{"id":25288,"date":"2026-03-19T14:27:57","date_gmt":"2026-03-19T20:27:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/?post_type=transcript&p=25288"},"modified":"2026-03-19T14:31:05","modified_gmt":"2026-03-19T20:31:05","slug":"anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real","status":"publish","type":"transcript","link":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/","title":{"rendered":"Anne Lamott & Neil Allen: Write Toward the Really Real"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"image_print\"Print Transcript<\/span><\/a><\/div>

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Don\u2019t write towards irony. Don\u2019t write towards like snark or loftiness. Write towards compassion. You know, write towards real. Right towards the real.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> It\u2019s like anything that you master in life. The point of mastery isn\u2019t virtuosity. The point of mastery is there comes a time when you don\u2019t have to try as hard anymore.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> Welcome friends. In this episode of Insights at the Edge, my guests are Annie Lamott and her personal husband, Neal Allen, talking about their new book, <\/span>Good Writing: 36 Ways to Improve Your Sentences<\/span><\/i>. Neal Allen is a writer, a spiritual coach, and speaker. He\u2019s a former journalist and corporate executive, self-described hack writer, someone who can write on cue on deadline.<\/span><\/p>\n

He\u2019s the author of <\/span>Shapes of Truth<\/span><\/i> and <\/span>Better Days<\/span><\/i>. Annie Lamott\u2014maybe you\u2019ve heard of her, maybe you\u2019ve read one of her books\u2014she\u2019s the author of 20 books, including seven novels, non-fiction work, and beloved bestselling collections of autobiographical essays, including <\/span>Traveling Mercies<\/span><\/i>, <\/span>Plan B<\/span><\/i>, and <\/span>Grace Eventually<\/span><\/i>. I think of both of you as members of my soul family, from my heart to yours, and now including all of our listeners welcome.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Oh, thanks Tami. We feel exactly the same way. You\u2019re, you\u2019re a really beloved cousin.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> We love this community too.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Yeah, we do.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> Good writing. Neal, you created this collection of rules for improving your sentences. Tell me a bit about the origin.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Yeah, the origin is\u2014so these are rules, um, that I started to pick up when I was a journalist. And so the assumption in these rules is that you\u2019ve got a grammatical sentence. How do you make that sentence better in the sense of being, being able to better persuade the reader to read the next sentence that follows, and the next sentence that follows, and the difference between somebody who looks at themselves fundamentally as a writer and somebody who looks at themselves as a subject matter expert who writes, is that the writer is actually more interested in the sentence than the content.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

So, um, to be interested in the sentence means to notice that it has a lot of possibilities after it\u2019s grammatical. And I, I start picking, the first rule I picked up from an a really, uh, helpful editor was write with your verbs, right? If you use a vivid verb instead of a dull verb, if you use trudged, instead of walking, you pull the reader in better. And that was my start. And that was very useful. And then I started to collect other rules, you know, uh, question transitions, prefer Anglo-Saxon, brutal short words over Latinate. Long, complicated words. And eventually I noticed I had, you know, first four or five and then eight or 10 and a few years ago, I noticed I had gotten more than a few years ago, maybe 10 or 15 years ago, I noticed I had gotten up to about 30 or so such. such. rules. And uh, one day I looked around and looked for who else has rules maybe I can add to these, you know, and I was kind of astonished because a lot of writers had lists of these kind of rules on how to improve a sentence, how to make it better. Uh, but they were. Um, Hemingway had four rules, and Elmore Leonard had eight, and Margaret Atwood has 10. The, the most that I saw out there was, um, Martin Amos had 15, right? And I was like, but they\u2019re more than that. And then I looked around, is there a book that collects them? And that\u2019s how books get written, is you see that that book isn\u2019t already out there. And it\u2019s tug and it tug and it tugged at me. And so my interest in writing the book was to write a book that hadn\u2019t been written before.<\/span><\/p>\n

And then my interest when writing the book was as it is for, um, a lot of us, the fun of writing one sentence after another. So Annie and I look at each other more or less as people who make sentences. And this, I just thought, this book isn\u2019t out there. Let\u2019s see what, whether we can get it out there.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> I noticed as I was reading good writing, I was like, I don\u2019t think I can ever. another sentence. As long as I live after writing this book, I\u2019m all in a nod. I don\u2019t even know if I can speak a sentence, but then as I got to the conclusion, and Annie, you wrote about this notion of having three drafts and I, I felt liberated to use these tools. So I wonder if you can explain that idea of the three drafts.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Well, you know, I wrote a whole book about it, bird by Bird, that basically I think, encourages people because none of the writers, they love to write good first drafts. No one knows what they\u2019re doing until they finish a first draft. Really. I can\u2019t think of Muriel Spark, the great English World War II writer felt that she had headset, uh, Dictaphone headsets on and was taking dictation from God.<\/span><\/p>\n

But that, I mean, first of all, that\u2019s such a very angry thing to say and aggressive. But um, like if that was true, why would you say it to other writers? But most of us write really God awful first drafts. Neal really doesn\u2019t, \u2019cause he was a journalist for 15 years. He, because he\u2019s always under deadline, right? But, um, the rest of us, uh, write a really terrible first draft. I said in the in <\/span>Bird by Bird<\/span><\/i> that it was the, uh, child\u2019s draft. You just get it all down and it\u2019s way too long and the prose is too purple and you use overly long descriptions and whatnot. And then the second draft is the grownups draft. And you go through, it\u2019s like Dr. Spock, the pediatrician said to mothers with two year olds, you must be firm and friendly. And you go through and you\u2019re firm and friendly and you say, this really doesn\u2019t go there and let\u2019s save it for somewhere else, which means you\u2019re not, you know, it\u2019s getting cut and you go through and you, and the second draft is really fun.<\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s sort of what you\u2019re in it for. Is that you take something that was 10,000 words and you bring it down to the 5,000 that it will really, um, end up being. And then the third draft is a dental draft. You sort of go tooth by tooth and you, that\u2019s paragraph by paragraph or passage by passage or sentence by sentence. You wiggle \u2019em and jiggle \u2019em, and you poke \u2019em and you see if anything needs help. Sometimes they\u2019re just fine and healthy. Other times they need a cleaning. Other times they need, you know, and you, and, and so there\u2019s a really systematic way to go from this rush of ideas or visions or memories or I just an idea for a novel or a screenplay or a memoir that comes out, pouring out to it being something really tight without losing, its your voice or its juiciness, or whatever. Yeah, but I think that\u2019s what gives writers hope is that none of us know what we\u2019re doing until we finish the first draft, and then the second draft is really fun.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> And that\u2019s really where these rules for most people come in, in terms of their application is the second draft and the dental draft.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Yes.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> We say that. We say this is a book about second drafts<\/span>. Bird by Bird<\/span><\/i> is a book about how do I make myself a writer? And this is really a second draft book. Much more technical than <\/span>Bird by Bird<\/span><\/i>. <\/span>Bird by Bird<\/span><\/i> is much more, uh, fluidly about a process.<\/span><\/p>\n

