Tips from Bobbyswritingschool.com

A Note on Dramatic Climax

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 23:25:00 +0000

Yikes! It's been awhile since I've been here. Is it too late to say Happy 2010?!

My last post talked about the wants of a character and if they're important to the character, they will be important to the reader/viewer, meaning that said reader/viewer will stay invested in your story - that's the theory at least.

Building on top of that, the climax of your story should be violent! If achieving the goal is a matter of life or death to your character (not necessarily in the physical sense), the climax of this quest, the moment where the protagonist and antagonist go head-to-head... well, if it's not violent, it's a bit of a letdown, wouldn't you say? If a goal or want is a matter of life or death, it stands to think that a character will do everything in their power to achieve it. It also stands that there's an antagonist out there also willing to do anything to stop our hero. A perfect recipe for a violent confrontation of some sort.

Again, this idea of the climax being violent doesn't have to apply strictly to the physical The climax can be emotionally or psychologically violent too. Obviously, film and screenwriting lend themselves easier to a physically violent climax, but ideally, if you can combine the three, you're onto something special. An example off the top of where you have a trio of climactic violence is in Fight Club between Tyler Durden and Jack:

A most excellent climax if ever one existed.

Coming Soon: How you can learn everything you need to know about storytelling from boxing and MMA.

How to get your audience to care about your writing

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 18:51:00 +0000

I forget where I was when I heard people talking about how to make your reader care about your story and your characters. Now that I'm thinking about this, I may have been reading a forum thread or a blog somewhere... the point is that the question of how to get your audience to care about your writing seems like a difficult hill to climb, but there are a few things you can do.

The first and simplest answer is that as the writer, if you don't care about what you're writing, why should anyone? Of course, that can applied to anything you do in life, creative or otherwise, so let's go for some specifics as they apply here.

A more technical answer is available too: Everybody wants something. No matter where you are in life, you want something. When you're at a gas station, you want to fill up and move on as quickly as possible (if you don't, what's wrong with you?!). When you're out to dinner, you want a pleasant experience. Granted, some wants are more exciting than others, but the point is that your character has to want something to begin with.

Unfortunately, in storytelling, wanting something isn't good enough. All the little mundane "wants" (I'm going to switch to "goals" from here on out) have to lead to an ultimate goal. A super-objective, if you will, for the actors in the e-house. The goal has to be something that the character craves more than anything. This main goal has to be the most important thing in the world for your character at the moment your story is taking place.

In fact, it has to be life or death. Don't take that to mean literally life or death in a physical sense (though that can apply if you're in the action/adventure genre); it can be emotional or psychological . Your character has to have a goal to which if they achieve this goal or not, their life will forever be changed.

By doing that, you get your audience/reader invested in the outcome along with the character they're following and thus... you get them to give a damn.

NOTE: It's been awhile between posts. I apologize and will try to be better. To be fair, I am working on a novel.

A Character Development Fable: Mr. Bum and Bank Manager

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:08:00 +0000

I was in the bank earlier this week to take care of some mundane stuff, when I got a impromptu quick refresher course on the nature of conflict.

Two characters in a setting. Both want something. The other is getting in the way of them achieving their goal. The basic building blocks of drama.

In this case, a Mr. Bum had entered the bank before I arrived on the scene. I'm talking bulgy nose, leather skin, tattered beard complimenting electrified looking dreadlocks, green sweatpants, etc. Now he wasn't loitering, no, he was filling out a deposit slip. Enter the stiff, clearly uncomfortable Bank Manager with excellent posture. At first, Bank Manager stood a few feet away from Mr. Bum with his hands quietly folded in front of his waist. Mr. Bum is oblivious and continued writing. Bank Manager, having realized that non-verbal passive-aggressiveness does not work on the homeless, took a shoulder-inflating deep breath and asked if he could help the gentlemen with his banking needs.

Mr. Bum dropped the pen, turned to the door, and left without a word. The Bank Manager followed a few steps behind, stood by the exit, and presumably watched Mr. Bum disappear into the world once more.

Dramatically speaking, this little scene had it all:

- Two clearly defined and opposing characters. The deposit slip business for Mr. Bum was a unique touch, taking full advantage of the setting.
- Both had a defined, direct goal that conflicted with the other - Mr. Bum wanted to finish his banking, Bank Manager wanted to stop him.
- The conflict resulted in a climax where one character's goal won out versus the other.
- There was verbal and non-verbal interaction that arose organically from the situation.

If only they would have always have dramatic elements on display at the bank...

Three P's of Character Development

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:45:00 +0000

A quick note on a technique, almost like a checklist, I've learned that you can use to help round out your characters.

It's called The Three P's.

In a nutshell, it's a reminder that your character (and all of us, really) can be generally summed up with three distinctions: Personal, Professional, and Private.

Personal - What are the personal relationships for your character? Single, married, dating, etc. This could also extend out to their family, but keeping it focused on the romantic side of things is where you should concentrate.

Professional - Simple enough: What does your character do for a living?

Personal - Show your character when they are totally alone. How are they? What are they like when nobody is watching when they are their true self (hopefully). This is usually the most interesting of the three.

These are good to follow because your character is going to behave differently when dealing all three aspects of their life. Everyone does. The same person you are at work isn't going to be the same person in a personal relationship and definitely not the same person when no one else is around. That makes for a compelling and layered character.

[DISCLAIMER: If you've found enough peace in your own life where there isn't a discernible difference between the three for you... excellent! You are most like a well-adjusted, even-keeled human being. You're also probably exceedingly boring and certainly not someone people are going to read about or watch. No offense.]

Anyway... give your audience these moments, the Three P's, as quickly as possible so that they can get a sense of who the story is about. The sooner they get to know your protagonist, the sooner they will latch on to them (hopefully, right?) and their goals. The more information you give about them, the more likely your audience will find something that hooks them.

I'm currently reading Hell by Robert Olen Butler and Butler gives us the Three P's right away for his protagonist Hatcher McCord, who is a Anchorman in Hell, he's living with Anne Boleyn, and well, I don't want to give away the personal, because the personal aspects of a character are the most revealing, and I won't post any spoilers here.

Good luck with your 3 P's!

Edgar Allan Poe's Balloon Hoax

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:40:00 +0000

One could argue that nothing's "new" and everything worth doing has already been done long ago. In the case of the balloon boy hoax, it is in fact, very old. Not early 21st Century old. Not even 20th Century old. You have to go back to the mid 19th Century to find the original balloon flight media hoax.

A century and a half before The Onion began to brilliantly skewer the news on a daily basis, no less than Edgar Allan Poe beat them to the punch back in 1844 when he published a story in a newspaper concerning a balloon ride across the Atlantic. People bought it and two days later, the paper published a retraction.

So if you've been questioning your intelligence for falling for the sensationalism of the recent balloon boy saga, relax. This has been going on for a long time. And don't worry, the next time there's a media hoax, you'll fall for it too.

Good storytelling wins every time.

For your reading enjoyment, enjoy Poe's Balloon Hoax tale....

