Posts Tagged: writing


15
May 12

Macbeth V.5

The complete quotation:

She should have died hereafter;
There would have been a time for such a word.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.


3
Apr 12

Check out this example of Paul Graham composing “Startups in 13 Sentences.”. You can pause, fast forward, rewind. Stypi was built for real-time editing with multiple users but it also lets you play back your typing and editing later so that you can “see” the nature of the composition. It’s like the iOS Brushes app for Words. On your computer.


12
Mar 12

Plague Doctors

I am reading Jeffrey Carver’s Eternity’s End, which features a version of The Flying Dutchman legend in it. (A bit too obviously — really, the allusion would have sufficed without constantly being told, “Hey, it’s a Flying Dutchman … in space!) A recent experiment in using a writing prompt had me re-writing Sherlock Holmes with the narrator, Watson, being an AI. I find myself fascinated by these kinds of revisions, and so I can’t help but wonder what one could do with the image and idea of plague doctors:

A Plague Doctor, by Faul Furst
Paul_Fürst,_Der_Doctor_Schnabel_von_Rom_(Holländer_version)

12
Mar 12

Henry Miller on Writing

  1. Work on one thing at a time until finished.
  2. Start no more new books, add no more new material to ‘Black Spring.’
  3. Don’t be nervous. Work calmly, joyously, recklessly on whatever is in hand.
  4. Work according to Program and not according to mood. Stop at the appointed time!
  5. When you can’t create you can work.
  6. Cement a little every day, rather than add new fertilizers.
  7. Keep human! See people, go places, drink if you feel like it.
  8. Don’t be a draught-horse! Work with pleasure only.
  9. Discard the Program when you feel like it—but go back to it next day. Concentrate. Narrow down. Exclude.
  10. Forget the books you want to write. Think only of the book you are writing.
  11. Write first and always. Painting, music, friends, cinema, all these come afterwards.

Thanks, Brain Pickings.


6
Dec 11

Better Blogging

Every once in a while the blogosphere likes to talk to itself about blogging. To my mind, it really comes down to this: write what you want to read and don’t assume your reader, which isn’t you, knows what you are talking about.


12
Jul 11

On Progress and the Occasion of Its Lack Thereof

I have over the past few years increasingly encouraged students to keep a journal of some kind as they begin work on projects. Blogs are acceptable, since they give one the chance to publish something — or at least create an atmosphere in which one is reminded that you hope to find, or create, a public interested in your work. Whether a journal or a blog, the most important thing is to write. Words don’t just flow; they don’t just happen. They have to be strung together into sentences and those sentences grouped into paragraphs and those paragraphs diligently blocked into sections called sections or chapters.

But the key is to write.

My friend Rodger Kamenetz once said, “You have to be there to get it.” And by that, I have always thought he meant that you have to write. Writing is like any other activity, any other skill: it requires practice. The great thing about writing is that sometimes the practice can turn out to be a really useful, and usable, piece of prose that one can use in a “non-practice” venue. The truly useful thing about a journal, or blog, whether it be handwritten or electronic is that one is free to copy from it to another work.

I am writing all this here as a way of practicing quite literally what I preach. After a really nice start to the summer with something like 12,000 words written in the manuscript, the past two weeks have seen the mighty wheels of the book grinding, if not quite to a halt, then grinding much more slowly. So much so that I decided to take a momentary break to revise an essay for the Journal of American Folklore that is very much past due.

I will have a bit more to say about the revision of the essay in the next day or so, as I complete that work, but I did want to spend some time here noting the slow-down in writing and encouraging myself, and my students (should they read this), to try this: chronicle even the moments when the writing is not going so well.

I’ll even go so far as to offer up a bit of a chronicle…

As some of you know, I am trying to write this book less like a scholarly monograph and more like trade nonfiction. This has been harder than I could have imagined. A lot of the practice I had been getting in by writing various commissioned essays for the Louisiana Crossroads performance series were really more belletristic than I imagined this book being. Like some of my scholarly work, those belletristic essays are very tightly-bound pieces, the binding made up of very careful turns of language that, I hope, convey an idea with a fair amount of precision. I want this manuscript to be “looser,” with the ideas being conveyed not in highly-tuned sentences and paragraphs but in paragraphs and sections that feel like packets of information casually, but purposefully, put together.

