Welcome

My drug of choice is writing––writing, art, reading, inspiration, books, creativity, process, craft, blogging, grammar, linguistics, and did I mention writing?

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Worst Page Turner

What's the worst book that you just couldn't stop reading?  

Since yesterday's post grew into something bigger than I'd expected, I'm spending today going cross eyed reading the second round of guest-blogger submissions, as well as trying to get a couple of articles in the hopper for Friday and Monday while I'm in Denver.

There's only a week to go in our second semifinal for worst book you couldn't stop reading (no matter how much you wish you could). Next Wednesday the results go up and the four titles that are the worst (but most page-turniest) will go on to the final round

Don't forget you get three (3) votes, but that there is no ranking, so using as few votes as possible is better.

The poll itself is in the lower left at the bottom of the side menus.

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Paying The Bills With Writing (Five Years In–Personal Update)

Writer looking triumphant–despite still being sick.
Today's post is a bit streamy. I'm still sick and still taking it easy, but there's something important to talk about today.

There's this scene in Necessary Roughness (and I bring it up, not only because it totally fits in with my usual melange of 20+ year old pop culture references but that it describes how I'm feeling today pretty well).

Tragically, I can't find a clip of it and this is the best I can do: https://youtu.be/F9xZ6ay5kMg?t=1h26m4s The whole movie is a pretty forgettable flick about college football. It was okay, and had its moments, but kind of blends into the early nineties pastiche of not-quite-eighties anymore, but not quite the multicultural and alternative media blitz that shaped so much of the later part of the decade. The part that I remember liking is that Scott Bakula's character writes a pretty good essay in his composition class and was actually there to go back to college.

I always dig the writer types.

Anyway, they're in a huddle, before the last play. (I hope you are all okay with 26 year old spoilers.) It's fourth down. They're exhausted. They haven't been able to make a passing play for a while.

This isn't the movie's climax. They make the pass and it becomes 21-20. The extra point would tie the game, but they go for a two point conversion and end up winning. (Yay.) THAT'S the movie's climax. It's overly-telegraphed in the dialogue, and involves some cheesy slow motion shots that are more movie than sports. It wraps up some character arcs with satisfying crunches. It's a 90's football movie–what did you expect?

But let's go back to that fourth down. Here's the reason I couldn't find the clip: It's just a line. It's delivered kind of nonchalantly before the play, and I think the director cared more about the joke right before it. But somewhere across twenty years and change in my mind, it became the most important line of the movie. It became the line about the moment where a struggle pays off. In my version, Scott Bakula paused before he said it–a long pregnant pause. He looked around the stadium and saw important people watching. He glanced across the faces of his teammates and saw the doubt in their eyes that their own abilities could get them through. In the background, not overbearing, a long note of music started. Scott took a deep breath, and he said to them:  "Listen up. (pause) You're hurt, you're tired, you're bleeding. (shot of everyone looking wrecked) I am too. I'm gonna make you a promise though. (a long pause) If we make it. In that end zone, when we cross that line....it's not going to hurt anymore. I promise.*"

(*Actual line: "Listen up. You're hurt, you're tired, you're bleeding. I'm gonna make you a promise. In that end zone, you won't feel pain. You hear?")

Something happened earlier today.

My Patreon funds disbursed. I've been making money in small amounts for years now through Paypal, but even my most spectacular months were about half of what Patreon just pulled in, and that's a monthly amount. In the last day or so, I've also gotten a big donor and I am now within $11/month of the second goal. This goal would permanently eliminate my need to teach a second night each week.

That's its SECOND goal already almost hit in a single month.

Image description $589 of $600 for the second goal.


There's a long way to go before writing is my only job. I'd have to cover what I'm making now from the second night of teaching, from nannying for The Contrarian, and the money the Kickstarter is currently covering. And even then, that creates only a pretty a tight, shoestring budget.

But also...as I dragged my ass through this last month of pet death and writing difficulties (because of the inauguration), as I've dragged myself through this last year of break ups and moves and loved ones with cancer and losing the parent relationship I had with T.C., there has been a lot of hurt around getting up every day and writing.

