On
Writing the Truth
Ryan
Eckes
I
just re-read Bertolt
Brecht’s essay “Writing the Truth: Five Difficulties” (1935), which is
about writing under fascism. When I first read it, during Occupy Wall Street, I
thought “this is so relevant to our time.” Reading it five years later, after
the 2016 US presidential election, I thought “this is so relevant to our time.”
You can read a PDF online here. Brecht’s five difficulties are:
1
– The Courage to Write the Truth
2
– The Keenness to Recognize the Truth
3
– The Skill to Manipulate the Truth as a Weapon
4
– The Judgment to Select Those in Whose Hands the Truth Will Be Effective
5
– The Cunning to Spread the Truth Among the Many
For
Brecht, truth can be a weapon if a piece of writing illustrates the causes of
barbarous conditions. He asks, “how can anyone tell the truth about Fascism,
unless he is willing to speak out about capitalism, which brings it forth?” His
description of those who aren’t willing calls to mind American liberals who
cling uncritically to the Democratic Party: “Those who are against Fascism
without being against capitalism, who lament over the barbarism that comes out
of barbarism, are like people who wish to eat their veal without slaughtering
the calf.” Yes.
In
the US, where the working class has no voice in government, the Democratic
Party continues to act as a roadblock to social justice. Most large unions
forfeit their power to this party; their leaders rarely even mention the word
“capitalism”, the very thing that divides and crushes us. Instead, since the
election, we hear messages like “stop the normalization of hate”, as if hate
hasn’t been normal for the entire brutal existence of the country, as if racism
hasn’t been sustained by capitalism. I think writers need to undermine
capitalist narratives peddled by liberal institutions however we can. It’s not
enough to simply counter right-wing narratives. We need to show the relations
between these narratives. Class war is always made invisible. Wars on women, on
people of color, on LGBTQ people are always made invisible. So let’s make it
visible. I imagine poets, journalists, essayists, fiction writers contributing
to an infrastructure of disobedience and solidarity that people are already
building.
Because
we live in a media-saturated world, Brecht’s 4th and 5th
difficulties strike me as most difficult right now—how best to disseminate the
truth? Brecht points out an obvious problem: “The writer thinks: I have spoken
and those who wish to hear will hear me. In reality he has spoken and those who
are able to pay hear him.” Where does our writing exist? In journals? in
newspapers? on buses? on walls? on sidewalks? in cafes? in workplaces? in
people’s mouths? in people’s ears? What specific audiences do we have in mind,
and why?
Vijay
Prashad, in an interview with Mark Nowak, defines “socialist writing” as
that which comes from listening and interacting with people who are ultimately
your audience but not necessarily your customers. Citing Antonio Gramsci,
Prashad suggests that socialist writing elaborates on the “common sense” of a
people and produces continued conversation and interaction. This model
partially addresses the difficulty of spreading the truth. As a poet, I like
the idea, and to poets who are used to writing within a community, this idea might
sound obvious. But like everyone else, poets’ social circles are often
determined by education, class, race. The severe stratification and
compartmentalization of society—a society in which our individual identities
are sold to us endlessly—makes spreading the truth that much more difficult.
We
should work to make sure our writing isn’t always funneled to predictable
venues. The internet isn’t as democratizing as we may think, and we cannot rely
on its stability and accessibility. We can be imaginative with print and
performance. We can be helping to construct a public, feeding networks of
solidarity.
Beyond
telling the truth, writers have to keep inventing a world we want to see. And
we have to keep attempting to live it, especially in the face of despair.
Prashad explains why this is so critical:
“One of the things that has become clear to me
is that once human beings surrender to the present, the idea of the future
wears thin. There is only a present. The present stretches on into infinity.
When we say tomorrow, we mean only tomorrow in time, but not in epochal terms.
Tomorrow will look like today. The sensation of an endless present greets us
each day. Change is never going to come.
That feeling — of futility — is the greatest
detriment to the socialist imagination. Socialist writing, to my mind, has to
help break that fatalism and create what Arundhati
Roy calls ‘a new imagination’ — an imagination of a different kind of
world, with different priorities and different sensibilities.”
Practicing
this new imagination is necessary to help each other continually overcome the
difficulties that Brecht points out, difficulties which won’t disappear.
Lately
I’ve also been listening to James Baldwin’s
speech “The Artist’s Struggle for Integrity” (1963), which deepens the
urgency to identify and articulate the truth. After expressing his distrust of
words such as “integrity” and “courage” for their imprecision, Baldwin states
that our words are
“attempts made by us all to get to something
which is real and which lives behind the words. Whether I like it or not, for
example, and no matter what I call myself, I suppose the only word for me, when
the chips are down, is that I am an artist. There is such a thing . . . The
terrible thing is that the reality behind these words depends ultimately on
what the human being (meaning every single one of us) believes to be real. The
terrible thing is that the reality behind all these words depends on choices
one has got to make, for ever and ever and ever, every day.”
I
recommend listening to the whole thing.
Ryan Eckes is a poet who lives in South Philadelphia.
His books include Valu-Plus and Old
News (Furniture Press 2014, 2011). You can read
some of his poems in Tripwire, The Brooklyn Rail, Slow Poetry in America Newsletter,
Supplement, Public Pool, Whirlwind and on his blog. He is the recipient of a 2016 Pew Fellowship in
the Arts.
Well said, Ryan. Thanks. You give me hope.
ReplyDelete