On the Wisdom of Simplicity

 

I’ve been a longtime fan of martial arts and still have the privilege to endure the training sessions when I can make the time for it in my life.  Any person well skilled in martial arts with the proper training will tell you it’s a lifestyle, both physical and mental that is embraced together.  There is no perfection of the skill, one is a student always training, and even “Masters” take humble but serious responsibility in teaching others what they know.

In other words, “The Karate Kid” made several valid points about martial arts, but to leave it at tournament training would be disrespectful.

“A Book of Five Rings” by the famous samurai Miyamoto Musashi is one of the philosophical books many read that are either trained in martial arts, read history of the Samurai, or amongst the masses that read “The Art of War" by Sun Tzu and “The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli, a set of books that each carry their own deep philosophical messages that apply to modern life and are often quoted today.

Musashi’s book, like Sun Tzu is a brief read, but has a wonderful, simplistic way of examining society and thinking about it from a warrior’s point of view.  He reviews various methods of fighting and strategy, and the relationship of facing one opponent versus numbers of opponents.  He describes certain weapons are useful for certain battles, but not weapon is suitable for all battles.  He reminds the reader that battles are not won by weapons alone, thinking honestly for you will bring about the cunning needed for victory.

What does Musashi’s book have to do with a new author?  Everything.   He emphasizes over and over again “this takes much practice.”  Writing takes practice.  Historically the samurai remain famous for their skill and discipline.  As we create characters, think about what conflicts they face and how they will overcome them.  New writers, if you have a couple of hours, pick up Musashi’s book and read it.  He gives us a large dose of inspiration with very few words and pages.  I highly recommend it.

On the American Princess

During my cyber-absence, I wandered into several non-dark fantasy books, because I like almost everything, and biographies are one of my favorites non-fiction categories.  In thinking about people I haven’t read about, one woman occurred to me that I’ve overlooked in my adult years:  Grace Kelly.

What I remember are so many tabloids I’d see in the grocery store with my Mom as a kid about “Princess Grace, Princess Caroline, and Princess Stephanie.”  I asked my Mom, who at the time was in college to become a teacher, who Princess Grace was.  She told me Princess Grace is the actress Grace Kelly and became a Princess because of who she married.  When I asked her where Monaco was, she told me to find a map and clean up my room.  I pressed her further about why are her kids always in jail or drugs or something, and she said, “That’s what rich, spoiled kids do.”

In reading this of the many, many biographies of Grace Kelly, this interaction with my mother was how she and her daughters were perceived in the later years.  I do remember when she was killed in the car accident and felt bad for her family.  As I’ve grown older and watch her films, I’m happy to say I’ve learned a new appreciation for her work.  While doing a bit of net-surfing looking at famous bridal gowns (a girl thing), I clicked to Grace Kelly’s pictures.  Wow!  She was absolutely beautiful.

The biography above tells the story of Grace Kelly in what some would say a sympathetic tone; meaning, in a way that her Royal family would agree with.  The Prince, her son and daughters reportedly gave input to the bio, along with close friends.  

Grace grew up in a family of wealth and privilege, but was the “least talented” of the group of kids and always wanted approval from her father; it was a long time before it arrived.  She left home from Pennsylvania to become an actress/model in New York City.  After bringing home a boyfriend and taking him for an outing, her meddling parents reportedly found birth control and divorce papers, so he was sent away on a train, and she was brought home (how intrusive!  That would have been a MAJOR fight with me). 

Grace found her independence by moving to Hollywood and continuing her film career.  In this book she apparently dated often, had several lovers, and worked hard as an actress.  But somewhere in the 1950s culture she felt compelled to get married.  By almost an accident, she meets Prince Ranier Grimaldi and agrees to marry him before she really knows him and had no understanding of how it would affect her life, including the $2 million dowry her family had to put up.  The examination regarding her ability to have children I found humorous.  When asked about her virginity, she replied, “It’s impolite to ask.”  (Really!)  But like every other obstacle in her life, Grace made it happen.  The wedding was beautiful, the cameras flashed, the family smiled, and finally people in the world found out Monaco existed.  Then everyone left to go home and left Grace in the tiny world of decadence, away from her film career, away from her friends and family, and in the cold comfort of European Royalty.