And this is because it\u2019s technical. My problem was I didn\u2019t wanna write a technical manu manual like a grammarian might. Uh, you know, which makes it sound like everything\u2019s right and wrong. And these are these rules. Can be broken and you can, you can argue with them. And they are not right and wrong.<\/span><\/p>\n

They are rhetoric and persuasion. And everybody\u2019s got a different way of using persuasion. And so I didn\u2019t run, I didn\u2019t feel like that kind of expert. I felt like they were useful to me. And so I tried to write just what. Came top of my head about my experience with using these as more or less a user\u2019s manual rather than a technical manual maybe.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> Now you shared these rules with Annie towards the beginning of your time together dating. What was your response, Annie, when you, when you looked at that?<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Well, I think, I think he shared them with me on our fourth or fifth date. So this is 10 years ago, and I was amazed. I mean, I thought they were great. Some of them obviously I knew, but they were written down in a way that had structure. It was concise and just brilliant. And so I started giving them out to all of my students at my writing workshops and whatnot. And then, uh, a couple of years ago, Neal put them into a book and, um, and did these meditations on \u2019em, you know, and these little essays on each rule with a lot of examples. Now, Neal is, we\u2019re just very different stylistically. He\u2019s really organized mentally, and he can be professorial. And he has a lot of brilliant examples.<\/span><\/p>\n

I mean, he\u2019ll bring up Socrates very casually in a conversation about, you know, JonBenet Ramsey or something. And then I am more like the den mother for the third graders. I bring in the cupcakes and I say, I really want you to consider doing this. I think you can do it. You\u2019re, there\u2019s a lot of help available.<\/span><\/p>\n

Your voice is important. You\u2019re important. And so I looked at his book and I loved it, but I said, Hey, you know what? I know something about writing too. And, um, Mr. Mann and um, and so I asked if I could contribute my responses to his as to his essays and my ex, my own example. So that\u2019s how it all came about.<\/span><\/p>\n

But so after all of a sudden he had them posted at his website, shapes of truth.com, and I was just referring people to \u2019em. I was saying, just go to shapes of truth.com, you\u2019ll find the rules, you know, and people were just blown away by \u2019em. That\u2019s how we both knew we were onto something.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> It turned out that that difference in style, um, really lucked out, um, because the way Annie decided that she might. Uh, horn in on this book is, uh, respond to each of my, um, essays. So it\u2019s a call and response where she always gets the last word, which she likes a lot. Yes. And in some cases she disagrees with the rule and so she gets the last word on the rule. Um, but it works with our style because I\u2019m an explainer and. My greatest fault in writing is I overexplain, right? And so I\u2019m gonna, I\u2019m, that\u2019s just what I do. I, I kind of look at things and kind of try to put them together and find patterns and explain why the pattern works and that sort of thing. And Annie\u2019s cathartic, right? She connects in a different way to, with the reader, so that the reader can, and the way it works in the book is that, and it was just serendipity. By my going first, her going second. You get the rule, you get an explanation of the rule, and then you get kind of a coach helping you, uh, feel comfortable with the rule.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Mm-hmm. And yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> The den mother who says, go ahead, break the rules.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> And yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Plus you get to end on, on on humor because she\u2019s much funnier than I am.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> And also I have a very strong, uh, spiritual interest in people writing because I feel, and, and, and it\u2019s all, all through good writing. My feeling is that if you wanna write and you don\u2019t get around to it, it\u2019s just gonna plague you. It\u2019s gonna hurt you at the end of your life that you had. You wanted to get your memories down for both, for your grandchildren and just for your own self. And you wanted to tell this novel that you started in college, but that life interfered and you had a family and you had a job and now you\u2019re 65 and, and the.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal\u2019s inner critic is telling you, you, it\u2019s too late to start, or there\u2019s, or there\u2019s no way that you could dah, dah, dah, dah, dah. And, and so my spiritual influence, I think is to say this is really about your heart and your soul. That you find a way to get a little bit of work done every day. And these are some of the hacks we use to get our own work done.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> You mentioned that you\u2019re both very different kinds of writers and that\u2019s displayed in the book clearly, and one of the things you talk about is how in finding our own voice, you write Neal like music. Writing relies on the integration of melody, rhythm, and harmony, that we\u2019re adept at all three, but usually one is prominent and that\u2019s your default talent or writing style.<\/span><\/p>\n

And I wonder if you can explain that more and then take us into the Beatles as writers and where you and Annie fit into that.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Yeah, that\u2019s funny. I, uh, so, you know, I, I have a spiritual practice that came up through Diamond Heart and it\u2019s got a lot of fourth way, um, uh, content, including this idea that we are three centered beings. Head, body, heart, right, head, body, chest, however you want to put it. And they correspond in music with melody is the head center, the curiosity, the bright stuff, the, the pulling stuff and making leaps of faith and leaps of interest. And then, um. Rhythm is the body center wanting to dance and heart is the harmony that music requires, right? Of being relational and adding voices and getting them to blend and that sort of thing. And writing is the exact same way, right? I, I get my ideas, like ideas always start with curiosity and they come in through the head center. And then I move them through my body where they can kind of coalesce into patterns, right? Dance patterns, which aren\u2019t unlike chemical valences. And they either work or they don\u2019t to the ear. And then when I. When I\u2019ve succeeded in those two, then I still have the reader to be connecting with, and that\u2019s the harmony.<\/span><\/p>\n