The structure of these sections looks something like this:

  1. Making Land
    • Something Amphibious This Way Comes – description of a crawfish boat at work
    • The Olinger Repair Shop – introduction to the book’s multi-threaded argument
    • Hills and Holes – the geology and topography of south Louisiana
    • We’re Not That – a very brief history of the Cajuns
    • (no working title) – a very brief history of the Germans
    • Ein bateau – a survey of the area’s folklore
  2. Making History
    • Survey of Louisiana folk boats, especially with an eye to amphibious forms
    • The Rise of the Crawfish Boat
    • The First Field Day
    • … Profiles of the various makers
  3. Making Minds

Each section is designed to be 2000 to 5000 words long, which gives me a lot of flexibility, which is the goal of having no chapter structure. So what I have are parts and sections, each of which can grow or shrink according to demand and desire.

Within that scheme, the first and third sections of the first part are done as are the second, third, and fourth sections of the second part, as well as various sections in the third part of the book (whose structure is not yet clear to me).

The last week of June just sort of got frittered away, but I spend last week working on the second section of the first part, the crucial laying out of the thesis section. I am 3000 words in, make no mistake I got some writing done!, but I am not entirely convinced that any of the plans I have cooked up for that section have been or will be successful.

And so I jumped out of that section and into the Cajun history section, §4 of Part I, where I got hung up on how to construct the frame for the section.

Two things to note here:

  • First, each section of the book possesses a narrative frame. The book simply doesn’t tell you about the crawfish boat: it puts you in a boat with someone — in this case, Randy Gossen. The book doesn’t talk about shops … okay, enough about what the book does … I don’t talk about the shops and what happens there, I want to put you in a shop so that you can “see” some things while I talk about them. In the case of the section that follows on geology, I narrate a fair amount of material while Dwayne Gossen in his tractor water levels a field.

  • Second, I want to narrate the history of Cajuns while traveling with the Mermentau Mardi Gras … and, I just figured out how to do that while writing this entry.

And so, I made my point.


11
May 11

And So It Begins

Note: Work on Genius Loci has begun. I can’t promise to publish everything of the book here — I don’t think my publisher would be too keen on that — but I would like to share with folks what the book is looking like. As always, comments are welcome. (Send them to me by e-mail or post them on Reddit or Digg or even Facebook.) I’ll have more news about other parts of the book, and, I hope, quite a few more glimpses.

How It Begins

The wind that blew lightly over the freshly plowed rice fields was just cold enough to chill exposed fingers and cheeks and just strong enough to rustle nearby trees. Perched somewhere unseen in the trees, a few birds whistled their wakefulness. Moving across a narrow blacktop road, the wind picks at the surface of a flooded field, transforming its smooth surface into thousands of fractals, each reflecting the sun, still low in the sky, differently.

It was, for all the world, a quiet country morning until a small engine clattered to life. Its owner ran it up for a moment, and then let it settle down to an idle that will let it warm itself to the day’s work. The sound of the motor was high, almost nasally when compared to the throatier roar of the big diesel engines that typically make their way across these fields powering tractors. This sound was more like something you would hear on a suburban lawn than an agricultural field. And that was about right, since this motor could only offer up twenty-five horsepower.

The motor continued its fierce vibrato, while Randy Gossen finished loading his boat with bait for the morning’s run. The plastic tubs were full of frozen fish chopped, depending upon their original size, in halves and thirds. The fish were chub, trash fish to most fishermen and a bycatch of the menhaden fishery. The tubs were the same ones seen in any retail store when shelves are being restocked. The chopped chub were packed tightly in the tub, but they still managed to shift a bit as Gossen slid them off the lowered tail gate of his truck and onto the floor of the boat. He countered the shift using his tall frame to his advantage, and the chopped fish settled back into place with a low squelch.

The boat’s engine rumbled low and steady, while Gossen continued to prepare for the morning’s work. The gas tank was already filled, the oil already checked, the boat already given a good once-over before anything else got done. Everything done, he glanced over the water sparkling in the morning sun, as he prepared to climb into the boat. It was another great morning.

