One Writer’s Journey: Writing and the Intersection of Everything

            One of my college professors gave me a strange piece of advice: If I wanted to be a professional writer, he cautioned me, I should study something other than writing. His reasoning: Writers need something (other than writing) to write about, and too much focus on one thing can lead to a myopic view of the world.

            At the time, I thought such advice was mad. I wanted to write comic books for a living; why did I need to study anything else? However, I kept his words in the back of my mind even as I went on to devote most of my studies to writing—majoring in English, completing a master’s in English, attending numerous workshops and conferences.

In time, I began to understand what he meant: Writing can be an insular world. Writers spend all day inside their own heads. They hang out with other writers, talk about writing, and perpetuate the sense the writing is the center of our universe—almost our god.

***

            However, a singular focus on the craft of writing isn’t necessarily bad. When I was young, I watched adults around me struggle through jobs they hated. I decided I didn’t want that. I never wanted to take a job or choose a career just to earn a paycheck. Money alone has never been sufficient motivation for me to do anything (though lack of money has been). 
            I chose a different path by focusing on things which interested me, things I enjoyed doing, and things which challenged me intellectually and emotionally. I found all of these things in writing—and it happened almost by accident.

***

            I grew up reading comic books and watching science fiction shows such as Star Trek. They sparked my imagination by showing me possibilities that didn’t exist in the so-called real world. I wanted to be a super-hero or a Starfleet officer! Since those careers did not exist, I turned to the creative process behind such characters.

            Like most kids, I first wanted to be an artist. Armed with only a pencil, typing paper, and markers, I got pretty good at copying the line work, figures, and shading of certain comic book artists (Neal Adams, Dave Cockrum, and John and Sal Buscema were favorites) and created my own characters. But when it came to studying art in school, something didn’t click. Learning to draw fruit, the folds in clothing, and the same figure doing different things (smiling, dancing, running), was too much like work. I wanted to do something fun.

***

            Learning the craft of writing hasn’t been fun (at least as I defined the term then), but it has engaged me in wholly different ways. I love the structure of writing—how an outline can lead to the basic building blocks of a story yet leave room for improvisation. I love the way writing looks on a page or screen—neat and ordered formats remove all doubt as to where to put the page number and allow me to concentrate on the most important thing in writing: ideas.

I also became enthralled with writing scripts. I write something down, and a character in a story says it. I describe a scene, and an artist brings it to life.

Early collaborations, however, did not go well. As I wrote numerous scripts which will never be drawn, I became aware of my own limitations as writer. I created a Star Trek-like military, but had little clue what being in the military was actually like. (Fortunately, my brother and father both served, so I learned somewhat from their experiences.) I cleverly called my science officer a “geometeorologist,” but had no idea what a geologist or a meteorologist would do in the context of an alien planet, let alone someone who combined both fields.

Writing super-heroes seemed easier because I could just make stuff up, but even then I had no idea how to pace or end a story. I was further dismayed when people read my scripts and told me all my characters sounded alike!

Clearly, I was missing something.

One thing I've learned from my journey is that writing does indeed go hand in hand with other things--with everything, in fact. Garrison Keillor said it best and with his usual wit: "Nothing bad happens to writers. Everything is material." Everything. 

My professor was partially correct: If you want to write, study writing, but also study everything else: politics, religion, philosophy, human behavior, geology, biology, history...everything informs your world and the worlds you create.

Art credit: https://openclipart.org/detail/277036/ink-muse

Why Writing is Selfish—and Why That's a Good Thing

The Semi-Great One will be at ConQuest in Kansas City, MO, on Saturday, May 23, and Sunday, May 24, with copies of The Power Club. Come on down and say hello!

Every time someone says they have never liked to write, I wish I could wave a magic wand and make them start liking it. 

But I can't.

What I can do is encourage each person to find something they like—anything at all—and build on that. 

As a writer, I've come to enjoy several aspects of writing, including: 

• the physical sensation of typing 
• being able to share my thoughts (without interruption!) 
• learning more about myself and my ideas through writing them down 
• watching a piece of my writing evolve through revision
• the payoff of publishing a book I've worked so hard to nurture and shape

If some of this sounds selfish, it is! There's no point in undertaking a serious effort such as a career, vocation, or learning a new skill unless you derive some personal benefit from it. 

