Welcome

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

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Writing Prompts--Fast and Random

Random enough for ya?
Trying to get to my writing group this afternoon turned into a zany adventure of being late that culminated in a sit-com-esque moment when texting my partner to let her know that I was running late, I missed my stop on BART. Only a strange looking insurance salesman with a proclivity to share way too much personal information about his gastrointestinal status could have it worse. And the end result was we didn't get writing until a half an hour late. So instead of doing extensive writing on anything we picked we gave ourselves only five minutes of frenzied pace.

Why am I telling you this? Because sometimes some of the most exciting prompts that generate the most interesting ideas can come from having very little time. (This can be true in general about writing--put yourself on a fierce deadline and you will probably surprise yourself.) If you can't sit and think for a long time; you silence the second guessing pretty quickly.  Anyone who's finally gotten their paper topic with two hours to go until it's due knows exactly how this works.

Each of the following prompts is only five minutes. FIVE MINUTES--that's it. Write fast; don't stop; and don't take time to think. See what happens.

Don't forget that these are JUST exercises, and most importantly don't forget to HAVE FUN!!

Prompt 1- Pick a book from around you at random. Go to page 42. The first sentence on that page is the first sentence of your writing prompt. (If it makes absolutely no sense at all, go to the next sentence, but the point of the prompt is to make something out of nothing, so don't just keep looking until you find something you like.)

Prompt 2- Pick one random verb and one random noun. This is a pretty good place to do that if you don't have another way you prefer, but you don't need to use them AS a phrase--just figure out the verb and the noun. Just set one word to noun, one to verb (transitive or intransitive) and leave the others blank. Do this TWICE. These are the ideas you have to marry together in your prompt.

Prompt 3- Here's one from long long ago. Picture a memory. Nothing specific, just the first thing that pops into your head. Could be from last week or your very distant childhood, but don't "switch" memories to something easy to remember. Really do the first one to pop in your head. (Mine was about my fourth or fifth birthday. Close your eyes and try to focus on that image for just a moment or two. When you open your eyes, write about it in as much detail as you possibly can.


Next week: Reporting Progress

In the not-too-distant future --
Next Sunday A.D. --
There was a guy named Chris,
Who you might realize is me.
He wanted to make money with his art,
Just another fool trying to chase his heart.
He also taught English and cleaned up the place,
But his bosses didn't like him
So they shot him into space.

So he wants to be a writer huh?
What a pretentious git (la-la-la).
He'll have to report what he's up to,
And we'll evaluate the worth of it (la-la-la).
Now keep in mind Chris must report
What he writes from beginning to end (la-la-la)
If he really wants to succeed at this
He'll never see his non cat friends.

Kitty Cat Roll Call: (All right, let's go!)
Princess!
Benjaman!
James Bond!
Quiiiiiiiiiin!

If you're wondering if he's really in space,
has no friends and other facts (la la la),
Then repeat to yourself, "It's just a filk,
I should really just relax
For Future Reporting of Writing Progress...um...3000!

Saturday, March 24, 2012

You Can DOOOO EET!!!!!!!

Photo by AmyLovesYah
A lot of people look at writing like it's some mystical process and writers like they're a different species. For years, the pedagogy of creative writing programs across the country was that genius could not be taught. Starting writers worry more about some mythical quality that they hope they have that will transform their dreams into success than they do about how much work it's going to take to get from "here" to "there."

But writing does not need to be mysterious. As a culture we've come to revere the genius rather than acknowledge the simple fact that most artists were relatively normal people who put in a shit ton of effort. Craft can be taught.  Creativity can be cultivated. Discipline can be exercised. And while writers like Shakespeare or Faulkner are certainly wordsmiths of the caliber that we can only admire from far, far below, most writers are just people who work very, very hard, think deeply about their words, and learn to tap into the creativity that we all have within us. They are human beings composed of the same spiraling cords of DNA as the rest of us.

And you can do it too!

The Holy Trinity of Writing Advice--The Only List You Really Need
Earning Your "Er."
Ziglar and Success.  What's Yours?
A Writer's Attitude: 15 Adjustments Toward Success
Using S.M.A.R.T.(S.) Goals in Writing
Progress is Progress
10 Reasons to Write Daily (Accentuate the Positive)
Don't Make it So Damned Hard!