An investigator the rest of the year, Randy Gossen lives for crawfish season. It is his time. A time to be outside. A time to think. A time to watch the slow turn and change of the world. Two nearby television antennas that tower over him went up as he watched from the seat in his boat. The land from which they rise is not being farmed now, but somewhere in Gossen’s eyes there was a long view of things that saw a tractor, or some other machine not yet imagined, one day turning the soil in order to coax rice or soybeans from the land. If that future machine does, perhaps there will be a chance to coax crawfish out of the land, too.

Randy Gossen himself does not farm. He works in collaboration with his cousin Dwayne Gossen. Dwayne farms over a thousand acres each year. Some of it is family land; some of it belongs to others, who have placed in him their trust to bring it the best crop possible. Some fields he will plant with rice, and others soybeans. Some of those fields will rotate between those two crops in years to come, but others he will rotate between rice and crawfish, and in those fields he places his trust in his cousin.

Crawfish are not a crop like rice or soybeans, and they have largely, as we will see later, resisted easy understanding. Wresting them from the ground successfully comes from years of patient observation as well as individual trial and error. Anyone who crawfishes can tell you that even then, getting the crawfish reliably out of a field and into a sack is nothing to be taken for granted.

Randy Gossen stooped under the boat’s canopy and stepped in. He slid the tubs into place, his tall frame into the driver’s seat, and the sorting table back on its rails so that it was within easy reach. With everything in place, he throttled up the engine, and slid the boat backwards off the land and into the water. With a practiced sense of timing, he flipped the lever that switched the boat into forward motion and began his first run of the day. Ahead of him lay a string of crawfish traps, spaced approximately forty feet apart.

With the boat itself setting a slow deliberate pace, Gossen began his day by picking up an empty trap he had left near the beginning of his run and baiting it. The trap is made out of nylon-coated steel mesh and looks like a three-sided pyramid, a tetrahedron, with a large, cylindrical chimney coming out of its top. At each bottom corner of the pyramid, the mesh has been pushed back in on itself, forming a funnel which opens into the body of the trap.

Properly placed, usually anchored with a steel rod but sometimes only carefully set down, a trap sits on the bottom with the funnels offering an easy entrance to its interior. The bait is the welcome sign to the crawfish, who, having made their way in, cannot get back out. Their exit comes as Randy plucks a trap from the water, empties it from the top, re-baits it, and then places the trap not where it was but where the next trap is, as it itself is plucked from the water to be emptied, re-baited, and then replaced. The boat never stops. Its engine’s roar changes rarely.

Gossen proceeded along his first line of traps, his body quickly remembering the rhythm and tempo of the work. The light breeze occasionally pushed at the boat, sliding sideways over the water, and he responded with a deft tap of his feet to the steering pedals that lay beneath the sorting tray. At the end of the first line, a steady push of his left foot on its pedal turned the boat leftwards, where more traps lay waiting. This morning, Randy began by working the line of traps at the perimeter of the cut — as the small, leveed off sections of rice fields are usually known. As he approached his starting point, he turned in and started working the next line of traps in the forty acre cut, following what amounted to a large, oblong spiral.

Trap upon trap, the work is steady. At each trap, Gossen leans a bit out of the boat and reaches down with his right hand to snare the rim of the trap. He switches the rim to his left hand as he picks the trap up and uses his right hand to dump its contents into the sorting table in front of him. He switches hands again and digs for a piece of slowly thawing, and increasingly smelling, fish and drops it into the trap before placing the trap back into the water. That done, he has time to regard the contents of his catch, surveying the crawfish — Are they getting bigger? Have they molted recently? What price will this lot fetch? — to determine what changes he needs to make, if any, to his operation and to pluck out weeds and any other detritus that have come up in the trap. Today, the catch was reasonable and Gossen was enjoying the steady, if also a little slow, accumulation of crawfish on the table. Every few traps he opened the doors to the chutes that guide the crawfish into the waiting sacks hanging off the table and then he cleans the table of any remaining bits with a deft swirling motion of his hand that catches everything in it.

