Writing with Spirit
Writing, reading, and living with passion.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Spooky, isn't it?
The living believe there is just one way to die when, in truth, there are infinite ways. I know because I am dead.
All of those things that you leave behind. They are the dead that follow you. Remember the hate for a co-worker, someone who was once a friend, an acquaintance? Do you think those thoughts fall away so easily? The dead are energies floating around.
I am the Grim Reaper, of sorts. I find your dead, and reap it. I steal it in my astral fingers and fill my tiny mojo bag with it. Then, I bring it back to life.
Some call me spooky, a ghost, when they meet me, but I am so much more. Your worst nightmare sounds so cliche, but I am the one who brings the dead back to life. Your dead. I am the one who brings the dead back to you.
Beginning in October, what my people understood and you seem to know nothing of, is the time of the Dead. The months of the Dead. October and November. This is the time when the veil grows thin, when it is easy to make your dead follow you. Nobody remembers their ancestors anymore.
Right now, you are just a meatbag vibrating at a lower rate than me. Flopping around without a care. Yours are the eyes that seek not to bother with your soul and Divinity. Yours are the eyes that would rather feed the ego. Think you know so much better than your neighbor? Think you are so much better than your neighbor? Oh, I love that sweet, sweet poison. The thing I can sling back at you so easily. Yours are the eyes of lust, selfishness, gluttony, greed....Such a long list.
But you will remember. Call me spooky, if you will. It's a fun name for such a dark creation.
More than anyone, I should understand why you are who you have become. After all, you created me.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
CONSTANT CARL: RUB OUT THE WORD
The word is a virus, said the author of The Naked Lunch,William S. Burroughs. Rub out the word.
I was 21 the first time I read The Naked Lunch. It changed the way I thought about writing: the possibilities with the written word, what I could say and get away with, ideas about narrative, philosophy as a writer, and just about everything else. I had written a lot of poetry, short stories, essays, some of which was published. But I had never tackled a novel. Then, at 26, I became infatuated with a man 11 years older than myself. I couldn't get him out of my head. It annoyed me. Strangely enough, someone 11 years younger than myself became infatuated with me. And that age difference began to strike me as interesting. My infatuation border-lined obsession once too often for my taste, and I became tired of such obsessions that would lead nowhere. Burroughs's words hit me repeatedly over the years, but with full force that time: The word is a virus. Rub out the word. It occurred to me that the thought was more what Burroughs was talking about. That we needed to cut off this thing that just spreads right where it spreads.
So I wrote Constant Carl, which is free today and tomorrow on Amazon. I wrote it as an experiment. That I could rub out the word with the word. It's not so experimental that it is devoid of a storyline. However, I think its experimental nature is evident in some places. I wrote about this man for months on end in order to rub him out of my head. It worked.
It's true. The word is a virus. Rub out the word.
I was 21 the first time I read The Naked Lunch. It changed the way I thought about writing: the possibilities with the written word, what I could say and get away with, ideas about narrative, philosophy as a writer, and just about everything else. I had written a lot of poetry, short stories, essays, some of which was published. But I had never tackled a novel. Then, at 26, I became infatuated with a man 11 years older than myself. I couldn't get him out of my head. It annoyed me. Strangely enough, someone 11 years younger than myself became infatuated with me. And that age difference began to strike me as interesting. My infatuation border-lined obsession once too often for my taste, and I became tired of such obsessions that would lead nowhere. Burroughs's words hit me repeatedly over the years, but with full force that time: The word is a virus. Rub out the word. It occurred to me that the thought was more what Burroughs was talking about. That we needed to cut off this thing that just spreads right where it spreads.
So I wrote Constant Carl, which is free today and tomorrow on Amazon. I wrote it as an experiment. That I could rub out the word with the word. It's not so experimental that it is devoid of a storyline. However, I think its experimental nature is evident in some places. I wrote about this man for months on end in order to rub him out of my head. It worked.
It's true. The word is a virus. Rub out the word.
