Following up on my last post, here are a few thoughts on Gordon Van Gelder’s benchmark for excellent fantasy:

“A fantasy story that reaches the level of myth.”

For me, successful fantasy always at least brushes along the borders of myth, and the best fantasy plunges right in.  What does that mean? Let me start by defining what I mean by myth.

A myth is a sacred story that has significance that is far deeper and more meaningful than its surface events and characters. Joseph Campbell once called myth the doorway through which the inexhaustible energies of the cosmos enter human consciousness (paraphrasing because I can’t find the exact quote; sorry!). Myth or sacred story is the way we humans try to understand the nature of the universe and the divine (God or gods or the Way or chi or whatever), as well as our own nature and our relationship to the cosmos.

While good science fiction tends to deal with matters of technology and society,  good fantasy goes right to the meaning-of-life stuff: “Who are we?” “Why are we here?” “What is God or the universe trying to do to us?” and most interesting in many fantasies: “Who are those other creatures, and what does it mean to share the world with them?”

(Bad fantasy or science fiction often just sets the characters down in a stereotypical fantasy/Sf environment – dragons! elves! space ships! ion cannons! – for some kind of adventure that’s supposed to be a big sweeping epic. Nothing wrong with this approach for popcorn entertainment as long as it’s executed with some style. However, failing to lay a solid conceptual foundation will always limit the scope of the story.)

I think achieving myth starts with reading a lot of myths and stories, and from there, being able to put mythical beings or objects into a story, or being able to invent good ones of your own. But it only starts there.

For me, the real benchmark is to capture the otherness of mythical elements: the unexpected, the unexplainable, the weird and sometimes frightening and completely beyond rationality; an otherness that you can recognize but can never completely assimilate even to the reality of the world you’re building, let alone the one we all seem to live in.

So here’s a short list of some fantasy creators that achieve myth on a regular basis:

Terry Pratchett’s Discworld. I’m long overdue to be writing a “Reading” post on the Discworld. No one is better than Sir Terry at combining contemporary genres (mystery, horror, satire, romance) with comedy, folklore and genuine myth. My favorite Discworld novel, Hogfather, has more layers to it than the Tooth Fairy has teeth.

Lois McMaster Bujold’s Chalion is inhabited by gods, demons and animal spirits that interact with, and sometimes possess people in ways that you’d never expect but that feel absolutely true. (I discussed these books in more depth in an early post that you can find by following my Reading tag)

Nina Kiriki Hoffman. In the short stories and novels I’ve read so far, the main character has some natural magical power; that is, the power is closely related to the natural world.  And what is more mythical than nature?

Greg Keyes. His first pair of fantasies drew on Northeast Asian mythology; his latest tetralogy, Kingdoms of Thorn and Bone is supposedly “Northern European fantasy” but you won’t find any of the familiar fantasy creatures in it. The world feels enormously old, with powers and forces sliding by in the shadows, or breaking into the light to scare you to pieces.

Charles de Lint writes urban fantasy about people whose hometowns overlap with ancient worlds: the gods and spirits of Native American myth, the fairy courts of the Celtic lands, or even stranger characters that, as far as I know, spring from his own imagination.

I’ve already posted a great deal about my favorites, Neil Gaiman, Ursula K Le Guin, and of course Tolkien. Just follow their tags to see what I’ve already said about how each of them uses myth in their writing.

Well, good to see that everyone is looking for fun lists for holiday shopping! The “30 Books Every Writer Should Own” blog entry spiked my average reader count for this blog; it was the highest single-day total yet. I thank you all very much!

I’ve already received some wonderful comments, but this one leads to today’s blog: “What books were hardest for you to keep off the Top 30 list?”

Since I took 50 books that have touched me deeply in my writing career – or life – and pared them down to 30, I thought I’d run out the list of the 20 “Very Honorable Mentions.” Keep in mind: this list is incredibly subjective. All of these books belong on every writer’s short list of titles. They continue the theme of how I believe writers should read – roundly, fully, deeply, and interactively.

The Very Honorable Mentions (again, not in any particular order):

The Faith of a Writer: Life, Craft, Art, by Joyce Carol Oates: If you could mate pure, distilled wisdom and vision with the intimacy of a deep romance, this book would be the offspring. What a treasure, by one of the greatest writers on the planet.

The Artful Edit: On the Practice of Editing Yourself, by Susan Bell: For most writers, the hardest part of the process comes after you finish writing the draft – editing your work. In my opinion, this is the best book on editing. It contains tips, strategies, counsel from the greatest book editors of the past century, and interviews with top-selling authors. The author’s personal touch makes self-editing very inviting … and I invite you in, because these days, books need to go to publishers very well edited.

Zen in the Art of Writing, by Ray Bradbury: Zen connotes space, presence, serenity, succinctness. All of which you find in Bradbury’s prolific writing style. I was at a signing when science fiction’s greatest living writer toured this book 20 years ago … I’ll never forget his encouraging comments to me. This book remain a treasure.

On Being a Writer, Bill Strickland, ed: I kept this in the Top 30 list until the last moment. A great collection of conversations with our finest authors, who discuss voice, technique and process openly, in a way that every writer can absorb.

Prism of the Night: A Biography of Anne Rice, by Katherine Ransland: One of the most poignant biographies of a living literary figure. Ransland’s book itself is art. It also dives all the way into how tragedy, turmoil, deep suffering and vision created the author who did the impossible – rewrote the legacy of vampires.

The Power of Myth, by Joseph Campbell: We need to be in contact with the mythologies that formed the archetypes we use in our writing. We also need to know the art of myth-making as storytellers. This book, first published in conjunction with a PBS series in the late 1980s, brings myth into the present. Worthy companion: Mythology, by Edith Hamilton.

Keeping a Journal You Love, by Sheila Bender: A wonderful friend in the writing-teaching community, Sheila has dedicated the last 20 years of her life to helping writers improve their craft. She’s written several books, but this brings home the essence of what it takes to be a compelling writer: Going deep inside, taking your life experiences and world view with you, and percolating wisdom and compassion through journaling. This book erases writer’s block – fast.

The Poet and the Poem, by Judson Jerome: 35 years after its publication, this Writer’s Digest Book remains a landmark on the craft of poetry.

Writing Begins with the Breath, by Laraine Herring: This new release borrows from William Carlos Williams’ philosophy of poetry, which launched the Beat poets movement. Part Buddhism, part instructional … a fine book.

Dare to be a Great Writer: 329 Keys to Powerful Fiction, by Leonard Bishop: Another Writer’s Digest Book, this is one of the most thought-out breakdowns of the fiction writing technique and process.

The Rise of the Creative Class, by Richard Florida: A sociological book on how society, culture, education, timing and the ’60s conspired to form perhaps the most diverse and creative group of people in U.S. history – us. Invaluable reading for better understanding of the Boomers and Gen X – the core book-buying public.

The Literary Journalists, Norman O. Sims, ed.: Another book about the New Journalism movement, which launched the personal memoir and narrative non-fiction as we now know it.

The Aquarian Conspiracy, by Marilyn Ferguson: A classic from its publication in 1979, this book breaks out the sociological network of community, technology, spiritual living and environmental consideration that are front-page news items today. I consider it a “must” because it reminds us of our responsibilities to society as creatives.

The Life of Poetry, by Muriel Rukeyser: A beautifully rendered part-memoir, part-instructional discussion of poetry by one of the greatest writers of the mid-20th century.

Journal of a Solitude, by May Sarton: As those who have been in my workshops know, I am BIG on journaling. This wonderful book is best read by a fire, with a cup of coffee or tea, quiet music … and a journal alongside. Because you will be sparked by the writings of the ever-wise May Sarton.

On Death and Dying, by Elisabeth Kubler-Ross: I realize this classic is a very unusual choice, but let’s face it – the vast majority of novels include death, many of us touch the subject in our writing, and we all face it. Why on this list? Because, when I edit books and read end-of-life scenes, it is very easy to see who has experienced them with family or friends, and who has not. This book will bring greater authenticity to your writing. Plus, everyone should read this book.

The Art of the Personal Essay, Philip Lopate, ed.: This should be a staple in every aspiring and practicing essay writer’s home library – from ages 10 to 100. The variety of essays, and informative lead-ins, make this one of the best edited and selected writing anthologies ever.

The Best Writing on Writing, Jack Heffron, ed.: Jack is a former Writer’s Digest Books editor who occasionally teaches writing workshops. He also compiles very good anthologies. This annual release offers plenty of great pieces for writers looking for a tip or some inspiration.

The Alphabetic Labyrinth, by Johanna Drucker: Writing is conveyed by letters. This masterpiece shares the history of alphabets worldwide, how cultures intermingled to create new alphabets, and how the written word spread. The book is beautiful rendered and illustrated, and is one of several wonderful studies of language and the word by this author.

And finally, one of my own:
The Write Time: 366 Exercises to Fulfill Your Writing Life, by Robert Yehling: It’s very hard for me to include myself in any list, but I’m just sharing the vibe I’ve received from readers and reviewers since its publication in September. The exercises in this book are both stand-alone and mini-series pieces that cover every genre and leave plenty of opportunity for personal interpretation. You won’t find a more diverse writing exercise book.

“People say that what we’re all seeking is a meaning for life. I don’t think that’s what we’re really seeking. I think that what we’re seeking is an experience of being alive, so that our life experiences on the purely physical plane will have resonances within our own innermost being and reality, so that we actually feel the rapture of being alive. That’s what it’s all finally about, and that’s what these clues help us to find within ourselves.”

“Myths are clues?”

“Myths are clues to the spiritual potentialities of the human life.”

“What we’re capable of knowing and experiencing within?”

“Yes.”

I found some daily musings I wrote last spring, back when I was toying with starting a blog.  Back when I wondered if I would have enough material.  Ha!This is one of them….

