2 posts tagged “author”

When you have one of those days when nothing wants to go on the paper, this is a good way to loosen things up. It only take a few  minutes and works surprisingly well.

To start: You need two characters and a basic setting. Do this fast, without giving yourself too much time to overthink it. The point is to try to get the rhythm of it. When I first set this down, I don't even attribute the lines, just basic dialogue & a few bits of setting. Have fun!

1. Character A speaks. Must be less than 6 words.
2. Character B does not speak; instead, describe an action that he/she performs.
3. Character A speaks one line.
4. Character B responds less than 3 sentences.
5. Character A answers one line.
6. Character B responds less than 3 sentences.
7. Character A gesture.
8. Character B speaks less than 3 sentences while performing some action.
9. Character A speaks a line beginning with "I remember . . . "
10. Character B responds with less than 2 lines.
11. Character A asks a question.
12. Character B speaks a line beginning with "I used to believe . . . "
13. Describe character A and some object from the setting, either A is doing something, or the object relates to A somehow.
14. Character A speaks one line.
15. Describe Character B's actions when he/she doesn't respond.
16. Character A speaks a line beginning with "I never" or "I always."
17. Character B speaks one line.
18. Character A speaks one line; describe the action while he says it.

There you have it. Easy-peasy. As Anne Lamott tells us, all first drafts are shitty, so here's my shitty first draft. Later I'll post revisions, and we'll see how we progressed from this to that.

So, here's the exercise:

A: "I thought you weren't coming."
    Jane dropped her bags in a heap on the floor and flopped into the chair, covering her face with her hands.
A: "Looks like you had a fantastic day."
B" "My God, Neil. My life is turning to shit and I can't seem to get myself out. I've been fighting with Bill all day over the phone."
A: "Do tell."
B: "Oh, it's really the usual. His inability to commit, his lack of attentiveness, his aversion to family and convention. Really, you must be tired of hearing this?"
    Neil cleared his throat.
B: "I'm sorry to bore you." Jane leaned forward in her chair, taking Nail's hand in hers. "You're perfect. Tell me the secret of finding a perfect, normal man."
A:   "I remember you before you met him. You weren't so keen on convention then, remember?"
B: "But I love him, Neil. That's the difference. Now I want to be utterly conventional."
A: "Don't you think you need a c onventional man for that?"
B: "I used to believe that eventually I'd find someone who was perfect for me, you know? Now I'm beginning to doubt it."
    Neil picked up his pen from the table between them, holding the tortoise-shell barrel between his pale fingers. "Want me to write you a happy ending?"
    Jane gave him a wan smile and sighed. She slid her ring over the knuckle and then back, over and over as the silence stretched out.
A: "You'll never guess who I saw at the farmer's market this week. I went to get some arugula and tomatoes,and I happened to see your sister. She was buying goat cheese."
B: "You never met my sister . . . did you?"

Anyway, that's my shitty first draft :)

A link to an interesting Authorlink interview here.

Patricia Marx is a longtime writer -- Harvard Lampoon, Saturday Night Live, New Yorker -- but only recently did she write her first novel, a romantic comedy entitled Him Her Him Again The End of Him. She says that she was urged by her friend, photographer Richard Avedon (you mean you aren't friends with a world-renowned photog? What's the matter with  you?) to write the novel as an expression of her own personal voice, something she says she has never before allowed.

This brings up a good question for everyone who wants to write. Do you write the voice in your head, or is the voice a construct? I'm sure it depends a lot on the situation. Whoever read an English Lit final written in the author's natural voice? However, writers of fiction take note: Marx thinks that her natural voice allows readers to identify better with the character, makes it feel less staged. Hell, she didn't even give this main character a name. Why? Because, as a fellow writer, Marx is bothered by the "contrivance."

Which leads to another question: isn't the entire thing a contrivance, even if your characters have no names, even if you write in a natural voice? The answer is, of course, that it is a contrivance. But the less obvious the staging is, the gauzier the veil between the reader and the character, the better the book. Stream of consciousness was intended to remove the veil completely. Of course, any reader of Ulysses can tell you that the endeavor is not completely successful. In my opinion there is no way to seamlessly interject a characters thoughts and actions into a reader's head. For example, Woolf's Mrs. Dalloway was one of the first to use the technique, but although I might sympathize with her thoughts on postwar England, I cannot completely immerse myself in the time or the place. A modern reader may simply be too far removed from the setting.

Although I agree with Marx that finding your own voice is not only important, but possibly vital to success, I think there are limits on the positive effects to be achieved. Improved writing, better characters, and verisimilitude will all result, but I think is unrealistic to hope to completely absorb the reader. Entertain, distract, engage, or even enthrall a reader -- yes. But completely transport -- no. Sadly, no.