I mean this with all love and respect, friend, but I think you may be overthinking it a tad bit. ;) First of all, "reasonable sense, ontological depth, and studious discipline" are as much feminine traits as they are masculine traits: we're all rational image bearers, called to live with sobermindedness, and pursue the gifts of the intellectual life. Edith Stein, Teresa of Avila, Simone Weil, Tullia D'Aragona, Dorothy Sayers, Annie Dillard, and any number of brilliant women throughout history testify to that. It's not "masculine" to be a mind, seeking after clarity of ideas--it's virtuous! And all great writers throughout history, men and women, from Thomas Aquinas to Flannery O'Connor, have held passion, mystery, intuition, reason, logic, wonder, and skill together in the tapestry of traits that an artist or thinker needs to develop. You clearly hold those tensions together in your own self in a strong way! You're wrestling with it here, but also, I've seen that even in the writing you've done before.
That being said, one of my favorite ways of talking about what it means to be a woman is what Hans Urs von Balthasar calls "the Marian fiat of receptivity." The feminine virtue, at least according to Edith Stein and JP2, isn't a kind of illogical "emotionalism", but this receptivity, the ability to hold the world within oneself that's imaged most clearly (though not exclusively) in fertility. One of my favorite quotes is by J D McClatchy: "Love is the quality of attention we pay to things." Also Mary Oliver's "Attention is the beginning of devotion." The quality of good thought and good writing and good living is paying attention, taking things into yourself through this willingness, this "let it be unto me" act of receptivity.
Paying attention helps you build a good argument, because you catch logical errors. Paying attention helps you make true art, because you can write about what Ray Bradbury called "the texture of real life." Paying attention makes you more empathetic, which is the best quality a writer can have. (Cynthia Ozick calls the writer's empathy an act of attentiveness, of "envisioning the stranger's heart.") And so on and so forth. Attentiveness is a trait that all artists should pursue, men and women--women just have a bit of a head start. ;) And both analysis and emotional vulnerability stem from the same human desire: to know, to be known, to understand, to wonder at things. They're streams from the same ocean, not enemy armies.
Megha also made a good point, I think, in a much more succinct way.
I would push back on the “overthinking” part, haha!;) I know for a fact I overthink life at times, but this…well, this has been something that’s built to a head and has kept my writing voice stunted—this struggle with finding a middle ground that utilizes empathy and reason, if that makes sense. It’s difficult to put words to. I’m glad I’ve thought as deeply as I have about it because I want to explore what it means to write clearly, intelligently, but vulnerably as well. I will say, there are many other thoughts about this topic that I could expound on, but many of them intersect with deeply personal areas of my life which would be inappopriate to share online, and so these are my more unedited swirling thoughts, I suppose.
But what you talked of, the Marian fiat of receptivity, BEAUTIFUL. Thank you so much for that, for putting words to a feeling, a tickle at my brain, which I was unable to piece together—one of the beautiful things about knowledge is that feeling you get when someone lights up the world with a spoken sentiment.
As well, I think that was what was challenging about writing this post or even deciding to publish it because I fundamentally believe men and women are called to be learners, artists, intellectuals, perhaps to varying levels depending on where God has us all. I didn’t want to imply the notion women are or should be less sensible, reasonable, or disciplined than men. I think that is the struggle exactly—being those things without becoming solely calculating and discompassionate toward the reader or oneself. But perhaps this makes even less sense. Like you, these are thoughts off the top of my head.
What you said, about paying attention, touches the core of something. That which you are passionate about and love, is that which you cast a riveted eye upon, honing it and refining it, much as God does us—his poemas.
Like you said, this could be a whole post (one which I would absolutely read if you happened to find spare time to write one, hint hint;)). Thank you for your thoughts and intentional respone. They mean so much to me. Hurray for Substack encouraging open conversation!!
I didn’t mean at all to make you feel like this is a small thing to wrestle with, with the “overthinking” comment! I’m sorry if I made you feel silly in any way: I just meant that you shouldn’t let it impede your writing at all, even as you wrestle with it. One of my dear friends calls it “playing 4d chess when I’m supposed to be playing checkers” when I start focusing too much on building a framework for what I’m supposed to be doing and lose sight of the doing itself. This is definitely a worthy thing to be writing about and thinking through—I just was trying to convey that you shouldn’t let the thinking about form + ways of writing stress you out too much. :) Writing is sort of like dating, in that how things go depends very much on the particular person (or in this case, project) at hand; any broader principle just helps get us situated to learn about those particulars.
What do you think the heart of this tension is for you? Are you worried about how people will view your writing if you tend too far into vulnerability or whatever the opposite may be? Don’t feel like you have to share something personal, I’m just curious. (Though if you ever want to unpack more in depth in a less public space, my DMs are wide open. :)
Haha, if I have time, maybe I’ll come around and write about it. I have sort of a personal rule about not writing about “gender things” on Substack, because I think there’s a proliferation of that content online and in books already, but this is a topic that I’ve done a lot of thinking about.
Also, forgive me if what I said wasn’t clear….I’m running on very little brain capacity, due to helping my friend plan and execute her wedding tomorrow.😉
Also, I've wrestled with a lot of these same questions for years! So totally get where you're coming from, and I could write a whole post on this. The above is just the summary of what I think about it, off the top of my head.
You start with a question that you think matters and you try to answer it as succinctly and clearly as you can. Or you start with something you know from the depths of your bones and you try to put it into words.
