Horse Thieves
You abuse me for objectivity, calling it indifference to good and evil, lack of ideals and ideas, and so on. You would have me, when I describe horse-thieves, say: "Stealing horses is an evil." But that has been known for ages without my saying so. Let the jury judge them; it's my job simply to show what sort of people they are. I write: You are dealing with horse-thieves, so let me tell you that they are not beggars but well-fed people, that they are people of a special cult, and that horse-stealing is not simply theft but a passion. Of course it would be pleasant to combine art with a sermon, but for me personally it is extremely difficult and almost impossible, owing to the condition of the technique. You see, to depict horse-thieves in seven hundred lines I must all the time speak and think in their tone and feel in their spirit, otherwise, if I introduce subjectivity, the image becomes blurred and the story will not be as compact as all short stories ought to be. When I write, I reckon entirely upon the reader to add for himself the subjective elements that are lacking in the story.
Anton Chekhov
THAT is such a good quote!
It really is!
Why are you going to complain about it?
You think I’m going to complain?
Come on. Clearly you had a thought and you’re a man and this makes you really proud of yourself and you feel like everyone needs to know.
That’s pretty apt. Okay look. For years, I really loved the sense of principled objectivity Chekhov described above. It was an approach I admired in the media and in fiction, and one I tried to follow.
But then I began to question the very nature of objectivity.
“The very nature of objectivity?” That sounds smart.
Yeah, it happened when I saw this slogan for Fox News…
Never mind.
…and it was “We Report, You Decide.” Every cable news network followed some variation of this messaging, in their slogans or mission statements, and I found it deeply problematic.
THAT’S what you found problematic about Fox News?
Well, among other things. For one, it could easily be effectively argued against.
For another, its lazy journalism.
BURN. But what do you mean?
At its worst, particularly with cable news, where stories aren’t investigated as much as reported, objectivity refuses to press for answers, and instead waits for answers to be given. It allows the powerful to remain unvetted. It’s an approach that has failed in preventing abuse. And, more importantly to the industry, this neutered approach has failed commercially.
It seems like, commercially, the media is dying from a thousand cuts.
This cut is particularly close to the heart. Objectivity has been conflated to passivity. I would prefer this approach to those in power from our journalists and, outside of Rachel Scott, it’s not one we often see. If we did, maybe we’d learn prior to a crucial debate that a sitting President is perhaps incapable of performing his duties for another four years. Or we wouldn’t allow a lying liar to continue lying his lying lies as he runs back to the White House.
Of course, it could be the case that our political journalists simply aren’t up to the task of investigation. Which makes me think of someone’s argument (I think it was Sarah Weinman, but I might be wrong) that we don’t need political journalists investigating politicians like Trump, but criminal ones.
But what does any of this have to do with writing?
With journalism, this approach is lazy. With writing, it’s impotent.
In my own writing, I’ve always sought to make my characters morally complex…except one. In every book, I have a character whose actions I don’t care to excuse. In The Unrepentant, it was Barnes, a prominent sex trafficker; in They’re Gone, it was Scott Temple, a corrupt District Attorney. And in No Home for Killers, Victor Winters was a force of evil, whose machinations echoed into When She Left. I defined those characters as best as I could, gave them backstories and sought to make them feel real, but never sympathetic. There are criminals in the world I don’t have sympathy for, or want to particularly empathize with.
I think I could emphatically describe a morally conflicted individual who chooses to kill children.
I also think it’s an abdication of personal responsibility if I do.
Doesn’t that choice make for a lesser novel?
Not at all. In fact, this month I have a review of Attica Locke’s new novel, Guide Me Home, coming out in the Washington Post. It’s a novel that deals with the ramifications of the Trump presidency within law enforcement, in particular, the allowance of bigotry. Her book is unflinching and brave and character-based and a worthy addition to her Edgar-winning, bestselling trilogy. The characters are empathetic, but there’s no paternalistic notion to protect the audience, and the story is fearless and necessary.
I suppose. But it seems…disrepectful to name names. What’s the media supposed to do? Call a presidential candidate a liar when they lie? Hold people directly accountable for their actions?
It would be lovely if we had a confrontational media, one that demanded candidates and elected official answer to them on a regular basis. Not when those officials down a Five Hour Energy and rush the podium, or when they decide to have a very structured debate. Treat them like the NABJ, or like Hamilton Nolan suggested above. This should be something we demand of our media, and make our elected officials promise when they’re campaigning (any politician will agree to anything when they’re campaigning, seriously, try it).
And, as writers, we should be just as relentless. Objectivity should never stand in for cowardice. Locke went after and captured a certain truth, and her work is better for it. Is it an objective view of Trump? That’s arguable. But it is an honest one, and that’s not.
That seems rude.
Look, even Chekhov didn’t shy away from calling criminals “horse thieves.” We only have so many words and chances we’re given in this life. Make them count. Make them fearless. Do your job.
EA
I first came across Elle Marr when I saw the haunting cover of her Kirkus-starred novel, Lies We Bury. I read that book in a quick weekend and started following her across all her social media platforms, and then keeping an eye on her career. She writes the kind of books I like to read (and write) - character-driven, but with the pace of a brisk thriller. I’m so excited about her newest novel, Your Dark Secrets, and had to invite her to play a game of Kiss, Marry, Kill below:
Kiss: Connor Windell
Definitely a kiss for one of my main characters, Connor. He probably wouldn't accept it, however, since he's hellbent on regaining a sense of integrity and he's madly (secretly, even to him) in love with another woman. As a disgraced private investigator, who's been banished from Los Angeles to the bowels of Las Vegas, Connor has a few chips on his shoulder and not nearly enough on the craps table to change his luck.
Marry: Phinneas Redwood
Sure, as CEO of a major pharma company that has committed egregious public act after profit-hungry scheme, Phinneas might not seem like the ideal candidate for a partner. Still, after several false starts at redemptive arcs, Phinneas is determined to exchange addiction for stability, to finally give himself the happy ending he deserves and which the world has often denied him.
Kill: Addison Stern
She's been named LA's Top PR Executive for two years running, but when several of her high-profile clients--the elite's worst--turn up dead, Addison is relegated to babysitting overseas actors. Ostracized and alone while fighting her own demons, Addison turns to the only person she's ever semi-trusted: her ex-boyfriend Connor, whom she would rather kick across the San Andreas fault line, to help her solve the murders surrounding her. And although I wouldn't personally kill Addison, I know a dozen other Hollywood publicists, political pundits whose careers were derailed, and would-be kings whose secret lives were exposed in the name of promoting one of Addison's annointed would have a different answer.
Thank you, Elle! To learn more about Your Dark Secrets, click HERE.
It's giveaway time! The winner of Elle Marr’s latest is:
book_____ly@_____.com
Congrats, and I'll send you an email soon!
Remember that event at Yorktown Library I was all excited about with LynDee Walker? My dog ended up getting sick and I had to cancel, but the library was nice enough to reschedule us for October 12. More to come as we get closer to the date!