I have always liked to use some musical links in my writing. Many of my writings deal with songs that have inspired me over the years. (Where Have All My Young Friends Gone?) A few years ago, I started wondering what I could learn from music that might infuse my writing with more elegance and passion. I tried my hand at a “musical composition.” I am not sure that it came out very well but if you are interested, you can read my piece at: ON WRITING, MUSIC, CHOREOGRAPHY, THE SEASONS AND LOVE.
Recently, in our writing class, I gave my students the assignment to come up with a 100 word writing piece that used some elements of music in their writing or that writes about the use of music in writing. It was an odd assignment made more difficult because my instructions were pretty vague. The following week students brought in their writings and shared them in class.
The discussion that accompanied our readings was very helpful. Wilma, a writer in the class, found a good article that illustrated very well what I had been trying to say and do in terms of using music to provide creativity or at least another perspective to our writing. I am adding links to Wilma’s article which was in Medium and another that I found while perusing Medium.
The first article is by Mark Benis and is titled: “Is Writing Stories so Different from Writing Music?”
The second article is by David W. Berner and is titled: “Writing is Like Music.”
I hope you will find these articles interesting and that they will perhaps inspire some use of these ideas in your own writings.
Very few things emerge that make good signs of the times. Rising costs and rising taxes have been true forever. War, famine, and pestilence were frequent during the days of the Pharaohs and are still with us today. Disease kills millions yearly and people do not really seem any less or more happier than in days gone by. Is life easier or more difficult today? You would probably notice that it depended on who you asked.
I have read at least a dozen books and heard a different theory each month on why Trump was elected. From racism, to sexism, to xenophobia, to white supremacy, to rural alienation, to immigration, to abortion, to anti-immigration, to income gaps, to blue collar woes, to anti-globalism, to Christianity, to government overreach, to tax issues, to wage gaps, to inflation, to isolationism, to lack of American jobs, to anti-education, each one of these and several more have been promoted as the “reason” for Trumps support.
Next, let us establish a lethality of weapons. I will put it thus: fists are not as lethal as brass knuckles. Brass knuckles are not as lethal as clubs. Clubs are not as lethal as knives. Knives are not as lethal as guns. Handguns are not as lethal as rifles. The range of lethality that I have noted is “most” often true but there are always exceptions. Thus, I will say again, the lethality of the potential weapons structure I have described is most often the case but not always.
This cycle explains quite well what happens in many cases of gun violence or other types of violent outburst. In phase two, tensions are building up. This could be from a variety of different causes. It might be strains from the work place or strains from home relationships with family and children. The strains are often cumulative particularly with people who may lack the ability or means to discharge their stress. The stress builds up until the individual finally explodes. The explosion could be in words or actions. Actions might involve throwing things, punching things, hitting things or various levels of assault against things or people using a wide range of weapons.
Phase three is the incident itself. A trigger is needed to set the individual off. Perhaps the individual gets fired or their spouse asks for a divorce. Maybe they have a fight with a neighbor, or a car cuts them off at an intersection. When the trigger occurs, the individual explodes. The explosion could involve a violent attack that might go from simple threats or curses all the way to shooting someone. The availability of weapons will play a major role in the level of violence. This is one reason why a “waiting period” for purchasing a firearm makes a lot of sense. In two recent mass shootings, there was no waiting period for the purchase of a high-powered rifle and the individuals engaged in shooting massacres within a week of buying their rifles.
Many anti-gun control people push the solution that more mental health is needed. The problem with this solution is that anger and angry outbursts are as normal in the population as mom, God, and apple pie. There is no way to treat all the people in America who might lose their temper on a given day. There is no way to tell when or where these outbursts will take place. Therapy for “normal” people is not on the radar. Make no mistake, your best friend, your neighbor, your cousin just might “lose” it tomorrow and go on some type of violent jag that results in death for someone else. It happens all the time. The papers are full of reports of people who lose it and end up killing their loved ones and themselves.
The other solution is to reduce the availability or the lethality of guns in society. This solution makes the most sense. We can somewhat reduce the availability of weapons through background checks, waiting periods, age restrictions, gun training, and reducing the ability to carry a gun in public. We must get rid of these ridiculous concealed carry laws. It should be illegal to carry a gun in public concealed or otherwise unless you have a permit with a valid reason for why you need to carry a gun.
We can reduce the lethality of guns by limiting clip capacities and by eliminating rifles that were designed for military purposes and not hunting. Why anyone would need a rifle with more than a three round capacity is beyond me. Rifles should be for hunting or target shooting and nothing else. Any game that you are hunting will be gone long before you can chamber and fire your third round. A .223 caliber was first designed for the military in Vietnam. I had to qualify on an M-16 in 1965 when they were first issued. It was like shooting a bb gun. Easy to shoot with a round that was designed to wound and not kill. They said this would take two or more people out of the war instead of just one dead body. The individual shot by a .223 would be severely wounded and would need someone to take him back to a medic or out of the war zone. Read any of the gun magazines today and it looks like they are selling guns and accessories to someone who is going to war. Helmets, bullet proof vests, high-capacity magazines, laser sights and guns more fit for killing humans than hunting are touted and readily available.
Aging Capriciously 