Re-Searching, a Novel Thing

It’s time again to do a little research for the novel. All novels require some amount of research. I didn’t mention it in my previous post about How I Work. All part of the process. This novel, especially, demands tons of it.

Now I’m curious about REsearch. How can it be RE if I didn’t do the searching for this bit yet? Its cousin of course, is Rehearsal. Is the first “rehearsal” a hearse? Um…wait…
[I think Sunshine already stated the "rehearse" oddity in a comment somewhere... or she told it to me before.]

A Wink at Hood

Just wanted to mention that I really enjoy the BBC’s Robin Hood series. BBC America plays it and my TiVo faithfully collects the episodes for me. It’s not an incredible show, but it is certainly above average by my reckoning. They’ve taken the legend and treated it with respect, trying for a grittier more realistic tone. Of course, one can only be realistic to a certain degree with a tale like this, so it does have its “wild fun” moments. I also like the fact that they have made it their own. Yes, it follows the conventions we all know and love of Robin Hood. But they have also added a number of their own twists, elements and characters into the mix. So far I have loved each of these. If you have not seen it yet, give it a shot. (Get it?) They are now airing the second season here and I believe we are nearing the end of it. (The season, not the series.) And right now I can’t get the instrumental theme song out of my head. Bravo!

How I Work

Thought I’d explain a little about my process.

My novels do not come fully formed from my head like Athena from Zeus. And I wouldn’t want them to, as that would spoil the discoveries made along the way.

They start off as kernels, or sparks. A tidbit (a line, scenario, image, etc) that seems interesting to me. When I do get an idea, I make sure to write it down. I usually just let it be for a while. For either I am already working on something else or I let the seed get nurtured…that whole metaphor. I peruse the notes every so often. I let them stay in my mind, watering them with some “what ifs” or maybe a “hey that idea fits in here, too.” By the time I finish what I’m currently working on, I have a pretty solid idea of what to work on next. Sometimes, though, it’s like Jack’s Beanstalk and growing out of control. I’ve actually had to put a novel on hold in mid-completion because the character’s plight would not leave me alone. Or rather the character would not leave me alone. They can be quite “loud.”

A little of Asimov’s advice and a lot thinking gives me a Malleable Outline. A Malleable Outline has room for expansion, changes or cuts. A number of elements remain fixed, of course. But often I will not leave nothing to the imagination. I find that writing is a collaborative experience. Between the Inspiration, the Characters and the Author. Some totally grok that I “hear” from characters, others just nod and smile. No, no voices. But I do listen. They often interject tidbits or plot points that are entirely “news” to me. I reassess the story and write accordingly.

Generally, I write out of sequence. As long as the pillars of the MO are in place, I’m free to zero in on the parts that particularly excite me. Parts that I’m most passionate about or can’t wait to “see.” I’ll end up with larger chunks that can be easily bridged. And along the way I’ve incorporated new ideas and influences into a better whole. As I stated before, lately my choices have been pieces which would behoove me to write in chronological order. It depends on the work, of course. So I’m not locked into a method. As I say, it’s malleable.

I revise as I go. I backtrack, reading the last 5-10 pages (usually in transit) and make revisions. I’ll then write more. When next at a computer I make the changes. I make alterations to my changes as well as the new material as I type them . At certain points (nothing regimented, just as I feel necessary) I will read through what I have so far of the book. Getting back in touch with it as whole, rather than a series of specific scenes. The process repeats to completion.

Despite the old adage that one should, I do not necessarily write every day. Sometimes I need to “work out” a scene and want to let it stir. Spurts, maybe? There are stretches where I do write every day. It just depends on the piece. Since I’ve been blessed recently with no shortage of ideas, I am content to let the stories unfold as the characters share them with me.

Gotta go...I think I hear Andy calling...

Crème de la Theme?

I’d like to point out a bit of fine writing. Many of you will probably think I’m nuts. But if you do, I urge you to visit (or re-visit) the work. I am talking about a television theme song. I’d venture to say that a “good” theme song should be catchy, or at least compelling if "catchy" does not fit with the tone of the show. There’s nothing worse than a lousy opening to a show. (Okay, not nothing worse...don’t nitpick.) For those shows that have words set to them, when done right, the lyrics should describe the premise of the program. Now, despite how you feel about this particular television series, I find it hard to deny the brilliance of the theme. It not only contains the aforementioned elements, but it introduces the characters and gives insight as to their relationships as well. Plus, it has delicious rhymes. I also rather enjoy the animation style here. And so, regardless of how you may or may not feel about the show itself, I invite you to watch and listen to Ann Hampton Callaway’s masterpiece, the theme to The Nanny. It’s one of the best.

