As a technology optimist I am almost always in favor of pushing the art  and science of the web further. As we know the current period is hyper-focused on Social Media. We hear a lot of discussion about the new era of personal journalism. The news is now frequently reported by regular citizens who are witness to something and broadcast it through Social Media. But having a Twitter account and practicing serious journalism are worlds apart. Wired Magazine published the following list of untruths that were spawned by this new army of journalists on Twitter in 2009.

Bill O’Reilly is gay (Jan.) // Rick Sanchez is high on crack and might not be coming into work today (Jan.)// Britney Spears is dead (March) // Pork gives you swine flu (April) // Google is buying Twitter (April) //Apple is buying Twitter (May) // Prop 8 was overturned (May) // Steve Jobs is dead (June) // Sarah Palin is getting divorced (Aug.) // Kanye West is bisexual (Aug.) // Jeff Goldblum is dead (June) // Zach Braff is dead (Oct.) // Microsoft is buying Twitter (Oct.).

Real journalism is on the decline and Social Media loose cannons are everywhere. Which brings me to the actual topic of this post; art journalism. Yes you read that right. art and journalism. Writing has never been lucrative, at least not for 99.9% of writers. And writing about art is probably at the bottom end of the writer’s financial food chain. So when you find someone who does it well you can be sure it’s a labor of love. That’s the case with Liz Goldner and her Contemporary Art Dialogue site. She loves art and people, and is a splendid writer. She listens and tries to write about what people are interested in. She lives in southern California and moves fluidly through that active art community. Much of her research is carried out in interviews. Her work effectively teases out the interesting details. She describes it as follows.

Working in art journalism, I am privileged to know a world infused with color, light, form, texture and the often-intense emotions of artists as translated onto canvas, photo paper, wood, clay or any material. I converse with those who draw inspiration from genres as diverse as the dada movement to abstract expressionism. They pay homage to these influences in their own works, filtering them through the prisms of their inner muses.

Her writings are a journey. She explores, connects and celebrates art. I’ve known Liz over 10 years and the best word I can find to describe her is “rare.” Have a look at her site. Take a moment to read about abstract art, assemblage art, photography, graffiti art and of course people. Add your experiences and impressions. If you find yourself in Laguna Beach area, look her up and buy her dinner. It will lead to great conversation.

Full disclosure. Liz has dubbed me a Postmodernist (guilty as charged) and has included me on her site.

JOHNNY MISHEFF: You used to design buildings.  what’s your history with that, and how does/did it affect your ability/decision to make clothing?

SIKI IM: My training as an architect theoretical and practical helps me to focus not only on the exterior but also in the interior. In my opinion a great building is only great if it also works: if the details inside are cohesive, the program and movement work with the inhabitant / user, and if the architect put also thoughts in the bathroom (which many think is irrelevant). And not to forget it needs to be aesthetically pleasing or displeasing…

So in my garments I am very meticulous about the construction, the seams, the finishing, and the pattern. That there is honesty in all these, and that the inside of the garments are as beautiful as the outside.

For me architecture is not so much about buildings but about the space and the void then rather the physical. The same I think it is with fashion – I mean obviously the clothes are very important but also the emotion, the image, the intangible: how we feel in it, what it makes us feel, etc. and this we cannot design but direct and steer.

Part of my “Red Carpet Writing: Hook Your Reader Hollywood Style” workshop is focused on dialogue. Our favorite movies always have those stand out lines, during those key moments that embed into our hearts and memory. How often do we remember lines from our favorite books though? Particularly, dialogue. I’m challenging myself to create more memorable lines in key moments in my books now. Since it takes a village, I’m hoping you can help.

What are your favorite romantic movie lines and why?

Here are some of mine:

“Aaaasssss yoouuuu wiiiissshhhh.” -Princess Bride

“…that no one in my whole life will make me feel the way I feel when I’m with you.” -Dirty Dancing

“I’m also just a girl, standing in front of a boy, asking him to love her.” -Notting Hill

:}Amber Scott

“You know,” said the Guru, “there’s nothing better than Eternal Happiness.”

“What about a leaf of lettuce?” asked the Tortoise, who was quite fond of the shrubbery.

“A leaf of lettuce isn’t nearly as good as Eternal Happiness.”

“But it’s better than nothing, right?”

The Guru shrugged. “Yeah, I guess it’s better than nothing, but–”

“So if a leaf of lettuce is better than nothing, and nothing is better than Eternal Happiness, then by simple logic, a leaf of lettuce must be better than Eternal Happiness!” And with that, the Tortoise munched a large chunk of lettuce. “Mmm-hmm,” he said.

“I think you’re missing the point,” said the Guru.

“I think you are,” said the Turtle, who was chewing in preparation to swallow.

From ancient times man has always believed in something larger than himself, typically a being of great power who at the very least affected his life in some way. It is not always the case, however, that a religion entails the belief in a ‘god’ or ‘goddess’, as shall be seen later on. Evidence of beliefs in deities of a kind has been found as early as pre-historic times, in the form of ruins and remains scattered throughout the Earth. Of the earliest temples we need look no further than the Maltese shores.

The megalithic temples of Ħaġar Qim, Ġgantija, Mnajdra and the Neolithic temples among others, are the oldest free-standing structures erected by man, older even, than the pyramids or Stonehenge. Little is known about the beliefs of these people, except that the remains indicate that they revered a goddess of fertility. This goddess, represented as a rotund woman, was also found in a variety of postures, from the typical standing posture to the sleeping posture, possibly indicating a link to life and death. Often, a deity’s representation tends to reflect the needs and priorities of that time. In this case, the fact that the goddess represents fertility makes sense because the people of that time were farmers. Interesting to note is that certain temples, such as those of Ħaġar Qim or Mnajdra, are built in such a way that the sunlight will make a certain pattern, or the sun’s rays will hit the midpoint of the trilithon entrance as it rises on specific days of the year, such as the equinoxes or the solstices.

One major feature of most religions is the belief in continuity of a kind after death. While it is unclear whether such beliefs existed in the most primitive of religions, some version can be found in most religions, be it simply a belief in an afterlife, reincarnation, or rebirth. A religion in which the concept of an afterlife was particularly important was traditional Egyptian religion. For the ancient Egyptians, religion was of high importance and affected people’s lives to a very large extent, most of all their belief in an afterlife. 

Evidence for this lies in the various unearthed Egyptian pyramids and tombs, which indicate that a lot of time and wealth was funnelled into funeral practices. The process of embalming or mummification, which for example was very time-consuming, was aimed at preserving the body for the afterlife, where they believed people could achieve their full potential. However, Egyptian religion was not all about the afterlife. Traditional Egyptian religion in itself was mostly polytheistic, sometimes having as many as 2,000 deities. Interestingly, their gods and goddesses are often depicted as being part human and part animal, though they were not considered the gods’ true forms, but merely symbolic representations. Among the most important

Egyptian deities one finds Amon-Ra, the sun god, often associated with the creation of the world, and Osiris, the god of the underworld. In certain cases, the many different deities started to be viewed as different aspects of a single deity. This concept is one that is extremely common among today’s religions.

Currently, it would seem that the most widespread religions are Hinduism, Christianity, and Islam, and to a lesser extent Buddhism and Judaism. There are a number of similarities between these religions, be it in the beliefs themselves or in the underlying concepts. One core characteristic between most of these religions is the belief in a deity or deities. In this respect a religion is said to be polytheistic if there is belief in more than one individual and separate deity; monotheistic if there is belief in only one deity; trinitarian if there is belief in a single deity which has three aspects; and henotheistic for the belief  in many gods and goddesses which are manifestations or aspects of a single deity.

