![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
More randomness...
Jun. 19th, 2004 08:14 pmI'm afraid that I'm letting my job get the best of me. Not that I'm turning into a worker drone who has no life, living and dreaming about candles. No, it's just that it's gotten to the point that I feel like my job is just another thing to do to pass the time. Is that good or not? On the plus side, I figure it shows that my priorities are right where they should be: on my writing. I find myself schlepping boxes for eight hours and all I can think of is what I'm going to write when I get home.
Now if that isn't a sign of a writer, I don't know what is.
* * * * *
Speaking of writing, Book 3 of the Mihari trilogy is coming along, which I'm quite happy about. If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say I'm about halfway done with it. Being that I started it in January and it's almost July, I'd say I'm right on schedule. One full year per long-ass novel is just about my speed.
The only problem I have with it is that once I'm finished with Book 3 (and I hope there's only 3, or I'm gonna have to do some serious editing), I'm going to have to take some serious time to look over all three books at once and tidy them up. I just finished rereading Book 1 (A Division of Souls), and to my surprise I found it a lot better than I thought it would be. That's a good sign if you can reread your stuff and be kinda sorta happy with it. There are just a few minor subplots and a few branches of the major plot that have to be trimmed, tied up, or completely removed for it to run as smooth as I want it to.
I just started rereading Book 2 (The Persistence of Memories) and already I can tell that the beginning needs some work. One of the major plotlines screws with the setting of the opening scene (!!), so I have to tweak it some. I'm not going to worry, though...I had a fun time writing this one, and it needed very little rewriting, so this one should be easier to fix.
(NOTE: For those writers out there who just scoffed at me for saying "needed very little rewriting", I do a lot of rewriting while I'm writing it. That way I don't have to tear the damn thing apart as much when I do rewrite it.)
* * * * *
How do you deal with critiquing someone's work?
I don't pose this as a complaint, but rather as a valid question. Truth be told, I haven't critiqued anyone's writing since I was in Screenwriting class in college, back in '92-'93. I'm sure there's sufficient ways to critique, but I'm always afraid that I'll end up saying something to the effect of "Well, if it were my story, I'd do this..." which is not what I want to do. On the other hand, I'm also one of those writers who can spot a typo a mile away and I'm worried that I'll dwell too much on that as well.
Added to that, I find that when I read someone's stuff, I'm always approaching it as if I were the reader who just picked up the book at Barnes & Noble and is now reading it to debate whether or not he wants to buy it. Added to the fact that ever since Mr. Ronco taught me the wonder that is "critical thinking" (*shudder*) way back in junior year of high school, I've hated analyzing anything, be it movies (which I had to do many a time in college...), music (more about that later), or any writing. I just DO NOT ANALYZE CREATIVE WORKS. At least not right away, anyway. It drives me batty and it takes away from the enjoyment of reading/watching/hearing as pure entertainment.
So yeah, critiquing. Maybe I'll just read it as is, try to pick it apart as if I'd written it myself, find the problems/high points/neat bits and dwell on them. Well, we'll see what happens.
* * * * *
...which of course brings me to the point of analyzation. Don't get me wrong--I have done some tearing apart of various creative works which only made me enjoy them much more. Take the time-honored film school movie to watch: Citizen Kane. Taken on its own it's an okay movie...interesting it places, slow in others...but having seen the movie at least seven times during a four-year period, I've come to admire what Orson Welles did. He put together a movie so complex it was like he'd made a film that was supposed to be a novel. There are so many levels to that damn movie.
As with music, same thing. There are some songs I know so well that I can't help but listen to them now and picture how the band put it together in the studio. In fact, I kinda enjoy reading about that...if you ever have the time, check out Mark Lewisohn's books about the Beatles' recording sessions. An utterly fascinating read about the time they spent in the studios. Still, I only do that with songs I know extremely well. Other songs/albums/etc., I'll stay with the impressions I get when I hear them. Mainly because their ambience gives me fodder for scenes in my books...
* * * * *
I'm listening to The Secret Machines a hell of a lot lately. Awesome album. My only complaint is that some critics somehow think they have a Pink Floyd influence. Me, I can't hear that at all. If anything, the nearest they come to PF is the fact that they manage to give the songs such HUGENESS, despite being a trio. Hugeness in sound as well as in structure, I should add, while somehow still remaining not to be too complex.
Speaking of PF, I find myself listening to them a lot as well, lately. Maybe it's because I picked up the remaster/reissue to "The Final Cut" a while back. I've forgotten that it's actually a pretty good album, despite it being their last one with Roger Waters (and thus yet another PF album with a WWII theme to it). I like their post-Roger stuff, simply because I love the way David Gilmour makes his guitar soar, but it's almost like that post-Beatles thing: Dave and Roger were brilliant together, but apart their stuff just doesn't hold up nearly as well as it should. Dave's PF stuff is great but lacks the raw emotion Roger gave to it. Roger's stuff is great but waaaaay too Angry Bastard at times. Maybe VH1 should have Amin from "Bands Reunited" get those two together again...heh!
