Life Beyond “Good” and “Bad”: Off the Cuff Review of Reviews

When I first started my journey through reading 52 books this year, I only had one criteria that I thought needed to be sated: did I enjoy the book or not? This is the simplest, most direct way of deciding whether or not a book is “worth” your time usually.

But, as with many things I do, it’s become more complicated than that as the weeks have bore on. For everything that I do in my life, there seems to be an ever changing criteria sheet which I use to make value-based judgements on my performance. I believe I inherited this from my father. The 52 books challenge has been no exception, and of late I would probably afford myself a C. Despite being proud of how my writing is progressing, I think my main concern was immediately noticing how I was following a set pattern.

The structure is as follows:

> I didn’t know if I’d like this novel or not.

> But I did end up liking this novel.

> Clever one liner for personality flare and points for style.

> Light analysis unsupported by evidence.

> “Ultimately I liked this novel but it might not be for you, I don’t know.”

Knowing your structure isn’t necessarily a bad thing when it comes to writing, but for me the fact is that I’m essentially saying the same thing for each book. Perhaps the pitfall with reviews is that we get caught into that trap of deciding whether or not a book is good enough in our opinion to be worth someone else’s time on a grand scale. That is, I’m tasking myself with the responsibility of deciding whether or not a book is suited to everyone who may or may not read my reviews.

The answer to the question of if a lot of people will like something is almost always going to be yes. When you try to wrap a piece of literature into a neat package of objectively “good” or “bad”, it almost always ends up being good unless it’s a complete train wreck.

Besides that, for as much as I talk about avoiding homogenising culture, literature, society, etc., I end up homogenising my own content in following my review structure. This is the final irony which does not escape me.

In my life as an under grad I got to a point where it was less about whether a text was “good” or “bad”, or if the story was enjoyable or not. Every part of the process was enjoyable for me. When you penetrate a certain level of analysing literature, it becomes less about the thing as a whole and more about tiny pockets of what it is that you’re looking at.

Recently, I read a fabulous Musing from Dirty Sci-Fi Buddha on my WordPress reader. In his Musing, he reflects on the need to approach people’s actions as neither “good” nor “bad”, and rather to approach them instance by instance. I of course, being me, misread this entirely and for whatever reason thought he was talking about books at first glance. This is the price I pay for constantly being focussing on creating content: many things are slipping through the gaps unless they appear immediately relevant. I’m learning to closely re-read again, little by little.

I think that the advice given in Dirty Sci-Fi Buddha’s musing can be applied to what it is that I’m trying to do. Perhaps it’s time to not look at each book as another point towards my end goal. My reading chops are back up enough again that I don’t need to look at the big picture of a novel anymore, and I can take the time to appreciate all the little parts of it that make it interesting or compelling.

We’re in a constant state of evolution and appraising what we can do better. Or at least, I know that I function that way. And so I find myself in the wonderful position of loving everything I am learning through this process, getting to read a lot of great books, and getting better and better at my craft in my own eyes.

Advertisements

2/52 books of 2019: Devil in the White City by Erik Larson

33002076540_b3cd4964dc_b.jpg

I’m really glad that I didn’t stipulate needing to have necessarily started the novel in order for it to count when I committed to the 52 books challenge. I’m going to get this out of the way early: Devil in the White City is taxing on the brain, and I don’t mean this in a negative way. Like most historical accounts, this is a very content heavy book. Where I usually fly through fiction, I was reading at a much slower pace to comprehend all the information that was being thrown at me. If not for this challenge, I probably would’ve taken another leisurely two years to finish the book.

I’ve never really been drawn in by the H.H. Holmes mythos – like most people, he isn’t the first person I think about when I think about true crime. In some ways I think his crimes were too horrific to be sensationalised by the media. They go past the point of being just the right level of horrifying and err more on the side of making me feel sick in my tum tum. I probably wouldn’t have picked this book if not for both Last Podcast on the Leftand My Favourite Murder raving about it. Ironically, despite my love of true crime, it was actually learning about the development of the Chicago World Fair that really sucked me into this story. I didn’t know I needed to know that much about Chicago soil, but I enjoyed learning about it none the less.

