Writing is Magic.

Writing is magic, as much the water of life as any other creative art. 

The water is free. 

So drink. 

Drink and be filled up.

 Stephen King, On Writing.

=-=-=-=-

To paint a picture or to write a story or to compose a song is an incarnational activity. The artist is a servant who is willing to be a birth giver. In a very real sense the artist should be like Mary who, when the angel told her that she was to bear the Messiah, was obedient to the command. I believe that each work of art, whether it is a work of great genius, or something very small, comes to the artist and says, 'Here I am. Enflesh me. Give birth to me.'

Madeline l'Engle. Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art.

=-=-=-=-=-

Art gives me life. It is the deepest expression of the human soul. 

I make it because I have no other choice.

T. C. Boyle, author.

+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+

 Sheesh, I'm thinking I have something to add to these voices? They're too brilliant...but, I can observe that these three different authors offer us powerful insights into the creative act. All three seem to see creativity as something that pulls them forward or lifts them up, something bigger than themselves...frankly, is something that transcends reality.

Writing wrongs?

I write because it's right.
I write because I haven't left.
I write because it'd be wrong to not write.

I cannot say, as does my hero Stephen King, that I have to write, that I sneak away to write on evenings and holidays and weekends and on vacation. Hm.

However, I do love the creative process, bringing to life something that has never, ever existed, something unseen, unuttered, utterly unique. A newborn baby, if you will.

I write because the voices in my head tell me they'll...oops, shhhh.



"To write, or not to write...that is the question."

Chasing the Truth, by All Means. Part 1.

It was not possible for man to know himself and the world, except first after some mode of knowledge, some art of discovery. The most perfect, since the most intimate and intelligent art, was pure love. 

The approach by love was the approach to fact; to love anything but fact was not love. 

Love was even more mathematical than poetry; it was the pure mathematics of the spirit.

Charles Williams: Descent into Hell. p69.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Okay, you probably read that and sighed. Or, read it twice or thrice, which is my hope!

This quote reminds us that to use our minds in the loving pursuit of knowledge is an act of worship...and that to honor anything that is less-than-true is to commit hellish idolatry. But, what really kicked my cranium was the last line--that to love is to enter into an equation--my mind on one side, and truth on the other.

What's this jazz about "...love more mathematical than poetry"? Has anyone in the history of humankind ever called poetry mathematical? Really?

Makes me fall deeper in love with poetry, real poetry, poetry written by honest seekers of truth. And, helps me to see why I hate some poetry (and some modern art): they're not seeking truth, they're just deconstructing with no interest or intent to reassemble the pieces to find truth--they like the fact that they've reduced something to sharp little shards of meaninglessness.

I think I blogged about the 81 page book of poetry where I understood only three or five pages...or, I kinda thought I might have understood them, perhaps? That author can be commended only for getting someone to print his stuff. Probaly goes over big at Berkeley.

Phoo.

That said, I think deconstructing in order to reconstruct--cool. Be it architectural elements or somebody's philosophy or a corpse on the autopsy table--we take stuff apart, learn, and build deeper truths from what we've learned!


-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Charles Williams is a favorite author--he was one of the "Inklings," completing that famed trio with C. S. Lewis and Tolkien, sharing many the tale and pint at the Eagle and Child Pub there in Oxford. (Son Daniel told me it was also known as the "Bird and Baby" or the "Fowl and Foetus.") Williams wrote tales that match Stephen King for weirdness but omit the gore.

NOT reading?

What are YOU reading? Curious people wanna know.

                                           

The link below highlights a few "popular" books that the majority of Americans haven't read. Why? Because the majority of Americans aren't readers!

https://www.barna.org/barna-update/culture/678-books-the-bestsellers-americans-are-and-aren-t-reading#.U-KBxrl0ycw

Have you read THE HUNGER GAMES? Its sequel, CATCHING FIRE?
Howzabout any others on the list?

For me, I'd generally rather ignore the TV and instead be reading. Why?
--expands my horizons
--challenges my world-view
--stretches my vocab
--makes ME think up images that represent the story, instead of TV serving up pictures (and sound) in its soporific, mind-controlling, commercially-driven environment. (if ya wanna know how I really feel about television...well, let me just misquote Stephen King, who calls it the glass pacifier--actual term, "the glass teat." I'll bet your mind just came up with an image!)
--invites me to wonder about an author's meaning, their context, their biography
--helps me to applaud the gift of creativity as we emulate our creator.

Let Them Go Free!

In a library we are surrounded by many hundreds of dear friends imprisoned by an enchanter in paper and leathern boxes.

 

--Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882) --

Friends and enchanters, come to me!
   Wink your eyes and tap your feet
Come tell your tales of horror and glee
   I cannot wait for us to meet!

I'd write more, but I've gotta hot book to read, bye!

(Oh, all right. I'm reading something that transports me across centuries and across the ocean--historic fiction, set in Europe. The characters are believable, and the plot feels like real life--some things go well, and others are a face-plant into concrete ranging from wet to solid!)