After about a half hour or so of steady work, Gossen had a sack of crawfish already tied up and lying on the bow deck of the boat, and he had two more sacks that were close to full hanging off the sorting table. This part of the field was done and it was time to move onto the next.

Gossen continued on this way, adding thirty acres to forty acres to twenty-five acres and slowly working his way across the entire field. The work is always the same, but the views change as the boat moves about and as the sun rises. With luck, the cool breeze and the warm sun combine to make for a pleasant day. On other days, the wind blows cold and hard and picks up an impressive bite as it crosses the water and slams into the boat’s slab hull, pushing it about. Towards the end of the season, the breezes die away and there is only the heat growing heavier as the day wears on. And then there’s the rain.

But today was a perfect day. Trap after trap. Line after line. Cut after cut. Each rhythm combined to make the time pass quickly until the moment came to move from one field to another, and that was when something amazing happened. Not so amazing for Randy Gossen who does it many times a morning when crawfishing, but amazing for anyone else who might happen to be standing nearby and watching: Gossen pointed the boat at a corner of the field which led to the road where his truck sat. The boat dutifully took his directions and quickly ran its bow up onto the dirt at the field’s edge, pushing water in front of it, slicking the dirt into mud. Most boats would have stopped there and awaited the pull of an arm or a winch to beach it thoroughly, but Gossen drove the boat further and further onto land, with only a slight pause to give the engine a bit more gas and to operate a hydraulic ram.

And the boat, the boat heaved itself onto the land, exposing for the first time the wheels just behind its bow and demonstrating quite forcefully the power of its drive unit, which was not a propeller, but a large, cleated steel wheel that rolled the boat down the field road, where Gossen turned and dropped into the next field.


28
Mar 11

Of Notebooks

There’s a lovely post by Whitney Carpenter up at The Bygone Bureau, wherein she describes her own misfortunate investment in “just the right” notebook and other writing paraphernalia as a way to imagine herself as a writer. It’s both a kind of perfectionism and a kind of procrastination. (And I think it’s currently the consensus that the two are often intertwined.)

Carpenter does a marvelous job of chronicling the various notebooks she bought as she builds toward a nice realization — understood here both as visualization and as epiphany — that the notebooks are just weighing her down. (An idea she reinforces by, quite literally, toting an antique typewriter in the trunk of her car.)

I confess I have been down the path myself. For me, it ended when I realized that the larger Moleskine notebooks were good enough for me. In short, they worked. Writing instruments? I almost entirely rely upon a handful of mechanical pencils. My preference for them is simple:

  • I make mistakes and I like being able to erase those mistakes instead of lining through them. (I like to be neat when I can.)
  • Graphite does not run when wet. I am around a lot of open water in my field research, and I have been known to drop things. Even if there is no water in the ground, it’s also the case that I am often in extremely hot environments and, well, I sweat.

When I am working at a desk, I use a stiff-backed yellow notepad. I tear out pages as I fill them and they can easily get filed where they need to go. (This also makes it easy to find notes, since the yellow pages contrast easily with the various sheets of white paper that are photocopies or printouts.)

My entire writing life is nothing more complicated than that. Oh, you didn’t imagine that note-taking at meetings would be part of my writing life? That particular decision was not one I made but one that got made for me once I realized the difficulty of keeping the various notes from various parts of my life in diverse notebooks. It’s just easier, I finally realized, if everything goes into one notebook. Some people call this approach by naming the item a “day book” or an “everyday book.” I just call the thing my notebook. The only thing not in it is my fieldwork. (Well, that an truly personal information which I keep elsewhere.)

Having everything in one place requires that I perform some regular checking back over the past few pages/days to see what needs to get carried forward, but that’s a fairly pleasant task and that kind of review is built into various organization strategies, like GTD, anyway. I get it for free. (How nice is that?)


6
Feb 11

Re-reading Alistair MacLean

Shortly after moving into our old house, my wife and I stepped into the wonderful maze of the remaining independent bookseller in Lafayette that also happened to be in our neighborhood. Inside, in one of those lovely moments of finding something from your past, I came across a copy of Alistair MacLean’s South by Java Head. As an adolescent reader, I had rapidly run through my father’s collection of MacLean novels. They were, in a way, my next step after the Hardy Boys.