Ultimately, to me this isn’t really a book about either of the main male figures – H.H. Holmes and Daniel Hudson Burnham – in isolation. I don’t really think it’s even a book about what they achieved. Rather, I think this is a book about how consumerism and greed came to grip a nation in the American century (if you subscribe to the British century being the 1800s and the American century being the 1900s). It’s an ode to the great American past time of dreams and greed, and violence.

No facet of the American dream cannot exist in isolation. In order to have achieved the American dream, you must have fallen victim to its less desirable qualities.  Devil in the White City is an account of the different faces of the American psycho – the incessant need to destroy and rebuild, and the draw of greed, fame, and infamy alike. Holmes and Burnham are pitted against each other as representative of the American dream. Where Holmes represents the greed, violence, and mania that has plagued American identity, in turn Burnham represents the reach for glory, fame, and accomplishment.

Continuing on with my, “everything comes back to Gatsby” theory of American literature, it is easy to see the circumstances in which characters like Jay Gatsby were created. Devil in the White City is an account of the lengths a man will go to in order to achieve their dreams – whether that is to run the most successful world fair, or to create a murder hotel to kill young women in. Maybe, after all is said and done, this is what makes it so engaging. It is in our nature to need to succeed, and maybe we’re always doomed to be drawn in and revolted by the lengths people will go to achieve their dreams.

Would I recommend you read this book? Well, it really depends. Do you have a lot of time on your hands? Are you a patient person? Do you think you could sit through hundreds of pages explaining how the heating system was used in the world fair, not to mention the pages all about the soil types of Chicago, and still find it exhilarating? If you answered yes to these questions, I’d recommend reading it. If not, then I’d probably just wait for the movie or listen to a podcast series about it. I recommend the Last Podcast treatment.

On a final note, here are a few of the fun things I learned from this book: Pabst got the blue ribbon from the Chicago World Fair, there was one case of “extreme flatulence” recorded as an ailment resulting from the fair, and the fair was host to the largest Ferris wheel built to date at the time. Most people assumed it was going to result in tragedy.

Gillette: A Close Shave with Genuine Sentiment

Do you see what I did there?

In the unlikely event that you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve just escaped some sort of religious cult and this website was your first stop, or this is your only source of news for pop culture (if so, may I ask, why?), 2019 has come out swinging with Gillette releasing a short film entitled,We Believe: The Best Men Can Be. Before reading this article, you may wish to peruse their wares below:

 

 

As is to be expected in the current climate, an all-out internet civil war has been sparked as a result of the advert being released. I’m at the point where whenever anything to do with gender comes up in a mainstream internet setting, I try to make myself as small as possible and pray for it to be over soon. Not because I don’t care about gender politics, but because I know exactly what it eventually devolves to over the internet. If you are not sure what it might look or sound like, please refer to the video of two foxes screaming at each other previously featured in my article about outrage culture.

We’ve got all the sides coming in to say their two to five cents on the topic of Gillette’s video. I think it’s their god given right to do so, just as it is my god given right to lurk and continue to gain intel on my endless quest to understand human emotions and behaviour. I find you all fascinating.

In one corner, we’ve got men who feel their masculinity is being threatened by an advert for a $10 razor. In another, we have misandrists who continue to call for the blanket punishment of men everywhere, despite the fact that they don’t realise it’s counterproductive for their cause. They’re pro $10 razor, from what I can understand. We’ve got other people saying, “hey maybe we need to just be more committed to all being better people.” Then we have that one corner of people saying, “You’re not my real dad and you never will be.”

I’m not here to talk about gender politics for once in my entire life, nor am I here to defend either side of an argument about a shaving implement when everyone knows that this isn’t Communist Era Russia and you are free to simply buy a different brand. Seriously, Gillette does not have the monopoly on razors and you have plenty of independent companies you can choose from if you don’t believe in corporations. I know Proctor & Gamble is massive, but there are so many other alternatives if you are bothered by it – which you have the right to be. I’m for it. Do what you need to do to maintain your integrity.