Contrary to popular belief, in the majority of its forms, Hinduism is not exactly a polytheistic religion, that is, there is no belief in a multitude of completely separate gods and goddesses. Rather, it is a henotheistic religion, one which believes in essentially one deity, with the other gods and goddesses being facets of this single deity. It is sometimes also considered to be a trinitarian religion because Brahman, the single supreme deity, is viewed as being three persons while being only one, much like the Christian god. In the case of Hinduism, Brahman is viewed as Brahma (the Creator), Vishnu (the Preserver of order), and

Shiva (the Destroyer, though sometimes also viewed as a benefactor), and in some cases Brahman is revered as one of his forms. It should be noted, however, that Hinduism is quite widespread, and the beliefs and forms of Brahman that are revered as the ‘main’ god tend to vary slightly between regions. One major characteristic of Hinduism is the belief in continual reincarnation or Transmigration of the Soul, which is also known as samsara. It is believed that this continues until the person is purified enough to be worthy of enlightenment.

Related to the concept of reincarnation is that of karma, which is essentially the effect of good and bad actions taken in previous lives on the current one. Good actions lead to beneficial effects in the present life, while bad actions lead to detrimental effects.

Christianity and Islam believe in the same single, omnipresent and omniscient deity, for the simple reason that they are offshoots of Judaism. Due to their common roots, they are sometimes referred to as Abrahamic religions, after Abraham who is believed to be one of the founders of the religions, in the sense that he was one of the first (if not the first) person with whom God made contact. While Islam and Judaism believe that God is one, and only one, Christians believe in a trinity of persons in the same Godhead.  A common misconception in Islam is that of the jihad.

While in cases it does refer to a 
‘holy war’, its true meaning is more than that: it represents an internal struggle against temptation and such things. Despite having the same deity, these three religions’ views on this higher power tends to vary. While Muslims believe one should submit to God’s will, the view of most Christians is more along the lines that one should work with God. However, it should be noted that beliefs tend to vary even within the same religion, where one tends to find numerous sects and divisions. In Christianity in particular, one finds a widespread range of beliefs throughout the many groups.

Some religions are unusual because they do not believe in a sovereign deity as such. Buddhism is not a religion in the classical sense, in that it does not concern a belief in a higher being or any deity, but in an ultimate truth. The goal of Buddhism is  to improve oneself, with particular emphasis to mental and moral development in order to obtain wisdom and eventually, enlightenment (the ultimate truth). Hence, like all religions, Buddhism also carries with it a certain code of conduct (in a loose sense). Of particular interest is the so-called Golden Rule, which can be summarised as:

Do unto others as you would want others to do unto you.

This rule is also found in Christianity, and to a lesser extent in Judaism, where one finds the negative Golden Rule:

Do NOT do unto others what you do NOT want others to do unto you.

The religions of the world tend to be extremely diverse and unfortunately, beliefs and practices tend to be many, so much so  that this article barely touches on what each religion is truly about. It makes one wonder, however, whether any religion is ‘more accurate’ regarding the nature of ‘God’, given there is one in the first place. Perhaps, like henotheistic religions, the many religions are in fact facets of one larger thing, and each gives us insight into the nature of ‘God’ or the ‘ultimate truth’. Perhaps in reality each religion is ‘right’ and one merely has to find their own path, not based on convenience, for that is likely to be a decision based on laziness and would probably be far from the best, but based on what  one is  truly convinced of (and not stubbornly so). In reality, the myriad of religions may not be as different as we think they are – maybe each and every one of them can offer an ingredient to our approach to the Supreme Power.

Of course not. Glenn Beck is not seriously trying to have a dialogue about the subject. He’s not having an exchange. He’s communicating to a base audience in racial code. He won’t even attempt a dialogue on “white culture” with, say, Katie Couric, because that’s not what his use of the phrase is about.

A sociologist or a liberal who might be studying “white culture” in college (with nuance and careful to make distinctions between, say, Italian Americans in Jersey and Norwegian Americans in Minnesota) is fine. But that’s not at all how the category “white culture” functions with Glenn Beck. Rather, it functions as code for a string of anti-black stereotypes. In other words, the right’s use of the phrase “white culture” sets African Americans into the position of being a shadow to idealized post-WWII Protestant norms (think Ozzie and Harriet ). It functions as a racist category, and a locus for prejudice. That’s why Beck won’t define it above because it becomes the inverse of whatever stereotypes some whites habitually set upon blacks.

As for Glenn Beck being “aw shucks” innocent of his own uses of language, that too is bullshit. Beck is not dumb. He’s Iago deliberately pouring poison into Othello ear. He knows exactly what kind of crap he’s putting into the public square, and, like Iago in Shakespeare’s play, he’s hoping that the poison he’s whispering around will end in the undoing of a black man (Barack Obama).

To put it bluntly: He hates the Moor.

Let’s not pretend that Beck’s schtick (or Limbaugh’s, or any of these other haters stoking white fright of Obama) is innocent, or the product of a sincere, emotionally and intellectually vulnerable, inquiry. Instead, it is a thinly veiled, and perhaps even murderous, hostility towards our first African American president, and it is impervious to dialogue or serious engagement. It is a psychologically authoritarian and racist phenomenon, and if we can’t call it what it is, then we will be unable to think clearly about it.

When you are hearing Limbaugh or Beck, you’re not hearing from a mature, vulnerable person. You’re hearing from an emotionally armored person hell bent on casting doubt upon, and trying to destroy (without any serious regard for truth) the reputation of another human being.

To counter Beck’s yucky karma, I offer this:

As I move between  corporate clients and struggles with virtual teams ( it is not easy we acknowledge that) and the work with the NGO, Mediators Beyond Borders preparing for the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference, I am struck by how we in the corporate world have so much to learn from how this amazing virtual team of mediators works together.

This team from MBB achieves both results and process dimensions beyond anything I have experienced in many years of  corporate work – senior executives in Fortune 50 organizations as well as their OD/Leadership/professionals.

There is a quality of deep listening and attentive reading (people actually purposefully and with consideration read  full emails – don’t just skim and mentally take off on another agenda).

A new C suite Officer  Chief Mediation Officer would be the keystone for building  Collaboration that was deep and lasting and for embedding the spirit of mediation into all of the organization’s ventures.

Collaboration is the current management “trend” – of course lots of history and  good data to support the fact that collaborative teams do indeed achieve higher results in both productivity and innovation (see Lynda Gratton’s results from the Singapore teams http://www.hotspotsmovement.com/ as a Hot Spots Coach I experienced this excellent work  first hand).

Unfortunately Collaboration can be superficial and temporal – especially in virtual teams. A quick “Mediation Refresh Button” for every team/joint venture would embed and legitimize the thinking, spirit and process – and save not only time – but  the hurt/misunderstandings and negative energy around “oh that email wasn’t very supportive, wonder what they really meant – guess I’ll just not copy him next time” behaviour that builds walls and shuts down any possibility of real collaboration.  We recognize that we need to derive the very best from the diversity and creative thinking that can come with virtual teams.

There is an enormous amount of data supporting the innovative results and value of diverse teams. An excellent article Bridging Faultlines in Teams by Tammy Erickson, Lynda Gratton and Andreas Voigt http://sloanreview.mit.edu/the-magazine/articles/2007/summer/48411/bridging-faultlines-in-diverse-teams/ explores the reality of the challenges and makes good tactical suggestions for managing the breakdowns in collaboration and for keeping the teams from developing Faultlines. An embedded culture of mediation would make it is not only OK but comfortable (ooh that is the hard part) and normal to address the inevitable – and btw, very healthy conflict that arises within all teams. It is key that conflict be OK, be named and examined, before it becomes – de-energizing and painful and poisonous.

A mediation culture supports conflict and recognizes that it is  healthy and innovation generating  and that suppressing it at a personal level or group level will at best lead to compliant behaviour with no creativity and at worst to isolation and shut down at personal the group thinking levels.

Mediation skills building (and I am very privileged to have recently taken workshops with both Tom Fiutak and Ken Cloke) bring together many of the practices we in the OD/ Leadership/ Coaching world know so well, especially Organizational Learning, (all of the Five Disciplines) Shared Vision, Systems Thinking, Personal Mastery, Mental Models, and Team Learning ).  Mediation as practiced by experienced mediators  integrates, sharpens and focuses these and many other specific skills and experiences to bring to the very skilled process of conflict resolution.

