument leans more towards the quality side of the spectrum, but he received his inspiration on a daily basis. Faulkner might have picked and chosen his inspirations for publication because not every thought or idea would have been good enough for him to publish into a great work of fiction. He chose his quality ideas over the number of concepts that occurred to him. Edmundson would say that any writing is good writing for to strengthen the mind, but I would have to disagree. Write what is meaningful to you and what you feel is worth writing. Do not write to fill words on a page. Write to fill the inspirations in your heart, and, then, you will truly have strengthened your mind.

Works Cited

Edmundson, Mark. Why Write? Bloomsbury, 2016.

Janeczko, Paul. “In Their Own Words: An Interview with Stephen King.” National Council of Teachers of English, JSTOR, vol.69, no.2, 1980, pp. 9-10, http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/815321.pdf. Accessed 1 May 2017.