And I connect with the reader by bringing in the familiar and balancing it with the unfamiliar and kind of tugging them along and patting them and, and being, bringing cupcakes, that sort of thing. And I thought about and righted right about this, how. You can really kind of see that in music in the Beatles, where you know there probably is no better. Me in our generation or several generations than Paul McCartney, he is a pure mellitus, leaping intervals. He just thinks up. You, you watch that, that, um, the making of the, of, uh, let it be. And you just watch him invent a melody and it turns into a song. And I think 18 minutes they\u2019ve got it complete, right? But he\u2019s just got these melodies going and then you listen to John. And John has a very, very narrow. First one thing, Paul has a four-octave, he has a five-octave range voice. And so those leaping intervals work for his voice too. But John has, uh, more like a three octave, and he doesn\u2019t think in melody, right? John thinks in rhythm. John, uh, I, Ringo might be right when Ringo says John is the greatest rhythm guitarist who ever lived. And Ringo doesn\u2019t have to, and Paul don\u2019t have to keep the beat in the Beatles. It\u2019s a very strange thing because John keeps the beat and John\u2019s also the leader, more or less of the group.<\/span><\/p>\n

And so they follow his rhythm and he stretches notes and he, and he and Ringo can follow him just lockstep. They\u2019re in, they\u2019re absolutely in love with the rhythm and the beat. And then interestingly, Ringo is, um. A rhythmic MEUs. His instrument is the drums. But Ringo\u2019s trick in being a drummer is he\u2019s never following the bass player. Right? In jazz, everybody follows the beat of the bass player, including the drummer, right? You think the drummer\u2019s keeping the beat? No. The bass player\u2019s keeping the beat. And in rock and roll, there\u2019s a lot of that. Too often the drummer keeps the beat Ringo\u2019s following the voice. He\u2019s following the melody. All the time. All he\u2019s listening to, he\u2019s interacting kind of intuitively with John on the rhythm, but he\u2019s listening to whoever\u2019s singing the song. And then George is kind of a harmonic, rhythmic guy. He also isn\u2019t a, he\u2019s an okay melodies. I mean, something is beautiful, beautiful melody, but he\u2019s thinking first of harmony because that\u2019s who he is.<\/span><\/p>\n

You know? He is this spiritual harmonists. And so. You can find your own beetle, and the point to that is to notice what\u2019s my strength, and if my strength is like I\u2019m a rhythmic writer. Um, fundamentally rhythmic writer. I don\u2019t worry about, I don\u2019t have to read my sentences aloud to myself because I know I am.<\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s what I\u2019ve captured in my lifetime in my voice, is the ability to feel at ease, creating the rhythms of, and these aren\u2019t the rhythms of I ambi pentameter. These are the rhythms of conversation. And so I can be conversationally rhythmic in my writing. Um, Annie, he\u2019s a. An incredible mellitus. I could never come up with the kind of metaphors and the kind of bright points and the kind of leaps that Annie comes up with. So I build on my strengths and I, and I struggle and occasionally bring in a metaphor. Annie can just drop one metaphor after another, after another other.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> What is the value of knowing which type of musical writer you are?<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> So you don\u2019t get hung up on trying to be something you aren\u2019t. Right. I\u2019m not gonna get hung up. John was okay with not being as good a mellodist as Paul. It didn\u2019t stop him from producing music that we all listened to just as much.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> You know, it\u2019s just very important to know what, um. What you\u2019re good at and what you love to do with writing.<\/span><\/p>\n

Like with, a couple years ago, the Washington Post asked me to write some pieces on, um, getting older. I wrote a series of 12 over the course of a year and back when the post was still the post. And, um, but what, when they came to me, they had this idea that I would write, it would be much more sociological. You know, I would talk to other people across all different socioeconomics, just, um. Levels and, and I said, I don\u2019t do that. That\u2019s not what I\u2019m good at. I, I don\u2019t want, and I also don\u2019t want to, but I can write about what it\u2019s like for me and what it\u2019s like for my friends who have gotten so much older and, um, and so they went for that. But it\u2019s, I know that I\u2019m not gonna ever write like Neal. I\u2019m not gonna ever write like Isabella Y day. I\u2019m not gonna write like Barbara King salver. And it causes me pain that I will never write like Barbara Kingsolver or George Saunders. I hate that. It makes me feel, there\u2019s no point, but I can write like me, you know, and I can tell my stories, and I can tell my stories in my voice, and that\u2019s the mu that\u2019s the only music I can play. And also it\u2019s like John Prine. You know, John Prine was not Eric Clapton or vice versa. I much prefer John Prine. But, um, you find out what you love and what comes naturally to you and what you wanna do. As a writer and you, you stick to, you don\u2019t stick to that, but that. Uh, like, I know Neal thinks I\u2019m Paul McCartney, but he\u2019s actually my last, my least favorite Beatle Plus, as I mentioned in good writing, we went to the Oakland Coliseum to hear him and I, we caught COVID, so then I completely turned on him. But I, you know, I loved John. I loved, I loved the other three of \u2019em, and I\u2019m happy, or at least in old age, I\u2019m accepting of the fact that I can tell my stories the way I tell my stories. There are a lot of tangents. You know, and, and, um, Neal doesn\u2019t, isn\u2019t as tangential as I do. Neal is an explainer.<\/span><\/p>\n

He will explain, you know, till the cows come home. But I will be going off on all these tangents and, and then I can somehow, because I have a gift, bring it all together and help bring you back home. That\u2019s what I can do and I can\u2019t do other things. And, um, and so I, we wanted writers to know that their natural voice. And the stuff that they love both about life and living and their own lives is theirs uniquely to tell. And that\u2019s what we wanna hear. That\u2019s the song we wanna hear.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Yeah. Once I found my natural voice, it\u2019s like anything that you master in life, the point of mastery isn\u2019t virtuosity. The point of mastery is there comes a time when you don\u2019t have to try as hard anymore, and once you can just sort of sit back and ease into it. And let it flow on its own, then you can use your mastery not to get better at your mastery, but to use it as a groove in which you can center your view of the outside world. And the, the, the, the, uh, the metaphor I use for this, or analogy I use for this is a, a good river guide, um, knows the river so well that you barely see him or her working the paddle. And if you watch him or heard, they\u2019re not even bothering to watch the currents anymore because they know the river anymore. What are they watching? The otters playing on the banks. Nothing to do with their mastery. Right. And so when I found my voice and accepted it, that I wasn\u2019t going to be William Faulkner ever and, and, and took my voice and decided to work with it, whatever it was, and strengthen it, whatever it was, to the point that I could, uh, feel comfortable with it at any time. Uh, then I got to use writing to write about anything I wanted to, and it became a channel to explore the world.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> I like to essentialize, so I\u2019m going to pull out a quote from good writing that I thought very essentialized all of the rules. These rules economize the plain spoken and specific keep the reader\u2019s attention sharp. And in other ways show respect for the audience\u2019s time and desire for novelty. you wrote this and I thought we could go through it a bit and it would be a way that you could point out. Some of the rules that support each one of these essential principles. So firstly, these rules economize, I, I love this. I, you know, I\u2019m just sitting here, I\u2019m writing a long text to somebody as I\u2019m reading the book yesterday and I thought, wow, that\u2019s really long, Tami. I\u2019m apologizing for something and I have a lot to say in my apology, and I\u2019m like, the last thing this person wants to read is a text this long. So then I thought, I\u2019m gonna use the rules. And I went back and I probably. Took 30% out and I thought, this is awesome. So go ahead, talk a little about economizing.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> So interestingly, by the way you say, I wrote that sentence. That\u2019s my favorite sentence in the book, and I have, it is, and I have a complete absence of sense of owning it. I don\u2019t know, it\u2019s the sort of thing that just comes and so I really can sort of see the interdependence of the world and see that I didn\u2019t write this book, my parents wrote it, my friends wrote it.<\/span><\/p>\n