And I know your lives hurt too. And sometimes that's when it's the hardest to keep writing–especially for an audience.

But listen up. You're hurt, you're tired, you're bleeding. I am too. I'm gonna make you a promise though. If you make it. If you get that paycheck, if you have that moment where you realize you're paying the bills from writing–that you've crossed the line of that dream you've had for thirty-two years....it's not going to hurt anymore. I promise*.

*Other shit will hurt because that's life and writing doesn't make it go away, but all those moments you didn't think you could do it and you thought that it was best to just quit and only write when it was fun and you just did not know how you were going to get up and put something on the page anyway...those evaporate. 

Five years in...

I set this blog up in 2012, of course, to write and to write about writing, but also as a real-time, meta demo of how hard (but possible) it would be to make money writing. I knew from everything I had read, seen, heard, and everyone I'd talked to in the industry, two things stood out almost everywhere I looked:

1) The perceived "legitimacy" of non-traditional publishing was less than that of traditional, but that non traditional publishing would pay out faster. Also the latter was becoming harder and harder to break into–with every passing day, with every tech advancement, writing was becoming less and less a paper and gatekeeper world.

2) That even with the "faster" success of non-traditional publishing, it would take about ten years of solid, legitimate effort to reach the point where I was a working writer. (In traditional publishing those ten years tend to just be almost completely unpaid with maybe the occasional short story sale, and then BAM book deal. (Which usually is around the five year point for a writer going at it prolifically and though it isn't enough money to live off of for long enough to fully write the next book, it marks the moment when a writer can make some "day job" sacrifices for writing.) In non-traditional, you can make your first few cents the same day you start writing, but it's a long slog to the kind of money that pays for more than just your Netflix account. A year ago I averaged $200 a month. A year before that about $75.)

It's now been five years. We're about halfway there. I'm paying about half my bills with writing.

If the symmetry were any more perfect, I would burst.

I'm not particularly talented. I'm not a great writer. Any skill I have come by has been hard fought over years. I don't have the concentration to sit for twelve hours a day like some writers have. I don't have an unfettered life. I'm not doing anything super interesting that folks find compelling. I just do it. I do it every day. And I peel back my skin and rib cage and put myself out there.

The take home here is that it works just about exactly as fast as all these people who are on the other side telling you what to expect say it will. And every day you don't get to work adds another day onto the end of your "five to ten but really closer to ten" years.

For many–especially those just tuning in who haven't seen this as a process as slow as watching the grass grow–I have already crossed the Rubicon from "What the fuck does he know?" to "Teach me your secret ways!" but the "secrets" are all laid out in this blog. It's all there. Every crappy article that didn't land. Every swing-and-miss of fiction (and more to come). Every time you could just TELL I didn't have an article in me, but I wrote something anyway. The way I've foraged an online presence but never made that the end rather than the means. It's all right there.

In the last five years, people have disparaged my choice to go non traditional and disparaged my choice to put some of my effort into self-promotion and disparaged my advice to write daily, and disparaged every bit of advice I've given, but most of them are still in the same place they were five years ago. Of course, I don't think I'm right about everything, and certainly someone could make a fine writing career while ignoring a few choice morsels of my advice. ("Screw him I'm going to get an MFA and write for NaNo every year!") But what I hope keeps happening is that everyone sees that the formula isn't a trick or a secret.

It's just a lot of fucking work.

I do want to make one thing clear though: If you write, you're a writer. That's the part that changes your life. That's the part that opens up your world. That's the part that makes a difference. That's the art and the catharsis. That's the part that makes you feel whole when the bottom falls out–as it will do because life is kind of like that. If you write unpaid, unread, in your room for the sheer joy of it, ferreting your pages into the back of a drawer.... YOU. ARE. A. WRITER.

Everything else is frosting.

But if you're shooting for the frosting dream, and putting up with a lot of pain to try and get there, when you cross that line, all that work doesn't hurt anymore.

Speaking of Patreon:

Do you have a dollar?

