|
Free Updates
Navigation
Categories
| November, 2008 (3) |
| October, 2008 (4) |
| September, 2008 (4) |
| August, 2008 (4) |
| July, 2008 (5) |
| June, 2008 (4) |
| May, 2008 (5) |
| April, 2008 (5) |
| March, 2008 (7) |
| February, 2008 (8) |
| January, 2008 (4) |
| December, 2007 (4) |
| November, 2007 (4) |
| October, 2007 (7) |
| September, 2007 (4) |
| August, 2007 (6) |
| July, 2007 (4) |
| June, 2007 (9) |
| May, 2007 (7) |
| April, 2007 (9) |
| March, 2007 (5) |
| February, 2007 (3) |
| January, 2007 (1) |
Search
Archives
| | Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 1 | | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | | 30 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
Blogroll
Writing Resources
|
 Tuesday, November 27, 2007
On Deadlines and Self Examination
I am working on a deadline for Boston Magazine. The deadline is this Thursday. And, at the moment, that seems manageable. I am (mostly) done with the reporting, I have (partially) transcribed the interviews, I even (vaguely) know what I'm trying to say. Of course, there are other things for me to do as well, smaller-ish things, like preparing a presentation about the mechanics and literary devices employed by Philip Roth when beginning and ending chapters in The Human Stain, re-writing a portion of a chapter to turn into my workshop and writing, you know, this blog, but the deadline is the major looming thing in my life this week. The deadline rules. And this stresses me out. Now, in my "writing life", I have written several blogs, columns, and features about my procrastination issues. As my editors can surely attest, they are more than well-documented. They are, perhaps, over- documented. So this is not another recounting of the various techniques I actively and passively employ to facilitate not writing (examples I will not be giving: constantly getting up to refill my water, organizing my books by author then re-organizing them by genre, typing 200 words worth of swear words or catch phrases, etc.) . No sir. Totally not that. Instead, I am attempting to examine the psychology behind my dangerous and job-threatening need to procrastinate. Because if we can get under the hood and take a look-- to use a semi-incompatible cliche--maybe this baby will finally drive right. Onward self-examination! Reason 1: I need the pressure to focus.Analysis: Because I wait till the last moment to do things, I like to leave myself with little to no choice about whether or not I can work because--if I know I have time-- I will then rationalize doing something else, usually involving Netflix. Pressure leaves me no wiggle room, which forces me into a corner, which unleashes my creative side, which is something to behold a 4 AM. This excuse may have some legs. What My Dad Would Say: You are lazy and unbecoming of the Alexander lineage. What My Mom Would Say: I'm very proud of you, but I want you to get more sleep. Reason 2: I have an acute fear of failure and/or not knowing what I'm doing.Analysis: Every time I sit down to begin another article/blog/ chapter, I am stricken with the thoughts that I can't do it, I can't possibly pull off something again, that I will never write (blank) like the last (blank) that I wrote, and that I shouldn't even bother, and I should just get an internship at an Art Gallery. What My Dad Would Say: You're not a closer. And an internship at an Art Gallery sounds unpaid. What My Mom Would Say: You're the best writer ever, but I want you to get more sleep. Reason 3: If someone else is doing something, I need to also be doing that thing.Analysis: Like most people who spend their days locked up with their thoughts, I get lonely, even (or especially) when surrounded by hippies., which makes me susceptible to--like the title of R&B group 'Nuttin Nice's song says-- being "down for whateva". Also, people with 9-5 jobs don't "think I do anything all day", and always call me when they a) have a day off, b) want to go out during the week, c) want to do something stupid like go to Europe for 4 months, and can't find any takers. Of course, when I say "people with 9-5 jobs", i mean my friend Casey. What My Dad Would Say: If your friends jumped off the Tobin Bridge and into a low paying, non-health benefits filled "sea" of self- doubt, would you? Oh God, don't answer that. What My Mom Would Say: You're very unique, but I want you to get more sleep. Reason 4: I'm just lazy.Analysis: Maybe I'm just lazy. What My Dad Would Say: Yep. You nailed it. What My Mom Would Say: I agree with your father. Anyway, I don't have time for this. I have to go stress about my deadline while watching a documentary about the rise of R&B on VH1 Soul. I'm up to the part where they talk to Boyz II Men about Jodeci. Feel free to leave your own reasons as to why you think you procrastinate in a little something the Internet 2.0 likes to call the Comment(z) section and I'll try and update you on how things turn out. Let's get this money. Thank, You (live)Boyz II Men