All the things that influenced and got channeled into it. But that sentence in particular. I didn\u2019t write that sentence. Now that you, you read it aloud to me. I notice that the answer to your question is the end of the sentence, right? So the end of the sentence says something about respect the reader\u2019s attention and desire for novelty, uh, uh, attention span.<\/span><\/p>\n

It could say, right. Uh, I\u2019ve forgotten the exact words you read, but, um, that\u2019s exactly it.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> The audience\u2019s time… which is\u2026<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> what which is also what we\u2019re doing here. I respect their time and their desire to hear something new that\u2019s gonna help them. But keep going, Neal.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> No, that\u2019s it. I\u2019ve economized, I answered your question. It\u2019s time and respect for novelty. People want novelty and people want to be able to conclude it so they can do something new.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> We\u2019re going to go into it a little bit more. We\u2019re gonna go into it a little bit more. What are some of the top ways you both know when you go back into draft number two and three? Annie, I\u2019m going to economize. Like, this is it. This is what I do.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Well Neal and I show each other everything we write before we submit it to an agent or an editor. And so I will, um, ask him, I will know something is 500 words too long and I will ask him to go through, \u2019cause you know, by the time you\u2019ve written the draft, your eye starts glancing off stuff. You know, that you really would, might have paid better attention to, or cut or um, or shortened and need.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s so great to have somebody go through and say, this goes on too long. This Descrip. You don\u2019t want this long a description. You know, you wrote two long paragraphs about your, the trip to the local dump with your father when you were eight years old, and I would love one short paragraph. Do it again.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s just about putting, you know, when I was coming up, same with Neal. There was this phrase about putting it through the typewriter again. And it meant you, you, you went through the whole draft and you, you looked at every paragraph and you took out everything you could, or like Jessica Milford\u2019s, great paraphrase that you must kill your little darlings that you go through and there are these sentences you shoehorned in. That, uh, that are supposed to make the reader think you\u2019re smarter or more educated or more ironic or less of a buzzkill than you really are and you just love it so, so, so much. And you just have to take it out if it\u2019s one of your darlings, because it\u2019s gonna stick out to the reader. I, um, I\u2019m the same as you when I write a text.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s way too long, you know, and I\u2019ll go through and I\u2019ll cut it in half. I mean, every second draft I write, I\u2019ve cut out a quarter. Of the first draft, because the l the length of the first, the stuff got me to, uh, to, to, to having. So, um, the choice, the ability to select the stuff that really shines, the stuff that is, uh, really resonant or that is, um, descriptive. All of us write descriptions that are way too long and we maybe we write the description beautifully and it\u2019s like, that\u2019s nice, but being a writer means I gotta get you to the next page. And I am not gonna read three paragraphs about your, uh, kindergarten class. You know, I will read one, I will read one if you wrote it carefully, really happily.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2019cause I will identify, it\u2019ll be a mirror for me. So, um, everything I write is too long. Every draft, every email, every everything. And, um, one thing, this book often talks about, um, trusting your editors because editors will very gently say. This goes on to law. You\u2019re losing me.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> It\u2019s summed up in rule 14. Remove the boring stuff.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Yeah, remove the boring stuff.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> And, and for me, and I think for most people, most of the boring stuff is, I\u2019ve gotta prove what I just said.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> So I\u2019ve gotta explain it and prove it. And we get taught in high school and college that that\u2019s the model. If you say something, prove it and show your work, show your explanation. Right. Well that\u2019s, that\u2019s not in real life. People trust each other or distrust each other and they make a snap judgment. And if they distrust you, maybe they need to see some proof. But if they trust what you\u2019re writing and they\u2019re a friendly reader, you don\u2019t have to prove what you said. And usually they kind of can fill in gaps and get it on their own and wanna move on much faster than I think they do.<\/span><\/p>\n

Annie\u2019s much better at removing the boring stuff. She doesn\u2019t even put it in her first draft. I have. I have to cut so much more.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> Okay, we covered these rules. Economize favor, the plain spoken and specific. This notion of the plain spoken don\u2019t be a showoff. I really liked that part of the rules. I thought yes!<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> I\u2026there\u2019s so little plain spoken and modest and true in the popular culture that when we come upon a writer or a person who you know, says what they mean, mean what they say. And don\u2019t say it mean, my heart leaps. Because there\u2019s something so comforting about people not showing off, about people not doing literary pyrotechnics.<\/span><\/p>\n

One of Neal\u2019s rules is, if it sounds literary, it isn\u2019t. You know, you gotta take it out. It\u2019s a, it\u2019s, um, pretentious or it\u2019s elitist, or it\u2019s just showing off. So you\u2019ll think that we\u2019re fancier writers than we are. I don\u2019t wanna read fancy writers. I wanna read someone, there\u2019s a great quote in there by the wonderful screenwriter of Ms.Doubtfire, Randi Mayem Singer, who said, \u201cTell me a story, make me care.\u201d And when someone will tell me a story in plain spoken English, where they\u2019re focusing on who the character is and, and helping me get grounded in the setting and helping the plot move along. Oh, I\u2019m so grateful. I\u2019m so grateful, and there is so little of it. Everybody\u2019s told to make it fancier, to burnish it, to make it bounce off the page, to make it pop. You know, I don\u2019t want that. I want you to tell me a story and make me care.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Your father had a neat way of talking about it with nickel words. Yeah. What was it?<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Yeah. He taught me, you know, um, just that you could use nickel words to describe things instead of these 25 cent words that maybe you got from the thesaurus.<\/span><\/p>\n