The corner that I’m coming from today is the corner with a bit more of a complicated title. This corner is titled: corporations do not care for us and we need to stop allowing them to make us upset and impact upon our wellbeing, though we can still enjoy their products should we choose to without feeling like we’re siding with Darth Vader.

Whenever I have romantic thoughts about corporations, and I do often, I’m reminded of a time before my own, where cigarettes were marketed to men, women, and children alike as healthy. I think about all those scenes from Mad Men, which I use for fodder in imagining my life as a film but set in the 1960s, where the everyone smoked like chimneys, even in the doctors office. It was in the best interest of corporations to keep selling the message that cigarettes were healthy for you. And do you know why?

The answer has four words, features in a famous song from the 90s, and it makes the world of businesses go round. That’s right: dollar dollar bills ya’ll.

Call me jaded or incendiary, but from the first frame of this short film I knew that Proctor & Gamble were trying to get my hard earned money at the expense of my values and beliefs. They were trying to nickel and dime me using the well-known advertising technique of pathos. They made me feel emotions at the expense of my integrity. How dare they! How dare I buy a Gillette Mach 3 Turbo four months ago because it’s a closer shave and my European heritage refuses to let me have soft feminine leg hair and now it’s my feminine shame! I’m going to burn my tube of Oral B while I write this!

This is not the first time we’ve seen this happen, with a recent example of this being the Kendall Jenner Pepsi commercial. Pepsi Co had, unfortunately for them, far more transparency in their advert. The ham-fisted representations of fired up youth who can’t get their protest on without that sugary sweetness flowing through their veins was an exercise in hitting me over the head with, “buy my soda you damn millennial!” and then dragging my corpse back through it.

Clearly Proctor & Gamble learned from this, because here we are, getting angry over a $10 razor. For what it’s worth, I think this is actually a really well put together advertisement. One of my guilty pleasures is that I actually love analysing adverts and derive a lot of joy from figuring out what they’re trying to sell to me, besides the product itself. Sometimes KFC tries to sell me happiness, sometimes it’s just fried chicken. Either way, I’m enjoying the show.

I think the key to P&Gs success also stems from the fact they haven’t made the face of their campaign someone who earns more than most of their customer base will earn in a life time. Sure, they used the footage of the incredible Terry Crews speaking on issues of abuse and toxic masculinity, but it was used tastefully in my opinion. That’s right: I like the way they made this advert. Sue me.

And it’s obviously working, because all anyone seems to want to talk about on the internet is either Gillette or the returning queens for Rupaul’s Drag Race All Stars 4.

I want to impress this upon you: whether you want to boycott Gillette because you think they’re misandrists, or you’re standing with Gillette because you feel like they’re putting women first, or you’re having any sort of reaction at all that will impact upon whether or not you buy this product, I want you to keep in mind what I’ve talked about in this article. It is a corporation’s sole duty to make money. If someone is trying to sell you a product, they will do anything they can to get you to spend your hard-earned cash. No matter what, they want to close the deal. They only care that you buy, and they don’t care how they get you to do it.

My favourite example of how far someone will go to sell you something comes from the Tyra Banks Show. When I first heard about this clip, I assumed that it was a parody, or it was fake, or it was some Mad TV shenanigans, because it sounded so ridiculous to me. But anyway, here’s a video of Tyra Banks giving her viewers Vaseline tubs and everyone freaking out like they’ve been given the elixir of eternal life.

 

 

Yep.

And you know what? That’s the reaction that is desired by marketing campaigns. They want you to buy their products. They want you to be invested in their product and to ensure brand loyalty. They want you to buy into the idea that your quality of life will be better for buying this product. To afford a corporation any sort of moral direction is somewhat laughable. Whatever will sell, they will use.

