tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34590944663640694472024-03-05T00:40:49.226-07:00Third Person Ltd.Weekly random thoughts on reading and writing by an as-yet unpublished novelist.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-81948129361543810262011-03-13T11:32:00.000-06:002011-03-13T11:32:48.996-06:00A Better Novel<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFo2PWpV99-Y7OUOonBeueDdR8TK9qGhHJQT-zBLgCqvblDHskX-7xvsYNng1_GO66kJuEBUEs4td8RFIltLIwSJvAT6IIa_xJFEvCWmzGbsz5aOnGM5e7_7N1fs1Lf10CH7UgTqk_Vfmw/s1600/IMG_2219-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFo2PWpV99-Y7OUOonBeueDdR8TK9qGhHJQT-zBLgCqvblDHskX-7xvsYNng1_GO66kJuEBUEs4td8RFIltLIwSJvAT6IIa_xJFEvCWmzGbsz5aOnGM5e7_7N1fs1Lf10CH7UgTqk_Vfmw/s400/IMG_2219-blog.JPG" width="277" /></a>The physical format of a novel has been largely unchanged for centuries. It shares most of that format with other printed matter of similar length: a series of double-sided pages bound together in a durable cover. Normally the author is named, and page numbers are provided as are a title page and chapter headings.<br />
<br />
It wasn't always that way. A reader used to have to cut the pages after purchase. Chapter breaks were a crazy new invention at some point. Works were copied by hand. There was a time when it was considered gauche for an author to claim credit for his work. There was authorship before paper.<br />
<br />
And if you've spent any time reading older literature (certainly anything pre-1700) you've noticed differences in the style and pacing of those stories compared to what's produced today. The novel is not a fixed-form; it continues to evolve.<br />
<br />
We've become very comfortable with the format of a modern-day novel, both its physical presentation and the story itself. But is there a better way?<br />
<br />
We're seeing physical format changes in the e-readers, but they try to mimic paper books to a large degree. We still have to <i>page</i> forward and back, even though there are no longer any pages. The text sits still while we move our eyes, rather than the other way around. We are still shown <i>covers</i> even though these <i>books</i> (which are not <i>books</i> at all) have none: the protective purpose they used to serve is unnecessary.<br />
<br />
The novel itself is changing, as it has changed throughout history. The physical format the novel is presented in is changing too. Are we making too many concessions to what readers are accustomed to? Do we really lack the imagination required to make reading a better experience in more than just a token fashion?<br />
<br />
Aside from instant purchase and downloading of books, and the ability to carry a large number of books with us on our e-readers (note that none of these changes the reading experience itself) what have we done? We've provided a way to change the font size. That's about it that I can see (no pun intended).<br />
<br />
Shouldn't we expect more?John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-33761804125750226422011-03-06T01:38:00.011-07:002011-03-06T01:38:00.469-07:00Time is a Writer's Friend<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJmVM2wA-HB4oB3ACp3doR0-NJUra8yP6CMVz2Xd4-TNWUME777Skc0b7zC9WnXN9R5Epnm7QTXy49XyO7lpkiEYlTheJQ-W1mov4jDI3QeZmPMJU1RM1MySXcrcZhuwyF6sJ3JZi5fp8A/s1600/IMG_2221-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="241" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJmVM2wA-HB4oB3ACp3doR0-NJUra8yP6CMVz2Xd4-TNWUME777Skc0b7zC9WnXN9R5Epnm7QTXy49XyO7lpkiEYlTheJQ-W1mov4jDI3QeZmPMJU1RM1MySXcrcZhuwyF6sJ3JZi5fp8A/s400/IMG_2221-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>We often think of time as an enemy, or at least as something that's working against us, something we'd always like to have more of.<br />
<br />
But let's remember this: time isn't our enemy -- time doesn't care about us. We each get our share, no more and no less.<br />
<br />
Time is nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once.* Time gives us history, perspective, second-chances. Ah, second chances....<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Time is my helper; I shall not want.<br />
It alloweth me to lie down in green pastures:<br />
It leadeth me beside the still waters.<br />
It restoreth my muse:<br />
It headeth me on the paths of rightness for my novel's sake.<br />
<br />
Yea, though I wade through the rivers of my story,<br />
I will fear no false step: for Time art with me;<br />
My delete key and my backup, they comfort me.<br />
Time preparest a plan for me in the presence of my doubts;<br />
Time annointest my manuscript; Creativity runneth wild.<br />
<br />
Surely writing and revision shall follow me all the days of my life,<br />
And I will dwell in my house of cards forever.</blockquote><br />
[Okay, that was corny, but let's hear a big shout-out to that oh-so-poetical King James Bible anyway.]<br />
<br />
I'm back on track with my writing. The commitment I made last week to (re)make writing a priority paid off. I started writing from the very first day, but on the fourth day I found my groove and the words began to flock to my fingers. I'm working on the outline like I promised myself, and it's fun and flowing like the regular writing (when I pantsed it last time around). I am so excited.<br />
<br />
Time is on your side if you want it to be.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="color: #999999;"><i><br />
</i></div><div style="color: #666666;"><i>* Attributed to </i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler">Physicist John Archibald Wheeler</a> (who coined the term "black hole"). He continued on to say<i> "Space is what prevents everything from happening to me." That guy had a way with words just as he had with theoretical physics.</i></div>John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-19672378254791609152011-02-27T01:15:00.001-07:002011-02-27T01:15:00.836-07:00Struggling to Be a Plotter<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGFNpSOd5iRqjurJyGqUURS_9pnARqTiO1Fk6chBHoKq2nNKsKL9N3xOKJB8R8olE6GCY2saet6cZI1HDKg1ZvNTQ_6Qc4mZBRYnxXwDVcM-fMMc1rzUtCHucOqGVYVj3wid_pAnBCndkX/s1600/IMG_2218-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgGFNpSOd5iRqjurJyGqUURS_9pnARqTiO1Fk6chBHoKq2nNKsKL9N3xOKJB8R8olE6GCY2saet6cZI1HDKg1ZvNTQ_6Qc4mZBRYnxXwDVcM-fMMc1rzUtCHucOqGVYVj3wid_pAnBCndkX/s400/IMG_2218-blog.JPG" width="358" /></a></div>I'm still struggling to plot my next novel. I'm not sure what the problem is, but I have an idea.<br />
<br />
I've never plotted before, not like this. I pantsed my way through my first novel, and while I had a blast doing it and learned a lot, the story suffered from the lack of a blueprint.<br />
<br />
I know how to plan. I plan all the time at work, at home, in the car, out for a walk, mowing the lawn -- you name it. What's got me blocked with plotting out this novel is <i>fear</i>, and the way I deal with that fear is through <i>creative scheduling</i>.<br />
<br />
I <i>fear</i> two things: that I'll plot everything out and then my story will leave my intended path, or that on the other hand I'll be unable to make my characters come alive because I'm writing inside the bounds of my plot-box.<br />
<br />
The <i>creative scheduling</i> technique I use has effectively kept those fears at bay. What I do is promise myself every day that I will work on my plotting, and then find other things that have to be done before the writing. Or other things that <i>can</i> be done before the writing. Or I just let myself get distracted. I know that some people would call this <i>procrastination</i>, but that's such a nasty-sounding word. I like the term <i>creative scheduling</i> better.<br />
<br />
What to do?<br />
<br />
I know I want to get back into the writing phase. The plotting is wearying and scary to me, but the writing and revision is fun. The only way I'm going to get to the writing is to get through the plotting process (or just abandon that process and pants my way again through this next novel, but I'm not going to do that).<br />
<br />
And the silly thing is that the plotting process should really only take another week or so -- two weeks max. (I tend to be optimistic in my scheduling, so maybe it will be twice that, but still that's not very long.) It isn't getting done by itself. What I need to do is make my <i>creative scheduling</i> work for rather than against me.<br />
<br />
That's why tonight, instead of sending that email I've needed to send all week, and instead of making my Amazon order, and even instead of writing this blog, I worked on my plotting. First. Then I did those other things that needed to get done.<br />
<br />
The writing has to come back to first place in my priorities for my evenings, the way it used to be. The other things still have to get done (well, most of them, anyway), but I need the energy and time to write, so now the writing will happen directly after dinner instead of at some indefinite time slipping into "later".<br />
<br />
I feel some progress coming on!John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-44335225277189703732011-02-20T00:03:00.001-07:002011-02-20T00:03:00.369-07:00Synergistic Writing, Anyone?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsGjTxLKgqEnqwCn_TWnUTaY-k-bELmz8z9c59DDqiasOkKpojPy_kr2qji-fsfxLrc0ckhkjm90aNgRoRgaZ0fVQY7wF28EoDM-iQ8PvSjr7w_KrjOHD1Lsc9V4_zFp6fhR5A6_D_vftm/s1600/IMG_2204-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="215" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsGjTxLKgqEnqwCn_TWnUTaY-k-bELmz8z9c59DDqiasOkKpojPy_kr2qji-fsfxLrc0ckhkjm90aNgRoRgaZ0fVQY7wF28EoDM-iQ8PvSjr7w_KrjOHD1Lsc9V4_zFp6fhR5A6_D_vftm/s400/IMG_2204-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>Last week I wrote about <a href="http://thirdpersonltd.johnmbaron.com/2011/02/synergistic-reading.html">reading more than one book at a time</a>, but what about <i>writing</i> more than one? Some people do.<br />
<br />
If you think it's a challenge to keep to books that you're reading together straight in your head, how much more difficult must it be with two stories you're creating?<br />
<br />
I haven't tried writing two novels simultaneously, but it definitely has an appeal. I probably wouldn't go with working on both each night, nor would I schedule alternating nights (or mornings or whatever -- I write at night), because scheduling is a sort of tyranny I despise. No, I see simultaneous projects as a way to have an alternative when one of them has me stuck.<br />
<br />
