Writer's FAQ #1

So here's a new series I'll be working on. I call it the Writer's FAQ. I think there are a lot of small questions that never really get touched on in writers books, because they focus a lot on larger topics like Theme and Character and Setting. So I'm going to work on some very specific questions sent to me by our lovely readers or given to me by members of The Milwaukee Writers Workshop.

Q: How do I keep my writing fresh and inventive?

My answer to many questions like this is two-fold: read and write in equal parts.

In all seriousness, though, to keep your writing 'fresh' is to understand what is going on in the contemporary world of the style you're writing. If you're writing science fiction, for example, know what other science fiction writers are writing. That doesn't mean go and buy every new book as soon as it comes out; it just means keep tabs on what's popular, what's pushing the envelope, and who is doing things that impress you. 'Fresh,' to me, means unique, and that means creating your own voice and finding your place in the world as a writer, within the context of your peers.

'Inventive' is a slightly different matter. They're kind of one-in-the-same, but my interpretation of this word is that it means "outside the box." I don't know that this is always necessary, but it's certainly a good way to go. Genres -- of all varieties -- begin to have tropes; it's inevitable. Understanding those standards (tropes) and utilizing them to your best advantage, or in some cases doing away with them entirely, is the best way to make your writing inventive. Understanding takes knowledge, though, so I'll go back to my original statement: read and write in equal parts.


I think some of the most Fresh and Inventive writing comes out of short fiction. So in the next week, go to the bookstore and look for some of the literary journals in the magazine section and pick up one in your favorite genre. See what those writers are doing. See what they're not doing, too, because honestly not every writer is going to speak to you -- even though they got published. That's ok.

If you have a question for the Writer's FAQ, send it to boone@milwaukeewritersworkshop or visit us on Facebook.

The Tension Mounts

Right now, somewhere in the world, my story "Westward Expansion" sits being considered for what will be my biggest publication to date (should it get accepted). It's been out for 98 days now and the editors have gone through two rounds of sending out rejections. As the old saying goes, "No news is good news." I'm excited, nervous, anxious, and scared as hell, because it will be a great step forward for me -- mostly because the story will be in print instead of online. So there's that.

In two weeks, I'll be hosting WriteHouse, which is like the little brother of WriteCamp, and I'm a little nervous about that, too, because I'm essentially doing the entire event by myself, with some help from the editor of UWM's undergrad publication (and she's been a doll about the whole thing with the help she's given). So it's a bit of a nerve-wracking thing to hope that it turns out well. But I'm satisfied that it will at least give more visibility to my little group.

Also, after five years of hemming and hawing about the idea, I've decided to go back to school to get my Master's. In what, I'm not entirely certain; it will most likely be either in Adult Education or Creative Writing, though I'm still not convinced that an MFA will really help me as much as something else would. We'll see. My only gut-twisting issue with this decision is that it will lead me out of state to get said Master's degree, and I haven't moved more than 20 miles from one place to another in nearly 15 years, so starting over -- while I've done it many times in my past -- is a change of monumental proportions, and it scares me.

So that's that. I'm eagerly preparing for NaNo, too, and that's exciting. And enjoying the last of Wisconsin's pleasant afternoon's at the coffee shop.

Stroking the Muse

Someone recently asked me whether I thought "The Muse" was fact or fiction. Being a writer, other writers consistently ask what my muse is, where it comes from, how I react to it; at the same time, non-writers ask me what I think it is. Quite plainly - after years of frustration, story after story written, and time spent supporting other writers - I think The Muse is an excuse.

What are you talking about? you say.

Too often, the muse is a good thing when you produce and a bad thing when you can't. Thus, to me, it's a "Fair weather Johnson" kind of effect. It's like writer's block. The best way to get rid of either is to just write. Sit down; get your thoughts out; eventually, you will produce something. Waiting for the Muse to hit or claiming that you have writer's block is a way to say "I don't really have time for this."