Believe it or not, this article isn’t put together so that I can tell you whether you should or should not buy Proctor & Gamble’s products. It’s not my job to tell you anything you should buy, unless I think it’s worth endorsing. I think people should have the right to choose what they want to buy and to make informed decisions. That’s the benefit of living in our capitalist society. I don’t have time in this article to consider whether I’m pro, anti, or post consumerist culture and capitalist: I just want a razor that works, and I just want milk that tastes like real milk.

What I’m trying to impress upon you more than anything is to continue to be an informed consumer, and to not allow the efforts of a multi-million dollar corporation to sell a $10 razor to cloud your judgement on issues or products. So often we get caught up in what’s going on in the internet world and don’t really pay attention to what’s going on in the real world. For every caricature in advertising of a dangerous man or a vapid woman, I can guarantee that there are tenfold more wonderful people who in every day  life are a testimony to how good people can be.

That’s right, I believe people are good and have the capacity for great things under this jaded façade. You want to come for me for that?

 

tenor.gif

 

Anyway, thanks always for reading. Love your work. Remi.

Bleeding Hearts of the World Unite: Outrage Culture in the 21st Century

abstract board game bundle business

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

 

We live in the age where everyone is a public figure, no matter how small their reach. Everyone gets to say their two cents on any topic they can think of. I think Banksy said it best:

In the future, everyone will be anonymous for 15 minutes.

One of the topics I’m most fascinated by is that of “outrage culture”. Much like Nick Carraway looking over Manhattan, I am simultaneously entranced and revolted by outrage culture. I can’t look away, and yet I continue to have a foul taste in my mouth.

I’m defining “outrage culture” as being specific to the internet, characterised by a readiness to “cancel” people, engage in witch hunts, and dogged character assassination. A cursory Wikipedia search returns this as a definition of outrage culture: “Call-out culture (also known as outrage culture) is a term for the social phenomenon of publicly denouncing perceived racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and other forms of bigotry.”

Typically what results from outrage culture is the following:

 

Anyway, you get the point.

Right off the top I need to stipulate that I’m all for addressing problematic behaviours people exhibit. It’s important to set boundaries, and to re-educate people who might have outdated ideas about things such as race, gender, homophobia, transphobia, and so on. This will always be important to me. I would hazard a guess that it’s important to most people.

I also need to stipulate that this is not an article intended to defend anyone’s actions. It is especially not an article intended to defend people who have been pulled up on damaging behaviours and statements, who continue to demonstrate bigotry because they think it makes them funny or edgy, or because they prefer to be ignorant because it makes them feel safe.

The issue from outrage culture doesn’t arise from the correction of behaviour, or from defending the rights of minority groups to live safely and with the respect experienced by the majority. The issue arises from a culture that determines someone is “cancelled” and lambasted long after they have attempted to rectify their actions.

I see a lot of outrage culture being directed at young content creators, especially young men. One of the most controversial figures subject to this is Felix Kjellberg (better known as Pewdiepie). I know, when will the straight, white man catch a break?

Again, I feel the need to reiterate that I’m not defending anyone. It isn’t my role or responsibility to decide whether or not we should be outraged by Kjellberg’s past mistakes – and boy howdy, they were extensive and career damaging. I don’t hold the key to “forgiving” Kjellberg on a larger level, but for what it’s worth, I do think his experience with the media provides us with an interesting case study.

I also want to acknowledge that at the time of writing this article, Kjellberg has apologised for the unacceptable behaviours he has engaged in, acknowledged the issues with them, and has worked to correct his behaviour while remaining aware of the impact of his actions. In my opinion, this is all someone can do when it comes to saying or doing the wrong thing.

As a recent example of the outrage culture directed at Kjellberg, a Twitch streamer implied that the lyrics of Kjellberg’s parody diss track, “Bitch Lasagna” (what a name), have racist undertones. The lyric is as follows:

I’m a blue eyes white dragon, while you’re just dark magician.”

Now, for those of you who aren’t as well versed in Yu-Gi-Oh as I am, blue eyes white dragon is a very desirable card to have, while dark magician is a relatively common card that isn’t as powerful. It was essentially the deus ex machina of the series. And yes, I was a very cool person in primary school.