Astounding News by Express, via Norfolk!

-- The Atlantic Crossed in Three Days! Signal Triumph of Mr Monck Mason's Flying Machine!

-- Arrival at Sullivan's Island, near Charleston, S.C., of Mr Mason, Mr Robert Holland, Mr Henson, Mr Harrison Ainsworth, and four others, in the Steering Balloon, Victoria, after a passage of Seventy-five hours from Land to Land! Full Particulars of the Voyage!

The subjoined jeu d'esprit with the preceding heading in magnificent capitals, well interspersed with notes of admiration, was originally published, as matter of fact, in the New York Sun, a daily newspaper, and therein fully subserved the purpose of creating indigestible aliment for the quidnuncs during the few hours intervening between a couple of the Charleston mails. The rush for the 'sole paper which had the news', was something beyond even the prodigious; and, in fact, if (as some assert) the Victoria did not absolutely accomplish the voyage recorded, it will be difficult to assign a reason why she should not have accomplished it.

The great problem is at length solved! The air, as well as the earth and the ocean, has been subdued by science, and will become a common and convenient highway for mankind. The Atlantic has been actually crossed in a Balloon! and this too without difficulty -- without any great apparent danger -- with thorough control of the machine -- and in the inconceivably brief period of seventy-five hours from shore to shore! By the energy of an agent at Charleston, S.C., we are enabled to be the first to furnish the public with a detailed account of this most extraordinary voyage, which was performed between Saturday, the 6th instant, at 11 A.M., and 2 P.M., on Tuesday, the 9th instant, by Sir Everard Bringhurst; Mr Osborne, a nephew of Lord Bentinck's; Mr Monck Mason and Mr Robert Holland, the well-known aeronauts; Mr Harrison Ainsworth, author of Jack Shepherd, etc.; and Mr Henson, the projector of the late unsuccessful flying machine -- with two seamen from Woolwich -- in all, eight persons. The particulars furnished below may be relied on as authentic and accurate in every respect, as, with a slight exception, they are copied verbatim from the joint diaries of Mr Monck Mason and Mr Harrison Ainsworth, to whose politeness our agent is indebted for much verbal information respecting the balloon itself, its construction, and other matters of interest. The only alteration in the MS received, has been made for the purpose of throwing the hurried account of our agent, Mr Forsyth, into a connected and intelligible form.

THE BALLOON

Two very decided failures, of late, -- those of Mr Henson and Sir George Cayley, -- had much weakened the public interest in the subject of aerial navigation. Mr Henson's scheme (which at first was considered very feasible even by men of science) was founded upon the principle of an inclined plane, started from an eminence by an extrinsic force applied and continued by the revolution of impinging vanes in form and number resembling the vanes of a windmill. But, in all the experiments made with models at the Adelaide Gallery, it was found that the operation of these fans not only did not propel the machine, but actually impeded its flight. The only propelling force it ever exhibited, was the mere impetus acquired from the descent of the inclined plane; and this impetus carried the machine further when the vanes were at rest, than when they were in motion -- a fact which sufficiently demonstrates their inutility; and in the absence of the propelling, which was also the sustaining, power, the whole fabric would necessarily descend. This consideration led Sir George Cayley to think only of adapting a propeller to some machine having of itself an independent power of support -- in a word, to a balloon; the idea however, being novel, or original, with Sir George, only so far as regards the mode of its application to practice. He exhibited a model of his invention at the Polytechnic Institution. The propelling principle, or power, was here, also, applied to interrupted surfaces, or vanes, put in revolution. These vanes were four in number, but were found entirely ineffectual in moving the balloon, or in aiding its ascending power. The whole project was thus a complete failure.

It was at this juncture that Mr Monck Mason (whose voyage from Dover to Weilburg in the balloon, Nassau, occasioned so much excitement in 1837) conceived the idea of employing the principle of the Archimedean screw for the purpose of propulsion through the air -- rightly attributing the failure of Mr Henson's scheme, and of Sir George Cayley's to the interruption of surface in the independent vanes. He made the first public experiment at Willis's Rooms, but afterward removed his model to the Adelaide Gallery.

Like Sir George Cayley's balloon, his own was an ellipsoid. Its length was thirteen feet six inches -- height, six feet eight inches. It contained about three hundred and twenty cubic feet of gas, which, if pure hydrogen, would support twenty-one pounds upon its first inflation, before the gas has time to deteriorate or escape. The weight of the whole machine and apparatus was seventeen pounds -- leaving about four pounds to spare. Beneath the centre of the balloon, was a frame of light wood, about nine feet long, and rigged on to the balloon itself with a network in the customary manner. From this framework was suspended a wicker basket or car.

The screw consists of an axis of hollow brass tube, eighteen inches in length, through which, upon a semispiral inclined at fifteen degrees, pass a series of steel-wire radii, two feet long, and thus projecting a foot on either side. These radii are connected at the outer extremities by two bands of flattened wire -- the whole in this manner forming the framework of the screw, which is completed by a covering of oiled silk cut into gores, and tightened so as to present a tolerably uniform surface. At each end of its axis this screw is supported by pillars of hollow brass tube descending from the hoop. In the lower ends of these tubes are holes in which the pivots of the axis revolve. From the end of the axis which is next the car, proceeds a shaft of steel, connecting the screw with the pinion of a piece of spring machinery fixed in the car. By the operation of this spring, the screw is made to revolve with great rapidity, communicating a progressive motion to the whole. By means of the rudder, the machine was readily turned in any direction. The spring was of great power, compared with its dimensions, being capable of raising forty-five pounds upon a barrel of four inches diameter after the first turn, and gradually increasing as it was wound up. It weighed, altogether, eight pounds six ounces. The rudder was a light frame of cane covered with silk, shaped somewhat like a battledore, and was about three feet long, and at the widest, one foot. Its weight was about two ounces. It could be turned flat, and directed upward or downward, as well as to the right or left; and thus enabled the aeronaut to transfer the resistance of the air which in an inclined position it must generate in its passage, to any side upon which he might desire to act; thus determining the balloon in the opposite direction.

This model (which, through want of time, we have necessarily described in an imperfect manner) was put in action at the Adelaide Gallery, where it accomplished a velocity of five miles per hour; although, strange to say, it excited very little interest in comparison with the previous complex machine of Mr Henson -- so resolute is the world to despise anything which carries with it an air of simplicity. To accomplish the great desideratum of aerial navigation, it was very generally supposed that some exceedingly complicated application must be made of some unusually profound principle in dynamics.

