I've been hearing the phrase "interval training" for awhile now, but didn't know anything about it. I've been faithful for years to go for a nice brisk walk at least three times a week, and that was enough to keep me in shape. Plus I enjoy it, so why tamper with a good thing?
Then the Big 5-0 rolled around, and my body started to change in mysterious ways. I decided if I didn't take action, I'd be rolling around instead of walking, myself.
So, for the first time in years, I've started an official diet. I'm trying out the South Beach Diet online, and one of their newsletters mentioned the benefits of combining interval training with walking. They suggested twenty minutes every other day, in which you walk at a nice, comfortable pace for four minutes, then go really high-intensity for one minute. You repeat that cycle four times.
I love it! I feel that I'm getting so much out of that twenty minutes, and the time just zips by because the exercise is broken into manageable pieces. During that one minute, I can hardly breathe but that's okay, because I know it will be over soon. Then I slow down and enjoy. The next four minutes fly by, and before you know it, I'm back home and feeling great.
There's got to be a life metaphor in there, right? This is probably one of those things you could twist around to mean whatever you like. I choose to look at it in a positive light. Yes, there are times when I don't seem to get much writing or "art" done, but I'm still moving. Then there's the intense time, when I seem to be flying along, heart pumping, excited--full of ideas, turning out those pages.
But I can't maintain that. I have to slow down. That word count that was going to be constant and every day falls by the wayside. But I'm still moving. And there's another intense time coming.
And maybe that's okay, after all.
Showing posts with label Writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Writing. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Benjamin Button Review, Part II
So, where did it go wrong? If you missed the first part of this review, you should know that I loved the first part of this movie- probably about a third of it, as it is a long film. But then The Curious Case of Benjamin Button took a turn, and I have been trying to put my finger on exactly why the last part did not work. The answer, I believe, is that there are several reasons!
First, the writing...Maybe the writer thought the concept itself was interesting enough to carry this short-story-turned-loooonnnngggg-screenplay, but it wasn't. Like anything, without a strong story, it suffers. Things do happen in Benjamin's life along the way, things which should and could be interesting, but for some reason they aren't. He had a lifelong deep love with a woman, played by Cate Blanchett, and I didn't care. He went to war and worked on a boat, and I didn't care. He had a child, and I didn't care.
One of my problems with the story is that the viewer is robbed of the pleasure of discovery. Why write a story about someone so extraordinary if no one, beyond his father and foster mother initially, ever seems to find it strange that he gets younger instead of older. I love discovery scenes. I was left sorely wanting.
A friend of mine said it was a regurgitated version of Forrest Gump, and I have to agree that there are similarities, mainly in tone. The two movies feel the same. Also, they are both about extraordinary boys who live interesting lives in spite of what others see as their handicaps. But BB's is not nearly as interesting, in my opinion, as Forrest's. This leads me to character development, which also goes to poor writing.
Story is important, but when we don't care about characters, who cares what happens to them? I think this was a major part of the problem. Looking at FG again in comparison, we can see strong character development in Forrest and Ginny from an early age. They BOTH face great obstacles. In fact, I would venture that Ginny faces more trouble than Forrest, many either of her own making or as a result of her abuse growing up. We care about both of these characters, and we feel what happens to them, both the good and the bad.
In BB, Cate B's character, Daisy, is one-dimensional. She is a beautiful dancer. She shows up every few years and eventually she and Benjamin do get together and then split up, and that's about it. We have no idea of who she is outside of the knowledge of her as a dancer and someone who likes Benjamin. Usually, I LOVE Cate Blanchett. She is one of my favorite actresses, but somehow, she could not make this one work.