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Why the Avengers needs work and how us writers can learn from it
Okay, ranting because I went to the drive-ins last night, and can't believe how monumentally let down I was by The Avengers. First, let me say I saw and loved Thor. I saw and loved both Iron Man movies, and am a Robert Downey, jr. fan. I didn't see Captain America, and couldn't stand the idea of watching the second Hulk after the first pukefest called a movie. I think Stan Lee could have drawn the Hulk and done a better job with the first one. But anyway, basically and so as not to give away any spoilers, this is what the plot boils down to:
Loki, a.k.a. God of Chaos and general ornery dude-- along with a lightning-style sword and what amounted to Alien-like cicadas riding on freaking in-flight humpback whales--versus The Avengers. The whole gang wants a certain cube that amounts to a lot of power for anyone on Earth who has it. More than half of the stinking picture was a collage of about 5-10 minute bits about every single Avengers character. For any of you who know the least bit about writing, you're currently laughing your ass off because two major writing "rules" have been broken right off the bat. Rule #1: No point of view character established. There was absolutely no one in particular to focus on so honestly, I didn't give a crap if all of them died. The writer could have been smart and taken Natasha or Hawkeye or, imo, Nick Fury as the point of view character, and given *extremely* tiny bits about the rest. After all of these movies, we really don't know all that much about Natasha, Hawkeye, Nick...and truthfully, we know about the same after the movie. Rule #1 rant done. Rule...okay, really it's more Guideline #2: Isolate your character for maximum tension. That is, don't have your character with the huge supergang who will easily defeat the little, wimpy enemy. Have one character against the world, so to speak. With a story like this, I could see how that might be hard. The problem I have is that through most of the movie, I'm freaking ROOTING for Loki because he's the one who stands against the world. He's the underdog. (And really, some wicked part of me will always root for Loki...and I'm not the only one.) While I can see how isolating so many characters might be tough, isolating the flipping ANTAGONIST makes no sense at all. So...if they weren't going to do that, then they could have chosen a character to focus on (note I said *focus* and not *entirely use*), given some vulnerability to create tension or even given some personal stake in the whole thing. Instead, there is no tension because there is no true *conflict.* Conflict in any well written story consists of conflicting emotions while some outward event is taking place. Sometimes, even the outward event doesn't matter, depending on the story.
Iron Man's conflict: I'm a man of peace who finds out I'm in the business of war profiteering, so I must face or change who I am.
Iron Man 2's conflicts: Everybody is completely safe until I discover otherwise, and I have to save myself as well as the world.
Thor's conflict: Get my big huge weapon (hammer) back from a modern Midgard (Earth) while being a god who no one on Midgard believes is a god and also facing my own weakness.
There are internal and an external struggles in these stories that raise them above the usual shallow, mindless violence. (I also happen to like that Thor followed the Norse myth cycle fairly accurately as well...and the casting is quite good.) I realize they probably wanted to keep with Stan Lee's Avenger stories, and I know they kept to the cartoons well, but this movie left me feeling more than a little disappointed. Visually, it also had problems, being too dark for the screen in some places. There were some things I outright couldn't see. All this money spent and they couldn't jack up the lighting? And it wasn't just my blind self. My husband said the same.
However, it was a double feature. While there were some flaws, I liked John Carter waaaaay more than The Avengers. Also, I couldn't help but laugh after noticing *at the very end of the movie* that Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad, Malcolm in the Middle) played a general. I'm convinced Bryan Cranston is a chameleon, not an actor. Maybe I'm Bryan Cranston and I just don't know it yet....
Anyway, it's not a popular sentiment, it seems, but skip The Avengers and go for John Carter.