So well satisfied, however, was Mr Mason of the ultimate success of his invention, that he determined to construct immediately, if possible, a balloon of sufficient capacity to test the question by a voyage of some extent -- the original design being to cross the British Channel, as before, in the Nassau balloon. To carry out his views he solicited and obtained the patronage of Sir Everard Bringhurst and Mr Osborne, two gentlemen well known for scientific acquirement, and especially for the interest they have exhibited in the progress of aerostation. The project at the desire of Mr Osborne, was kept a profound secret from the public -- the only persons entrusted with the design being those actually engaged in the construction of the machine, which was built (under the superintendence of Mr Mason, Mr Holland, Sir Everard Bringhurst, and Mr Osborne) at the seat of the latter gentleman near Penstruthal, in Wales. Mr Henson, accompanied by his friend Mr Ainsworth, was admitted to a private view of the balloon, on Saturday last -- when the two gentlemen made final arrangements to be included in the adventure. We are not informed for what reason the two seamen were also included in the party -- but, in the course of a day or two, we shall put our readers in possession of the minutest particulars respecting this extraordinary voyage.

The balloon is composed of silk, varnished with the liquid gum caoutchouc. It is of vast dimensions, containing more than 40,000 cubic feet of gas; but as coal-gas was employed in place of the more expensive and inconvenient hydrogen, the supporting power of the machine, when fully inflated, and immediately after inflation, is not more than about 2500 pounds. The coal-gas is not only much less costly, but is easily procured and managed.

For its introduction into common use for purposes of aerostation, we are indebted to Mr Charles Green. Up to his discovery, the process of inflation was not only exceedingly expensive, but uncertain. Two and even three days have frequently been wasted in futile attempts to procure a sufficiency of hydrogen to fill a balloon, from which it had great tendency to escape, owing to its extreme subtlety, and its affinity for the surrounding atmosphere. In a balloon sufficiently perfect to retain its contents of coal-gas unaltered, in quality or amount

for six months, an equal quantity of hydrogen could not be maintained in equal purity for six weeks.

The supporting power being estimated at 2500 pounds, and the united weights of the party amounting only to about 1200, there was left a surplus of 1300, of which again 1200 was exhausted by ballast, arranged in bags of different sizes, with their respective weights marked upon them -- by cordage, barometers, telescopes, barrels containing provision for a fortnight, watercasks, cloaks, carpet-bags, and various other indispensable matters, including a coffee-warmer, contrived for warming coffee by means of slack-lime, so as to dispense altogether with fire, if it should be judged prudent to do so. All these articles, with the exception of the ballast, and a few trifles, were suspended from the hoop overhead. The car is much smaller and lighter, in proportion, than the one appended to the model. It is formed of a light wicker, and is wonderfully strong, for so frail-looking a machine. Its rim is about four feet deep. The rudder is also very much larger, in proportion, than that of the model; and the screw is considerably smaller. The balloon is furnished besides with a grapnel, and a guide-rope; which latter is of the most indispensable importance. A few words, in explanation, will here be necessary for such of our readers as are not conversant with the details of aerostation.

As soon as the balloon quits the earth, it is subjected to the influence of many circumstances tending to create a difference in its weight; augmenting or diminishing its ascending power. For example, there may be a deposition of dew upon the silk, to the extent, even of several hundred pounds; ballast has then to be thrown out, or the machine may descend. This ballast being discarded, and a clear sunshine evaporating the dew, and at the same time expanding the gas in the silk, the whole will again rapidly ascend. To check this ascent, the only resource is (or rather was, until Mr Green's invention of the guide-rope) the permission of the escape of gas from the valve; but, in the loss of gas, is a proportionate general loss of ascending power; so that, in a comparatively brief period, the best-constructed balloon must necessarily exhaust all its resources, and come to the earth. This was the great obstacle to voyages of length.

The guide-rope remedies the difficulty in the simplest matter conceivable. It is merely a very long rope which is suffered to trail from the car, and the effect of which is to prevent the balloon from changing its level in any material degree. If, for example, there should be a deposition of moisture upon the silk, and the machine begins to descend in consequence, there will be no necessity for discharging ballast to remedy the increase in weight, for it is remedied, or counteracted, in an exactly just proportion, by the deposit on the ground of just so much of the end of the rope as is necessary. If, on the other hand, any circumstances should cause undue levity, and consequent ascent, this levity is immediately counteracted by the additional weight of rope upraised from the earth. Thus, the balloon can neither ascend nor descend, except within very narrow limits, and its resources, either in gas or ballast, remain comparatively unimpaired. When passing over an expanse of water, it becomes necessary to employ kegs of copper or wood, filled with liquid ballast of a lighter nature than water. These float, and serve all the purposes of a mere rope on land. Another most important office of the guide-rope, is to point out the direction of the balloon. The rope drags, either on land or sea, while the balloon is free; the latter, consequently, is always in advance, when any progress whatever is made: a comparison, therefore, by means of the compass, of the relative positions of the two objects, will always indicate the course. In the same way, the angle formed by the rope with the verticle axis of the machine, indicates the velocity. When there is no angle -- in other words, when the rope hangs perpendicularly, the whole apparatus is stationary; but the larger the angle, that is to say, the farther the balloon precedes the end of the rope, the greater the velocity; and the converse.

As the original design was to cross the British Channel, and alight as near Paris as possible, the voyagers had taken the precaution to prepare themselves with passports directed to all parts of the Continent, specifying the nature of the expedition, as in the case of the Nassau voyage, and entitling the adventurers to exemption from the usual formalities of office; unexpected events, however, rendered these passports superfluous.

The inflation was commenced very quietly at daybreak, on Saturday morning, the 6th instant, in the courtyard of Wheal-Vor House, Mr Osborne's seat, about a mile from Penstruthal, in North Wales; and at seven minutes past eleven, everything being ready for departure, the balloon was set free, rising gently but steadily, in a direction nearly south; no use being made, for the first half hour, of either the screw or the rudder. We proceed now with the journal, as transcribed by Mr Forsyth from the joint MSS of Mr Monck Mason and Mr Ainsworth. The body of the journal, as given, is in the handwriting of Mr Mason, and a PS is appended, each day, by Mr Ainsworth, who has in preparation, and will shortly give the public a more minute and, no doubt, a thrillingly interesting account of the voyage.

THE JOURNAL

Saturday, April the 6th. -- Every preparation likely to embarrass us having been made overnight, we commenced the inflation this morning at daybreak; but owing to a thick fog, which encumbered the folds of the silk and rendered it unmanageable, we did not get through before nearly eleven o'clock. Cut loose, then, in high spirits, and rose gently but steadily, with a light breeze at north, which bore us in the direction of the British Channel. Found the ascending force greater than we had expected; and as we arose higher and so got clear of the cliffs, and more in the sun's rays, our ascent became very rapid. I did not wish, however, to lose gas at so early a period of the adventure, and so concluded to ascend for the present. We soon ran out our guide-rope; but even when we had raised it clear of the earth, we still went up very rapidly. The balloon was unusually steady, and looked beautifully. In about ten minutes after starting, the barometer indicated an altitude of 15,000 feet. The weather was remarkably fine, and the view of the subjacent country -- a most romantic one when seen from any point -- was now especially sublime. The numerous deep gorges presented the appearance of lakes, on account of the dense vapours with which they were filled, and the pinnacles and crags to the south-west, piled in extricable confusion resembling nothing so much as the giant cities of Eastern fable. We were rapidly approaching the mountains in the south, but our elevation was more than sufficient to enable us to pass them in safety. In a few minutes we soared over them in fine style; and Mr Ainsworth, with the seamen, was surprised at their apparent want of altitude when viewed from the car, the tendency of great elevation in a balloon being to reduce inequalities of the surface below, to nearly a dead level.

