Friday, March 27, 2009

Research

You never know what you'll find when you open a book.

I'm reading Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely (Harper Collins, 2008), and even though it should be a dry treatise on the psychological causes of our insistence on repeating the same mistakes, I find it a most enjoyable experience.

Maybe it's because Dan Ariely shows that our instinctual understanding (or at least my instinctual understanding, as writer) of human motivations and urges, is not as flawed as we might fear. And that the extreme reactions we like to showcase in our stories, at the point of crisis, are not as far-fetched as a cool, rational mind would like to make them.

And maybe it's because the author of Predictably Irrational is himself an excellent writer, a rare gem in the world of academic prose. He doesn't just provide information, and the names of the researchers involved in the experiments he describes, he entertains his public with the work he obviously loves and performs with a passion.

What have I learned so far in this book? That expectations do trump reality -- your senses will be betrayed by your mind. That ownership gives things more value than they're worth -- value is not a static, objective concept, but a scale that depends on variables as intangible as the moment when you decide how much you care for the thing you're considering selling or buying.

I can't help but wonder, as I read this book, how a Zen master would walk through life. Would he be as predictably irrational, or would his rational self govern him at each step? Could a human attain enough self-control to stop and consider every decision with a quiet, if not cool mind, before launching himself into reckless action?

Some days, I wish I was that Zen master. Other days... I just don't know. Whenever you gain something, you also lose something. And the grass is always greener...

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Book Lists

I came across another one.

You know them. The lists of "classics" you "should have read" if you're a "book nerd."

Considering that I'm just a few pages and a stand-up performance short of a PhD in literature, you'd think I'd cross off every book on every such list.

Nuh-uh.

My lists of books read, unread, to-be-read, and never-to-look-at are just too odd.

Sure, I do have War and Peace, Crime and Punishment, Le Comte de Monte-Cristo on my lists.

I also have a French collection: Zola, Balzac, Sartre, Camus. I'll have to put it into some order... some day.

The fact is, I've done my "serious" reading in graduate school. And before. When I had classes. And papers due. You know, grades.

What do I mean by serious reading? My good author friends, do no make faces! It does not mean "good" reading. It means obligatory, not-by-choice reading.

I read War and Peace for fun, but Anna Karenina as obligatory reading (although it ended up being fun). I read Crime and Punishment for fun, but Chekhov as obligatory reading. Some of the authors and titles shifted from one category to the other. Some didn't. Some I revisited. Some I ignored pointedly after I closed the book once I was done with the assignment. Some I could almost burn (if I could ever bring myself to destroy a single book). Some I'd take with me to a deserted island.

Now lest these authors and titles start impressing you, I will admit that I also enjoy graphic novels, comic books, and manga. I am an old-time fan of science-fiction and fantasy. I couldn't survive without my regular dose of genre novels. I read all of the Harry Potter books, but none of the Stephenie Mayer ones (timing, I guess). And yes, I am a big fan of Tolkien and C.S. Lewis.

The point is, there is no bad reading.

There is such a thing as not pushing yourself, as limiting your curiosity. When my first child was little and I felt my reading was going by the wayside, I joined a book club -- just a few friends who got together for coffee and chatting. We decided on a book and talked about it. Nothing formal, but I read some authors I wouldn't have discovered otherwise. And I enjoyed the books.

I pushed myself out of my comfort zone.

We should always do that. We should push ourselves. Be curious. Opening a book is a great way to take a risk without risking danger. And a library is a wonderful place to open a book without opening your wallet.

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Too Short

I never thought I'd write this.

My story is too short.

I mean, I used to have trouble writing anything less verbose than a Tolstoyan novel. It's the Russian genes, you know. The European upbringing and all that.

And then I discovered the pleasure of shortening my tales.

Now it's too short. By about 2000 words.

Do I need to add a scene? Expand a few here and there?

No, don't tell me. I'm going to sleep on it.

As the Russian folk tales say, "the morning is wiser than the evening."

Maybe I'll dream the solution. It's happened before.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

I'm cleaning, I'm cleaning!

I just read this blog by Tara West:

MySpace.com Blogs - CLEAN UP YOUR LOITER - Tara MySpace Blog

Well, I thought that Tara meant it literally, but her post had me laughing, and then thinking... and now back to laughing.

So I'm cleaning up my loiter.

The fact is, I've been loitering a lot lately. Not really by choice, mind you, but I've been seen loitering in the rooms of nursing homes waiting for my father-in-law while he got ready to leave when I came to pick him up. I've been known to loiter in coffee houses and public libraries in search of a fast internet connection. I've found myself loitering in the den of my in-laws' apartment in-between bouts of fetching ice water and fixing dinners.

And before that, I was loitering at my day job.

What I haven't been doing is posting on my blog and writing stories.

Hopefully, I'll start cleaning up the litter of my life and get around to actually do something productive (now if it came with some green attached to it, wouldn't that be mah-velous, but hey, I'll take a vacation from all the loitering while I can).

One act of clean-up is to offer a workshop... on writing (see the previous post). Another is to clean up my work area (that's physical cleaning, and other, better writers have chronicled such a process).

But most importantly, I'm beginning to hear my characters speaking to me.

And you know how sweet that sound is.






Powered by ScribeFire.