I mean this with all love and respect, friend, but I think you may be overthinking it a tad bit. ;) First of all, "reasonable sense, ontological depth, and studious discipline" are as much feminine traits as they are masculine traits: we're all rational image bearers, called to live with sobermindedness, and pursue the gifts of the intellectual life. Edith Stein, Teresa of Avila, Simone Weil, Tullia D'Aragona, Dorothy Sayers, Annie Dillard, and any number of brilliant women throughout history testify to that. It's not "masculine" to be a mind, seeking after clarity of ideas--it's virtuous! And all great writers throughout history, men and women, from Thomas Aquinas to Flannery O'Connor, have held passion, mystery, intuition, reason, logic, wonder, and skill together in the tapestry of traits that an artist or thinker needs to develop. You clearly hold those tensions together in your own self in a strong way! You're wrestling with it here, but also, I've seen that even in the writing you've done before.
That being said, one of my favorite ways of talking about what it means to be a woman is what Hans Urs von Balthasar calls "the Marian fiat of receptivity." The feminine virtue, at least according to Edith Stein and JP2, isn't a kind of illogical "emotionalism", but this receptivity, the ability to hold the world within oneself that's imaged most clearly (though not exclusively) in fertility. One of my favorite quotes is by J D McClatchy: "Love is the quality of attention we pay to things." Also Mary Oliver's "Attention is the beginning of devotion." The quality of good thought and good writing and good living is paying attention, taking things into yourself through this willingness, this "let it be unto me" act of receptivity.
Paying attention helps you build a good argument, because you catch logical errors. Paying attention helps you make true art, because you can write about what Ray Bradbury called "the texture of real life." Paying attention makes you more empathetic, which is the best quality a writer can have. (Cynthia Ozick calls the writer's empathy an act of attentiveness, of "envisioning the stranger's heart.") And so on and so forth. Attentiveness is a trait that all artists should pursue, men and women--women just have a bit of a head start. ;) And both analysis and emotional vulnerability stem from the same human desire: to know, to be known, to understand, to wonder at things. They're streams from the same ocean, not enemy armies.
Megha also made a good point, I think, in a much more succinct way.
I would push back on the “overthinking” part, haha!;) I know for a fact I overthink life at times, but this…well, this has been something that’s built to a head and has kept my writing voice stunted—this struggle with finding a middle ground that utilizes empathy and reason, if that makes sense. It’s difficult to put words to. I’m glad I’ve thought as deeply as I have about it because I want to explore what it means to write clearly, intelligently, but vulnerably as well. I will say, there are many other thoughts about this topic that I could expound on, but many of them intersect with deeply personal areas of my life which would be inappopriate to share online, and so these are my more unedited swirling thoughts, I suppose.
But what you talked of, the Marian fiat of receptivity, BEAUTIFUL. Thank you so much for that, for putting words to a feeling, a tickle at my brain, which I was unable to piece together—one of the beautiful things about knowledge is that feeling you get when someone lights up the world with a spoken sentiment.
As well, I think that was what was challenging about writing this post or even deciding to publish it because I fundamentally believe men and women are called to be learners, artists, intellectuals, perhaps to varying levels depending on where God has us all. I didn’t want to imply the notion women are or should be less sensible, reasonable, or disciplined than men. I think that is the struggle exactly—being those things without becoming solely calculating and discompassionate toward the reader or oneself. But perhaps this makes even less sense. Like you, these are thoughts off the top of my head.
What you said, about paying attention, touches the core of something. That which you are passionate about and love, is that which you cast a riveted eye upon, honing it and refining it, much as God does us—his poemas.
Like you said, this could be a whole post (one which I would absolutely read if you happened to find spare time to write one, hint hint;)). Thank you for your thoughts and intentional respone. They mean so much to me. Hurray for Substack encouraging open conversation!!
I didn’t mean at all to make you feel like this is a small thing to wrestle with, with the “overthinking” comment! I’m sorry if I made you feel silly in any way: I just meant that you shouldn’t let it impede your writing at all, even as you wrestle with it. One of my dear friends calls it “playing 4d chess when I’m supposed to be playing checkers” when I start focusing too much on building a framework for what I’m supposed to be doing and lose sight of the doing itself. This is definitely a worthy thing to be writing about and thinking through—I just was trying to convey that you shouldn’t let the thinking about form + ways of writing stress you out too much. :) Writing is sort of like dating, in that how things go depends very much on the particular person (or in this case, project) at hand; any broader principle just helps get us situated to learn about those particulars.
What do you think the heart of this tension is for you? Are you worried about how people will view your writing if you tend too far into vulnerability or whatever the opposite may be? Don’t feel like you have to share something personal, I’m just curious. (Though if you ever want to unpack more in depth in a less public space, my DMs are wide open. :)
Haha, if I have time, maybe I’ll come around and write about it. I have sort of a personal rule about not writing about “gender things” on Substack, because I think there’s a proliferation of that content online and in books already, but this is a topic that I’ve done a lot of thinking about.
Also, forgive me if what I said wasn’t clear….I’m running on very little brain capacity, due to helping my friend plan and execute her wedding tomorrow.😉
Also, I've wrestled with a lot of these same questions for years! So totally get where you're coming from, and I could write a whole post on this. The above is just the summary of what I think about it, off the top of my head.
You start with a question that you think matters and you try to answer it as succinctly and clearly as you can. Or you start with something you know from the depths of your bones and you try to put it into words.
Thank you, Megha! Wonderful wonderful advice. I love to hear it.
As a new writer, I am struggling with some of these questions. I have not found my feet!
A friend suggested I read Phillip Lopate’s “To Show and To Tell” and it has helped enormously. Highly suggest his short book on creative nonfiction!!
Thank you for the recommendation! I will check it out