Other positives are a reduced risk of boredom, and chance for cross-fertilization between novels, maybe bragging rights....<br />
<br />
The difficulties are numerous and, I think, of no significance at all. I could get characters / plot / setting confused between the stories. Oh, come on. Do I get confused between multiple characters in a single novel? Of course not. Do I get confused between these things in my story and real life? No again. [If I watched television, would I get confused when watching two different multi-episode television programs over a span of a month or two? I don't think so.]<br />
<br />
One of the novels could fall by the wayside, and the effort I'd expended would have been wasted. First off, I have to say that effort is never wasted. Effort is how you learn. Second, the novel that fell out of favor must not have been up to snuff -- otherwise why would it have fallen? It's loss of status may not be permanent (snuffiness is relative, after all). It may just be <i>the right time</i> for the other novel, and after that one is done it may be the right time for the dropped story to be picked back up and finished.<br />
<br />
Schedule difficulties abound with writing multiple novels simultaneously, but even the worst of these is not a real problem. The simplest problem is that it takes twice as long to finish a novel because I'm working on two. That's not a problem at all. The worst problem, I think, is "I need to produce one book a year: not two books every two years." Maybe so and maybe no. The key is to understand that the books don't have to be written in lockstep. I don't have to start both novels the same week and end them together. It makes more sense to start one, and roughly halfway through the writing process start the second one.<br />
<br />
Many writers have an affinity for either writing or for editing but not for both. I enjoy both sides, but they are very different processes, and that is why it makes sense to double-up. Any time I sit down to work I have my choice to write one novel or to edit the other. It should help to mix things up and keep me fresh. On the other hand, if you have a strong dislike for editing, then the knowledge that on any given day you are guaranteed to have editing to do might be a discouraging thought.<br />
<br />
I haven't tried writing two novels at once, but (if I could only get back into the habit of writing at all) I'd like to try.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-43382177974612078952011-02-13T01:58:00.005-07:002011-02-13T08:13:34.820-07:00Synergistic Reading<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhj6BogIdfky4gQabxw2kww9vZuzCl5E7X4QQk9nm0xJxIq92b1VQ5w_-GwkOF7_AkhV8oiClR8gTYpyiJxoW8Efd1IiNcwyR4n6WJnWxI-66OtwtDzO7hWIoUSZZdnNCV5HRdzjNv_eoD3/s1600/IMG_2200-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhj6BogIdfky4gQabxw2kww9vZuzCl5E7X4QQk9nm0xJxIq92b1VQ5w_-GwkOF7_AkhV8oiClR8gTYpyiJxoW8Efd1IiNcwyR4n6WJnWxI-66OtwtDzO7hWIoUSZZdnNCV5HRdzjNv_eoD3/s400/IMG_2200-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>When we read, we bring our life experiences, prejudices, hopes, and dreams with us. All of our personal <a href="http://thirdpersonltd.johnmbaron.com/2010/09/literary-traps.html">baggage</a> creates a synergy with the words the author put on the page. Each person who reads a given novel <a href="http://thirdpersonltd.johnmbaron.com/2010/03/literary-analysis-and-you.html">gets something different</a> from it, and each person is affected by it -- each person is <a href="http://thirdpersonltd.johnmbaron.com/2010/11/undue-influence.html"><i>changed</i></a> -- depending partly on the writing and partly on their baggage. The effect is stronger than the simple sum of the words and baggage, which is what makes it a synergism.<br />
<br />
Sometimes, when reading two books close together the works themselves create connections the authors never intended. It's an odd and refreshing synergy that comes from one book becoming another book's baggage in real time.<br />
<br />
Two books I'm reading together right now are Proust's In Search of Lost Time, and Clarke's Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrel. Lost Time is set in the late 1800s, in what I can only describe as Victorian France. The electric light comes into use during the course of the novel, but it's mostly candles and footmen, landaus and horses, twice-daily post and hand-delivered messages, voluminous dresses, walking-sticks, and a vague sense of envy of far-off London.<br />
<br />
Strange and Norrel is set in the early 1800s, during the war with France's Emperor Napoleon. The feel is much the same as Lost Time except that there is no electric light in sight, France looms in the background as a malevolent force rather than a trend-setter, and magic is real.<br />
<br />
I put down one book and pick up the other. Sometimes I lose track of which one I'm reading. For example, I confuse Lost Time's young Gilberte with the older and magical Miss Absalom of Strange and Norrel. They are both wearing blue gowns, they both have red hair, they are both intriguing women (for entirely different reasons). Gilberte lives in a sort of fairytale world (of tea parties, theater shows and such) which is at first inaccessible to the narrator, and which he is later allowed to enter. Miss Absalom died some years ago, and now, apparently, lives on in the land of fairie: Strange is (currently, as I read) trying to reach her there.<br />
<br />
Would I have noticed these and other parallels if I read these books separately? I doubt it.<br />
<br />
Sometimes reading two books at the same time gives you more than just two books worth of reading.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-4891982341694595562011-02-06T04:29:00.006-07:002011-02-12T19:13:13.172-07:00E-Books in the Gutter<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgtPowbc3G2extSjBSPqojOwpUI_nTgElIFVZEE0ZsC7QLTKE6aha_UyxYZar1rdohNAAQj1mV8Op_W7EST5VH4OBovNYdDNDxvqEEQlJlh9IV5hwEpTTbH6MjuD1VU-ZNQuXNqW2B6OEve/s1600/IMG_0922-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="290" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgtPowbc3G2extSjBSPqojOwpUI_nTgElIFVZEE0ZsC7QLTKE6aha_UyxYZar1rdohNAAQj1mV8Op_W7EST5VH4OBovNYdDNDxvqEEQlJlh9IV5hwEpTTbH6MjuD1VU-ZNQuXNqW2B6OEve/s400/IMG_0922-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>Last week I bought a book and discovered something interesting. I had $5 in Borders-bucks that was about to expire and an upcoming trip to CA. I reasoned that I could pick up a cheap paperback for just a couple of bucks and read it on the trip. [I prefer not to take my <i>good</i> books on a trip, because they're sometimes too large to fit in my "fanny pack" and/or they'll get too beat-up in the process. I also like to read something on the lighter and more exciting side while I travel.] The book I was looking for (All the Pretty Ponies) was not available in a mass-market paperback, and after looking at it I decided I didn't want to read it anyway. I wandered the store for a ridiculously long time and finally stumbled over Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell. The mass-market paperback at $7.99 was in my price range and less than half the cost of the $16.99 Trade paperback. Done.<br />
<br />
Now I'm enjoying the story and hating the book, odd as that may sound. Norrell and Strange is 1000 pages in mass-market format. That's 1000 pages with tiny light print that flows annoyingly close to the binding -- so close in a book so thick, that I find myself guessing at the last few letters on each line of the left pages, and the the first few of each line on the right, since I can't flatten the book enough to see down into that dark crevice.<br />
<br />
I tried finding out what this crevice is called. The on-line visual dictionary I consulted proved unequal to the task, and it tended to crash my browser in the process. I would have consulted a reference librarian, but it's after hours.... At the start of this post I wrote that I discovered something interesting: it was not the name of this word swallower. I have (for now, anyway) had to make up a name for this space. I call it a page pit, much like an armpit, or an elbow pit or a knee pit. I <i>will</i> find out the name for this region of a bound page. <strike>If any of my readers know, please enlighten me.</strike> <i>[My brother Ken reminded me that it is properly called the </i>gutter<i>, which fact I knew in a former life and had since forgotten.]</i><br />
<br />
So let's move on to what I <i>did</i> discover. If I hadn't been so cheap I would have sprung for the trade paperback, which had approximately the same number of pages but the pages themselves are pleasantly larger. The reason I didn't is not just that I was looking for a minimal expenditure over the Borders-bucks, but that the trade pb was too large for me to take on the trip. As it is, I won't be taking Norrell on the trip with me, I'll be taking the second volume of In Search of Lost Time. It's not the ideal book for a trip, but it's a good physical size, the printing is much more eye-friendly, and I certainly won't be trapped in the page pits.<br />
<br />
But that's still not what I discovered. What I discovered is another good thing about e-books: e-books don't have pit-text because they don't have page-pits. They don't need them. In fact, they don't need a whole host of tricks that the printers and publishers have been using to save paper and ink. They don't need to single-space after a period (but that's a religious war that I won't enter into today). They don't need to reduce the size of the print to keep the price down. They don't need to reduce the interline spacing, or use cheaper paper, or refuse to start chapters on a new page. None of that has any effect on the price of an e-book.<br />
<br />
It has always seemed strange to me that (good) computer programmers know the value of whitespace and value it more than printers/publishers. Now I realize that's not the case: we <i>all</i> value it, but it's always been free for programmers, and it is only now becoming free for printers and publishers.<br />
<br />
The only good thing I can think of about page pits (in a volume where the printing doesn't go very far into them) is that it's probably good for your eyes to have to change focus over the gentle curve of the page as you enter or leave the pit on each line. That may be a stretch, but our eye's are amazing machines, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that such a slight focal change is beneficial.<br />