Been transported by a book lately? A recent fav of both the Blogger and the Mrs. was Stephen King's 11/22/63. We traveled through time and space to a weird take on "reality" that had none of King's rather-common gore and guts...enchanting and just a little bit scary...that wonderful kinda book that was hard to put down.

How's that for a book criterion--"I had a hard time putting it down. Go, pick one up today"?

"Of course you're a writer."

I recently overheard a published novelist badgering his friend, "You have to write: it's the only way to express yourself and work through your emotions!"

I later found out that the recipient of the hassling was an excellent water-color artist and a decent saxophone player...as if he couldn't express himself through art AND music? Surely, the writer was a bit stuck in his own world...making me wonder how often we look at others but only see what our own field of view permits us to see?

Now, that's a nice twist to use in a story: the flawed character, the narcissist who cannot really see anyone else with clarity--he superimposes his own image and experience. Sadly true: we fail to see others for lack of looking beyond the end of our own nose!

How do you get inside someone else's life? Their experiences, their feelings?

Part of the answer, of course, (duh,) is to be a good listener: don't solve their problems, don't criticize their actions, don't reprove their emotions--just listen.

Here's another part of the answer, one I'll bet you didn't expect--be a good reader.

Didja expect that? Ha! It's not really my own idea (really, how many truly original ideas are invented every year? Not many!)...but I sorta synthesized it from thinking about Stephen King's dictum that to be a good writer one needs to both read a lot and to write a lot!

My point is...the well-read person has a great breadth of (second-hand) experience. The reader is more likely to have met a similar person or problem in print, and can truly better understand their friend's plight.

That's what I think...what are your thoughts?

Fantasy? Fantastic!

Fantasy.

What do you think of when you read that word?

Faeries? (of the classical sort?

...or, Tinkerbelle?

Hobbits, orcs, ents?

Talking carnivorous plants (Little Shop of Horrors)?

Space aliens who are thwarted only when reluctant heroes ally themselves with the village idiot (Dreamcatcher, S. King)?

My mind goes straight-way to Tolkien and CSLewis. Okay, shows my age, I know. Madeleine l'Engle just wasn't that popular when I was in those formative years as a reader. The greats of sci-fi were popular, so I read lotsa Asimov, Pohl, Bradbury...but, where does sci-fi stop and fantasy begin? I didn't catch up with Tolkien and Lewis' fantasies until college, courtesy of a close friend who became even closer over the yrs (she made a darn fine mother of our children...and she and I still read a lotta the same stuff together!)

Last month, I read: a mystery, a poetry collection, a romance, 2 biographies/memoires, 2 literary novels, a non-fiction (THE YR 1000: history of England), and two thrillers. In my mind, the wider or more old-fashioned definition of fantasy embraces almost all of these works--they are the works of the writers' imaginations--even the non-fiction still requires inventiveness and aptitude with phrases and creative ways of presenting history that made it that book a fun, lively read--so fun, I read several ppghs aloud while Elizabeth (pretended to?) listened as she cooked.

Do you like to stick with just one genre of reading? What invites you to try something different? I need to know these answers, as a writer and marketer of my works...I'd deeply apprec yr comments.

Oh, and that bridges to another critical query--what moves you when buying books as gifts...but, more on that for another day.

Again, pls take a sec to comment, below. Thnx, D.

Laugh or Cry or Gape in Amazement: what great writing is all about.

“No tears in the writer, no tears in the reader. No surprise in the writer, no surprise in the reader.”

-Robert Frost

- - = = - - = = - - = = - -

"No fun in the writer, no fun in for the reader" would be my little addendum, if I dare to camp onto the Poet Laureate's words. Not that life is all fun and light and sweetness...but don't we crave moments of light and sweetness and fun and fulfillment? I think those kind of yearnings are there to remind us to fix our eyes on something bigger and better'n we ourselves are.

So, do I cry when I write? Nope. (Sometimes, reading what I've written--oh yeah!)

Am I surprised when I write? Oh, certainly. I adhere to one famous author's suggestion: Take strong characters, throw them into difficult circumstances, and see what they do! Then, throw them into more difficulties...add tension, stir, and repeat.

The critical ingredient in that recipe is STRONG characters. Or, characters who are becoming strong. Or, characters who used to be strong and we wonder--do they still have it? Are they gonna reach way down deep inside and do it, or will they choke? Stay tuned, because, as Scarlett reminds us, "Tomorrah is anothah day!"

..............

"I want to make you laugh.

I want to make you cry.

Even better, both at the same time."

 

(from Stephen King's lapidary opus, ON WRITING: For Love of the Craft.)

 

“The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be kindled.”
― Plutarch

"But, once kindled, it must continue to be fueled."

― DLS

=--=-=-=-=-=-=-

I have to agree strongly with one of my favorite writers, that refueling at the "glass teat" is not nourishing. And if Stephen King sez it...

He says to unplug your television, or for even more fun, take a hammer to it!

Now, I know you're already rushing to defend this channel or that program...but the point is, reading is generally more stretching to the mind than is mere watching. Reading involves many more brain circuits, as you need to generate the images and sounds (and other senses) awl by youw're wittle wonesome sewlf...without a director/producer/etc deciding exactly what you will see or hear. And, and what you won't!