May 22, 2009 Follow Your Bliss

The mythologist and scholar Joseph Campbell author of a Hero with a Thousand Faces and co-author with Bill Moyers Power of Myth, among other books, interview and lectures said (somewhere, I don’t know where) now famously, “Follow you bliss.” So what is bliss? I, personally find it in all the wondrous places you might think that evoke poetry, misty eyes, and fluttering hearts. My spirits rising above me, floating in the trees as I quietly walk a forest path. My senses hum with the smell of earth in my hands as I plant our spring garden with my little boys at my side, spraying the hose, digging the holes for Mommy. A fresh sheet of paper. A glass of wine on the deck with my husband. A full sheet of paper.

But I gotta admit I also experience bliss, or at very least a quick tickle in my soft spots in other earthly things as well. I’ve got the sexiest damn pair of red shoes that ever walked the earth. They instantly take off ten pounds and I feel like queen of that tropic island Wonder Woman was spawned upon. You know the one where they capture the men and simply pick one for their sexual pleasure and the minor consequence of reproduction? And can I tell you how many hours I spent just sitting at my kitchen table after we re-did our kitchen, just staring at the cabinets and the counter-tops and the new floors and breathing in the fumes of fresh paint? And please, if dining out could be a sport…I’d like to be the gold medalist, MVP, World Cup holding champ. Does this make me materialistic? Does this make me bad or not spiritual? Can I be both spiritual and enjoy the material pleasures of life?

Elizabeth Lesser’s book The Seeker’s Guide: Making Your Life a Spiritual Adventure references Campbell’s bliss statement as well, but also points out that Campbell referred to bliss in the context of sacrifice. Sacrifice? Oh, God, no! Run! There’s nothing more I dread in life than a life depleted, bound, stripped. No. She goes on to say “While spirituality is about bliss, it also is about balance. Without some degree of sacrifice for the greater good, spiritual self-discovery eventually leads to plain old self-indulgence.” Okay. I think I get that. For example, I know many women in the suburbs who spend the majority of their day exercising, getting massages, nails, hair, shopping, decorating, and coordinating the hired care of their beautiful homes. They might say they love their life this way. Is this life blissful? They might say they love it and it makes them very happy. Is it spiritual? They may say, yes, some of them attend church and volunteer in the community. It’s not for me to say. But I guess the balance thing comes in for me here. And since, I shouldn’t say what I might guess about some of these women that perhaps their lives aren’t as balanced between the materials rewards of the world and say the more organic forms of happiness like discovering your talents and how they fill you up as you learn from others. Or how these talents and learning can attract others of similar passions. Or how these talents or callings can lead you to spreading that joy to others. Or the ecstasy of being. And presence. And not “doing” at all. I can only observe them and think what I would prefer for myself.

 I recently did an interview with a woman who practiced and taught others about the principles of Voluntary Simplicity. The concept is as it sounds. You chose to simplify your life in ways that suit you and your family so that you have more time and money to dedicate to the authentic ventures in your life. One of the things she said that struck me as so honest and so true was something to the effect that she didn’t go to fancy restaurants like she used to but still felt a bit of envy when she passed them and saw the fancy cars. And she still likes to look pretty and get dressed up. So, she doesn’t completely deprive herself of material pleasures. She doesn’t deny her desires.

I get this. I see some of the kitchens in the homes around me and I’m like “Wow!” I love to cook and I imagine myself entertaining in an evening gown, surrounded by all of my favorite people and a few new additions. Yet, when it came to doing our own kitchen, we were only able to do a few updates. We had a flood in our home that came on the heals of my husband’s layoff. We could have gone into our home equity to finance a Mack-daddy reno but, we decided it was best to do what we could given the insurance policy and our savings. That resulted in keeping and painting our cabinets, shopping at Sears scratch and dent for appliances. We kept our microwave, kept the dated lighting fixtures, saving thousands of dollars. We chose not to sacrifice the financial integrity of our family nor my husband’s heart health for a supped-up kitchen. Do I still want new lighting? Yes. But it’s time will come. Or not. And going out for dinner. We do it occasionally. And we go to a nice place usually. I insist on going somewhere we haven’t been before because, for me, it is also about the adventure and the exploring and it makes me feel like I am getting away with my husband. But we do it every couple to few months; we trade babysitting with friends, and we eat Campbell’s soup and grilled cheese throughout the week. I’m fully aware that this money spent on dinner pulls away from new lighting, they kayak my husband has been saving for a year, and the tree house we’d like to build, but it’s all about balance. My red shoes. Girls! They were worth every penny and I wear them every chance I get! I’ve never had a moment of buyer’s remorse. They don’t pull from the time I spend in my garden with my boys. They don’t take me away from my writing or my pleasure in reading. We may have to eat a few more cans of soup because of them, but, I personally enjoyed watching the boys spell funny words in their Alphabits and stretching the toasted sandwich halves to see who could get the longest stretch of Velveeta. Who knows, maybe I’ll really achieve true bliss one day and where my red shoes to dinner with my family as we dine on condensed soup in my kitchen under the ugly lighting. This could be the ultimate form of self-indulgence.

People say that what we’re seeking is a meaning for life.
I don’t think that’s what we’re really seeking.
I think that what we’re seeking is an experience of being alive,
so that we actually feel the rapture of being alive.

~Joseph Campbell~

The words below, have been my “pick me up” for a very long time. Not only do they lift up my mood but also my spirit. I am instantly in another parallel world where all is just simply beautiful. When you read or hear them you will know too. These words describe what  I exactly feel is the RAPTURE of BEING ALIVE as Campbell above states it so beautifully

Lyrics to “I’m Alive” by Celine Dion

Mmmmm … Mmmmm …
I get wings to fly
Oh, oh … I’m alive … Yeah

When you call on me
When I hear you breathe
I get wings to fly
I feel that I’m alive

When you look at me
I can touch the sky
I know that I’m alive

When you bless the day
I just drift away
All my worries die
I’m glad that I’m alive

You’ve set my heart on fire
Filled me with love
Made me a woman on clouds above

I couldn’t get much higher
My spirit takes flight
‘Cause I am alive

When you call on me
(When you call on me)
When I hear you breathe
(When I hear you breathe)
I get wings to fly
I feel that I’m alive
(I am alive)

When you reach for me
(When you reach for me)
Raising spirits high
God knows that…

That I’ll be the one
Standing by through good and through trying times
And it’s only begun
I can’t wait for the rest of my life

When you call on me
(When you call on me)
When you reach for me
(When you reach for me)
I get wings to fly
I feel that…

When you bless the day
(When you bless, you bless the day)
I just drift away
(I just drift away)
All my worries die
I know that I’m alive

I get wings to fly
God knows that I’m alive

What does “Being Alive” mean to you?

Did You Like this post? Posts are updated thrice a week! Get them emailed to your inbox or subscribe via RSS.

Sharing Is Caring

Share via Facebook/Twitter/Stumble/Digg etc..

If you ever waver in your belief in the importance of the work of the artist, read what Joseph Campbell said in The Power of Myths:

“Myths must be kept alive.  The people who can keep them alive are artists of one kind or another.  The function of the artist is the mythologization of the environment and the world.”

Pescare sulla schiena della balena è una frase coniata da Joseph Cambell, psicologo e allievo di Jung, nei confronti di Freud il padre della psicanalisi.

J. Cambell sosteneva che Freud – al quale va riconosciuto il gran merito di aver scoperto la presenza dell’inconscio – andasse alla ricerca dei “pesciolini della sessualità” per capire la psiche umana, senza rendersi conto di essere seduto sulla “balena”, archetipo dello Spirito immerso nel mare infinito dell’esistenza.

Questo aforisma si adatta perfettamente ad una rappresentazione simbolica dell’atteggiamento del Leader.

Il leader va a pesca di pesciolini chiamati obiettivi, di pesci di media taglia che si chiamano scopi e si occupa della pastura incessante dei pesci pregiati: i principi. Egli non dimentica, però, di far attenzione a dove si siede. Non si dimentica della propria anima, si cura di quello che non vede con gli occhi e non fa parte dei quotidiani obblighi esistenziali.

Ogni leader cerca la balena a modo suo. Non è importante la tecnica di pesca o se la navigazione avviene su un bragozzo d’altri tempi o su uno yacht della Ferretti. L’importante è la ricerca che può realizzarsi in mille modi: attraverso la meditazione, la lettura dei migliori autori sul miglioramento personale, la curiosità per i meccanismi della mente, la destrutturazione dell’ego, l’amore incondizionato verso il prossimo, l’attenzione costante verso le domande importanti della vita o un qualsiasi percorso spirituale e di miglioramento del proprio potenziale.

E quando trova la balena? Come si comporta? Cosa fa il leader?
Quando la trova non si siede sulla sua schiena a pescare insignificanti pesciolini.

Come Pinocchio in un’improbabile iniziazione dei nostri giorni, il leader si tuffa nel ventre del maestoso cetaceo alla ricerca del babbo, per uscirne completamente trasformato: da burattino di legno a bambino in carne e ossa, pronto a smettere di raccontarsela.

L’archetipo della balena che s’immerge nella profondità dell’oceano, è il simbolo dell’avventura dell’uomo all’interno del proprio sé, alla scoperta del nucleo nascosto nella profondità dell’esperienza umana, garanzia di una ciclica gestazione che lo fa rinascere ad una nuova vita attraverso il magico contatto con il suo cuore antico, ogni volta che riprova a respirare con la natura.

Il viaggio-avventura nell’antro della balena è una opportunità che abbiamo sempre, ad ogni istante, tutte le volte che decidiamo di guardarci dentro per dare la migliore risposta alla situazione presente. Tutte le volte che invece di imprecare contro gli altri, contro la sfiga o peggio ancora contro noi stessi, decidiamo di prenderci la responsabilità dei nostri comportamenti e delle nostre re-azioni.

Il leader coglie l’opportunità e, come Giona il profeta, viene vomitato e resuscitato dalle fauci nell’onda della quotidianità: in famiglia, al lavoro, nelle relazioni; sempre più abile a dare risposte, a guidare gli altri, a comprendere le proprie pulsioni, a modellare successi e ad imparare dal proprio mondo emotivo grazie alla straordinaria avventura introspettiva.