<br />
Let's hear it for ciliary muscles (which focus the lenses in your eyes), whitespace, and, of course, generously sized or nonexistent <strike>page pits</strike> gutters.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-62079588313179999792011-01-30T01:39:00.010-07:002011-01-30T01:39:00.119-07:00Friction<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyPlwf4HR5-tJ0nAChglpySA6r2z_yFvcOkUE9CS-Up2wsiVQCfb4PBrOu99ZCpArx0wEGXjZoiJM4wfKDfeRoYF0WdiHHVIG8qSeL06MS66JlD3HH0zYwG24kfvd9GdrnlLvD56nVrP5b/s1600/IMG_2174-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="243" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyPlwf4HR5-tJ0nAChglpySA6r2z_yFvcOkUE9CS-Up2wsiVQCfb4PBrOu99ZCpArx0wEGXjZoiJM4wfKDfeRoYF0WdiHHVIG8qSeL06MS66JlD3HH0zYwG24kfvd9GdrnlLvD56nVrP5b/s400/IMG_2174-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a>Friction is one of my favorite things. A world without it would be very different, and mostly boring. Don't believe me?<br />
<br />
For one thing, walking wouldn't exist, since it's friction that allows us to push forward off the ground at each step. Let's just say that without friction we wouldn't get out much.<br />
<br />
And we wouldn't talk to each other either, since it's a form of friction that moves the sensing hairs in our ears that allow us to hear. There's not much reason for speaking when no one can hear.<br />
<br />
So we're talking about a world where everyone stays in one place and nobody speaks. There are a myriad other problems (if a surface wasn't precisely level then anything placed on it -- including lunch or yourself -- would slide downhill, pencils would leave no mark on paper, you'd be unable to ever scratch an itch...), but these two alone are enough to spell <i>boring</i> for me. <br />
<br />
But of course, there's another kind of friction: the social kind. While I would be overjoyed to do away with friction in my personal life, I wouldn't want to lose it from my writing. Well, I don't want it for my <i>writing </i>(which I'd like to be a smooth and easy activity). I want it for my story.<br />
<br />
Most writers call this <i>conflict</i>, but to me the term <i>conflict </i>carries such negative connotations that it turns me off. I prefer to think of it as <i>friction</i>. Friction, by its <a href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/friction">definition in the field of Physics</a>, is "a force that resists the relative motion or tendency to such motion of two bodies or substances in contact." Substitute for <i>bodies</i>, the word <i>characters</i>, or <i>desires</i>, <i>goals</i>, <i>need</i>s, etc, and you have a definition of friction suitable for writing.<br />
<br />
One of the things I especially like about it is that it refers to two bodies/characters/goals <i>in motion</i>. We never want out stories to stall or stagnate, do we? We want our conflict to be combined with forward motion that pulls the reader through the story. With the word <i>friction</i> we get the sense of movement and the reluctance/resistance together. Friction is motion (which is change) or at least the attempt, along with something/someone fighting back.<br />
<br />
Change for our characters, change that's hindered, that's delayed, that's prevented, that's fought and won or lost or both: that's conflict.<br />
<br />
That's friction.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-35517342442355979032011-01-23T03:07:00.001-07:002011-01-23T03:07:00.244-07:00Customizing Your Writing Space<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEir4yrdiS1pojiRDZYQQFTI2jN32ccmftHHPI3vJZb6KGSKeYhVMy6-KStdoULxz2ylElADilvA6fhiFc4HMTrj-0joWBFf5Pyr2EkV73nuThRuORAXVtr2bEm2UJ96OCpsiT4AK1gm9Yfe/s1600/IMG_2170-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEir4yrdiS1pojiRDZYQQFTI2jN32ccmftHHPI3vJZb6KGSKeYhVMy6-KStdoULxz2ylElADilvA6fhiFc4HMTrj-0joWBFf5Pyr2EkV73nuThRuORAXVtr2bEm2UJ96OCpsiT4AK1gm9Yfe/s400/IMG_2170-blog.JPG" width="266" /></a></div>Look at your writing space. You <i>have</i> a writing space, don't you? Mine is a shared space, but it's shared only with other activities, not with other people. The key thing about owning a space like this is that you can make it your own; you can customize it.<br />
<br />
There are lots of ways to do this, but in my mind they break down into two areas; you can customize for taste, or for functionality. Either way you have to guard against the customization becoming an end in itself.<br />
<br />
Some people, for instance, are organizers or color-coordinators or alphabetizers or picture-of-the-day types. When they realize their space could be more (<i>insert their problem here</i>) than it is, they buy storage bins, a bulletin board, new pencils, better calendars, more colors of sticky-notes -- whatever.<br />
<br />
I am a tool-maker by nature. When I find a problem, my first impulse is to make a tool to solve it. If I buy storage bins, I might have to modify them so they do the job to my satisfaction. I might be tempted to make a custom bulletin board, because none of the ones commercially available will do the trick, or my own color-coded index cards because I'm too cheap to buy them (and mine are better anyway).<br />
<br />
And that's fine, so long as it doesn't become another excuse not to write. I try (and try and try) to get the tool-maker in me to concentrate on the real goal: is my real goal to make tools? No. Take a step back: is my goal to solve problems? No again. Step back further. Is my goal to write my story? Yes, that's it!<br />
<br />
We need to solve problems to tell our stories. We need to get our spelling and grammar correct, and we need to have so many different things, pacing, voice, character, dialog, etc, all work together seamlessly. Sometimes we make tools (or buy colored markers) to help us solve some of our problems, but the goal has to be to write. Otherwise we're working on the wrong thing.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-51819818529095327222011-01-16T03:50:00.002-07:002011-01-16T03:50:00.127-07:00Seeing Different<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizkRKec-XmHT7L-3vnu1qg1kCN9u-Q12RthBMV6G6gS_dBRMy0VV6oRvcxkzlzZhVu_4MC1CFwimTThgcn3EayyFxbGThTfTUGrZyWiMrkcklOz2m1eGSO9uubu9S5KpAphMZMymYHjz4v/s1600/IMG_2159-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizkRKec-XmHT7L-3vnu1qg1kCN9u-Q12RthBMV6G6gS_dBRMy0VV6oRvcxkzlzZhVu_4MC1CFwimTThgcn3EayyFxbGThTfTUGrZyWiMrkcklOz2m1eGSO9uubu9S5KpAphMZMymYHjz4v/s400/IMG_2159-blog.JPG" width="337" /></a></div>I was just thinking (okay, that goes without saying) -- ever notice how sometimes the sky, when you look at it upside-down, looks like the sky reflected in a puddle? Complete with ripples from a soft breeze?<br />
<br />
Didn't think so.<br />
<br />
If you stepped into that upside-down sky, would your foot get wet? Would you keep sinking in all the way to where the birds flit about?<br />
<br />
Sometimes, if we pay close attention, we might see our characters in a way that changes them and ourselves at the same time. And our characters might have the opportunity to see each other in a new light; it could change their entire world, opening up new possibilities for them and for our novels.<br />
<br />
Because even the sky has two sides.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-39051502575319697802011-01-09T10:26:00.002-07:002011-01-09T12:45:44.910-07:00Proust on The Novel<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPco5SC20nJ3LZyr85kfAH-x15U16NvhnnMarfwZAM82FycT3oAugqs9goKjt5NaQRL1qbAWchya6AInbB-GCr9uKphxa4WZr26z0mmQOnoucu0azv-lunD8j6c4MUV8im4W6977RVTfB8/s1600/IMG_2112-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhPco5SC20nJ3LZyr85kfAH-x15U16NvhnnMarfwZAM82FycT3oAugqs9goKjt5NaQRL1qbAWchya6AInbB-GCr9uKphxa4WZr26z0mmQOnoucu0azv-lunD8j6c4MUV8im4W6977RVTfB8/s400/IMG_2112-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>I have begun reading Proust's "Remembrance of Things Past", or as the title has been more recently translated, "In Search of Lost Time". This is one of those books that lots of people have heard about, and lots of people talk about, but nobody has read. And half of those nobody's who've read it think it is unreadable and so didn't finish it, while the other half (a tiny half, to be sure) think it is a masterpiece.<br />
<br />
It spans six volumes, with over 1.5 million words in all. I'm only 120 pages into the first volume, but I'm being swept away. This volume, "Swann's Way", was published in 1913, and despite that being a different world from this, with different expectations of pacing in novels, I was caught-up from the very first page. The prose, translated beautifully from the original French by Moncrieff and Kilmartin, is smooth and charming and breath-taking. Yes, the sentences are long and wandering, but it's appropriate: the book is about time and memory and change.<br />
<br />
Some people insist that it's not a novel at all, but something else instead. Either way, it's a rewarding read.<br />
<br />
One paragraph especially jumped out at me when I read it last night with the need for a blog topic lurking in the back of my mind. The main character -- I need to explain that this is told in what I'd have to call "first person reminiscence", and while it's not autobiography, the MC is undoubtedly some version of the author himself -- is talking about the experience of reading a book on a hot summer day in a room closed up so much to keep the heat out that he has barely enough light to read by. He is hearing the church bell toll the hours, and he is so absorbed in the book that the time he spends inside it doesn't seem to register in the real world. It seems only a few seconds from when the clock strikes one hour until the clock strikes the next. And then he talks about <i>what a novel is</i>.<br />
<br />
Paraphrasing: <i>A novel is crammed with more dramatic events than usually occur in an entire lifetime. These events are not happening to "real people", but the thing is we can never hope to know any real people other than on their surface. If we understand any of the joys or misfortunes of another person, it is only because we have constructed within our own minds a sympathetic image of that person and their situation, and it is that image that we're reacting to. The novelist's ingenuity lies in their ability to distill real people down to these images, cutting away everything that hides the truth, removing every barrier to the reader's emotional connection with the character. The result is that the reader experiences things in the space of an hour or two that would take years of actual life to get to know. These experiences, in turn, enable the reader to recognize changes in </i><i>real-life </i><i>that happen over too long a span of time to be otherwise noticed.</i><br />
