The Despairing Man

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

I was reading a book tonight and this idea occurred to me.  I wanted to explore it, and I thought, "What better way than in a short story?" So, here it is, everyone: my first short story.


The Despairing Man

I had not known the man long; in fact, it couldn’t have been more than a month since Fate first caused our paths to cross.  But then, he was not the sort that required a long acquaintance.  From the very start, it was clear that he was a singular person, one so unique and so different from the rest of the world that it hardly seemed possible he was the same species as everyone else.  In a world where greed was not only accepted but sometimes seemed to be the driving force behind society, this man existed as the purest form of altruism I could imagine.

He was so friendly, so kind, so caring.  It was as though he didn’t even realize he had needs at all; only the problems of others were important.  He always worked overtime, adding as much value to society as possible while gratefully received the extra compensation he was entitled.  And yet, despite that, he didn’t lead a rich life.  His clothes were second-hand, his car was old and probably nearing the end of its life, and the meals I saw him eat could only be generously described as Spartan.

Curiosity soon got the better of me, but inquiries directed at both him and our coworkers barely brought me closer to unlocking the secret.  Did he have a family to care for? No, none that anyone knew.  Was he investing all the money in order to grow wealthy in the long run? It wasn’t likely.  Was he a slave to some crippling addiction that drained his resources? Of course not; or rather, no one thought it was even remotely possible.  I had to agree with them.

It seemed that the man donated all of his money to charities and spent his very little free time helping the less fortunate.  He was a modern day urban monk, living sparingly so that others might benefit.  If there was any fault in him, it was well beneath our radar.  Some tried to feel insulted at his “holier than thou” attitude, but it just wasn’t present.  He was content to be charitable, no matter how it affected him, and no matter what anyone thought.

Knowing all this, I’m sure you can imagine the confusion that overcame me when I found him sobbing at his desk late one Tuesday night.  I was working late because I had to; he was doing so because it was routine.  There was no one else in the building.  My immediate desire to help him was equal parts curiosity, concern, and knowledge that he would’ve done the same for me.  I hesitantly cleared my throat, but he took no notice.  Finally, I spoke.

“What’s wrong?”

The man didn’t lift his head, and his reply was appropriately muffled.  “It’s all wrong! It’s pointless!”

Too vague.  “What is?” I pressed.

“I’m a slave.  There’s no way around it.  I don’t control my actions.  I’m helpless!”

“I’m sorry?” I questioned, hoping for elaboration.  Some part of me hoped he wouldn’t launch into a conversation about free will; I had never found such talk interesting, and honestly, my life seemed easier if I didn’t worry about it.  Besides, if those kinds of concerns were enough to bring this vibrant man to such complete despair, I want nothing to do with them.

The man finally raised his head.  “Nothing I’ve ever done has had any meaning.  I can’t escape it; I’m self-centered, and I only look out for myself.  I only care about myself.  And that will never change.”  His voice shook with regret.

Was this really the same man who had been so benevolent all this time? Had he gone crazy? How could he not see (or remember?) the nature of his own actions? I decided to push the issue.

“If there’s anything I know about you, it’s that you’re the most selfless person I’ve ever come across.  I know you’ve helped a great many people.  What could be selfish about that?”

“But I don’t do it for them!” the man wailed.  “I never have.  This was never about helping people.  This was about me and what I wanted.”

“I don’t understand.”

The chair squeaked as its occupant shifted his position to face me.  “As a child, all I knew to do was what others told me.  Parents, teachers, pastors…I had no control.  I could only obey.  I became sick of it, and I looked forward to growing older and doing what I wanted.”

“Sure, but that describes any childhood,” I said thoughtlessly.  I wanted the words back as soon as I spoke them, but luckily the man didn’t seem to notice.

“In my teenage years, and later as a young adult, I finally had the freedom I longed for.  I did what I wanted, when I wanted.  It wasn’t until later that I realized my actions weren’t truly my own.  Or rather, I suppose, that they were too much my own.”

I remained silent this time, confident that he would continue without a prompt.  He didn’t disappoint.