If you're enjoying this blog, and would like to see more articles like this one, the writer is a guy with a rent and insurance to pay who would love to spend more time writing. Please consider contributing to My Patreon. As little as $12 a year (only one single less-than-a-cup-of-coffee dollar a month) will get you in on backchannel conversations, patron-only polls, and my special ear when I ask for advice about future projects or blog changes.

Friday, March 23, 2012

Earn it!


How to break the rules of writing within your writing...and get away with it.

It's not enough to say to a writer "Don't do this unless you have a good reason."

For starters, every writer will always think they have a good reason. They'll think they have a great reason. They'll think, since the dawn of the written word, they are on the top five best reasons ever to break this rule.

This advice is also probably wrong. Or at least wrong-ish. Or at least not absolute.

Every "rule" in writing is breakable.

Despite my philosophical divide with the pedagogy of SFSU, I really did learn quite a bit while I was there. I would probably not know how to torture lit snob professors by pointing out that canon literature is speculative fiction without having that education. At least not as well.

Plus there was a really good sandwich shop there in the cafeteria...

I must learn to intersperse my trash talking with poignant moments of self reflection. For all my quibbles, it was the best thing I ever did both as a writer and as a person. I did what I went there to do--I honed my craft. I wrote what they told me I "ought to be" writing, and avoided what their syllabi said they did not permit (that "evil trixie genre" writing) and I applied the lessons I'd learned to my own writing in secret–but first I locked the door, swept the room for bugs, and swore to them I was writing a short story about a bisexual Jew living in a halfway house who has AID, a meth addiction, and an unsupportive family.

Then I secretly worked on my genre novel.

One of the strengths of learning craft directly from people who have gone before you is that they can direct your efforts in a way that yields a greater return. Great writers can (and have) done nothing more to study craft than to read voraciously, and most writers (especially some of the MFA types) would do well to remember that before the 1950's or so, that (and maybe a mentor) was the ONLY way writers learned to write.

However, for writers like me with more passion than talent or skill, every improvement has been like passing a kidney stone, and the presence of instructors to point things out can help ease that transition.

Professors are like cranberry juice that way.

One of the instructors it was my honor to learn under enjoyed collecting a mental tally of stories that "broke the rules."

There are a lot of rules in writing, and I'm not talking about grammar. Crack open most books on writing, and a deluge of rules comes spilling out: Don't write in second person. Don't be too abstract. Don't write out dialect. Don't TELL people how to feel.  Don't switch point of view in a short story. Write about a short period of time. Don't write in second person. On and on and on. Some of these rules get as specific as "don't write about little kids," "don't write dreams," or "you should never have more than one adverb per page."

And of course there are today's variations. "Vampires are overdone. Stop writing about schools of wizardry. First person is so five minutes ago–use close third. Quit thinking writing in present tense is edgy."

Pretty much...all bullshit.

Not that this advice is useless, and a writer would do well to understand what they're getting into if they write a present tense book about vampire children at a wizard school who dream a lot. But any rule you can dream up has had unimaginably touching and deep fiction that breaks it–probably even canon literature.

Writers dispense rules all the time. Actually most artists dispense with the rules of their art all the time, and it's when some of the best works show up. (Most artistic movements are basically gaggles of artists flipping the bird to the last generation's "rules.") Still writing has always had this strange relationship among the arts with its own anachronistic advice. Somewhere in the mix of idolizing those writers who have "made it," it seems like advice from writers (even those writers we would never today want to emulate) takes on this mystical veracity that it doesn't in other arts or professions.

In a normal discipline, if a teacher tells you to always or never do something, there's this response that seems almost second nature to the students of, "Let's figure out why this is a rule so we can bend or break it." But writers have stuffed that part of their brain with Tennyson quotes and dirty limericks, so they don't always take this advice with respect and a grain of salt.

For some reason, writers tend to go all or nothing. Or they go the other way and just ignore it altogether and never learn why it where its wisdom comes from. Every writer is a special snowflake and their story is so fucking brilliant that they are exempt from traditional wisdom.  Because "if you really want to" or "unless you have a good reason" isn't even a speed bump when it comes to many writer's sense of their work's importance. So now you have a bunch of abstract second person stories about vampire wizard kids telling you how to feel and the writers don't really understand what the problem is because they are all convinced that their reason was a really "good reason."