<br />
Of course he uses a page-and-a-half-long paragraph to explain what I've paraphrased, and says it more clearly and with rich detail. That's what you get from a master like Proust.<i><br />
</i>John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-23521659112318362102011-01-02T01:09:00.003-07:002011-01-09T09:35:13.614-07:00Repetition<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTaqDGYyBXI-0FbtBh4I-cy1DcCdFbT41w_eiNxD-0BCqNd4bgOhxJilWvO49RjyJKifM-yWS_wgQYAvI0TKIH-Ov8e7VOB0OLyb_7k2uzVhrMYY3loC2XAQOF1NeOYDoT-mSmpplclt1K/s1600/IMG_2146-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTaqDGYyBXI-0FbtBh4I-cy1DcCdFbT41w_eiNxD-0BCqNd4bgOhxJilWvO49RjyJKifM-yWS_wgQYAvI0TKIH-Ov8e7VOB0OLyb_7k2uzVhrMYY3loC2XAQOF1NeOYDoT-mSmpplclt1K/s400/IMG_2146-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>Have you ever noticed how annoying it can be to have to listen to someone who repeats themselves? I sure have. (I'll do you the favor of not repeating the question here.) In a class on mass media in high school, I learned about repetition and reinforcement; that's how advertising tries to hammer home its message. We call this <i>intentional</i> repetition. I'm talking about the <i>unintended </i>variety. (Note that I used uninten<i>ded</i> rather than uninten<i>tional</i> to eliminate a verbatim repetition.) Unintentional repetition is not just annoying: it diverts your attention from the rest of what the person has to say.<br />
<br />
We dread (or we <i>should</i>, anyway) unintentional repetition in our writing. We have to be careful also of purposeful repetition to ensure it doesn't become distracting, but that's another issue.<br />
<br />
I recently finished reading Thomas Pynchon's "Gravity's Rainbow" -- a fairly massive and very complex book. It has nearly 800 pages, roughly 400 characters (including a sentient light-bulb), and it-feels-like-200 digressions. It's packed with esoteric trivia, it changes narrators and voices, and bounces around in time. The book is hard to follow.<br />
<br />
And I noticed a repetition of a distinctive phrase used near both the end and the beginning of the book. I can't recall what the phrase was, and I was reading in hard copy so I couldn't do a search and find the earlier occurrence, though that would have been a cool party trick on an e-reader. In a way it's surprising that I'd notice the repetition among all the crazy things flying by me in the book. But it's not really surprising at all.<br />
<br />
That's why we have to be very careful. Repetition like that is not easy for a writer to catch, and perhaps not for anyone else reading the manuscript multiple times.<br />
<br />
We each have to find a way.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-70951947315586222702010-12-26T03:41:00.001-07:002010-12-26T03:41:00.597-07:00How Realistic Can the Fictional Dream Be?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8GgF0aXfikWsBXpbHrPSNfy6K8Spb0CnDQB670vfsIdMevgaLOFgM_XVX5x2fGoiT3oPof4OyznFG2OfV3zj_X_09GPeM1WNBbSwmKhYxj2PD9lPwlhNhza0nE4cpyjylVcRleubVtHSJ/s1600/IMG_2137-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8GgF0aXfikWsBXpbHrPSNfy6K8Spb0CnDQB670vfsIdMevgaLOFgM_XVX5x2fGoiT3oPof4OyznFG2OfV3zj_X_09GPeM1WNBbSwmKhYxj2PD9lPwlhNhza0nE4cpyjylVcRleubVtHSJ/s400/IMG_2137-blog.JPG" width="387" /></a></div>A few nights ago, I dreamt I remembered flying a small plane with my cat in the copilot's seat. Notice that I didn't dream I was flying with her, but instead I was <i>remembering that I had</i>. I recalled her sitting up in the left seat, peering out the windshield, calm and happy, queen of all she surveyed. And she was surveying quite a bit, being a mile or so up in the air.<br />
<br />
Of course this never happened, and if somehow I had lost my mind and placed her in that seat, she would not have stayed put, she would not have been calm or happy, and she couldn't have seen over the dashboard either. I wonder if instead I had dreamt that we were flying together (rather than <i>remembering</i>), that upon waking I would have known it was a dream. As it was, it took a moment for me to realize (later in the day, when the memory came to the front of my mind) that it was a dream and not reality.<br />
<br />
As writers, we strive to create fictional dreams. Our stories should pull a reader into the book, into our protagonist's world. There have been a great many great writers, and I have read a great many of their works. I get engrossed in my reading: I laugh out loud, I nod my head, I cringe, I duck, I squirm, I jump, I cry....<br />
<br />
Why have I never mistakenly thought, even for a moment, that a passage I've merely read actually happened to me?<br />
<br />
Has it ever happened to you?John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-19534577046115620932010-12-19T01:00:00.001-07:002010-12-19T01:00:04.044-07:00Time and Tidiness Wait for No One<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXvfKsT7IY8PnFtUXU9NVD93jizgvyEV37vvPuYs9ZfdcE0ntZJ7G72t9a2k0mmDJUZi4hq6GE4YdGgVBSAyVhPtVdyKOTm5gO6nLqe-qZx5dBGgqTbkazkMGhlKjEeex2b-u7B_le3wLM/s1600/IMG_2152-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="377" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXvfKsT7IY8PnFtUXU9NVD93jizgvyEV37vvPuYs9ZfdcE0ntZJ7G72t9a2k0mmDJUZi4hq6GE4YdGgVBSAyVhPtVdyKOTm5gO6nLqe-qZx5dBGgqTbkazkMGhlKjEeex2b-u7B_le3wLM/s400/IMG_2152-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>I've been thinking a lot about cleaning, lately. The options are to:<br />
<ul><li> leave a mess (who needs to clean?)</li>
<li>leave a mess until you do a deep cleaning at the end</li>
<li>always keep things clean</li>
<li>cycles of let-it-get-dirty followed by clean-ups</li>
</ul><br />
Let's just put the <i>leave a mess</i> idea out to pasture. We're going to show more self-respect than that.<br />
<br />
Alternatively, cleaning up after making a long-term mess, after letting the cruft pile up, the stains set and the mold grow, may work but having to do all that cleaning at one fell swoop is difficult. There's always the chance that you'll claim you're done before it's really as clean as it should be. Cleaning can be a mind-numbing activity, and numb is not a place from which you're likely to do your best. But if you enjoy the cleanup process, then this may be a good approach for you.<br />
<br />
The opposite of leaving a mess is the other extreme: never letting anything fall out of place. Anything that might become dirt or disorder is immediately tackled and dispatched. Cleanliness rules. It sounds good (even if in practice it's difficult to do) but I think it's a red herring. Cleanliness is not the goal -- writing is. <i>[Of course this is about writing -- did you think I was talking about house cleaning?]</i> The goal is writing: clean writing, yes, but writing first, cleaning second. Another word for clean is <i>sterile</i>, which is not something we want our writing to be. Disorder can help trigger connectivity and creativity.<br />
<br />
As usual, the middle road sounds appealing and sensible. Interspersing periods of writing with periods of cleaning, clutter-removal and looking for targets to send to the trash or recycling, seems like a good idea. You can adjust how often you clean based upon your style, energy, schedule and need. I just don't find it works for me. How can I know what is discardable before the draft is even finished?<br />
<br />
I enjoy the cleaning process best when I can see a big difference between the before and the after. When I was young, my favorite time to vacuum the floor was when it was filthy enough that I could <i>hear</i> the dirt going through the hose. For similar reasons, I now prefer to leave my editing till after a draft is finished.<br />
<br />
How about you?John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-19565245404263020692010-12-12T04:49:00.004-07:002010-12-12T08:07:41.797-07:00Tossed in the Winds of Change<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuzCtHHPzayp3_GaqmA0_LDsNfWhvKG9yzZD_SHuie8xGq3dR7lqY1IkpTtVYdkCF99UMJRWwLpUW5FzWbJFFQV7qQVfJZ47FzyrdHOJ4fA2PDM_sy09MPHmFB_jGG4c__YvbZ-06yPE15/s1600/IMG_2153-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="243" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjuzCtHHPzayp3_GaqmA0_LDsNfWhvKG9yzZD_SHuie8xGq3dR7lqY1IkpTtVYdkCF99UMJRWwLpUW5FzWbJFFQV7qQVfJZ47FzyrdHOJ4fA2PDM_sy09MPHmFB_jGG4c__YvbZ-06yPE15/s400/IMG_2153-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>Winds shape the clouds, the trees, the land, the climate, the life. One wind shapes another wind. Winds create flow, change, and sometimes turmoil. Flow, change and turmoil create winds of their own.<br />
<br />
Breaths, waftings, currents, breezes, blows stiff and shrill, gales, turbulence, uplifts and chop make leaves dance, trees bend, dust obscure, snow fly, wires buzz and rain pelt. We sense a change in the air. Winds bring change, carry change, warn of it, spawn it, sweep all before it. We speak of the "winds of change," but rarely of the "changes of wind." <br />
<br />
Without wind, the wind of the soul, change, little would happen worthy of a story, little would happen worthy of a life. Our characters are buffeted by winds; their responses, and the further stirrings they trigger are what make the reading interesting. When they blow through our own lives we always have a choice of how to respond, just as we have a choice to make for our characters, though we may not want to make the same choices in both instances.<br />
<br />
How are you dealing with the winds blowing through your life right now?<br />
<br />
One word: <i>wings</i>.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-48389093094656765792010-12-05T01:30:00.017-07:002010-12-05T01:30:01.180-07:00Writing for Our Selves<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhWLumlEdQssd2SA2Zb6wkCw1my0BYJazx6O71CDTrDkrAlpTkp7iWFR2bS_K5P1RA6o2Lda7aZdfNMxVqLhZYB6TUVBZmsajNSSkuVcBJMYq_1l8VNwQaDntM3HPih2_naRqKGheszID0m/s1600/IMG_2098-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhWLumlEdQssd2SA2Zb6wkCw1my0BYJazx6O71CDTrDkrAlpTkp7iWFR2bS_K5P1RA6o2Lda7aZdfNMxVqLhZYB6TUVBZmsajNSSkuVcBJMYq_1l8VNwQaDntM3HPih2_naRqKGheszID0m/s400/IMG_2098-blog.JPG" width="376" /></a></div>Lately a lot of people have been under pressure. I've certainly been feeling it. Pressure from my day-job, pressure about the holidays, pressure about elder-care responsibilities, pressure to be more fit, pressure to make better use of my time, pressure to get the yard work done... you name it.<br />
