At some point every semester, I ask the journalism students I teach a question that is meant to make them rethink some of the assumptions they might hold about their chosen trade. I ask them this: “Who is the most important American writer?”
It triggers a classroom expedition whose itinerary you can probably guess: embarking from the Morocco-bound pantheon, branching into private fandom and detouring into willful obscurities - novelists all, usually, even though we’re in a temple of fact - before I try to steer them toward my chosen destination by asking the question again, underlining the word “important.”
“Whose words meant more than any others’?” I ask.
“Jefferson,” somebody will often say then, recognizing the direction I’m heading in and citing the Declaration of Independence. Close - grabby lede, soaring kicker, but a saggy middle, so no, not quite. It takes a long time to finally reach Abraham Lincoln.
I suspect the game might be up now, though, and that my pedagogical odyssey might shorten the next time I try it. If Lincoln the movie enters its own pantheon at the Academy Awards on Sunday—its nominations include best picture and best actor—then the answer to my question might become self evident, because I’m hard-pressed to imagine how anyone could see it and believe there is any other answer.
Lincoln is a movie that is, gloriously and thrillingly, about words. It is bracketed by brief bits of carnage - amazingly little, considering that it unfolds during the bloodiest war in our history - but it is bracketed, too, by words, the same words that bracket the wise and weary marble figure inside the memorial on whose walls they are carved: the Gettysburg Address, recited back to Lincoln by some soldiers at the start, and the Second Inaugural, delivered by Lincoln himself at the end.
Movies find their moments, and the words in Lincoln that have gotten the most attention are the words that seem to fit so presciently this moment of partisan rancor in Washington - the words of Lincoln the conciliator and compromiser, the horse trader and vote wheedler, the moralist who is unafraid to be a politician, too. It is hard to come away from the movie without wishing that our leaders would take their lessons from it. Sequestration, after all, seems far less daunting a problem to solve than slavery.
But the Lincoln I saw was the Lincoln I want my students to learn from. It was Lincoln the writer. The movie is blessedly free of the tropes through which writers are usually portrayed - the earnest scratching on paper, the brow kneading, the crumpled drafts on the floor, the gazing out the window in search of the muse - and yet it manages a fuller and truer portrait of a writer than almost any other I’ve seen on screen.
Writing, as Holden Caulfield observed in The Catcher in the Rye, is not just a matter of putting “all the commas and stuff in the right places.” Yes, you need to know about grammar and punctuation, and also about word choice and sentence rhythm, imagery and dialogue, character and description. You need to be handy with a wide range of rhetorical tools.
But none of those technical skills matter if you are not also what Lincoln most profoundly was: a clear thinker. Writing is thinking, and if you don’t think clearly about what you want to say, what story you want to tell, you will never write clearly about it. Clarity - of thought, of purpose, of expression - is the cardinal virtue of good writing, and it shines abundantly through everything Lincoln says and does in the movie. Writing is not just what happens at a desk. It happens everywhere and always, whenever your mind encounters a thought it wants to wrap words around.