Loki, a.k.a. God of Chaos and general ornery dude-- along with a lightning-style sword and what amounted to Alien-like cicadas riding on freaking in-flight humpback whales--versus The Avengers. The whole gang wants a certain cube that amounts to a lot of power for anyone on Earth who has it. More than half of the stinking picture was a collage of about 5-10 minute bits about every single Avengers character. For any of you who know the least bit about writing, you're currently laughing your ass off because two major writing "rules" have been broken right off the bat. Rule #1: No point of view character established. There was absolutely no one in particular to focus on so honestly, I didn't give a crap if all of them died. The writer could have been smart and taken Natasha or Hawkeye or, imo, Nick Fury as the point of view character, and given *extremely* tiny bits about the rest. After all of these movies, we really don't know all that much about Natasha, Hawkeye, Nick...and truthfully, we know about the same after the movie. Rule #1 rant done. Rule...okay, really it's more Guideline #2: Isolate your character for maximum tension. That is, don't have your character with the huge supergang who will easily defeat the little, wimpy enemy. Have one character against the world, so to speak. With a story like this, I could see how that might be hard. The problem I have is that through most of the movie, I'm freaking ROOTING for Loki because he's the one who stands against the world. He's the underdog. (And really, some wicked part of me will always root for Loki...and I'm not the only one.) While I can see how isolating so many characters might be tough, isolating the flipping ANTAGONIST makes no sense at all. So...if they weren't going to do that, then they could have chosen a character to focus on (note I said *focus* and not *entirely use*), given some vulnerability to create tension or even given some personal stake in the whole thing. Instead, there is no tension because there is no true *conflict.* Conflict in any well written story consists of conflicting emotions while some outward event is taking place. Sometimes, even the outward event doesn't matter, depending on the story.
Iron Man's conflict: I'm a man of peace who finds out I'm in the business of war profiteering, so I must face or change who I am.
Iron Man 2's conflicts: Everybody is completely safe until I discover otherwise, and I have to save myself as well as the world.
Thor's conflict: Get my big huge weapon (hammer) back from a modern Midgard (Earth) while being a god who no one on Midgard believes is a god and also facing my own weakness.
There are internal and an external struggles in these stories that raise them above the usual shallow, mindless violence. (I also happen to like that Thor followed the Norse myth cycle fairly accurately as well...and the casting is quite good.) I realize they probably wanted to keep with Stan Lee's Avenger stories, and I know they kept to the cartoons well, but this movie left me feeling more than a little disappointed. Visually, it also had problems, being too dark for the screen in some places. There were some things I outright couldn't see. All this money spent and they couldn't jack up the lighting? And it wasn't just my blind self. My husband said the same.
However, it was a double feature. While there were some flaws, I liked John Carter waaaaay more than The Avengers. Also, I couldn't help but laugh after noticing *at the very end of the movie* that Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad, Malcolm in the Middle) played a general. I'm convinced Bryan Cranston is a chameleon, not an actor. Maybe I'm Bryan Cranston and I just don't know it yet....
Anyway, it's not a popular sentiment, it seems, but skip The Avengers and go for John Carter.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Let's have fun
I'm not sure where all you readers are, but here, it's snowing, it's cold, and honestly, I'm sick of hearing about my best friend's girlfriend problems. However, I do respect his patience. Anyway, instead of blabbing about something spiritual or useful, I want to share my current, favorite TV program, Shaun the Sheep. My son is 3, so this is the extent of our TV viewing while he's awake...and I love it.
Then there's the other show I like so much: Deadly Women. It's all about female killers. My husband keeps teasing me and saying, "Don't get any ideas." Of course, I like to make him think so I say, "I have more imagination than that." Mwa-ha-ha. I couldn't find the blip of my (so far) favorite episode on Youtube, but it's about Elizabeth Bathory, a Hungarian countess from the 1600s reputed to have used the blood of young girls to try to retain her youth. (Drank it, bathed in it). Those are the "good old days" my elders keep talking about. Don't look so good to me. Here's a little Discovery channel thing about her.
Anyway, must seem schizophrenic to go from kids' shows to real-life murder stuff...but it sure is fun.