The Chief Mediation Officer is a position that was part of ancient cultures –  usually one of the village elders – someone who was wise, with years of learning. As my Bedouin guide said to me “I don’t know why you have to teach people about systems thinking and dialogue, when you grow up as we do you practice systems thinking in order to survive in the desert and dialogue is how we talk with each other when we are making decisions” .

As we move toward disruptive innovation in our management practices; the most important  need  is how to capitalize on the human capital assets  of diverse groups of people working together virtually. We can continue to learn from ancient peoples and we can put focus on the fields of collaboration – with integral mediation skills and practices.

What follows is a trip through my notebook pages from this year’s World Fantasy Convention — things I wanted to remember, many of which are authors and the titles of their books and stories, some of which may be misspelled. [I think I've noted the spellings I'm not sure of.] The stuff is in no particular order — it’s like a junk drawer dumped out onto the tabletop. It’s a starting point: the place to begin intriguing searches and maybe discussions. Feel free to jump in with corrections, information, comments, or further queries.

It’s from such soup that great ideas might come. (Artist Guest of Honor Lisa Snellings said “You can’t go wrong with a soup analogy. It’s all in there.”)

Poe . . . Stephen King . . . background in poetry.

The Last Unicorn poses a riddle that is never answered in the book: “Why is a raven like a writing desk?” One panelist, frustrated for years, eventually caught up with Peter S. Beagle and asked him for the answer. He allegedly said, “The answer is either ‘Poe wrote on both’ or ‘Both have inky quills.’” Someone in the audience chimed in and suggested a third answer: “Both produce notes that are generally not musical.”

There’s a folkloric connection between ravens and the Tower of London — if ravens cease living in and around the Tower, England’s monarchy will fail; the royal line will break. So even now, there are special attendants who look after the ravens and make sure they’re happy living there.

There’s a curious relationship between wolves and ravens in the real world. They play together. Ravens will swoop down and pull wolves’ tails, and the wolves will snap and chase the ravens. (I’m not at all sure the wolves are “playing”. . . .) They also hunt together, helping each other for mutual benefit. Ravens will scout out likely-looking prey and call the wolves’ attention to it. Wolves will leave leftovers that ravens can eat. Ravens follow wolf packs, and wolf packs follow ravens.

The panelists were somewhat divided on whether the raven is more often a wise, instructive friend to humankind or a treacherous opportunist who is not at all our friend. In The Hobbit, the ravens living on and around the Lonely Mountain are long-term noble friends of the Dwarves. The raven who sits on the bust of Pallas in Poe’s “The Raven” may just be making mindless noise; it may be leading the narrator to consider his situation; or it may be mocking him and/or actively trying to push him over the edge. The panelists talked about the raven who leaves Noah’s ark and doesn’t come back, because it finds what it wants and needs elsewhere; they didn’t mention the ravens that bring Elijah food. (Have I got that right?) I keep coming back to the “Twa Corbies,” who will be making a sweet dinner of the dead knight — feeding on his heart, feeding on his “bonny blue eye,” and using his hair to weave into their nests. One panelist had a very good feeling about ravens she’s actually met; one always felt coldness from their eyes, and the sense that, if she died, they would gladly eat her. At Niigata University, there are abundant black birds — I’m not sure if they’re ravens or big crows — who come and hunt through the garbage and glare at passersby. I often get a very unfriendly feeling from them. There was, however, one early summer a couple years ago when I would often give little pieces of my lunch to a big one who would find me regularly and watch and hop as close as he dared. Of course I don’t think he was my “friend.”

Robert Chambers [I think], The King in Yellow

L to R: Jay Lake, Lisa Snellings, Garth Nix, Michael Swanwick, Donald Sidney-Fryer, Richard A. Lupoff, Zoran Zivkovic, Ann VanderMeer, Jeff VanderMeer: World Fantasy Convention 2009, San Jose, California

E.F. Benson, “Negotium Perambulans” (I may have read this years ago, and that’s what inspired me to include that inscription in Dragonfly, above the shaft where the Thanatops lives. It’s a quote from the Psalm, “Negotium perambulans in tenebris” — “The pestilence that walks in darkness.”)

“A Voice in the Night,” by William Hope Hodgson –  one panelist said a teacher read this out loud to them in gradeschool, and the room was utterly silent, and the kids were totally freaked out and never forgot it.

Same group, same caption

The Sun Bird, by Wilbur Smith (an excellent lost race novel) 

The Moon Pool, by A. Merritt — Lovecraft loved the novelette but condemned the novelization — which is probably the one I have on my shelf here.

David Hartwell’s The Dark Descent (I gather this is some kind of an overview of weird/horror fiction. Very intriguing.)

These next are all from Lisa Snellings:

It’s best not to write some stuff down. Sometimes when we do, when we capture the idea and put it down on paper, that satisfies us, and we’re done with it. Don’t worry: Good ideas persist. If it keeps coming back to you, it’s probably a good one. [This thought really made me nod in recognition. I agree.]

She says Ray Bradbury told her: “A general direction is better than a plan, because plans rarely work out. Keep working.”

The best ideas ring like a bell. The best ideas make you sweat. You just want to work, and don’t care if your shirt is on inside out. [Again, I recognize the truth of this. I've been there, now and then!]

In general, people who are successful work very, very hard.

Lisa Snellings says: “Why I’m never blocked: because I go to work every single day. It’s your job.” [Stephen King says pretty much the same thing in On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft.]

When you’re working or doing some kind of playing that you’re totally into and the rest of the world disappears, you’re in the Zone. For our well-being, our brains need to be in the Zone. It’s like a shower for our brains. She’s in the Zone often when she’s playing video games. But you can get there when you’re working, too — on art, music, writing, etc.

Moving back to general notes:

Garth Nix: “Some books are good enough to survive the most horrendous authors and constant exposure to them.”

He says “Sabriel” with a long a, as in saber.

Ellen Kushner: “Real life is a great impediment to grace and elegance.”

Tim Powers doesn’t read his contemporaries at all. He has a horror of ever being in a writer’s group, because he’d be expected to read the other group members’ manuscripts. (He says not to tell anyone about this; he hopes no one will post it on-line.)

When Ellen Kushner was a little girl and realized some other people didn’t like her, her father said, “Do you like everyone you meet? No? Then why should they all like you?” And she never worried about that again.

Something Garth Nix said that I really identified with: He’s a “story-driven character writer.” He knows very little about the characters as he begins writing. He learns about them as they go through the story, as they face the events and act. So he doesn’t try to figure out all that about the characters before he starts. I find this to be amazingly comforting, because I go at it the same way and always wondered if there was something wrong with my approach. This seems so much more real to me than filling out all those character sheets, writing profiles for them, pretending to walk around talking with them for months before you write your book, etc. I’m so relieved!

Someone asked if the panel was supposed to be 55 minutes or exactly an hour. Ellen Kushner said, “It’s 55 minutes. It’s a therapy hour.”

Ellen Kushner: “We live in an age that devalues the imagination.”

Some writer said: “I am all my characters, but none of them are me.”

Michael Swanwick pointed out how in Lud-in-the-Mist, the conflict is between magic (Faery) and the law. [True! In Lud, the modern people are in denial of the existence of magic, and to say "fairy" is like saying the worst swear-word, and their legal language has euphemisms for magical things.]

Swanwick: “At the heart of fantasy is mystery. The universe is unknowable. In sf, it’s the other way around — the universe is knowable and follows noble rules.”

Swanwick related how William Blake saw ghosts all the time. Blake drew a picture of the ghost of a flea to show people what he was looking at. [And this is me: still one of my favorite Blake-related quotes was from his wife: "I seldom enjoy Mr. Blake's company. He's always in Paradise." Blake was in the Zone!]

Swanwick: The weakness of the “deal with the devil” story is that the very existence of the devil offering the deal proves the existence of the afterlife, testifies to eternal consequences, etc. — so who would take such a deal? [An old first-grade classmate of mine, no longer with us in this world, was a fine writer who actually took that into account in writing a "deal with the devil" story.]

Swanwick: “If it’s said in front of a writer, it belongs to him.” [Fred: By this point, most of my friends know this to be true!]