But you can also expand on that personal benefit and reach out to help others (which is personally rewarding in and of itself). 

For some people, it works for them to see writing as a step in a process—you need to write in order to get a job, graduate from college, etc. This thinking has never worked for me. 

It takes too long to think of doing all that hard work for some distant goal that may or may not ever come to fruition. (You may die before you graduate, the economy may tank before you get that job, and so forth.) 

I'm selfish. I need instant gratification. Writing provides that instant gratification while, at the same time, serving as a step to larger goals. 

So I get to hit two targets with one arrow, but I focus only on the one target.

Find something you like, whatever it is, and embrace it. Build on it. 

Also, don't think you are restricted to writing in a particular way. Explore fiction, screenplays, poetry, and other genres until you find something that clicks. 

Most important: Don't expect perfection from yourself. Have fun and play around with your writing. Write a crappy first draft, just because you can. Write your entire essay in reverse, just for the heck of it. Make up your own language, just because.

If you find something you like about writing, you will probably find the other aspects you struggle with falling into place.

It won't happen over night, but you'll enjoy the ride! And that's what writing basically is: a journey toward self-discovery and connecting with others.

That Moment When You Realize Your Favorite Character Has Flaws--and So Do You

Story: Jim Shooter. Art: Win Mortimer/Jack Abel. All characters and artwork © and TM DC Comics Inc.

There comes a point in every fan's life when you realize that your favorite actor/musician/athlete is a human being and thus capable of doing things you may find unsettling.

With fictional characters, it's much the same way. Characters often become our favorites because they represent some aspect of ourselves or what we wish to be like. Identifying with certain characters has advantages—we can use them as role models and adopt traits we admire.

However, identifying with a favorite character can also blind us to flaws in the character and in ourselves.

Characters are the brain-creations of writers. They represent how the writer sees the character, not how fans wish the character to be. Most writers imbue characters with flaws on purpose—who wants to read about a perfect hero? Sometimes, however, flaws are less obvious and may even be “accidental,” just because the writer is also a human being.

While it's fun to discover things about a character you weren't aware of before, it can be unsettling when you realize your favorite character—one you looked up to as a role model—may have some less-than-savory qualities that were there all along.

I realized this while re-reading an old story featuring one of my favorite characters, Mon-El.

From Space Wanderer to Legionnaire

Mon-El is a stalwart member in most incarnations of the Legion of Super-Heroes. Originally introduced as an amnesiac space explorer who was mistaken for Superboy's older brother, Mon had the same super-powers as the Boy of Steel, but a different weakness—common lead instead of kryptonite. Lead poisoning resulting in Mon being placed in the Phantom Zone, where he remained without aging for a thousand years, until a cure could be found.

Upon his release, Mon-El joined the Legion and was eventually elected leader of the team. This was the era in which I discovered the Legion, and Mon-El stood out.

He wore a costume similar to Superboy's, but with opposite colors—a red tunic and blue cape, for example. He cast a dashing figure—powerful and confident, yet responsible and mature. In one story, he remains on duty at Legion HQ with his girlfriend, Shadow Lass, while the rest of the team attends a wedding of two former members. 

These were all traits I admired and sought to emulate, consciously or not.

“Lament for a Legionnaire”

The story which hints at Mon's less-than-savory qualities appeared in Action Comics # 384, January 1970. 

In “Lament for a Legionnaire,” Dream Girl—the Legion's resident seer—predicts that Mon will die in five days. Initially, he receives the news with stoicism, learning to appreciate the sunrise, a shower, and breakfast. Then he decides that maybe he can fight death by stocking up on anti-lead serum and staying busy as a Legionnaire.

All well and good so far.

I won't spoil the story by revealing the twists which ultimately lead to Mon-El surviving his predicted death (though it's not a spoiler to say he does so). However, on re-reading this story, I came to see Mon in a different light.

Shadow Who?

One of the things that jumped out to me was that Mon, facing the possibility of his death, never thinks of his girlfriend, Shadow Lass. One might expect that he would want to spend some time with her or at least say goodbye. Instead he seems to avoid her altogether by embarking on a space mission which lasts three days and departing just before Shadow Lass returns from her own mission.

Shady is angry and upset, and even lashes out at the Legion's then leader, Karate Kid.

