"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anais Nin
Yes, it's been awhile. Over a year and a half. I'm in the process of overhauling a lot of things right now, the blog included. I stopped writing when I stopped blogging. Sad but true. Not the kind of thing a writer likes to admit, let alone practice. Life has been kind of crazy the past two years, but it's taught me a lesson or two. I'm hoping this time they stick.
I didn't pick the best time to start writing. Family moving, school ending, graduation imminent, a wedding anniversary, father-in-law coming to town, Father's day looming, chronic illness still parked above my head like a junker with no wheels. Don't get me started on learning a new camera and Photoshop Elements . . . . Still, the time felt right.
With Lost over, it seems obsolete to continue posting about it. Maybe I'll revisit an episode or two when a theme or literary device resonates, but I think my Lost days are over. Time to start fresh. Start new. Time to put on my steel-underpants and start writing.
Courage. Ain't it a bitch?
Showing posts with label About. Show all posts
Showing posts with label About. Show all posts
Friday, June 11, 2010
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Summertime Blues
"If your parents never have children, chances are you won't, either." Dick Cavett
This isn't a particularly relevant quote other than I think it's pretty ironic and my kids are partially to blame for my current blogging drought. When summer approaches, I always harbor the same misconception. I think I'm going to have so much more time to write with the kids out of school. Every year, I'm proven wrong.
How is it possible that I have less time to write than more? They're teenagers now. It's not like I have to potty-train or chaperone outdoor activities or even make them lunch anymore. They're fully functioning humans now. But somehow that doesn't matter. They are masters of distraction despite having the ability to occupy themselves. My son is practically wired to his computer and my daughter is addicted to every reality dance show on the air, yet they still sabotage any quiet time I manage to scrape together. They'll burst into my office to announce how bored they are or shout from the couch, "Mom, come here. You have to see this."
When they're not home, I'm driving them all over creation - summer classes, jobs, dance camps, friends' house, dentist appts, etc. I've managed to cut back on driving (and shrink our carbon footprint just a bit) by having my son bike to his job and class, but that still leaves the dancing queen. Her social calendar is fuller than most debutante's.
Add to that physical rehab on two shoulders (tendonitis) and a knee (surgery) and I'm booked down to the ground. What's much worse is how far ahead we are in LOST now. We're up to the fourth season already! Yes, we're addicted. Revisiting season one is going to be a challenge given all the new character revelations to which I've been exposed.
Somehow I'll manage. I'm just not sure when. Family's coming to town this weekend. Birthdays are stacking up. School shopping is not far behind. It will be September before we know it. Thank God.
Hopefully I will be back before then, but since my parents decided to have children...well, you can fill in the rest.
This isn't a particularly relevant quote other than I think it's pretty ironic and my kids are partially to blame for my current blogging drought. When summer approaches, I always harbor the same misconception. I think I'm going to have so much more time to write with the kids out of school. Every year, I'm proven wrong.
How is it possible that I have less time to write than more? They're teenagers now. It's not like I have to potty-train or chaperone outdoor activities or even make them lunch anymore. They're fully functioning humans now. But somehow that doesn't matter. They are masters of distraction despite having the ability to occupy themselves. My son is practically wired to his computer and my daughter is addicted to every reality dance show on the air, yet they still sabotage any quiet time I manage to scrape together. They'll burst into my office to announce how bored they are or shout from the couch, "Mom, come here. You have to see this."
When they're not home, I'm driving them all over creation - summer classes, jobs, dance camps, friends' house, dentist appts, etc. I've managed to cut back on driving (and shrink our carbon footprint just a bit) by having my son bike to his job and class, but that still leaves the dancing queen. Her social calendar is fuller than most debutante's.
Add to that physical rehab on two shoulders (tendonitis) and a knee (surgery) and I'm booked down to the ground. What's much worse is how far ahead we are in LOST now. We're up to the fourth season already! Yes, we're addicted. Revisiting season one is going to be a challenge given all the new character revelations to which I've been exposed.