Voglio terminare questo post, forse un po’ troppo pretenzioso, con un altro aforisma di Campbell: “ il grande interrogativo è se sarai capace di dire un sì convinto alla tua avventura”.

Francesco Perticari

“Nossos símbolos foram neutralizados pelas religiões institucionais que interpretam esses símbolos historicamente. Símbolos que remetem ao mistério da psique ou alma foram, ao contrário, interpretados como referências a eventos históricos reais que, como nos informam os estudos modernos, não ocorreram. Enquanto as pessoas puderam pensar que houve um Jardim do Éden com uma serpente que falou a Adão e Eva e que nesse Jardim aconteceu um incidente semelhante a uma queda, tornando necessária uma redenção para nos recuperar, e enquanto as pessoas puderam pensar que houve um dilúvio mundial, uma Torre de Babel, um Abraão, um Êxodo do Egito, uma edição dos Dez Mandamentos confiados fisicamente a Moisés no topo do monte Sinai, seguida de uma segunda edição a ele entregue depois de haver despedaçado as pequenas tábuas da primeira; enquanto as pessoas foram capazes de conceber e aceitar essas coisas como eventos históricos, puderam também aceitar esses símbolos e se mover com eles através de suas igrejas e templos, bem como suas tradições religiosas. Tão logo, contudo, as pessoas começam a compreender que é muito duvidoso que tais eventos tenham ocorrido algum dia, os símbolos perdem seu cunho histórico e sua energia emocional é, com isso, exaurida e reduzida.”

Joseph Campbell

Um mal gerado pelo literalismo bíblico. Narrativas que tinham acima de tudo significado espiritual e psicológico, perderam esse significado ao se obrigar as pessoas a acreditar que se tratava de narrativas de histórias totalmente reais. Ao se concluir que muitos desses eventos nunca aconteceram, e, se aconteceram, não foi exatamente como estão narrados na bíblia, as pessoas acabam enxergando que sua religião está desconectada da realidade ao obrigá-las a crer em fatos que jamais aconteceram e, para isso, negar o que a história e a ciência dizem, e acabam se afastando. Um dia, os literalistas bíblicos vão perceber que com isso, deram tiros nos próprios pés e destruíram a religião que supostamente julgavam defender.

Final de domingo, filhos na cama (ufa!). Fiquei o dia inteiro refletindo sobre o que vi no TEDxSP ontem, o evento mais incrível que participei nos últimos tempos. Talvez o melhor que eu tenha participado até hoje. Não consigo lembrar de outro assim. Desde que acordei estive pensando no que poderia escrever. Então, hoje não vai ter foto, mas vai ter texto. (Muito texto, confiando que vocês vão até o final acreditando na máxima de que não existe texto longo, existe, sim, texto chato!)

Não é fácil cuidar de dois filhos pequenos no final de semana! Só consegui bater o olho nos jornais do dia agora. Nada de interessante. Ia olhar as semanais, mas decidi que não. As revistas semanas são muito factuais. Demais até. Há tempos que não conseguem nos levar para o futuro, levar nossas mentes adiante. Vou investir meu tempo no futuro, escrevendo minhas impressões sobre o TEDxSP (ao longo do texto, coloquei em itálico alguns dos tweets que enviei durante o evento, assim como coloco também os endereços no Twitter dos palestrantes – @nomedo palestrante).

O evento me fez pensar, repensar, reler e me entusiasmou com as possibilidades do Brasil. Muita coisa interessante, muito combustível para a mente. Pessoas das quais eu nunca tinha ouvido falar, fazendo coisas incríveis! Teve o publicitário Danilo Mendes, que apresentou a máquina que tira água do ar e teve a química Milena Boniolo (@milena_anelim), que mostrou como a casca da banana pode tirar metais pesados da água. Valério Dornelles mostrou o case da Tecnologys, inovador em construção civil, com tijolos inspirados no Lego e Anysio Campos mostrou o incrível Obvio, carro movido a eletricidade (brasileiro!)

A designer Fernanda Viegas (@viegasf) mostrou o site Many Eyes, que ela co-desenvolveu com a IBM e que ajuda a visualizar dados, a filtrar a quantidade absurda de informação que a gente recebe. Sem dúvidas, vamos precisar de algo assim, até para enxergar as coisas de um jeito novo, que vai fazer muita diferença no mundo que teremos pela frente, com temas novos em pauta, coisas que ainda precisaremos conhecer melhor.

Como a bioinformática, por exemplo. Sandro Souza falou sobre isso, sobre o avanço nos estudos do Genoma. Ele é um dos pesquisadores brasileiros mais reconhecidos no meio e trouxe questões intrigantes sobre o futuro.

**Sandro Souza no #tedxsp. Genoma e Bioinformática vão mudar vidas nos próximos anos. Desde 1995 já deciframos genomas de espécies.

**Em 2001, custava US$ 3 bilhões p/ sequenciar um genoma. Em 2009, chegou a 50 mil. E deve chegar a 3 mil p/ vc sequenciar o seu. S. Souza #tedxsp

**Logo, logo, você vai chegar no médico c/ pendrive c/ genoma e ele vai dar remédio. Não há proteção legal para info genética. S. Souza #tedxsp

Além de criatividade por todo o lado, alguns temas chamaram a atenção pela onipresença: educação, redes sociais e bicicleta (!).

Vou começar pelo último, que é mais fácil de analisar.

Bicicleta (!)

Além da palestra do designer Flavio Deslandes, que criou uma bicicleta com quadro de bambu, que de tão resistente chegou a quebrar a máquina de testes, o médico Paulo Saldiva recebeu destaque por ser um ciclista desde os tempos de faculdade, quando ia para a USP, pedalando. Saldiva fez um paralelo interessante entre a doença do planeta e doenças humanas.

A lógica dele foi a seguinte: pensemos que cada país é um órgão e que as pessoas são as células do planeta. Estamos com febre (aquecimento global), viciados em uma droga (petróleo), com obstrução das vias áereas (trânsito caótico), com infecção renal (acúmulo de lixo, pois não conseguimos eliminar os dejetos), com alguma flatulência (tornados que estão cada vez mais freqüentes) e com disfunção cognitiva (alguns neurônios – cientistas – dizem que o planeta vai esquentar graças ao homem, outros dizem que é algo normal). Fora essa brincadeira genial, Saldiva contribui com a precisa afirmação de que a poluição deveria ser considerada problema de saúde pública.

Cerca de 4 mil pessoas morrem por ano em São Paulo em função da poluição, ao passo que menos de mil pessoas morrem em função de AIDS e cerca de 500 por tuberculose. Tem ou não tem razão?

Osvaldo Stella, doutor em ecologia, também pedalou. Abandonou um curso de engenharia para cruzar de bicicleta a Transamazônica com dois sujeitos que não conhecia.

Stella foi responsável por um dos momentos mais engraçados do dia. Ele deve ter sido o décimo palestrante. Entrou ‘perdido’ no site, dizendo que não sabia mais o que ia falar e pedindo desculpas para quem tinha feito o power point, que ele não ia mais usar.

E se pôs a falar de sua vida, rodando como se fosse um peão, atordoado com tudo que tinha ouvida até então, nas suas palavras. Acabou falando da Iniciativa Verde, a primeira ONG de compensação ambiental do Brasil. Neutralizar os efeitos do padrão de vida é importante, mas não é suficiente, vale lembrar. Melhor é diminuir a chamada ‘pegada ecológica’.

**Osvaldo Stella é a surpresa engraçada do dia. Largou engenharia e se transformou pedalando na transamazônica. #tedxsp

**Impacto da crise financeira diminuiu mais a emissão de gases de efeito estufa do que o Protocolo de Quito. Osvaldo Stella #tedxsp

Redes Sociais

O outro assunto que rendeu pano para manga foi redes sociais. Augusto de Franco (@augustodefranco) foi o grande palestrante sobre o tema. Apresentou conceitos técnicos, a origem do relacionamento em rede e mostrou como se faz.

**Augusto de Franco sobre redes sociais. #tedxsp Diz que a Matrix existe!, interligando todos nós agora. Social é o q está entre as pessoas.

**Paul Baran, da RAND. 3 organizações d redes: centralizada, descentralizada e distribuída. Boa fonte p/ redes. #tedxsp (via @augustodefranco)

Luiz Algarra, (@lalgarra) designer de redes sociais, da Papagallis, entre outras, também falou sobre redes sociais. Achei a palestra dele viajante pacas. Tinha o nome de Solilóquio Reflexivo. Falou de redes sociais, de amor, física quântica, misturou tudo. Disse até que o amor era empírico metafísico.  Valeu para conhecer mais um doidão no mundo. Algarra fez uma pergunta interessante: “Eu quero querer o que quero?”

**”Somos humanos porque percemos nossa humanidade, com base no cuidar, no fluir da emoção.” Papo bicho-grilo total. Tá legal. @lalgarra #tedxsp

O outro que falou sobre redes sociais foi o Silvio Meira (@srlm), grande cara. Silvio tem domínio do palco e sempre rabisca os pensamentos no laptop tablet (lembra dele?) causando um efeito interessante. A melhor sacada de Silvio foi dizer que educação deve ir de ‘just in case’ para ‘just in time’. Ou seja, aprender o que se usa. Ou faz algum sentido aprender números imaginários para quem, como eu, é um jornalista?

**Mamíferos vivem em média 2milhões de anos como espécie. Seres humanos já vivem há 200mil anos e tentando se matar logo! @slrm #tedxsp|

**Quem acha que já viu tudo em possibilidades de computação, ainda não viu nada. Próximos 25 anos vao criar oportunidades de cooperação e educação.

**@slrm diz que dormiu em 75% das aulas de graduação, passou e ganhou duas hérnias de disco. +1 crítica p/ educação. #tedxsp

**Humanos, gregários, coletivos e conectados viverão na rede para sempre, pois é onde sempre estiveram. Redes sociais forever. @srlm #tedxsp

Educação

A revista Economist publicou uma matéria há algum tempo falando que o grande fator responsável por mudar o padrão de desenvolvimento de uma nação é a educação, seguida pelo crédito. Os psicologistas costumam dizer que o primeiro passo para resolver um problema é reconhecê-lo. Pois bem, juntando Economist, psicologia e TEDxSP, chego à conclusão que podemos ter esperança. Praticamente todo palestrante falou sobre educação em algum momento de sua palestra, quando não era o tema principal.