Guy Gavriel Kay: “If almost anything is done well, it can work.” [Isn't that also extremely comforting? Your idea doesn't have to be Earth-shaking. Just tell the tale well. Eight centuries ago, the Japanese poet Fujiwara no Teika (1162-1241) told his writing students: "Do not strain for novelty."]

Guy Gavriel Kay liked the Emma Thompson film Sense and Sensibility — very good film overall — but he intensely disliked how the filmmakers played the manners of the time for laughs from a modern audience. They pandered to a modern audience. It was almost bad enough to kill his enjoyment of the movie. [At my first-ever writers' conference -- I was in high school -- Paul Darcy Boles told me that a good thing about my writing was that I didn't poke fun at my characters. If we write about people in a different time or culture, we have to let them be who they would be in that time and place.]

Modern readers are very averse to dialect. In the 19th century they loved it when characters spoke in dialect on the page, but not now.

Ellen Kushner made the point that, to represent the language of another era or place, you can use the rhythms of that culture’s language. One skillful writer she cited, to give French characters the “flavor” of speaking French in her English-language books, consciously employed the beats of standard French poetry. And the English lines do somehow give the illusion of being French!

Avoid trendiness in speech patterns. [Note to self: Do not have characters in an epic fantasy say, "Tuh. As if!"]

Deanna Hoak: “Copyediting is like bathing. No one notices it unless you don’t do it.”

Guy Gavriel Kay (on writing dialogue that sounds authentic): “There’s no formula for success, but there are avenues for authenticity. It depends on maintaining a consistent tone.”

[In my Hokkaido days, I was the D.M. for a small group that played Dungeons & Dragons in the parsonage of Asahikawa Lutheran Church. As a non-native speaker of Japanese, I spoke -- and still speak -- the language at one level of politeness: the standard, safe-in-all-situations level that foreigners are taught in classrooms. But Japanese has a huge range in levels of politeness, each appropriate in a different situation depending on the speaker's relationship to the listener, their relative ages, genders, statuses, etc. Sometimes my D&D group would burst out laughing because my orcs spoke so politely: "Please drop your weapons. If you do not, this will turn into a fight! -- Grrr! Aargh!"]

Everyone says read Mythago Wood, by Robert Holdstock. The direct sequel is Avilion. [I'm not sure about any of those three spellings.]

Lavinia, by Ursula LeGuin, is absolutely amazing.

Little, Big is evidently a great book.

Alice Henderson [sp?] has a really good-sounding horror novel set in Glacier National Park.

The Weirdstone of Brisingamen, by Alan Garner — apparently really excellent — one panelist whom I respected re-reads it every year.

In Cold Blood by Capote is really disturbing, really scary.

Final note: It would be a very good idea to read the World Fantasy Award-winning novels and runners-up each year. The ones that win seem to be highly original, hard to categorize.

And there we have it!

Let us go forth and read, write, love, and live!

Mate Soulmate SPDP  

Short Fiction – A Tasty Story

By

VIKRAM KARVE

Pune. Fergusson College Road. Vaishali Restaurant. 5 PM on a Sunday evening.

Crowded. Crammed full. Jam-packed. All tables occupied chock-a-block. Aisles teeming with people waiting with watchful eyes for signs of someone finishing their refreshments.

Suddenly I see a woman waving to me, beckoning me with her hand. Her face seems familiar – oh yes, she is Ravi’s wife. She is sitting all alone on a table for two with a half eaten masala dosa in front of her.

I walk towards her and give her a smile.

“Sit down, sit down,” she says to me, gesturing with her hand towards the empty chair opposite her, “Sit down here with me, otherwise you will have to wait for hours.”

I sit down opposite her and say, “Thanks.”

She summons a waiter and orders peremptorily, “SPDP.”

“Two?” the waiter asks.

“No, one SPDP for Madam,” she says pointing to the empty plate in front of me without even bothering to ask me, then she pauses for a moment and tells the waiter, “and get one Kachori for me.”

Before I can recover my wits, she says, “You like SPDP don’t you? Ravi told me.”

“Yes, I love the SPDP at Vaishali. In fact I come all the way here every Sunday…”

“To spend the day reading in the library opposite followed by an SPDP at Vaishali,” she completes my sentence.

“Ravi told you all this?”

“Of course. He’s told me everything about you. Ravi admires you so much, he always talks about you.”

“Really? But he never tells me anything about you.”

“What’s there to tell? I am only his housewife, you are his office wife.”

“Come on. Please don’t say that. There is nothing like that between me and Ravi. We are just colleagues – workmates…”

“Workmates?” Ravi’s wife interrupts, and then says with a hint of sarcasm, “I think you are his true soulmate – and I am only his mate!”

I am struck dumb, feel a bit uneasy, but suddenly the plate of SPDP is kept in front of me, so I look down and begin to eat.

“I’m sorry,” she says, “Don’t get angry. I was just teasing. I want you to be Ravi’s friend. He likes you so much. That’s why he is so happy in office and doing so well in his work.”

I stop eating; look up at her vacuously, wondering what to say.

“Ravi appreciates you so much he even brings you home to me every evening in his thoughts and talks…that’s why I wanted to meet you.”

“We’ve met before…”

“Only once, that too only an introduction, at the Office Annual Day get-together…we are hardly married for three months, you know, and you all are so busy, with your targets and all, so I decided to meet you, talk to you, get to know you better, make a friendship…”

“You mean…”

“Yes, I contrived this coincidence. I came to the library also, but you were so busy browsing that I did not want to disturb you, so I waited here in Vaishali knowing you would surely come for your SPDP.”

“You’re not eating your Kachori,” I say, trying to change the direction of the conversation.

“Here, you eat,” she says pushing her untouched plate of Kachori and katori of whipped curds towards me, “I am all full – I ate an Uttapam, Idli-Vada Sambar, god-knows-what, waiting for you to come…”

She leans forward and casually picks up a Sev Potato Dahi Puri from my plate, pops into her mouth and says, “Wow. I love the chatpata flavour of SPDP – you call it Umami taste or something – that’s what you told Ravi, isn’t it?”

“I think I’ll go now,” I say, feeling distinctly uncomfortable, making up my mind to have a long talk with Ravi the moment I meet him in the morning at work.

“No, no, don’t go, I want to show you something.”

“Show me something?”

“Yes, that’s why I came all the way here to meet you.”

We finish the SPDP and Kachori, I insist on paying the bill, she doesn’t object too much, and then she takes me to the drapery section of the Shopping Mall nearby.

“We are furnishing our new house,” she says, pointing at the curtain cloth on display.

I look at her clueless.

“I like yellow, you like blue, and since you have told him about the aesthetic cool tranquil beauty of the blue colour, Ravi is besotted with everything blue – blue shirts, blue trousers, blue table-covers, blue bed-sheets, blue napkins, the sober blue everything that you make him buy…”

I look furtively and self-consciously at the blue dress I am wearing, and say, “Okay, tell me which curtains you like.”

She points to a bright yellow floral print and says, “I like that one, I love yellow, so lively and cheerful… I hate sober gloomy colours, especially blue, it depresses me.”

Next morning at the office, Ravi says to me, “Hey, keep yourself free in the evening. We’ll go to Deccan for some shopping. You’ve got to help me select curtains for our new home. Then we’ll have SPDP at Vaishali.”

“Sure, Ravi, I’ll love to come with you,” I say.

Now I’ve got till evening to decide one thing – which colour curtains should I tell Ravi to buy – Yellow Curtains or Blue Curtains?

VIKRAM KARVE

 Copyright © Vikram Karve 2009

Vikram Karve has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the author of this work.

http://vikramkarve.sulekha.com 

http://www.linkedin.com/in/karve 

Appetite for a Stroll

vikramkarve@sify.com

Humans have been telling stories to each other since time immemorial. They serve a deep psychological and sociological need. Let us examine a few key concepts:

WHAT IS A STORY?

