#61
April 4, 2004
From: anonymous
Thanks for your description of "angles", "filters", and the Interpersonal Gap.
Re your mention of the Interpersonal Gap, I further educated myself here.
It reminds me of the psych-book, Games People Play, re word/body language play.
That is infinity. Apparently, it boils down to skillful and appropriate use of intention and interpretation as priorities in order to profit from conversation, personally, writer/reader, or artist/viewer.
You mentioned "discerning plot from unusual angles" and you mentioned this as best found in film. However, a film cannot be randomly read (another advantage for the traditional book concept). The film can project a sense of randomness, disjointed layers, but only one sequence exists.
A digital movie or website could exhibit randomly though, thus alleviating 'choice'. Page-flipping could be eliminated also. Current E-books offer this, and they could avoid repetition of sections, which can happen with manual random reading. Reader-choice could be allowed or attenuated.
I meant, 'gathering' the plot via random reading, and moving through many tentative plots in the process.
In terms of fiction, all writing loses control to the needs of the reader. Convention is necessary to have an audience, yet the most successful styles, as I theorize here, allow (conventional, sequential) readers the ability to 'write' their own book, whereby even 'profundity' or 'apotheosis' may be perceived. The artistic product is an insight-vehicle for the reader, albeit a guided tour. :)
Yet, both comedians and judges seem to be able to specifically control their delivery and the intended effect.
You ended with, "Filters matter. Often they are integrated at such an unconscious level that it takes a lot of work to dig them out. But it's work worth doing, in my opinion."
Yes input/output filters/embellishers are eternal problems and capabilities.
Solitaire seems appropriate for this era.
Thanks for the link—it's a useful document.
I'm not sure I would compare Games People Play directly to the Interpersonal Gap model, mostly because so much of Games (as I remember it, and it's been a while) is concerned with conscious or unconscious bad intentions, and I associate the Interpersonal Gap with good intentions gone wrong. For me, it's about clarity. Of course, we can have bad intentions and be clear about them, but then it seems to me that we are not playing games, just being clearly nasty. I find it difficult to understand how people experience this as a good thing, but mileage varies.
The ability to clearly articulate intentions, filters (coding) and effects in real-time is perhaps the most powerful communication skill I know of. I am impressed by it even in people I don't particularly like, because their skill (and mine) makes it much easier to navigate the interpersonal friction. It incorporates awareness of self and other, and the willingness to acknowledge difference, fear and vulnerability in the service of greater connection. I'm fortunate to live with someone who has this skill in spades, and as it happens I like her very much (grin), and find our conversations rich, sometimes astonishing, sometimes terrifying, always connecting.
I believe I understand better now what you mean by random. It's interesting to imagine moving through tentative plots toward a final understanding of the plot as it exists. A new literary concept: Shroedinger's Plot. I only do this as a reader if my linear reading experience becomes boring or stressful. When that happens, I'll jump around in the book to see if I can get a sense of what's to come without necessarily connecting all the dots. I think that's as close as I get to what you've described. In the best of book-worlds, I like to start at the beginning and have the story swallow me whole—and I always begin by hoping for the best.
I would paraphrase what you're saying about writing as "everyone reads her own book." This is, for me, related to my notions about books and multiple entry points. It's true that any meaning (profundity, resonance) to be found in a book depends on the experience and values and desires of the reader as much as those of the writer. When these intersect in story in a way that is meaningful to both parties, well, that's a fine moment. That's the connection that I seek as an artist.
 |
 |
#60
April 4, 2004
from: Michael
Finished Solitaire two days ago; it's still ringing in my thoughts. I'd almost given up on it around page 50; you found your stride later, and I'm glad I stuck with it.
Twice (twice!) I found myself tearing up (and I don't cry *that* easily—both times with joy, at the human truths you gracefully set up and then depicted, cleanly, showing-not-telling, without a bit of the maudlin or the melodramatic.
Nicely done! Just wanted to pass on my compliments directly. Keep writing—I'll keep looking for your next novels.
Thanks for sticking with it. I'm glad it became more to your liking, and that you did not find it maudlin or melodramatic. I worry sometimes about my propensity for what I think of as riffing, which is akin to taking a running start at an emotional cliff and then flinging myself off, clinging to a rope of exuberant prose. Riffing is great fun, but not always great writing. The last two paragraphs of the elevator scene are a riff, and so is most of Day 424 in VC, and the entire reunion scene with Snow, and they were all fun to write, even the hard ones.
One way I know I'm on a right track in my own work is that it makes me cry to write it, not because it's deathless prose but because I'm getting close to some kind of truth that is right for the story, a joy or sadness or exhilaration, or those piercing moments that are these combined.
I, too, am looking for my next novels (grin) and I know they're in here somewhere. If I could get away with riffing all the time, I'd be on Book 37 by now.
Kelley—I read for a lot of reasons—some of which are—to learn, feel, experience, contemplate, confront, dream, and transcend. Sometimes I seek solace, a new way of approaching life, or the unexpected. The stories that have the most impact on me become a world unto themselves—these are my favorites and I will read everything I can get my hands on by that author [or musician or director in other mediums]. What they have written lives on forever in my psyche. Solitaire is one of those books.
You taught me something important. I am a solo and I need to do some [more] online editing. And I am fortunate to have my own web.
Jackal and her world have intersected mine and I am grateful.
I enjoy the links and referrals by you and your readers. I am looking forward to reading more. Thank You.
And thank you. I do this myself with books and music, and can't imagine how I could be myself without them moving through me like tides. I'm honored that you would include Solitaire on your list of things that work in you this way.
It's interesting to think about the difference for me between books, music, and visual media in this context. I give my heart to a TV show every so often, one led by a really good writer/director whose vision shapes all aspects of the experience (Buffy, Firefly, The West Wing, My So-Called Life, and does anyone remember Wizards and Warriors from the early 80's? I loved that show.) Movies are different. I tend to think of them as a more singular experience rather than part of a spectrum of work. I have a few favorite actors whose work I will seek out, but I don't make the same commitment to directors and screenwriters. I'm partial to some (Peter Weir, John Sayles) but I don't form the same passionate attachments that I do to authors and musicians. Hmm, she said, thinking, thinking. I wonder if this is perhaps because I recognize movies as collaborative, and what I am more drawn to is the work of the individual? Auteur television falls somewhere in the middle ground. And of course no artist is free of the influence of others: in some ways, we're all collaborating with the world in general and our own lives in particular. We are all editing online, all the time.
I love movies and television and theatre: I love the total sensory experience, and the complexity of so many elements coming together. Successful collaboration is a particular thrill to participate in, and to witness, and I've had some amazing emotional experiences in these situations. But I find my most powerful connection and recognition with books and music, where I am more free to consider the experience from multiple perspectives. It fascinates me that movies are a collaborative effort to present a unified vision, and fiction is an individual effort to present an experience that can be entered into in multiple ways. At least, that's how it works for me. And music: well, I've talked about music before—for me, it's the express train to places sometimes too deep for words alone.