I'll spare you all the official fundraising post this month and instead just tack a mention on here.

Just one dollar a month? To support all the writing I do? All the page maintenance, all the blogging, all the political ranting (and eventually all the fiction because it'll always be free–with *at cost* options for e-readers and print copies)? As little as one dollar could support this.

Currently over half my Patreon amount comes from three patrons. And over 80% of the money I'm making comes from fewer than a dozen donors. It's not that each of these isn't breathtaking and so unbelievably generous that I'm moved just thinking about it, but it sometimes makes me feel a little....vulnerable to have so many eggs in one basket.

I would just love it if I had lots more smaller donors too! For signing up to be a Patreon Patron for just a dollar a month, you can get in on the backchannel discussions and participate in Patron-only polls where I really listen carefully to feedback about upcoming projects, current directions, and where I should put my energy.

You can also get more rewards at the higher levels. They're not really "worth it" but it's a small way of saying thanks for the even greater levels of support. However, a single dollar a month would really be spectacular.

Monday, March 6, 2017

A Quickie (Cause I'm a Sickie)

Image description: Writer looking sick, but still hella cute.
Really Rough Draft  

Raw unfettered shit- 78, 512 (Last update 71,814) [Just this update- 6698]     

Slightly polished turd- 55, 716 (Last update 34,809)  [Just this update- 20,907] 

Superpolishedfragileshitstick- 11,513

Notice the new category? It's a third pass at the draft without completion, break, and writing out a whole new draft. I'm not usually one of those people who goes back and twiddles endlessly with the beginning. I do often start a writing session by reviewing my some of what I wrote the day before, but that's more of a jump start than anything. (A blank page is a hard start.) Usually, though, it takes just a couple of pages to get me back into the flow is plenty to kick off a writing session. 

However (and I've tried to be transparent with my Kickstarter backers about this), I had a pretty serious lapse in this work for a while there. It was mostly the couple of weeks leading up to and the month or so after the inauguration. (From what I understand, that's been really hard on a lot of artists.) It was all I could do to keep blogging and kind of peck at my word count. But the initial shock and horror have faded into more of a grim determination. The world will need relevant art. 

I woke up with a cold today. It's mild, but I'm flying on Thursday, and I really don't still want to be suffering. I'll break today's post up into a report (today) and a personal update (tomorrow) as I try to get some rest.

And of course keep plucking away at these word counts.

Sunday, March 5, 2017

Worst Page Turner (Semifinal 2)

What is the worst book that you simply could NOT put down (no matter how hard you tried)?

They're the books you want to hate, you want to stop reading...but you just can't.

We've culled our quarterfinals and come up with sixteen titles. Eight of these sixteen have already been culled down to four remaining. Now these eight need to be culled to see which titles will go on to the final round.

Everyone will get three votes (3). The top four names of this poll will go on to the final round. 

Before you simply vote for your favorite five, consider that, as there is no ranking of those votes; each vote beyond one dilutes the power of your choices a little more. So if you have a genuine favorite–or pair of favorites–it's better to use as few votes as possible.

The poll itself is on the left side, at the bottom of the side menus.

Friday, March 3, 2017

Worst Page Turner (Poll Results Semifinal 1)

Well since yesterday's post was supposed to be a light and easy Thursday post, but turned into a 2000 word article on social justice within linguistics. So today, I'm going to just put up poll stuff, and maybe get you a light and fluffy question this weekend. I have other writing that I didn't do yesterday, guest bloggers to respond to, plus a mid afternoon plan, and I'm hoping to see The Contrarian tonight for some bro time before I won't for over a week.

Text results below.

I'm not sure if the titles below Eat Pray Love were deemed to be not irresistable and page-turner enough or if they were actually considered too good for this poll, but either way, they won't be going on to the final round.

Stay tuned. I'll be putting up our second semifinal round later today.