Somehow I'll manage. I'm just not sure when. Family's coming to town this weekend. Birthdays are stacking up. School shopping is not far behind. It will be September before we know it. Thank God.
Hopefully I will be back before then, but since my parents decided to have children...well, you can fill in the rest.
Friday, May 30, 2008
The Star-Spangled Bananas
The only thing we have to fear is fear itself – Franklin Delano Roosevelt
I interrupt this regularly scheduled writing lesson to give you the following public service announcement: What the hell?? I don’t normally get political, but when people accuse perky, harmless Rachel Ray of seditious acts of style, I worry about the future of our country.
The blogging community went bananas last week when a Dunkin’ Donuts ad featured Rachel Ray wrapped in an innocuous black and white scarf. Critics, led by political commentator Michelle Malkin, charged Rachel Ray with “endorsing terrorism” and “hate couture” because some rocket scientist somehow managed to draw a parallel between her stylish rayon-blend swatch and a kaffiyeh, the traditional headdress of Arab men.
Say what? Please tell me they’re joking. This mockery passes for news reporting and issues of national security? They further complained about the possible meaning of the scarf. Meaning? You mean, outside of its function as apparel? Well, it’s possible that - I don’t know - her neck was cold? It’s not like she bound it around her head over a face-covering black hood while toting an AK-47. It was a simple scarf draped around All-American, non-violent Rachel Ray clutching a coffee cup, for heaven’s sake.
Were these people raised by wolverines? How can anyone possibly go from paisley scarf to the latest in guerilla fashion wear? Do they seriously believe her stylist used malice and forethought to select an accessory that venerates jihadists everywhere? Not to mention how insulting it must be to the millions of peace-loving Muslim men who wear kaffiyehs for no other reason than it’s traditional and it keeps them cool in a climate that is brutishly hot and arid.
The ad was successfully yanked. How can an ingenuous, inane thing as a donut spot whip people into a terrorist-fearing frenzy? Is this what passes for patriotism these days? What a hard, sad fact.
Rachel Ray may be guilty of a few things – among them, the overuse of such words as “yum-o”, “evoo”, and “de-lish” - but that’s hardly grounds for commercial castration. I’m appalled and saddened such power is wielded by dangerous, hate-spreading people. What’s next? Banning Dalmatians from Petco ads because their coloring promotes the symbolism of Yasser Arafat? Come on.
I guess I’m not terribly surprised. Turn on any info-tainment news channel – Fox News and CNN just to name a few – and they are loaded with reason to fear walking out your front door every morning. Have we nothing better to do than speculate whether Barack Obama was giving the finger – to whom, no one could sufficiently answer – during a speech when he was just scratching his cheek? Really? Is it any wonder the airwaves are bogged down with commercials hawking anti-depressants to get us through the day and sleeping pills to help us through the night? Who can live with themselves when they are glued to drivel like this?
It’s dehumanizing. And sad. And ridiculous. I recommend anyone with an ounce of compassion and sense go out and support your local Dunkin’ Donuts by buying at least a dozen donuts in protest. It’s the American way. Not to mention the sugary goodness will lift your spirits. Donuts are, after all, “yum-o” and “de-lish.”
I interrupt this regularly scheduled writing lesson to give you the following public service announcement: What the hell?? I don’t normally get political, but when people accuse perky, harmless Rachel Ray of seditious acts of style, I worry about the future of our country.
The blogging community went bananas last week when a Dunkin’ Donuts ad featured Rachel Ray wrapped in an innocuous black and white scarf. Critics, led by political commentator Michelle Malkin, charged Rachel Ray with “endorsing terrorism” and “hate couture” because some rocket scientist somehow managed to draw a parallel between her stylish rayon-blend swatch and a kaffiyeh, the traditional headdress of Arab men.