While I understand that “blue eyes white dragon” may be misconstrued to be linked to Aryan features, I think you have to perform some pretty extensive mental gymnastics to interpret this as Kjellberg intentionally using a children’s card game to put forward some sort of racist message. When I look at the title of the track itself, I’m not really given to taking this song to be one with particularly deep messages.

To me, the streamer’s interpretation is a clear example of how no matter what Kjellberg does from this point on, his past mistakes will always be dragged back up from the mire and held against him. Where he used to be known for frankly cringy gaming videos with relatively unfunny jokes, people will now seemingly forever associate Kjellberg with “edgy” alt-right ideology as a result of the character assassination occurring after his remarks. Regardless of if there is any concrete evidence to prove that Kjellberg subscribes to alt-right beliefs, that is now who he is to the larger general public. Furthermore, it is easy to assume that if not for the controversies, this rap would have been taken for what it is: a pretty idiotic lark making fun of the 2018-present subscriber war on YouTube.

It isn’t my job to decide whether or not Kjellberg is deserving of the continuous public criticism he faces and the microscope he is under, especially given the severity of some of his more “edgy” internet stunts. But it does work to demonstrate my point about the extent to which outrage culture can affect a person’s career and character.

In outrage culture, no matter how much you correct your behaviour or attempt to make reparations for your ignorance, you are always going to be twisted and misconstrued to reinforce that you are still the person you were when you made the mistake in the first place. There are no second chances on the internet. They think, therefore you are.

On a long enough timeline, we are all bound to say something stupid or ignorant. We’re human, and sometimes we simply don’t know better until someone teaches us. In real life, outside of the internet, most often when the behaviours of people around us are corrected the issue is dropped. We tend to look down on people who call out others for things that are no longer relevant. So why is it that on the internet, everything is fair game?

night television tv video

Photo by Tookapic on Pexels.com

 

What I would argue is that part of it is a desire for people to appear to be on the bandwagon – to be “woke” and “progressive” –  as opposed to a genuine outrage or taking of offense. Sometimes I see a tendency to wait to be told whether or not to be offended by something. What really gets my goat about this is the fact that the very same people who engage in constant public humiliation of people who are trying to fix their mistakes are the same people who preach “only good vibes”; you cannot have both.

For as long  as we keep internet outrage culture alive, we’re going to foster a society where people won’t speak their minds authentically because of fear of being lynched by public majority opinion, and when you do that you eradicate intelligent discussion. We’re going to homogenise culture until we all think, feel, and act the same way out of fear of being completely annihilated.

What it really comes down to is this: yes, address problematic behaviours and opinions. Yes, challenge people’s beliefs and identify gaps in knowledge. But you have to allow people the chance to demonstrate that they’ve changed and that they’ve learned. If you ask me, the cost of someone’s character isn’t really worth the internet points you might gain.

January Whip-Around: the future of Remi Gallagher

computer keyboard

Photo by Negative Space on Pexels.com

 

Well, here we are: 2019.

I made the decision a long, long time ago to not touch this website until I had a better idea of what direction I actually wanted it to go in. I’ve gotten burned out with writing fiction if I’m honest; my heart isn’t really in it as much as I think it probably needs to be in order to be successful. Call me an old fashioned stiff, but I think if I’m going to do something I should either do it with my heart or not do it at all.

Upon taking the time reflect on what I had originally wanted this website to be for me, and thinking about what kind of writer I wanted to be, it was never about fiction. Rather, my joy comes from the art of intelligent discourse about such frivolous topics as pop culture and media in general. If I’m honest with myself I think it’s always been there, though the allure of being a fiction writer is surely quite a hard one to resist.

Growing up, when I thought about fiction writers, I saw them as representative of reaching a higher level of intelligence; of knowing the secrets of the world and human behaviour that mere mortals do not possess. Maybe I’m too old (lmfao), or a little bit jaded, maybe both, maybe neither, but that image of a writer has been disillusioned for me. Not because I think fiction writers aren’t all those things, but because I’d assumed a level of arrogance and superiority came with it. Every time I meet a fiction writer, I am meeting someone who presents their own window into the world and has the grace to share it, along with the humility of someone who I suspect may have been born without an ego.