Thus, we have our second problem...the acting. I mentioned in Part I of this review my opinion that Brad Pitt does excellently as his first incarnation of BB, when he is a really old, small man, with a little boy's mind. He is subdued, but you can see the twinkle of youth in his eye. It really was great. But I have a MAJOR CORRECTION to make here to the first blog- even though he looks a lot like Brad in the face, IT IS NOT HIM IN THE FIRST PART OF THE MOVIE. You may be thinking this should have been obvious since he was so small during this segment, but they made the hobbits in Lord of the Rings look much shorter than they were! The actor with the convincing twinkle was actually, according to www.imdb.com, Peter Donald Badalamenti II. Sorry for not doing this research sooner! I knew something wasn't right there!
When Brad took over the role, I believe he tried to show us his version of growing up, which was just to grow dull. He lost the twinkle of youth created by his predecessor, and with it went his personality. He shows very little emotion during his adulthood.
There was also no chemistry between Pitt and Blanchett. I have a suspicion that Angelina Jolie was hanging out on the set scaring the blazes out of them. This is something the director (third problem) should have caught in casting, but he also should have pulled better acting out of these guys. I mean, the last part of this movie was a perfect storm of bad choices, but better acting and chemistry between the principals could have saved it partly.
Good things? Make-up, atmosphere, the old people in the home (one of whom is always telling about his seven instances of being struck by lightning), and nice performances from Taraji P. Henson, who played Benjamin's adoptive mother, Jared Harris as Captain Mike, and Badalamenti.
Melanie, one of our faithful readers, commented on the last review, asking how could a story with this premise end well? My answer is that it can end as well as any story about a person's life from beginning to end, but it should have given us a reason to care about the stuff in between. I like to joke that the movie ends when he becomes an atom and then splits and explodes, but that footage ended up being cut. Actually, it ends by randomly tying in Hurricane Katrina. We see the flood waters rising at the train station, and we are shown the basement, where the old clock still resides. Not, I imagine, the original intent of F. Scott Fitzgerald.
First, the writing...Maybe the writer thought the concept itself was interesting enough to carry this short-story-turned-loooonnnngggg-screenplay, but it wasn't. Like anything, without a strong story, it suffers. Things do happen in Benjamin's life along the way, things which should and could be interesting, but for some reason they aren't. He had a lifelong deep love with a woman, played by Cate Blanchett, and I didn't care. He went to war and worked on a boat, and I didn't care. He had a child, and I didn't care.
One of my problems with the story is that the viewer is robbed of the pleasure of discovery. Why write a story about someone so extraordinary if no one, beyond his father and foster mother initially, ever seems to find it strange that he gets younger instead of older. I love discovery scenes. I was left sorely wanting.
A friend of mine said it was a regurgitated version of Forrest Gump, and I have to agree that there are similarities, mainly in tone. The two movies feel the same. Also, they are both about extraordinary boys who live interesting lives in spite of what others see as their handicaps. But BB's is not nearly as interesting, in my opinion, as Forrest's. This leads me to character development, which also goes to poor writing.
Story is important, but when we don't care about characters, who cares what happens to them? I think this was a major part of the problem. Looking at FG again in comparison, we can see strong character development in Forrest and Ginny from an early age. They BOTH face great obstacles. In fact, I would venture that Ginny faces more trouble than Forrest, many either of her own making or as a result of her abuse growing up. We care about both of these characters, and we feel what happens to them, both the good and the bad.
In BB, Cate B's character, Daisy, is one-dimensional. She is a beautiful dancer. She shows up every few years and eventually she and Benjamin do get together and then split up, and that's about it. We have no idea of who she is outside of the knowledge of her as a dancer and someone who likes Benjamin. Usually, I LOVE Cate Blanchett. She is one of my favorite actresses, but somehow, she could not make this one work.
Thus, we have our second problem...the acting. I mentioned in Part I of this review my opinion that Brad Pitt does excellently as his first incarnation of BB, when he is a really old, small man, with a little boy's mind. He is subdued, but you can see the twinkle of youth in his eye. It really was great. But I have a MAJOR CORRECTION to make here to the first blog- even though he looks a lot like Brad in the face, IT IS NOT HIM IN THE FIRST PART OF THE MOVIE. You may be thinking this should have been obvious since he was so small during this segment, but they made the hobbits in Lord of the Rings look much shorter than they were! The actor with the convincing twinkle was actually, according to www.imdb.com, Peter Donald Badalamenti II. Sorry for not doing this research sooner! I knew something wasn't right there!
