Presented for Your Amusement

Revision:  The Game!

Welcome to REVISION: THE GAME!
You are in a WRITER’S ROOM.
There is a desk here.
There is a chair here.
Exits are W and E.
What do you do?

One of those humorous pieces with a lot of  good advice buried inside it.

This next one is at least tangentially writing-related, but mostly I’m linking to it because it’s funny, and because at various times in my life I too have been trapped in Paper-Grading Hell.

And Then I Was Eaten by a Grue

>read essay
With trepidation, you lift aside the cover sheet. Suddenly, the world around you seems to melt away…

Hell
You are in a maze of twisty little paragraphs, all alike. The path ahead of you is littered with sentence fragments, left broken and twitching at your feet as their pathetic spaniel eyes implore you to put them out of their misery. Dangling modifiers loop happily through the branches overhead. In the distance, that sound of undergraduate feet has turned into a heavy, erratic thwump – swoop – THWUMP you recognise immediately – it’s a badly-indented long quotation, and it’s coming closer.

>run
You wish.

The Turning Seasons

Only a few days ago, it seems, I was complaining about the sultry summer weather.

Last night, we had a frost warning, and there are already spots of color on the maple tree in the front yard.  And in about a month, it’ll be time for us to head south to Martha’s Vineyard and the Viable Paradise workshop.

If you didn’t apply this year, don’t worry . . . next year’s applications open on the first of January 2014.

Worldbuilding: Implications and Consequences

Writers in the science fiction and fantasy fields talk a lot about worldbuilding, mostly because it’s a necessity in their genre.  Stories set in past or contemporary consensus reality don’t need it, or at any rate don’t need it in the same way — they may need to show the reader a new or unfamiliar part of the world, but the writer doesn’t have to make that part up from scratch.

Building a world from scratch is hard work.  Most writers, being only human, tend to concentrate on the aspects of the world that are of the most interest to them, or of the most importance to the story.  A writer of hard science fiction might not be able to rest until he or she has got the orbital mechanics of their fictional planet’s fictional solar system all worked out to five decimal places.  A different writer might be content to leave the moon and sun and stars set on “default”, but will insist on figuring out all the finer details of the local banking system and exactly how letters of credit work in the absence of faster-than-light interstellar communication.  And yet a third writer may not care very much about either moons or money, but will be as thoroughly conversant with their imagined society’s rules of etiquette as the local version of Miss Manners or Emily Post.

The trick — one of the tricks, anyhow; there’s lots of them — is to think about the day-to-day implications and consequences of the worldbuilding bits that you’re concentrating on.  For an example of the kind of thing it pays to think about, the blog Hello, Tailor has a post on the way worldbuilding in film is implicit in — or fails at being implicit in — the costuming.  To quote the author:

The visuals of movies like Equilibrium and Gattaca (and Aeon Flux, and Ultraviolet…) are, to me, the costuming equivalent of all those thousands of hard sci-fi novels that concentrate on the science fiction but forget to give the characters human personalities. Even in a world where everyone is genetically engineered to perfection (Gattaca) or everyone is drugged with emotional inhibitors (Equilibrium), it’s never really articulated why people look so similar. And if they were pressured to wear identical outfits every day, they wouldn’t be dressed to the same degree of neatness, a trait that varies enormously from person to person. Not that this really makes much difference to the overall quality of the film: it’s just something that bugs me, personally.

Because in the long run, everything in your fictional world is connected. The length of your planet’s days and seasons, and the rise and fall of the tides in its seas, will have an effect on how long or short the working day is, and how hard the seasons are, which will effect in turn the way the local economy is set up, and who is hardworking but poor and who is rich and idle and what the politics are that arise from that division, which will in turn influence the social customs and the unwritten rules of behavior that are an etiquette-writer’s stock in trade.

You can’t trace out all of the connections — you are, after all, only human, and this world you’re making is only words — but you can trace out the ones you’re interested in, or that influence your plot, and that will be enough to convince your reader (at least for the length of time it takes to read a story) that you’ve seen them all.

Look What the Postman Brought

One of the small pleasures of a writer’s life is the arrival of author’s comp copies in the mail.  The new-book smell, the solid heft of the real and physical object, the gratifying appearance of one’s name and words in crisp black type . . . there’s nothing quite like it, and it never really gets old.

Today’s mail included our comp copies of the Thomas Easton and Judith K. Dial anthology Impossible Futures, which contains our short story, “According to the Rule.”  We think the anthology looks nifty-keen, especially the cover art:

(This has been a shameless plug.  Buy one; better still, buy a dozen.  They’re just the right thickness to shim up that short table leg that’s been driving you crazy for months now . . . .)

Sultry Weather

Hot and humid, with thunderstorms happening in random places that aren’t here.

Not good weather for thinking, or for writing.  Summer in general isn’t.  Spring and fall are the best times, and the shoulders of winter.  Deep winter is almost as bad as summer, because (as I’ve said here at least once) the answer to “How warm can you keep a nine-room house with a full basement in deep snow country” is “Never quite warm enough.”