Dona Adozinda Kuhlman, educadora, 92 anos, (escolhida via twitter a palestrante mais fofa do evento) mostrou uma mente para lá de afiada. Ficou a certeza de que uma mente ativa ajuda a saúde física. Ela ficou lá até às 22h e a palestra dela foi de uma lucidez impressionante para quem tem 92 anos. O conhecimento é a pílula da juventude!

**Dona Adozinda, educadora de 92 anos, diz q BR é terra jovem, c/ mto a oferecer ao mundo. Matèria-prima somos todos nós e as ideias #tedxsp

**Dona Adozinda: “Minha profissão tem a função de alicerçar as outras profissões”. #tedxsp

**Consciência s/ seu papel é fundamental para satisfação no trabalho. Dona Adozinda dá show de lucidez aos 92 anos. #Tedxsp

Guti Fraga, do Nós do Morro, também foi pela linha de educação. Fraga foi o responsável pela apresentação mais vibrante, emocionante do dia. O cara transpirava emoção em cada palavra e mostrou como o teatro ajuda na inserção social de pessoas que vivem na favela.

**”Malandragem é universal”, caiu a ficha de Guti Fraga no #tedxsp.

**Guti Fraga: “ninguém tem amor maior que esse: dar a sua vida para os outros”. #tedxsp via @mbtorres

Eduardo Moreira também falou sobre teatro e inserção social, ou educação via arte.

**Artigo de 1a necessidade para as pessoas é exercer ludicamente a vida delas. #tedxsp Eduardo Moreira

**Uso dos espaços públicos por viciados em crack é perigoso para a democracia pq vira lugar de ninguém. #tedxsp Eduardo Moreira

Samara Werner (@samarasa) do Instituto Oi Futuro, bateu na mesma tecla, de que precisamos investir em educação. Uma frase boa dela foi:

**Samara Werner cita Antonio Carlos Gomes da Costa:  Se cuidassémos da educação como da escalação brasileira, BR teria mto + a oferecer. #tedxsp

Ela também citou Einstein:

**A mente que se abre a uma nova ideia nunca volta ao seu tamanho original. Einstein via Samara Crespo #tedxsp

Ao final da palestra dela, fiquei com uma dúvida atroz:

**Pq todo mundo reclama da escola e como ensinamos, mas não conseguimos valorizar  iniciativas diferentes de educação? #tedxsp

A próxima a falar sobre educação foi Maria Alice Setubal, que mostrou projetos bacanas do CENPEC (Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas em Educação, Cultura e Ação Comunitária).  Projetos muito importantes para um país repleto de carências, como o Brasil, mas ainda na milenar batida de dar o peixe e não de ensinar a pescar.

Criatividade

E aqui chegamos num outro bloco que vou chamar de criatividade, embora em quase todas as palestras essa questão tenha estado presente. Meu amigo e jornalista Dênis Burgierman abriu o dia falando do imenso potencial criativo do Brasil, pois estamos cheios de problemas para resolver. Muita gente criativa + um monte de problemas = oportunidades de sobra!

Regina Casé (@reginacase) foi a certeza disso mostrando o seu incrível trabalho antropológica perseguindo a manifestação cultural da periferia. A partir do que descobriu no funk no Rio de Janeira, ela mergulhou em outras regiões suburbanas do mundo e descobriu que na Cidade do México, em Paris, e em Luanda (Angola), existem culturas tão forte quanto o funk, mas relegadas a segundo plano pela mídia.

Ronaldo Lemos, fundador do Overmundo e diretor da Creative Commons no Brasil, ainda que eu não tenha conseguido ver toda a palestra, também foi por essa linha, mostrando o impacto que o mundo underground tem nas redes sociais. Principalmente o que as Lan House fazem pela inclusão digital e como o tecnobrega ganhou o mundo digital.

O mundo 2.0 traz uma incógnita em relação à propriedade intelectual e pirataria. Regina Casé mostrou uma banda de Kuduristas (de Kuduro, um ritmo angolano que quer dizer “bunda dura”), que vendeu 15 000 CDs em 3 horas. E os impostos? Não se falou nada…

**Hermano Viana pelo funk foi chamado com DJMarlboro diversas vezes no departamento de polícia do RJ, mas nunca no de Cultura! Regina Casé no #tedxsp

**Regina Casé no #tedxsp mostrando variações do funk pelo mundo. Incrível! Trabalho antropológico de primeira. Já tem documentário?

**Expressão da periferia é estigmatizada, negligenciada pelo que é cultura, pelo que é popular. Periferia do mundo está à margem. No news. #tedxsp

**Brasil – vamos aproveitar o q já existe, não precisa inventar muito. BR pode ser vanguarda anti-gueto do mundo. #tedxsp Regina Casé

Fabio Barbosa foi incisivo. Lembrou que o Brasil precisa mesmo é fazer uma reforma de valores, que inclui, entre outras coisas, falar “ilegalidade” e não “informalidade” como costumamos dizer. A mensagem foi a mesma e consistente de sempre:  conjugar negócios e ética. No folder do evento, dizia que Fabio valoriza a pontualidade. Foi um dos somente quatro que cumpriu o tempo dado (15 ou 5 minutos, dependendo do palestrante) à risca.

(Achei interessante a visão de Tiago Dória sobre a palestra do Fabio Barbosa: “Gostei também da apresentação do Fabio Barbosa, presidente do Banco Santander. Ele não usou esse termo, mas falou sobre algo que acho bem importante na administração, que é a “teoria da janela quebrada“. É preciso resolver os problemas enquanto ainda são pequenos. Acredito que seja um conceito que se aplica muito bem não somente na administração pública, mas também na privada (gestão de plataformas de redes sociais, por exemplo). Bug em um sistema? Conserte o mais rápido possível.”)

O único estrangeiro do evento foi Casey Caplowe (@caseycaplowe), da revista Good, que debate formas interessantes de fazer o bem e transformar o mundo. Um dos slogans da revista é “América: deixe-a ou conserte-a.” Outro é para “people who give a damn”

**Casey Caplowe mostra gráficos interessantes q a www.good.is usa. Informação visual facilita mto p/ entender a dimensão dos problemas. #tedxsp

**You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the new model obsolete. Casey Caplowe

**Brasil pode sair de exportar coisas para exportar solucões como o sistema de ônibus de Curitiba. C Caplowe #tedxsp

**Street art do Brasil é muito valorizada nos EUA. Pq não é aqui? #tedxsp

**Muito pensamento legal, de gente bacana no #tedxsp. Pq a diversão e a arte ficam em 2o plano no mundo ’sério’ político-empresarial? Perda de tempo?

Sobre revista, Roberta Faria apresentou o modelo da Sorria, que conseguiu mais de 200 000 exemplares por edição com um modelo de negócios inovador, via doação social.

João Paulo Cavalcanti, da Box 1834, propôs que o Brasil deveria ter um sonho como nação. Falou do Poder do Mito, de Joseph Campbell (para quem não sabe, a base que George Lucas usou para construir a história de Guerra nas Estrelas. Cavalcanti lembrou que:

**Há 1 certo momento na trajetória de qquer nação q ela se sente escolhida. Nesse momento, ela dá o melhor e o pior de si. EMCioran #tedxsp

**Poder do mito de Joseph Campbell. O escolhido precisa estar preparado para entregar o que dele se espera. BR pode! JP Cavalcanti #tedxsp

**A nação que não possui um sonho não é uma nação. Dostoievski, 1871. Via JP Cavalcanti #tedxsp. Qual é o sonho brasileiro?

**Criatividade nasce da diversidade. Não ter raízes é a riqueza da nossa pobreza sob o ponto de vista de inovação. #tedxsp JP Cavalcanti

Realmente não sei se precisamos de um sonho ou de um projeto de país, mas que precisamos ter um norte, ah isso precisamos. Cavalcanti chegou a dizer que nosso sonho pode estar na festa, que pode ser nossa grande contribuição ao mundo, essa alegria de viver. Citou Regina Casé, que focou sua palestra no funk. Eu prefiro ficar fora dessa de festa, sob o risco de virar um grande Carnaval. Temos que ter alegria, mas não acho que festa deve ser central.

E acabamos o evento com um babalorixá, Carlos Buby, que falou na Filosofia Guaraciana, do índio caboclo Guaraci. Esse índio ajudou Buby a se encontrar na vida quando tinha 18 anos e essa experiência gerou essa filosofia.

**Carlos Buby: O homem jamais será reconhecido enquanto ele viver à sombra da luz de seu mestre. Ele precisa ser o seu próprio mestre. #tedxsp

**Carlos Buby: Veracidade da história não está diretamente ligada ao fato em si, mas a credibilidade de quem conta a história. #tedxsp

**Carlos Buby: É muito fácil saber o que desejamos, mas não o que necessitamos. #tedxsp

**Carlos Buby: Um país sem raízes é como árvore sem raízes: é só enfeite. #tedxsp

**Carlos Buby. Posso ñ acreditar em 1 só palavra do q vc diz, mas vou lutar com todas as forças para vc ter a liberdade de dizer o q diz. #tedxsp

A palestra de Buby foi carregada de auto-ajuda, mas seu simbolismo é muito maior. Representa o grande ecletismo que foi a seleção de palestrantes do primeiro evento TED independente realizado no Brasil.

Magistralmente realizado, diga-se de passagem. O formato é muito vencedor. Palestras de cinco e quinze minutos são infalíveis. A mensagem central de qualquer pessoa está nesse intervalo de tempo. Mais do que isso é variação sobre o mesmo tema. É claro que é importante falar mais sobre determinados assuntos. Mas em um evento, vale a máxima de que “menos é mais”. Resultado: 30 pessoas fizeram palestras incríveis.