* * * * *
Okay, I've wasted enough time. I gotta get some writing done.
Later, kids.
Now if that isn't a sign of a writer, I don't know what is.
* * * * *
Speaking of writing, Book 3 of the Mihari trilogy is coming along, which I'm quite happy about. If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say I'm about halfway done with it. Being that I started it in January and it's almost July, I'd say I'm right on schedule. One full year per long-ass novel is just about my speed.
The only problem I have with it is that once I'm finished with Book 3 (and I hope there's only 3, or I'm gonna have to do some serious editing), I'm going to have to take some serious time to look over all three books at once and tidy them up. I just finished rereading Book 1 (A Division of Souls), and to my surprise I found it a lot better than I thought it would be. That's a good sign if you can reread your stuff and be kinda sorta happy with it. There are just a few minor subplots and a few branches of the major plot that have to be trimmed, tied up, or completely removed for it to run as smooth as I want it to.
I just started rereading Book 2 (The Persistence of Memories) and already I can tell that the beginning needs some work. One of the major plotlines screws with the setting of the opening scene (!!), so I have to tweak it some. I'm not going to worry, though...I had a fun time writing this one, and it needed very little rewriting, so this one should be easier to fix.
(NOTE: For those writers out there who just scoffed at me for saying "needed very little rewriting", I do a lot of rewriting while I'm writing it. That way I don't have to tear the damn thing apart as much when I do rewrite it.)
* * * * *
How do you deal with critiquing someone's work?
I don't pose this as a complaint, but rather as a valid question. Truth be told, I haven't critiqued anyone's writing since I was in Screenwriting class in college, back in '92-'93. I'm sure there's sufficient ways to critique, but I'm always afraid that I'll end up saying something to the effect of "Well, if it were my story, I'd do this..." which is not what I want to do. On the other hand, I'm also one of those writers who can spot a typo a mile away and I'm worried that I'll dwell too much on that as well.
Added to that, I find that when I read someone's stuff, I'm always approaching it as if I were the reader who just picked up the book at Barnes & Noble and is now reading it to debate whether or not he wants to buy it. Added to the fact that ever since Mr. Ronco taught me the wonder that is "critical thinking" (*shudder*) way back in junior year of high school, I've hated analyzing anything, be it movies (which I had to do many a time in college...), music (more about that later), or any writing. I just DO NOT ANALYZE CREATIVE WORKS. At least not right away, anyway. It drives me batty and it takes away from the enjoyment of reading/watching/hearing as pure entertainment.
So yeah, critiquing. Maybe I'll just read it as is, try to pick it apart as if I'd written it myself, find the problems/high points/neat bits and dwell on them. Well, we'll see what happens.
* * * * *
...which of course brings me to the point of analyzation. Don't get me wrong--I have done some tearing apart of various creative works which only made me enjoy them much more. Take the time-honored film school movie to watch: Citizen Kane. Taken on its own it's an okay movie...interesting it places, slow in others...but having seen the movie at least seven times during a four-year period, I've come to admire what Orson Welles did. He put together a movie so complex it was like he'd made a film that was supposed to be a novel. There are so many levels to that damn movie.
As with music, same thing. There are some songs I know so well that I can't help but listen to them now and picture how the band put it together in the studio. In fact, I kinda enjoy reading about that...if you ever have the time, check out Mark Lewisohn's books about the Beatles' recording sessions. An utterly fascinating read about the time they spent in the studios. Still, I only do that with songs I know extremely well. Other songs/albums/etc., I'll stay with the impressions I get when I hear them. Mainly because their ambience gives me fodder for scenes in my books...
* * * * *
I'm listening to The Secret Machines a hell of a lot lately. Awesome album. My only complaint is that some critics somehow think they have a Pink Floyd influence. Me, I can't hear that at all. If anything, the nearest they come to PF is the fact that they manage to give the songs such HUGENESS, despite being a trio. Hugeness in sound as well as in structure, I should add, while somehow still remaining not to be too complex.
Speaking of PF, I find myself listening to them a lot as well, lately. Maybe it's because I picked up the remaster/reissue to "The Final Cut" a while back. I've forgotten that it's actually a pretty good album, despite it being their last one with Roger Waters (and thus yet another PF album with a WWII theme to it). I like their post-Roger stuff, simply because I love the way David Gilmour makes his guitar soar, but it's almost like that post-Beatles thing: Dave and Roger were brilliant together, but apart their stuff just doesn't hold up nearly as well as it should. Dave's PF stuff is great but lacks the raw emotion Roger gave to it. Roger's stuff is great but waaaaay too Angry Bastard at times. Maybe VH1 should have Amin from "Bands Reunited" get those two together again...heh!
* * * * *
Okay, I've wasted enough time. I gotta get some writing done.
Later, kids.