Granted, even the most prolific, dedicated writer needs a break from writing, and it's OK to admit that. To use the muse as an excuse as to why you haven't written anything, though, isn't productive. When you've written something truly great, that's precisely what it is: don't give credit to some unseen entity; take pride in your hard work that's paid off. And when you can't get something out, just say so. You'll be able to produce something soon enough when you sit down and get your thoughts out of your head.

Ideologies Abound

Literary movements typically happen without an express intent to do so. Writers working under similar perceptions of the nature of language, writing, politics, society, or whatever else drives a writer to write, tend to create movements inadvertently by writing in similar fashion. Modernism was a response to the Romantic idealism of the 19th Century. Post-Modernism was a response to the traditionally-bound and structurally-minded artists of Modernism. This is the way of movements: the writers didn't intentionally try to create a movement; it just happened.

The "punk" movement in science-fiction is a good example of this. For very general information, you can look up cyberpunk and steampunk on Wikipedia (though the information is certainly less than exhaustive). Both of these movements were created in reaction to a previous way of thinking; both of them created a new movement that spawned a way in which to present a story.

I believe, however, that both of them are dead - or at least not progressing - movements. Cyberpunk has run its course. It's message has been stated, and the reaction has been made. Steampunk has also run its course, ideologically, though it is still around as an aesthetic. The stylized nature of the sub-genre has produced more than its fair share of fashion, movies, and styles. But it can be revived.

Why am I bringing this up? Because my current project lies in the attempt to recreate a new steampunk. The message of the first wave of steampunk has been sung; I think, though, that the environment can be kept and a new message inserted. So that's what I'm trying to do. I'm reading a fair amount of literature that I hope will inspire a new idea (one I already have in mind but wish to solidify) and some essays. When I'm done, it will either be a grand success or a very educational failure.

I'll keep everyone informed :-)

Strangely Motivated

The Editor-at-Large of Every Day Fiction just got back from Clarion West this past weekend, and I caught up on his blog (after a brief discussion about a rejection I received from EDF - only my second). It got me thinking about the amount of writing I actually produce in a given time.

When I started writing consistently, I was in my sophomore year of college - yes, I said college. I had written a few bits and pieces in high school but only at the mercy of the Muse. When I started writing more frequently, it was more on the pressing of deadlines for classes. Material was spotty at best and rarely worth more than a once-over after it was critiqued.

(I learned something then that I have stuck with since: your drafts (first, second, possibly third) are going to be poor. They're drafts for a reason. So it's ok to produce material that you're not initially pleased with so long as you give it out to others to read, and then polish after. But I digress.)

It also taught me to write when I didn't feel like it, write when I could have been doing other things, and write when it needed to be done. Writing is - and always will be - a job for me. I enjoy it at the same time that it gets on my nerves when I feel like I have to do it. I've set it aside for a bit too long, though, and I haven't really produced anything new in about two months (possibly longer). I feel that I have a lot of good ideas, but it just takes time out of doing things that are a lot less brain-cell-using and fun.

So outside of strapping yourself in a chair and forcing yourself to write, I offer you these bits of advice to get yourself writing on a regular basis - which I will begin to use, too, in conjunction with a program I'm starting with the Milwaukee Writers Workshop.

1. Make a schedule. Even if you only decide to write for an hour a week, make sure you keep yourself to it. It does you no good to set it and not adhere to it. If it's important enough to you, tell your family and friends and ask them to respect it.
   
   
2. Don't self edit. Every writer thinks that they "could've worded that better" and that's fine, but wait until polishing to take that task up. It doesn't help the story when you're first writing it.
   
   
3. Finish the story. They're no good if they're sitting on a shelf, or in a file, unfinished and unable to be read and worked on. So finish them already.
   
   
4. Find a distraction-free space. Everyone is distracted by different things. For me, it's my cats (or computer games, or books). So find somewhere that you know you work well and go there to write.
   