Say what? Please tell me they’re joking. This mockery passes for news reporting and issues of national security? They further complained about the possible meaning of the scarf. Meaning? You mean, outside of its function as apparel? Well, it’s possible that - I don’t know - her neck was cold? It’s not like she bound it around her head over a face-covering black hood while toting an AK-47. It was a simple scarf draped around All-American, non-violent Rachel Ray clutching a coffee cup, for heaven’s sake.
Were these people raised by wolverines? How can anyone possibly go from paisley scarf to the latest in guerilla fashion wear? Do they seriously believe her stylist used malice and forethought to select an accessory that venerates jihadists everywhere? Not to mention how insulting it must be to the millions of peace-loving Muslim men who wear kaffiyehs for no other reason than it’s traditional and it keeps them cool in a climate that is brutishly hot and arid.
The ad was successfully yanked. How can an ingenuous, inane thing as a donut spot whip people into a terrorist-fearing frenzy? Is this what passes for patriotism these days? What a hard, sad fact.
Rachel Ray may be guilty of a few things – among them, the overuse of such words as “yum-o”, “evoo”, and “de-lish” - but that’s hardly grounds for commercial castration. I’m appalled and saddened such power is wielded by dangerous, hate-spreading people. What’s next? Banning Dalmatians from Petco ads because their coloring promotes the symbolism of Yasser Arafat? Come on.
I guess I’m not terribly surprised. Turn on any info-tainment news channel – Fox News and CNN just to name a few – and they are loaded with reason to fear walking out your front door every morning. Have we nothing better to do than speculate whether Barack Obama was giving the finger – to whom, no one could sufficiently answer – during a speech when he was just scratching his cheek? Really? Is it any wonder the airwaves are bogged down with commercials hawking anti-depressants to get us through the day and sleeping pills to help us through the night? Who can live with themselves when they are glued to drivel like this?
It’s dehumanizing. And sad. And ridiculous. I recommend anyone with an ounce of compassion and sense go out and support your local Dunkin’ Donuts by buying at least a dozen donuts in protest. It’s the American way. Not to mention the sugary goodness will lift your spirits. Donuts are, after all, “yum-o” and “de-lish.”
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Introduction
"Begin with the end in mind." - Kathy Clark
Welcome. This is my inaugural entry into blogging. I’m an unpublished romance writer. I’m not trying to command an influential, worldwide audience or publish breaking news. I’m just trying to hone my writing skills when I’m stumped creatively. If you learn something along the way, that's icing on the cake.
I’m in my forties and the sad fact is, I’m in my forties. I can’t put it any more eloquently than that.
Writing is all about revealing character. I’ll try to reveal something about myself in every entry, along with nuggets of craft I’ve picked up along the way. I can’t promise I’ll do this daily and I think you’ll thank me for that in the long run.
Why a blog? Because there just aren’t enough of them out there. Truthfully, I stumbled across the blog of Jane Espenson, a seriously savvy television writer. I’m a dedicated Joss Whedon fan and Jane was on staff at Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I learned tons about character and story from the Whedon-verse, including some fascinating insights from Jane’s blog.
Check it out. I recommend it, no matter what writing medium you pursue. She targets the nuts and bolts of script writing, but so much of it is relevant to craft – character, dialogue, humor. You can’t go wrong. Plus she’s layers of funny.
To get an idea what inspires me, check out the sidebar for some of my favorite things. If these don’t work for you, it’ll save you a lot of time. I won’t list dislikes, but I have to be honest - I don’t like mushrooms. I can’t eat fungus, I’m sorry. If that’s a deal-breaker, I’ll understand.
Since TV is the theme, let’s start there. The best shows are those that emphasize character in terms of hook. The hook draws us in, but characterization keeps us thirsting for more.
Several successful 90’s sitcoms centered on characters living in the big city – Friends, Seinfeld, and Sex in the City come to mind - but it was the characters’ evolving emotional life that had people tuning in. The ha-has were great, but they were reactions to their urban situations, and those reactions revealed something about character.