I had read the Navarone books, and I remembered reading a whole lot of others, but I had never read South by Java Head, which was MacLean’s third published novel. Strangely enough, it was a lot like one of my favorites of MacLean, The Golden Rendezvous, which I had carried with me as a battered paper back through many years of graduate school. Reading South by Java Head scratched an itch and it didn’t spur me to read more of MacLean for a while. A few years went by and I found myself purchasing a few more here and there, but I wasn’t drawn to read them. Not until this past summer when something about being in the new house returned me to MacLean and I read The Golden Rendezvous (again), Ice Station Zebra, and Night Without End.

And now I am reading The Secret Ways, and my initial response is that I like South by Java Head and The Golden Rendezvous better. Unlike the other books, at least those I have re-read so far, SbJH and TGR do not feature professional spies as protagonists but rather capable men simply caught up in larger events. It may be no accident that both men are executive officers of merchant ships. MacLean was himself a sailor: his first book H.M.S. Ulysses was, I believe, based fairly closely on his naval experience. Perhaps he is at his best when imagining himself caught up in larger events.

Another response is that MacLean’s prose, when he is at his best, is quite good. Better than Clive Cussler. I am listening to Cussler’s The Chase right now as an Audible book, and I have listened to two of the books from the Oregon Files series. Cussler’s prose really can’t be even described as workman-like, for at times it is so — clumsy? awkward? — that it actually gets in the way of itself. (Please note that I am quite sure Cussler doesn’t care one whit about evaluations of his prose style: the man has produced a remarkable oeuvre not only in his “only-author” books but also in the franchises he has set up with other authors. He is able to do so because readers have come to expect a certain kind of book from him and his name is a trustworthy brand to deliver that content. I should be so industrious and smart as Cussler … I just wish I could edit him here and there. That’s all.)

I read both MacLean and Cussler less as an English professor and more as a writer: Could I do this? Could I pull off this plot line? How would I do it different? What story can I tell? What do they do well that I could imitate/use in my own work, no matter whether it is nonfiction or fiction?

I have no idea if there is any scholarly treatments of either author. Ian Fleming has certainly achieved a certain status now. Perhaps it is time to give MacLean his due. I wonder where he fits within the larger chronology of the development of the spy thriller or whatever one calls this genre that also includes the work of Cussler and Robert Ludlum — remember his three word titles? — and later folks like Tom Clancy and I suppose now Dan Brown(?).


4
Feb 11

O’Brian’s Historical Fiction

A long, long time ago I noted — in a post so ancient that I think it actually exists in a database long ago archived — that Patrick O’Brian’s fiction was something for contemporary historians and ethnographers to emulate, to take as an example of fiction that was both enormously popular and capable of delivering vast amounts of historical/ethnographic data to a readership that simply wanted more. Indeed, as Jo Walton points out in her terrific re-reading of the entire series on Tor.com: O’Brian himself realized his readers loved the technology and the characters so much that he gave up history in order to keep the machine going. I suppose it is the boon of the science fiction writer and the bane of the historical fiction writer that time is not as bounded in the former as it is in the latter — though Walton’s playful picking at the boundaries, and her promise of writing a novel realizing her play, is to be admired.


31
Jan 11

Coppola on Short Fiction

In the middle of her interview with Coppola, Ariston Anderson asks him, “What is the one thing to keep in mind when making a film?” Coppola replies:

When you make a movie, always try to discover what the theme of the movie is in one or two words. Every time I made a film, I always knew what I thought the theme was, the core, in one word. In “The Godfather,” it was succession. In “The Conversation,” it was privacy. In “Apocalypse,” it was morality.

It’s great advice for writing short stories, too. And perhaps essays. And sections of books. I am going to try it out as I revise the first few sections of the boat book, now that I think I know what they should be doing and how they should be doing it.