When Brad took over the role, I believe he tried to show us his version of growing up, which was just to grow dull. He lost the twinkle of youth created by his predecessor, and with it went his personality. He shows very little emotion during his adulthood.
There was also no chemistry between Pitt and Blanchett. I have a suspicion that Angelina Jolie was hanging out on the set scaring the blazes out of them. This is something the director (third problem) should have caught in casting, but he also should have pulled better acting out of these guys. I mean, the last part of this movie was a perfect storm of bad choices, but better acting and chemistry between the principals could have saved it partly.
Good things? Make-up, atmosphere, the old people in the home (one of whom is always telling about his seven instances of being struck by lightning), and nice performances from Taraji P. Henson, who played Benjamin's adoptive mother, Jared Harris as Captain Mike, and Badalamenti.
Melanie, one of our faithful readers, commented on the last review, asking how could a story with this premise end well? My answer is that it can end as well as any story about a person's life from beginning to end, but it should have given us a reason to care about the stuff in between. I like to joke that the movie ends when he becomes an atom and then splits and explodes, but that footage ended up being cut. Actually, it ends by randomly tying in Hurricane Katrina. We see the flood waters rising at the train station, and we are shown the basement, where the old clock still resides. Not, I imagine, the original intent of F. Scott Fitzgerald.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Reading Lives
Until recently, I wondered why anyone would read nonfiction books when there are all those thrilling novels out there. I adore history and at one point could tell you a good bit about the kings and queens of England and the times they lived in. But that was because I read so much historical fiction, especially a prolific writer named Norah Lofts, whose career spanned a large portion of the 20th century.
I think I've collected almost all her books (at least 50 or so), and they cover every time period of English history--from the Saxon invasion and the occupation by Caesar's troops, through Civil War and Restoration and right on up until current times. Although her stories sprawl across time periods, most of them take place in one small area of England, with characters and families that are interconnected. Once you've read enough of her books, the fragments of English history start falling into a memorable pattern. Now, that's my way to learn facts. Read a suspenseful, thrilling story and have the educational bits slipped in like medicine in a spoonful of sugar!
As a part of research for my fiction writing, I have to dip into nonfiction, of course. I usually consider this a chore. But lately, I've started reading biographies to help me get an insight into people. Maybe I need details on a certain career, or insight into a unique personality, and a biography seems like a good resource. In the past two weeks, I've dipped into several different bios, and I'm surprised to find myself actually zipping through them.
One was called If I Am Missing or Dead, by Jeanine Latus. I picked this one up because I may soon be writing a character who is obsessed with a particular man and will do almost anything to hang onto him. She blinds herself to his abuse and manipulations and rationalizes everything he does. I have trouble understanding the motivations of someone like that, but I need to be sympathetic to her. In real life, both Jeanine Latus and her sister put themselves in that situation not once, but over and over--until sister Amy ended up dead. Latus's book covers their lives and "loves" from childhood until the time of the tragedy in an attempt to understand, and help us understand, what went wrong. It's a sad and disturbing story, but it broadened my knowledge of people who are different from me.
On the other hand, the celebrity bio I'm reading makes me realize that people in different walks of life can be pretty similar under the skin. There And Back Again is an autiobiography by actor Sean Astin, maybe best known for playing Sam in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Astin is the son of Patty Duke and John Astin (remember Gomez Addams?) and has been acting since childhood, including a major role in The Goonies when he was a kid. What fascinates me about his story is that, even though he was born into a successful show biz family and has been acting professionally and successfully since childhood, the angst and self-doubt he experiences sound incredibly similar to what Kristi and I write on this blog!
