Tuesday, November 10, 2009

"Ah, take the Cash, and let the Credit go"

A comment with query to a recent entry caused me to acquire a November Journal. I haven't yet perused it cap-a-pie, and I do not come to bury or praise this Caesar. To paraphrase Antony once again, if I seem to love the Journal and Sentinel less it is because I love Christian Science more. I know my reach is extremely limited and my influence even less, but once again I would like to encourage any of "We few, we happy few, we band of brothers [and sisters]" to submit something fresh, something you yourself would like to read, to the periodicals. They need it.

I am a poor one to say it, but the periodicals cannot be abandoned to the bog of mediocrity and "The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune". Every sincere Christian Scientist should have something helpful to say. If one decides to dip a reluctant tootsie into the waters, don't expect the first, or second, or maybe even tenth submission to be accepted. Initial efforts are seldom, if ever, very good, no matter how devotedly we may be attached to each of our precious offspring, especially the first, and how much we may resent in high dudgeon our child's barbaric rejection. Persist, persist.

Do not use what is currently there as a model. The numbing blandness and prolixity of much of the prose can be exasperating, and tired cliches poke up their insolent heads with crabgrass-like persistence. Think freshly. We all reflect the one infinite Mind and are uniquely individual. Share the inspiration you have gleaned from your studies, prayers, and experiences. Don't be discouraged by or resentful of rejection. It won't help, and others may as a result be denied what you have to offer. Ask God for help and protect the help He freely gives. Get a copy of Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. It's short and full of helpful hints. A varied menu of high-quality supplementary reading won't hurt either.

It is off-putting that almost every article, in this Journal at least--Mrs. Eddy's Christian Science Journal--seems aimed at a reader for whom that article will be his or her first exposure to C.S. Why does nearly every article need to revisit ad nauseam elementary concepts? Is every reader seen as a metaphysical toddler in diapers? My recent accusation of CSPS humorlessness was maybe a bit unfair, which the back cover of the November Journal will verify. For the actual or perennial 5-10 year-old it might be a delight, but I wonder if Mrs. Eddy would find this embarrassingly juvenile material acceptable in or on her Journal? One might think it was a kiddie magazine.

The inquiry that gave rise to all this had to do with the three quatrains on page 54. It was stated that the first was really Omar Khayyam, but whose were the other two? The first is indeed from "The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam" [italics on the fritz again] (Edward Fitzgerald translation) with a few small changes. The other two quotations I do not recognize. They are probably original with her and don't seem to me to be particularly noteworthy. She was not, to me at any rate, a particularly fine poet, much as she loved poetry and wrote it all her life. Her borrowings from others are a curious fact, but they are, I believe, the borrowings of an unconsciously sympathetic and retentive heart rather than a dishonest head. The subject has no doubt been well served by many of her vicious detractors. Start with Gill if the subject interests you.

29 comments:

Avid fan said...

You are something else, blogger. Unusually well crafted and I thank you much. Am going to read over again.

Around Boston said...

You've done it again. And so soon. Love it, love it!

London (UK) said...

Simply inspired. A wonderful essay and since I've just skimmed it (this was enough to see how well-written it is) so am going to go back and ponder.

L. R. said...

Re: the current crop of offerings in the periodicals, too, too true.
Couldn't agree with you more. Let's hear it for freshness!

Impressed said...

You are a teacher of creative writing. I just know you are. An excellent blog post and one many CS's should read.
I thank you for taking your time to do this.

Hawaii greetings said...

Whether or not the author of this blog is a creative writer teacher, he or she certainly could be. Talk about you fresh writing!

Keep blogging said...

You rock! If only the periodicals had stuff like you put out, there'd be a lot more of us reading them.

Florida CS said...

Excellent. And glad you mentioned asking God for help with whatever one writes, and most important, protecting it!
Helpful essay here.

Susan said...

Just love the way you think and write. Nothing else like this on the CS landscape for sure. Found quite a lot in this one that needs a second or third look, to get the full import.
Thanks blogger.

Patrick said...

You are so learned and thorough in the way you present your blog posts. Really appreciate your bringing your talents to bear on Christian Science issues.

Best from Canada said...

I feel we're very blessed to have you surveying the CS scene and giving us your extremely intelligent perceptions of how things could be more in line with what our dear Leader would want her periodicals to be. Would she ever want metaphysics watered down?!!

Thank you much said...

So well written, as yours always are. Like what you bring out about infinite Mind being the source of unlimited inspiration/originality--if we just avail ourselves of this mighty truth. No excuse for ho-hum thinking or writing for us CS's, is my view of things.

practitioner, Chicago said...