<br />
Do we really need to add the pressure to write a novel? To find an agent and revise the entire book in the process? To revise again to get an editor? To (perhaps) wind up with a novel that is not our story anymore? To be pushed into writing two books a year even though our natural pace may be slower than that? To have our writing or our families or our jobs suffer in the attempt? <br />
<br />
Must our process of writing cease to be a delight in order for us to succeed?<br />
<br />
It depends on our definition(s) of success; my definition says "no" to the additional pressure.<br />
<br />
I don't need another full-time career -- I've already got one that is always straining to be more than 40 hours/week. I need a(nother) creative outlet. That's what I want from writing.<br />
<br />
You should do what you've got to do. But remember to do it by choice, with your eyes open to the benefits and costs both to yourself and to those around you.<br />
<br />
Happy trails.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-67962723501351701052010-11-28T04:13:00.001-07:002010-11-28T04:13:00.691-07:00Kindle 3 Impressions<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimfqdS_4JoD8E6q-OH8zV9b3SNWdEw5Ck9-IG21iQ0lTGNld4KzW2ycAqMJGiYkvWe59VWY7615Jw1y56Ly0clvzzzxZCt2fsDmQI2MNIe3GxOdNn4U8mpvesCgd9thr6WFLM1gT3YPiOt/s1600/IMG_0913-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimfqdS_4JoD8E6q-OH8zV9b3SNWdEw5Ck9-IG21iQ0lTGNld4KzW2ycAqMJGiYkvWe59VWY7615Jw1y56Ly0clvzzzxZCt2fsDmQI2MNIe3GxOdNn4U8mpvesCgd9thr6WFLM1gT3YPiOt/s400/IMG_0913-blog.JPG" width="342" /></a></div>My wife has an Amazon Kindle 3. It has changed her reading habits for the better -- she's reading a lot more than she used to -- so it works for her: does it work for me?<br />
<br />
Let me get the negative stuff out of the way first: I've read two books on it now, and it doesn't seem as convenient to me as a paper book. Partly the inconvenience is that my wife and I use different font sizes, so I need to switch to mine and back to hers each time I read (I <i>am </i>borrowing <i>her</i> Kindle, after all). The screen occasionally has a glare problem when I'm reading with my back to a window with the sun shining over my shoulder. The 5-way controller is too easy to click in the wrong direction. I'm getting better at it.<br />
<br />
I wish it had a dynamically calculated page number based on your selected font size. A percentage and location code is always shown, but call me old-fashioned, I still think in terms of pages, not percentages. Really, I'd like to have some idea how far it is to the end of the chapter. Of course I could just page forward till I find it, but it's too easy to get lost on an e-book on the Kindle, and I don't mean that in a good way. If you think you're moving back, but you move forward instead, it can be a daunting task to get back to where you were. That probably doesn't really make a lot of sense until it happens to you....<br />
<br />
I hope it never does.<br />
<br />
There are a host of other user interface annoyances, but I'm not going to go into them here, because even though I can pick nits like you wouldn't believe (with anything -- it's part of my training as an engineer), <i>I like the Kindle</i>.<br />
<br />
The device is the right size, the right shape, the right weight, and even the right texture. It stays in your hand(s) well. The screen (my biggest concern, originally) really is readable: I never experienced eye-strain from using it. Searching for a word or ordering a new book may be a little iffy with the keyboard and 5-way controller, but the reading experience is wonderful. And face it; reading is what you'll be doing with your Kindle most of the time. I appreciate that the Kindle is not one of those "oh, and you can read books on it too!" devices like the iPad.<br />
<br />
One odd thing I noticed when reading on the Kindle was that I didn't move my hands much. The Hunger Games was an exciting read and the device is light compared to a paper book. But that meant that my hands stayed in one position for a long time, which is not good for arthritic joints. I'll have to train myself to move my hands a bit to replace the movement I get with a paper book from turning the pages and shifting from left page to right page.<br />
<br />
<br />
The page forward and page backward buttons fall "to finger" readily. One issue that both my wife and I found, was that we expected the left-side button to move us back through the book, and the right-side button to move us ahead. Actually, the large buttons on either side move us forward, and the smaller ones move us back: simple, yes, but we still mess it up as often as not. See above comment about getting lost.... The paging buttons allow one-handed and left-handed operation. Battery life is excellent.<br />
<br />
I like the Kindle, but I still prefer my paper books. As time passes and e-readers get progressively better, I don't doubt I'll buy one.<br />
But not everyone should get an e-reader.<br />
<br />
Like my 84 year old mother. I love her, but we're talking about a woman who sometimes can't get her fan to work without my help. Yes, her fan. Don't even ask about her VCR, television, cordless phone, alarm clock, photo frame, answering machine, microwave oven, etc. When she mentioned that one of my brothers was going to buy her a Kindle for Christmas I thought, "well, there goes whatever free time I might have had." She'd heard about e-readers, but had never actually seen one in action. My wife and I had her try to use my wife's Kindle, and Mom very quickly realized she wanted no part of it. One of the striking things for me was realizing she had absolutely no idea what a cursor was.<br />
<br />
The reasons my mother would have liked a Kindle (if she could have handled using one): it's light -- heavy books tire her out, and she could have increased the font size for easier reading. At her age, however, with her complete computer illiteracy, it just wouldn't work.<br />
<br />
For everybody else -- have at it!John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-42030575223691692322010-11-21T02:34:00.002-07:002010-11-22T12:18:18.088-07:00I am not Katniss Everdeen<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3wGni02bMHw1eF0R5I60_CvVeo0Z9abBJEoK73wGyEHXwxoa9-MUJ-D1FQV61GokBtQIg7nLVv4MvtOafVu9OJ6ZVbgVfy9q3_G8o47S01VcMzh-1M9R0kzU2SJgXcpB6MvjL6fPdaQx0/s1600/IMG_2104-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3wGni02bMHw1eF0R5I60_CvVeo0Z9abBJEoK73wGyEHXwxoa9-MUJ-D1FQV61GokBtQIg7nLVv4MvtOafVu9OJ6ZVbgVfy9q3_G8o47S01VcMzh-1M9R0kzU2SJgXcpB6MvjL6fPdaQx0/s400/IMG_2104-blog.JPG" width="277" /></a></div>A month ago, if you'd asked me how I felt about first person narratives, I would have told you that they don't interest me. I can't think of anything I've ever read that cried out for first person, anything that couldn't have been done as well or better in third. Except, of course, things like detective novels and the rare book that seems to need first person to "put you right there in the story." But I can't think of any non-detective novels that I remember as needing first person.<br />
<br />
The biggest problem I've had with first person point of view is that I'm not the person I'm reading about. Maybe I can identify with them on some level, or empathize with them, or try to put myself in their shoes, but.... I'm not an alcoholic inventor who repeatedly goes on benders and then sobers up to find he's invented something, but he has no idea what the invention does. I'm not a star-crossed lover contemplating suicide as the only way out of his predicament. I'm not a 16 year old girl who's been sent to an arena to fight 23 other young people to the death to provide "entertainment" for the capitol.<br />
<br />
Oh, but I am. Or rather I should say that I have no problem getting into a story as told from the point of view of a 16 year old girl who's been sent to an arena to fight etc. I've read "The Hunger Games" and I'm reading the second installment now. I love the story. I love the story<i>telling</i>. Suzanne Collins has done something I haven't seen before -- she's written a novel in first person that doesn't make me feel like I have to shed my skin and step into someone else's. The reason I don't feel that way? Because the transition is effortless.<br />
<br />
I mentioned to my wife (I'm reading her copy on her Kindle -- more on the Kindle in an upcoming post) that The Hunger Games was written in third person limited (a POV I'm rather fond of) just like the Harry Potter novels. She said I was wrong. And I was. I recognized that I was getting the entire story through Katniss's eyes, and because it never once felt forced or awkward, I assumed it was third person. Amazing. I'm there in the arena. Maybe others who read it become Katniss, but not me. Instead I'm looking over her shoulder and listening to her thoughts (just as if it was close third person). Does this sound confusing? I suppose it is, but it doesn't matter: I've got a front-row seat and a mind-link with the main character.<br />
<br />
To add insult to injury, I looked at the text and realized it was written in present tense. Normally I find present tense kind of hokey; it feels stilted and interrupts the fictional dream. In this case it helps to make the story feel more immediate, and it's use is warranted.<br />
<br />
So now I'm wondering how many other novels I've read that have actually been first person but I didn't notice because they were done equally well. The times I've noticed first person POV have been when the author didn't manage to make it work. When the POV stuck out like a sore thumb, it led me to the opinion that first person is the problem. I can see now that the fault lies not in the POV, but in the author.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-11786740740330272912010-11-14T03:28:00.004-07:002010-11-14T22:03:59.080-07:00The Bulldozer Has Stalled<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXI4YijS_CekIHf0oWfv3Cx3iGzQLXscneQ_hzGDaDiuCyrMKlBs5a3KfKKIvGPsqA37-bWwSiojhR3Oxz-410zQMbXdZVF3rsjWiHmCwV7uzpltKjUZ1gbl4qmMsYCrIQiE6EQO7jaJmd/s1600/IMG_0905-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="232" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgXI4YijS_CekIHf0oWfv3Cx3iGzQLXscneQ_hzGDaDiuCyrMKlBs5a3KfKKIvGPsqA37-bWwSiojhR3Oxz-410zQMbXdZVF3rsjWiHmCwV7uzpltKjUZ1gbl4qmMsYCrIQiE6EQO7jaJmd/s400/IMG_0905-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br />