I recommend this biography as a touching story about Grace Kelly that spans her entire life and tragic death.  It brought me back to the time as a child about seeing her in the tabloids; she seemed to have it all.  I never thought it possible that she could have a difficult life, but after reading this, now I can appreciate her work, her beauty, and her strength as a person.  If anyone had it all, it was Grace Kelly.  But she did not, and if she were alive today, I believe she’d be the first to say so, but in a very prim, ladylike fashion she was known for.

On Writers and Great Characters

April Wheeler "Revolutionary Road"

Viserys Targaryen "Game of Thrones"

In reader book reviews, one of the first topics usually mentioned is the lead character, and whether the reader liked him/her or not.  Like I’ve written in the past, the lead character must hook the reader in by good or ill deeds and often either breathes life or kills the story.  Supporting characters have a role as well, and sometimes a strong supporting character gives enough strength to the story, or a group of supporting characters, as in the prototype dark fantasy LOTR.

But when readers say they like or dislike characters, does it mean they are not good characters, in reference to writing a story?  Perhaps the better term is effective character.  Did the character affect the plot?  Did you remember the character after you finished reading the book?  Readers often base preferences on characters they like, meaning that they can relate to, but when they say they dislike a character does that put down the story?  Answer?  Not always, from a writer’s standpoint. 

I’ll go back to a non-fantasy classic mainstream writer’s favorite novel:  “Revolutionary Road” by Richard Yates.  I know plenty of readers that didn’t like the story or film, because of the depressing ending.  But as a reader, do you remember April Wheeler?  The 1950s housewife who felt trapped in their “safe” post WWII suburban lifestyle and wanted to act upon her dream of moving to Paris for a different life?  She was selfish, hot tempered, but had dreams.  Don’t we all dream?  From a writer’s standpoint, is she a great character?  Yes.

Another example, on the other sphere, my world of dark fantasy:  “A Song of Ice and Fire” books or “Game of Thrones” cable series, take a look at first season (or first book) at silly stupid older brother of Daenerys, Viserys Targaryen.  I didn’t find anything to like about Viserys, except that he had the vision of retaking Westeros but the methods were ideas of others.  While we readers and viewers were glad to be rid of this stupid character (with a scene everyone seems to like) was he an effective character?  Do we remember him?  His family was murdered; he wanted his birthright crown, so he had a valid argument, though was sexist and violent.  So from a writer’s standpoint, was he a great character?  Yes.  

Readers want to find a connection with the lead character.  But likable characters need balance with obviously flawed characters, sometimes, selfish, jealous, or manipulative.  These characters bring depth to the story and make it memorable.  Most of the time, when I think about any novel, while the description of the world is important, the characters remain with me.

Review of “Rising” by Elizabeth Marshall

“Rising” by Elizabeth Marshall begins with the life of Brody, a who is raised by a woman who is not his natural mother who had to give up her natural son to be raised by others.  As the boy grows up, he has an irrational intolerance for his family, and later his friends.  While demonstrating intelligence and aptitude to do anything he wants to do, he realizes most things he wants come easier to him than most around him.

When he becomes older, his irritation with his family and friends changes to absolute hatred leading him down a dark path of murder and treachery. He finds himself in a place in Scotland that exists outside of the time he once lived and meets many people that knew his natural mother, meets and faces the consequences with his natural father, and the son of the woman that raised him instead.  Brody remains incapable of opening his heart and changing his ways.  By the story’s end, the Brody finds that evil does come full circle, that horrific energy expelled may nourish something else altogether, creating another power.

“Rising” is a complex and clever ride, taking the reader not only into darkness, but also through time.   It is a skillful character study of how good becomes evil, how neutral remains neutral, and how good arises from it all.  Five stars!

On the American Party Education

During my blog break, while glancing over an online newspaper, a book review caught my eye with the title “The Five Year Party.”  That translated to me the obvious, known to us University College graduates as “college.”  I like reading many genres, so I couldn’t pass this one up.

While I’m an adult with no kids, this doesn’t impact me directly, I’ve always been interested in the education of kids from all walks of life, particularly like I came from; poor, living on a gravel road, no telephone, violent father, no family car, and very few frills.   I find it annoying when the blogosphere describes as the “magic bullet” kid from lower middle class who will do whatever it takes to better his or her life.  Magic bullet?  To me, that’s “hard work.”

