So, that didn't go so well ...

Yeah, didn't make the top 6 in the Amazon contest. Again, I didn't really expect to, but it's still a wee bit depressing. I did edit the screenplay and set up a revision, which will be entered for the February contest, but I don't expect much to happen there. Still, top 50 out of 2500 or so scripts means I don't completely and utterly suck.

However, I must be a glutton for punishment as I'm entering the Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award competition. They have a young adult section, so I'm throwing Shiloh's Way into the ring.

The problem is, it's not ready. It needs massive editing. I've already cut an entire page out of the first chapter, and I'm finding passive voice everywhere. It's kind of overwhelming because the contest deadline is so close -- worse, they have a limited number of entries allowed, so it could close earlier.

So, I'm back to editing! Wish me luck!

Been away so long ...

Wow, it's been a long time since I posted here. I really should keep my blog better up to date. For those of you checking it out - my screenplay of Blackburn Burrow made the top 50 of the Amazon Studios contest. I have to say, I was pretty shocked by that. They'll be announcing the top 6 soon, I'm not really sure I have a chance at that ... Still, it's nice to be in consideration!

Everything else is pretty much the same. My mind is overwhelmed with story ideas, and no time or focus to be able to get them down into long form. I'm going to keep trying though.

I will update more often, though! Hopefully, that'll keep me on track.

Book review: Usurper of the Sun

I've been away from the blog for a couple weeks (so sad ...), but I'm back to do something new - a book review! Ok, review might be too strong a word -- perhaps, a book impression is better.

Book: Usurper of the Sun
Author: Housuke Nojiri
Translated by: John Wunderley
Published: 2003 JP/2009 US

Book Summary: The mysterious Builders have brought humanity to the edge of extinction; can they be reasoned with, or must they be destroyed?Aki Shiraishi is a high school student working in the astronomy club and one of the few witnesses to an amazing event—someone is building a tower on the planet Mercury. Soon, the Builders have constructed a ring around the sun, threatening the ecology of Earth with an immense shadow. Aki is inspired to pursue a career in science, and the truth. She must determine the purpose of the ring and the plans of its creators, as the survival of both species—humanity and the alien Builders—hangs in the balance.

Impressions: The novel is one of the staple concepts of sci-fi - a first contact story. However, it's more in the vein of Clarke, as in hard science in a fictional setting, rather than Lucas - fantasy in space. I love sci-fantasy books - warp gates, hundreds of aliens interacting, high adventure across the galaxy ... but, it's not even close to being realistic. And, the concepts that are explored, while possibly important, are extremely broad.

Usurper of the Sun deals deeply with the science surrounding awareness, intelligence, and cognition. While the physics and difficulty of space travel is presented in a highly believable manner (other than the speed of the spacecraft, though they remain sub-light) , the real core of the story is Aki and her passion to understand the aliens that they have dubbed the Builders.

I have to admit, I highly enjoyed the book. Between all the hard science, there was enough adventure to keep the plot moving. I did break down the book into chunks, as the concepts were worth dwelling upon, especially when deal with theories regarding self-awareness and intelligence that I had never been presented with before. To get the most from this book, you really have to open yourself to somewhat high-level conceptual frameworks. I wouldn't say it's difficult to read, however the concepts are more along the level of grad school than high school. However, they're presented well -- you're taught the information through dialogue and example rather than having an info dump or the author just expecting you to just get it.

It's hard to write about an author's style in translation, because you never know if the writing is more like the original author or the translator. Still, the book is well written and easily understandable - I never felt like something was lost in translation. Some of the dialogue had that odd floaty feel that seems unique to Japanese in translation; this may raise the eyebrows of a few readers, but the characters still feel distinct even though it is really just Aki's story.

I'm purposefully not delving into much of the plot other than the summary provided on the back of the book because you really don't know exactly what's going to happen. I had a few good guesses, and I was pretty close. Still, I was served with several surprises. The flow and all the events of the book seemed very natural -- even the extended time span the book covers.

That is, except for one event. One little thing happens in the book that, while it was set up earlier in the novel, still feels a bit like Star Trek -- you know, everything is going bad then suddenly Spock or Data says, "I now have this one piece of never seen before technology that will solve our problems, and it just so happens to be right here in my hand." Like I said, it was mentioned earlier, but that it suddenly works like it supposed to at the very last second feels a bit manipulative, but it didn't ruin the book for me. It was just one small, weak point in a very strong story.

Recommendation: Worth reading - especially for those liking real sci-fi.

Writing is actually more than just the story

Here is a conundrum that I often face: do I follow the naturalist path in writing or the artificial god route? If you've never really tried to write a sustained fictional narrative you may have never even have thought to consider this question. Me, I think about it all the time. Now, these terms are pretty much my own, because I'm not well educated in the lingo of graduate level literary studies ... so, let's start with my own little definitions.

When I'm talking about the naturalist path in writing, I'm expressing a desire to make the story (regardless of how crazy the situation may be) flow in a natural manner. This means the reader may not know everything that is going on and not every situation has a tidy ending. It's more like life. Sometimes, we just don't know things. Situations are sloppy.

You have to understand, when you read a story or watch a show where the situations seem chaotic and that it's like real life, the writer meant it to be that way. It was crafted -- it's something fake trying to take on the appearance of reality. When done well, it can really draw you into characters and make you a part of the story.

Another option is the writer as an artificial god, clearly manipulating the situation to make it simple or exciting or self-contained. As I mentioned, all stories are artificial - the difference here is that the writer doesn't really follow the pretense of the narrative being true to life. A lot of your action films follow this route - you create a circumstance that forces the main character to clearly define who they are, you create these set pieces that don't seem natural at all -- but they're really, really exciting. As a reader or viewer, you're overtly being manipulated, but when done well -- you just don't care, because it's so much fun.