I’d also like to try that advice in writing a short story: I should note that I was very inspired by my viewing of the Walker Percy film yesterday. What Percy did again and again was to observe life around him and try to capture it accurately. He didn’t reach for far away places and he didn’t reach into the past. The New Orleans of his novels was the New Orleans he knew.

In his wake I find I want to challenge myself to do much the same: to document as best I can the reality around me. Right now I am working on a book that’s about boats, but it’s also about the prairies, a place much mythified even by folklorists. (I just saw a film today that was about the country Mardi Gras, one day out of a year filled otherwise with trying to wrestle rice out of the ground.) After the countryside, it would be nice to turn to this small city in which I life, Lafayette, and capture it as it is, try to understand it as it is. It is much like other places, and it is also different from other places, but we can only those similarities and differences if we actually document them. Otherwise we are only working from a collection of so many personal anecdotes, which is poor stuff compared to a more organized study.


25
Mar 10

Kurt Vonnegut at the Blackboard

This flashback at Lapham’s Quarterly makes me realize two things: writers often don’t have much to say about writing and I will never understand how people can get anything out of presentations that really don’t say anything. Is it just the brand name? Really? Vonnegut says it and somehow it’s profound?

But there’s a reason we recognize Hamlet as a masterpiece: it’s that Shakespeare told us the truth, and people so rarely tell us the truth in this rise and fall here [indicates blackboard]. The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.


22
Jul 09

Why I Do What I Do

Early in The Writing Life Annie Dillard tells the story of an aspiring writer coming up to her after a reading and asking if she, too, could become a writer. That she really wanted to. In the moment, Dillard tells us she remembered a similar question once being posed to a painter and that his response was “Do you like the smell of paint?” Her response is “do you like to make sentences?”

The nature of the response is to point out that we too often focus on the role or persona and not on the process or product. Painters paint. Writers write. It’s a stupidly simple assertion, but it reminds us that behind any fame or glamor attached to someone who has done something is the doing itself.

There’s a lot more to be said on this subject. I only come to it this morning because I am working on a photo-essay, an argument by illustration is what I am calling it, for a start-up journal. It’s on the boats, of course — which is nice after taking a hiatus to work on the Project Bamboo scholarly narratives. And what brought me to say out loud “I love what I do” was writing on some photographs I had printed out with a permanent marker, numbering them and also marking topics within the image that I wanted to pursue. I love the feel of it.


1
Jul 09

Making (Foot)Notes

As I began work on the analysis of the Scholarly Narratives deposited in the Project Bamboo planning wiki, I found I needed the occasional footnote to explain a few items that didn’t really deserve space in the text proper but still deserved to be addressed in some fashion. Such extra-textural information can customarily be contained in notes of some kind, either foot or end.

Fortunately, the variation of Markdown that I am using, MultiMarkdown by Fletcher Penney, contains note functionality.

All I have to do to embed a note into the text is to add [^1] in the body of the text and then at the end of the text add a mate [^1]: Followed by the body of the note. Simple, n’est-ce pas? The HTML it creates looks like this:

<a href="#fn:1" id="fnref:1" class="footnote">1</a>

And later:

<div class="footnotes">
<hr />
<ol>

<li id="fn:1"><p> [footnote text here] 
<a href="#fnref:1" class="reversefootnote">&#160;&#8617;</a></p></li>

</ol>
</div>

Note how the MultiMarkdown script generously creates a link to return you to the spot where you were reading in the text proper. Thank you, Mr. Penney.

But all of this, it turns out, opens up a larger can of worms that has been poked at by a number of individuals with sticks that reveals that there really is no terribly good solution to the problem of notes in HTML — this despite the fact that one would think that the very links that saturate HTML texts would do the job.

Well, they do, but not quite in the same way that footnotes do the job. One of the great advantages of footnotes, one that they have over endnotes to my mind and why I have always preferred footnotes, is that the reader doesn’t really leave the space, the cognitive space if you will, within which they are operating. If a number or symbol indicating a note is available is paired with an item that piques the reader’s curiosity, all she has to do is flick her eyes to the bottom of the page. Thanks to a pretty decent spatial memory built into the human brain and to the fact that the note you’ve just read had a particular symbol paired with it, returning to the approximate spot in the text from whence the reader came is usually not so difficult a task that it breaks the reader’s sense of flow. (I do not find that endnotes accomplish this at all, by the way, and I’m sorry that my own discipline has chosen endnotes over footnotes.)

