Last week I asked a bit about what folks would like to see update-wise and regarding the blog here. I got some great answers, and I really want to thank Charles, Tom, and Adam for their comments. Though it doesn't fully return the favor of how much their input helped me, here are links to their spots online. Hopefully a few more people will stop by and read the compelling things they have to say!
All great sites to visit! These fellows know writing better than I.
After taking in their thoughts along with some personal pondering and prayer, I am leaning towards a particular direction at the moment:
At some point in my acquisition of domain names, I added JKRiki.com to my basket. I figured it wouldn't hurt to have, and since there was some "bulk purchase" deal it ended up costing under $10 I believe. At any rate, since I have a book coming (hopefully) soon and a few more in the works, I feel that having a dedicated place for those things would be useful. A lot of self-published authors I admire have a similar setup to what I'm considering.
Essentially I would have a very simple site up at JKRiki.com that mostly contained my book on Creativity (with others to follow) and a weekly post that offers a particular insight or encouragement. I very much enjoy rambling here on this blog, but sometimes I feel that the updates are very self-centered and I'm not sure how USEFUL they are to the rest of the world. The weekly updates there would be similar in nature to other inspiring authors that I read now and then, and a place to stop by every Monday (or Wednesday, or Friday, I'm not sure which day yet) and read something that's purpose would be to encourage and cheer forward readers. They might be little stories from my personal experience, or just something I think would be useful about the creative process, or simply a post reminding you that it's worth slowly chipping away at any walls standing between you and your dream goals.
Meanwhile this blog you're reading now would be updated on a less regular basis, and mostly whenever I had something on my mind or new art. I'd probably try to post more art, and less words, and shoot for some new drawing or illustration once a week here. It might be a new Ukrainian Egg or just a doodle from warm up practice. The deeper stuff in text form would be regulated to JKRiki.com.
The biggest reason for this is that it would allow me to focus a lot more on my writing outside of the blog, which could potentially be compiled one day into actual books that people could hold and add to their own personal library. A blog is nice for writing, but it feels less and less "tangible" the more I do it. I've written things over the years that I certainly don't remember anymore, because I don't put that much thought into it all. And I certainly don't edit (in case you couldn't tell from the common spelling errors)! I would love to be able to dig a little deeper and focus on writing with purpose, instead of just rambling as I currently do.
This is all very preliminary, so you know! It is merely the direction I'm leaning at the moment. I'm certainly open to more ideas, suggestions, and thoughts, so if you have any please share them! I want to be useful to this world, and part of that comes from knowing what would be useful to you who sticks around and reads this stuff here.
My friend Kyle recommended a book called "Searching for God Knows What" to me. He has used examples from it many times in our conversations, but I finally got around to reading it. It was fantastic.
I then went and bought Blue Like Jazz, by the same author, Donald Miller. I know a few readers know his work (Tom mentions Don in his book, Struggle Central) so I'm preaching to the choir there, but if you've never heard of him or read any of his books, I can't recommend them enough. It's been on my mind lately, so I thought I would take a few minutes to talk about it here.
Firstly, Donald Miller makes me want to go write. I get so much out of his writing that I desperately want to rush off and write things so maybe I could have such a profound impact on other people, and keep the cycle going. Unfortunately the next thought that springs to mind is often "But I can't write as brilliantly as this." The blend of poetry, honesty, and simplicity that Donald Miller writes with is astounding. There are passages that I wish I could "copy and paste" and send to most everyone I know. This morning I read a passage in Blue Like Jazz about writing. (It was actually in a chapter about money, but this part was about writing.)
Writers don't make any money at all. We make about a dollar. It is terrible. But then again we don't work either. We sit around in our underwear until noon then go downstairs and make coffee, fry some eggs, read the paper, read part of a book, smell the book, wonder if perhaps we ourselves should work on our book, smell the book again, throw the book across the room because we are quite jealous that any other person wrote a book, feel terribly guilty about throwing the schmuck's book across the room because we secretly wonder if God in heaven noticed our evil jealousy, or worse, our laziness. We then lie across the couch facedown and mumble to God to forgive us because we envied another man's stupid words. And for this, as I said before, we are paid a dollar. We are worth so much more.