It could be worse–a couple of years ago at about this time, we were dodging the remnants of Hurricane Irene on its way up the Connecticut River Valley, on our way down to Massachusetts to return one of our two remaining offspring to college.  He attracts weird weather like that; when we moved him in for the first time as a mid-year transfer student, we ended up fighting our way through a massive snow storm that blanketed the east coast from Washington up through Maine.

Oh, well.  Back to work, heat or no heat.

A Poet Passes

Seamus Heaney has died.

He was Ireland’s first Nobel-laureate poet since W. B. Yeats, but I — being a medievalist at heart, rather than a modernist — remember him with gratitude for his translation of Beowulf, which did so much to bring new readers to a work I’ve always loved.

For every reader, I think, there are some books that aren’t just books, they’re part of the permanent furniture of the reader’s mind; Beowulf was one of those for me.  I liked the brightly colored world of Middle English poetry well enough, but the sepia monochrome of the northern thing, with its occasional smear of red and flash of gold, was the landscape that I really loved.  It always disappointed me when modern readers would see it only as a primitive tale of monster-fighting — almost as much as it would disappoint me when critics failed to appreciate the monster-fights as much as they should have.  (Those are some damn fine monster-fights.)  Heaney’s translation may not have been scrupulously accurate; no poetic translation is ever going to be, and only a silly person would use a poetic translation as a crib sheet.  But it did much to convey the mood and the feel of the work, and showed the reading public why Beowulf is a major work of world literature and not just an interesting historical artifact.

And for that, as I said, I am grateful.

A recording of Heaney reading from his translations at the opening of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists Conference, at University College Dublin.

More Simple Cookery for the Deadlined and Overworked

The only difficult part of this recipe isn’t actually difficult at all, just a bit fiddly — if cutting up a whole head of cabbage into thin strips and turning three or four carrots into matchsticks takes more time or attention than you have at the moment, save it for another day.

Pork and Cabbage Stir-Fry

1 head of cabbage, cut into strips
3 T peanut oil, give or take
2 or 3 carrots, cut into matchsticks
1-2 pounds pork tenderloin, cut in thin slices
2 tablespoons minced ginger
1 cup chicken broth, divided (3/4 and 1/4)
1/4 cup soy sauce
shot of sriracha

Directions:

In a large wok (or a deep skillet, or a dutch oven; but a wok works best), stir-fry the cabbage and carrots in hot oil for about 6 minutes, until the carrots are crisp-tender. Remove and keep warm.

Stir-fry the pork in the remaining oil for 2 minutes — add a bit more oil if you need to. Add the ginger and stir-fry for 2 more minutes or until the pork is lightly browned. (“Lightly browned” pork is actually a kind of pale grey.  What they actually mean is, “no pink showing.”  Thin slices of tenderloin reach this stage quickly.)

Stir in the 3/4 cup of chicken broth and the soy sauce. Bring to a boil. Reduce the heat; cover and simmer for 3 minutes or until the meat juices run clear.  Combine the cornstarch and the remaining broth until smooth. Gradually stir into the wok.

Return the cabbage and carrots to the wok.  Add a squirt of sriracha.  (If you don’t have a source of sriracha where you are, I have a suspicion that a healthy shot of Tabasco, while non-canonical, would have a similar effect.)  Bring everything to a boil; cook and stir for 2-3 more minutes or until the sauce is thickened.

Serve over rice.

Not All Here

If things are a bit scattered around here at the moment, it’s because of the traditional end-of-summer flailing-about attendant upon getting the remaining offspring out of the house and off to school — one to graduate school at Rutgers (library science) and the other to his senior year at Curry College.

It only seems, sometimes, that we’ve been putting kids through college for roughly forever; in fact, it’s only been about thirteen years.  But that’s still a good long time.

I’m incredibly proud of my offspring, just the same.  They’re good kids, and they’ve always been incredibly patient with the vagaries and vicissitudes of having freelance writers for parents.

Today’s Link of Interest

A post from harm·less drudg·ery about descriptive and prescriptive grammarians, and what (in the opinion of a reasonable descriptivist) a reasonable prescriptive grammarian ought and ought not to do.

Full disclosure, here:  I’m firmly in the descriptivist camp, both by training and by inclination.  A language that doesn’t change is dead; the spoken language is primary and the written language — however much I may love it — is secondary; and trying to stop language change is like trying to stop the tide from coming in.

(Nevertheless:  it’s sneaked, not snuck, in written discourse; alright is a barbarism; and orientated instead of oriented is wrong, wrong, wrong.  We all have our bits of beach we want to keep dry.)

More from the Department of Nifty Stuff

As an addendum to my post the other day on outlines and cover letters, there’s this (from romance novelist Linda Conrad via Terri-Lynne DeFino): a handy-dandy basic two-sentence “elevator pitch” generator:

(TITLE) is a (GENRE) about (Heroine/Hero), a (backstory/identity) who, after (inner conflict) wants (goal). But when (turning point) happens, he/she has to (external goal), which seems impossible because (external conflict).

Looked at in skeletal form, it resembles nothing so much as MadLibs For Authors, but it works.