But a web page is not a page except in name. The comparable physical space is really a screen.

The compromise has been for the most part to treat the web page as a page and to place notes at its distant, and sometimes unknown (from the reader’s point of view) bottom. The convention that the Markdown script follows, in giving a link back to where you were in the text, is also a common one. The idea is to achieve via technology what the reader used to do themselves physically. I don’t find the effect to be as smooth and it is likely, at least for this reader, at least half the time to result in me losing track of where I was.

There is a really terrific description of all this by Paula Petrik in a post where she also gives some really concrete and practical advice on how to construct notes according to one’s own preferences.


3
Jan 09

The Writing Life

Bernard Cornwell’s Writing Advice

Bernard Cornwell is the author behind the Sharpe series, which have, like Patrick O’Brian’s seafaring novels set in the same Napoleonic period, achieved a kind of cult status. The Sharpe saga was later turned into a television mini-series by the BBC and aired in the U.S.A. on PBS. What follows is an encapsulated version of his “writing advice” which can be found at his website:

  • Find an agent.
  • Get the story right. Do not worry about anything except story. What will get you published? Not style, not research, but story. Kurt Vonnegut once said that every good story begins with a question.
  • Once you have your story, you must keep it moving. If I could have my life over again I would rewrite the first third of The Winter King to compress the story, because when I wrote it I was too busy creating a world when I should have been keeping the characters busy. [JL: But some writers mistake busy characters for a story.]
  • Want to write a better book? When I wrote Sharpe’s Eagle, never having written a book before, I began by disassembling three other books. Two were Hornblowers, and I forget which the third was, but I had enjoyed them all. So I read them again, but this time I made enormous colored charts which showed what was happening paragraph by paragraph through the three books. How much was action? And where was the action in the overall plan of the book? How much dialogue? How much romance? How much flashback? How much background information. Where did the writer place it?
  • How much research is needed? Stay focused on the project at hand. Why explore eighteenth century furniture making if the book does not feature furniture? Do as much research as you feel comfortable doing; write the book; and see where the gaps are; then go and research the gaps. Don’t get hung up on research: some folks do nothing but research and never get round to writing the book.
  • In the end, you have to write the book. A page a day and you’ve written a book in a year.

HOW TO WRITE A SCRIPT

Write a story that is juicy

These days, when I sit down to write, I don’t think about the message I want to convey with a story. I don’t think about what the film is “About”. Instead I try to find a story that gets my juices flowing, then I attempt to discover why my juices are flowing in such a way, and once I do, I try to find a way of conveying that, that once discovered, seems all too obvious.

Oliver Taylor’s Scene Analysis

13 May 2006. I’ve come up with a set of questions I ask myself that I use when I need help getting started or getting thru a scene. These questions have been lifted and combined from two sources.

There is an acting technique called Practical Aesthetics, which is most clearly defined in the book A Practical Handbook for the Actor. In it, the job of the actor is defined as,

Find[ing] a way to live truthfully under the imaginary circumstances of the play. Thus the actor must be able to decide what is going on in the text in simple, actable terms.

A bad actor will look at a scene and say, “This scene requires that I be angry, because at the end I yell at the other character.” A good actor will say, “When I yell at the other character it shows that I’m angry.” How do you act angry? You assume all the traits of an angry person, you grumble, you scour, you put on a mask. That mask is the worst thing you can do as an actor because it gets you further away from the most important thing you do, “Find[ing] a way to live truthfully under the imaginary circumstances of the play.”

Masks of anger, joy, confusion, all distance the actor from anything real that is happening in that moment.

As a writer you are also attempting to create something that feels real, as if the scene unfolds without the slightest effort, sending it’s characters reeling into fits of rage, joy, whatever. Like a bad actor, a bad writer will say, “This scene requires him to be angry, so I’ll have him yell at her.” A good writer will say, “Him yelling at her reveals that he is angry.” The thing to note about this distinction is that you’ve identified what’s important about your job as a writer, instead of focusing on an angry thing for him to do, you’ve shifted the focus to revealing a piece of information. And that’s what writing is all about, revealing information.

