I've finished another draft of Girl in the Shadows, and it's getting pretty close to where I want it to be. In this last rewrite I completely rewrote one character (Mrs Steppa), deleted an entire chapter (which actually felt quite good) and weeded out a whole lot of unnecessary description.
As part of the master's course, my manuscript gets assessed by a professional manuscript assessor, who will tell me everything that's wrong with it (along with some ideas to fix it, hopefully!).
So I think I'm almost ready to send the manuscript off for assessment. But before I do, we're going to do some peer critiquing at our next class. I've put up my first chapter for the rest of the group to critique (& have since then already changed some of the opening lines). But first chapters are always the hardest.
It wouldn't matter if your book was the most brilliant thing ever written. If the first chapter was crap, no one would ever read past it to find out how brilliant you really were!
I know my first chapter can still do with some improvement. I'm confident that the rest of the master's group can give me a couple of brilliant ideas to make it just that bit better. And once that's done, it's off to the manuscript assessor for a major reality check.
When I have the assessment in my hot little hands I'll have a pretty good idea of how publishable Girl in the Shadows is. Or at least know how much further I have to go before it's ready to submit to an agent or publisher.
And if they reckon it truly sucks, well, it'll be bum-down-head-up for another major rewrite.
27 April 2007
19 April 2007
Stop ranting & start researching
Tomorrow I meet with my master's supervisor to talk about where I think I'm going with the exegesis. This means that I'd better come up with something to say that's a bit more positive than the previous post.
I have come across some interesting stuff. One paper I read was written in the 1960s by a team of psychiatrists. They did a study where they sat people in front of a mirror in a dark room for 30 minutes and recorded what they experienced. Not so bad, you might think.
Except each person was in there alone (apart from the researcher) and had to look into the mirror continuously and describe what they saw. The only light in the room was provided by the little light on the tape recorder, which was recording their words.
They used four groups of people: psychotics, neurotics, sociopaths and 'normals' (who probably weren't by the end of it).
Two things that fascinate me about this study. Number 1, that they got away with doing it (obviously ethical standards were a bit different in the '60s). And number 2, every person, 'normals' included, saw weird stuff in the mirror: basically, they all hallucinated.
So people sitting in a dark room in front of a mirror at night (the tests were done between 7&9pm) all described fascinating, horrifying and bizarre things that they could see in the mirror. A few people even experienced kinetic hallucinations (eg felt like they were rocking or swaying).
Every person experienced this; not just the people with diagnosed mental illnesses.
Right now I'm reading a really interesting book by German Jungian psychologist, Kaspar Kiepenheuer, who has a special interest in treating teenagers. In Crossing the bridge: a Jungian approach to adolescence, Kiepenheuer describes adolescence as a turbulent and transitional period. He writes 'Indeed, one might even say that puberty is a more or less mild form of schizophrenia.'
Put these two ideas together - mirror hallucinations and adolescence as a form of schizophrenia - & I think I've got something that's worth investigating.
I have come across some interesting stuff. One paper I read was written in the 1960s by a team of psychiatrists. They did a study where they sat people in front of a mirror in a dark room for 30 minutes and recorded what they experienced. Not so bad, you might think.
Except each person was in there alone (apart from the researcher) and had to look into the mirror continuously and describe what they saw. The only light in the room was provided by the little light on the tape recorder, which was recording their words.
They used four groups of people: psychotics, neurotics, sociopaths and 'normals' (who probably weren't by the end of it).
Two things that fascinate me about this study. Number 1, that they got away with doing it (obviously ethical standards were a bit different in the '60s). And number 2, every person, 'normals' included, saw weird stuff in the mirror: basically, they all hallucinated.
So people sitting in a dark room in front of a mirror at night (the tests were done between 7&9pm) all described fascinating, horrifying and bizarre things that they could see in the mirror. A few people even experienced kinetic hallucinations (eg felt like they were rocking or swaying).
Every person experienced this; not just the people with diagnosed mental illnesses.
Right now I'm reading a really interesting book by German Jungian psychologist, Kaspar Kiepenheuer, who has a special interest in treating teenagers. In Crossing the bridge: a Jungian approach to adolescence, Kiepenheuer describes adolescence as a turbulent and transitional period. He writes 'Indeed, one might even say that puberty is a more or less mild form of schizophrenia.'
Put these two ideas together - mirror hallucinations and adolescence as a form of schizophrenia - & I think I've got something that's worth investigating.
Scholarly expert?