Anyway, as most of you know I probably have double the amount of ego I should  have, which makes me perfect for writing opinion pieces!

So in 2019 the content I am bringing is more focussed on my musings of pop culture and literature, and less to do with my own creative works. Who knows, I might come back to them one day. Then again, I said the same thing in 2009 about wearing band shirts and listening to metal that boys liked. Needless to say, now I wear a tropical fantasy wardrobe with every colour of the rainbow and listen to Lady Gaga.

Who knows.

This year I’m doing my best to fulfil the 52 book challenge. One of my favourite things to do in 2013 when I was deep into writing novels was to read blogs that took the challenge upon themselves. I loved to read other people’s opinions on things, and found myself exposed to a lot of things I otherwise wouldn’t have been. In fact, not for the first time in my life, I fell really in love with blogs and the writing on them. I’ve been reading blogs since I was 13, and I still love and defend it as its own art form.

Over the coming weeks I’m going to start uploading an extended piece on each book I’ve read thus far, one at a time, at a pace of my liking. I’m also going to provide my commentary of different things going on in the media – from pop culture contributions to critiquing controversial advertising and so on.

Thanks for all being here on this journey with me.

From Paris (it’s pronounced “Brisbane”) with love,

Remi.

I WRITE THINGS: On using “The Snowflake Method”: moving from stabbing in the dark to stabbing in a pleasantly lit room

fashion art coffee macbook pro

Photo by OVAN on Pexels.com

I am not an effective planner. That’s not to say I don’t plan things – this is an essential part of being a teacher. It’s that key word “effective” that most often trips me up.

However, as an analytical person who is solutions based (use this information as you will), I am particularly adept at finding things I’m not good at and figuring out how to fix it. Again, the application of this skill is often also not very effective.

In the past two months I wrote two first drafts of two different novels. These were both roughly 30 pages long, with about 15 pages devoted to a really compelling and engaging exposition to the novel, and then the remaining pages being akin to the story telling skills of a five year old telling you about a birthday party they went to. The “and then” story telling structure is strong with this one.

With both of these first drafts, I have done what some would call “diddly squat”. I didn’t plan for either of them – I wrote them by the seat of my pants. This has been my method for most of my writing career. I get an idea and I just sort of go for it without stopping. What I end up with is great little bits of writing amongst an otherwise on fire manuscript where the fire extinguisher is also on fire.

Herein lies my problem: at the end of writing something, I’m usually staring down the barrel of something that’s gotten way out of my control and I don’t know how to get it back under control. That sentiment in itself is one I have trouble wrapping my head around. Every time I’ve written something, there comes a tipping point where it feels as though I’ve relinquished control of the narrative and I don’t know how to reign it back in. Here I am, the God of the universe I have created, with no idea how to actually write a compelling plot.

Herein lies another problem: my longer pieces of writing tend to not really have a plot. Or at least, their plot isn’t strong enough to carry the whole novel. I would liken this to playing an RPG game the likes of Fallout or Skyrim: after five hours of game play, I’ve suddenly remembered there’s actually a story buried in there, somewhere.

In the past when I have encountered a problem, I have chosen the Quit and Accept Futility Method, which is 100% ineffective and does nothing to serve me.

Recently, I have been trying a new method, called the Find Help From an Outside Source and Accept That You Are Not Perfect. As a result, I’ve found out about another method, the Snowflake Method. I’m not going to explain it to you because I assume you can read, but I’ve found this planning method to be invaluable to me in my current writing endeavours, and also to stop me from my aforementioned use of QAFM.

It’s forced me to stop and really think about what’s going to happen next in my stories instead of just panicking and hitting the “fuck it” button. Usually, my writing technique is to go with whatever idea pops into my head first and assume that it’s the right one. Have human sized crabs featured in the story up to this point? No, but okay brain, let’s do it!