I can read just about anything: cereal boxes, upside-down newspapers, phone books, toothpaste tubes, road signs, books. When it comes to reading books, I tend to finish what I start. Sometimes I'm disappointed for one reason or another with something I'm reading, but I still finish.<br />
<br />
I'm consistent about the finishing part. I've probably abandoned less than 10 books in my life, and maybe only half that many.<br />
<br />
Much of the time I breeze through my reading. That's not to say I'm not reading fully or not paying attention, just that the books are absorbing: Harry Potter, Dante's Inferno, The Hunger Games, War and Peace, Shakespeare, etc. When things get tough I go into snow-plow mode. I can plow through just about anything: The Faerie Queen, Dante's Purgatorio, A Pilgrim's Progress. [I found out last Spring that even English professors don't read The Faerie Queen by choice, but I didn't think it was that bad.]<br />
<br />
There are a few books that I have to be a bulldozer for, because a snow-plow just won't cut it. While a snow-plow can take to the highway in a storm, a bulldozer never moves that fast. I went bulldozing for much of William Blake, all of Sigmund Freud after the first week, William James, Dante's Paradiso, parts of Nietzsche, but I finished them. All.<br />
<br />
I've finally found a book that I cannot finish. It's been taking forever to read because it's never my first choice. I've let it fester, half-finished on the top of my dresser for a week now, unsure what to do about it. I've been coming to the sad conclusion that I'm going to abandon it, but I couldn't quite admit it. I thought of writing about it here, and this morning I lay in bed thinking about getting some facts from the book for this blog, and that's when it hit me: I have a physical aversion to opening that book again. The bulldozer has stalled.<br />
<br />
I've finished books I've been bored by, books I wasn't sure if I should bother, some that I wasn't sure if it made sense to finish. And this is a "classic" international best-seller that I've come to hate and now (finally) refuse to finish. Yes, the bulldozer has stalled, and not up against some huge and dense boulder-like tome, but against the almost fluffy little book "The Unbearable Lightness of Being."<br />
<br />
I don't understand what prompted people to buy this book into best-sellerdom. Did they read it? I understand it's a philosophical novel, and how it's set in the Prague Spring, and that it's theme is love and sex... and that I can't stand it. The author comes across as such a mysoginist it makes me want to scream (but it's probably okay because I get the idea that he's a misandrist too). That, and the way he puts chapter breaks (and there are a lot of them) right in the middle of scenes -- even between two lines of conversation! Oh, yeah -- and there are what seem like sloppy repetitions of phrases, but that might have been a conscious (though grating) stylistic choice.<br />
<br />
This is not a review. I'm perfectly willing to put the blame on myself for my failure to finish this book. I simply do not understand what's so wonderful about it. My son had to read it in High School, and he thought it was awful and unreadable, if I remember correctly. I smiled when he told me that, and figured he just didn't have the maturity or the background to appreciate a great work of literature. Now I know where he was coming from.<br />
<br />
What am I missing? I'm not lacking maturity and I'm not lacking background. I'm not lacking an appreciation for good literature. I don't know what it is, but...<br />
<br />
I was wrong.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-91723742174481468692010-11-07T04:27:00.003-07:002010-11-07T20:29:19.105-07:00Undue Influence<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJEbH-2hyeG7QtU_5atMPzAA_Pbsfj-GCUVLXbocyQpZnRy5zV8Ag92by3ZLbvECZNVOt8MVOWfLVmpqbQCwlR4V7omwTyV6aDOht3p_ZwBXD27pVwkGi0sM38Vym3QifKNwJNlp1tGVG3/s1600/IMG_2094-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="243" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJEbH-2hyeG7QtU_5atMPzAA_Pbsfj-GCUVLXbocyQpZnRy5zV8Ag92by3ZLbvECZNVOt8MVOWfLVmpqbQCwlR4V7omwTyV6aDOht3p_ZwBXD27pVwkGi0sM38Vym3QifKNwJNlp1tGVG3/s400/IMG_2094-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>The media's influence on our minds and actions has been in the... media... a lot lately. My son is discussing in class whether violent video games beget violent people, and whether stereotypes in games cause or add to racial / ethnic prejudice, etc. I just read about a study that says romance readers are more likely to accept unsafe sexual practices than others. Most of this is being looked at in the ethics and morals field, less so in the scientific field of human behavior. I'm a science guy, so I'm going to look at it from a scientific viewpoint.<br />
<br />
Sort of.<br />
<br />
But not really. I'll use a single real-life subject -- myself, so my conclusions are not statistically significant. So be it.<br />
<br />
Let's step into the wayback machine, to a time when I was an impressionable teen / pre-teen. What books did I read and did they leave any lasting impression? I can only recall the ones that left some kind of impression, because the rest I've forgotten, although there were many. The ones that I recall, I may have the wrong title for, or no title at all, but I remember the story.<br />
<br />
The Other Side of the Mountain triggered a lasting interest in peregrine falcons, their near-extinction, their successful recovery, and their beauty. However, I never felt any desire to live in a tree-trunk.<br />
<br />
A story, whose title I don't recall, about a boy who had a skunk for a pet. He was a really cool skunk, but I've stayed a cat person.<br />
<br />
A biography of Steinmetz, a competitor to Thomas Edison, encouraged the engineer / scientist part of me, while teaching me that sometimes people fail in spite of all their hard work and intelligence.<br />
<br />
Another title-free story about a teenage boy who'd just been blinded through the carelessness of a classmate with a firecracker. I've never liked loud noises, and this story put the finish on my dislike of personal fireworks, but it also gave me a deep (though admittedly outsider) empathy for the blind and otherwise physically disadvantaged.<br />
<br />
A whole lot of sci-fi -- Asimov's robot novels and Foundation series, Niven's Ringworld, Andromeda Strain, etc -- taught me to look to science and technology to solve problems at the same time they create new ones; to think about the (far) future; the law of unintended consequences; and to remember always that people, no matter how powerful, are still just people.<br />
<br />
(Only the first book out of 15 or so of) Castaneda's Teachings of Don Juan, all about peyote-driven hallucinations and stuff like that. I still worry about my brother that gave me that book. I did not develop an interest in drug-induced mysticism, although the out-of-body part of the book intrigued me and I delved into that a bit through sleep-states and a bit of self-hypnosis.<br />
<br />
Johnathan Livingston Seagull rocked my world. It spoke to me (unlike Catcher in the Rye -- I don't think I could ever relate to Holden C.). Alas, I didn't become a seagull, but the book bolstered my determination to make my own way in life. Which didn't need any bolstering anyway.<br />
<br />
There are undoubtedly other books that I'll remember only after this is posted, but these are enough to make my point. Did these books influence me? Of course they did. Did they make me<br />
<ul><li>a violent sociopath? No, but I didn't read much about violent people.</li>
<li>a mystic? No. While I have a very active imagination, I believe the world is thoroughly grounded in everyday reality.</li>
<li>a drug addict? Not a chance.</li>
<li>a person who chooses to live outside society? No again.</li>
<li>an engineer? Yes, but my father was an engineer and had much more impact on me than any of these books did.</li>
<li>a very different person from who I was already turning out to be? No, my reading didn't so much change my trajectory as it widened certain parts of the path of my life.</li>
</ul>Why is that? Why is it that (so we're told, anyway) some people are at risk of picking up life-altering "evil ideas" from what they read? Aren't they then also at risk of picking up life-altering "positive ideas" as well? [Besides, who's to say what are "good" things and what are "bad"? That brings us right back to <a href="http://thirdpersonltd.johnmbaron.com/2010/10/confuscius-and-censorship-and.html">censorship</a>.] Maybe some people have less of a hold on the direction their inner life is heading in than others do. I don't think the problem is the book / video game / movie, but the person doing the reading / playing / viewing. If it wasn't a book that sent them down the wrong path, it would be something, anything, else.<br />
<br />
I think those people are already in trouble before-hand.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-13646365590641041172010-10-31T04:35:00.003-06:002010-10-31T04:35:00.383-06:00Puzzling Observations<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiV6LBkmpYe2XXNQD79q5DIvPBxu4HJ6G8CFMhyphenhypheng1K6zZjvTMCFEX1oBjqC6BTETqO5EjwlzOytEOMkyu5-eysOtYvc3ifAWfx_Nd8ol2SeMI63qm3IHhqmaI_CwBmnf_c_1Q0onsQ_ezrI/s1600/IMG_2088-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="338" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiV6LBkmpYe2XXNQD79q5DIvPBxu4HJ6G8CFMhyphenhypheng1K6zZjvTMCFEX1oBjqC6BTETqO5EjwlzOytEOMkyu5-eysOtYvc3ifAWfx_Nd8ol2SeMI63qm3IHhqmaI_CwBmnf_c_1Q0onsQ_ezrI/s400/IMG_2088-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>Lately I've been assembling jigsaw puzzles, and (like everything else I do) I see some things they can teach us about novel writing.<br />
<br />
There is a difference between a 100 piece puzzle (a short story) and a 1000 or 1500 piece puzzle (a novel). They both need every piece to be put in place to finish them, to "see the big picture," but the larger puzzle, having more pieces, allows for greater subtlety. Think of each puzzle piece as an action, description, line of dialog, conflict, etc: a piece of your story. Each piece is a tiny part of the whole, but none can be omitted without leaving a gaping hole in the completed work. It would be nice if we could view our novels the same way we can view a puzzle to see what might be missing or how much is left to be done.<br />