Quite simply, it is a journey of inter-connected events with a beginning, middle and an end providing

• dramatic fulfillment
• education
• knowledge
• entertainment
• emotional stimulation and,
• a satisfying conclusion (we love closure)

Stories began as visual medium when our forebearers painted images on cave walls. or drew with sticks in the sand. They were accompanied by words or grunts. As complex language developed, stories were increasingly verbalized, and later on written. Stories today can be exclusively composed of images, written words or speech, but often times are a combination. Cinema is primarily a visual medium, with a lesser proportion of words (dialogue). Television is more dialogue based than cinema in general.

A story must have a purpose. For instance, the Australian Aboriginal woman at a rock formation called “The Devil’s Marbles” in the Northern Territory told stories to keep youngsters away from these rocks to avoid danger. A story can be as dry as a depiction of actual events or “life-like” events. Even fantasy fairy tales emulate “life-like” events through suspension of disbelief. Whatever dungeons and dragons we use, the events in a story must feel authentic .

Stories also need a theme (exploration of the human condition). What topics or concepts is your story exploring? Racism? The power of the human spirit during disaster? Love always triumphs over evil? Revenge? And the list goes on. This has been discussed in an earlier blog in the 36 dramatic situations by Georges Polti.  Be careful that you are only exploring one central theme and perhaps one or two minor ones. Otherwise your story loses focus which must be found.

In order to make a story compelling, there must be a protagonist (hero), a goal, a dilemma, conflict, an antagonist (nemesis) and a moral (leading to growth) to create a complete experience. And more importantly, an audience. Stories help us communicate with each other, and add meaning and enrichment to our lives. They bring people together through sharing and help us evolve and grow stronger.

Dramatica defines story as a grand argument dealing with a problem or an inequity. Huh? Basically, it raises the issue of a hero with a conflict as they are yanked from their natural world through a critical or inciting incident, and how they go about solving it.

During a recent seminar by Jen Grisanti (a Hollywood writers’ consultant and wonderful person too), she spoke of the importance of finding your story. What is the writer specifically trying to say? Why are they taking up her with a series of events? Is your story too episodic? What do you want your audience to get from watching your film? What message are you trying to convey to your audience?

The movie “Tootsie” spent close to a decade in development until the writer Larry Gelbart finally decided that ‘Tootsie” was a story about a man who had to become a woman in order to better understand them and himself. It wasn’t so much a story of desperation, the lengths people go to to make it as an actor, or about a guy liking to dress up. Consider “What Women Want” with Mel Gibson and Helen Hunt which was essentially the same story with body rather than clothes swapping.

Jen Grisanti sees stories as media for building communities. Pretty powerful stuff. A good story must have clarity and must be relevant to the times. How does the story make you feel? These are primal concepts, but difficult to nail down. It must also possess deeper symbolism to have a greater impact on us. She sees the important aspects of raising the emotional stakes in a story as being

• anticipation
• expectation
• participation
• surprise and,
• a delayed payoff

WHAT IS A PLOT?

A plot is simply the way a story is executed, or a cause and effect series of events. A road map. It is the mechanics of your story; how the sequence of events are put together. Many writers confuse the two and think writing event after event constitutes a story, especially in action films. Is your plot linear, non-linear or avariant? Classic examples of unconventional plotting include “Memento”, “Reservoir Dogs” and “Run Lola Run”. Plot also relates to structure, the most common being the Aristotelian three act structure. Is there a clear concept or story idea, which is more specific than a theme? Good versus evil isn’t a story concept.  Is there a well defined central/main character with a clear motivation, goal, a dilemma and obstacles. One way to enhance your plotting is to consider what is the worse case scenario if your main character doesn’t achieve their goal. The ultimate failure to achieve a goal is death.

Subplots are secondary or tertiary storylines. Some readers have complained that, because a writer hasn’t really found their story, some subplots are actually more intriguing than the main plot. It happens in unpolished scripts. Even to me! Another problem I recently grappled with is my choice of main character to drive the plot. In the end I switched the boy to a girl (literally not surgically) and everything fell into  place.

FINDING YOUR VOICE

These are the less tangible qualities that define you as a writer. Jen Grisanti claims that many newer writers lack a distinct voice which distinguishes them from other writers.

This is a difficult process of self exploration. It means that we need to delve deeper into our psyches than ever before. She made us define a critical or life changing incident where the rug was pulled from under our feet and we are forced to deal with a new reality. Sound familiar? In doing so, we help shape our characters which are products of our creativity and therefore ourselves. Imagine placing your profile on a social website. Think of how you would describe your personality? What are your likes and dislikes? What do you value most in your relationships with other people? Certain patterns will emerge which define you as an individual. Are you easy going? Wound up tight? Chatty? Pensive? Conventional? Alternative? Think about how a producer might discuss what qualities you possess as a writer. If a project is greenlit and a producer is looking for a writer and they say “This project is perfect for xxxx (insert your name)”, it’s because of your voice.

Part of finding your voice involves common themes in the stories we like to tell. Are we animal lovers? Philanthropists? Comedians? Feminists? Optimists? Cynical? Interested in human suffering? Are your characters strong, successful people? Are you strong and successful or do you aspire to be? Are characters underdogs? What is their disposition? Happy? Smarmy? Cheerful? Quirks?

Finding your story and finding your voice is rather like wanting a quick definition of the meaning of life. The only way to find it is to keep searching. And the search lies in the writing. So what are you waiting for?

I’ve now managed to write seven posts without putting in any real dialogue, and I’m almost wondering how it’s even possible. But I know why. Firstly, and most obviously, dialogue is hard. You have to remember stuff that people say, and generally people say really boring things anyway, so I hardly feel like it’s worth my while. But secondly, there’s no dialogue (yet) because I didn’t talk to anyone about Jen. Not to Dave, who first introduced me to her, and not to Andy, who’s my closest Anglophone friend out here. I told Andy how I felt about her when I first met her, and he was pretty dismissive, so this time I didn’t tell him anything. That is because my brain, or my conscious mind, or whatever you want to call it governs me. And my brain is a dictatorship. There is no room for dissent. The only dissenting voices are from within myself, but that’s fine – all the best dictators were a bit mental and showed signs of mental illness and schizophrenia, so I figure my brain telling me two different things depending on which way the wind is blowing is more or less the same thing. Now that I know that I want to be with Jen, I don’t want anyone telling me differently; I have no time for being contradicted by my friends. Except maybe one. You see, by Wednesday, I was getting restless, and I didn’t know what to do. One minute I wanted to forget she ever existed and never talk to her ever again, the next I wanted to turn up at her door and tell her to be with me. It was confusing as anything, and rather tiring too. Knowing what you want really is a luxury. By 2am in the morning, after turning the situation over and over in my sleepless mind, I couldn’t take it any more, so I emailed my best friend, James. I was going to Facebook him, in keeping with the trend I had established, but my internet connection is about as reliable as the Italian rail network, and at this particular moment all traffic to Facebook was cancelled, so I was forced to use my email. This is what I wrote:

“i meant to facebook you this, but my internet’s playing up and not letting me send private messages, so i’m having to email instead.

mate, i need some advice on some girl issues that i’m having. and by advice, i need you either to tell me to stop being an idiot and move on, or to grow a pair and do something.

back in january, a mate of mine from school who’s doing erasmus in a city about 2 hours from Lyon came for a weekend, along with a few of his friends. one of them, the girl in question, i got along with really well, we pulled, then they went back and although i was sorry to see her leave, i told myself it was just a one night thing

then this weekend, i went to visit my mate, and ended up spending loads of time with this girl, enough to realise that she’s pretty much perfect for me (not even much of an exaggeration). i spent the night at hers, then had to leave the next morning to go back to Lyon. when i got back i told her how i felt, and how i wanted to be with her. she said that although she has feelings for me etc etc, she also has feelings for a guy back in england at uni with her who’s on erasmus as well this year. apparently he’s a ‘mega twat’ (her words), they were together complicatedly last year, and she wants to be with him again next year, so she doesn’t want to be in a relationship with me.

i’ve tried to be mature and nice about it, told her i’m upset but understand etc etc, but i don’t really know what to do. i don’t know this guy, but he sounds like a cunt and people don’t change, which i want to tell her, but i also feel like it wouldn’t make any difference telling her that. i also know that i should probably just move on, but i like her so much that i don’t want to.

so if you could just tell me to grow a pair either way, it’d be much appreciated.