Wow. Dang. That is a paragraph right there! As I typed it out, I saw where I would have written it differently. For starters I would have added a LOT more commas, but I think that's part of the charm. It is honest because he DOESN'T pause. I also kept adding "and" in places, accidentally. Then I had to go back and remove them. When I saw the little red squiggly line under "facedown" I wanted so badly to go fix it because Firefox says it is wrong. It was actually an interesting experiment to copy that passage, because I could get a taste of what writing that way might feel like. Maybe.
At any rate, I recommend you go pick up one of his books from the library or bookshop(/site). Personally I've enjoyed "Searching for God Knows What" more so far, but I didn't finish Blue Like Jazz yet. After that I'll be off to whatever the next one is, thankful that he's written a bunch of books. Then I will lay facedown on my bed and mumble about how I should go write stuff of my own, jealous of his stupid words.
Tune in tomorrow, if you'd like, for a big announcement of sorts. Or maybe it's more of the musings of a potential announcement, if I'm honest.
On Easter we had some people from church join us for dinner (lunch, really, in spite of the family referring to it as "dinner") and I was discussing creativity with one of them. She mentioned that she wishes she could be creative, but believes it's something that some people just naturally have. She asked me if I thought it could be learned. Since my upcoming book is on that very subject, my answer seemed rather obvious, but thinking about it for a moment first I said this instead:
"Actually I think you're right. It is something that people have naturally. The thing is, I think EVERYONE has it naturally, and it is removed from us over years of formal education and social interactions. Most people don't want you to be 'different.' They want everyone to be the same, and predictable. That's why school systems allow only for one 'right' answer, and if you give a different answer you are wrong."
I was extra inspired to get back to work on finishing the book editing, because she is due to head back to Korea next month, and I would love to be able to give her a copy before she goes.
It saddens me how many people I talk to want to be creative, but believe it is impossible because they are older and must have missed some mystical boat. I think that's a direct product of society, not any missing natural talent or skill. I've yet to meet a child who is not in some way creative. To think that some people can't be creative because of a natural lack doesn't fit well into my own experience and world view. I have yet to meet someone who cannot think creatively when guided through the process, and then act creatively with a little encouragement!
What do you think? Is creativity something some people just "have" and others are out of luck?
Continuing in my quest to read prolific author's works, today we take a look at a book from Louis L'Amour. This is one of his 100 novels over a 37 year career.
The more I read genres I don't often read (in this case, Westerns) the more I'm noticing how limited my reading habits tend to be. I don't branch out much, it seems, and this whole prolific author exercise has been very good for me I think.
For starters, Dark Canyon is just about as opposite of The Pebble in the Sky as you might find. My biggest complaint of the Asimov book was that it had too many words and added fruitless fluff to pad the pages. Dark Canyon almost needs MORE words. It works, but by golly it doesn't beat around the bush. It tells the story, and in 130-odd pages there are about three descriptions of anything, and usually it's about how pretty a canyon is and then that's the end of it. The book is "raw" in a way, and it was fascinating to read.
From the first few pages, L'Amour hooks you with characters (the mark of any great story). You know almost nothing about them, but they seem so alive that you want to keep reading. It isn't contrived in the way many modern books are, but as if the man himself happened to be part of the story and just left his character out of the final writing. No one feels fake or forced, though at times everything is a little cliche. (That doesn't seem to be uncommon in Genre Writing though. People know what to expect, and they like that aspect.)
The whole book has a sense of excitement and often dread running through it, so that you're always on edge even in the "quiet" moments. There is romance involved, but it is handled so succinctly that it almost comes off as strange. There is no poetry describing falling in love, merely "He liked her" one sentence and a proposal shortly afterward. In this instance, I almost wanted a little more "fluff" because love kind of requires fluff. It is not logical or hard, and needs handled with a bit more tenderness I think.
