Submitted For Your Consideration
July 2010
Spectacular Failures
Although I've been privileged to enjoy some recent successes (such as my recent Derringer nomination -- boy, that still blows my mind), I think it's my failures that have actually been most instructive (even if not terribly fun).
Take for instance, my recent perpetration of total blogger fail. As you may know, I have five blogs. I try to come up with interesting content for all of them and post to them as regularly as possible.
Last month, I decided to run a post about the Washington Post Hunt. I won't bother writing all the details (especially since you can read them here, here, here and even here). Like I said, total blogger fail.
Even my apology and explanation were less than they could be. Because I failed to explain that when I said "I'm sorry -- am I supposed to know you?" about Tom Shroder, I really meant it. The name tickled my brain, but I couldn't place it. I kept thinking, "I think I've heard that name. But where? Should I know this person?" Those words went into the post and ended up sounding snarky to the person who pointed out my big blogger fail. (Gene Weingarten, who takes no prisoners when he's pissed off and didn't in my case.)
So, if I thought getting my books reviewed by The Washington Post was an impossibility before, it would seem likely that they'll be playing ice hockey in Hell before they'll touch me now.
As I observed in my correction, I could have simply deleted the offending post, scuttled off and pretended it hadn't happened. But I didn't for a reason (well, a few reasons, actually).
The first reason is accountability. We need more of it. People should take greater care about what they write online. They should be held accountable for their mistakes. This would help cut down on the huge amount of misinformation being bandied about on the Web. If people would just take a few moments to check sources and be sure of what they're posting (sometimes all it takes is carefully reading the thing you're posting about -- believe me, I know), it would make the Web a more accurate and pleasant place to visit.
The second reason is historical accuracy. In the old days, communication was set in stone (literally). Things communicated attained a permanency. Surely, back before papyrus, the Guttenberg press and online writing, the first person to chisel thoughts on rock had plenty of opportunity to think about these scratchings before they were made. Perhaps it allowed the writer (or chiseler -- no, not a crook!) to think a bit before making such a permanent mark. The advent of paper still required scriveners to take the time to apply pen to paper. Handwritten missives acquired a permanence and value, because they were rarer and often tended to contain special information. (Such as books handwritten by monks before the printing press.) And since there was no Wite-Out back then, scriveners were probably careful about what they wrote and how they wrote it. Even the printing press took enough resources and time to make the printed product more difficult to change. Once a book is printed, it's there for good and any changes require creating a new edition. Because of that, book content has a permanent nature.
All this is to say that communication before the Web was permanent enough to create a historical record of sorts. Today it's so easy to just wipe things out. But once a piece of information is distributed, it seems wrong to simply wipe it out and deny its existence. Who knows who's seen it and been misled? Merely making it disappear isn't enough. When misinformation is spread by Internet, a correction is called for. Besides, there's something a bit creepy and revisionist about the ability to make information disappear. Something that smacks of Big Brother deniability, as well as the lack of personal accountability I mentioned earlier.
Which brings me to the third reason -- learning from one's mistakes. This goes hand-in-hand with both of the previous reasons. If a person can make all their mistakes disappear, what will be learned from them? This lesson was embedded in the film Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. If we erase our errors and bad experiences, are we doomed to repeat them? (Like societies being doomed to repeat mistakes by ignoring history.) How much better is it to acknowledge them (embrace them, even) and vow never to repeat them?
Finally, the fourth reason -- being willing to take risks. Occasionally, you may extend yourself a bit too far out on the branch, in an attempt to succeed at something. In my case, the branch broke. I fell. A spectacular failure. However, sometimes it takes spectacular failures to make progress.
Soichiro Honda once said, "Many people dream of success. To me, success can only be achieved through repeated failure and introspection. In fact, success represents the 1 percent of your work which results from the 99 percent that is called failure."
In that case, I must be doing something right.
Debbi Mack
Fiction
Monthly Column
Freelance Writing
Blogs & More