For a bigger dramatic payoff, take Angel. This spinoff of Buffy the Vampire Slayer featured a vampire with a soul who moves to Los Angeles to help people while seeking salvation for his “vampire without a soul” past. The soul angle freshens the vampire hook and guarantees a moral struggle with every person – or creature - he encounters, good and bad.
In a fifth season episode, “Just Rewards”, Angel has been handed the reins of the law firm, Wolfram & Hart, and decides to use their extensive resources to continue the good fight. He elects to fire an undesirable client. Spike, another vampire, tags along for the sacking. They’ve always had a contentious relationship, but Angel’s unique status as “vampire with a soul” is challenged b/c Spike has a soul, too.
Why is this an issue now? Angel only recently learned of Spike’s spiritual enhancement. He’s astonished and not a little intimidated. When Spike complains Angel has this empire at his disposal while Spike has been transformed into a lousy ghost after surrendering himself to save the world - how’s that fair? - Angel retorts: “Fair? You asked for a soul. I didn't. It almost killed me. I spent a hundred years trying to come to terms with infinite remorse. You spent three weeks moaning in a basement, and then you were fine! What's fair about that?” *
Big reveal in contrast - Angel was cursed with a soul, Spike asked for one. We know this entering the episode, but we don’t know Angel’s reaction until now. It’s speaks directly to his internal conflict, neatly linking back to the episode’s title – not to mention the show’s hook. Both characters feel unjustly served by sacrifices they’ve made on their journey for redemption. What is just rewards, then? How is justice earned? Or is it? It also plants a new story question. Spike is not only strong enough to seek a soul, but pay the consequences with relative ease. What does that say about Angel? Who’s the hero now?
Why do we care? Infinite remorse. Those two words evoke a boatload of empathy. Remorse is universal. Infinite punches up the ‘ouch’ factor. And the inequality of one hundred years versus three weeks – well, that would sink sinner and saint alike.
The premise was not, “How does Angel feel about Spike’s new soul?” Angel’s goal is to fire an evil client. A fairly straightforward decision. With unforeseen emotional consequences. The client is understandably unhappy and convinces Spike to double-cross Angel. Or does he? The line between hero and villain is blurred, almost redefined at times. Angel is forced to confront this truth and re-examine his path in life. Instead of getting clearer, it gets a whole lot murkier.
Romance writers must capture the emotional heart of story through premise. A story is about a character seeking a goal. The romance is not the goal. It’s the thing that gets in the way of the goal. Maybe not the only thing, but it’s definitely a monster obstacle.
I’ve personally struggled with this concept in the past and found analyzing well written episodic TV a great help. Premise is easy to detect. It’s external. The emotional heart is internal. And it’s what sells books. So do hooks, but that’s a topic for another day.
During your down time, watch one of your favorite shows and see if you can catch the reason this episode was written. Not the premise, but the emotional heart. What is revealed about character? Why now? And most important – why did you care?
* Dialogue from ‘Just Rewards’ teleplay by David Fury and Ben Edlund
Welcome. This is my inaugural entry into blogging. I’m an unpublished romance writer. I’m not trying to command an influential, worldwide audience or publish breaking news. I’m just trying to hone my writing skills when I’m stumped creatively. If you learn something along the way, that's icing on the cake.
I’m in my forties and the sad fact is, I’m in my forties. I can’t put it any more eloquently than that.
Writing is all about revealing character. I’ll try to reveal something about myself in every entry, along with nuggets of craft I’ve picked up along the way. I can’t promise I’ll do this daily and I think you’ll thank me for that in the long run.
Why a blog? Because there just aren’t enough of them out there. Truthfully, I stumbled across the blog of Jane Espenson, a seriously savvy television writer. I’m a dedicated Joss Whedon fan and Jane was on staff at Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I learned tons about character and story from the Whedon-verse, including some fascinating insights from Jane’s blog.