Love this whole essay, from the arresting title you've given it, to the hints to help budding (or experienced) writers, to the solid metaphysics you've presented.
Good job!

Dallas, TX said...

As I read through this very nice essay, well, more than that actually, but couldn't help thinking about something S&H brings out, that we may think we're the authors of something but that Diety is. As we realize this more clearly, I feel our writing will get better and better, certainly fresh and original.

Carolyn said...

I'm finding your latest postings quite helpful to me in my desire to dig deeper into divine Science, and for this, I thank you.

Cambridge said...

Dear Writer,
Couldn't agree with you heartily that our periodicals do need every inspired, fresh article they can get. There is no reason why what Mary Baker Eddy left us should not be of the highest possible quality.

St. Louis, (P. W.) said...

"The Broken Net" is my most favorite blog on Christian Science, and just wanted you to know how much I'm being helped by what you are sharing with your readers.

God bless you, blogger said...

A most interesting and informative offering you've given us. Filled with worthwhile tips on how to express one's thoughts better and do for CS what it should be receiving from earnest adherents.

West Coast fan said...

Having gone back and read a ton of your blog essays, I must say how impressed I am with your sturdiness in keeping in the game, and consistently posting first-rate work.
Look foward to many more from your inspired, capable pen.

UK regular said...

There may be those checking out your website who say, there this writer goes again, criticizing Boston. But I think what you've said here is spot on, and it needs to be honestly expressed.
Do continue your splendid work.

All the best to you said...

A really well thought out and presented piece, one I enjoyed thoroughly reading just now. Appreciate your using your intelligence and talent to address important topics concerning our beloved Cause.

Phoenix, AZ said...

Your titles would draw readers in, even if the content were not worth purusing. Which it certainly is.
Good writing consistently.

An appreciative fan said...

Hello, folks. This blog is beautiful and articulate--actually much more than articulate. But let's not lose sight of a couple of facts. The periodicals are in the state they're currently in for a number of reasons. First it's obviously a top-down directed policy to water down the articles to "attract newcomers." Also, it's obvious that over the years, those who would oppose Board decisions have been purged. Not to mention Boston is notorious for either outright re-writing submissions or requiring changes to totally change the material to where the original author doesn't recognize the piece. I've known people who refused to allow the revised work to be published because it didn't resemble what they had originally intended. Finally, does anyone really think in view of the above that anyone who has openly dared to criticize the policies would be allowed to have their work published? It would either be outright rejected or simply ignored.
But, hey, again a fine post as always blogger.

Jeannie said...

Interesting, and right-on, comment previous to this one. I actually know first-hand of someone who sent in an article with a fine healing. It was butchered so, the friend went to bat for what he had originally submitted. Editors persisted in what they had changed. The friend said, "But it was MY healing!" If this doesn't tell you everything you need to know. Don't send your work to them!!

A real Christian Scientist said...

Excellent essay, this. While we're at it, let me tell you about my experience with Journal/Sentinel and battling editorial meddling. Having been published through the years, what finallly did it for me was having an article proof sent to me with the Christian Science so made pablum that I said, you can't publish this under my name. I had put up with this before, thinking, well if any truth gets out there, it may help someone. But this was a bridge too far. Could not stand behind what they had done. Almost evil, in my view, to put something like that in our Leader's church organ. So, that tore it for me, and I imagine I'm not the only one who said, enough is enough.

No name, as yet said...

Among the benefits to your readers who follow your blog is the practical help they get in studying CS. And this particular posting I should think will encourage many, make them feel, why I'm not alone in the way I've been treated by higher-ups. There are probably more of us out here than anyone would like to think.

Faithful viewer said...

Keep telling it like it is, brother (or sister, as the case may be.)
We love your blog out here!

Thanks (Jack R.) said...

Nice entry, no actually superior entry. So enjoy seeing good writing. Rare among CS's.

Seeker of Truth in DE said...

What the comments above reveal is that good writing is not rare; rather bad editing is in charge of it. Nonetheless, let me say that the caliber of this blog is indeed lofty, but what makes it reach those heights is the prayer inspiring the writing, as our beloved KJV and Science and Health well demonstrate. A proper appreciation for those two books, as well as an understanding of what produced their beauty was conveyed to me by two experienced Christian Scientists who were both writers and poets. These two men were also both First Readers and having heard them both read, I would add that such prayer, inspiration and humility properly inspires the desk, as well.