11/27/2007 9:32:20 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)
|
|
 Tuesday, November 20, 2007
The Two Question Novel Quiz Part 3: Voice
In order to sell your novel, books recommend having a unique "voice" that separates you from the pack and wins you literary, commercial, and social-emotional praise. The fact that books also recommend that you be married to the chairman of Random House and/or Judith Regan is neither here nor there. But what kind of voice do you want to have? Do you want your voice to be strong and masculine like Hemingway and that dude who told Oprah he woke up on an airplane with no teeth or clever and flirty like Lauren Weisberger or whomever writes Candace Bushnell's books? If you said neither, books would point out that you're lying. Either way, to discover where your voice fits in on the voice spectrum, please take this short, two question quiz and then feel free to spend the rest of the week in a semi-concussed state of food coma remembering the vaguely worded story of Squanto and the Pilgrims before venturing to the mall at 5 AM on Black Friday to buy vanilla cookie candles at 40% off. It's totally worth it. Directions: Read then choose, then read then choose, then learn. 1. Your protagonist finds themselves seated across from their true love at the Olive Garden. Please describe said scene.A. The breadsticks were warm and garlic-scented and I was hungry. First, I was thirsty though and I ordered a whiskey and thought about bull fighting and other sports. I like sports. A girl was there, I think. B. Unless he's being ironic or something, the fact that Jeremy even considered taking me to an OG (in the burbs!!) is kind of ridic. Olive Garden's are full of ew people, and ew people cannot appreciate the fact that I squeezed into this Bottega Veneta Camel Shearling Shrug and these Jimmy Choo Biker Leather Flat Boots With Rabbit Fur Lining. I need like eleven Cosmo's. C. Music. The gentle hum of the synthesized version of "Hey Ya"reverberated off of the plush, faux-Italian decor. A cold rush came over me, a suspicious rush of season's past, a remembrance of things before, before a flood of emotions crept up on me like our vaguely mustachioed waiter. As Daphne ordered her Endless Pasta Bowl, I reflected on a time when the song of my love still played, still reflected towards me like a pool of reflective water. That my heart still beats is a wonder at all. I ordered the Tour of Italy and became dour. D. Don is famous for a lot of things, and most of those things have something to do with being a naughty, naughty boy. "Have you been a bad boy," I asked in a whisper, leaning over the table as the waiter brought the breadsticks. "You know I have," Don said, his crystal clear blue eyes running up and down my body. I picked up a breadstick, seductively. Three minutes later, we were doing it in the men's lavatory. 2. Your character finds themselves at an ATM machine needing money. How do they handle it?
A. We went to the woman at the bank and requested money. She said to use the machine. I told her I don't use machines. Walking home, I tried to think of what she meant. B. Jeremy made some joke about going "dutch" to dinner tonight, so I went to the ATM, the one down on Houston and Mott in Nolita by that cute brunch place Nolita House with the morning margarita's. Going "dutch" wasn't my problem. My problem was that as I was walking up to the ATM, I got my Purple Label Grey Metallic "Lizard" Crissy Evening Sandals stuck in a grate and I slipped, nearly ruining my Adriano Goldschmied Boyfriend Shorts and that cute top I borrowed from Kristin (whose new thing, apparently, is not eating). I should have moved to the Village. C. Doors. Opening and closing, exposing and then covering up. The automatic doors at the ATM remind me of the clapping hands of a babysitter I once had, a small Latina woman with strong, callused hands. Isn't life often like the closing and opening of doors, be they automatic, manual or otherwise? Friends become enemies, enemies, friends and the seasons pass with nay a look in the direction of God. I've forgotten my ATM card. D. "Where are we going to do it?" I asked Don, the bad boy actor. I felt bad. So bad that I kind of felt good. "I don't care baby, as long as it's hot and in public," Don said. He was smoking a cigarillo. "Well," I said, slyly plucking the cigarillo from his mouth and taking a long pull. "The ATM machine has a camera." "You're bad," Don said with a mischievous smile. "I know," I said. "I am bad." Key:
Mostly A's: Your sparse prose gives the bare minimum of details and doesn't really let us "inside". You pull it off, you're Hemingway. You don't, and you're (insert any male high school writer after just reading Death in the Afternoon by Hemingway). I'm pulling for you.