Or they go the other way and take the advice as some commandment-level rule. Hating themselves for every perceived slight they have made against a set of advice by a 100 year old novelist who would never ever EVER EV-ER find an audience among today's readers.

Enter Janusprof.

I know when I felt it was time to move on from Janusprof, I really felt like it was time to move on–being told LeGuin didn't have any real social messages will do that to a science fiction fan–but while I studied the force at the foot of the Emperor, I learned a lot.

What was great about this professor is that for pretty much any rule you could name, he had this mental list of a half a dozen stories that had successfully and beautifully broken it. Most of the stories were from authors that your average reader would recognize. He always had a sense that if you knew WHY something was a problem that was better than just trying to obscurely declare it to be so. So instead of spending his time worrying about what people shouldn't write (except....apparently when it came to genre) he instead had a catch phrase.

"Earn it."

Do the work that can make the writing happen. Earn the scene. If you want a character to wax abstract about their feelings, it's going to take a lot of concrete details around that moment to ground your reader so they don't just feel like they're being ham-handedly TOLD what to feel. If you want to write about little kids, earn that by showing how major events can take on strange and different meaning to them. If you want to write in second person, figure out what the strengths are of that voice and earn it like Loorie Moore or Jay McInerney.

Write your vampire story. Even your sexy angsty 90210 teen vampire story if that's what your soul burns to write. But also learn why that shit is overdone and publishers are avoiding it and then bring a fresh perspective to the table as well.

Rules beg to be broken. It's like telling a little kid "Okay, I'm going to leave now–don't look in the closet."

As you grow up, your relationship with rules changes. You learn to measure things like risk and consequences and to carefully break the rules you don't like. (If you make sure everyone's really gone, and you don't leave any evidence, but also you accept that you might be ruining your birthday present surprise, you can look in the closet.) Most people who do illegal things (like drugs or speeding) understand this relationship with rules. It doesn't mean they totally ignore them just because fuck rules–driving 120 through a school zone or blowing pot smoke into a cop's face. But they do know when and how to get away with strategically ignoring them.

Writing advice isn't really any different. Ignoring it because "I had a good reason" or because one simply doesn't understand why it's advice in the first place won't make the prose any better or more readable. And following every bit of advice like it's the Code of the Writer™ will leave work stilted and unwilling to risk.

Instead when writers focus on doing what it takes to make successfully execute their problematic moments.

"Earn it" is so much better than many of its contemporary bits of advice. Forget the reason. Forget whether it was even a good reason.

I don't care if it was a dare or if two groupies told you they would have a threesome with you if you would just publish something in second person. Your reason doesn't matter.  Your sense of whether its importance doesn't matter.

You don't ever have to justify your writing to yourself. Just sit down and write. You have to justify your writing to your readers. And for that there is no personal excuse. You must simply, without prejudice or passion, pay the toll of making it work.

Earn it.

"Earn it," casts off the veil of glamour and mystique about writing. There isn't some mystical force that will tell you when a reason is "good enough" to break a rule. This isn't magic that drips from your fingers into the pen or keyboard and spills out onto the page. What will get your from an unearned scene to an earned scene is not the pen of Poe or the finger bone of Shakespeare or talent or even having a really good reason. It's work–hard work.

The only rule is you have to earn it.

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Writers Talking Smack


When writers talk about "the rules" of writing, they always forget to talk about them as THEIR rules. Young writers, especially standing in the splendor of a successful, published author, are sometimes in awe of another person who has made the magic work.

These writers forget to whip out their grains of salt, and the result is that legions of young writers forget that art is like Jujitsu--do what ever works. "Whatever works" might break one of another writers vaunted rules or even conventional writing wisdom. The end result being that writers are often quoted at length for their "Thou shalt..."/"Thou shalt not..." advice without a second thought. It's important to remember that writing is not an equation or it wouldn't be an art and a lot more people would be very good at it.

In the same way we have different tastes in reading, we have different tastes in writing. When a chef says "don't use too much butter in your cooking" we somehow know that is THEIR style and that Julia Child would have a thing or two to say about that, but when it comes to writing the tendency is to forget that not all writers--and even not all GOOD, FAMOUS, LITERARY writers--agree on rules or style or even what makes good writing.

