When I worked as a store manager for Borders back in the
mid-90s I was called on to help write, and then host a customer-service
training video. The idea was to show booksellers how to help customers in a
variety of scenarios, some of them difficult, and to "give them the
words" to handle things successfully.
Giving people the words is of immeasurable help. Have you ever
discussed—with a trusted friend or associate—a difficult situation you're about
to face, and that person puts just the right spin on it, and you found yourself
saying, "Oh, thanks! That's just what I'll say." I sure have.
So I was delighted to help write the script. Having managed
people for years, and witnessed some terrible choices and behavior along with
the good (and been the one to clean up the mess afterward), I made sure to include a common scenario where the bookseller says
and does the wrong things. Then I
wrote a scene where the bookseller does it right. My reason for putting in a
negative example was so that front-line staff would understand that certain
words and actions a) are in fact rude; and b) never achieve the result you
want. When you're standing in front of a mirror, it's hard to be in denial
about what you see.
But the human resources dept. manager, upon reviewing the script,
cut the negative example. I believe the HR people had the fear that showing a
negative example would somehow encourage negative behavior, which made no sense
to me. But I was certain the scene would prompt nervous laughter and give
employees insight they couldn't get otherwise. I lobbied my case, but lost that
one. We shot the video, and it was a good one, but it could have been better,
funnier, and more effective.
These days when I write articles or teach workshops on how
to write well,
I include negative examples where appropriate. Simply
saying, "Do it this way," is of limited value unless you show how
crappy a result you get if you do it that
way. The meta thing is that a student doesn't necessarily know which elements
of "doing it the right way" are the important ones. I always remember,
as a young reader, consuming Dan Keyes's innovative novel Flowers for Algernon and being struck by the scene where the
mentally impaired Charlie Gordon is told to watch a baker make rolls so he can
then do it. Watching, he has no idea if the position of the baker's elbows as
he rolls the dough is as important as the recipe itself, or what. He cannot
generalize or differentiate at all. He needs more context.
If you let students examine a suboptimal example, then
present a worthy one, you have provided a huge amount of context, and their
understanding and ability to translate the material to their own experience
goes up by a factor of at least three. (Where did that math come from, you ask?
Just trust me.)
I've been thinking about this while putting together a
reading list for an upcoming novel-writing workshop. There is no perfect novel,
no flawless novel out there (because of course art is subjective in the first
place). Being able to point out and discuss the negatives in an
acknowledged masterwork is freeing and instructive, and it's just a bunch of
fun too.
[Postscript: I just Googled Dan Keyes and found he died a few days ago. RIP to somebody who gave a wonderful gift of art to this world.]
What works for you as a learner? Click
below where it says, 'No Comments,' or '2 Comments,' or whatever.
If you'd like to receive my weekly love letter to writing
automatically as an email, look to the right, above my bio, and subscribe
there. Thanks for looking in.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Tell us your thoughts! You know you want to.