Then there's the other show I like so much: Deadly Women. It's all about female killers. My husband keeps teasing me and saying, "Don't get any ideas." Of course, I like to make him think so I say, "I have more imagination than that." Mwa-ha-ha. I couldn't find the blip of my (so far) favorite episode on Youtube, but it's about Elizabeth Bathory, a Hungarian countess from the 1600s reputed to have used the blood of young girls to try to retain her youth. (Drank it, bathed in it). Those are the "good old days" my elders keep talking about. Don't look so good to me. Here's a little Discovery channel thing about her.
Anyway, must seem schizophrenic to go from kids' shows to real-life murder stuff...but it sure is fun.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Thank you, readers!
I just wanted to take a moment to express my gratitude to all those who have helped me spread the word about my longish short story, This Dark Magic. The sales have been amazing lately, and I just feel so grateful to those who have helped. For those who might want to know, the below are my best numbers so far. Thank you!
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Jehovah's Witnesses
It's been a while since I've posted anything here, and instead of a book review or a grammatical rant, I have something spiritual to say. It's about the Bible. It shouldn't be controversial to Christians or non-Christians...just something to think about. I had a Jehovah's Witness call my home today, and read a good deal of Bible verses on YHVH, also known as Yahweh, also known as Jehovah. The King James Bible translates these letters into the Lord, which actually makes no sense since the Hebrew for Lord back then was Adonai, from my understanding. What is neglected is the actual Hebrew translation of YHVH, which is I AM. Because I'm just that kind of chickie, I'll repeat: YHVH=I AM. There are other magical interpretations of these four letters, but I won't go into that here. But look at what the Bible is really saying: I AM. This name is a challenge, in my opinion, to look inward to your true and Divine Self. If you believe in the Bible, then you believe we were created in "God's image." Many buddhas, including Buddha, said, "Be a light unto your self." This is not a religious rant, as I believe that all religions seek to do the same thing, although not all religions are conscious of what those things are.
So what am I saying? We are all just fragments of God, I AM...that eternal Self. If we would only look inward to our True Selves, then we would find great power and beauty there. I say this because as I spoke to this Jehovah's Witness, I realized that he was looking for God outward and upward. But why look above you when you can look all around you and see that eternal I AM within all things? When you say that name of God, you are saying, I AM. Not HE IS. Not LORD. And of course some people will say that to be a writer is to be a mystic, magician, spiritual leader, etc. Writing is often part of our Divinity because it is where our true nature lies, and I don't know about anybody else, but it's a big part of who I AM. Food for thought :)
So what am I saying? We are all just fragments of God, I AM...that eternal Self. If we would only look inward to our True Selves, then we would find great power and beauty there. I say this because as I spoke to this Jehovah's Witness, I realized that he was looking for God outward and upward. But why look above you when you can look all around you and see that eternal I AM within all things? When you say that name of God, you are saying, I AM. Not HE IS. Not LORD. And of course some people will say that to be a writer is to be a mystic, magician, spiritual leader, etc. Writing is often part of our Divinity because it is where our true nature lies, and I don't know about anybody else, but it's a big part of who I AM. Food for thought :)
Friday, December 23, 2011
Update
Thought I'd better post an update here before folks feel like there are tumbleweeds breezing through. With the holidays coming up, I finally have my Christmas decorations done and most of the shopping finished. Just in time to take them down in a couple weeks :)
After a recent experience with an indie writer friend of mine, I decided to go into the copy editing business. Basically, I caught *a lot* of errors that went through another "editor" who had the nerve to charge her for shoddy work. Strangely enough, I thought the business would happen when I wanted it to. But before I even officially put out the word, I had someone contact me for such work. I'm both honored and excited to work with her. When it's published, I'll be sure to keep everyone updated.
So now that I almost have Christmas stuff done, my only jobs are copy editing, writing, and chasing after my 3-year-old, a.k.a., the evil monkey. Oh, and cleaning the apartment when the mood strikes. For those of you wondering where I've been when you've emailed, the answer is, most likely, sleeping. Hope everyone has a wonderful holiday season!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)