Monday, March 9, 2009

New Writing Workshop Begins Soon

New Workshop
Great Descriptions
Begins March 22

Learn the Secrets of Great Descriptions
Practice
See Examples
Discuss
Make an Impact on your Writing
And on your Readers

Registration Open Now
Duration: 3 weeks
Fee: $20

Visit http://ottercreations.mashaholl.com
for more information


Click to join GreatDescriptions

Click to join GreatDescriptions



Follow the directions in the email you will receive once you submit your application

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

We have a winner!

... who should have been announced yesterday, but man proposes and the Fates dispose...

Housemouse is the winner!

Congratulations!

Please contact me so I can send you your prize!

Thursday, February 5, 2009

February Contest! Follow the Links!

Everybody writes about love in February. Why should I break the trend?

Read on and follow the blog trail to your next target! Find out who hosts the next stop on the blog trail at the bottom of the page. Then post a response to this blog before 12 midnight on Monday, February 9th for a chance to win a copy of The Joining before it hits the cyber-shelves on Wednesday!

Now let me tell you. There’s more to love than greeting cards and roses.

Of course, a greater number of books and plays have been written about it than any other subject. But fiction writers are not the only ones to ponder the nature of love.

Why don’t we look at what philosophy says about it?

First, let’s learn about the word itself.

Yes, I do mean the word. I’m not going to recount any emotional first meets, or tell you the best way to set up a romantic dinner.

No, I want to look at the meaning of the word love and what it signifies for our relationships.

But have we imagined that love comes in several different kinds, and that each can have a multitude of qualities and degrees?

We know of a mother’s love, of brotherly love, of the warm feeling of a deep friendship. However, have we considered that all these are entirely different types of love, rather than degrees of one and the same feeling?

The Greek language (so beloved of ancient writers and philosophers), differentiates between four kinds of love. There’s storge, philia, eros, and agape. They refer to different bonds between different people. We all know (or think we know) eros. But what of the others?
Philia is not unfamiliar from compound nouns we use quite often: philosophy, Francophile, bibliophile, philanthropy, not to mention the less pleasant ones… that I’m not going to quote here. They all refer to someone who likes or loves something. But there is an even deeper meaning to philia.

Agape is the Greek equivalent of the Latin caritas, charity. And the meaning of charity in our language is charged with centuries of cultural changes, so that the modern English word doesn’t reflect anymore the original agape.

Storge is an entirely different term, and refers to affection. But before you dismiss affection as a lukewarm and weak emotion, let’s see how one philosopher discusses the differences between The Four Loves.

Meet Clive Staples Lewis.

We all know C.S. Lewis for his Narnia stories. But Lewis wasn’t just a children’s writer. He was a philosopher of religion. In The Four Loves, he explores the nature of love from a Christian perspective through thought-experiments and examples from literature (Wikipedia).

Not only did he define the various terms in the context of our Western culture, but he also gave them an order of importance, agape being the greatest of loves. I will take the liberty of upsetting his order, because I’m not looking at love from the strict point of view of philosophy, but rather from my own -- that of a fiction author who can’t help but add romance to her stories.

In Lewis’ words, agape is an unconditional love directed towards one's neighbor which is not dependent on any lovable qualities that the object of love possesses. Agape is the love that brings forth caring regardless of circumstance. It’s the emotion that urges us to help a stranger. It’s the emotion of a civilized society, that which holds it together and transcends its laws and rules.

Storge, affection, is fondness through familiarity, especially between family members or people who have otherwise found themselves together by chance. It’s the feeling you have for your siblings, even though you can’t stand to be in the same room with them. It’s the comfort of knowing you have relatives and acquaintances who fill your life, and that you are not alone.

It’s also the feeling necessary to survive the anxieties of raising children. Parental love, too, is storge.

Friendship, philia, is a strong bond existing between people who share a common interest or activity. In other words, if you don’t have anything in common with someone, you cannot experience philia for that person.

A common cultural background, a common pride in your heritage, engenders philia. Belonging to the same association. Sharing a passion for books or sports. Philia is the emotion that makes football-watching a successful social event.

Eros is love in the sense of “being in love”. We associate eros with physical expressions of love, love-making, and sensuality. But Lewis separates it from sexuality, although he does spend time discussing sexual activity and its spiritual significance in both a pagan and a Christian sense (Wikipedia).

Because, while eros does lead to, or contain the seeds of sexual expression, it is neither limited by it, nor dependent on it.

What does this discourse mean for writers and readers of romance?

Something we already know: love isn’t simple. True love, the love of a lifetime that binds the partners, is a construct of all of the above. It is eros, because we should never fall out of love. It is storge, because our partners become our family. It is philia, because if we don’t have anything in common, nothing to share, our lives will be barren, and there will be nothing to feed the relationship. It is agape, because true love must be unconditional and spiritual.

Now lest I become too maudlin, allow me to share C.S. Lewis’ warning, that love—commonly held to be the arch-emotion—becomes corrupt by presuming itself to be what it is not (Wikipedia) — “love begins to be a demon the moment he begins to be a god" (C.S. Lewis, The Four Loves).

Now leave me a comment, and enter to win my latest story of intergalactic love!

On Tuesday, follow this link: Ginger Simpson (http://mizging.blogspot.com) for the next wayside on the blog trail!