Mostly B's: Your voice is a little bit sexy and a little bit city. As long as your protagonist is 23-25 and working in a cool, creative, city job (fashion, magazines, advertising, corporate accounting, etc) with some boy trouble, you're pretty much already published.
Mostly C's: Oh, pseudo-literary. The eternal quest to flood the page with hyper-symbolic prose and internal reflection. When it's good, it's amazing, when it's bad, it's the worst. A little bit like sushi.
Mostly D's: You are Jackie Collins. And you are naughty.
Ok. Let me know where you stand in the comments. And--if you feel like your voice wasn't given a shout out-- feel free to drop where exactly you place yourself, preferably in that Hollywood movie-pitch style, "Tom Clancy meets E. Annie Proulx at Ken Follett's house". Don't use that one though, that's mine. I Wanna Be, RichCalloway
11/20/2007 2:01:37 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)
|
|
 Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Pseudo-In-Depth Analysis of The Things I Read Online: Slate.com
As in gymnastics or morning visits to the bathroom, everyone has their own routines for visiting the Internet 2.0. Before I can safely get to "work", I scroll through a lengthy list of favorite blogs, news sites, social networking...networks, trendy sneaker information providers, and forums analyzing "The View" in an effort to get a more full and informed view of the world. And perhaps because of that finely tuned, cosmopolitan-esque view of said world, a lot of people should ask me, "What, Kevin, are those sites that provide you with such piercing insights and almost encyclopedic knowledge of other people's relationship statuses via The Facebook?" So--in an effort to answer that self-asked hypothetical question-- I am dropping a new, potentially recurring entry into my nest of recurring blog entries called, well, you can read the title. The point is to take a look at some of the sites that I read, give you some background on them, and then review them. Best case scenario, friends, is that you discover a new site of potential interest, worst case scenario, is that--somewhere down the line-- I attempt to submit something to one of these sites and, after a quick Google search, all of this comes back to bite me in the ass and I'm summarily blacklisted from participating in the Internet. Hmmm. Maybe this isn't a good idea. Slate.comSlate.com is an online news and culture magazine. According to its Advertising page (brief teaching moment: a good way to get a quick idea of how a magazine imagines their audience is to go to their "advertise with us" page and look at how they define themselves to advertisers and who they describe as their audience. It sounds kind of obvious, but it seemed entirely clever to me at the time I sorted it out), they attract 5 million unique visitors a month, although I don't know anyone outside of the journalism or writing worlds that doesn't just assume that Salon and Slate are--in the words of my roommate-- the same "online magazine thing". Journalists, on the other hand,--or, at least the ones that I associate with--assume that everyone is reading this particular online magazine thing. In fact, 86% of all conversations I have at Boston Mag start with, "Did you read __'s takedown of __ in Slate?" and then trail off into some sort lengthy debate as to whether you agree or disagree, usually followed by some sort of speculative, unconfirmed anecdote about the personal/professional life of the person who wrote it and then a call down to Ad Sales to see if there are any open-bar launch parties that night. That, friends, in a nutshell, is how good journalism is made. Anyway, Slate caters, if not specifically to journalists, then at least to people who spend a good deal of their time reading other magazines and newspapers, and they do it by acting like a meta-magazine; offering analysis, commentaries, and refutations of things written in other papers or magazines or blogs. Other online entities also do this (in fact, it's sort of an online specialty) but--since most of the people who write for Slate are seasoned journalists--you don't get that snarky "outsider attacking insider" feel that you get at a site like Gawker.com, and you can feel intelligent plagiarizing their opinions in an effort to sound more informed while making small talk on the subway. My one issue with Slate, which is most people's issue, is they seem to have a standard template for all of their pieces: think of some sort of contrary POV about a major issue/commonly prescribed notion, counter said argument using cleverly worded rhetorics, add many, many hyperlinks. When they pull it off, (which, admittedly, is most of the time) it comes off sounding fresh, new, and almost genius, but when they don't, it just sort of sounds like they all sat around brainstorming what would happen if every day was some sort of highbrow, literary version of Opposite Day. Either way, Slate does what any good culture/news mag should do; it infuriates, informs, and entertains, all while sparking debate. Plus, their movie critic Dana Stevens and I share similar tastes in films, which makes me feel smart. Anyway, as soon as I can sort it out, I'll give you a tasting plate of some classic, must-read Slate pieces. But, friends, since this is more of a conversation than anything else, I'm curious to get your own insights and opinions on sites that you read everyday, especially ones that are well-written, informative, and hilarious. So check up on those in the Comments. And yes, self promotion equals automatic disqualification. Come on now, you're better than that. Get out of my dreams, and into my car.Billy, Ocean