But the Five Year Party isn’t about hard work; actually it’s the opposite.   This book reviews details about kids entering universities called “Party Schools” where kids do little or no classwork, get good grades, and spend most of their time underage drinking or worse, just to graduate with a meaningless diploma and a huge debt burden with no job to pay for it.  Chapter after chapter, the author grinds into the hideous issues of the party schools, linking all of the ills of the teenage generation to riots, assaults, and even deaths of students.  From reading this book, the teachers do their best, the students do their worst (if you call partying worst), and the school administrators walk away with the cash. 

While this book has few nice things to say about American universities, the author seems to believe Ivy League or other small colleges give students better educations without the Five Year Party.   Really?  He can write what he wants, but in my “vast hard science educational background” as I’ve written about in the past, I’ve known plenty of brilliant people who graduated from “party schools.”

Do I think this book is worth reading?  If you’re sending your kids to the large university schools mentioned in this book, parents should know what can go on and understand the finances behind the academia.  “The Five Year Party” is presented as “in your face” but many things in college are in your face that I’d prefer not to remember. 

Was my undergraduate college mentioned?  Of course!  I knew it would be before I opened the book…

On Story Endings

"All That Jazz"

When I wrote the first two Gastar novellas, editors highly criticized the endings, especially for the second book of the series, “Children of Discord.”  While both stories built upon each other and have been reviewed separately as stand-alone books, the second one tends to leave the reader ready to pick up the third novella.  (Progress is going well.)

I completely respect and understand the criticisms from editors; but the creativity must come from the writer.  The story is our own, and some rules (to me, anyway) just have to be broken.  Not every chapter needs to be a single scene, dialogue can and does drive the plot in action stories, and not all endings need to be a couple kissing or a massive blowout destruction of a diabolical enemy.

Are there endings I don’t like?  Some Hitchcock films had weird endings with much unexplained, though I am a major fan.  (Why did those Birds show up?) Of course, the G.R.R.Martin mega-hit “A Song of Ice and Fire” (Game of Thrones) has sad endings in some of his books but one way or another, at least the first three, are memorable.  Many dark fantasy stories like the prototype LOTR and later Harry Potter led up to the “big battle,” and resolved the story.   Clichéd endings admittedly are not a favorite.  I don’t mind the couple getting together but give us more than a jealous ex-boyfriend or ex-girlfriend to get past to achieve the ending we expect.

What endings do I like?  Generally, if I like a novel, then I usually like the beginning, middle and ending.  Historical backdrops, especially involving war sometimes have tragic endings, but I appreciate that in a well written, moving story.  Over the top, insane endings are just as great.  My overall favorite endings would be tying characters together in a story like in “A Confederacy of Dunces.” 

So, new authors, there’s no real answer to a better ending to a story.  Just make it your ending.  As a reader and reviewer, the creativity is what I’m looking for, so go for it. 

On Dialogue and Dialect

Hagrid in the "Harry Potter" Series

Being from the Deep South, “dialect” is a term I became comfortable with a long time ago.  I didn’t meet many people from out of state until I was a teenager, but I’d hear on television accents and to me, most people on TV didn’t seem to have an accent unless the person was from another country.  Southern dialects on TV never sounded right to me; here we call it “the Delta drawl” where the words are rolled into several syllables instead of the flat, slow “drawl” that I grew up speaking. 

I appreciated the challenge of writing dialect when I read The Harry Potter series involving the character Hagrid.  While the actor Robbie Coltrane did a terrific job in translating the dialect to bring the character to life, reading the ‘ems, ‘nuffs, and ‘ye’s I admit made for the most tiring reading for an otherwise easy to read series.  Author J. K. Rowling wrote the dialect to make Hagrid stand out as a bit less intelligent, loyal, lovable part-giant guy. 

When I sat down to write my own story, I knew I am not ready to write dialect.  While I don’t think it is necessarily a skill for professional writers, I think some writers have a better feel for it than others.  I thought about trying to write my southern drawl in a conversation with a person from Ohio.  Nevermind. 

Writers, if you can write dialect to bring depth and description to your characters, I highly recommend it, even if it makes the read a little more challenging.  As a writer, I am a huge fan of dialogue in reading and writing.  People speak differently, and so should our characters.  But not one size fits all.  I know I’m not ready to write dialect, though I speak it all day.  To me, it’s just conversation.