At half-past eleven still proceeding nearly south, we obtained our first view of the British Channel; and, in fifteen minutes afterwards, the line of breakers on the coast appeared immediately beneath us, and we were fairly out at sea. We now resolved to let off enough gas to bring our guide-rope, with the buoys affixed, into the water. This was immediately done, and we commenced a gradual descent. In about twenty minutes our first buoy dipped, and at the touch of the second soon afterward, we remained stationary as to elevation. We were all now anxious to test the efficiency of the rudder and screw, and we put them both into requisition forthwith, for the purpose of altering our direction more to the eastward, and in a line for Paris. By means of the rudder we instantly effected the necessary change of direction, and our course was brought nearly at right angles to that of the wind; then we set in motion the spring of the screw, and were rejoiced to find it propel as readily as desired. Upon this we gave nine hearty cheers, and dropped in the sea a bottle, inclosing a slip of parchment with a brief account of the principle of the invention.

Hardly, however, had we done with our rejoicings, when an unforeseen accident occurred which discouraged us in no little degree. The steel rod connecting the spring with the propeller was suddenly jerked out of place, at the car end (by a swaying of the car through some movement of one of the two seamen we had taken up), and in an instant hung dangling out of reach, from the pivot of the axis of the screw. While we were endeavouring to regain it, our attention being completely absorbed, we became involved in a strong current of wind from the east, which bore us, with rapidly increasing force, toward the Atlantic. We soon found ourselves driving out to sea at the rate of not less, certainly, than fifty or sixty miles an hour, so that we came up with Cape Clear, at some forty miles to our north, before we had secured the rod, and had time to think what we were about. It was now that Mr Ainsworth made an extraordinary but, to my fancy, a by no means unreasonable or chimerical proposition, in which he was instantly seconded by Mr Holland -- viz.: that we should take advantage of the strong gale which bore us on, and in place of beating back to Paris, make an attempt to reach the coast of North America. After slight reflection I gave a willing assent to this bold proposition, which (strange to say) met with objection from the two seamen only. As the stronger party, however, we overruled their fears, and kept resolutely upon our course. We steered due west; but as the trailing of the buoys materially impeded our progress, and we had the balloon abundantly at command, either for ascent or descent, we first threw out fifty pounds of ballast, and then wound up (by means of the windlass) so much of the rope as brought it quite clear of the sea. We perceived the effect of this manoeuvre immediately, in a vastly increased rate of progress; and, as the gale freshened, we flew with a velocity nearly inconceivable; the guide-rope flying out behind the car, like a streamer from a vessel. It is needless to say that a very short time sufficed us to lose sight of the coast.

We passed over innumerable vessels of all kinds, a few of which were endeavouring to beat up, but the most of them lying to. We occasioned the greatest excitement on board all -- an excitement greatly relished by ourselves, and especially by our two men, who, now under the influence of a dram of Geneva, seemed resolved to give all scruple, or fear, to the wind. Many of the vessels fired signal guns; and in all we were saluted with loud cheers (which we heard with surprising distinctness) and the waving of caps and handkerchiefs. We kept on in this manner throughout the day with no material incident, and, as the shades of night closed around us, we made a rough estimate of the distance traversed. It could not have been less than five hundred miles, and was probably much more. The propeller was kept in constant operation, and, no doubt, aided our progress materially. As the sun went down, the gale freshened into an absolute hurricane, and the ocean beneath was clearly visible on account of its phosphorescence. The wind was from the east all night, and gave us the brightest omen of success. We suffered no little from cold, and the dampness of the atmosphere was most unpleasant; but the ample space in the car enabled us to lie down, and by means of cloaks and a few blankets we did sufficiently well.

PS [by Mr Ainsworth.] The last nine hours have been unquestionably the most exciting of my life. I can conceive nothing more sublimating than the strange peril and novelty of an adventure such as this. May God grant that we succeed! I ask not success for mere safety to my insignificant person, but for the sake of human knowledge and -- for the vastness of the triumph. And yet the feat is only so evidently feasible that the sole wonder is why men have scrupled to attempt it before. One single gale such as now befriends us -- let such a tempest whirl forward a balloon for four or five days (these gales often last longer) and the voyager will be easily borne, in that period, from coast to coast. In view of such a gale the broad Atlantic becomes a mere lake. I am more struck, just now, with the supreme silence which reigns in the sea beneath us, notwithstanding its agitation, than with any other phenomenon presenting itself. The waters give up no voice to the heavens. The immense flaming ocean writhes and is tortured uncomplainingly. The mountainous surges suggest the idea of innumerable dumb gigantic fiends struggling in impotent agony. In a night such as is this to me, a man lives -- lives a whole century of ordinary life -- nor would I forego this rapturous delight for that of a whole century of ordinary existence.

Sunday, the 7th. [Mr Mason's MS.] This morning the gale, by ten, had subsided to an eight or nine-knot breeze (for a vessel at sea), and bears us, perhaps, thirty miles per hour, or more. It has veered, however, very considerably to the north; and now, at sundown, we are holding our course due west, principally by the screw and rudder, which answer their purposes to admiration. I regard the project as thoroughly successful, and the easy navigation of the air in any direction (not exactly in the teeth of a gale) as no longer problematical. We could not have made head against the strong wind of yesterday; but, by ascending, we might have got out of its influence, if requisite. Against a pretty stiff breeze, I feel convinced, we can make our way with the propeller. At noon, to-day, ascended to an elevation of nearly 25,000 feet, by discharging ballast. Did this to search for a more direct current, but found none so favourable as the one we are now in. We have an abundance of gas to take us across this small pond, even should the voyage last three weeks. I have not the slightest fear for the result. The difficulty has been strangely exaggerated and misapprehended. I can choose my current, and should I find all currents against me, I can make very tolerable headway with the propeller. We have no incidents worth recording. The night promises fair.

PS [By Mr Ainsworth.] I have little to record, except the fact (to me quite a surprising one), that, at an elevation equal to that of Cotopaxi, I experienced neither intense cold, nor headache, nor difficulty of breathing; neither, I find, did Mr Mason, nor Mr Holland, nor Sir Everard. Mr Osborne complained of constriction of the chest -- but this soon wore off. We have flown at a great rate during the day, and we must be more than half way across the Atlantic. We have passed over some twenty or thirty vessels of various kinds, and all seem to be delightfully astonished. Crossing the ocean in a balloon is not so difficult a feat after all. Omne ignotum pro magnifico. Mem.: at 25,000 feet elevation the sky appears nearly black, and the stars are distinctly visible; while the sea does not seem convex (as one might suppose) but absolutely and most unequivocally concave.