“Everything I did, I did for myself.  I felt independent because others no longer influenced my choices, but beneath it all, I was just fulfilling animal instincts.  If I played sports, it was to foster a feeling of accomplishment.  If I watched movies, it was to provide myself with entertainment.  If I went out with friends, it was to experience companionship.  I wanted control, but I was simply a slave to my own humanity.  And choices aren’t truly free will if they’re simply fulfilling needs.”

“You didn’t want to be happy?”

“I wanted freedom.  Happiness is an emotion, and trying to generate it only leads to a dependence on it.”

What a strange way of looking at things.  I tilted my head slightly, trying to get a handle on the man who didn’t want happiness.

“So what’s the answer? How do you avoid happiness? Hurting others? Hurting yourself? That doesn’t seem right.”

“It’s not.  Hurting others brings about retribution, and in the worst case, the law.  That would be nothing more than a secession of the control that I desire.  Hurting myself still puts the focus on me, and as long my actions are centered around myself, I’m no better off than when I started.”

“What’s left? You won’t allow yourself to help or hurt yourself.  Are randomness and chaos really all that remain?”

The man almost smiled.  “Sometimes it felt like it.  Could the only truly free actions be the pointless ones, the ones done purely for the sake of doing them and nothing else? Almost.  But there’s one final component.”

I finally began to see where he was going with all of this.  The pieces of his talk were falling into place, and I made a bold guess at what the last one was.

“The actions need to be directed outward.”

“I have to act in a way that affects others, not myself, and I can’t do it in a way that will hurt them.  There’s no middle ground, and all that’s left is the charity that’s made up my recent life.  That’s the only way to truly act freely.”  His expression became dark again.  “At least, that’s what I thought until today.”

“What changed?”

“I like this life! I like what I’m doing.  I feel fulfilled when I see that I’ve helped others.  I feel good when they feel good.  And all that means is that I’m doing this for myself, not them.  I’m selfish.”  He buried his head in his arms once more.

I was speechless.  What could be said to the man who felt poisoned by joy? Silence reigned for at least a minute, maybe more, before I understood the answer.  I had no idea where it came from, but as I considered it, nothing seemed like it could be any truer than what I had just realized.  I smiled.

“You’re not giving up your free will,” I stated confidently.  “You’ve just discovered an odd truth about it that so many people don’t and will never understand.”

“What do you mean?” His eyes searched mine, and I couldn’t tell if it was confusion or hope that fueled his expression.

“Free will is a powerful thing, and it’s that very power that makes us desire it so much.  People have been using it to seek happiness for as long as such a concept existed.  But the problem is that, as you said, happiness is simply an emotion.  People may make themselves happy, but it won’t last.  They’re forced to keep driving ahead, doing what they can to realize what truly is an animal instinct.”

Disappointment began to grow in the man’s eyes, but I wasn’t finished yet.

“There’s more, though!” I exclaimed.  “If you freely give up tending to your own desires, you’ll find something deeper, something that can’t be gotten any other way.  You know what it is.  It’s fulfillment.  It’s the one thing in the world you can get without chasing.”

Now it was his turn to await my next words.  “So what you’re saying is…”

“I’m saying that the very existence of your contentment is proof that you weren’t motivated by obtaining it.  It’s a bonus, so to speak, like reading a book for research and discovering you find it interesting as well.  You freely chose to help others, and you happened to be rewarded.  The fact that you didn’t realize it for so long is further evidence that it wasn’t your motivation.”

His face took on a look of wonder.  “So I’m still free...”

“You’re still free,” I confirmed.

The man broke into his trademark grin.  “Thank you.”

I returned the smile.  “I’m glad I could help.”

[Veritas]

Would you show the Internet your first drawing and pass it off as legitimate art? No you would not. If you're interested in writing, write a more, learn how to write, and also write a whole lot more.

I can understand you wanting to show this off out of pride, but I really hope you don't try and defend it like some novices do ("you just don't understand it", etc.). It's bad. Don't try and pass this off with a  "oh, but it's my first story", because you put it up here, and it's really honestly bad. The advice I will give you (beyond write more) is this: show, don't tell. Show. Don't tell.