Seth”

You see, I’d realised that I needed to talk to someone about what I was going through, and James knew me better than anyone. He’d been my next-door neighbour in halls, we’d lived together in second year, and although we’d fallen out once or twice, he was still my best mate. I spent most of Thursday waiting to see what he’d say, wondering if I could actually go through with my two options of: get over her; or dramatic gesture which would probably lose her forever. I also had to sort my life out before my mother and sister, who were coming to visit me for a week, arrived the next day. This meant shaving (I had neglected my appearance somewhat, and had some lovely patchy growth going on), tidying the mountains of rubbish in my room, hiding the large amounts of booze and generally smartening myself up. It seems wrong to say so, but at the time I wasn’t looking forward to their visit. I’d spent the whole week trapped inside my head in a state of introversion and introspection, and as a result the idea of having to deal with other people was not exactly welcome. I was pissed off, confused and upset. I also made the mistake of deleting all my porn from my computer (fun fact: after coming back from Clermont Ferrand, I went two weeks without masturbating). So when James replied to me around 6pm, I wasn’t really expecting to read this:

“Well,

I would want to know two things;

1)is it feasible that you and her can be together i.e. where is she at uni? what year of her degree is she in? etc

2)do you think that she will go off this other bloke?

I am a great supporter of chasing the ladies, and it would seem to me that she is special as it is not very often that you are moved by a femme.
She has clearly had an effect on you and I would say that you should make yourself look as elligible as possible, without complaining about the other bloke, as she is able to make up her own mind (case in point; lyndy and felix, I thought he was a bell end, he cheated on her, I broke his ribs, they broke up anyway, I won).

I think it is quite simple; if you think she is worth chasing, and she clearly likes you, then i think you should stick it out and see if you can go the course.

That is my verdict.

I hope this is of help, I am glad you asked.”

It was exactly what I needed to hear, and exactly what best friends are for. Just when my head was in danger of exploding from the pressure of my own self-absorption, I had a wake-up call and a welcome dose of clarity. So from that moment, I decided to ‘stick it out’. There are limits; there are always limits. There’s a chance I’ll meet someone better and more available. There’s an even bigger chance she’ll get back with this wanker. But as long as she’s single, I decided to show her that she can choose the nice guy. That I’m worth forgetting him. At least then I’ll know, whether I end up with her or not, that I tried – even if she goes back to him, I can tell myself that that’s what counts. It’s not, but you know, you’ve got to take comfort from somewhere.

I have been dancing around this for sometime now, but it’s time to face facts: if I’m going to write this, I have to explain how I got to be in such a state now. I’ve dredged up the past enough times in my mind, so writing it down here shouldn’t be too much of a stretch. It’s not something I particularly want to do though, as will probably become apparent.

Emotion is an essential element in good fiction. If I as a reader can’t get inside the POV character’s emotions, feel what they feel about the setting, for example, to go in and be that character at that moment in time, then there is no way I can connect with them. If the emotion of the character is missing, so is the character missing. If I can’t tell what a character feels, then the character isn’t there for me.

Writing through an emotional filter can be the most difficult part of a character to capture in words. It reminds me of my life before Lasik surgery. My vision had been 20/1000 for many years. The day the doctor finished my eye surgery and I sat up, I saw the doorknob on a door across the room—I mean, I SAW it! That is when a doorknob is more than a doorknob.

When a writer doesn’t use what author Nancy Conner calls the emotional filter, it’s like the character isn’t there.

Conner says when we apply an emotional filter rather than writing neutral descriptions of a setting, location, or character, for example, the author colors the description according to the character’s state of mind.

The emotional filter is a way to show how a character feels, thinks, judges, and interprets anything. For example, if I look out my window, I might observe, “Snow covered the ground.” That doesn’t say anything about my state of mind. But if I write, “Snow nestled around the trees and fence posts,” you get an idea of how I feel about the snow. If I said, “The snow imprisoned me inside the house,” you get a different sense of how I feel about the snow even though I didn’t say how I felt about it.

If your character doesn’t feel strongly enough about what she sees, hears, tastes, touches or smells to give some type of emotional reaction to it, the reader won’t either. This applies to everything in the story, whether it be action, dialogue, description or other characters.

Your story will have great impact on readers if you help them interpret it emotionally.

- Prenez-moi dans votre bouche.
- Vous ne voulez pas attendre le dessert ?
- Si vous ne le faites pas dans la minute je crois que je vais exploser.
- Un peu de retenue voyons.
- Jamais pendant un repas.
- Oh, quel joli principe. Vous êtes un homme de principes ?
- Me faire sucer dans un restaurant ne relève pas du principe. C’est tout le contraire.
- Parlez pour vous. Prendre des queues en bouche au déjeuner, c’est pour moi un principe.
- Vous êtes une femme à principes ?
- Malheureusement, non.
- Il est temps d’y remédier ! Il faut se tenir à quelques résolutions certaines de nos jours. C’est vital.
- Pour vous.
- La minute est passée. Je vais avaler mes testicules par le colon si vous persistez avec vos règles paradoxales. En début de repas ça m’aurait couper l’appétit net. Et ça va bientôt me couper…
- Tout de suite les grands mots…
- Sucez-moi ou je fais un malheur.
- Vous radotez.
- Montrez-moi vos seins.
- Vous ne voulez pas que je vous suce d’abord ?
- Garçon ! L’addition ! Cette femme n’a aucune morale !
[...]
- Il vous en reste sur le coin des lèvres.
- Embrassez-moi.
- La prochaine fois que vous sucez le garçon de café, prévenez-moi, j’apporterai mon appareil-photo couleur.
- Ca existe encore en noir et blanc ?
- Taisez-vous. Embrassez-moi.
[...]
- Demain, à déjeuner ?
- Vous me ferez ce plaisir ?
- A l’entrée ou au plat principal ?
- Promesse de femme !

Who else can we thank?

Another way of saying it:

God is not on the Left, Right, or Center.

I know that is blasphemy to millions. But they seem to be worshiping tribal gods. Tribal gods are OK, but brittle.

Thank God, or the creative nature of the universe, that we are not all on the right, or all on the left, or all in the center. We are only all human, and only all earthlings.

If we were all on the right, or left, we would certainly hurtle over the cliff of our choosing, even faster than we’re now approaching the cliff that no one is choosing.

If we were all in the center, we would still be getting closer and closer to the non-chosen cliff, because there is too much investment in the status quo, and too little appetite for change.

But we’re not all in one place, one ideology, one proclivity, one style, one perspective.

That’s not a design flaw; that IS the design.

Even though that’s the design, we rail against it.

Even though, by our nature, we’re not all of one perspective, we’re in huge trouble now because enough of us haven’t waked up to realize that all our perspectives and peculiarities are needed to survive and thrive.  Or, that is, all are needed to be part of our on-going conversations, deliberations, adaptations, and innovations.

My heroes (dual gender) are those who have waked up to that, and who are able to speak well, and model well, in ways that are convincing to large segments of center, right, and left. Not just talking and inspiring (though those are important) but demonstrating – not as in protesting, but as in showing how.

“Help!” someone cried out. “Get me out of this! My leg’s fractured! Is anyone there? Help!”

“Who was that?” Victor said.

A terrible noise came from a mansion. Hammering on doors could be heard. Screams echoed in the area.

“Sounds like he’s in trouble,” Dave replied, worried.

“Fractured? How? Why?”

“Let’s find out.”

Imagine what you’d feel if you came across these opening paragraphs in a book. You’d be interested, certainly. You’d want to know what person was crying for help, and why. You’d want how his leg came to be fractured. You’d want to know who the heck Victor and Dave are. And you’d want to know why they were at this place and what they were doing there. In short, you’d want to read on.

And this is precisely what reaction you have in mind for the reader after reading the first few lines. You want to read on! A story must have a superb compelling opening – that’s the rule. Otherwise, as I told you in the previous post, the reader will close the book.

So what’s the summary of this section? To write a compelling opening chapter you must first write the compelling opening lines. (The first page in other words). Only then the reader will take a further look in the first chapter.