Also of note, The Nanny is one of Bart’s guilty pleasures…and a co-worker informed him that a line from it showed up as a $1,000,000 question on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? “Who is the lady in red when everyone else is wearing tan?” [Which is also a fine example of the succinct yet much-revealing (dare I say poetic?) lyrics.]

Comment Continues to Conclusion on Strange Book

I finished the strange book.
Generally it tumbled gracefully forward in the same manner which I had described last time. But it did so entertainingly. The weaving in and out of the fictional realities remained captivating…up until the end. I am sad to say that I did not so much care for the ending. Actually, the outcome I very much expected given the increasing hints throughout the piece. Yet it did have some other startling moments. The most salient of these, though, comes in the part that disappointed me. Kensington Gardens utilizes one of those hackneyed devices. The kind you can envision a literary professor professing to never use. You know, as in: And they awoke from the dream. (Not the one used in this book.) It just left me cold. Something so grandly knitted together deserves not to fray.

One of my favorite sections is a description of a grand party his parents, you remember, the rockstars, gave one wild evening. It goes on for 10 and half pages in an ‘endless’ list of celebrities who attended. Each celebrity received a comment in parenthesis. Glib comments about what they wore, what they drank, who they spoke to and why, what they did, etc. Each a little quip. Here’s an example: Truman Capote (that voice like fingernails on a blackboard singing some song from The Mikado over and over again all night…) I genuinely laughed out loud several times on the train. It has a build to it with recurring jokes (both commentary and people) and is worth picking up the book to read this part alone.

Overall I have mixed feelings about what I “got out of” the book. To me it seemed as if he suggested that children’s fantasy fiction is a kind of infection. The allure and “promise” of heroes with implausible but delicious powers…ones that in our present state of reality are not actually going to happen. The child soon learns the sad fact. And yet characters always outlive the author. Their “impossible” feats will always cause pain. It always ends in let down. He says authors write to take revenge against the world that would not realize the fantasy, spreading the infection. I’m not so sure I can agree but then it’s hard not to see a logic. As I said, mixed feelings. Still, I could be reading too much into it and making a fabrication of the real message of a fake author whose history is invented into our reality…

However, I did not have mixed feelings about two omissions. These occurred in yet another list of famous people. This one did not prove as long. Only about a page. It recounts all those who have played Peter Pan. It contains parenthetical comments again, but more so about trivia. Here is the first “omission” that bothered me. Jean Arthur (with Boris Karloff as Captain Hook); Mary Martin; Mia Farrow (who doesn’t need to cut her hair…) Back up. Where is Mary Martin’s parenthetical? How in the Neverland could he not comment on her? Here’s the other: and finally Peter Pan as a boy savage in the film directed by the Australian P.J. Hogan. And his name? I don’t get it. Why would he fail to mention Jeremy Sumpter? I have mixed feelings about Hogan’s movie itself. But I, for one, adore Jeremy’s portrayal of Peter. Perhaps Peter Hook/Fresán did not agree and disliked his performance. Could be - yet he obviously has no trouble slamming two other celebrities by name here: and Spielberg’s terrible Peter Pan, played by terrible Robin Williams (an adult, amnesiac Peter Pan) Perhaps the book published prior to its casting/release? No, the movie preceded publication by two years. Why, then, omit his name? It just irks me. Jeremy Sumpter (the fantastic first live-action boy Peter Pan) There.

Well, all in all, it’s a hell of a read. Despite the “oh please…” epilogue of sorts, I enjoyed having my brain jostled by this one.

One other thing…the author (Fresán) does address the notion of using real people fictionally in a footnote. Interesting that he put quotations around the word real.


And yes, that's John Lennon on the left there. The Beatles factor heavily into what's growing in the fertile mind of Fresán's Kensington Gardens.

Exist-essential?

One of my favorite sources of odd news,

Boing Boing, presented a great literary laugh.

Click here for a hoax and a dose of life imitating art.

Just be careful not to spend too much time boinging around at

Boing Boing.

Old Saying, New Twist II

After making a playfully snarky comment to her, Mina asked me if I'm "Cruisin' for a bruisin." I replied: "No, I'm aiming for a maiming."
Don't you think we could use some new clichés?
There. I just created an oxymoron, too.
Stop me.

Old Saying, New Twist I
Old Saying, New Twist III
Old Saying, New Twist IV
Old Saying, New Twist IV.ii
Old Saying, New Twist IV.iii