If you'd like to learn how to truly write about a man in despair, read Notes from Underground by Dostoevsky followed by Nausea by Jean-Paul Sartre.

[a-4-year-old]

This is pretty good for a first draft.

Would you show the Internet your first drawing and pass it off as legitimate art? No you would not. If you're interested in writing, write a more, learn how to write, and also write a whole lot more.

I would show the internet my first drawing so I could have some feedback because I wouldn't be able to improve it if I never consulted someone better than me.

The rest of Veritas' advice is spot on. If you wish to edit this piece showing rather than telling should be the focus of your second draft. A typical short story leaves a whole bunch of questions for the reader to answer, a small detail hints at the bigger picture.

Specifically when your character hypothesizes about the man you simply bring up then refute possible explanations for his peculiar behavior. It may be better to replace that with a detailed description of the man, his work desk does not have pictures of family which indicates to the reader that he is alone. You know, that sort of thing.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Would you show the Internet your first drawing and pass it off as legitimate art?

As a4yo said, how am I supposed to know the quality of my work unless people tell me what I think?  What if I wrote this, sat on it, thought, "Dang, that's really good," and kept writing more like it? I would grow stagnant very quickly.  That's why I put this up here, so I can get criticism from people like the two of you.

I know I've heard the phrase "show, don't tell" pretty much everywhere, but can't that leave things too open to the reader's interpretation? Or is that my job as an author to close down things so readers interpret only what I want them to? Or is good writing supposed to be vary in its meaning from person to person?

[DarkCrusade]

Whether you leave things open or not is a question of what kind of effect you intend to produce. If you want that the reader comes to a conclusion that you want him to achieve show them that there is only one possible way (like Bertolt Brecht did after he became a communist (read "The Good Person of Szechwan")). Or let him come to his own conclusion and leave things open.

 

[-Major-]

look at your own stuff after you've looked on better peoples stuff, or read it again later when it's not freshly in your mind.
if you can't detect your own flaws, then you should maybe just give it up...

[VijchtiDoodah]

if you can't detect your own flaws, then you should maybe just give it up...

Writers have editors and draft readers because it's often very difficult to properly critique your own work. If he can't detect his own flaws, it only shows that he's as normal as any other writer.

Regardless, the "just give up if you can't...etc." attitude is a quick way to ensure that you never rise to a challenge. It's the coward's way out of a difficult situation.

[a-4-year-old]

I know I've heard the phrase "show, don't tell" pretty much everywhere, but can't that leave things too open to the reader's interpretation? Or is that my job as an author to close down things so readers interpret only what I want them to? Or is good writing supposed to be vary in its meaning from person to person?

I simply refer to the delivery of information.  Suppose you had a story where the main character, Bob, is miserable. 
 "Bob is sad" is about as bad as one could write. Instead you would indicate to the reader that Bob is sad through his actions.

"Bob sat alone, a tear rolled down his cheek." I'm no writer but I know this beats the pants off of a simple sentence in passive voice. However, this may be too obvious. We do want our reader to have to think.

"Bob rubbed his knees as he peered through the dim light of his empty house.  His arthritis always flared when it rained."  This example uses mood to hint at the feelings of a character.

I guess I was paying attention in English IV.

[Blacksheepboy]

I know I've heard the phrase "show, don't tell" pretty much everywhere, but can't that leave things too open to the reader's interpretation? Or is that my job as an author to close down things so readers interpret only what I want them to? Or is good writing supposed to be vary in its meaning from person to person?

A good author gives a story boundaries, while letting the reader interpret anything they want to within that story's boundaries.

The reason some movies don't display a horrible moment, but tell you that it happened/is going to happen is this: because the viewer's mind can create a scene much more drastically and dynamically than the one specific scene a movie can create.

Think about radio dramas. They do a lovely job of "show, don't tell" because, well, they HAVE to!

Also, if you want to write well, read a lot of classics. One enjoyable classic to read would be "The Count of Monti Cristo." It is the ultimate tale of revenge, and pretty famous. I recommend it because I am reading it right now ^.^

Writers have editors and draft readers because it's often very difficult to properly critique your own work. If he can't detect his own flaws, it only shows that he's as normal as any other writer.