Let’s delve deeper in why these opening lines (the ones with which I have started the post) have been proven to work. If one looks closely, there are some elements hidden there. Elements which have been used by famous authors. They are…

1) Dialogue

Starting a story with dialogue helps. It helps greatly. It’s better than the old “Once upon a time, a farmer lived on the hill.” It’s better than “Raju was struggling.” It’s better than “John and Richard were very naughty.” It’s better than “The sea shined and sparked as they left it.” It’s better than all of them.

Why, though?

Because it draws in the reader and makes him interested.

When you compare dialogue and narrative, you’ll find out that by and large readers prefer dialogue. Yes, there is a thing such as too much dialogue, but when starting a story, dialogue is always one of the preferable options.

Now, of course with every case there are rules attached. This is no exception. You can’t just write some sloppy dialogue (like How are you doing) and say “I started it with dialogue.” It has to be good. It has to be interested. It has to show the personality of the speaker, and be short and snappy. Above all, it must not bore the reader.

So this was the first element. Notice that the first word in the story was above was “Help”, which was dialogue, yes, but something else. Which is…

2) Call to action

A good story begins with not action, but the scene before the action. It creates a growing sense of fear and dread if you use it carefully. As I said before, there is a thing such as too much dialogue. If you just have your characters talking and laughing with each other, well – you’ve mirrored real life, but after all, this is fiction, and your reader’s dozing off already. Wake him/her up with some action!

But beginning stories with action-packed scenes is not a good idea, since the reader has no idea who the characters are and doesn’t care a bit about them. Therefore – inject action into the dialogue! Make one of your characters say he’s going to do a daring task, or something like that. Then, before the reader’s “don’t-carishness” kicks in, quickly explain why that particular thing is so important.

And so… you’ve got your reader hooked. Mission accomplished if you handle it well.

3) Depict struggle and conflict

We all know that without conflict stories would become boring. We would hate to read them. We would hate to read about the great heroes that reach their goal without any struggle, without any conflict.

And oh… I think you are the same.

So what do you have to do? You have to depict struggle and conflict. Keep it short, though. Remember that the reader doesn’t know about the characters yet. Keep him in the dark first. Be vague in describing the struggle.

But at the same time, tell the reader that struggles and conflicts are definitely abound in your story. Illustrate it with a few lines. Short and snappy are the magic words.

And there you have it… another reason why the reader will continue reading!

4) Done all that? Got the reader’s attention? Now take hold of it with a stunning plot (and characters)

If you’ve done the above correctly, you should now have got the reader’s attention. All you have to do now is to keep hold of it.

You roll your eyes. “Okay, boy, easy for you to say. How exactly?”

I’m going to tell you how.

Think of a stunning plot. Create superb memorable characters. Write in a compelling manner. Do not ramble for even a second. Keep depicting conflict. Hurt the main character. Flaw him/her. Make his goal memorable, but impossible to get. Write a superb ending and leave some loose ends still unwrapped. To mirror real life.

OK… I know all that is hard to do. Heck, even I find it impossible to do many times. But the purpose of Schoolboy Author is… to help you in fiction writing. A blog written by a kid with few experiences but writing knowledge. Let’s see how hard it is.

That’s all for today, to give your scroll-bar a rest.

P.S. – If you don’t know, this is the second part of a tutorial on How to Write the Best Opening Chapter. The first part can be read here. Stay tuned for the whole series and keep in touch with it by receiving our updates for free by RSS or email. And feel free to have your say in the comments below.

This week has been a very difficult one for many of us. The national tension unveiled as a result of the Fort Hood shooting is quite unsettling. The levels of distrust and misunderstanding among people are overwhelming to say the least. But I am personally troubled by my daily experiences these last few days.

In my last few posts I talked about Islam and how it is being perceived since the incident. I knew that when I started openly discussing my religion in the light of current events that there would be negative, positive, and supportive reactions. I mentally prepared myself for the one thing that I always have a hard time dealing with, and that thing is being intentionally distanced from many of the ‘friends’ in my life. Psychologically it’s just something that comes with the territory…I expect it and accept it. What gets me is the period of emotional stress brought about by knowing that many good friends will be friends no longer. There is even one former friend of mine who tries to anonymously confront me with very hateful language. I wish things could be different, but such is life.

I want readers of 3EYEVISION to know that what I write is NOT intended to encourage your acceptance of things that you might have no desire to embrace. My words are just that — my words…and I take full responsibility for everything that I write. What I am trying to do is simply offer opinions of life events that give readers different perspectives as they contemplate the world around them.

Religion is very touchy subject in American society, but now more than ever we need some serious, sincere, honest, candid, and RESPECTFUL dialogue across the nation to understand each other on common ground.

The discussions about social justice in my tutorial have been getting pretty heated. People are getting downright emotional. Things are getting seriously personal. Nobody feels quite comfortable. And it must be interfering with the educative process. Enter my tutorial instructor with the rational solution – a presentation on dialogue (or rather, on how to conduct oneself properly during tutorial!)

What could possibly be problematic with dialogue? If only we could engage in calm, rational dialogue, we could arrive at fair solutions to all the world’s problems, n’est pas? Yes, through dialogue, we shall all become enlightened. Empowered by reason, there will be equality for everyone.

To those who say the Age of Enlightenment is over, I say – give it time! Be patient for another century or so, and one fine day we will arrive at the conclusion that you are in fact human, despite the fact that you are so different from me. Trust me. Just you wait and see.

…Errr. Looking around the table, I see those with whom I am to engage in dialogue. There are 10 straight people and I am the only queer. Well the playing field for this dialogue isn’t exactly level, is it? Thanks to these numbers, queer issues might not be considered a legitimate topic for dialogue in the first place. I am at the mercy of the straight people to decide whether queer issues are even on the agenda. And my experience tells me they probably aren’t since many of the folks around this table are reluctant to engage with the topic – its decidedly “not pertinent to the educative process.” No worries, surely I can win them over through the power of reason.

Trouble is, many of their brains are thinking using the assumptions and concepts from dominant discourses (which are homophobic and heteronormative, so the odds are further stacked against me). Within these discourses, there are very rational ways to explain why there are two sexes (male and female) and male-female sexual partnerships are the natural pattern for all humans to follow. Makes sense, right? Well, not to me. I’m not going to spend time discussing the merits and critiques of both perspectives on gender and sexual identity here (I don’t feel like justifying my right to be considered a normal human being right now, thanks). But I will say that we are not operating on the same assumptions nor with the same understandings of crucial words like ‘natural’ and ‘gender.’ The very foundation of the dominant culture rests on there being distinct men and women, who each embody certain characteristics and occupy certain roles. I’m operating on assumptions that are so radically different (but still highly sophisticated and logical) from the dominant culture and most of the people around the table, that for them to engage with my ideas, they need to accept a significant degree of discomfort and trouble the very foundational ideas of their culture and society (such as: what if the line between male and female isn’t so clear cut? How would you understand your identity then?).

This is where another problem with dialogue kicks in. People feel emotions. Cue the fear. Or the guilt. Or the defensive anger. We’re taught that we can use reason to control these emotions, so they don’t cloud our judgment. I’m not sure we should be controlling our emotions so much as understanding where they come from and why they might be problematic. I think we can do this to an extent, but I don’t think it comes easily to many. In fact, I think this is a skill that most of us need to be taught in order to participate in dialogue effectively. And sadly it’s a skill that by and large isn’t currently taught in public schools. So now, if my fellow interlocutors are to understand what I am contributing to the dialogue, I’ll probably have to spend time on getting them up to speed on the latest theories about emotions and education, like pedagogies of discomfort and crisis, and how we can navigate emotions in educative ways. And you know what? I could do that…if I were the instructor! But I’m not.

Rather than the heterosexuals doing some intellectual and emotional heavy lifting, it’s so much easier for them to simply cast the queer voices as less legitimate and on the fringe. The path of least resistance is so tempting that queer voices tend to end up being brushed aside as less than relevant.