Conversando com outros participantes, disse que não me senti surpreendido pelo que vi nos palestrantes. Estava esperando altos e baixos, como em qualquer evento. E isso aconteceu. Agora, me surpreendi, sim, com a realização.

Helder Araújo (@haraujo) e equipe fizeram um trabalho nota 10! Os mínimos detalhes foram perfeitos, o pré, o durante e o pós-evento, com um brinde para comemorar, foram de tirar o chapéu, como fez Silvio Meira no palco. Muitos elogiaram a surpreendente equação juventude + rigor na organização.

Helder não só conseguiu atrair grandes palestrantes, como ainda apresentou, com ajuda de outros Tedsters, como o impagável Bruno (@oestagiario), a vibração do TED original, da Califórnia. Todos que participaram entenderam melhor o que é e como participar.

Responde à pergunta do TED sobre o que o Brasil tem a oferecer ao mundo, fiquei com a certeza de que a efervescência criativa, baseada em nossa grande diversidade cultural é o nosso princiapl ativo. Senti um verdadeiro orgulho, uma brasilidade, muito presente no TEDxSP. A sensação de que o país tem um enorme potencial e que tem muita gente a fim de fazê-lo acontecer.

Fiel ao lema de compartilhar ideias, agora, teremos as 30 palestras disponibilizadas na íntegra, uma por semana: WWW.tedxsaopaulo.com.br.

Minha gratidão ao Helder Araújo, ao Dudu Camargo (@dudex) e a todos os demais envolvidos na organização do TEDxSP. Foi um grande presente de Natal antecipado. Uma ebulição de ideias, uma semente para formar uma comunidade com grande potencial. Que venha o próximo e um brinde ao conhecimento!

Sinopse: Isto És Tu, obra organizada , é uma seleção de conferências e ensaios de Joseph Campbell que aborda a tradição judaico-cristã, seus símbolos e metáforas e os interpreta à luz de seus notáveis conhecimentos da mitologia mundial. Principalmente, estabelece a diferença entre a interpretação literal e a metafórica da religião e reexamina a função essencial dos símbolos judaicos como chave para a compreensão da espiritualidade e da revelação mística.Nas seleções que compõem este volume, Joseph Campbell fornece uma base para o nosso entendimento da tradição judaico-cristã. Ele evoca, por exemplo, a qualidade viva do povo judeu e a riqueza simbólica do Velho Testamento, e com sensibilidade e respeito genuínos ilumina a majestade da crença e história judaicas. De modo idêntico, Joseph Campbell refamiliariza cristãos com a aura de significados que pairam sobre as narrativas religiosas do Novo Testamento. Como é nesta aura, isto é, nas conotações que, por sua natureza, se desenvolvem das metáforas, que na abordagem da história judaica deve ser encontrada a mais profunda significação das histórias da vida e obra de Jesus.

Isto és tu – Joseph Campbell

knowing where you are can be a very good thing…

i just came back from a long walk on this autumn day. the sun decided to come out and make us aware of its presence. while the trees showcased their variety. as i was walking in this newly fabricated neighbourhood that had interlocking streets, I realized, I was lost. I didn’t know where I was. I didn’t get that nervous, but got a bit concerned. Then I realized I wasn’t that far from home, and in the meantime I should just enjoy the journey. Once I came to that conclusion, before I knew it, I realized where I was.

But then it occurred to me, maybe knowing where I am is also a dangerous thing.

If I always know where I am, then there isn’t room to move out from where I know that I am. And this sense of knowing where you are comes with a deep soul-sense of safety and familiarity. I know the way and the way knows me. Sometimes, we think Christianity is about ‘knowing’ the way. Yet, like Tolkien once said, “Not all who wander are lost”. There is something beautiful and unsettling about mystery. But hopefully our curiosity for the unsettled part of it should invite us into a journey of the uknown. Sure, its scary when you get started, but man, all the things you will see. Mystery invites us deeper into the forests we have yet to see. Onto the mountains we have yet to climb. And into the skies we have yet to soar.

Sometimes the unknown can be things like the places we have come to fear the most. dreams we have yet to make into a reality. even our beliefs in God. or our belief in ourselves or others. we may have to let go of these things before we can move forward, this is where we move from the region of the unknown to the region of awe (C.S. Lewis) and find our bliss (Jospeh Campbell)…what is your bliss? And what will it take for you to get there??

One of the big questions that started Jung off on his own quest was ‘What is the myth you are living?’. He asked himself this question and found that he did not know.

“So in the most natural way, I took it upon myself to get to know ‘my’ myth, and I regarded this as the task of tasks”.

(quoted in the Portable Jung, edited by Joseph Campbell).

Communion is a 1989 drama/thriller film based on the book by Whitley Strieber with the same name, starring Christopher Walken and Frances Sternhagen. It tells a story of a family that experiences the extraterrestrial phenomenon while on vacation at a remote vacation home in the wilderness. According to Strieber, the story is a real-life account of his own encounter with “visitors”, with Walken playing the role of the author.

Trivia:

The Writer’s Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers (3rd Edition) by Christopher Vogler (Author), Michele Montez (Illustrator) is a valuable book for writing any story or script.  It is interesting and informative.  I advise you to read this valuable book if you are at all serious about writing.   It is based on the work by author Joseph Campbell who wrote Hero with a Thousand Faces and The Power of Myth with Bill Moyers. 

A book that the head of Acquisitions and Distribution at Alliance Atlantis suggested to me in 2001 (right before 9/11) was the book Making a Good Script Great 2nd Edition by Hollywood script consultant Linda Seger.  It is “A guide for writing and rewriting” scripts.  

If you are looking to be a writer in Canada then the book, The Canadian’s Writer’s Market 17th Edition, by Sandra B. Tooze is an important source.    Besides being a valuable tool for helping you be a writer in Canada, it

…offers practical advice on manuscript preparation and marketing, income tax for the freelancer, copyright, and libal law.  (Please see my post Protecting your Script).

After the more leisurely-paced episode Senate Spy (and then a three-week break), The Clone Wars has returned with action galore in Landing at Point Rain. This is a 22-minute slice of intensity from a larger war epic — think the D-Day landing sequence from Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan crossed with Ridley Scott’s Black Hawk Down — and it opens a four-part story arc that will continue in the coming weeks. (Senate Spy essentially functioned as a prelude.)

The war returns to Geonosis

With the earlier discovery of a new droid foundry on Geonosis, Generals Skywalker, Kenobi and Mundi lead a landing party to take down the shield generator protecting the foundry, ultimately hoping to destroy the facility and capture Geonosian leader Poggle the Lesser. But things don’t exactly go as planned, and Anakin Skywalker and Ki-Adi-Mundi must journey to the rendezvous point on foot, fending-off legions of armed Geonosians in the process.

There isn’t a clear, direct link between the fortune cookie and the episode this week (“Believe in yourself or no one else will”) though it is a truism that is particularly relevant to leaders in battles as well as to life in general. But the most interesting moments of Landing at Point Rain are quieter than the bombast on display  — they come from the world-weary demeanour of Obi-Wan Kenobi as he contemplates the price of war.

“What I worry about is the way this war seems to be drawing-out with no end in sight,” Obi-Wan remarks in the opening scene, all too aware that the need to revisit Geonosis does not bode well for the continuing efforts of the Republic. As he prepares to return to the barren rock planet that was home to the first battle in the ongoing Clone Wars, he can’t help but reflect on the events of that fateful day. There’s a real sense that nothing has changed despite the best efforts of the Jedi, and yet real people continue to die on the battlefield.

To drive the point home, clones die left, right and centre in Landing at Point Rain, with at least one hapless trooper being carried off by a Geonosian, presumably to face a fate worse than death. Flamethrowers are employed as Geonosians swarm in from all directions, and these bug-like aliens begin to writhe in agony as they burn to death. This is ugly stuff, and as the look on Obi-Wan’s face shows as the battle rages on, there are no winners in such a blood-soaked enterprise.

"Bring in the flamethrowers!"

Anakin and Ahsoka, meanwhile, jokingly compare kill-counts in a game of one-upmanship. “I’ll never understand how you can simplify these battles into some kind of game,” is the extent of Obi-Wan’s reaction, yet this difference in attitudes sums up perfectly the gulf between the philosophies of the Jedi Master and his former Padawan. Anakin’s cavalier attitude to war reflects his ego-centric view of life in general, ultimately leading him to make certain momentous decisions in Revenge of the Sith.

The role of General is a serious one, with the lives of all those under you resting on your shoulders. Obi-Wan has accepted this new responsibility by acting not as a single man but as a part of a larger whole — on the battlefield, he is simply General Kenobi: no more, no less. Anakin, on the other hand, is first and foremost interested in serving his own ego, showing-off for the sake of it and just generally acting as if the war is being provided for him to prove his abilities.

Joseph Campbell, in Pathways to Bliss, recounts the tale of a certain samurai:

His overlord had been killed, and his vow was, of course, absolute loyalty to this lord. And it was his duty now to kill the killer. Well, after considerable difficulties, he finally backs this fellow into a corner, and he is about to slay him with his katana, his sword, which is the symbol of his honor. And the chap in the corner is angry and terrified, and he spits on the samurai, who sheathes his sword and walks away.

Why did the samurai sheath his sword? Had he killed the man in a personal act of vengeance, he would have no longer acted as a samurai but instead in the service of his own ego. I leave as an exercise for the reader the determination of who, between Obi-Wan and Anakin, would have withdrawn their lightsaber in such a situation.

True heroes don’t fight for the glory or the fame: they fight only because they must. It’s not about how many kills you make or what fancy moves you can pull-off. As Yoda says in The Empire Strikes Back, “War does not make one great.” At the end of the day, it’s all in the attitude.