So damn true... This is EXACTLY why games have beta testers.


Come to think of it, writing requires a lot of research, or, if you're lucky enough to have experienced tons of the world, experience.

Personally, not only have I a read a decent number of classics, but I have done a fair amount of psychological research (reading books like "The Way of the Shadow" [great book for understanding character development]) so that, one day, if I had the desire to, I could make a fictional character "real." I say this because our minds are complex. It would be easy to create a fictional robot or planet because all the ideas are coming from the author.

BUT, with creating a human being, we all project our ideas of what human beings are to each of us, and therefore can easily detect when a fictional character is... fictional. Do they react typically? and if not, do they have a reason for acting abnormally?

Worst of all, we project ourselves onto the hero/main character. All human beings have similar "hardware" in our brains. What is different about each of us are what "versions" we have, and of course, the gender. WOMAN ARE SO EMOTIONAL! That's why they can make the worst leaders. Sorry women. But this is why developing a character might be a son of a b***h. It's still worth looking into psychology if only for your own enlightenment (using the word lightly; I don't mean Zen or Buddhist).


Also, if you write when you're feeling emotional, it's a good bet that you'll have to go back and revise it. Writing when you are feeling emotional can sometimes be a dangerous thing. Many people have written many emotional songs, and it can easily turn into the stereotypical garbage. We want unpredictability, and since we all have had those dark awful emotions, they're pretty much predictable all the time. Sorrow, depression, I AM SAD KAY? Depression and love appeals to teenagers (CHICK-FLICKS/TWILIGHT!!!). After those years, we [usually] get the picture and have moved on . Except for women. Lol

I mean, c'mon, Alice in Wonderland was such a letdown... so extremely predictable... It was the most predictable movie I have ever seen. BUT MY SISTER LOVED IT!!! You see, it was all about "woman's lib" too

Yep.

[Veritas]

Today Blacksheepboy teaches us that brevity is a virtue

[Blacksheepboy]

most definitely

[VijchtiDoodah]

most definitely

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

Alright, next question.  In a longer story, one with actual substance, can a good plot be enough to compensate for mediocre writing?  I ask because while I think I do a better job in my primary work (I spend about a month on each chapter, as opposed to the roughly 90 minutes from concept to posting that this short story took up), it's likely that I have many of the same troubles.  If the characters are sufficiently realistic and developed, and the plot flows well and is interesting (big assumptions, I know), will that be enough to sway the readers? Or will poor writing overshadow all that?

[-Major-]

shouldn't you have the plot before you start writing it? you can always change the writing as you get everything together.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

shouldn't you have the plot before you start writing it?

What made you think I didn't? I spent a full year designing the plot before actually beginning the writing, and I've been revising and updating said plot in the year and a half since.

I'd rather not change either aspect (writing or plot) of the story at this point, but I think I'd much prefer a rewriting to a redesigning.

[-Major-]

so you write down the plot quite plainly, and then you rewrite it better..

[DarkCrusade]

The writing style is more important than the actual plot. Your style can make a boring plot interesting. For example you can write "He walked down the street." or "Whilst walking down the 6th Avenue he decided that it'd be the best to...".

Get me?

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

The writing style is more important than the actual plot. Your style can make a boring plot interesting. For example you can write "He walked down the street." or "Whilst walking down the 6th Avenue he decided that it'd be the best to...".

Get me?

To an extent, but to me that feels like frosting without a cake underneath.  Although...is that such a bad thing? If I'm enthralled while reading a story, does it really matter if the plot is nothing more than "guy walks down street and goes to hardware store"?

But I feel as though I'd finish it, sigh happily at the brilliant narrative, then slowly realize, "I do believe I've just been had."  On the other hand, if a person never gets to the end of the book because he can't stand the writing, that's not much better..

[DarkCrusade]

It's like reading books for kids. If you passed a certain level you'll find it boring. Not even amusing. A good plot adds depth to your story.

[{LAW} Gamer_2k4]

So wait, which is more important, plot or writing?