And what could possibly illustrate that point more than seeing great writers talk shit about other great writers?

"[Hemingway] has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary."
-William Faulkner
"Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words?"
-Ernest Hemingway

"[Ulysses is] the work of a queasy undergraduate scratching his pimples."
-Virginia Woolf (about Ulysses)

"That's not writing, that's typing."
-Truman Capote (on Jack Kerouac)

“…like a large shaggy dog just unchained scouring the beaches of the world and baying at the moon.”
-Robert Lewis Stevenson on Walt Whitman

“All raw, uncooked, protesting.”
-Virginia Woolf on Aldous Huxley

“Miss Austen’s novels . . . seem to me vulgar in tone, sterile in artistic invention, imprisoned in the wretched conventions of English society, without genius, wit, or knowledge of the world. Never was life so pinched and narrow. The one problem in the mind of the writer . . . is marriageableness.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson on Jane Austen

“A hack writer who would not have been considered fourth rate in Europe, who tricked out a few of the old proven sure fire literary skeletons with sufficient local color to intrigue the superficial and the lazy.”
-William Faulkner on Mark Twain

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

The T Files

Each month I will (quietly) post screen shots of the blog's financial gains so that I maintain transparency regarding my Financial Pledge.  When Google sends me a check, I will post a picture of my PayPal account, the receipt from the charity, and a picture of me either stuffing Hen Wen with cash.  Eventually that will translate to improvements on the blog which you would get to see.

The intention here is never to brag, but rather to remain transparent about things like the literacy charity that W.A.W. provides.

December 2012 (First Paycheck)- Totals and charity.  Stuffing Hen Wen.
Screenshots between checks- Jan, Feb, March, April, May, June, July

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Guy Goodman St.White Reviews Judith--Speculative Nonsense

Pictured: NOT the human condition.
The English canon wasn't even around very long before it had its very first fanfiction. 

Good evening. I'm Guy Goodman St.White, your terribly British sounding host. Tonight we will be returning to the fountainhead of English literature again rather than mucking around in the regretfully seminal non-English parts of the canon. We will take a look at Judith. While this could technically be considered a religious text, the poem has some significant differences with the book found in the Catholic Bible. Regardless, Catholics are supposed to be doing their...non-protestant thing of hanging out in holy phone booths or whatever, and not reading the bible, so hopefully no one who might be offended will notice.

Major sections of Judith were destroyed in a fire. It was first discovered as an appendage to Beowulf. This is particularly notable as the chief claim Judith has to literary quality is that it is NOT Beowulf. Beyond that, it is a cesspool of genre tripe modeling itself closely after that steaming pile of speculative...oh dear, I nearly forgot my impeccable British manners.

Though there is some academic contention as to whether Cynewulf wrote Judith or not, it is my personal opinion that some silly git liked Beowulf a little too much, tried to write a story "just like it."

Obviously what we are looking at is the first recorded example of fanfic.

Cynewulf or no, our author needs to learn a little something about how to portray character in literature. If writing wants to have any hope of being considered as high art, a character must be portrayed as a morally ambiguous agent.

The human condition creates within each of us a duality. We are all a mixture of repugnant traits and admirable ones. In REAL literature, the author knows this, and doesn't fall into the trap of "good guys" and "bad guys." Such is the mark of hack writing with no literary value to speak of. All these virtues Judith has create an implausible protagonist as she goes to fight monsters. She even glows with saintly light as she strikes down evil.  I mean come ON!

Where's the moral ambiguity that is required for high art?

Obviously Cynewulf needed to ditch the unrealistic monsters, focus on the human power struggle of the socio-political landscape, the struggle of duty vs. desire, and the confrontation of dark shadows regarding the ethical implications of killing another human being. If PTSD nightmares over the horror of taking a life had led Judith to self medicate with prescription drugs and junk food while slipping into a quagmire of increasingly unsafe sexual exploits (with other women, no less), this might have actually been a story worthy of literature.

As it is though, we're going to toss it on the pile with last month's Asimov Magazine and lament the cold reality that speculative fiction even exists, and that the canon is so rife with it.