Yesterday I went to the monthly RWA meeting (still feel awfully guilty for not paying dues -- while I support my local chapter of writers, I don't feel any kinship or allegiance with the national organization). Anyway, I was glad I went this time, even though I didn't really get any sleep and had to be up and ready by 9am (which is usually the middle of the night to me). The speaker was professor Craig Howes of UH. He is the director of a biography center -- part of an obscure discipline of writing (there are something like five or so of these centers throughout the world). He is also an expert in Thackery's Vanity Fair, and seems to know a great deal about Punch magazine. It sounds like it should be boring, but the dude was remarkably fascinating. It's just amazing when someone is excited about something they are in interested in -- and are able to communicate not just information but their excitement as well. I wanted to take his courses at UH! It wasn't just me -- everyone in the room was riveted.
The coolest part is that he was extremely cordial, and offered to meet with anyone about their writing! I'm really excited. I've had an idea for a screenplay on the back burner because it is based on true history and I wasn't sure how to approach it -- so now I can talk to an expert in the field, which is totally invaluable.
After the meeting, Leslee and I had lunch and she read a new piece I started. I was inspired after reading Chuck Palaniuk for the first time. I loved how he built up a story, rather like a person actually remembers things than a completely linear narrative. He filled in details and retraced scenes. Over the past several months I've tried to become a broader reader and try genre's and authors I would not have otherwise approached. This has really opened my mind about how I can be a better writer, and bring in new tools. I don't want to copycat anyone, but the more techniques I can understand and master, the better a writer I think I can become.
The piece Leslee read is called "Zero Player Game". It is intended to be an experiment, so it may or may not be completely fleshed out. It's based on an idea I discussed about a year or so ago with my friend Steve. We were talking about how it would be neat to have a story set in an environment where everything is legal. We agreed it was intriguing and cool, but I didn't go anywhere with it (it just nestled in the deep recesses of my mind and hibernated for awhile). Since I didn't know where to go with the idea, I though the Palaniuk techniques (or my impression of what they are) would be a great way to see if I could flesh out the story idea.
I started with a simple paragraph, just stuff that came to me:
I am a judge. I get a large office and a government stipend. I get a large car that likes leaded gasoline. I have the use of a sprawling luxury apartment midway up Liberty Tower. The best perks are the bribes.
Pretty pedestrian. Next I went through and started adding between the sentences, using that first paragraph as a rough sketch. The cool thing about the technique is that it is very fast. I don't have to think about what goes where too much, in terms of time sequences. It pretty much throws out all the writing logic I learned in high school, and it is actually really natural. I think the technique is worth exploring further.
This is part of the section that came from the line about the office:
I get a large office and a government stipend. The office sits like a morbidly obese frog in the middle of a brackish pond. The room itself is wide and long and squat, government green carpeting, rimmed with black walnut flooring and an insulating layer of old law books stretching from floor to ceiling, from back in the day when there were laws on books. No windows. The room is dead-center in Building A of capitol judicial sub-complex H, twelve floors up, with eleven floors above, a labyrinth of green carpeting, black walnut, sallow lighting, and faintly phthalate smells from the electronics snuggled between walls and floors and ceilings. All the judges' quarters are in the center of the building, a layered column shielded with extra concrete -- under New Law the judges act as temporary governors if all other government systems fail. This is something I try not to think about too much, though it does lend my duties a satisfying feeling of gravity. The stipend isn't much to talk about -- it is a nominal token to legitimize the job.
It's not the best selection, admittedly, but comparatively blog friendly for a general readership. I really had a blast writing it, but was still unsure. I feel like I still have a hard time communicating with readers. I lot of people miss important points if I don't spell something out in excruciating detail. I may be too nuanced, I may had stuff too locked up in my head, or the readers aren't capable of getting it (which I think is arrogant to think, but it's always in the back of my mind when someone gives me a weird critique).
Leslee didn't connect with the first page at all, and reread it several times stumbling over stuff. Most of her blocks were very valid -- just from crappy first draft mistakes. But what bothered me was that she was lost, and couldn't get a grip on the story -- and she was bothered by the nonlinearity. The latter worries me a bit -- older readers don't seem to get that one, while younger readers clue in -- so I don't know if I need to retool or if I am fine (my target reader is younger and geekier). Anyway, I am rambling. I do love experimenting though, I feel some real growth as a writer.