   
5. Critique and Polish. Once you finish the story (and you will finish), give it to a critique group, so they can offer feedback. Then polish it and send it out.
   

Give Me Purpose!

Why do you write? What drives you to put words to paper or screen?

I write because I have something to say, and I want to world to learn about my vision of the world. There is much to make commentary on in society and the world at large, and I use my writing to do just that. I have a purpose in writing. I believe that that is the difference between "literary" fiction and non-.

Too many people get hung up on writing what they deem to be literary fiction, when inevitably someone else makes that decision for them. I intend each time I write to produce something that will one day be literary, because I write fiction that has a definitive purpose. To me, that purpose makes my fiction literary as opposed to commercial (using the definition of literary not to mean "good, scholarly, 'important' fiction").

This was a topic of discussion between me and another writer colleague of mine. To both of us, there was a significant difference between writing that sought only to entertain - that is, to provide titillating fiction with no drive for the reader to have to work at it - and writing that is meant to enlighten. The difference between the two is something of a personal definition in my opinion, and I think it's pretentious to try and impose your own definition on someone else's fiction. However, to understand the literary community and the editors who (unfortunate though it is sometimes) hold reign over it.

The term 'literary' has been used too often to be the definition of "good" fiction. Fiction that doesn't adhere to the formula of the classics tends to be looked down upon as "commercial" or "mainstream" well before it gets the appropriate reading that it deserves. Editors love to think that they're in the powerful position of helping to continually redefine what is literary, when it can only be proven that future generations will be the one to determine what sticks around and what does not. Despite the academic community's refusal to recognize genre fiction as "literary," books like The Lord of the Rings, War of the Worlds, and Brave New World continue to be wildly popular and in the case of LOTR the second most purchased book in the 20th Century. How, then, does this make them less literary when all of them teach us a variety of things and enlighten us to the widely different ways of human nature?

In the end, find your own purpose. This is just my definition. But you should have one, because to write is to put your very passion out to the world and if you're doing it "just cuz" then you're opening yourself up to a world of painful rejection, which is never a good thing.

Fresh Ideas

I've been very pleased lately with my writing.  Or, rather, the fact that I've been writing.  I polished a story I had not even looked at in quite some time and began a new story that I'd had in my head for a while.  I suppose distractions were my biggest reason for not writing but more importantly I think it was a mental block.

I get that way sometimes - as I'm sure plenty of other folks do, too.  I find it hard to break the cycle of "oh, well, I'll get to it tomorrow" when I'm so busy dealing with other things.  I have been bad about practicing what I preach (regarding writing on a regular basis), and I feel badly about it.  I feel like I've been abandoning my own craft for other things.  But I'm glad to be back on track.

I think that we, as writers, get pulled aside so often to do other things that we forget our passion at times.  Or maybe it's just me.

In other news, WriteCamp is just two weeks away, and I'm getting a little annoyingly excited about it.  Already we have a good collection of sessions, our keynotes, and a fair amount of registered folks.  I think it's going to be a wonderful event, and it will be a great establishing of the community for future events.  As with everything else I'm doing this year, I'm being very positive and considering this part of me "Year of Boone."  If nothing else, I will have learned a great deal about event planning by the end of things.

That is all.

Make It Mean Something

I was speaking with one of my students the other day, and she asked, "What is it about short stories that make them stand out?" I asked her if she meant stand out from other stories or stand out as a medium for fiction. She wanted both answers.

So . . . what makes certain short stories stand out from other short stories?

For me, it's stories that mean something. Not in the truly metaphorical way but more in the metaphysical one. They have to speak to me in some way - make me connect with the story, the characters, the concept, something. I want to walk away from a short story with having gained some sense of the author's truth about the world.