<br />
I think of putting together a jigsaw puzzle as an exercise in observation and memory. Memory is handy -- it helps speed the work when we can remember where we saw a certain odd-shaped piece, or one with only half of a shasta daisy on it -- but we can get by without very much of it. Observation is key, though.<br />
<br />
I'm continually struck by the transformation, the ramping-up of my powers of observation as I work on a puzzle. At first, half of the pieces are not even right-side up (in the context of a novel, they're incomplete ideas). Soon each is readily classified as sky, and building, and grass, and tree, and... wait -- what <i>is</i> that? And I don't see anything here that looks like this area by the walkway. Hmmm. Even working from an image on the box (an outline), not all the pieces are easily identifiable. Not this early.<br />
<br />
As time goes on and I've been culling pieces, making and filling gathering-areas for grass, brush, trees, I begin making finer distinctions. There are trees against the sky, trees against the wall, trees in shadow. But then again, there are two walls, and the trees against the brick are lighter than the trees by the stucco. Later when I'm in the middle of the trees against the brick, I see that the color changes left-to-right, a bit yellowish on one side, a bit more blue and slightly out-of-focus on the other end near the shadow. Finally I see the boy leaning up against the tree trunk: I hadn't noticed him in the picture on the box because he's so tiny, and even though he fits on a single puzzle piece I couldn't see him for what he was until he was in place, under his tree. Observation has level upon level.<br />
<br />
Many is the time that I'm looking for a piece of such-and-such a shape with <i>this</i> green and <i>that</i> purple toward one end, when I find out that the green actually changes as we enter this new piece, and the purple changes to pink. The larger the puzzle, the smaller the pieces and the more difficulties and surprises there are.<br />
<br />
As I complete (or nearly complete) sections of the puzzle, they become like scenes in a novel. It's not always clear where they fit into the whole scheme. Before I have them properly linked to the body of the puzzle, they may be in the wrong place, or they'll be upside-down. When the connection is finally made, it's like magic, and instantly hard to imagine it in any other configuration. A major part of that magic is that the proper place for the "scene" is defined by a dozen or a hundred relationships with the rest of the work -- not the physical interlocking of the pieces, but the lines, shadows, colors, and textures that cross the boundary between the newly added section and the rest, relationships that were not evident until, suddenly, they popped into relief.<br />
<br />
Observation, layers of observation. She drank her coffee. She chugged her cup of Joe. She sipped her espresso. Slurped her Java. Inhaled her caffeiney-beaney whip. Yes, one combination is perfect; <i>She sipped her coffee.</i> But don't forget that the mug was heavy, and she'd wrapped her slim fingers around it to warm them on that windy November morning. She held it ready between sips, unconsciously concealing her mouth, her elbows on the sticky diner table. Her eyes stared off, unfocused, her mind elsewhere, but she must have been smiling: you could tell from the way the edges of her eyes crinkled.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-5671137152269868662010-10-24T01:46:00.002-06:002010-10-24T01:46:00.463-06:00I live. I wish. I dream. I write.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjza4Sd-yC26Kgcchkqd3wUrDNUiYpm_jrGuU3aVbc6CKFF2Qz1MvIreXR6CEc5W7FG4JqL7BVN3ik0UOQepT1VOSND3KZYIBfY1vqUilsMoy_w0CZePfk88lQd0MYN0RwWo13Zv378KmLu/s1600/IMG_2100-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjza4Sd-yC26Kgcchkqd3wUrDNUiYpm_jrGuU3aVbc6CKFF2Qz1MvIreXR6CEc5W7FG4JqL7BVN3ik0UOQepT1VOSND3KZYIBfY1vqUilsMoy_w0CZePfk88lQd0MYN0RwWo13Zv378KmLu/s400/IMG_2100-blog.JPG" width="266" /></a></div>I live. I wish. I dream. I write. That means that roughly 75% of the time I am the absolute ruler of my world. And believe you me, it is my very own world.<br />
<br />
Or worlds, actually. Plural. Writers are creators, though not all of our creations show up in our writing. Let me tell you about one of my worlds.<br />
<br />
In this world of mine, people really care. Simple things are simple, and hard things are hard. Everybody tries. Everyone is good at something. Failures are for learning and improving and keeping perspective, not for leaving scars.<br />
<br />
The skies are blue, the rivers wide, the earth soft under your bare feet. Each of the four seasons has its own distinctive beauty. Even rainy days are good days.<br />
<br />
Nothing in this world is quite as beautiful as a full moon lighting up a night walk through a scattering of fresh fallen leaves. Unless it's the sight of the first crocus poking its head up through an early spring snow. Or a Canada goose, wings straining to cup the air, coming in for a full-stall landing. Or a bite of a red-delicious apple. Or a cloud shot through with the sun. Or a thousand-thousand other things. <br />
<br />
In my world, everyone misunderstands once in a while, so everyone knows what it's like to be misunderstood. People do noble things because they seem right, without knowing or caring how others will interpret those actions. They hold doors open for each other, use their turn signals, smile at passers-by, and yield to pedestrians in crosswalks. <br />
<br />
Things are what they seem, at least if you look hard enough and deep enough. Evil exists here, because without evil there's no rallying point for good, and even in my world, good needs to be rallied now and then. Evil may sometimes attempt to clothe itself in the guise of good, but good has no use for masquerades.<br />
<br />
And in my world, the wait-staff are always in a good mood, all dogs are friendly (or at least willing to negotiate), the produce is always first-rate, and children's shoelaces stay tied all by themselves.<br />
<br />
<br />
Because even in my world, it's the little things, you know?John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-67287526320154083482010-10-17T03:02:00.006-06:002010-10-17T03:02:00.661-06:00English Rules<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQ7mu4FzEfLzheRsEFWD_WhQQlrXQvwFegTfYUWvB1V01uUOoaLPc5nKunqSQ807O1hTXXUcU5KxJjNkwq9xULesrOGjYBvBDIF1s8XPX8GcNZR277fnAgLuUJqYOIiInw-dR6yUd6cDu5/s1600/IMG_2081-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQ7mu4FzEfLzheRsEFWD_WhQQlrXQvwFegTfYUWvB1V01uUOoaLPc5nKunqSQ807O1hTXXUcU5KxJjNkwq9xULesrOGjYBvBDIF1s8XPX8GcNZR277fnAgLuUJqYOIiInw-dR6yUd6cDu5/s400/IMG_2081-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>"Pay attention!" the English teachers say. Our language has rules -- lots of them. We must adhere to them at all times lest we invite misunderstanding.<br />
<br />
Take adverbs, for instance. They're simple and consistent modifiers-of-verbs. If you <i>quickly run to the store</i>, then you're quick about going. When you <i>carefully drive up the twisting dirt road</i>, you're full of care behind the wheel. If you <i>barely made it to the library before it closed</i>, you arrived naked. If you <i>hardly finished your vegetables</i>, you mashed them to bits with a hammer. More to the point, if you see a used item for sale in <i>hardly used condition</i>, you can count on its having been used (perhaps very) hard. It's clear that every adverb modifies its verb in the same way every time. Simple. <br />
<br />
Let's move on to something just a bit more complex, shall we? Word choice is important -- there is always one best word, and you must be sure never to use an incorrect word. Of course, meanings run on a continuum between the best word and the worst. You might think there is no single worst word possible for any other, but there is. It's called the opposite.<br />
<br />
We'll use opposites to illustrate the danger of not choosing the best word. Suppose we want to say that Tom was speedy, fleet, rapid, swift; <i>Tom was fast</i>. The opposite is that he was motionless, tied-down, secured, static; <i>Tom was fast. </i>Or for another example, that the CEO's motives were clear, obvious, visible, plain to see; <i>the CEO's motives were transparent</i>. The opposite is that they were occluded, hidden, concealed, invisible; <i>the CEO's motives were transparen</i>t. You can clearly see the peril of not choosing the best word. Those sentences with the opposites in them really stick out like hardly used thumbs, don't they?<br />
<br />
<br />
English is scarcely simple, even though there's plenty of it; English is devious, cunning, treacherous, crafty -- <i>English is slippery</i>.<br />
<br />
And fun too.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-8711665939238709602010-10-10T02:29:00.007-06:002010-10-10T11:48:54.596-06:00Confuscius and Censorship (and Pornography)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRaM3BpzMrRoHmbtigeyI5_K5DiWyDJpk2RFN6_c4UxyX-MYVehBnUXbXdZjMhrMqY-bz1ldKZYCQZTA9sR-dFzmUp9YyiIBr9to_mVLR8uORKt6wBq9faZwGOjhLEYvxx3disc9Tqztrr/s1600/IMG_2084-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRaM3BpzMrRoHmbtigeyI5_K5DiWyDJpk2RFN6_c4UxyX-MYVehBnUXbXdZjMhrMqY-bz1ldKZYCQZTA9sR-dFzmUp9YyiIBr9to_mVLR8uORKt6wBq9faZwGOjhLEYvxx3disc9Tqztrr/s400/IMG_2084-blog.JPG" width="260" /></a></div>Wondering what the link is between censorship and Confucius (and pornography)? It's the rectification of names.<br />
<br />
One of the first and most basic arguments Confucius made was in favor of the rectification of names: calling a duck a duck. He said it's impossible for us to live together with any hope of peace and mutual respect if you call something a duck while I call it a milkshake (not his words). We have to agree on definitions before any real communication can take place. A dictionary is a good place to seek out mutually agreed-upon definitions.<br />
<br />
Peace and mutual respect fall apart when they hit the censorship wall, the division point where one party insists they know what's best for everyone else (to which I always say, "Excuse me, but I'll think for myself.") There are plenty of examples of book censorship to choose from, but I'm all riled up right now about an art exhibit.<br />
<br />
