The writing mentor and other thoughts

Lately, I've been thinking about what it takes to be a writing mentor. I had a good one for my first novel, but I struggle to work out why that person was right for me at the tenuous time of attempting my first bona-fide novel. If he had handled the job less sensitively, would I have given up? Well possibly that book, but probably not from attempting another which incorporated some of the ideas - I have a bit of a stubborn streak that usually doesn't let me give up. On the other hand, how do you know if you can do something, until you've done it? Sometimes confidence gives out before the job is done.

My mentor and I have become friends in the long process of writing the book, meeting for the occasional cup of coffee, and not long ago we met for a delicious meal with his partner who also read my book in the manuscript stage and, to my great delight, gave it the thumbs-up. Two mentors for the price of one! 

Maybe part of the solution to getting the mentor mix right is in being able to talk freely with him or her about one's random and sometimes fairly incoherent ideas that may or may not make it into the story. I did, and after doing that I would go away and make them a little more coherent in my imagination (some might say, fester in my imagination). My mentor is skilful in resisting what must sometimes be a strong urge to give me 'solutions' before I have had the chance to think them through myself. So maybe a good mentor is, in part, a sounding board with minimal distortion in reflecting back what I want to do, and not necessarily what he might do himself.

A good mentor seems to be one who will help the writer be the best he or she can be, rather than a faultless version of the mentor's idea of what a good writer should be. The mentor needs to be good at pointing out the mentee's existing strengths and skills, and encouraging him or her to build on those. The mentor needs to be able to make suggestions that enable the writer maintain the integrity or feel of the work - and to develop their unique voice. I believe there is little point in simply reproducing what others do when it comes to writing. Cynically following a formula might or might not get you published, but really, what does it add that is of value to what is already out there. A writer's 'voice' is the golden thing that is the result of the unique life they have lived and the way they have learnt (and continue to learn) to communicate this.

With voice comes authenticity. I have mentioned authenticity in previous posts. What I mean by authenticity is not kidding yourself, or trying to get away with something that you know isn't quite right or congruent with the character. The temptation is there when the authentic clashes with the socially popular, or with some sort of truism or social more. I guess if you're a writer sometimes you have to be prepared to put alternative positions, even when they risk making you look bad. If that's what the particular text calls for. So it's not that easy to be authentic, to strip away the social self and really look at what lies beneath, through the characters that we create. It makes us vulnerable (and yet in vulnerability, there is strength). I feel that every book, regardless of how fanciful, contains an element of autobiography, if only because it emanates from the writer's particular take on something. There are embedded assumptions in any perspective, reportage or opinion, this post included. Assumptions can, and should, be changed when more constructive assumptions are able to take their place. I'm not sure that it's possible to have no assumptions, but I'm always open to persuasion.

I think we are nearly all seduced (in one way or another) into small 'p' politics when it comes to self-representation - which I assume all writing is, to some extent. I understand the voice to be an extension of identity beyond the body, which is why silencing people diminishes them. This idea is really well discussed in a classic book written in the nineteen eighties by Elaine Scarry: The Body in Pain: the Making and Unmaking of the World. It's largely about torture and the reduction of the person to the body.  I think it's an important book in really understanding the nature of power and control. I think it obliquely influenced some of the ideas in my first novel.

Getting back to the mentor discussion - I think the good mentor needs to be expert in their field, and available to answer questions, be able to avoid being judgmental, without doing away with the ability to provide constructive feedback (requiring sound judgement).

The group associated with this blog site is a network of authors who read each other's work and discuss various elements of working on a book-length writing project. We are all learning to become mentors to support one another in our work. I would be interested in any ideas on how we can make this work well for us all.