Horror movies often follow this path: hey, there is some supernatural mofo stalking and killing all of us, but let's leave the group to go have sex in that secluded spot with only one exit. I mean, we all KNOW what's going to happen, but we accept it as part of the framework and go along with it.

So, I'm often torn by which path to follow. Most people prefer stories in the artificial god mode -- they like being taken on a ride, and they don't like to have to work for it. This is what sells and what is successful. Heck, some of my favorite books and movies definitely follow this route. At the same time, I'm so drawn to creating worlds where the reader just doesn't know everything, where things are spoon fed.

Anyway, the point of this post is just to let non-writers into what someone like myself thinks about when creating. Stories aren't just "there" -- writers have to make a whole bunch of conscious decisions on how to sculpt them.

It's really so much work. I'm tired just thinking about it! :)

Jennifer Knapp is back! Yay her! Here's a video from one of her recent live performances:

Any road works

I keep being confronted with the stupidity of mankind at the same time I'm trying to write something that actually portrays our race as getting it right in the end. Sometimes, that makes me feel like I'm taking a cup of water out of the ocean to lower the tide. There are just things about people I just don't understand sometimes.

I don't understand people that refuse to learn. I don't understand how people would rather be ignorant than learn something just because that information might force them to change their opinion. I don't understand how people can cling to falsehoods when presented with the light of truth just so they can remain angry.

I know this is all abstract, but every time my mind goes over specific instances, I feel myself getting angry and annoyed. I've been irritated all day over so much foolishness that I can see all around me that so many people seem blind to. What bothers me the most is that people can't seem to comprehend that there are things that they don't know they don't know. Think about that for a bit.

In any case, I'll leave you with a quote ... it's good thing to remember when we're lost, I think. Lewis Carroll said -- If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there.

The Binary Society

I'm a bit disturbed by how entrenched a binary society has become in our culture. By binary society, I mean, that as a whole, Americans see most decisions as either one thing or the other. You win or you lose; you're successful or you're not; you're with me or you're against me. This perspective is in everything that goes on in our culture.

In politics, you're a Republican or a Democrat, and you either agree with everything in that party or you don't. The concept of politicians talking, negotiating, and reaching a compromise seems to not have just become foreign, but a negative -- as if the politicians are selling out rather than arriving at a better solution.

However, this sort of behavior expands through everything. Look at online message boards, call-in shows, any place people express themselves. You'll see how people are determined to be either good or bad, no gray, they can't be a bit of both. I was talking with my girlfriend the other day about American Idol. You see people constantly pointing out how people from that show, other than one or two are failures. Failure is a pretty absolute word. The fact is, if you're in a creative field - singing, acting, writing, etc - and you can actually make a living doing your art, you are an unqualified success. However, success is now determined to be ultra-rich and mega-famous, or you lose.

Is it any wonder than many Americans, especially younger ones, aren't trying as hard? The definition of success is almost impossible to meet. The with me or against me culture batters people and tears them apart, unless you're either overwhelmed with apathy or completely lacking empathy.

It's no wonder that most other cultures are having problems understanding us. However, we've also helped form a world where our main export is culture -- so, sadly, many nations are starting to adopt our methodology. It's something we've always wanted, right? Well, the problem is, what happens when their opinion differs? They won't back down or compromise because we won't. It makes our world much less friendly and definitely more dangerous.

It seems to me the biggest danger facing America is extremism, not from without, but from within. We're breeding extremism and it's time to step back from that chasm and start talking again -- not as enemies, but as neighbors.

If you hear a politician from either side use the language of enemies when talking about opponents, send them an e-mail and chastise them. It only takes a minute. If enough people did it, this sort of behavior would stop. Playground behavior has to end, and we have to expect everyone around us to act like adults.

You could even use a piece of chalk!

I just came across an interesting opinion piece on the Computerworld site regarding the iPad. The conceit of the essay is that the iPad is actually a good piece of hardware for creativity. Much of the noise regarding the unit was that it was only for content distribution and not creation - and, it's take quite a few hits in that regard.

When the iPad was first announced, I wrote up an entry regarding how I'd like to use it to write. I mentioned this in several places and received an awful lot of flak regarding those intentions. I don't really understand exactly why people were so threatened with the idea I might actually compose on an iPod, yet they were -- to the point of denigrating my interest in it.

The paragraph that struck me the most was this one:

In Japan, millions of novels have been written on cell phones. My great-grandfather wrote his Ph.D. dissertation with a #2 pencil. Chaucer, Shakespeare and Jefferson wrote their brilliant works with bird feathers. Yet the iPad's critics say creation is impossible using a device that would have been a Pentagon supercomputer 20 years ago. The computers that today's writers say are absolutely necessary for writing didn't even exist 10, 20 or 30 years ago. Is that when they think literacy started?

So, it's really kind of weird that people think that this device is somehow less capable of either creating an environment in which to be creative or generating the tools to allow someone to be. Anyway, you can check out the entire article here.

On to my writing -- the deadline-based screenplay competition I entered started this weekend. I have until Monday to submit a scene. I've been running a couple through my head since last night - so, I'll start writing them down today. The scene descriptor is so immensely broad that I don't think it does me any favors. I believe the more specific it was, the better I'd be able to do ... as it stands, it's so generic, people can just lift a scene from an already established piece and use it. Oh well.

I'm also scribbling a whole bunch of stuff in a notebook for something. Probably won't actually finish it for six months to a year, and I don't plan to talk about content at all until it's complete. However, I've settled on three themes that I'm weaving through every part of it. I may talk about that.

It's weird how that if you talk about a creative piece before you complete it, it can just die ... wither on the vine, if you will.