Check it out. I recommend it, no matter what writing medium you pursue. She targets the nuts and bolts of script writing, but so much of it is relevant to craft – character, dialogue, humor. You can’t go wrong. Plus she’s layers of funny.
To get an idea what inspires me, check out the sidebar for some of my favorite things. If these don’t work for you, it’ll save you a lot of time. I won’t list dislikes, but I have to be honest - I don’t like mushrooms. I can’t eat fungus, I’m sorry. If that’s a deal-breaker, I’ll understand.
Since TV is the theme, let’s start there. The best shows are those that emphasize character in terms of hook. The hook draws us in, but characterization keeps us thirsting for more.
Several successful 90’s sitcoms centered on characters living in the big city – Friends, Seinfeld, and Sex in the City come to mind - but it was the characters’ evolving emotional life that had people tuning in. The ha-has were great, but they were reactions to their urban situations, and those reactions revealed something about character.
For a bigger dramatic payoff, take Angel. This spinoff of Buffy the Vampire Slayer featured a vampire with a soul who moves to Los Angeles to help people while seeking salvation for his “vampire without a soul” past. The soul angle freshens the vampire hook and guarantees a moral struggle with every person – or creature - he encounters, good and bad.
In a fifth season episode, “Just Rewards”, Angel has been handed the reins of the law firm, Wolfram & Hart, and decides to use their extensive resources to continue the good fight. He elects to fire an undesirable client. Spike, another vampire, tags along for the sacking. They’ve always had a contentious relationship, but Angel’s unique status as “vampire with a soul” is challenged b/c Spike has a soul, too.
Why is this an issue now? Angel only recently learned of Spike’s spiritual enhancement. He’s astonished and not a little intimidated. When Spike complains Angel has this empire at his disposal while Spike has been transformed into a lousy ghost after surrendering himself to save the world - how’s that fair? - Angel retorts: “Fair? You asked for a soul. I didn't. It almost killed me. I spent a hundred years trying to come to terms with infinite remorse. You spent three weeks moaning in a basement, and then you were fine! What's fair about that?” *
Big reveal in contrast - Angel was cursed with a soul, Spike asked for one. We know this entering the episode, but we don’t know Angel’s reaction until now. It’s speaks directly to his internal conflict, neatly linking back to the episode’s title – not to mention the show’s hook. Both characters feel unjustly served by sacrifices they’ve made on their journey for redemption. What is just rewards, then? How is justice earned? Or is it? It also plants a new story question. Spike is not only strong enough to seek a soul, but pay the consequences with relative ease. What does that say about Angel? Who’s the hero now?
Why do we care? Infinite remorse. Those two words evoke a boatload of empathy. Remorse is universal. Infinite punches up the ‘ouch’ factor. And the inequality of one hundred years versus three weeks – well, that would sink sinner and saint alike.
The premise was not, “How does Angel feel about Spike’s new soul?” Angel’s goal is to fire an evil client. A fairly straightforward decision. With unforeseen emotional consequences. The client is understandably unhappy and convinces Spike to double-cross Angel. Or does he? The line between hero and villain is blurred, almost redefined at times. Angel is forced to confront this truth and re-examine his path in life. Instead of getting clearer, it gets a whole lot murkier.
Romance writers must capture the emotional heart of story through premise. A story is about a character seeking a goal. The romance is not the goal. It’s the thing that gets in the way of the goal. Maybe not the only thing, but it’s definitely a monster obstacle.
I’ve personally struggled with this concept in the past and found analyzing well written episodic TV a great help. Premise is easy to detect. It’s external. The emotional heart is internal. And it’s what sells books. So do hooks, but that’s a topic for another day.
During your down time, watch one of your favorite shows and see if you can catch the reason this episode was written. Not the premise, but the emotional heart. What is revealed about character? Why now? And most important – why did you care?
* Dialogue from ‘Just Rewards’ teleplay by David Fury and Ben Edlund
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)