The job of a writer is to discover what series of events best illustrates an idea or an emotion. Just like the actor, your job is one of translation, the most difficult part which is that it all comes down to this: you have to write something that a person can do in front of a camera.

Practical Aesthetics states that: “”[A] Physical action is the main building block of an actor’s technique because it is the one thing that you, the actor, can consistently do on-stage.”"

Notice any similarities to writing a scene?

The checklist

The technique prescribes a checklist for choosing an action. (Descriptions are my own).

  1. Must be physically possible to do.
  2. Pleading for help, Good. — Attaining the American Dream, Bad.
  3. Must be fun to do.
  4. You must make a scene interesting, if you’re not interested how can the audience be interested?
  5. Must be specific.
  6. You must have a clear path to follow, generality is death.
  7. The test of the action must be in the other person.
  8. By looking at the other person you must know how close you are to completing your action.
  9. Must not be an errand.
  10. The action must be something that it is possible to fail at.
  11. Cannot presuppose an emotional state.
  12. Any action requiring you to put yourself in a state before or during a scene will force you to act a lie.
  13. Cannot be manipulate.
  14. A manipulative action will force you to act in a predetermined way.
  15. Must have a cap.
  16. You must have an end to work towards.
  17. Must be inline with the intentions of the writer.
  18. You are part of a whole, not a whole itself.

These descriptions are, of course, inadequate at best. A Practical Handbook for the Actor is cheap, and an invaluable resource. Go buy it.

Asking Questions

When Francis Ford Coppola was adapting The Godfather he asked himself a series of questions while reading the book’s scenes and thinking about how to adapt them. He then wrote the answers to these questions in the margins of the book. The idea was that these questions would assist him in finding out what was important, and relevant, about the particular scene in question. His questions are listed below. (For this example I’ll analyze the first few pages of Braveheart.)

Synopsis
  • We are told that this is going to be a story about a man named William Wallace. This story may not follow accepted history exactly, but “history is written by those who hang heros.”
  • Scottish Nobles are fighting England for control of Scotland. William Wallace is 12 years old. His father and older brother are on their way to see a friend (a nobel) who was supposed to meet them after a meeting with the King of England’s men. They arrive and find all the nobles murdered. William, who has followed them, stumbles into the barn. This event will scar him.
  • Imagery & Tone — Specifics that stand out.
  • Cobalt mountains beneath a glowering purple sky fringed with pink; a cascading landscape of boulders shrouded in deep green grass; faces purple and contorted by the strangulation hanging, their tongues protruding.
  • The beauty of the landscape and the brutality of what is happening within it is a key juxtaposition that should be established quickly.
The Core
  • William should be established as a headstrong child, doing what he feels is right regardless of what he is told to do, foreshadowing the events to come.
  • The World — That does this say about this world?
  • Betrayal is a key element of the story. The fact that the Scottish are not more wary of “dirty” fighting means that they doomed to one day learn that lesson the hard way. It is therefore important that it be shown immediately that the Scottish were being betrayed and tricked by the English — and that it works.
Pitfalls
  • Making the English seem to villainous; the fact is that this was what war was like.
  • Shoving too much history down the audience’s throat.
  • Lingering too long on the setup, get to the hanging nobles as fast as you can.
  • Making the Scottish complete angels. List every obvious example in detail, this is not place for subtlety.

COMBINING THE TWO

I’ve combined parts of both these lists and compiled a set of questions I ask myself when writing a scene.

  • Synopsis: Short summary.
  • Imagery & Tone: Specifics that stand out.
  • The Core: What is important?
  • Pitfalls: How can you screw this up?
  • How does it end: How does the scene end?
  • Who is in the scene: Character 1 / Character 2
  • Character 1 wants:
  • Character 1 can fail by:
  • Character 1′s method used:
  • Character 2 wants:
  • Character 2 can fail by:
  • Character 2′s method used:
  • Who gets their way:
  • Winning method(s):