Really, I don't hate everything about TV, but I do lament that the AVERAGE American household consumes some 30 hours of programming per week....and, how much of that do you think is fuel for the mind? Just put your best guess in the comments section below! 

I've yet to hear a writer or visual artist say, "Yes, this work was inspired by xyz-program."

What does inspire this writer? Other books, to be sure. Talking with real, live people who dialogue with me, people whose warts and witticisms are obvious and occurring live, in real-time...ahem, just as are mine!

What else inspires me? Music! Outdoors! Vistas. Did I mention books? More books. Magazines. Kids of all ages. Museums. A sense of the divine.

What inspires you, keeps your fires well-fueled?



Talking about creative writing.

Them as can, do.
Them as cain't, teach.
------------------------------ -------------

Hmmm. Saturday was my day to teach about writing, focusing on the large, complex work (novels, screenplays). I suggested that we are grounded by the theology of creativity.

I focused the first part of my talk what creativity means, theologically, drawing a lot from Dorothy Sayers' THE MIND OF THE MAKER. This is a subject that I love to talk about (so bear with me!): since we are created in the image of God...just as He spoke and the world leapt into being...so, too, our creative use of words brings new worlds, new characters, and new stories to life.

I frequently referenced a favorite book, Stephen King's ON WRITING...as in this blog posting: http://davionwriting.blogspot.com/2013/05/immense-possibilities.html


If interested, link to my handout and notes. Link to my own writing.

Okay, enough with the links and references. My talk yesterday was intended to both encourage my fellow writers, and to offer some instruction and (what I hope were) some tantalizing ideas, concrete ideas such as:

--let your characters be themselves, don't force them into a mold of your own making. Just because I like to read doesn't mean all my characters need to be book-lovers. Just because I have a certain belief system I shouldn't force my story line to hew to my own theological preferences.

--let your characters be real: they are opinionated, scruffy, and nobody is ever a hunnerd percent good or evil...even a bad guy still loves his ____ (mother, cat, elementary-school chum)!

--let your story emerge from your characters: trying to predict a story is hard when you have strong characters who mayn't react exactly as expected, desired, or planned.

--write about what you know, sure...but, what you know may be as broad as "love" or "just being doggone human."

--write so that the reader still has room for their own imagination--don't over-describe. If I tell you that the man's charcoal pinstriped suit drapes his slim muscular frame perfectly, and that the pucker in the knot of his pink tie is aligned precisely with the midpoint of his button-down collar soft charcoal shirt, with the glimmer of silver cufflinks appearing as he gestures broadly to accompany his slow, drawling speech...well, I have painted a picture, 'tis true. However, if I told you, "Look up the words 'elegant' and 'gentleman' in the encyclopedia, and you'd find this pin-striped Southerner's picture"... well, I've left you room to see an image that YOUR brain created--you'll know exactly what he looks look without wading through my excessively descriptive prose.

--write so that the reader can see/smell/hear what's happening...but, again, use broad brush-strokes, not fussy fine strokes that, while lovely, slow the reader down.

--chaque-un a son gout...to each their own.

--read lots, write lots.

Have you read a poorly written work lately?--that's one of the best ways to learn good writing, I've discovered. (I'm hoping you're learning bad examples from other than moi!)

Have you read something excellent? Do tell!

I doubt it.

"Doubt is the beginning of wisdom."

If doubt is the beginning of wisdom, is a question the beginning of a good story? As Stephen King says, he takes a strong character, throws him into difficulty, and then, wonders how the character will work his way through the difficulty.

Now, this doesn't work so well if the character is not well formulated. Some writers will develop their characters, writing several pages about each character, before they ever think about putting the character into a story. This feels a little formulaic for me; having tried it both ways, thus far I prefer to let the character develop in the midst of the stresses and strains of the story. Granted, I still have a fair idea if the character is wise and witty, plodder or speedster, fussy or messy, literalistic or willing to bend (or break--oh my!) the rules.

Where do characters come from? Usually, mine are purely imaginary. Oh, there may have been a leaping-off point, where one deed or phrase or behaviorism caught my attention in real life, but I think most authors are sufficiently creative to craft their own reality without much cribbing from the folks around us. Besides, how'd you feel, seeing yourself inside a story, waking up to:
   "Yipes, get me get away from this person--I don't know them, I don't want to know 'em, and I don't like the way he's looking at me, like a hungry lion stalking a lame gnu!"
   Heavy breathing in the background.
   "Help! Let me out of this story!"
   A wet gurgle that may have passed for laughter was the only reply.

   Being caught in that story...now, that would be bad gnus, baby!

   Okay, some characters are full of doubts, wonders, questions, and insufficiencies. Others are strong and capable and rarely doubt themselves. A story populated by characters of only one of these types wouldn't work terribly well, and certainly wouldn't smack of reality, would it? Sorta like you and, too much or too little doubt--either extreme doesn't set the stage for success. Solomon, by the way, would disagree with my opening quote; Solly seems to think that awestruck reverence for God is the beginning of wisdom. Whattaya think of that?

"Never in doubt...sometimes correct."