Now we\u2019re big fans of the thesaurus to help you find the right word to help you find the strongest verb, which is. I think rule one, but by the same token and, um, somebody using a nickel word so that I don\u2019t have to look it up means I\u2019m gonna keep turning the page.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> It\u2019s interesting that you brought up the thesaurus because uh, I\u2019ve been one of those people when I see people where they\u2019re in meetings or something like that And then they pull up the this source and I\u2019m like, oh God, you\u2019re never gonna really be able to come up with something that has that original. The word that you both use, quirky thing, if you\u2019re using a thesaurus, it\u2019s gonna feel sort of forced and put on afterwards. So when I read that you both are fans of using a thesaurus, you go so far as to call it a book of magic spells. I thought, wow, Tami, once again, you\u2019re gonna have to open up your, you know, judgmental ways.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> And I tell the story of an old, um, uh, uh. An old friend of mine who I was looking at\u2026iit was back in the day of writing by hand, and this was sometime in the probably late seventies, early eighties. And I, she was writing short stories at the time, and I looked at a manuscript on her desk and I saw all these piled up on, every once in a while there would be a word with a whole bunch of other words piled up on top of it, and I asked what that was about, and she said, oh, oh. That word really stuck out to me. It might be the right word. It\u2019s a really important word for the, for the story, and I wanna make sure I get the exact right word. And so I\u2019m adding in other ones that might replace it and that taught me that that\u2019s what a thesaurus is. There is a word that is perfect for what you are trying to say. Go find it. And if I see, and you know, you develop an ear over time, and that\u2019s not the right word. Our, the most frequent conversation that Annie and I have about, uh, um, writing while one of us is writing a piece, what\u2019s the word for, or what\u2019s another word for blank?<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> And it\u2019s in the thesaurus. It isn\u2019t, it isn\u2019t supposed to be in my head. I\u2019m not Shakespeare. I don\u2019t have that many words in my head. Right. So I go to a thesaurus and find the perfect word.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> Okay. Keep the reader turning the page, keep them moving. Don\u2019t lose them. Don\u2019t try to show off. And so in the beginning of our conversation, Neal, when you were talking about these rules, you talked about using Anglo-Saxon words and not Latinate, jokingly in the book, in your commentary on this, you write about how you were a college dropout at age 19 and you had to look up. What this even meant, and I had to look it up too. I was like, what are we talking about? And so I believe in being a listener advocate, which is like being a reader advocate. One of the things you write about, uh, in, in better writing is an antagonistic reader. Is someone who\u2019s confused by what\u2019s happening.<\/span><\/p>\n

And I thought an antagonistic listener to any conversation also is someone who feels confused. I don\u2019t want our listeners to feel confused. I advocate for them. So I wanna go back, Neal to this. The Anglo-Saxon words. Latinate words. What are you talking about?<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Okay, so you\u2019re ignoring my, uh, subhead to that, um, chapter. Certainly. Rule six is \u201cPrefer Anglo-Saxon words.\u201d It\u2019s a short way of putting what I\u2019m saying, and then I explain it. Favor shorter, punchier. Anglo-Saxon words over fancy, abstract Latinate words. Now, what I explain in, in here, and that\u2019s why I, these are kind of meditations in a certain way. Annie puts that fancy word on them. What I explain is that, and you pick up this kind of new little piece of knowledge, if you hadn\u2019t been taught it before by reading this book, that actually English is, has two streams. Coming into it. Most languages come kind of directly through one stream. You know, Hindi comes out of Sanskrit in a kind of direct line and you can follow it.<\/span><\/p>\n

And, and, but weirdly, because of the way England developed, um, there\u2019s a stream coming from the north, which. A bunch of Scandinavian and Germanic languages that are called Anglo-Saxon. And there\u2019s a stream coming in from the south, which are all the Italian, Spanish, um, uh, French cognates that sit inside of English. And it\u2019s handy if you start to notice that you start to notice that a whole lot of the multisyllabic, boring words are coming up from the south. And a whole lot of the crisp, brutal words get you right into the scene. Words are coming in from the north.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> You talked, Annie, about how refreshing it is when someone says what they mean what they say, says it directly. And I notice I, I also find that extraordinarily refreshing. So maybe it\u2019s my love of the Anglo-Saxon directness that I didn\u2019t even know how to call it that. But one of the things I ask myself, and I\u2019m curious what you think about this when I\u2019m writing, is if it\u2019s not quite coming across, it\u2019s like I have to go more into my heart or using your three-centered model Neal, more into my belly. Like I have to get deeper into the blood and bone and the truth of what I\u2019m trying to say. And I wonder how that fits in with being simple and direct and saying what we mean.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Mm-hmm. Well, I love that question. I mentioned in this book, as I\u2019ve mentioned in <\/span>Bird by Bird<\/span><\/i>, that wonderful line of Shirley Jackson\u2019s that a confused reader is an antagonistic reader. And I love being able to follow along with the musician who is, uh, spinning this story and this song. And I am often reminded of something I wrote 35 or whatever years it was ago in <\/span>Bird by Bird<\/span><\/i>, where as a younger writer I thought I should write in a more impressive way, and I should write in a way that really made me look more educated and more New York and more male. Right? All those male East Coast writers that I came up on. The, you know, John Updike and all the Johns and, uh, all the, uh, all the most famous writers and all the New Yorker writers who were mostly New East Coast men, white men, and I wrote in <\/span>Bird by Bird<\/span><\/i>, like, don\u2019t write towards irony. Don\u2019t write towards like snark or loftiness. Write towards compassion. You know, write towards real. Right towards the real. You know, the ancient Greeks called God the really real, and when someone is telling me whether it\u2019s a student or a writer, a published writer, is telling me a story that is from the heart and it\u2019s really real\u2014it nourishes me. Oh, I\u2019m so starved for it. And I\u2019m so grateful for it. And so I try to do that, and sometimes I will be trying to\u2014 \u2019cause Neal is so literary, not literary, but he\u2019s just so intellectual\u2014that knowing that he\u2019s gonna read something I\u2019ve written, I might try to fancy it up a little bit and to sound a little tiny bit more like him.<\/span><\/p>\n

And then I\u2019ll go, that\u2019s not my, I can\u2019t sing my song in Neal\u2019s voice, you know? And so I\u2019ll just draw myself back, write from the heart. Write towards compassion. Write towards the really real, and um, and it just keeps being my way. And, um, and I always tell my writing students, write what you\u2019d love to come upon.<\/span><\/p>\n