We had an incident last week where there were protests outside a local art museum (in Loveland CO) because of an allegedly pornographic depiction of Jesus Christ with a priest. The artist intended the piece as a comment on the Catholic Church's problem with sexual abuse of children. The overwhelming majority of those protesting the artwork had not viewed it. I had not viewed it, and now no one can -- a crazed woman truck driver took a crowbar to the exhibit. Fortunately no one was injured. The protesters scattered on the four winds after the destruction. Wherever they blew off to, I hope they feel as responsible as I believe they are.<br />
<br />
But to get back to Confucius (and pornography); you can't call something pornography without it meeting the definition. Well, okay, you <i>can</i>, but you <i>shouldn't</i>, if we're going to carry on a conversation.<br />
<br />
You can't have pornography without intending to cause sexual arousal. [From Black's Law Dictionary, 8th edition: pornography, n. Material (such as writings, photographs, or movies) depicting sexual activity or erotic behavior in a way that is designed to arouse sexual excitement.] No one reported becoming sexually aroused by the exhibit. In fact, the protesters appeared uniformly disgusted and angered (by what most of them hadn't actually seen). I'll give them points for imagination, I guess. The creator of the artwork neither intended to, nor succeeded in causing arousal.<br />
<br />
It was not pornography.<br />
<br />
Maybe some of the viewers didn't like it, thought it was disgusting, against their religious beliefs, not quite the right color, discomfiting, poorly executed, etc. Fine. But that's not pornographic. And I'll make up my own mind, thank you very much.<br />
<br />
I'm ashamed that the day after the report of the attack appeared in my local paper, the comment section was full of people gushing about how happy they were that this abomination had finally been removed from their sight, expressing smug indignation that it wasn't done earlier, some remarking that they would have liked to have been there to help swing the crowbar.<br />
<br />
What did these <a href="http://thirdpersonltd.johnmbaron.com/2010/09/literary-traps.html">people bring to their viewing</a> of the exhibit that caused them to react the way they did? The exhibit was just something to look at -- what they took away from it was up to them. Are their closely held beliefs built on such a shaky foundation that one single image threatened those beliefs? Maybe so. Do they also think that everyone who shares those beliefs needs protection as well? What about those of us who don't share them? <br />
<br />
More to the point, how could the majority who protested without even viewing the exhibit make up their own minds? They didn't. They accepted someone else's opinion (who may not have seen the artwork either).<br />
<br />
We can't have a conversation about art or books (or anything else) if people are content to act on received opinion alone. Art and literature are <a href="http://thirdpersonltd.johnmbaron.com/2010/03/literary-analysis-and-you.html">supposed to make people think</a>, but they don't work for those unwilling or unable to do so for themselves.<br />
<br />
And even so many years after Confucius, one of the first steps toward peace and mutual respect remains the rectification of names.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-46932141265444936642010-10-03T01:01:00.002-06:002010-10-03T01:01:02.204-06:00First Things First<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjD5UsrcFUUD5zsr7VTtbI1o57nQRfKeQW46Qg5XcgJfYNHUk2QYcU-NntG0TelAkfSBPNBA6kAIONq7Ya7vBUx-12ZjpbxfzLnCzWamhH1OhJnUjdGM24sYKt2NNoVCyLwY0j4KMhvcJh2/s1600/IMG_2087-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjD5UsrcFUUD5zsr7VTtbI1o57nQRfKeQW46Qg5XcgJfYNHUk2QYcU-NntG0TelAkfSBPNBA6kAIONq7Ya7vBUx-12ZjpbxfzLnCzWamhH1OhJnUjdGM24sYKt2NNoVCyLwY0j4KMhvcJh2/s400/IMG_2087-blog.JPG" width="287" /></a>Last night at nearly 8pm the front of the house was dark when the doorbell did its dingle-dongle. I was upstairs, busy at the computer. It might have been a neighbor (who else would call at a dark house so late in the evening?) so I descended the stairs, turned on the porch lights and opened the door.<br />
<br />
A young woman unknown to me was standing on my doorstep with a diamond stud in her nose and a clipboard in her hand.<br />
<br />
"No," I said, shaking my head and beginning to close the door that hadn't yet made it more than halfway open.<br />
<br />
"But I'm not selling anything --"<br />
<br />
"I don't care," I said as politely (and firmly) as possible The door closed.<br />
<br />
I gave her a more than decent interval to get back to the sidewalk, turned out the lights, locked the door, and went back to my computer.<br />
<br />
I was being reasonable. It's election season. Just as I don't buy things from strangers who show up at my door, I don't discuss politics with them either.<br />
<br />
I was saving us both time.<br />
<br />
If I hadn't been busy at the computer I would have been busy with something else: busy playing piano, busy talking with my wife, busy reading, writing, painting, exercising, fixing, breaking, tinkering, thinking....<br />
<br />
Do you have "spare time"?<br />
<br />
I choose not to. I'm not all in a rush and hurry, but I've always got something to do.<br />
<br />
There are lots of distractions in this world. I've been [<i>I just ran 3 blocks down the street chasing a bunch of teenagers who had firecrackers and a thing for doorbells -- it's a wild night] </i>stuck in my writing for a while now. For the last year or more I've been distracted by the need to: <br />
<ul><li>write something different enough to sell </li>
<li>write something conventional enough to sell</li>
<li>write something to catch an agent's eye</li>
<li>get an agent</li>
<li>get published</li>
<li>hold my first novel in my hands</li>
</ul>The thing is I don't <i>need</i> any of those things. I'm not even one of those people who <i>need</i> to write. I <i>want</i> to write, though, and that's enough. I enjoy writing, and so long as that's true and I'm able, that's what I'll do without worrying about whether or not it's publishable or attractive to anyone but myself. I don't know how or when it happened; my writing took a back-seat to getting published. And I always told myself I wouldn't do that.<br />
<br />
<br />
Set your own goals. Keep them in mind. Put first things first.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3459094466364069447.post-54801915364952086462010-09-26T01:28:00.040-06:002010-09-26T10:03:50.578-06:00World Domination<div style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"></div><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZUJbJtmD5gPtfiC3VH6cmtTrvx2x0pavjdSK8bd6U4PWCFsDjzHVpwKVMScFHwzaYuER6kMdMmfBht2z7wdRipLBXmGLOPgpJMS0VJgMMX1E7jGReEPWL2VDlqSs1yq1CwyrjK34TADtg/s1600/IMG_2078-blog.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="258" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZUJbJtmD5gPtfiC3VH6cmtTrvx2x0pavjdSK8bd6U4PWCFsDjzHVpwKVMScFHwzaYuER6kMdMmfBht2z7wdRipLBXmGLOPgpJMS0VJgMMX1E7jGReEPWL2VDlqSs1yq1CwyrjK34TADtg/s400/IMG_2078-blog.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>I was looking into <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_map">mind-mappin</a>g software last week for the nth time (and for the nth time I decided to stick with pencil and paper). Mind-mapping is a useful technique to have in your writer's toolbox, however you do it. This post isn't about mind-mapping, though; it's about world domination. What do the two have to do with each other? Well, planning for world domination is a frequent topic of mind-mapping software examples and tutorials, that's all.<br />
<br />
So I started thinking about world domination. I mean, how would I go about it from a literary perspective. Let's say I wanted to take over the literary world. Or maybe take over the world through literature. How?<br />
<br />
The first thing that sprang to mind was the way certain soft-drink companies (all of whom are bent on world domination, don't you know) want to place their product in retail outlets and vending machines all over so that no one will ever have to walk more than a hundred feet (or something like that) to slake thirst with one of those soft-drinks. "Slake thirst" -- I like that. Thirst slaker in a can. Yeah.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/86/Operation_Crossroads_Baker_%28wide%29.jpg/800px-Operation_Crossroads_Baker_%28wide%29.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"></a></div><a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/86/Operation_Crossroads_Baker_%28wide%29.jpg/800px-Operation_Crossroads_Baker_%28wide%29.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="104" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/86/Operation_Crossroads_Baker_%28wide%29.jpg/800px-Operation_Crossroads_Baker_%28wide%29.jpg" width="200" /></a>We should have reading material (but not advertisements) within reach of everyone. We could slake thirst in this intellectual reality-tv dessert, this Bikini Atoll of culture.<br />
<br />
<br />
And then I thought about how we have all these soft drinks available, all these empty calories helping us get and stay overweight. Of course, there's the other class of soft-drink, which is the zero-calorie variety, the purpose of which is to counteract the weight-increasing kind. So we're surrounding ourselves with products that give calories to those of us that don't need them, or products that give us a way to spend our food-money on something that has absolutely no food value. All in a world with starving millions. Slake that.<br />
<br />
That got me feeling kind of negative about world domination. I decided to seek a more local solution.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br />
Writers could form gangs. I'd call mine the West Side Story. We'd roam the sidewalks at night forcing people to read our works at pen-knife-point under the street lamps, or just chase them into bookstores. On second thought it sounds too much like dancing.<br />
<br />
Maybe we could enlist the Secret Society of Fiction Librarians (come on -- you <i>know</i> the SSFL exists), but they're already busy with their turf war with the reference section, and fending off the book burners....<br />
<br />
I guess I'll skip the world domination thing for now. I don't have time anyway -- I have a story to tell.John Baronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01700561722434870258noreply@blogger.com1