Monday, the 8th. [Mr Mason's MS.] This morning we had again some little trouble with the rod of the propeller, which must be entirely remodelled, for fear of serious accident -- I mean the steel rod, not the vanes. The latter could not be improved. The wind has been blowing steadily and strongly from the north-east all day; and so far fortune seems bent upon favouring us. Just before day, we were all somewhat alarmed at some odd noises and concussions in the balloon, accompanied with the apparent rapid subsidence of the whole machine. These phenomena were occasioned by the expansion of the gas, through increase of heat in the atmosphere, and the consequent disruption of the minute particles of ice with which the network had become encrusted during the night. Threw down several bottles to the vessels below. See one of them picked up by a large ship -- seemingly one of the New York line packets. Endeavoured to make out her name, but could not be sure of it. Mr Osborne's telescope made it out something like Atalanta. It is now twelve at night, and we are still going nearly west, at a rapid pace. The sea is peculiarly phosphorescent.

PS [By Mr Ainsworth.] It is now two A.M., and nearly calm, as well as I can judge -- but it is very difficult to determine this point, since we move with the air so completely. I have not slept since quitting Wheal-Vor, but can stand it no longer, and must take a nap. We cannot be far from the American coast.

Tuesday, the 9th. [Mr Ainsworth's MS.] One P.M. We are in full view of the low coast of South Carolina. The great problem is accomplished. We have crossed the Atlantic -- fairly and easily crossed it in a balloon! God be praised! Who shall say that anything is impossible hereafter?'

The Journal here ceases. Some particulars of the descent were communicated, however, by Mr Ainsworth to Mr Forsyth. It was nearly dead calm when the voyagers first came in view of the coast, which was immediately recognized by both the seamen, and by Mr Osborne. The latter gentleman having acquaintances at Fort Moultrie, it was immediately resolved to descend in its vicinity. The balloon was brought over the beach (the tide being out and the sand hard, smooth, and admirably adapted for a descent) and the grapnel let go, which took firm hold at once. The inhabitants of the island, and of the fort, thronged out, of course, to see the balloon; but it was with the greatest difficulty that any one could be made to credit the actual voyage -- the crossing of the Atlantic. The grapnel caught at two P.M. precisely; and thus the whole voyage was completed in seventy-five hours; or rather less, counting from shore to shore. No serious accident occurred. No real danger was at any time apprehended. The balloon was exhausted and secured without trouble; and when the MS from which this narrative is compiled was despatched from Charleston, the party were still at Fort Moultrie. Their further intentions were not ascertained; but we can safely promise our readers some additional information either on Monday or in the course of the next day, at furthest.

This is unquestionably the most stupendous, the most interesting, and the most important undertaking ever accomplished or even attempted by man. What magnificent events may ensue, it would be useless now to think of determining.

NOTE -- Mr Ainsworth has not attempted to account for this phenomenon, which, however, is quite susceptible of explanation. A line dropped from an elevation of 25,000 feet, perpendicularly to the surface of the earth (or sea), would form the perpendicular of a right-angled triangle, of which the base would extend from the right angle to the horizon, and the hypothenuse from the horizon to the balloon. But the 25,000 feet of altitude is little or nothing, in comparison with the extent of the prospect. In other words, the base and hypothenuse of the supposed triangle would be so long, when compared with the perpendicular, that the two former may be regarded as nearly parallel. In this manner the horizon of the aeronaut would appear to be on a level with the car. But, as the point immediately beneath him seems, and is, at a great distance below him, it seems, of course, also, at a great distance below the horizon. Hence the impression of concavity; and this impression must remain, until the elevation shall bear so great a proportion to the extent of prospect, that the apparent parallelism of the base and hypothenuse disappears -- when the earth's real convexity must become apparent.

Treat Your Setting Like a Character

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:52:00 +0000

Is your setting as important as your main characters? "As" important, I don't know. I guess it depends entirely on the story you're telling, but still, setting is pretty important and sometimes gets overlooked in my opinion.

In fiction (I'm including plays and screenplays too), a lot of attention and emphasis is given towards developing your characters/their goals/quirks and rightfully so. But what about treating your setting like you would a character? It certainly couldn't hurt, could it? After all, your setting should be alive somehow, shouldn't it? So why not take the time to give your setting the depth that you would give to a character? If your setting leaps off the page on its own, it makes it that much easier for your characters to take that jump too.

The first example that pops into my mind is Collateral, starring Tom Cruise and Jamie Foxx.

The entire city of Los Angeles is a supporting character in the story. It's always there, observing the players as they navigate their way through the plot. Best of all, the setting is alive.

I've come up with a list of questions to ask yourself about your setting. Even as just a creative exercise, think of a specific place and apply some of these questions (the ones that interest you the most) to your setting. I'd be very surprised if a story doesn't come out of you by the time you get to the end.

Or, answer all of the questions, put those answers away and then create a story into your setting with all the knowledge you've created and see how that affects your handling of your characters.

Setting Questions

-What is it?

- What time is it?

- What year is it?

- Where is it, geographically?

- What’s the weather like around it?

- What is it next/connected to?

- What’s the size?

- The shape?

- What’s it made of (concrete, steel, etc.)?

- How tall is it?

- What’s the setting used for?

- Can it be used for more than one thing?

- How long has it been there?

- Does it move?

- What does it smell like?

- What does it feel like there (comforting, intimidating, frightening, etc.)?

- What’s the temperature inside?

- How is the inside different from the outside?

- What does the inside look like?

- How is it decorated?

- What’s inside it?

- What’s on the outside?

- Who is there (workers, visitors, etc.)?

- What do people do there?

- Why do people go there?

- Is it a crowded place?

- Who made it?

- Why was it made?

- Is there any interesting history at this setting?

- What makes this place special?

- Anything else you can think of!

First Draft as Improv Comedy Exercise

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 23:50:00 +0000

I have an audition in November for an improv group and while there's not a whole lot I can do to prepare for it per se, I have started to go over the basic principles of improv in my head to remind myself of at least what not to do.

The first and most important rule of improv is "Yes, and..." which basically means that everything you do moves the scene or the story forward. No denial. No editing. Always moving forward.

I think a similar approach is needed for a first draft, regardless of what you're writing. With your first draft your biggest enemy is always going to be that part of the brain that tells you that what you're about to write is absolutely terrible, beyond laughable, and that you should stop what you're doing immediately to spend an hour trying to convince yourself that you're not a total idiot for wanting to write.

So just follow the "Yes, and..." idea of building upon what you're writing as you compose your first draft. Don't worry about editing or denying what comes out of you. In fact, just tell yourself that it's not allowed at all. Trust yourself enough as writer to let that first draft just come out of you.

I understand that this might not work as well for writers that do a lot of pre-writing before they begin their first. In fact, it might not even work at all. But I will be crass and suggest that this still applies when working on your pre-writing notes!

On Ending a Short Story

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 19:55:00 +0000

A lot is said and plenty is written about how to begin writing a story and today I want to offer a few notes on ways to end a story; a short story, in particular.