Twilight-S. Meyer 107 34.85%
Divergent Series- V. Roth 47 15.31%
Sookie Stackhouse Series- C. Harris 46 14.98%
The Fault in Our Stars-J. Green 30 9.77%
Eat Pray Love-E. Gilbert 23 7.49%
The Mortal Instruments-C.Clare 23 7.49%
Left Behind—T. LaHaye 22 7.17%
Bridges of Madison County-R.J. Waller 9 2.93%

Thursday, March 2, 2017

Dialects, Idioms, and Intelligence (Mailbox)

Image description: White Mailbox with two letters inside
[Remember, keep sending in your questions to chris.brecheen@gmail.com with the subject line "W.A.W. Mailbox" and I will try to answer a couple each week (after this week). I will use your first name ONLY unless you tell me explicitly that you'd like me to use your full name or you would prefer to remain anonymous.  My comment policy also may mean one of your comments ends up in the mailbox. I can only handle one seemingly simple question that turns into a massive explanation of cultural tensions once every few weeks.]    

Our week of mailbox posts continues...

Aelyth asks: 

Greetings!

First of all, I really thankful for your page, Got me back on track writing my world further. Secondly, it's so mesmerizing how much depth English has, as a foreigner, I learned it pretty much by watching movies and reading online stuff, but not so much proper books, yet I thought I should write my novel in English, for obvious reasons, but well. I'm not there yet that's for sure now. The thing what I want to ask you, do you know any site or book which explains this part of English? Like a dictionary of some short, explaining the expressions, and on top of that the more poetic expressions. Because I really want to learn that. 

On another note, I used English a long time ago last, so I'm not sure, if I missed out something, but... I read this post which said: "My mom didn't raise no fool." Isn't the double negative makes a positive?  Or that's just in math? 😀 Sorry, I'm quite a hermit, no social life, I have no one  to ask. And You seem pretty legit in grammatical questions. 

Third thing, Another question, it's about writing techniques... Ish. So I have this story, with a bunch of characters, and I'm pretty sarcastic in real life - no wonder I don't have friends - but When I write, I just can't come up with smart answers, as there are no stupid questions. Any idea how to make dumb characters? 😀 

Thank you very much. For inspiring, and for showing the hidden beauty of this language. 

[Chris's note: I added the link to the letter above.]

My reply:

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaang. So much for little league, I guess.

If you asked me to come up with a list of things I'm good at (after the initial imposter syndrome wore off that obviously I'm not good at anything, of course), I would actually have a reasonably robust list. I am pretty good at dissecting popular media through a literary lens. I give decent back rubs. I do this thing with my tongue piercing–well maybe that for another time. And I guess I can sort of write, though that is more a skill foraged out of years of determined practice than any kind of innate talent.

But I don't think, even if you told me I had to keep plugging away every day at that list for a year that "legit in grammatical questions" would be anywhere on it. It's a good day when I can use the right homophone in a Facebook post and not forget what commas are for.

But I'll do my best.

So there's good news and there's bad news, Aelyth. The good news is, you're in luck: teaching at this level is actually one of my three day jobs. And I'm pretty good at it. I rock coordinating conjunctions, relative clauses, and prepositions almost as well as Trogdor burninates.

The bad news is....while your grammar isn't perfect (particularly punctuation if you're looking for where to put your improvement energy), the things you're asking me about in your question aren't actually grammar problems.

Also, that the questions you've asked are not grammar errors, is probably the simplest things that could be said about them, so here comes some cultural unpacking. And given the gravitas of the issue at hand, I'm going to be stepping away from my usual sarcastic persona,  just so I can be extra careful.

The first thing you mentioned ("My mom didn't raise no fool.") might be considered an idiom or maybe a fixed phrase, but it comes from non standard dialects of English. In modern standard English (which would be considered "proper" English by many of the white male elite and institutions still primarily run by them) it is considered an error to use a double negative. So yes, in formal, academic English, this would be an error, but almost every native speaker will know exactly what you mean.

Double negatives are common among dialects that are considered "lowbrow" in English. Poor communities and particularly regions with low educations often use double negatives in this way but it can also be used by folks who know MSA as a way to show that they are "down to Earth." It's perfectly understandable, but people like to have artificial means for separating classes, so you can consider the rules about not using double negatives to be worth knowing, but roughly analogous to being able to identify the fish fork.

