Over the past several years, through classes, workshops, readings, etc., I believe I’ve been able to write in a more minimalist style while learning which simply-put imagery adds necessary grounding to story. Still learning, but I’m nearer the goal.
However, in personal writing–versus creative–I’ve just had to send a full page letter to my lawyer through the critical eyes of my dearest friend. She sent it back compressed into two short paragraphs. She also had more emotional outrage and determination within the simplicity of facts that I was amazed. With just a few tweaks here and there, I sent it out (after struggling with it for a week and a half) and feel good about it.
As an excellent writer herself, though with no intentions of taking writing seriously, Nancy and I were able to discuss the changes and dissect them to the point of my agreement as to what was necessary and what was not. I’ve been intimidated by the seeming lack of concern and understanding by everyone involved in this–with the exception of the judge, who doesn’t know what’s going on–and tend to restate the same things over again. Even the legal points which seem to be ignored according to convenience.
While I may have good reason to doubt my point’s getting across in this situation, what this exercise has taught me is to have more faith in my readers when writing fiction. If they don’t exactly get the story I believe I’m telling them but see it differently–as long as it is enjoyable or thought-provoking, it doesn’t matter. Unfortunately, this does but shouldn’t hold true in legal debate.
Lessons learned from one part of life are well-used in other areas.