First off, the most obvious difference between ending a short story versus a novel is that you have infinite room to wrap up every aspect of the plot. After investing many hours into your work, the reader expects you (in most cases) to put a nice bow on the novel and tie everything together as needed.

With a short story, you don't have to do this.

Generally speaking, short stories work better when they end with an emotional impact instead of a complete conflict resolution. It leaves your readers wanting more and if you do it right, you'll give them enough information and feeling to let them carry the story on in their mind.

Ending with your main character experiencing an epiphany or discovering something is one way of achieving this result. Furthering this idea, is there a flaw embedded within the epiphany that your character is unaware of? Is your character expecting a happy turn of events on the next page that never comes when the reader knows full well that it's a one way street towards disaster?

As you're aiming for an emotional high note to end on, your two best targets are hope and despair. They're both make for huge targets and offer vast degrees of specificity, so do some exploring.

My final thought on short story endings is that it's better to end too soon instead of too late. You don't have much time with your reader, don't disappoint them at the last moment and violate the cardinal rule of all writing: don't be boring! Think of it like a punk rock song. When it ends with a fade out, it's not nearly as exciting as when it just shuts off at the perfect moment.

Documentaries - Mark Twain, Philip K. Dick, and Hubert Selby Jr.

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 22:07:00 +0000

Twain, Dick, and Selby Jr. (that sounds like some sort of punchline). Three American writers about as different in terms of style and substance as you can find. I've recently watched documentaries on the lives of Twain and Dick (The Ken Burns PBS special, and The Penultimate Truth About Philip K. Dick respectively), and one of my favorite all-time documentaries is Hubert Selby Jr: It/ll Be Better Tomorrow.

As different as the works of these three are, what these three have in common is that each of them wrote about the world as they saw it and with no apologies. More than that, they each had a perspective on the world that was wholly their own, yet one that other people could relate with. Their lives had helped to shape a unique perspective of the world and the way humans behave and in turn, it provided a base for their creative works.

Perhaps the biggest cliche in writing is to "write what you know" and I sometimes think that notion is taken too literally. To me, the idea speaks to writing about what you know not just in the autobiography masquerading as fiction sense, but to writing about what you know about life from your own perspective and your own feelings. What are the commonalities that we share, and how does one's unique perspective help illustrate those common truths?

Before I go off on too much of a tangent here, I simply wanted to share the trailers for these three films. I suspect you can find them all online to watch, but I recommend having all three at home in your library.

Mark Twain

The Penultimate Truth About Philip K. Dick

Hubert Selby Jr: It/ll Be Better Tomorrow

Enjoy!

Creative Writing Tip: Tell Some Lies

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:54:00 +0000

I don't know anything that mars good literature so completely as too much truth. Facts contain a great deal of poetry, but you can't use too many of them without damaging your literature... - Mark Twain

It's more of an exercise really, but telling some well-crafted lies is a good habit to get into as a fiction writer, especially for beginning writers. I'm not advocating them in your personal life, but as a writer: run, don't walk, I say.

Practicing a few quick sentences of complete BS can lead to a nice brainstorming session that may eventually lead to a story. By their very nature, lies are always more interesting than the truth. As proof of this, I offer up the history of all human politics.

Take a few sentences and have a blast with some good 'ol lies.

If your lies are emotionally honest, that's all the truth you need in fiction.

Quick Screenwriting Tip: On Descriptions

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 23:35:00 +0000

It's always good to keep in mind that a screenplay is the blueprint of the movie. Everything that's written down is what's going to be filmed and the audience doesn't get to read the script (only film nerds read screenplays). As such, your approach to writing a screenplay should be different than your approach to writing fiction, or even writing for the stage.

Perhaps the biggest adjustment you need to make is compensating for the one thing you can't put into the screenplay - and I'm primarily talking about in your description areas - is what a character is feeling. Here's what I mean:

INT. THEATER WINGS - NIGHT

It's opening night. LEAD ACTRESS waits for her first entrance. She's nervous. She's wondering if her agent is in the audience or if there's anyone in the audience. She hopes that LEAD ACTOR remembers that his cue isn't until she crosses right after she turns on the light.

The example above makes perfect sense to the screenwriter, the director, and the actors, but it doesn't take into consideration the most important person: the audience member. If the above scene goes into production as is, all you're going to end up with is a close up of a thinking face. You can't film thinking... well, you can, but there's a good chance it's going to be a bore.

Ingmar Bergman could get away with shooting long takes of a close up, but that's about it.

As a screenwriter, you can convey the same feeling and tension of the scene above, just don't worry as much about being too obvious and show, don't tell. Your screenplay descriptions should be the visually clear first, literary second.

Perhaps a better version of the example above might read as follows:

INT. THEATER WINGS - NIGHT

Opening night. LEAD ACTRESS paces back and forth in the wings taking controlled deep breaths. She moves the curtains just enough to peek into the audience. The LEAD ACTOR takes his place on the other side of the wings. She stares at him.

LEAD ACTOR

(whispers)

I know the cue. Relax.

Ray Bradbury Lecture on Writing (Video)

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:38:00 +0000

I was absolutely blown away by this video. I recently played this for my students and they too loved it... much more than I suspect they thought they would. There's plenty to learn here on writing well and dare I say even more to learn on the craft of living well.

The Lost Symbol Book Review - Eight Reasons Why it's No Good

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 04:02:00 +0000

I guess you can add me to the list of Dan Brown “haters.” Having read all of his novels, at least I’m an informed hater. In full disclosure, as to the question of "do I envy his success?" You bet your ass I do. We should all have such a failure.

To be blunt, Dan Brown’s The Lost Symbol isn’t a very good book at all, nor is Brown skilled novelist. That said, he writes very successful books in spite of his apparent literary shortcomings. In short, the laundry list of concerns regarding The Lost Symbol reads as follows:

8. The dialogue sounds like a series of encyclopedia entries written for middle school students. The characters continually lecture each other; they don’t communicate. What's worse is that no one seems to mind being constantly lectured at. The dialogue never extends below skin deep and reveals little about the characters beyond their urgent need to survive the overt obstacle du jour.

7. These poor females. Give Brown credit, at least he tries to hit as many stereotypes as possible. I wonder if he thinks these are stereotypes? Hot, brainy woman to be Langdon’s sidekick? Check. Chubby research assistant? Check. Short, frail, Japanese woman with a man's guttural voice... who happens to be the be the most feared person in the CIA? Chickety-Check, one-two. Having two seemingly opposite character traits in one person is not a recipe for a compelling character. It's a fast food caricature.

6. The main character is painfully razor thin. The hero, Robert Langdon, is crafted solely to serve the devices of the plot. His only motivation is to survive the current crisis the plot tosses in his lap like a hot potato. Langdon’s given fears are exploited by Brown to artificially inflate the conflict at key plot moments. For a man who is so resourceful and intelligent, Langdon sure doesn't seem to have any thoughts or feelings that extend beyond the obvious. He either doesn't know something until he figures it out moments later or applies dime store psychology to analyze characters that fall under the banner of "what you see is what you get."