Now, to be fair, Mon may not have been thinking clearly at this point. And, as KK notes, Mon believed he had "licked" the whole death prophecy. 

Still, you would think he would take Shady's feelings into a account, but he never gives her a thought.

If you can't trust your friends . . .

Mon also comes across in this story as exceptionally paranoid and reckless. Since lead is the only thing which can kill him, he takes great precautions to protect the vault in which his anti-lead serum is manufactured and stored.

The vault is already secured in such a way that casts doubts on Mon's ability to trust his Legion teammates and friends (the only other people who would have access to the vault), but he goes to extra efforts to seal it off and wreck the elevator that leads to the vault. 

Realizing the elevator was his only way out, he tunnels through the ceiling and comes out on another floor, knocking Element Lad off his feet.

Legion stories at the time did not address issues such as structural damage to the headquarters or who was going to pay for all the repairs. (The Legion's benefactor, R.J. Brande, must have gone bankrupt several time footing such bills.) As it is, Mon looks not only paranoid but irresponsible.

Heroes just win—even when they don't try

The last thing I noticed—and this ties into the ending I won't reveal—is that Mon becomes a passive protagonist. The resolution of the story is brought about not through his own efforts but by someone else.

It's great that Mon cheats death, but not at the expense of another character. In the stories which follow, we never see Mon erect a statute to this person (the Legion was big on erecting statutes to fallen comrades) or mention this character in any way.

Granted, continuity was not very tight in those days and throwaway characters were just that—throwaways. But the story ends with Mon reviving and wondering who this person is. We never get to see his reaction—if any—to the events which have unfolded. 

The overall impression is that Mon takes his whole near-death experience for granted.

A mirror into the soul

Did writer Jim Shooter deliberately imbue Mon-El with flaws such as aloofness, paranoia, irresponsibility, and ingratitude? Probably not. But those traits can certainly be inferred from the story.

And that's not a bad thing. In looking at one's favorite character in a new light, we may get to look at ourselves in a new light—including the reasons why we were attracted to the character in the first place.

There have been times in my life when I've been accused of having each of these traits—aloofness, paranoia, irresponsibility, and ingratitude—with justification. I don't think I picked up these traits from Mon-El—and certainly not from this story, which I first read in my late teens. Yet perhaps I was attracted to the character because I recognized a bit of myself in him—both good and bad traits.

Weird but true.

What about you? Have you spotted unexpected flaws in your favorite character?

2013: A Semi-Great Year in Review

Cartoon showing baby representing New Year 1905 chasing old man 1904 into history. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I detest the sort of “my year in review” columns in which the writer looks back and praises himself for his accomplishments or wallows in self pity for the things that didn’t work out. 

 

Like most writers, I have a propensity to do both and so I don’t like to reflect overmuch on my writing career. I’d rather let others do that if they are so inclined.

If writing is a form of communication (and it is), then it becomes more meaningful to the writer if it is shared—that is, if it comes back to me in some form (sales, feedback, reviews, and did I mention sales?).  

Nevertheless, something needs to be said about 2013 because it was a year in which I met two very important writing goals: publishing my first novel and taking a full-time teaching position. 

Both goals were realized after several years of hard work, learning, and faith. And both experiences have turned out far better than I could have hoped. 

But whenever one attains a goal (let alone two), there’s a need to sit back on that lofty perch and ask, “What’s next?”   

Well, what is next?

Fortunately (?), I don’t have the time to luxuriate in much indecision. My teaching job keeps me very busy, which is good: I have the privilege of teaching online English courses to students who otherwise might not get to go to college at all, as well as members of our armed forces, many of whom do their assignments while being deployed. 

If writing is communication, then teaching is service. I get to communicate and serve, passing on subjects I’m passionate about and which may help others find their passion.

However, some things have fallen by the wayside due to my busyness, including my next novel. I had begun work on a sequel to The Power Club™, but put it on the back burner after members of my writer’s group pointed out, rightly so, that it read too much like the first novel.

I'm simply not ready to tell the next step in Damon's story—or perhaps he's not ready to tell me.

Instead, I wrote a book which departs drastically from the concept of teenagers with super-powers. It is very different than anything I’ve written before, and, as of right now, it exists in one complete and very rough draft. I’m getting feedback from my writer’s group and revising it at a snail’s pace. It's been slow going as I take stock of what I have and decide what to do with it.

