X-Warning: mitvma.mit.edu: Host PACIFIC-CARRIER-ANNEX.MIT.EDU claimed to be MIT.EDU X-Sender: mbarker@po8.mit.edu (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1 Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 00:13:38 -0400 Reply-To: "Whatever you wish...do so to them" Sender: WRITERS From: "Whatever you wish...do so to them" Subject: [WRITERS] EXERCISE: and then... we'll vote To: WRITERS@mitvma.mit.edu [in case you've missed it, today -- very soon at least -- Friday August 14 at midnight we will stop accepting entries in our August contest. If you still want to enter, get your Web browser over to http://web.mit.edu/mbarker/www/summer98/august.html, check out the rules, rhymerhymerhyme and send your entry to corbett@axa.slu.edu...vite, vite!] What would you like to see next? I've got a question. Sitting here at my desk I can see a variety of books that I might use to do a series of exercises. There are books on verbal self-defense, including "How to Disagree without Being Disagreeable." There's "Metaphors We Live by." There are management books, psychology books, "Emotionally Intelligence", and enneagrams... There is also a slew of writing books including: The Writing Workshop? Writing the Natural Way? The Writers Journey? Writing with Power? Theme and Strategy? Scene and Structure? Characters and Viewpoint? Creating Characters: How to Build Story People? several books on writing mysteries some horror books some science fiction a dash of linguistics Self Editing for Fiction Writers? Or Revision? Negotiation? (How did that get in there?) Personally, I'm leaning towards alternating bits from "How to Disagree without Being Disagreeable" with something like The Writers Journey or Writing the Natural Way. I suppose I could even look at something like Word Weaving or Finding What You Didn't Lose and try to say something about poetry... However, I thought I would ask for your ideas. Note that I am not asking you to write the exercises or to do them publicly, I just wonder if there is something in this list of possibilities that you would really like to see. Since I am about 800 messages behind (sigh...) if you do have some specific suggestions for me, please send me (mbarker@mit.edu) a copy. That will help make sure that I see your ideas. A kind of an exercise: just as an example, From "How to Disagree without Being Disagreeable" by Suzette Haden Elgin, Ph.D., ISBN 0-471-15701-8 page 45: "Chronic users of hostile language fall into three general categories: Type 1 Those who are unaware that in other method for handling disagreement exists. Type 2 Those for whom verbal hostility fills a strong personal need for excitement that they don't know how to fill adequately in other ways. Type 3 Those for whom verbal hostility fills a strong personal need for human attention that they don't know how to fill adequately in other ways. In all these cases, the basic problem isn't wickedness; the most negative term we can reasonably use is ignorance. Almost always, the problem is a lack of awareness of the communication resources that are available -- a lack of essential information." (P. 52) "When someone abuses you with language and you take it for granted that their motive is to hurt you, it's natural for you to react with anger and pain and perhaps fear. Trying to smother your anger and pretend a calm you don't feel only turns the negative emotion inward and makes it fester. Pretending won't work; forcing yourself to be courteous through a seething rage won't work. In order to re-act to such language with the necessary detachment to respond effectively, you have to understand what's really going on: These people aren't out to hurt you. Either they are ignorant of any other method for handling disagreement, or they use hostile language to fill personal needs for excitement and/or human attention and know no other way to satisfy those needs adequately. Even those who consider conversational combat a sport are only looking for a sparring partner; the only way they know to find one is to attack you so that you'll counterattack and join them in the game. Knowing this won't make the language coming at you any less abusive. You won't like it any better than you ever did. However, you won't become hurt or angry, and you'll stay in control of your emotions. It will change your reaction to the language, save you from an emotional hijacking, and give you the ability to stop and ask yourself three essential questions and try to answer them: 1. What is the hostile speaker's motivation for talking to me this way? 2. What do I actually disagree with in this case? That is: do I disagree with the speaker's claims, do I think the speaker's facts are wrong, do I object only to the tone the speaker is using, or is it something else? 3. What is the most effective way for me to respond? Dr. Elgin suggests two different approaches to controlling your reaction and achieving detachment in the face of verbal hostility. The first one is called Taking out the Garbage. Step 1. After the hostile episode is over, sit down and write a letter to the other person. Put in every invective, every angry hateful thing that you wish you had said, all the toxic utterances -- everything. If you want to grind your pencil into the paper, do it! Step 2. Put the letter away in a safe place for at least 24 hours. Step 3. Take the letter out and read it. Remember that this is your reaction to someone who is uninformed and inept. Step 4. Destroy the letter. (P. 54) "Writing it down lets you take out the linguistic garbage so that you can forget about it, without having shoved it under anyone else's nose." Your exercise is fairly simple. Pick an episode that you have trouble dealing with or have had trouble dealing with in the past. Take out the garbage -- write your poison pen letter, put it away, then re-read it and throw it away. Try to figure out whether the person you're dealing with doesn't know any other way of handling disagreement, doesn't know how to fill their need for excitement in any other way, or doesn't know how to fill a need for human attention any other way. Look at the three questions that Dr. Elgin suggests we try to answer. This exercise probably won't produce anything that you want to post to writers. However, if we all try it, we may find that there are things that won't be posted to writers -- and we won't miss them... tink