Perhaps it's the literary mind in me. Perhaps it's the theorist as well. For a long time, I thought that there was a slight sense of arrogance to my preference (and I'll admit that might be part of it) - a hold-over from my academic days where criticism meant the world. Honestly, though, I think that it comes from a continually-growing love of short fiction. I try and read as much as I can when I can afford it and go to the library when I can't. So I've digested a lot of fiction in the last three years. To me, the stories that resonate the most are the ones that I respond to in some way. Whether it's "Wow, that was great" or "What the hell did I just read?"

And . . . what makes short stories stand out from other fiction media?

I will give you my thoughts, and then I will give you the thoughts of two individuals that I highly agree with.

First, I think that it takes a distinct desire to create something concise when one is writing a short story. And with that in mind the author gives himself a challenge to put together one grand thought into a short amount of space. I think it's a challenge because we have want to say what others have said before, but we want to say it our way, and we want it to resonate with someone in a way that it hasn't done before.

Second, I think that short stories are wonderful and diverse and offer a way to be creative, artistic, experimental, and out of the ordinary. Novels are hard to sell and harder still to make "out of the box." Poetry is, by its nature, out of the ordinary. It speaks to the soul in a way that the short story speaks to the mind. And fiction on stage and screen is dramatic and visual; it's hard to compare that to fiction most times.

I think it's best summed up by these two quotes:

Martha Foley, one of the first editors of the Best American series said, "A good short story is a story which is not too long and which gives the reader the feeling she has undergone a memorable experience." I think that Barbara Kingslover - the author - expands upon that nicely: "A good short story cannot simply be Lit Lite; it is the successful execution of large truths delivered in tight spaces."

Sad Songs Say So Much

I'm sitting in the library of the local university, and I'm listening to sad music. Why? It just strikes me sometimes that I need to listen to other peoples' sad stories; it helps me recognize the pain in the world and put it into my own writing. Some songs are so brilliantly written and poignant that they make me truly sad inside. It is my sincere hope that my own fiction will one day elicit that response from at least one reader. I believe that all writers should have a similar hope: to elicit an appropriate response from their readers in such a way that it completes their work - and not because their work was incomplete before - but because a reader, in my opinion, makes a work what it is for them.

I've been working on two pieces lately.

One is about a society forced into quiet acceptance and obedience made possible by forceful removal of dissenting voices. It is about a young man whose father is taken away, and he begins a revolution that is eventually - and sadly - quelled and forgotten, as is often the case in such societies.

The other is about a woman who feels that her life has come unraveled to a point that she feels her only course of action is to leave her husband - a man whose only true joy in life is his job. It takes place over the course of an evening as she waits for him to return home, so she can tell him why she is leaving, giving him some semblance of dignity, only to wake up in the morning to find that he's not come home. So she leaves regardless.

I don't know why it is that sad stories move me - they always have.

Thanksgiving Day Thoughts

I'm sitting in Chicago with my wife's family. It's cold out. Winter always reminds me of being unproductive - hunkered down in your house, wishing the cold away, and keeping yourself occupied until spring. The food is good: Ashley's grandmother is a great cook.

I'm not writing, though. I haven't in a few days honestly. It's disappointing, but I had a productive day the other day going through and plotting out my stories. After the other day (when I posted about my stories lacking plot), I realized that my stories are driven by characters and concepts. Many times they lack in a cohesive, linear plot. Sometimes that's not a bad thing, but as a standard, I don't like it. So I'm working on some more linear thoughts and seeing about
making my stories more functional. It's one thing to have conceptually- founded stories - indeed I quite like them - but to have stories with only a concept and no plot to drive the story just doesn't work.

So I've been debating doing something with my writing that I've never done: outline. I have never really thought of outlining as a good method for my writing, because I like to produce things very environmentally: that is, I like to write what comes to me and polish it later. What I've discovered, however, is that my mind wanders and when it wanders, so does the story. I don't always know how I want to the story to end, so I don't entirely know how to write the story to get to that point - especially if I'm going on the fly. Writing up an outline for a story might help alleviate some of my frustrations with not being able to produce those cohesive stories I desire.