Living the writing life

Writing does not happen in a vacuum.Writers live lives—or they should if they hope to write stories that resonate with readers who also have lives. I’ve pretty much avoided discussing my personal life in this blog as I prefer to keep the focus on writing and the journey of writing. 

But writing and living are intertwined; when one suffers, the other usually suffers, as well. While I wouldn’t describe my personal life as “suffering” this year, it has be tumultuous. I won’t go into details; let’s just say that I enter this Advent season in sort of a lull, and that’s okay. Advent is a time when Christians look forward to the coming of Christ, metaphorically or literally (or both)—a time when new things can happen in our lives.

So, as I enter 2014, I have no idea what my life or my writing holds in store. I’ve never really had a plan for my writing career, just an ever-changing dream. Someone recently told me that the difference between a goal and a dream is that, with a dream you have no idea how you’re going to get there but that’s what makes the dream worthwhile.

My writing journey in 2013 has proven this to be true.

Happy 2014 to all my readers! Thank you for stopping by, and may your own dreams be worth dreaming.

What Writers Can Learn about Inspiration from Lorde’s “Royals”

I don't keep up with popular music these days, so it takes something unusual for me to take notice. One of the most popular songs in the country is “Royals” by Lorde—a song which qualifies as unusual for several reasons. First, the song was written and sung by a 17-year-old girl from New Zealand, a remote country not known as a hotbed of musical activity. Second, its lush vocal arrangement makes "Royals" an energetic confection with a timeless quality.

What made me take notice, however, were the enigmatic and somewhat pointed lyrics:

                And we’ll never be royals

                It don't run in our blood

                That kind of lux just ain’t for us

                We crave a different kind of buzz

Such lyrics made me think the song was an intentional jab at Britain’s Royal Family and/or the media’s obsession with them. The last thing I expected was for the song to have any connection with Kansas City’s hometown baseball team, the Royals.

Yet a Kansas City Star article today revealed otherwise. 

It turns out that the song was inspired by a National Geographic photo of the Royals’ celebrated third baseman, George Brett, signing baseballs for fans during the 1976 season. The team logo was, of course, emblazoned on Brett’s jersey.

“It was just that word [Royals],” Lorde is quoted in the article.  “It was really cool.”

Leaving aside the notion that the song may be a jab at anyone, this story illustrates how writers can find inspiration in the unlikeliest of sources. It also illustrates how new creative works can be made by drawing connections from seemingly unrelated ideas across the globe.

Inspiration is a tricky thing. It is often compared to a muse—the mythological beings (usually female) who inspired men to do great things. On the other hand, inspiration can be compared to genius, which, in the words of Thomas Edison, involves 10 percent inspiration and 90 percent perspiration. The first attitude treats inspiration as a magical quality over which writers have no control. The second attitude treats it as nothing special.

To me, inspiration is indeed special. It often comes unbidden when I’m not ready for it (usually when I’m driving), and yet it also comes from hard work. Lack of inspiration, in other words, is not an excuse to stop writing. Inspiration, I’ve found, often returns when I’ve made it clear that I intend to plow on ahead with or without its assistance. Perhaps inspiration doesn’t want to get left behind.

But, returning to “Royals,” the story of its beginnings reveals three important points about inspiration for writers:

1. Don’t dismiss any idea, no matter how trivial it may seem.

According to Lorde, it was the word “Royals” itself which got her creative wheels spinning. Words can be enormous sources for inspiration—they carry meanings which are both denotative and connotative. Words suggest other words. Words suggest ideas and connections. Go with it.

2. Be receptive to inspiration from unusual sources.

How a teenager from New Zealand got hold of a 37-year-old National Geographic is still a mystery, according the Star article, but it doesn’t matter. Creative inspiration can be found in anything. The legendary ‘60s band Buffalo Springfield took their name from a sign on a steamroller. Starbucks, the coffee chain, took its name from the first mate in Moby-Dick. Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry drew inspiration from his own experiences in World War II and as a police officer, and from the TV series Wagon Train. 

Finding connections between seemingly unrelated ideas is what creativity is all about.

3. When inspiration comes calling, roll up your sleeves and get to work.

“Royals” may have begun with a photograph, but it didn’t end there. At some point, the song had to be written, rehearsed, recorded, sold and marketed.