And what I love to come upon is, is what we\u2019ve been talking about, you know, the compassionate, the heartful instead of the polished mind, you know, the prism of the mind writing. Also a lot of these books, you know, uh, we found out something very kind of shocking last year, which was that 80% of all books in America are bought (A) on iPhones and (B) at Amazon. And so if somebody is a, isn\u2019t that shocking? I mean, that is,<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> I didn\u2019t know I didn\u2019t know that, Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> That\u2019s not the world we came up in, but, um, we\u2019re still about hardbacks and paper and whatnot. But at any rate, going back to the rule, you\u2019ve gotta get people to turn the page. If I am picking up a book in a bookstore or reading the sample at eBooks and it\u2019s lofty and I can\u2019t quite track it, I\u2019m not gonna pay whatever I\u2019m gonna pay, $14 or $27 for it. And somebody starts to tell me a story in a distinctly human voice, I\u2019m so charmed and I\u2019m so grateful and I\u2019m going to keep going.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Fancification is a form of hierarchy and the idea of being sophisticated and hierarchical and superior, all kind of settle in with fancification, making things really fancy.<\/span><\/p>\n

I\u2019m gonna show any kind of showing off any kind of intellectualizing for the sake of intellectualizing. And you can\u2019t have judgment and empathy at the same time. They just can\u2019t coexist. Mm-hmm. And people aren\u2019t looking at books. I don\u2019t mean empathy that they\u2019re gonna agree with me. I mean, empathy that a member of my species that I care about is writing to me.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> Now turning the page, getting the reader to keep going. Keep going, keep going. Don\u2019t abandon this book. Annie, I have to ask you this question.<\/span><\/p>\n

Part of what gets me to turn the pages when you\u2019re writing and part of what will, all kinds of things attract me, but if I\u2019m going to laugh out loud, if something, if someone can get me to laugh out loud you know, Oh, my God, the jackpot.<\/span><\/p>\n

You reliably get me to laugh out loud and I\u2019d like to know is there any kind of rule or anything under that that you can help us with? \u2019cause laughing out loud, that is such a joy.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Oh, thank you. I know, the reason for being here at all is that incredible miracle of laughing with somebody. You know, I always say laughter is carbonated holiness, and I actually believe that when you\u2019re laughing with somebody, it\u2019s holy. And also it\u2019s the most therapeutic thing we do. But I have to say that in my writing. I put in a lot of stuff that is attempting to be funny, and I take it out. I kill my little darlings. I\u2019m either using it to try to get you to think that I\u2019m not a depressive or I\u2019m trying to seduce you with it and I have to take it out and I have to, I leave in the stuff that feels really genuine.<\/span><\/p>\n

It feels like there\u2019s a funny way of looking at this that you might not have thought about before. And, um. But you know, I got funny as a weapon against bullies \u2019cause I looked so different when I was a little kid and a teenager. And I, um, I weaponized it. But then I also found that in telling my story, I could, um, get people to really pay attention if I was a little bit lighter than, um. Uh, and infused it with funny moments, told the truth, but also infused it with funny moments. And the other thing is when I was, um, a young writer, I lived for writers who could make me laugh out loud from PG Woodhouse to, uh, you know, Charles Portis to uh, um, you know, Lori Cole, when. And to laugh out loud when to, to be reading something and to all of a sudden laugh and look up to me, that is what heaven is like. Right?<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> So humor is always about the absurdity of the difficulty of life, right? Humor is how we, if you, if you just complain as a straight complaint and you do it, and most people complain all day long, right? Most conversation is people complaining to each other about how hard things are and what\u2019s about to happen and what just happened.<\/span><\/p>\n

And it\u2019s like, oh, we\u2019re suffering, suffering, suffering. And that\u2019s most conversation, most gossip is complaining about other people. All of that. Um, and if you just do it as a complaint, it\u2019s unacceptable. You\u2019re a whiner. You\u2019re a complainer. But if you do it as humor, it\u2019s a hundred percent acceptable. Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

If you watch like Robin Williams, that brilliant, magnificent, 40 minutes at Lincoln Center, right. He is just riffing wildly through all the complaints of civilized life and, and turning the complaint into humor, which we, for some reason, we can accept it through humor and we don\u2019t accept it through being presented straight ahead to us. I get to be the straight man in our relationship. Mm-hmm. And Annie lightens up my life all day long.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Mm-hmm.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> One of your recommendations to people is to read their writing out loud,<\/span><\/p>\n

to listen to it. Does it keep your attention as you\u2019re reading out loud? What\u2019s the rhythm like? And I thought this would be a fun thing to share with our listeners, \u201cthing\u201d is one of the words you wouldn\u2019t use in writing, and if I were going back and editing that sentence, I wouldn\u2019t say thing I would say I think a wonderful section of the book that I would love to have you share with our listeners, is one of my favorite rules\u2014Rule 33. Write the hard stuff. Don\u2019t shy from the big mysteries of life. And I wonder if you can read us an excerpt from that section of the book. Both of you.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> By the way, you just did a brilliant bit of editing. Yeah, I had it. Don\u2019t shy away from the big mysteries of life and you, and you knew the word away was completely unnecessary. Yeah. And you dropped it, right? You economized? Mm-hmm.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Take out the little words.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

” Nothing is ineffable. Make the effort, write the material whose articulation first stumps you. The stuff that makes people tick Until that last talk. Finding a way to evoke the ineffable is related to Donald Murray\u2019s idea that syntactic failure is a sign. You\u2019re trying to say something important. In other words, if it\u2019s hard to write, it\u2019s probably worth writing isn\u2019t the whole point of writing to figure out something you don\u2019t already know. Most fiction and biography writers discover aspects of their characters along the way. In general nonfiction, the author seeks motivations and causes for events. The act of writing refines the author\u2019s notions and often opens new possibilities. I once heard the novelist, Siri Hustvedt, complain that her protagonist keeps getting killed off at the end of the story. She wants to protect her characters from themselves, but can\u2019t. In many traditions, God is expected to be so ineffable that it\u2019s hubris even sin to try to explain the concept. But those same traditions fill libraries with stacks of theology, the study of God. Don\u2019t pretend that anything is off limits to your consideration and articulation. You go where your characters go inside and out in their metaphysical meanderings and their hikes through the woods. Often nonfiction writers believe that they must wrap things up neatly and maintain an objective stance that might wobble if contaminated by subjectivity or the great irrational Wittgenstein said, the limits of language are the limits of my world. Well, my words include mystery and supernatural, and my syntax includes questions. And paradoxical statements. When I worked in daily newspapers, I could only ask a question that could be answered in the next paragraph. Magazine, blog and book. Writers often restrain themselves the same way, but that\u2019s a shame they have room in therefore license to raise the stakes, even if it makes some of their readers uncomfortable. Here is novelist Jose Saramago on what\u2019s important about the hard stuff. \u2019Inside us there is something that has no name, that something is what we are.\u2019 And here\u2019s how you do it if you\u2019re Cormac McCarthy, \u2019They were watching, out there past men\u2019s knowing where stars are drowning, and whales ferry their vast souls through the black and seamless sea.\u2019”<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> And then here\u2019s me. Thank you for letting us read. Yeah. This is what we love. Is to get you to share really exactly what this book is about.<\/span><\/p>\n