11/13/2007 10:17:25 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)
|
|
 Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Reviews of Books I Was Forced To Read in High School, Part 2: The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne
Brief Research Sidenote: In my long esteemed career of researching via the Web 2.0, I have come to love and look forward to the random factual tidbits provided for you by Wikipedia. For instance, where else would I have been able to discover that on an episode of "One Tree Hill", Lucas Scott reads a quote from The Scarlet Letter, or that the hip-hop group The Clipse features the lyric "Like a Scarlet Letter, for the world to see" on their mixtape "We Got It 4 Cheap: Vol. 1"? If you said nowhere, you're totally right. Eat it, World Book.
I read The Scarlet Letter during my freshman year of high school, which-- much like the book-- was a time of semi-specific love angst and poor clothing choices. The SL is by Nathaniel Hawthorne, a Bowdoin College Polar Bear, lifelong New Englander, and Concord, MA neighbor of two philosophizing writers with three names (Henry David Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson) whom I often confuse with each other. For those of you who don't know, The SL centers around a girl named Hester Prynne living on a 17th century Puritan settlement outside of Boston, who is forced to wear a big red A on her chest because she is an adulterer. The adultery in question is complicated, as her husband sent her ahead from England and allegedly never showed up, and God knows life in one of those Puritan settlements was kind of boring what with the hoeing and the witch hunting and what not, but, needless to say, once she got pregnant, the rumor mill (which was located next to the textile mill) abuzzed, and she got harangued. By the "town fathers". Seriously. This kind of stuff happened. As it turns out, other things also happened. Her long-lost husband was actually in town practicing medicine and using the creepy name Chillingworth. An eloquent minister is revealed to be the baby's daddy, which stresses him out. There is a meteor that looks like a red A. An escape to Europe is planned, then doesn't pan out. Revenge is sought by Chillingworth, then abandoned in frustration. Just think 17th century version of the movie "Something to Talk About" starring Julia Roberts and Dennis Quaid and I think you'll get it. Anyway, at the time of reading, I did not like The SL. As I recall, my analysis of the book was extensive. Using topical high school sophistry, I attempted a two-pronged attack, using the "Why were the Puritans so crazy?" argument and a less effective "personal experience with sin" component that pushed my grade into the low B's. I have since re-visited The SL (full disclosure: was forced to, in college) and can now better appreciate the themes in the book; sin, civilization vs the wild, old vs new, guilt, etc, but--what I've found looking back at these books-- is that, aside from The Great Gatsby, A Catcher in the Rye, and the underrated A Yellow Raft in Blue Water, I didn't "get" any of them while still in school and therefore, didn't like them. No doubt part of this can be blamed on the fact that I was probably "reading" these literary masterpieces while playing Goldeneye on Nintendo 64 and talking on my private phone line to my GF about whose house we were going to watch "Dawson's Creek" at, but still--for a man of words-- this is kind of embarrassing. But said embarrassment leads me to a question (or more of a statement about a question): I want to know which books you've read that--despite them receiving either critical, popular or social-emotional acclaim--you just really didn't like. Or "get". Especially if you lied about liking or "getting" them because you were ashamed to admit it and you didn't want that chick who sits across from you with the black rectangular framed glasses, the leather-bound notebook, and the smug, world-weary expression to have the satisfaction of knowing you didn't get them...or, you know, something like that. I await your embarrassment(z). I've got one hand in my pocket, and the other one is giving a high five
Alanis, Morissette
11/6/2007 7:40:36 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)
|
|
|
|