Hi all,
Tonight I decided to conduct a different kind of reading as an experiment. I would ask five questions open five books up at random and take whatever was written on the wherever my hand fell on whatever page the book opened to as my answer.
The first question I asked was
Who am I in this situation?
I grabbed the book “The Writer’s Journey” by Chrisopher Vogler. The book opened to page 156 and my hand fell on this passage

“Heroes don’t just visit death and come home. They returned changed, transformed. No one can go through an experience at the edge of death without being changed in some way.” This has been a year of consistent change for me, lots of death to old situation and rebirths and definite changes..

The second question I asked was
What is directly influencing me in this situation?
I opened the book “The Tree of Life” by Isreal Regardie
It opened to p. 207 . My hand fell on this passage:

“Those who first leaned the names of the Gods, having mingled them with their own proper tongue, delivered them to us that we might alway preserve immoveable the sacred law of tradition, in a language peculiar and adapted to them… Barbarous names likewise have much emphasis, great conciseness, and participate of less ambiguity, variety and multitude. Experience confirms that the most puissant invocations are those in which are words of a foreign, ancient, or perhaps forgotten tongue; or even those crouched in a degenerate, and it may be meaningless jargon.”

This has direct application to my life as it doesn’t take much imagination to connect it to my most recent course of study

My third question:
What is opposing me?
The Book I opened was “You are a Spiritual Being Having a Human Experience” by Bob Frissell
The book opened to p 35 which reads:

“The truth is that the technological “progress” of humanity has proven disastrous in many ways. The steps we take to control the environment or improve our health by material, technological means very often create unforeseen side-effects that make problems for us that are greater than the ones we set out to solve”
Also something that connects up with some stuff I’ve been going through lately.

The fourth question was:
What is helping me?
Book: “Thou Art That” by Joseph Campbell
P 80

“Jung interpreted Mandala symbolism as grounded in what he identified as the four basic psychological functions by which we apprehend and evaluate all experience. These are Sensation and Intuition, which are the apprehending functions, and thinking and feeling, which are the functions of judgement and evaluation”

Last question was
What is coming up for me?
I opened up “The Illustrated Rumi” to a page that said

“I you he she we….
In the garden of mystic lovers, these are not true distinctions”

So this type of reading can be done with books, with music, with newspapers, the medium is unimportant. If everything is truly connected and reflects everything else, then no matter what you choose as an oracle, your answer will be relevant, part of the use of an oracle is to allow ourselves to be open to seeing things in a new light with a new lens to filter information through.

To best serve our purposes, the new mythology needs an expanded definition of hero (see entries for 11/02 and 10/26).

So I offer this insight from Joseph Campbell, as recorded in The Power of Myth, with Bill Moyers:

“We are in childhood in a condition of dependency under someone’s protection and supervision for some fourteen to twenty-one years—and if you’re going on for your Ph.D., this may continue to perhaps thirty-five.

“You are in no way a self-responsible, free agent, but an obedient dependent, expecting and receiving punishments and rewards.

“To evolve out of this position of psychological immaturity to the courage of self-responsibility and assurance requires a death and a resurrection.  That’s the basic motif of the universal hero’s journey—leaving one condition and finding the source of life to bring you forth into a richer or mature condition.”

In that statement, Campbell tells us why we need heroes and heroines.  We don’t just need heroes to inspire us, to show us the best in ourselves.  We need heroes to show us how to effectively navigate the necessary transitions of life.  How do we transition through the many deaths and births that a full life requires?  We don’t need pep talks; we need tools.  The hero or heroine finds these tools for us, and demonstrates how best to work with them.

Too often, we select a prominent individual and project the best of ourselves onto that person.  We actually use that hero to disown our own heroic aspect.  Yes, we feel inspired by that person—inspired to cheer, to clap for him.

We need people who are like walking maps.  But for these heroes and heroines to be effective, they must reject our projections.  In that sense, perhaps the best hero is the one who does not want to be recognized as hero…

…the one who throws the projection right back in our faces and tells us to carry our own positive shadow.

© 2009, Michael R. Patton
sky rope (subterranean rappel)
dream steps

He who thinks he knows, doesn’t know.
He who knows that he doesn’t know, knows.
- Joseph Campbell

Yann Martel + Joseph Campbell = a tower of flames

While at Seattle Book Fest, Ben Raker was in an audience challenged to submit a tiger and life boat story to help with the ongoing effort to make this an open-source narrative form: the “Hansel and Gretel” of our age. That same day, for business school, he received the assignment to write a 50-word (exactly) saga using Joseph Campbell’s famous hero’s journey which features, departure, trials, return.

Read his story at A Boy, a Cat, a Lifeboat. Write your own story and send it along.

The Writer’s Journey.

Chris Jones inverviewed by SWF2009 resident vlogger Tom Williams.

I’m not sure but I think it’s me dangling in the background at the beginning of the clip…  That would be my first sneaky appearance on youtube.

A Feedback letter to the Course Administrators of the RKF International Screenwriting Course, lectured by Anjum Rajabali and K. Hariharan (with a dissertation on dialogue writing by Atul Tiwari). Conducted by Kamal Haasan. Not only a review of the lessons in the course, but also an in-depth analysis of the many discoveries and revolutions in screenwriting that I have come to understand through the span of 10 years:

I suppose the first step here would be to explain a little on where I am coming from so that my feedback on the Workshop will have a clearer perspective for you. The first screenwriting course I did was back in 1998, in Canberra University, Australia. I distinctly remember the lecturer expounding on the 3 Act Screenplay, but most especially I recall that being my first introduction to the Hero’s journey. Perhaps it was a lack of life experience and foresight, or perhaps it was the nature of the course itself, but I remember the Hero’s journey being a weak and finicky set of guidelines lacking in any real sense of depth. I quickly forgot all about it and moved on.

Now it has been 10 years, and I feel I have come full circle – once again revisiting the Hero’s Journey through Anjum Rajabali’s crystalline insight; and suddenly it is made clear to me at a point where I have the capacity to better understand it. You see, 10 years ago I had an inkling of why I wanted to be a storyteller… I dreamed about creating paradigm shifts through my stories and films; shifts in the way people thought and viewed the world. Since I myself had a small taste of this profound effect that a few films can have, I was determined that the craft was a worthwhile investment of the soul.

But the idea of investigating life and its meaning through storytelling was functionally lost on me. It existed only as an instinctive knowing that yes – this is possible! But on the whole, as much as I exasperated, I was unable to fuel insight and wisdom into my stories. For that, I suppose, I needed to live a little. To fall down, and rise up – and understand the profound miracle of what it means to rise up. I went in search of experience, and gave everything up – travelled a lot, lived as a hermit for a few years and threw myself into strange spiritual paradoxes that ordinarily passes you by. In effect, I was merely gathering material. Which inevitably comes to a point where you empty your cup and realise the material was within you all along. Even for that, you need to come full circle.

Coming full circle, Anjum begins to explain the Hero’s journey like a flaming arrow going to the crux of storytelling itself: Mythology helps us understand interiority. I had pondered mythology like a lifeline, I had written compulsively to externalise internal thoughts… yet this insight was a vital link that I had hitherto not anticipated. It validated and made sense of years of rich material that I was waiting to put to use. Suddenly, under the very construct of Anjum’s musings on the Hero’s Journey, my mind cleared and everything seemed to fall into place – options were made available where none seemed possible. Perhaps it seems I am overstating, yet believe me, for one who is intensely passionate about going to the heart of any given thing, this was a revelation. Mythology was not merely good material for me – it has been the pulse of a mystical creation symbolically told. The idea that we can fathom our own existence by our stories was always present, the door was visible and closed – but I needed the key.

After that moment, the course became transformative. At this point let me retrack a bit to set the scene… The second course on screenwriting I did was in 2004 with an Australian writer/filmmaker named Leslie Oliver. He brought a unique insight to storytelling that I don’t think I will ever forget – not merely for the fact that it is so simple but also that it is so revealing. He explained that “character is story, story is character.” I know we speak often in screenwriting circles about the importance of character, but few go so far as to state this inexplicable link. Most of the time, we find a difference between our stories and our characters, but not with Leslie. His technique was to observe the obscure moments of life by which to fathom a character that invokes us to explore him or her, and in placing that character into a conflicting situation, we see them develop. He felt that nothing else is really needed except this, in order to tell a powerful story. He spoke about writing as akin to sculpting; what you are doing in effect is chipping away on a slab of stone to uncover the nightingale already waiting within it.

This was so far removed from my first course in Screenwriting, which was formulaic in comparison, that after the course with Leslie Oliver, I seemed to find most of the other available courses were expounding mainly on the dastardly “character arc”, and I lost interest in going to any more workshops. Of course I was developing stories along the way, and getting stuck with some. Festering – I should say, living with my stories for years, developing them slowly. Time passed. Much happened.

I felt a certain knack for creating a breathtaking symmetry in skeletal framework for my screenplays, and it wasn’t until recently that suddenly my entire understanding of storytelling was shattered by an American playwright/screenwriter named Billy Marshall-Stoneking. At the culmination of 2008, just as I was arranging to come to India, I stumbled across Stoneking’s advert for his screenwriting course. He spoke of mediumistic, tribal storytelling. Mediumistic?! Tribal?! These words resonated deeply, as quite a part of my life was engaged in mediumistic spirituality – where ethereal beings were simply “channelled” into the body (the owner of the body handing control for a few moments), whilst the visitor inhabited. And it rang true, the moment I read two otherwise unrelated words grouped side by side. Mediumistic storytelling. Billy was a man who had spent a large part of his life living with aboriginal tribes and assimilating a sense of universal storytelling through a powerfully primal form – from the very origins of tribal consciousness.

Yes, it made sense. I had passed across several writers who spoke of living with their characters, of their characters voices in their heads, of their characters existing in their own right. I had always found this very intangible, as I only heard one voice in my head. Mine. No one elses (or so I thought). So, the entire idea of having a conversation with someone other than myself in my mind was more than a little unfathomable. Yet I longed for that intimacy I had read authors speak of in interviews – that profound intimacy with their characters where they even speak to them. Until then the sort of intimacy I shared with my characters were more the fodder of potent emotions begging exploration, rather than voices. Yet that is semantics really. Where the emotions manifest as thoughts, or vice versa, is almost seamless.