This is where many would-be writers run out of steam. The initial feelings of wonder and excitement generated by inspiration disappear, leaving them with the cold reality of hard work. The sad truth for some is that inspiration alone does not make dreams come true. 

Anyone can be “inspired.” Perhaps the ultimate lesson of “Royals” is that ideas are not enough. It’s what you do with an idea that counts.

Work Cited:

Liu, Kathy. "Yup, George Brett is Her Inspiration." The Kansas City Star 7 Dec. 2013: C3.

3 Tips for Creating Unforgettable Characters from Are You Being Served?

Before I recently cancelled my television service, one of my delights was watching the British comedies which air on public television. My stand-out favorite has always been Are You Being Served? Although the series has not aired on PBS in some time, episodes, documentaries, and interviews can be found on the modern miracle known as YouTube.

 

And, for a writer, that’s a good thing. AYBS has a lot to teach, particularly how to create memorable and enduring characters.

AYBS, which ran in the UK from 1972-85, produced only 69 episodes. But they have been repeated ever since and the series became popular in other countries—the U.S., Canada, Australia, and even non-English speaking countries such as Israel.  Not bad for a sitcom which follows the antics of a sales staff in an old fashioned department store and got much of its humor from innuendo and double entendres.

But, even more importantly, the show owed its longevity to the characters. Who could forget Mr. Humphries, the charming, is-he-gay-or-isn’t-he? sales assistant in men’s wear? Or Mrs. Slocombe, the overbearing head of the ladies department whose hair changes color every week? Or Captain Peacock, the autocratic floorwalker whose only job is to direct customers to the appropriate department? (In the U.S., he would be the equivalent of a Wal-Mart greeter.) 

But what made these characters so special? And what can you learn about creating your own unforgettable characters?

Here are three tips:

1. Plot is not as important as character.

Jeremy Lloyd, who co-created and wrote the series (with David Croft), has said in interviews that the plots weren’t especially important. What mattered was the characters—particularly the conflict generated by any two characters:  

• When the ladies’ department moves to the same floor as the men’s department, territorial sparks fly between Mrs. Slocombe and Mr. Grainger, the fussy head of men’s wear. 
• Captain Peacock remains polite and deferential toward his boss, store manager Mr. Rumbold, but one senses his seething resentment every time Rumbold undermines his authority.   
• When the sales junior, Mr. Lucas, tries to chat up sexy Miss Brahms in the ladies department, she lashes out at him with her Cockney accent because she knows he's chased other women.
• Mr. Humphries, who generally gets along with everyone, still bristles when someone innocently mentions terms such as "queen" or "fairy."
• The store's maintenance workers, Mr. Mash and Mr. Harmon, continually defy orders that they stay off of the sales floor during shopping hours—and they always find ways to get around the rules.

As the above examples illustrate, the plots often came from the characters—or more specifically from one character’s conflict with another character.

But if conflict were all AYBS had to offer, the characters would not be terribly memorable or even likeable.

2. Create a sense of family among the characters.

AYBS created a dysfunctional family, to be sure, but a family nonetheless. Everyone knows an authoritative father figure such as Captain Peacock or a mother figure such as Mrs. Slocombe, who never quite understands how her words come across, particularly when she mentions her cat.

In short, these characters are memorable because they are familiar to most viewers. Their familiarity makes them loveable in spite of (or because of) their flaws.

Most long-running TV series—from M*A*S*H to Star Trek—generate a sense of family among the characters, who put up with each others’ idiosyncrasies in the way only a family can.

3. Write what you know.                               

The verisimilitude of AYBS came from Lloyd, who spent three years working at a department store similar to the fictional Grace Brothers on the series. Lloyd drew his characters from people he interacted with. Though he exaggerated their qualities, those qualities were based on truth. 

More, Lloyd observed the strict pecking order and tricks of the trade (such as "kneeing" a jacket) that kept AYBS grounded in reality.

Whether you are writing a comedy or any other kind of story, creating memorable characters is a must. Drawing characters from real life, emphasizing character conflicts over plot, and creating a sense of family are three ways to make sure your readers never forget your characters.

If you like this post, you may also like:

• How to Write an Unlikeable Character
• Why You Should Write Your Character's Biography
• The Times They are a-Changin'--in Downton Abbey: How a British Historical Drama Speaks to Us Today