More specifically, "My mom didn't raise no fool," is an expression used within [among others] AAVE (African American Vernacular English) which is a dialect that doesn't have the same prescriptions about double negatives. Some people who are not linguists or anthropologists may not understand this, but AAVE actually is a viable, "proper" dialect of English with roots that go deep into the US history of anti-black racism and slavery and a "code" that couldn't easily be deciphered by white people. It is, simply put, a very slightly different language as are most other dialects in which it is found. And the only reason it isn't treated as such has to do with the ongoing racism in our culture (or classism when it comes to white dialects that use it like Ozark English and the power differential between those who see it as legitimate (less social power) and those who do not (more social power). Today it is mostly spoken by urban working-class Blacks or by middle-class Black folks who are often adept at "code switching" between AAVE and "standard" English as well as the often poorer rural dialects (like Ozark English). AAVE has its own vocabulary, it's own grammar (which makes perfect linguistic sense when studied), and its own idioms as do most other dialects that employ double negatives.

Now before I leave it there, let me make one more point about this expression. Be careful using it. I don't know where you're from or what you look like from your question, but there's some context here that I would be remiss not to give you.

I don't normally spend a lot of energy policing linguistic syncretism and how humans acquire language makes the intersection between race and culture very difficult to untangle, but you should be made aware of the cultural conflict you're stepping into. Not every Black person will care as much about AAVE in general or this expression in particular, a lot of white people will dismiss and trivialize the whole thing, and there is some complexity (like how the phrase is common enough in rural Appalachia to make trying to figure out who it "belongs to" almost impossible) that would take a lot longer to explain than a single post. Linguistics is super complicated and trying to keep two languages that share a geography from mixing might be a lost cause.

But what I can tell you is that white people in the US have a racist and colonialist legacy that complicates how it would be perceived by many if a non-black person used an expression like this. AAVE is often appropriated by people who are not Black to make them sound tough or "edgy" or trendy or even faux trendy funny like when a nerd "misuses it" to appear extra ridiculous, while at the same time it is considered by those higher in the social hierarchy to be "bad English," filled with "errors," or indicative of a lack of education. It mirrors many other aspects of Black culture that are repudiated by we white folk, but then become "cool" when done by people who aren't Black, particularly by white people.

As an example, I need go no further than the expression you asked about. In "standard" English, which is considered "proper" by those with more power in our cultural dynamics. "My mom didn't raise no fool," is basically saying, "I'm not foolish," or "I'm not going to fall for that." But the arts and entertainment are guilty of reinforcing this prescription by repeatedly portraying Black or rural folks in their arts and entertainment saying this expression WHEN THEY ARE BEING FOOLISH.

It's a slap in the face. It's racist. (Or at least classist.) It's bullshit. And it casts folks who speak this dialect as automatically foolish by virtue of not understanding the irony of a double negative. And all that history and oppression and racism still exists when white people want to turn around use this expression as an "edgy" way to say they're too smart to fall for something.

Your second question will require no less finesse. 

First of all, I know you wouldn't really know this as a second language speaker, but the word "dumb" is probably not the word you want to use. It's kind of falling out of usage these days because it's sort of unkind. I know I'm fighting an uphill battle (even with liberals) to retire terms like "idiot" or "moron" but there are certain slurs that have to do with people's abilities that have finally been recognized as hurtful. Most of us don't use the R-word or add "tard" to the end of words anymore. "Dumb" is kind of edging into that second group.

That's because usually the people we're calling these things are actually being immoral or obtuse or harmful or inconsiderate or any number of things that don't have anything to do with their brain capacity or processing speeds, and we have grabbed for a word that hurts other people as well by equating immorality, harm, and lack of consideration with these folks–when we shouldn't.