“Please, please, please, please write the hard stuff. Write about life and death and loss and hope, and how on earth you survive that child or injury or marriage.<\/span><\/p>\n

Find a way to write about people\u2019s underlying fears, maybe psychological but also mystical, fear of death, of legacy, of emptiness and lovableness. Write about who you think you are Deep down. Pass the persona and curation and the stories you believe about yourself because you are probably similar to me, and I love it when someone holds up a mirror. I love revelation. We\u2019re a species that crave stories about itself. Tell us our story through your lens, whether in fiction or nonfiction. It really is all you have to offer us. We\u2019re all gonna die. Hit the decks. How do we live fully boldly in the face of that? This is hard to think and write about, but we want you to.<\/span><\/p>\n

It is essential that you try. We\u2019re here on the incarnation side of things to discover the truth of who we are. We\u2019re animal, human, divine. That is hard stuff to capture, but that is what I most long to read. Truth Your Truth, our truth. Try this will not go well, but don\u2019t give up. Write an incredibly terrible first draft that will be way too long and overwrought and sophomoric. Then take out all the boring parts and see what is left. Then pray again and see if you can make it better. Go deeper, talk to people about what you are working on, and see if their input throws some lights on for you, or even provides phrases that will help you capture what you are after in your next draft. Ps. I\u2019ve always said that if you wanna be a writer, you should get the smartest, funniest friends, but it is best if they are not writers too, because then they won\u2019t let you steal all their great lines about these profound matters.”<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> And a good if not, laugh out loud moment, broad smile moment at the end of that.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Thank you.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> That was rule number 33, and I wanna end our conversation with something you\u2019ve already mentioned, but I wanna say a little bit more about it, which is rule 36, Worship Talented Editors. Writing is collaborative and editors save your skin.<\/span><\/p>\n

At the end of the book, Good Writing, you have this toolkit of all the rules. I printed it out for myself so I could have it. I\u2019m gonna keep this. It\u2019s an incredibly terrific reference. And here we are referencing number 36. The final rule, Worship Talented Editors, and I thought to myself, you know, how do you know that this person\u2019s really a talented editor?<\/span><\/p>\n

And furthermore, get your hands off my writing.<\/span><\/p>\n

I notice I have this thing of like <\/span>you\u2019re ruining it<\/span><\/i>. Both of you, how do you know when that\u2019s your ego speaking or, and you just need to let go. This person really knows better than me. How do you make that assessment?<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Well I really, really trust Neal with my work, and I, but I don\u2019t always go along with what he says. It\u2019s my book, it\u2019s my peace and whatnot. But I trust him because he has um, a great eye and he loves my work and he really truly wants to just help me get better and better. Helps me wanna present something that\u2019s just burnished to its most beautiful sheen.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> You know, I, I, I came up through newspapers, um, and, uh, I was stuck with editors and some were good and some were bad, and so I had to figure out how to deal with that and how to, how to. How to kind of look into that and I, over time I developed a rubric that editors are going to insert things that I call mistakes or errors or wrongheaded thinking they are going to do that in a, in the rush of a newspaper.<\/span><\/p>\n

This is especially true and I notice if I pay attention and notice that they\u2019ve made two improvements for everything that I don\u2019t like that they\u2019ve done. Then I\u2019ve really got nothing to complain about. And if they make three improvements, I\u2019ve got something to learn from that editor. Three improvements for every mistake, and somehow that\u2019s enough.<\/span><\/p>\n

Uh, that\u2019s as much as I know about how I select whether somebody\u2019s trustworthy as an editor.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Yeah. And um. It\u2019s funny because in my, when I was coming up and an editor, whether it was at a magazine or one of my early novels, would, um, make suggestions, uh, line edit. They would call it going line by line and, and making suggestions and, and cut crossing things out.<\/span><\/p>\n

I, I would take it personally, it would sort of hurt my feelings and then. And then rather early on, I discovered the miracle that an editor was bringing to the book, which is that they were making me come up with better words, better descriptions. They were taking out the excess, which really frame, it\u2019s like getting a really great haircut.<\/span><\/p>\n

What? Where it frames your face in a way that extra hair doesn\u2019t. And I ever since then, I mean this is 45 years ago since I published more than that, published, um. My first book, hard Laughter. Ever since then, I have felt a desperate gratitude, um, for editors. Um, and there are editors who don\u2019t get me and who, um, have harshed me and have tried to get me to sound more like the writers they love, and I have had to compromise with them, but I know I don\u2019t wanna work with them again because life is just way too short.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> And, and editors who are, who are good universally do the same thing that Annie and I do with each other\u2019s work, which is you just have to, through an entire adult life, no matter how much uh, you think you\u2019ve learned, or your advanced or your psychology works for you or whatever, you still have to do the sandwich.<\/span><\/p>\n

Yeah, you have to, if you\u2019re going to criticize something. You\u2019ve gotta start with something that\u2019s praise. Yeah. And then, and Annie and I do this, this is brilliant.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Mm-hmm.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Uh, you\u2019ve really got it. You\u2019ve really captured it. The structure\u2019s perfect. I just have a few quil about some things, and you\u2019ll notice it looks all marked up, but it\u2019s all minor stuff, Annie.<\/span><\/p>\n

Don\u2019t worry about it. Mm-hmm. And, and prepare them. Right. And first remind and then close before I hand it to her and I say. And I just want to say the world needs this, or usually the word brilliant. Again, the word brilliant is, as I think I say this in the book, is as universally useful as an editor, as the word cute is for shopping for clothes, right?<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> In closing, that one thing that writers, that writers who have not been published perhaps, or who have not been happily published, don\u2019t know, is that you\u2019re not, you don\u2019t have to do it alone. You know the American ways that you should do things alone and really not enjoy it, and that will indicate your commitment to it.<\/span><\/p>\n