All in all, I'm really glad I read this book and enjoyed it quite a bit. I'd like to read another by Mr. L'Amour if only to see the similarities between this book and his others. One thing that can happen in Westerns is repetitive plot lines, so I'm curious if he falls victim to that. For a single book, though, Dark Canyon was a wild and exciting ride.
Now that the egg show is done for the year, I'm slowly re-engaging with this "life" thing I put on hold while I was doing the egg show stuff. (Mostly, anyway. I am still doing eggs in spite of the show being over. The nice thing is now I can slow down and just do them for the love of it all.) One of the big items on my returned-to-list is to publish the book I wrote earlier this year. One of them, anyway, because I wrote two.
At any rate, coupled into that process is the upcoming need to put that published book up someplace to sell. Since it's on Creativity I was planning to just host it via Animator Island. However I've been enjoying writing so much that I'd like to continue publishing things after this first book, and subsequent fictional novels don't really fit on AI. So I'm thinking of possibly tossing together a small site for myself personally (apart from Fred, Studio Riki, and Animator Island) just to host whatever I'm personally publishing and such.
Included in all that thinking and planning and working is this blog. I have been enjoying writing for it, but also I'd like to split my writing time a little more so I can work on proper books. I realized the other day that if you put together all my blog posts from the last nearly-a-decade it would fill SEVERAL books. Bad books, of course, as I didn't have any intention of publishing this stuff past "a blog" but the word count would be there at least. So I want to use some of the writing time to work on books and not just blogging.
The other thing I was considering recently was just how personal the blog here is. I mostly just ramble, and I wonder how useful such a thing is. It's nice for me, but is it helpful in some way to the world? I imagine some of the posts are, but probably only the ones I actually put a lot of thought into. Rambling because I like hearing (in my head, since this is typed) my own voice is a bit of a fruitless endeavor. Meanwhile books like this one and the one I'm reading now are almost like complete-blogs in book form, and they've done a great deal for me as a person as I've read them.
ANYWAY, long story short, I would like some feedback from you folks reading this. Any thoughts are welcome, and specifically I would like to know if you have a preference for how often I update the blog. Is daily helpful to you in any way? Would you care if I made it a point to post one actually-deep-and-edited piece of writing once per week instead? I ask because I've been reading several new blogs this year, and they have different update schedules. Adam's blog at TMTF is Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, which makes me wish there was something new the other two weekdays, but also leaves me wanting more. Amy's blog appears to be updated "whenever" even though I thought by the title it would be every Monday. Maia's blog seems to update when there's something to be said, and never otherwise (which is frustrating at times because of the lack of schedule, but I certainly understand this method's benefits!).
So what are you thoughts on the future of this blog? If you don't care, post that too! I'm looking for any and all feedback, and I really appreciate you giving me yours as I'm deciding what to do in the coming months.
Today I write a short review (more "my thoughts" than an official REVIEW, I suppose) of one of the books by the prolific authors I mentioned previously. My first experience with writer Isaac Asimov, who penned 506 books in just 32 years.
Pebble in the Sky could be the poster child for "science fiction novel." From what I understand about Mr. Asimov, the same holds true for most of his books. The term "The Master of Science Fiction" seen on the cover above is not for publicity. Many people consider him just that, beyond simple publisher PR.
The story is complicated, but rings very true. I found myself compelled to read on, even in slower moments (which occurred very little, but here and there) and for the most part the "truth" behind the words captivated me. In spite of the majority of the book taking place hundreds of thousands of years in the future (which was slightly unbelievable to me, personally, because I think humans will die out LONG before such time) the characters are dealing with human feelings and problems that have transcended human history from the first record to today. It is because of this true-ness that the book is fantastic, and comes highly recommended. I will read more by Mr. Asimov, and would leap at the chance to do so if not for one thing: Prose.
OH MY GOSH THE PROSE.
I don't know if Mr. Asimov had word counts to meet. I imagine it's likely, as publishers are very concerned about things like word count. It would not surprise me the tiniest bit, though, if he completed his manuscript, sent it to his editor, and received a phone call saying "It's good, but it needs to be twice as long." Not wanting to alter the terrific story, he might then have proceeded to inject flowery descriptors and overly poetic fluff into nearly every sentence. I am not kidding when I say I could probably edit this book down by half if I just removed the useless prose, and it would be the exact same story. (Arguably better, but I don't wish to argue.)