5. The bad guy, Mal’akh, is like something out of a comic book. That's not hyperbole; he's really like something out of a comic book. If The Lost Symbol was indeed a Marvel publication, Mal'akh would be a compelling villain. In this world, he's out of place. If I told you that Mal'akh is a steroid fueled man of extraordinary power only matched by his own guile and immeasurable wealth; is literally tattooed from head to toe (with one exception),and is seeking an ultimate power that could either cripple or save no less than the entire human race, you’d ask… oh wait, I nearly forgot his “origin” rife with daddy issues and abandonment. Anyway, forget the snippy question and let's just move on.

4. The big climactic reveal is a bit of a letdown following Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code. We’re constantly told that this secret is a matter of national security but once you learn what it is and what the threat is... it's underwhelming. It would be the most watched video on youtube and a few people in the government would get fired, but it would hardly be the nation-crippler that Brown has all his characters insist it to be.

3. By the time Brown gets around to telling the readers what they want to know: that being what the big secret is and why it's so damn important, the story, for all intents and purposes, is over. A quick story crafting 101 - when your main character achieves their main goal, start packing it up because the tension is gone and so is your reader. What made the previous two Langdon novels work is that more and more was revealed as the stories unfolded. Whether the religious/secret organization conspiracy theory bar has been set too high or not, when Brown gets to the big idea, it's too late... and it's too bad because it's an interesting idea.

2. The story feels lazy. Brown is only into his third Langdon novel, and he is already repeating himself. The heroine, antagonist, and secondary characters are lifted directly from Da Vinci Code albeit with different names. The short chapters border on insulting. There's pacing and then there's not caring.

1. Most importantly, Brown does not challenge his readers. He teases them at a pivotal moment in the story, but predictably let’s them (and his characters) off the hook with what boils down to a “nuh-uh, just kidding, gotcha” trick. Getting through The Lost Symbol requires no critical thought on the part of the reader. It's not a challenge for a reader to be presented with conspiracy information that feels like a condensed wikipedia page. Get to the emotions and the psychology of motivation and then you're on the way to some depth. Brown never slows down long enough to attempt to engage his reader beyond the cheap adrenaline rush.

All of that standing, The Lost Symbol may be the easiest 500 pages you can burn through it in no time flat. When Brown weaves the symbols of art history into the plot is when he's at his best. For example, Brown gets into the the Zeus-like painting of George Washington at The Capitol, and it officially gets interesting. He just doesn't do it as much as he should during the story. There's not enough of a historical crutch this time around to cover for the lack of literary value.

Now for the confession: I want to say I enjoyed reading The Lost Symbol, I really do, but I know it's not a good book. Maybe it was the hype, and I'll admit, I'm a sucker for a good conspiracy theory. I love them. Ultimately, The Lost Symbol suffers from the same ailment that makes lesser conspiracy theories go the way of the buffalo: if they can't even fight back against the most benign criticism (take the lizard people theory for example), they immediately fall into deepest of chasms... that of the unremarkable.

On Research When Writing Fiction

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:43:00 +0000

Recently, I read something (I think a blog post or blog comment) along the way where a writer talked about giving up a project because the research involved became too much.

It goes without saying - and yet here I am saying it - that when you're crafting non-fiction, the more research, the better.

In fiction, I'm not so sure.

To paraphrase something Stephen King wrote in On Writing, if you're a fiction writer.... Just make it up!

Personally, I'm far more interested in emotional accuracy when it comes to fiction. There comes a point, especially if you're writing in a genre like historical fiction, where the possibility of letting the research dictate where your story goes.

Of course, there's the concern that if your story weaves in factual episodes into you're narrative, you won't be taken seriously without copious amounts of research and detail. True to a point.

Is there a Hummingbird St. that runs parallel to St. Richards Drive in the Chicago suburb where your story takes place? Who cares? There is now. Do you need to invent a painting by DaVinci that doesn't exist? Get to work on it and make sure you give it a good name.

Ultimately, I think it boils down to a matter of taste. For me, I don't care so much if the historical details of a work of fiction are fudged. On the other hand, I know that bothers some readers, and while I see their point, I'm simply don't agree with it. What bothers me much more is a work where the details are excruciatingly accurate and detailed, but is littered with two-dimensional characters and cornball plots.

Creative Writing Tip - Character Details

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 03:06:00 +0000

I was at the pet store yesterday and saw something that instantly made me think about how a single, specific detail can illustrate so much more about a character than any description can.

There was an old lady at the checkout buying two cart loads of canned cat food. That's right: two carts. Just imagine how many cats that feeds and now imagine how gnarly her home smells. But that's not the detail I'm talking about that caught me by surprise. A old cat lady. We know all about that.

When she was leaving, my girlfriend gets the attention of the lady and asks if the wadded up black plastic bag (a small one that maybe you'd get when you rent an adult movie... not that I know anything about that) on the ground is hers.

"Oh yes thank you," she says. "That's my purse."

She wasn't joking. And she wasn't apologizing for it. That tattered up black plastic bag really was her purse. When she picked it up, there was stuff in it, and not just spare change. She tossed her checkbook in that crinkled wad of plastic and left.

As far as creating a character, that kernel of information about the purse illustrates more than just about any other description could. It's that tinty detail that sets this elderly cat woman apart from every other cat woman. In terms of fiction, she's no longer a cliche.

When you're creating your characters, especially the "quirky" ones, really make them stand out. Find those details, those bits of your character's psyche, that once revealed tell you things about them that you... and consequently your reader, never saw coming.

In short, find your character's black plastic bag purses!

Let's try this writing blog thing again

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:19:00 +0000

Okay, so I think I went about this thing all wrong and here's how I know: I stopped writing pretty quick.

The good news is that I know why. But that's between me and my inner critic... little bastard he is.

It's back to the drawing board here and back to what I wanted this blog to be in the first place: writing tips as I see fit. For better or worse. Hopefully more better that not (I know, I know. It was meant to be a joke)...

On Dealing With Editors of All Breeds

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 23:29:00 +0000

Yeah, I said "breeds." Yes, I'm joking.

For the most part.

For the record, I don't have a problem with editors. I think many of them are very intelligent people who know how to get the best out of their writers.

A great editor is like a great director. They can command great performances from their actors by guiding them towards something organic instead regurgitating how the director would "act" the part. Same goes with an editor.

In my opinion, the best editor isn't someone who fancies themselves as a writer who happens to have an editing job. It's like an actor who's directing when they really want to be acting. There's a built in bias of "well, that's not how I'd do it."

As a freelance writer, you're going to work with several editors at a time (if you're lucky), and there's a good chance that each one is going to have their own version of what your "best writing" is.

I've worked with editors who either:

- are also the publisher and you have to track them down for your pay
- have a fixed political agenda they want you to follow
- don't manage their time and assign you more than you signed up for
- are missing a sense of humor

I've also worked with editors who are:

- intelligent
- well read
- know how to push you creatively to get the best from you as a writer

My best advice is to not take it personal once you're working with an editor. At that point, you're a professional writer (or damn close), and yes, you should care enough to put your best effort into your work, but you're officially in the world of commerce and you're providing goods. Those goods might come from your heart and soul, but they're still just goods.