There’s a lot to be said about the value of writing for the sake of writing and just enjoying the discovery process, and that certainly has it’s place, but I’ve come to realise that the issues I ran into when I first started writing haven’t changed, and that’s because I didn’t plan then and I certainly wasn’t planning when I first picked it back up a few months ago.

There are only so many times one can hit their head against the wall, and I suppose I reached my limit.

So, in adopting the Snowflake Method, have I got a best seller novel on my hands? Probably not. Have I found the hack, the “easy” way to write a novel? Also, probably not. I think what I have got though is a greater understanding of how to construct a novel. I’m being forced to stop and think about my characters more. I’m forced to have to think about, what’s actually going on in this story?

Stephen King once famously said that writing ideas down is a good way to immortalise bad ideas, and maybe he’s right. But an even better way to immortalise bad ideas, I have found, is to write without thinking and excuse it as getting into a “creative” flow.

Change is difficult. It is not easy to change something about yourself. It is not easy to change my mindset that I just can’t write novels, that I have no good ideas, and that what I’m doing is not worth my time. These are all difficult things. But the difference between people that do and do not is just that: it’s up to whether I chose to write or not to write. There isn’t really an in between.

Anyway, I have a head cold so I hope some of this is lucid and understandable.

I WRITE THINGS: Things I’ve learned so far in trying to write a novel and Toni Morrison

I knew when I started this website that, ultimately, I would want to eventually get to a point where I was able to produce something that was at an acceptable length for publication. After all, that is typically what writers want – to put what they have made out into the world for public consumption. What I have found immediately is that an extended piece of writing is a lot harder to produce.

 

When I first started writing seriously at the age of 19, I used to have idea after idea after idea present itself to me. Like apples on the proverbial idea tree, they were all just as delightful and engaging as the last. Then one day, I stopped getting ideas. This happened right around the time I finished writing my second full length novel and promptly decided it was unreadable garbage.

 

In the painful process of having to become the person I am 4 years later, I didn’t have the capacity to even think about writing. As I mentioned in my other post of a similar topic, for the past four years I’ve been drawing a blank. Especially going into my first full time job in an intellectually and emotionally demanding field, it’s hard to be distracted enough to imagine these ideas.

 

And so, moving ahead and taking the first step to write a novel is difficult. To date I have two half-baked first drafts that require far more planning and forethought. These were products of feverish discovery writing, where I took a character and went with it. These will require work. Hard work. They will take time, because I do not have all day to write. They will take a commitment to writing, even when I don’t feel like doing it.

 

Luckily, I have more of patience with my writing, and more of a tolerance for the fact that, frankly, ideas don’t just pop into my head. I may be lucky enough to be given a scene, or the portrait of a person, or even a desire to write about a particular theme or topic, but for the most part I’m on the front line alone while the ever elusive muse is off in another field.

 

Perhaps my patience comes from the knowledge that if I don’t just sit myself down and start writing, I’m going to blink and have missed all the time I could’ve spent on something I am so passionate about.

 

For what it’s worth, I don’t put a lot of stock into the idea that I don’t have any ideas. Of an evening, I may only have 2-3 hours to write stuff, and that is not time I can spend feeling sorry for myself that I haven’t had a whole story jump out in front of me ready for my willing hands. One very important lesson I’ve learned in these four years is that if you want something, you have to work for it. This can be applied to writing, too.

 

And so, I watch YouTube videos interviewing my favourite authors to see what they have to say about the topic or motivating yourself as a writer.

 

Tonight I watched an interview with Toni Morrison, who is arguably my favourite literary fiction author. Morrison writes about the plight of African American women navigating their lives as the least privileged members of society. Her intent was to make people feel that hurt experienced by the group she belonged to, and time and time again she has achieved this tenfold. Hurt is a word she uses quite a lot, and it is a powerful one at that.

 

She reflects on the African American literature of the time when she was first coming up, about how focussed on being empowering it was, and how she saw a gap. Morrison stated to the interviewer, “They’re going to skip over something. And no one’s going to remember that it wasn’t always beautiful.”

photo of person writing on notebook

Photo by JESHOOTS.com on Pexels.com