I stumbled my way through this book just because of the over-use of language. Sentences that could be over in 10 words went on for 20 or more. Not to mention the SCIENCE.
I am aware to have science fiction you must have science, but there's a very good reason I don't read science fiction often, and that is because it is too technical. There were paragraphs of this novel that I glossed over just because it was so science-y. Is this a positive for some readers? I'm sure. Not for me, though. For me, you could have cut that in half as well and I'd still be along for the ride. I'd be along because the characters were so compelling, not for any explanation of radiation in cells.
The absolutely most fabulous aspect of this book was the ending. I don't want to spoil it, but I will say that it surprised me as a writer, which is hard to do. I reached the point where the story "ended" and I knew "what happened" only to have him break into a sly grin and give me a wink, providing an alternate ending AFTER the ending that was perfectly timed. It is very hard to "time" things in a novel, but this was masterfully done. It was an extra twist I never saw coming, and for that I offer a standing ovation. Bravo, indeed.
I have iRobot on my desk, waiting to be read as well. I originally picked it up to see where it was different than the film (I hear it's very different) but now I'm anxious to read it for no reason other than "I like Asimov's stories." Sure, I only have one so far to judge my opinion by, but Pebble in the Sky was GREAT, and I can't wait to see what's next.
Too much excess prose could not destroy completely a wonderful and very human story alongside characters easy to connect with and cheer for. Recommended, but allow extra reading time for all the poetic descriptions and science.
I've always been a big proponent of things being "as long as they need to be." This is especially true of films. If a film needs 20 minutes to tell a story, it should be 20 minutes and not 2 hours. I've seen far too many movies stretched well beyond reasonable length, a number of them animated.
The same goes for books, I'd say. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, for example, needed to be 77,000 words. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows did NOT IN ANY WAY need to be almost 200,000. In any. Way.
Animal Farm (an incredible, incredible book, if you've never read it) clocked in at 29,966 and Mr. Orwell used every last one of those words beautifully to tell the story he set out to tell. Could it have gone on another 30,000 words? You bet, but it didn't need to. (Could it have gone until 200,000? Maybe if you had the pigs wandering through a stupid forest for a dozen chapters and killed off all the major characters along the way. What? I'm not bitter.)
As you may have heard, I've been writing a new novel. I still have no intention of publishing it, but the idea is certainly growing on me. The main reason I wouldn't is that it's... well, it's very different. It's not something that anyone who has anything to do with me would probably read and say "Wow, that is definitely JK's work." More likely they'd look at the cover again and be confused why my name was on it.
At any rate, I was happily (so happily) typing away, letting the words just flow out the way they should, and I did a quick word count and found the book was running at about 7,000 words give or take a few hundred. At that point in the story, things were well on their way and I could see the end around the corner. I realized that it might finish out at around 10,000 words. Now, depending on who you ask, 10,000 words is not a novel. It's a very long short story. You'd have to ask someone else, though, because I don't consider 10,000 words a short ANYTHING. (Well, I guess I'd consider it a short novel, come to think of it.) So I started to wonder, IF I ever wanted to publish it, what would it be? Could I call it a novel, being the length it was? I wrote it as a novel, so isn't that enough in spite of what some online literary critic might say regarding word count?
While it's an interesting thing to sit and consider, the point is rather moot now. It turns out the next day something interesting happened. What was it? Well, I don't want to give away ALL the details in one fell swoop! If you want to know, come back tomorrow for the thrilling conclusion.
(We authors call that a hook.)
Last week I was wandering through the library (as mentioned before, a favorite pastime of mine) and as I was on the way out I spotted Dave Barry's latest book:
I'd consider myself a Dave Barry fan, but not the type of ravenous fan who devours everything he writes. I own a few Dave Barry books, but there are more that I haven't read than ones I have. I'm more of a casual fan, I suppose.
