Category: Writing and Chaos - Mala Naidoo’s Book World

Writing matters in a world of chaos to reflect on the emotional, psychological, and social instability that arises from uncertain contexts, the chaotic context of the inhumane now we live in, globally. Writing becomes both a cognitive tool and a form of resilience. Writing is the salvation to preventing future generations from drowning in a well of hopelessness as writing creates meaningful connections asserting that our struggles unite us.

At a psychological level, writing externalises thought. When ideas, fears, or emotions remain internal, they are often fragmented and difficult to process. Writing forces organisation and coherence because it turns scattered impressions into ordered language. This enables the noise of the voices that perpetuate chaos to be represented in the language of the human heart of the struggling, suffering, starving, dying masses who cannot articulate their pain in fear of the horrific outcome emanating from speaking out, exposing, and resisting chaos. The written word captures the timeless documented memory on the historical unfolding of chaos and its impact on human survival.

Socially, writing enables communication when direct expression may fail. In chaos, spoken communication can be reactive, emotional, or misunderstood. Writing introduces deliberation. It is the opportunity to refine ideas, choose precise language, and convey complex perspectives.

Writing also functions as a form of agency. When external circumstances feel uncontrollable, the act of writing restores a sense of authorship. It allows individuals to frame their own narrative on the chaos experienced, rather than being passively defined by events. Writing personal stories during crisis times reclaims identity and empowerment.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness…” Charles Dickens. ‘A Tale of Two Cities’

Through writing, private struggles during chaotic times become part of a broader human dialogue to hold onto our prized values that make the world a compassionate inhabitable place for all.

Essentially writing transforms disorder into meaning. It is not merely a method of communication, but a way of thinking, remembering, and asserting control as an intellectual and emotional anchor when everything else feels unstable.

Keep writing! We need the connection stories offer.

Please share your thoughts.

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

A post read recently suggested writing from a knowledge base and not from imaginative creations that might be insensitive if writing about mental illness, physical disabilities, emotional disorders etc. While I agree with being sensitive by not causing injury to others, art should mimic and extend reality if understanding and connections are to be formed.

The question is – does one have to proceed with caution when creating a character with mental illness or a physical disability in a novel?

The depiction becomes insensitive when it supports stereotypes, insults, separates and denigrates actions and situations the character is placed in. To create a character who overcomes a difficulty by honing other powerful skills or having amazing support from family and community to achieve goals is indeed not insensitive but rather supportive of what a cohesive humanity is – certainly a message for raising the lot of the human condition.

The foremost purpose of writing, fiction, in particular, is to entertain the reader more than to inform. However, if the writer is able to strike a balance between entertain and inform, the reader is likely to gain valuable understanding from such a piece of writing. If written without dictating what is right and wrong then sensitivity should prevail and the writer is more likely to connect with the consciousness of the reader which might motivate the reader to read more books by the same writer.

When entertainment and purposeful information are included in a work of fiction, a level of research is necessary to sustain the story to its logical, authentic conclusion. If the storyteller/writer has first-hand experience of events, social issues, illness, particular ways of thinking and behaving then research is not the prerequisite as it would be for a nonfiction book that covers specialised areas such as crime, history, science, psychology, culture, economics etc.

Research will not go amiss in fiction writing, it should add colour and depth to the story plot and character representations. When creating characters with a medical condition, research around the condition or perhaps speaking to a medical specialist on how the condition manifests will add authenticity to the story. How much research should one engage in is dependent on how significant that character is to the overarching story or plot. Striking a seamless balance between the story and research is essential to avoid having the story appear like an ‘unofficial’ handbook or textbook. Shaping characters in true to life situations are more likely to lead to an enjoyable reading experience. For the writer to create authenticity in a story, it is necessary that the purpose of writing is to entertain first and then inform on matters that pertain to character and plot.

The writer has to give voice first to what he or she is passionate about. If one is to expose the harsh reality of particular situations prevalent in society, then that which makes the reader uncomfortable is equally necessary. We bandy around that we need to be ‘moved’ for change to occur – to be ‘moved’ is either happily or unhappily so, with joy or sadness. If we are to be catalysts for thought change through writing fiction or nonfiction books, it should come with some thought-provoking messages – George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four might leave readers either grateful that they have control of the decisions they make in life or it might result in a re-examination of whether they are indeed free.

Fiction and nonfiction books are of equal value to the reader when they create thought change or thought searching connections.

What do you think? Should sensitivity be at the heart of all our writing? Should the writer entertain, inform and shock the reader?

I would love to hear your thoughts. Please comment below.

← Back