Things That Make Me Cry

I've been running a writers workshop in a town north of where I live. Last night was the third meeting, and it went well -- as have all the others. We are working on characters and character development, because the majority of the writers there are new to the craft and have a lot to learn. I think creating believable characters are always a great place to start to write memorable stories.

As a good example of character development, I read Mary Robison's Yours, which is a poignant story about a man and his wife carving pumpkins before Halloween. I've read the story a dozen times, or more, and yet something about it at that reading nearly made me cry in front of the group. There's something about short stories -- and I suppose novels are the same way, only they take longer to read -- that hits you at a certain time and strikes a chord. That's part of why I love short stories. Each reading gives something new to the reader; each new interaction with the story sheds some new light on the reader's perspective of the world. It is that moment -- that personal revelation -- that I really strive to find in others' works, as well as my own.

Writing has been going well lately, though, which I'm happy about. NaNoWriMo is in full swing and even with folks in town and a new niece, I've been happy to have reached my word count every day (plus a little extra).

Begin at the Beginning

So NaNoWriMo is coming up quick, and I'm much better prepared this year than I was the last two - and especially last year. I've settled on the Steampunk genre, and I've got a fairly good plot outline. The YA aspect is a bit sketchy, but that's because I'm very new to the arena, and some of it is self-doubt. I'm sure I'll get over that.

One of the threads on the NaNo forum asks for a 20-word plot summary, which I decided to do, because I think that a one-sentence concept is always a good place to start (mine is a little over - but no worries). It's what I have my students start with when I teach the mechanics of a short story; it's what producers will ask for if you ever submit a screenplay (though that call it your log line).

So here's mine (please give some thoughts/comments): A young boy is thrown into a world of political under-dealings when he begins to question the death of his inventor uncle.

More next time. Cheers.

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.

Ideology, Pt. 2

I've been discussing the nature of ideology and steampunk a lot over on the Brass Goggles forums lately. Even after a few posts, it has become very clear to me that my vision of the genre is completely different from most of those who frequent the forums. I have always been one to take a serious approach to literature. As I've mentioned before, I feel like fiction ought to have a purpose: whether that purpose is to entertain or enlighten is entirely up to the author. For me, I want my readers to walk away having gained something more than just a fun story to add to their list of "have reads."

In light of the discussion, I began to think very specifically about the nature of genre and its meaning to people. So I've added to my list of tasks to research a number of others' views on genre and genre theory as it pertains to speculative fiction and begin to formulate my own ideas to either grow out of those thoughts or stand in opposition to them.

In general, I believe genre fiction has a unique place in the repertoire of literature because it has the ability to speak towards topics untouchable by mainstream fiction by placing them in a context that is either foreign or futuristic (or some other conception). It has the potential to talk about things in a way that other authors might be shunned by the general populace for bringing up. With that in mind, I think that there is something to be said for some of the movement towards strictly embracing a particular movement's aesthetic aspect only. To disregard ideology is to lose part of what makes a particular genre or sub-genre stand out and bring home its message.

I invite you to join in on the discussion over at the forums if you're keen on discussing steampunk. Otherwise, your thoughts here are always welcome.

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.