I learned this most vividly thru a book, The Autobiography of Lincoln Steffens. In it he described the method he took on when he went (at behest of Mr. Filenes) to muckrack Boston. He'd seek out the folks on one side (say the police and the politicians) and then the other (say the criminals and the merchants). And look for fissures in those groups, and the differing motivations that drove what they did and what they said about it and each other.
Vividness resonated because, at the time I was reading this tome, I got access to Boston City Hall Records only (probably) because a councilor vouched for me. And he did it because he thought he might get something useful on the mayor. Not that he'd ever be mayor himself, because "There will never by an Italian mayor of Boston." (Citizens who lived in the Athens of America from 1993 to 2014 know he was at wrong about that prediction.)
The councilor's aide, who took me to lunch, described the different factions. When I told him I thought a particular Globe columnist had good stuff he shot back 'he's a whore.' I took this to mean he traded on info and favors and later found corroboration. He told me to read Plunkitt of Tammany Hall, which was all about politics and motivation. Things started to fall into place. I figured out, later on, that a Globe sports writer was getting his rare insider info from a West Coast football team owner, and was carrying his (Al Davis's) ax and settling his (Al's) scores as he wielded his pen.
Readers, also go through a process of information filtering/motivation dissection. The writer should anticipate the reader will wonder why someone in a story has reason to say what they say. What both writers and readers need is continued critical analysis of the motivation of anyone that says anything. Short of going crazy doing it, ask 'why'.
Ok let's stop here. The rest is digression on digresssion.
In New York, I met a famous guy once who was 'grounded' because he had to take care of his child. I said "that's good" - he said 'why do you say that'. Later I found that was a common comment he shot at people he encountered. This was at least one way how he learned very much about humanity. His name was John Lennon.
Now you have to wonder if I am saying this because I want to impress you that I met John Lennon. I have to wonder myself. You may think I made it up. No, I didnt.
I should - come to think of it - realize - a search for motivation - realize that what I am rambling about here is commonly maimed today. A whistle blower that finally spills the goods on Trump is immediately put into a bin by the Fox Press as "a deep state liberal sympathizer looking to undo the 2016 election."
Besides motivation there are cold hard facts, But in Trump's era of lunacy they get heaved over the side. It becomes so easy to fudge actual analysis, impute all motivations, and neglect to pay the band, all to preserve precious bodily fluids. - Jack Vaughan
No comments:
Post a Comment