According to one of the readings I had to do for uni, the exegesis (that thing I'm supposed to write for my masters) should demonstrate 'scholarliness' and that the writer is 'an expert in the field.'
Looks like I'm screwed...
Post-Jungian shadow archetype despair has set in. (Hey, did that sound scholarly?)
To be honest, I'm not even sure that see the point of the exegesis, much less want to write one. The readings I've been doing for uni so far have meant to give me a greater understanding of what an exegesis is and its purpose. But for me, the readings have made me question the necessity of such a document at all.
I want to write a manuscript. I want to write the best, most entertaining manuscript I can write that will appeal to my target audience, take them away into a different world for a while and, when they come back, maybe even make them think.
I enjoy doing research to the extent that it can give me new insights and ideas. But do I really want to crap on for 7,500 words about my process of writing the manuscript, its place in a historical/literary/cultural context and defend it against possible criticisms?
I really hope I've got it wrong and that's not what I've signed up for...
Looks like I'm screwed...
Post-Jungian shadow archetype despair has set in. (Hey, did that sound scholarly?)
To be honest, I'm not even sure that see the point of the exegesis, much less want to write one. The readings I've been doing for uni so far have meant to give me a greater understanding of what an exegesis is and its purpose. But for me, the readings have made me question the necessity of such a document at all.
I want to write a manuscript. I want to write the best, most entertaining manuscript I can write that will appeal to my target audience, take them away into a different world for a while and, when they come back, maybe even make them think.
I enjoy doing research to the extent that it can give me new insights and ideas. But do I really want to crap on for 7,500 words about my process of writing the manuscript, its place in a historical/literary/cultural context and defend it against possible criticisms?
I really hope I've got it wrong and that's not what I've signed up for...
16 April 2007
Another hero dead
You take a week off work & avoid the news as much as possible & what happens? One of your literary heroes up & dies! Kurt Vonnegut died almost a week ago & I only found out today (when I was surfing the net at work - for research purposes of course!).
I have loved Vonnegut's writing since I was a teenager. A few years ago I went to a second hand bookstore & bought about four or five of his books, including Player Piano (his first novel) and one of my all time favourites, Cat's Cradle. Years ago I even went out & read books written by his alter ego, Kilgore Trout (really bad science fiction but I read it & loved it anyway).
His writing was just crazy - he wrote about universal themes of life, death, war, religion & mixed them all up with a good dose of nonsense. He inspired me because of his love of language & the genius of his imagination.
One piece of his liteary genius that I've related to all my life, and is particularly apt as I attempt to write a master's exegesis, is his definition of the "granfalloon":
"If you wish to study a granfalloon, just remove the skin of a toy balloon."
Wherever you are, Mr Vonnegut, I hope you're having fun.
I have loved Vonnegut's writing since I was a teenager. A few years ago I went to a second hand bookstore & bought about four or five of his books, including Player Piano (his first novel) and one of my all time favourites, Cat's Cradle. Years ago I even went out & read books written by his alter ego, Kilgore Trout (really bad science fiction but I read it & loved it anyway).
His writing was just crazy - he wrote about universal themes of life, death, war, religion & mixed them all up with a good dose of nonsense. He inspired me because of his love of language & the genius of his imagination.
One piece of his liteary genius that I've related to all my life, and is particularly apt as I attempt to write a master's exegesis, is his definition of the "granfalloon":
"If you wish to study a granfalloon, just remove the skin of a toy balloon."
Wherever you are, Mr Vonnegut, I hope you're having fun.
12 April 2007
Interpretive paradigm or interpretive dance?
In about five weeks time I'm supposed to hand in a 2,500-3000 word assignment on... well I'm not exactly sure! But one of the things I can choose to write about is my "interpretive paradigm".
So far, my thinking is that I feign confusion between "interpretive paradigm" & "interpretive dance" and come up with a 2 or 3 minute dance piece, possibly performed behind a curtain so I'm in fact a shadow, & present that instead of the essay. Or maybe I should leave that sort of performance stuff until my oral presentation is due, on 1 June.
On the positive side, I'm really happy with the progress of my manuscript. I've just started to rewrite the Mrs Steppa character, making her a bit younger (as in 60 rather than 80!) & funkier & less wobbly/senile. She now prefers jaffa tim tams to stale biscuits and her house smells like patchouli & ylang ylang rather than lavender. She may also have a penchant for feather boas (I just thought of that then, so I'll have to see how it goes). After all, people who are now 60 were teenagers in the psychedelic 1960s - bizarre but true! I'm starting to like Mrs Steppa much more already :)
So far, my thinking is that I feign confusion between "interpretive paradigm" & "interpretive dance" and come up with a 2 or 3 minute dance piece, possibly performed behind a curtain so I'm in fact a shadow, & present that instead of the essay. Or maybe I should leave that sort of performance stuff until my oral presentation is due, on 1 June.