It's like calling our current president "insane." He might be, but I'm not his licenced therapist, so I don't get to make that call (and and if I were he would have my confidentiality).  What his real problem is is that he's racist, transphobic, xenophobic, misogynistic, and completely self centered. And plenty of sane people are all those things, and plenty of mentally ill people are none of them (at least not to the same degree). When I tie all those things to "insane," as if "insane" is metonymy for all these things (when that's not what they have anything to do with), it makes it that much harder for someone who legitimately has a mental illness to avoid the stigma that they are also going to be racist, homophobic, self-centered and such. Language has that power and people who use language carefully (like writers) should do well to know it and use words with greater precision instead of insisting the world at large ought to know what they meant.

Originally "dumb" meant unable to speak and then kind of grew to mean stupid as well. But honestly, if you see someone "acting dumb," their behavior mirrors someone who is deaf. Someone "acting dumb" will be mimicking having trouble speaking because they can't hear precisely what the words are supposed to sound like. They will speak with exaggerated long vowels and slur their words. It's really, actually SUPER shitty if you think about it for a half a second to cluster those two assumptions about a person together in one vicious mockery. Super smart people can be deaf and have trouble talking in a "typical" way, and folks with brilliant articulation aren't necessarily bright. In fact, most ways people telegraph that someone isn't smart–speaking like someone who is deaf, southern drawls, imitating down syndrome, impersonating autism–are all pretty fucking awful and rooted in bigotry.

And even though most people don't mean to insult both groups with the one insult, they absolutely do.

But the other important thing is just exactly where you're going with the idea of "less intelligence" anyway. Sometimes people are slower because of a processing difficulty like ADD or Autism, but still quite bright. A lot of people are intelligent, but may not seem so because of completely separate issues like mental illness or emotional disorders. Our very concept of intelligence is culturally rooted.  In the U.S., for example, it favors linguistic and mathematical ability over anything else including basic emotional literacy or interpersonal skills. Spatial geniuses aren't considered geniuses if they can't write a paper about it or apply it mathematically.

Further, consider how often "stupid" is synonymous with "non-conforming" in some way–particularly when it comes to following the directions of authority.

So your question about a considered portrayal of a character who is maybe not as smart as average folks probably has the same answer as my question of what you even mean by that. The unkind value judgements are more likely to lead to flat, bigoted portrayals because they spring out of the idea that "stupid" vs. "smart" exist on a single axis instead of a honeycomb of nuance. Figuring out if a character has a processing disorder or is maybe less adept at linguistic expression (but super good at reading the emotional states of those around them), or if maybe they just sit off in the corner arranging the matchbox cars by color and size because they engage the world differently instead of "less intelligently" will make for a FAR more considered, genuine, and high integrity character.

Are you sorry you asked yet, Aleyth?

Making characters smart is a little easier since you have infinite time. I wrote a bit about that here.

In general, I think the best thing for you would be to keep reading. A lot. Read read read, and when you're done reading, read some more. That's where you're going to find the answers to the kinds of questions you're asking. Beyond the grammar (and even beyond vocabulary) language opens up into culture. An anthropologist would argue that language IS culture. Everything from idiomatic expressions to the intense emotive force of insults isn't accessible through even the most accurate translations. You've reached the point where these expressions and phrases and stories have underneath them complex (and often horrifying) history and cultural conflicts. Reading (as well as other kinds of linguistic engagement, but since you want to write in English, I'm recommending reading) is really the best way to begin to tap into that huge linguistic iceberg that is 90% beneath the surface.

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

Worst Page Turner (Last Call 1st Semifinal)

What is the worst book that you just couldn't stop reading?

Seems today's scheduled mailbox is just going to have to go up tomorrow. A little extra three-year old than I was expecting tipped the scales. Fortunately I can just flip today's post with tomorrow's and run two posts tomorrow.

Today is the last day to vote in our first semifinal for worst book you couldn't stop reading (no matter how much you wish you could). Tomorrow the results will go up along with the second semifinal round. From there we will go on to the final round.

So today is your last chance to vote. Don't forget you get three (3) votes, but that there is no ranking, so using as few votes as possible is better.

The poll itself is in the lower left at the bottom of the side menus.