So things get heated. People get emotional. It starts to get personal. And guess what identity groups end up bearing the brunt of the emotional burden (and subsequently, guess whose ability to thrive in this educative process is most likely to suffer). And yet we are told to control our anger, because otherwise… we aren’t following the rules of dialogue. And we’ll be seen as disrupting the educative process for everyone else.

With the emergence of President Barak Obama in 2009, the issue of health care has been at the forefront of his administration. There is a divide in our country about health care. Is this a battle of the haves and the have nots? The poor, unemployed, small business owners and others who don’t have health care or don’t have easy affordable access probably sees this debate very differently than those who have health insurance. Health insurance should be affordable to all and we have to find a socially just system that provides health care coverage to all citizens. What are your thoughts?

Since the election of President Barak Obama, the media and others have been using the term “Post-Racial America” to describe the United States at this moment. The essence of the term suggests that since the United States elected President Barak Obama as the first Black President, the U.S. is now beyond the racism historically evident in our society. Please share your thoughts.

- Nath’ : lundi, je ne travaille pas … Chouette !
- SC : Sympa ça … Tu en profites pour partir en week-end ? (i.e. Tu as un mec ?)
- Nath’ : Non, je vais faire du shopping avec ma mère pour les cadeaux de Noël
- SC : Samedi, j’emmene un super bon pote qui est de passage à …
- Nath’ : Non moi, j’ai rien de prévu samedi … Mais jeudi j’ai fait une petite soirée ?
- SC : Ah bon, quoi ?
- Nath’ : fêter le beaujolais !
- SC : Beurk, c’est pas un vin ça …
- Nath’ : C’est pas faux …
- SC : D’ailleurs, tu aimes quoi comme vin ?
- Nath’ : Pas trop le rouge, plutôt les blancs !
- SC : Secs ? Liquoreux ? Champagne ?
- Nath’ : Oui, oui et oui

J’ai aussi appris son age … 31 ! pas mal quand même … Bon, ce qui fait peur, c’est qu’elle a l’air vraiment “sage” !

Pour être honnête, l’idée de l’inviter à boire un verre après le boulot m’a effleuré mais cette pensée n’est restée qu’au stade d’idée pour plusieurs raisons (cf. Vendredi dernier ou encore mon dernier rendez-vous avec la RH). Puis merde, ce que je veux, ça n’est certainement pas ramener une nana différente chez moi tous les vendredis.

D’ailleurs, comme je ne veux pas de relation de couple non plus… Je ne pense pas être dans un bon état d’esprit pour avoir la moindre relation intime ! A moins que j’essaye de m’en convaincre pour faire descendre la pression … Je sais pas !

Heureusement que j’ai dit que je ne chercherai pas à la séduire ! J’ai eu la vague sensation qu’elle me cherchait jeudi et vendredi !

Puis, c’est même pas moi qui ai payé ce café !

Publication via iPhone

I am mentoring a graduate from the Leeds MBA course who wants to learn about facilitation before she returns to India, so I have 2 months to guide her the skills and tactics of facilitation.

Our initial thoughts

Our first session was about how to use Post It® notes to generate a range individual responses to a question concerning a team/organisation for example: What causes our meetings to overrun? What is helping employees to feel engaged with the business? What do consumers want from our business?

Once the answers have been recorded and grouped into categories the next task is to clarify the meaning of each item and ensure that they are in the right category. If the meanings of each note is clarified it then become possible to remove any items which are clear duplicates. This discussion is really important because it will start to define what the key priorities are for the group.Having agreed the categories it is often useful to have a reflective dialogue. A dialogue is a listening space where each individual can choose to share their insights so far and any themes that are starting to emerge from the conversations so far. Inexperienced facilitators often miss this stage and move straight onto voting on the issues and this can mean that some of the more complex grey areas remain unexplored.

The next option might be to prioritise the issues and one very simple way of identifying which are the most important issues for the group is by using a technique called Multi Voting. I have tended to use multi coloured dots so that each person can record their vote on each item at the same time and not have to see their score recorded on a chart.

The number of dots can be allocated by taking the total number of categories eg 6 and allocating 6 points to the top choice, 5 to the next point…., this requires 16 dots per person. However if there are more categories than this and lots of people, then this can become very messy in which case it is often recommended that the number of items are divided by 3 and then dots allocated so there is enough to put one dot on 2/3rds of the items. I often propose that a maximum of 3 dots can be placed on each item.

Our attempt at multi voting

I wondered what other facilitators were doing on the topic and I discovered lots of different methods. One other method I liked was from an organisation called Dotmocracy and they have printed sheets you could use. I can see how these could be combined with the post it notes to really gain some insights from larger groups on the issues: http://www.dotmocracy.org/sheets

Then I came across this blog discussion on the use of dots and I realised that this was a really big area of debate amongst facilitators. http://www.albany.edu/cpr/gf/resources/Voting_with_dots.html

My conclusions are to stick with a process that makes pragmatic sense at the time and the facilitator will need to make a judgement call. All the attempts to make a science out of the number of dots looked flawed in practice and I am drawn back to the title of Tony Mann’s book: “Facilitation: an art, a science or skill or all three” and would conclude that this is a great example of “all three”

Facilitation – an Art, Science, Skill – or all three? Build your expertise in facilitation

Recently I was watching a rerun episode of “3d Rock From The Sun,” a serial science fiction situation comedy which originally aired on NBC from 1996-2001. It starred John Lithgow as (High Commander) Dr. Dick Solomon, Kristen Johnston as (Security Officer, Lt.) Sally Solomon, French Stewart as (Communications Officer) Harry Solomon, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt as (Information Officer) Tommy Solomon. The characters they portray have come from another more advanced planet and the hilarity with which they encounter the nuances of behavior on Earth though blunted, is frequently hilarious, and serves as the basis for the zany show.

In this 2d season episode #22, entitled “Will Work For Dick” which originally aired May 4, 1997, Dick’s secretary Nina quits, and Dick hires Harry, whose poor skills become Dick’s source of frustration, while Nina tells Harry to fight back. Meanwhile, to advance her understanding of the human experience, Sally decides to attend a children’s ballet school to re-live the childhood she never had.

As usual, in the summary closing scene, they all are seated upon the roof to reflect upon the day’s events. In this episode Tommy, Harry and Sally are seated on the roof, while Dick joins them shortly.

Sally: Gyp – all I wanted was a normal childhood but Dick just couldn’t let me have one! I felt so humiliated.

Tommy: Hmm… I bet when you looked out into that audience and you didn’t see Dick there that you just felt like your heart was torn out.

Sally: Yeah.

Tommy: Yeah… and you felt betrayed and alone.

S: Uh huh.

T: …and you’ll never trust anyone ever again.

S: Exactly!

T: Yeah. Well, congratulations Sally! You’ve just taken your first step into childhood.

S: I have?

T: Yeah… and now you take all this emotional damage and let it feed your adult neuroses.

Harry: And the best part is that if you ever kill a guy or balloon up to 400 pounds, you get to blame Dick.

Dick: (off screen, and climbing onto the roof) Sally!! Sally… Sally! I am so sorry I missed your recital!

S: Yeah, you did. Umm, thanks, Dick.

Dick: What for?

S: Well, you’ve given the most precious gift of all…. emotional baggage. Thanks.

D: You’re welcome.

S: Now I gotta’ go eat.

D: I’m sorry Harry… I thought I didn’t need anyone. I thought I could do everything by myself. It turns out I was wrong. I do need someone… just not you.

H: Well, it takes a big man to admit that. And I guess it just goes to show you that you can’t work with your family.

T: But technically, we’re not a family. We’re more like coworkers.

D: Well… it goes to show you can’t work with your coworkers.

T: Isn’t that the motto of the Postal Service?

How ironic is it that within this humorous exchange we see the fallacy of blaming others and not accepting responsibility?

Birthed from pain, blame avoids responsibility. The fallacy that we are self-sufficient feeds failure. Yet  our natural tendency to avoid pain curiously drives us toward pain through avoidance of responsibility, which in turn feeds failure and absence.

It’s a vicious cycle. It’s a destructive cycle. But, it’s part and parcel of our shared human experience.

Calling honesty… come in honesty.

Is there anybody out there?