On the positive side, I'm really happy with the progress of my manuscript. I've just started to rewrite the Mrs Steppa character, making her a bit younger (as in 60 rather than 80!) & funkier & less wobbly/senile. She now prefers jaffa tim tams to stale biscuits and her house smells like patchouli & ylang ylang rather than lavender. She may also have a penchant for feather boas (I just thought of that then, so I'll have to see how it goes). After all, people who are now 60 were teenagers in the psychedelic 1960s - bizarre but true! I'm starting to like Mrs Steppa much more already :)
6 April 2007
Getting into research
I've got 10 days off work to get stuck into my research & weirdly enough, I'm starting to enjoy it. I'm finding the same writers' names in my research around Jung and his shadow theory, so I'm thinking that I'm on the right track.
Even better, I'm really starting to see how this research can give my writing more depth. As I write down notes from the books/papers I'm reading on one page, on the opposite page I jot down random thoughts about how these ideas can apply to the characters.
One character I'm a little concerned about at the moment though is Mrs Steppa. At the moment she seems to be working as a caricature, a plot device rather than a 'real flesh & blood' character. I'm hoping that during my research I can find something to make her come alive. Otherwise, she may drop off the pages and cease to exist. I'd be sad about that, because I kind of like her. Maybe I'll just have to listen a bit more closely to what she has to say.
Even better, I'm really starting to see how this research can give my writing more depth. As I write down notes from the books/papers I'm reading on one page, on the opposite page I jot down random thoughts about how these ideas can apply to the characters.
One character I'm a little concerned about at the moment though is Mrs Steppa. At the moment she seems to be working as a caricature, a plot device rather than a 'real flesh & blood' character. I'm hoping that during my research I can find something to make her come alive. Otherwise, she may drop off the pages and cease to exist. I'd be sad about that, because I kind of like her. Maybe I'll just have to listen a bit more closely to what she has to say.
1 April 2007
Inspiring writing workshop
One of the main reasons I wanted to do this master's course was so that I could particpate in writing workshops with established childrens/YA writers.
Yesterday we had a full day workshop with Sydney -based writer, Libby Hathorn. It was one of the most inspiring writing workshop I've ever attended.
Libby's style is simple and direct and it's this that allows her passion for writing, both as an author and a reader, to shine through. Her emphasis on the importance of poetry and imbuing our writing with poetic shape, rhythm and flow really struck a chord with me (& I've never been much of a fan of poetry).
I also found out that I can't write in the third person, or that when I do, I find it very strange and uncomfortable. I don't think I used to find it difficult, maybe it's just as my voice has developed over the years it's moved into the 'first person' groove & doesn't want to jump back out.
Maybe one day I'll attempt to write something in the third person, just to challenge myself. But not this year. I've got more than enough writing challenges on my plate.
But thanks to Libby's inspiration yesterday, I feel that I can at least take this year's challenges on. So it's off to my manuscript! And thanks to Libby Hathorn for a fantastic day of indulging in the world of imagination and writing - even if I got nothing else out of this course, yesterday would make it all worthwhile.
Yesterday we had a full day workshop with Sydney -based writer, Libby Hathorn. It was one of the most inspiring writing workshop I've ever attended.
Libby's style is simple and direct and it's this that allows her passion for writing, both as an author and a reader, to shine through. Her emphasis on the importance of poetry and imbuing our writing with poetic shape, rhythm and flow really struck a chord with me (& I've never been much of a fan of poetry).
I also found out that I can't write in the third person, or that when I do, I find it very strange and uncomfortable. I don't think I used to find it difficult, maybe it's just as my voice has developed over the years it's moved into the 'first person' groove & doesn't want to jump back out.
Maybe one day I'll attempt to write something in the third person, just to challenge myself. But not this year. I've got more than enough writing challenges on my plate.
But thanks to Libby's inspiration yesterday, I feel that I can at least take this year's challenges on. So it's off to my manuscript! And thanks to Libby Hathorn for a fantastic day of indulging in the world of imagination and writing - even if I got nothing else out of this course, yesterday would make it all worthwhile.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)