I decided to be honest and emailed Billy, explaining to him that I’ve been through a whole load of courses on screenwriting and have hardly come across anything new these days, so I would very much appreciate it if he would be forthcoming with me whether he’s got anything new to say or not. Yes, I was blunt, but respectful. His reply was to enigmatically encourage me to come along. And, as curiosity always gets the better of me, I went along to see what he had to say – without judgement.

What transpired was my mind shut down – not in any negative sense, but in the profound realisation that every rule I seemed to have set myself about screenwriting flew out the window. Because Billy was speaking of “dramatic storytelling” in a freshness that invoked, provoked the listener to drop their ideology and approach screenwriting with utter vulnerability. Let me summarise the kind of thinking he directed at you to confound everything you thought you knew for a fact:
• The whole thing is about transforming: every scene should hold a transformation.
• Dramatic intelligence is the art of becoming present.
• The intersection of the origins of the characters with the origins of the writer is what brings freshness to a story.
• You’re dealing with dead people, and you’re trying to make them alive. You are also dead. You become alive by writing… They are dreaming you, and you are dreaming them.
• The fundamental question you must ask yourself: What is your character fighting for?
• Drama is really an exploration of frustrated desires. Drama is essentially about anxiety and overcoming anxiety.
• Who is it that you are speaking for? Or more intimately: who is speaking through you?
• The truth is revealed in the face of opposition.
• We must journey on as if we are blind – if we look down, we will fall.
• Write the story that terrifies you the most. Go into the mouth of Kali.
• The screenplay world and your world are inexplicably connected… And whatever you do in one world will impact the other.
• Art never explains. Every time you explain what you are trying to do, you are trying to avoid a fear!
• The one thing of no use to a dramatic storyteller is knowledge, because knowledge gets in the way.
• This is the art of the invisible! In what is not said. In what is not shown.
• There are characters that want to come out. That are imprisoned by the writer’s fears. We project our fears and that drops the potential the characters actually have.
• When we hit the wall, we have to drop our expectations, because the wall is a manifestation of our expectations.

It is this aspect of hitting the “wall”, that was the crux of his unique way of seeing this ancient artform. That, inevitably, in every story, the writer and his characters will reach a point of critical conflict where he is forced to live it through his characters – and at this point most writers take the cowards way out. They resort to some rationality, some formulaic way out of the insurmountable situation. And if they do, the story will lose all its power and worth. It is at this point – at this wall, that one must drop everything they think they know, and step into the unknown. Become intuitive rather than intellectual. I would say there is rarely a screenwriting course that approaches storytelling with such bravery. This bravery was deeply appealing, as I had always considered good writing as that rare gift of pouring the depths of your soul onto paper. It felt like a code of honour only wielded by the warrior-poets. For they will not succumb, even in their words.

So it came to be that when I was at the right place at the right time, and invited to attend the RKF International Screenwriting Workshop, I decided to come without any expectations. In several ways Billy had created more questions than answers, and I was unable to pick up the pieces myself. I was stuck as to understand how to push my story ideas forward because his course had demanded of me a complete relinquishing of myself. It had demanded me to set myself aside and let the characters write through me.

I succeeded, and through the workshop created stories where I was so utterly surprised by the outcome, and since my own transformation was honest, I could see its effect on the audience. But as for applying this methodology to stories I had already developed upto treatment stage, I was unable to find the balance. This is not to say that my previous stories were so manufactured that they needed to be discarded. Rather, I am an unrelenting perfectionist – and I wished to imbue my entire body of work with this newfound insight. I realised that I had been hearing the voices of my characters all along, yet my fear had been stifling them.

I think you may understand now why I opted to give this explanation of what brought me to the point of your workshop, as it does set the scene in revealing what transpired within me throughout the phenomenal six days.

Firstly, I did not expect for Anjum, Hariharan and the majority of speakers to extol this very same bravery from us in our writing. That took me by surprise, and it was then that I realised that I was right where I was supposed to be. To divulge step by step:

DAY 1: PREMISE/CHARACTERISATION.

I have believed for a long while now that the real meaning of “literacy” is not the assimilation of information, but rather – to learn the skill of questioning what is before you – not taking anything as a given, but discovering for yourself. For that to work, the uniqueness of the individual is imperative. It is this uniqueness that produces originality, and I had a deepening sense of relief to witness that Kamal Haasan and the lecturers were acutely aware of this and were giving it utmost importance.

For a long time now in screenwriting circles the premise had been taught to be the fundamental moral of the story – the core “message” of the film. Yet on day one of the RKFI Course, Anjum explained the premise to be something else entirely – although he acknowledged that it is often known to be a moral, he insisted that a premise is better known as the “lock” of the story. That is, the culminating incident to which the entire story is built up, and thus resolved.

At first, I didn’t see why this difference in definition was even necessary, but as I began to ponder the issue, and moreover, apply it to my own stories, it soon became crystalline that this particular use of premise is far more useful in the construction of a screenplay. Because we are then dealing with the crux of the story itself, its very backbone, and thereby are constantly aware of where we are going off on tangents, or staying true to the heart of the story. As opposed to a moral or theme, which may speak for subtext, but on the whole does not define the constructs and motivations of the characters.

It became apparent that this particular definition of premise is most elevating for a writer on his/her journey of discovering characters and the situation of conflict they find themselves in. It brings focus on the conflict in very specific terms – relatable only to the story being told – it enables the writer to be unique and fresh in the telling. Suddenly, the “premise” had a use in the process of writing, and was no longer a musing on the tale.

Hariharan then presented, in his analysis of characterisation, what appeared at first notice to be an opposing approach. Whilst Anjum was fused with conviction in the intuitive magic that exists within writing, and was presenting ways in which to allow such intuition to “reveal” itself to the writer, Hariharan seemed passionate about the mechanics – about construction in a surprisingly mathematical precision. I would guess that for most delegates at the course, this would have posed an element of choice – of deciding one way or another. It certainly did for me, as I felt at home with the fire of intuition that Anjum had spoken of, and had often dismissed the need to totally intellectualise or feign the mechanics of the writing process. I am certain others would have felt more at home with the mechanics, and perhaps even puzzled at the notion of giving so much importance to intuition.

Yet, I was sitting in the course with already a dilemma at the back of my mind. The one that Billy had created, by persuading me with fine fuzzy zen-like logic to do away with any sort of mechanical approach – which I had on the whole found next to impossible. No matter how intuitively culminated, there would always be a strong mechanics in the structure of my stories that I was unable to do away with.

Pondering the contradicting approaches of both Hariharan and Anjum, it eventually dawned on me that this is indeed a right brain/left brain issue. That is, the optimum function of an individual is when both are in balance, when creativity and logic are simultaneously active and complimentary to the other. Suddenly, Hariharan and Anjum did not seem so far apart, and in imagining how both can be applied to the process of writing, slowly a clarity began to settle upon me.

For this reason, I felt it remarkable that the course syllabus was formed to represent two (or more) seemingly opposing ideas as a tangible whole. This aspect of opposing ideas co-existing was a recurring theme throughout the course, and one of its crowning virtues – it oft reminded me of the tantric saying: “The truth can only ever be told in the contradictions. Or… in silence.”

If anything, it would have placed the attentive listener in the predicament of not walking away with set rules and constructs – but rather inspired an openness to the writing process itself. In a worldwide education system that is surely failing because of its spotlight upon memorising a panorama of rules (and soon forgetting them), I was kindled with a vigour to witness a better method of teaching.

DAY2: STRUCTURE.

The finely tuned exploration of how a dilemma is built to a critical mass – being the engrossing topic of the second day. A few of the things that really stood out for me and have instilled themselves implicitly are:
• Change can only happen in a person capable of change.
• The nature of heroism is unintentional – a man is provoked into heroic acts – and heroism is not in and of itself a grounding motive.
• Tragedies are where characters are unable to resolve their dilemma.
• Subplots throw light on hidden dimensions of the main plot.
• Theory of dialectics: The opposite of something exists within itself.

In essence, the fundamental lesson here was that there must be an internal conflict within every powerful scene or sequence, a conflict that reveals itself through subtext or subplots, all intimately linking back to the premise. At this point, the premise becomes infinitely pivotal – every moment of the film holds a premise, contributing to an underlying premise that drives energy to the entire story.

Ultimately bringing home the essential masterstroke of every piece of art – show, don’t tell.

Of course, this point is made almost always in writing courses, yet to demonstrate the point also requires a lucidity that gives the student enough breath to recompose and integrate it into himself. For this, reason, I valued Anjum’s approach – he had carefully highlighted the underlying facet of conflict as in itself revealing the subtext. This essentially enables the aspiring writer to not find subtexts so mysterious. Which meant only intuition would decide the immaculate and fresh circumstances in which the characters find themselves.

Yet even this intuition is more guided by observing life, rather than observing film – it is a dance between the two – of translating those obscure moments that are so definitive of life into the language of film. So, the premise is more about deriving meaning out of existence, meaning on existence itself – that is the invariable link between life and film – every moment of every situation becomes meaningful in stories, and thereby gives meaning to life. Stories become sacred because they eradicate the pointlessness of existence. They become mythic because they remind the lost about the forgotten.

Everything became tangible here for me – it is essentially about dilemma, and surprisingly, a dilemma of the soul, making it an exploration of spirit – even if, in film, it seems simply like a character exploration. For why else is a character invoked into heroism, and into changing, if not to better himself into something intuitive. Why else is a writer invoked to forsake all knowledge and write with a divining sense of intuition, had it not been proved through the ages that only this kind of writing creates timeless art. More than about character, it was about the spirit within the character. For otherwise, intuition (and instinct) would not be so crucial. It would simply be another word receiving lip-service.

DAY 3: DIALOGUE & DECONSTRUCTION.

This was the central letdown in the course. Through all that Atul Tiwari was expounding, be it the history of dialogue writing, and especially examples of the best forms of dialogue – the one thing, the primary thing – that he neglected to divulge was the PROCESS of dialogue writing itself. I did ask a few questions pertaining to his writing process, but did not get an insightful response.