Since it's been a while since I read one (well, aside from reading this one again for the 12th time) I grabbed a copy to check out along with a book on drawing and the novel Eyes Wide Open by Ted Dekker. In reading it, I learned two things:
- Dave Barry is still hilarious.
- I'm mad I'm not as hilarious as Dave Barry is.
In a quote used in the book I'm currently finishing writing (which is not funny), Hugh MacLeod says:
"Being good at anything is like figure skating- the definition of being good at it is being able to make it look easy."
Dave Barry makes being funny look so, so easy. It's almost frustrating for those of us who take joy in their own sense of humor. We shake our fists at the sky (which will no doubt reflect our emotions back down towards southern Florida, that being the purpose of the sky) and cry out "Darn you, David Barry! Why do you have to be so good at what you do! You're making me feel bad about myself!" We also yell at other great authors, like J.K. Rowling and Charles Dickens.
We... all do that, right? It's not just me, surely.
Some of the chapters in the book- which by the way are not about parenting as the cover suggests (as he notes in the comical introduction)- had me in tears and unable to breathe from laughing so hard. Some less so, but it was hard to get through any given paragraph without at least a grin plastered to my face.
I suppose I started this blog post to discuss my appreciation for his writing and humor, and how I'd like to be able to write hilarious articles like he does. I suppose I'm finishing this blog with the realization that I am not Dave Barry or Dave-Barry-Level-Funny, so let's just all cut our losses and go read his work instead of me trying to imitate him.
Which I'd still like to try an do sometime, and I suppose kind of did back in the Stupid Stuff is Stupid days. Unfortunately that blog did not become a best-selling series of books.
For which I blame Dave Barry for being better than me.
Over the weekend I went to the library (one of my favorite places in the world) and picked up a new book to read. Interestingly, it was chosen based on its cover. I literally judged a book by its cover.
The bold contrast stood out instantly as I walked by the shelf where this was on display, and I picked it up mostly out of curiosity of the title. The inside flap describing the story seemed compelling enough, so I took it with me to the checkout and opened it to read as soon as I got home.
There are a lot of reviews for the book online (which I looked up afterward, to see what others thought) and most of them praise the novel. Unfortunately, it wasn't for me. This happens, not every book is going to be for every person. I had just finished The Trials of Lance Eliot and this story by comparison was dreary and mundane in subject. There was no spark that made me enthusiastic to keep reading two chapters in.
Which, actually, is where I stopped.
For the first time in my reading history, I began a novel and then made the conscious choice not to keep reading. A friend of mine does this often, and is quite content with not wasting any more time than necessary reading something he isn't enjoying. He walks away partway into books all the time, and never regrets it. I tend to have the habit of sticking with a book to see if it gets better, and then usually caving halfway through with the thought "Well, I've gone this far, might as well finish it."
I was curious where the story would lead, though, so I proceeded to have another first: I skipped to the end. I literally read the first two chapters and the final three. Do you know what was fascinating about this experiment? I totally understood what had happened in the middle.
At no point in reading the final three chapters was I confused. The characters and situations that were resolved at the end were the characters and situations that were set up in the first two chapters, plus or minus a few incidental support players. I was able to read the last three chapters and feel a decided sense of completion, knowing what probably took place throughout the middle. All the information was there.
This is curious to me, which is why I'm writing about it today. I had many things to consider after doing this.
- How terrible of a person was I for skipping pages upon pages of hard work by this author and going right to the end? (As a writer, I felt quite terrible indeed.
- Simultaneously, how important was the middle from a storytelling perspective if I COULD do this?
- Would it have been better to just set the book aside after two chapters and declare "This is just not for me?"
- Why was I not compelled to continue after two chapters? (As a writer, this analysis is very important.)
- Could I reasonably judge the book at all given that I had skipped so much, in spite of the fact that I felt a sense of completion?
Rather than go through all my thoughts on these questions, I'll leave them as questions for you to consider as well. I also wonder, have you ever done something like this with a book? Do you finish every book you begin, plugging away even if you decide partway through you aren't enjoying it? I'm very interested to hear others' thoughts on this topic, so if you have an opinion on this please chime in!