But the truth is that you need someone to read your work for you. You need a fresh set of eyes on it. You need someone you trust. Who respects your work and who is going to, um, help you get it to be the best it can possibly be? You don\u2019t, and there will be many people along the way who are going to step in and help you.<\/span><\/p>\n

And I think that takes away a great deal of fear, whether it\u2019s a writing partner, whether it\u2019s a writing group at the local independent bookstore. I mean, I started teaching writing at Book Passage 30 some years, 35 years ago. Jack Sam was a little boy on the floor with Legos and, you know, pretzels in a, in a Ziploc bag.<\/span><\/p>\n

And, um, I had people formed writing groups then that are still together, where two of the five have gotten published. You don\u2019t have to do it alone, and it can be something that you really love and that enriches your life and as a dream come true.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> In the description of the rule, I mean the very first. Phrase here, writing is collaborative. I mean, I underlined that because I thought, oh no, writing\u2019s the one thing you do just by yourself.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s the one thing.<\/span><\/p>\n

You sit at your, you know. But you\u2019re saying here is no, it\u2019s actually collaborative.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> And the question I have about this is what makes you a good collaborator? Not the editor, but what do you, what\u2019s the inner work you have to do to be available for collaboration?<\/span><\/p>\n

When you\u2019re dealing with this expression that you are so invested in?<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Yeah. You have to have. Uh, the, the way I think about it is I have to have an awareness that I have blind spots.<\/span><\/p>\n

And that, that\u2019s primarily the editor. That\u2019s the editor\u2019s first job. Mm-hmm. Is to make up for my blind spots. Mm-hmm. Right. And that, and that. I can\u2019t know my blind spots.<\/span><\/p>\n

Now, the first time I got a publishing contract for a book, I bought the book back because I couldn\u2019t trust the editor.<\/span><\/p>\n

And that\u2019s because. I want my blind spots to be taken care of because otherwise I\u2019m gonna have \u2019em smacking in my face when people read the book and say, but, but, or Why\u2019d you do that?<\/span><\/p>\n

Mm-hmm. Right. And the editor, the editor is my cheerleader and the editor or an agent, both of them kind of do this thing where if I don\u2019t detect that they love. Something about it and think this thing needs to be out there in some way, then they\u2019re not doing their job. Mm-hmm. So they have to start there.<\/span><\/p>\n

And then they have to, first of all, fill in my blind spots.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> I also just want to add that I was a really serious tennis player from the age of nine until. When I dropped outta college and I discovered rather early on how much more I love doubles than singles, you know, because it was fun and it was social and it was somebody could, if I didn\u2019t have a good forehand volley and Shelly Adams did, then I had, I could do the things that I could do so well, I had a great backhand down the line shot and I do to this day. But, um, it\u2019s just…<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Annie protects me from myself when she reads my stuff.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> And it\u2019s just so much more fun.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> Is it fair to say that this book, Good Writing, talking about collaboration, is your love child together? Is it fair to say that?<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Kind of. Yeah. Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> I\u2019ve been talking with Annie Lamott and Neal Allen. You say to question cliches and to twist them, so maybe we can twist the love child cliche in some way. You can both help me.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> You did. Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> They have written a new book together. It\u2019s called Good Writing: 36 Ways to Improve Your Sentences. And all kinds of other things about writing towards the really, really, can I throw in as many reallys as I want here and not economize in the end…?<\/span><\/p>\n

Because it\u2019s my gosh darn podcast, and who knows how they\u2019ll edit it.<\/span><\/p>\n

Writing towards the really, really, really real thank you both so much.<\/span><\/p>\n

Good Writing.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Thank you, Tami.<\/span><\/p>\n

Neal Allen:<\/b> Thank you.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> And we really, really do love you as a cousin and we love the Sounds True community, most of all. So thank you so much for having us.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tami Simon:<\/b> Yeah. Thank you both. Good Writing, friends.<\/span><\/p>\n

Anne Lamott:<\/b> Thank you, Tami.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","meta":{"_expiration-date-status":"","_expiration-date":0,"_expiration-date-type":"","_expiration-date-categories":[],"_expiration-date-options":[]},"class_list":["post-25288","transcript","type-transcript","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\nAnne Lamott & Neil Allen: Write Toward the Really Real | Sounds True<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"noindex, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Anne Lamott & Neil Allen: Write Toward the Really Real | Sounds True\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Anne Lamott: Don\u2019t write towards irony. Don\u2019t write towards like snark or loftiness. Write towards compassion. You know, write towards real. Right towards the real. Neal Allen: It\u2019s like anything that you master in life. The point of mastery isn\u2019t virtuosity. The point of mastery is there comes a time when you don\u2019t have […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Sounds True\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-03-19T20:31:05+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"46 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/\",\"name\":\"Anne Lamott & Neil Allen: Write Toward the Really Real | Sounds True\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-03-19T20:27:57+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-03-19T20:31:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Transcripts\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Anne Lamott & Neil Allen: Write Toward the Really Real\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/\",\"name\":\"Sounds True\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Sounds True\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/soundstrue-logo-footer-color.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/soundstrue-logo-footer-color.png\",\"width\":1035,\"height\":235,\"caption\":\"Sounds True\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Anne Lamott & Neil Allen: Write Toward the Really Real | Sounds True","robots":{"index":"noindex","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Anne Lamott & Neil Allen: Write Toward the Really Real | Sounds True","og_description":"Anne Lamott: Don\u2019t write towards irony. Don\u2019t write towards like snark or loftiness. Write towards compassion. You know, write towards real. Right towards the real. Neal Allen: It\u2019s like anything that you master in life. The point of mastery isn\u2019t virtuosity. The point of mastery is there comes a time when you don\u2019t have […]","og_url":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/","og_site_name":"Sounds True","article_modified_time":"2026-03-19T20:31:05+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"46 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/","url":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/","name":"Anne Lamott & Neil Allen: Write Toward the Really Real | Sounds True","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-03-19T20:27:57+00:00","dateModified":"2026-03-19T20:31:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/anne-lamott-neil-allen-write-toward-the-really-real\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Transcripts","item":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/transcript\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Anne Lamott & Neil Allen: Write Toward the Really Real"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/","name":"Sounds True","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#organization","name":"Sounds True","url":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/soundstrue-logo-footer-color.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/soundstrue-logo-footer-color.png","width":1035,"height":235,"caption":"Sounds True"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/transcript\/25288","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/transcript"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/transcript"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/resources2.soundstrue.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25288"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}