I'll end with a quick story about the worst experience I had with an editor.

I submitted a short story to a small literary magazine on the East Coast. My story was a satiric piece imagining Eugene O'Neill working as a court reporter at the Scopes Trial. Not exactly a premise for low brow humor.

The piece was simply poking fun at O'Neill's playwriting style, his scene and character description in particular, while using actual dialogue from the Scopes Trial.

The piece was accepted, OK'd by the editor, and was set to go to print.

A few days later, I received an email asking me to go deeper into the science vs. religion debate.

I reminded him that the piece really wasn't about that (it was a humor piece, and that's how I submitted it) and that I wasn't going to add in fake dialogue with the actual court transcript.

He responded that on second review he was going to pass.

I suggested that most likely he didn't read it in the first place.

I never heard back.

Ah well... it was later published online as it was intended to be HERE.

First Books on the Shelf Officially

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:25:00 +0000

I passed a milestone of sorts today...

My book, "The Exciting Life and Death of The Amazing Henry," is offically on the shelf at an honest-to-goodness bookstore.

Bookman in Huntington Beach, CA is the first store to carry my short story collection. They're a cool independent bookstore that mainly carries rare, used, and out of print books.

The Writer as an Independent Artist

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 23:07:00 +0000

Fiction and non-fiction writers find themselves in a awkward position in terms of being perceived as an independent artist.

There's a stigma attached to the independent writer that doesn't exist for other artists.

An independent musician or band who puts out their own CD is looked upon as someone who is non-compromising and believes in their work. The music that inspired me as a youth, and still does to this day, is largely independently produced.

Epitaph. SST. Dischord. Alternative Tentacles. All symbols of non-compromising art on the artist's own terms.

A filmmaker who puts up his or her own money to produce a film has been put on a pedestal in the artistic community in the past twenty-five years. Robert Rodriguez, Kevin Smith, Steven Soderbergh, Tarantino, etc. are rightly considered mavericks artists.

A theater group that puts up independent productions is often held in a similar regard as the independent filmmaker.

A self-published writer?

Hack.

Fraud.

No-Talent.

There's an interesting double standard that exists when it comes to writers as independent artists. Many will say that if your writing is good enough to be read, it'll be put out by a major publisher.

Take a second and think about how many great musicians and films you'd have missed out on if people held that same standard in other mediums.

It's interesting that, generally speaking, the same people who hold up independent music and film in such high esteem will just a quickly turn their nose up at an independent writer.

Why? Unfortunately, the answer is simple. There's a crap that's self-published. It's not all crap, mind you, but a good portion is. Same can be said with music and film in my opinion. The only difference is that it doesn't take week to listen to a few songs or watch a film.

I'm a huge fan of independent publishing and I think the times are changing and people are becoming more accepting of self-publishing. Blogging has resulted in an explosion of independent publishing.

As always, the Internet is on top of things faster than the man on the street.

More and more bloggers, who are essentially self-publishers, are looked upon as legitimate news, literary, and entertainment sources.

Independent writers also control their fate 100%. With people buying less books, it's imperative for major publishers to put out books by already established authors or "celebrities-turned-authors." In turn, this makes it that much harder for a new writer to break in... so why not just do it yourself?

Who wants to politely stand on someone's doorstep knocking on a door that's never going open, when you can piss on their stoop, build your own house (which will be way cooler), and party with all your friends!

When you put out your own work, you get all the profit. You'll have to work harder to get it, but it's all yours. It's entrepreneurial. It's as American as apple pie, as they say....

Plus, independent publishing is really easy to do!

There's a litany of sources available online to create a product as good as anything you'll find in a brick and mortar store. I've used lulu.com for short stories, audio works, photo books, and my short story collection. It's very easy to hook up with a talented graphic artist to create compelling art work for your book.

More than once I've heard, "Wow! This is just like a real book!"

It is. It is a real book.

It's an independent book.

A Confident Writer is an Enjoyable Read

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 23:41:00 +0000

A quick bit on the confidence needed to be a successful writer.

Writing a compelling piece is like asking someone on a date.

The only way to be successful to appear seamless.

Smooth.

Like you're not even trying.

You can't reek of gimmick.

But, of course, the hardest thing there is to do is to make it look easy.

Technical standards aside, for my money, the easiest way to appear seamless in your writing is to simply be confident in what you're saying.

How do you do this?

It's an attitude you need to have while you're writing. You need to know that what you're writing needs to be read and that you're the only person who can do it the right way (whether that's true or not doesn't matter - that's the mindset you have to have).

Just as important as your attitude is that you never, ever, apologize for your writing.

It's the same thing as stuttering or shaking when you introduce yourself to say... a pretty lady in the grocery store.

If someone doesn't like or disagrees with your writing, let them. You can't control how someone responds to your work, so there's no reason to let it bother or influence you in the slightest.

Your writing should also be like the attractive person who has to bat people away from them. Your writing should be so confident that it stands alone and demands readers to keep coming back for more. Your writing should never beg to be liked. Don't fill your work with what you think the audience wants read. They aren't writing the piece, you are.

Click here to leave a comment.

Technorati Post

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:25:00 +0000

Technorati Profile

Contact Me

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:16:00 +0000

This one is pretty easy.

You can reach me at dr_delux@hotmail.com

I'll get back to you.

No, really. I will.

About Bobby's Writing School

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:54:00 +0000

The High-Minded Philosophy: Knowledge and the ability to communicate should be free and openly shared. In a society that's rapidly moving in a direction of increased written communication, now more than ever... blah, blah, blah, it's nice to know how to express yourself properly with the written word.

We get it.

The Idea Behind This Site: Basically, I got tired of the many "experts" who will gladly show you how to write... for a fee, of course.

That, or you'll find a gaggle of professional bloggers who all rehash the same basic tricks to writing a blog.

The plan is create an ever growing and evolving library of tips for screenwriting, fiction, non-fiction, blogging, playwriting, and so on for people to use. Maybe even the rare acting tip here and there.

Except for poetry, that is. Admittedly, I'm a lousy poet. I'm OK with that.

Who The Hell is Bobby? Since 2000, I've made my living as a writer and actor. I have a Master's in Professional Writing from USC and a BA in film from CSULB.

I've published over 40 fiction and non-fiction pieces in various magazines. I've covered live sporting events and interviewed celebrities. I've optioned screenplays and had plays produced. Most recently, I published my first book of short stories, "The Exciting Life and Death of The Amazing Henry and Other Stories."

I used to write for and manage a humor blog, TontoandFriends.com.

Creative Samples

noreply@blogger.com (Someone) — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 18:11:00 +0000

It's not a stretch to assume that if I'm going to give out of all this unsolicited advice, I should probably offer up some of my own work as evidence that I might have some clue, wouldn't you say? Good. I agree.

Give me a few days and I'll stock up on samples here.

Until then....

UNDER CONSTRUCTION