The main aspect of dialogue writing (especially in Indian films) is that quite often screenplay and dialogue are not written by the same people. Yet Anjum had spoken at length about the necessity to spend an intimate amount of time living and breathing your characters, imagining them living alongside you and better understanding their motivations and characteristics. So much investment is made upon the characters to understand the emotions that rule them.

Having bled with your characters, finally you emerge out of the dark night with a reckoning screenplay, and are about to collaborate with a dialogue writer. I have full faith in the specific mastery of dialogue writing – I understand that it is entirely a different skill to writing screenplay or understanding time and space pertaining to plot. It is for this very reason that I wanted to delve deeper into this skill of the dialogue writer, to see how he is so quickly able to assimilate the characters that the screenwriter has been developing for months, and furthermore to understand their vocabulary and style and manner of speech. Hopefully in future courses this aspect of dialogue writing would be explored for the students. A greater focus on process would be far more helpful, I feel, rather than a demonstration of the history and evolution of dialogue writing (unless this evolution also is made to tie in to the “process”).

I am glad however, that the lecturers chose to emphasise that one must think of the characters as having an “independent” personality – that you, in effect, are not creating these characters, but pushing them, reacting to them, and evolving and transforming with them. You are walking beside them, not manufacturing them out of lego pieces.

The revealing of how subtext is used in films was quite instructive. It was a divulging into the “non-active” power that exists in films. The power of the silence, the power of what is not said. Nothing offers as much window into reality and the exploration of real dilemmas as the use of “what is not shown.” As Eisenstein would put it; “the art of the invisible.”

Which inevitably lead to the deconstruction of the screenplay, lectured by Hariharan. Immediately beginning with the proposition: Consider time also as a character. I was astonished to witness the detail to which the 7 minute intro sequence of Satyajit Ray’s film was broken apart and analysed with piercing and remarkable judgement. Without exaggeration, I sat mesmerised, and secretly hoped that Hariharan would continue to analyse the entire film with this prowess of film language.

With illuminating precision, the nature of the objective/subjective link in film was explored, coaxing the eager student to grasp the rudiments of great storytelling.

DAY 4: HERO’S JOURNEY, PROCESS & INDUSTRIAL ASPECTS.

“A writer’s inspiration enters you through your fingertips.” – Anjum Rajabali.

There are things we instinctively know – things like the virtues: no one ever disagrees that to be a hypocrite is a vice, not a virtue. And that to be honourable is a virtue. These aren’t social rules, or political ones. It is intrinsic to our very being. That is the essence of instinctive knowing – where suddenly your tribal or cultural affiliations, or where you come from doesn’t make you so different to the rest of us, because there is an underlying unification in our consciousness.

However, as much as we have this knowing, we are for the most part unable to see the heart of it, see the fodder from which it comes, and how it manifests. For this very reason, for a long time I believed in the power of storytelling, yet was unable to find the words to express its imminent role in one’s identity. Because for the most part, people would rather convince themselves that stories are merely a squandering type of entertainment to escape boredom. This superficial idea is often so powerful a paradigm, that entertainment itself seems to have succumbed to this very definition, and attempted to do just that – quell boredom.

The thunderous roar of the warrior-poets, who would weave stories in the hearts of their countrymen to inspire courage, to dispel fear, and to mostly, urge them to discover themselves – all of this innate power of storytelling is often forgotten. So it was, that when Anjum divulged the apex of the hero’s journey as essentially the facing of oneself (as proposed by Joseph Campbell), everything fell into place like the difficulty of a jigsaw puzzle being finally resolved.

Suddenly I had means in which to speak of that which I have devoted my life to – storytelling itself – I had means in which to speak of its dominating influence within society without being vague, or sceptical. Since that day, I had shared the very same insight I had learnt to several acquaintances during dinner gatherings, and have witnessed the clarity and power that settled over them to understand the real nature of stories.

Mythology in itself is a misunderstood word. I remember a few years back deciding to read about Jesus not as a historical figure, but as a fictional character – and was surprised to find how much more power he had over me, how much more influence. I then tried the same with the ancient Puranas, and to date have rarely come across stories so rich. Does it matter if it is fact, or fiction? More to the point, is fiction, by definition, a mark of what is not real… or is it that which signifies everything we value to be real! Therein lies its power.

Isn’t it so that the wisdom within the myths are more valuable than the question of whether it really happened? As Campbell repeats again and again, myths exists to show us solutions to our own dilemmas. Science itself is more an assertion of what has not been “proved” wrong, rather than what has been proved right. To the discriminating eye, there are no facts, and fictions become far more magical – magic itself becomes the reality. This is why writers give up the world, this is why they bleed, why they want to relinquish their own souls in order to discover themselves through their stories.

Just as the character discovers himself at the culmination of the hero’s journey, the writer is being transformed alongside him. But only if he is approaching it in an intuitive process! Which is why Anjum was insistent on this specific kind of writing, as was Billy. The hero’s journey, ultimately, is the visual representation of an otherwise invisible struggle of self discovery. Of facing your own fears. These things, quite often, happen in darkness, it happens often without anyone close to you ever discovering what you are going through. Yet with these stories, the world can intimately relate to you, because it is what they themselves are experiencing. This is why they revisit the majestic cinema!

Coming full circle – on this day, the pieces fell into place, and all the contradictions of storytelling that I had learnt became a potent oneness of expression.

The afternoon of the fourth day amassed a step-by-step analysis of how to create stories for the film industry. A tasteful and grounded counterpart to the deeply invigorating morning.

DAY 5 – DAY 6 –

I think what was very validating for the students was watching the guest lecturers speak about screenwriting within the same constructs and with the same approach as what was impressed upon us within the first four days. Especially since the guest lecturers/filmmakers were totally unaware of what transpired in the last four days in the course, the very fact that their own sharing and experiences corroborated with what was taught affirmed that we were not dealing with theories here, but applications.

Although the fifth and sixth day was an amalgamation of some brilliant minds within the international film fraternity, there is one issue that I wish you to consider: The writers/filmmakers who spoke to us did not seem so tuned-in to the kind of information we really wanted from them. It was not loaded with the essential wisdom a budding screenwriter desperately needs. It lacked the tightness of the first four days. Every now and then the celebrities would make a statement that was amazingly illuminating, but for the most part they seemed to talk in tangents. I think the purpose of having seminars in the last two days was to very specifically study the guest speakers’ process and development with screenwriting. Sometimes though I got the feeling the guest lecturers forgot this.

Perhaps if the prominent writers had it in their mind to speak to “themselves as beginners”, and to tell themselves the kind of things they would have wanted to know, it could improve the course immensely. Instead, for quite a substantial amount of the two days, what we received was a history of what these writers/filmmakers have been through… or worse, some industrial trivia that was no help whatsoever. Reflecting back on the mistake by Atul Tiwari in describing the history of dialogue writing, perhaps it is easier for a person who is unprepared to describe the history of things without ever going to the heart of it. I do request that you find some solutions to avoid this in future.

I must add here that this does not apply to the entirety of the last two days. Jean Claude Carriere, for example, seemed enamoured with naught else but the intricate process of screenwriting, and spoke lucidly about the mechanisms in which to understand it. Aside from that, each of the speakers every now and then delivered some striking wisdom that either affirmed or violently contradicted what was taught to us in the first four days. Either way, I took them both to be valid, because by then I had understood that the confusion that comes from contradictions is more helpful than harmful.

By the end of it all, I remember still being a little puzzled about what was said about dialogue writing, so I approached Rituparno Ghosh (his film from the night before, Dosar, still fresh on my mind), and questioned him about his prowess in writing such fresh dialogue.

I said, “How do you write your dialogues?”

He replied, “After a point, my characters write the dialogues.”

That seemed to summarise it all, and I have meditated upon that insight ever since.

Some unforgettable statements from the course:

“Mythology is the need to contextualise oneself. Mythology deals with denials and the understanding of denials.” – Shekhar Kapur.

“Scriptwriting is about how to catch the desire of the audience and how to hold that desire. What is credible is whatever the spectator desires.” – Olivier Lorelle.

“The rules of scriptwriting is nothing but a shortcut to a point of choicelessness.” – Shekhar Kapur.

“Language is a miserably inadequate medium to express the richness of emotions, and that is what makes its inadequacy a fantastic subtext.” – Balu Mahendra.

“Your local audience is your global audience. If you win the hearts of the locals, they can take you to the global.” – Bharat Bala.

“You have to enter the dark cave and come out of it all wounded to understand why you are writing the screenplay.” – Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra.

One word that cannot describe this course is: exhausting! Yes, it was an intensive plethora of hours spent, listening to discourses until evening, then analysing a movie during the night, and yet I felt more alive and invigorated, ready and anticipating the next day. Infact, after the movie, groups of us who were of like minds (and even staunchly opposing minds), would gather together to debate what we had learnt during the day – sometimes until 2am – before we decided to rest. And somehow wake up, ready to absorb all over again.

My deepest gratitude to everyone who contributed to a sure-footed step into redefining the standards of storytelling. I found Kamal Haasan, in person, to be wiser than I had realised, and his remark comes to mind, “when mediocrity is set as the standard, then to be a genius means very little.” I feel that several great minds felt a calling to improve things – and feel blessed to have been at the right place at the right time to take part in it. To bring meaningfulness back to storytelling has been my dream also, and feel extremely liberated to be offered the chance to dream it with others.

Thank you.

Vajra Krishna.

If you practice being fictional for a while, you will understand that fictional characters are sometimes more real than people with bodies and heartbeats. – Richard Bach.

When the world seems to be falling apart, the rule is to hang on to your own bliss. It is that life that survives.

~Joseph Campbell, in Reflections on the Art of Living

And so, here is a pic of one of my blisses: this is “Autumn Leaves” a grey baby girl, born on October 18, 2009. I was there, just hours after she was born at Calypso Farm in Lockport, IL, where alpacas and llamas are bred and frolic in the grassy fields there.  Quite magickal animals…in my book …