Astin is open about his experiences and his feelings, and even though I've only read about a third of the book, it's fascinating to know this "star" agonizes over feeling untalented, or insignificant, or what direction he should take. Just as Kristi and I do, he wonders whether he should do things that are commercial that don't interest him, or follow his art. He'll have a major success, followed by...nothing. Then he'll worry that it's over and he'll never work again. He knows there are games and strategies to be played to get ahead in Hollywood, but doesn't really know how to go about them. He knows that ultimately he wants to be a filmmaker and director, but has trouble staying on goal, or figuring out whether taking certain jobs will help or hinder him in his direction.
And just like me, he gets distracted from his goals. I had to laugh when he confessed that, in the middle of his most successful acting phase, he tried to fit in going to college because he felt inadequate without a college degree. I, on the other hand, always take college for granted but feel inadequate because I have no real artistic accomplishments!
People are indeed complex creatures. I'm glad I'm finally catching on so I can enjoy some of these real-life stories.
I think I've collected almost all her books (at least 50 or so), and they cover every time period of English history--from the Saxon invasion and the occupation by Caesar's troops, through Civil War and Restoration and right on up until current times. Although her stories sprawl across time periods, most of them take place in one small area of England, with characters and families that are interconnected. Once you've read enough of her books, the fragments of English history start falling into a memorable pattern. Now, that's my way to learn facts. Read a suspenseful, thrilling story and have the educational bits slipped in like medicine in a spoonful of sugar!
As a part of research for my fiction writing, I have to dip into nonfiction, of course. I usually consider this a chore. But lately, I've started reading biographies to help me get an insight into people. Maybe I need details on a certain career, or insight into a unique personality, and a biography seems like a good resource. In the past two weeks, I've dipped into several different bios, and I'm surprised to find myself actually zipping through them.
One was called If I Am Missing or Dead, by Jeanine Latus. I picked this one up because I may soon be writing a character who is obsessed with a particular man and will do almost anything to hang onto him. She blinds herself to his abuse and manipulations and rationalizes everything he does. I have trouble understanding the motivations of someone like that, but I need to be sympathetic to her. In real life, both Jeanine Latus and her sister put themselves in that situation not once, but over and over--until sister Amy ended up dead. Latus's book covers their lives and "loves" from childhood until the time of the tragedy in an attempt to understand, and help us understand, what went wrong. It's a sad and disturbing story, but it broadened my knowledge of people who are different from me.
On the other hand, the celebrity bio I'm reading makes me realize that people in different walks of life can be pretty similar under the skin. There And Back Again is an autiobiography by actor Sean Astin, maybe best known for playing Sam in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Astin is the son of Patty Duke and John Astin (remember Gomez Addams?) and has been acting since childhood, including a major role in The Goonies when he was a kid. What fascinates me about his story is that, even though he was born into a successful show biz family and has been acting professionally and successfully since childhood, the angst and self-doubt he experiences sound incredibly similar to what Kristi and I write on this blog!
Astin is open about his experiences and his feelings, and even though I've only read about a third of the book, it's fascinating to know this "star" agonizes over feeling untalented, or insignificant, or what direction he should take. Just as Kristi and I do, he wonders whether he should do things that are commercial that don't interest him, or follow his art. He'll have a major success, followed by...nothing. Then he'll worry that it's over and he'll never work again. He knows there are games and strategies to be played to get ahead in Hollywood, but doesn't really know how to go about them. He knows that ultimately he wants to be a filmmaker and director, but has trouble staying on goal, or figuring out whether taking certain jobs will help or hinder him in his direction.
And just like me, he gets distracted from his goals. I had to laugh when he confessed that, in the middle of his most successful acting phase, he tried to fit in going to college because he felt inadequate without a college degree. I, on the other hand, always take college for granted but feel inadequate because I have no real artistic accomplishments!
People are indeed complex creatures. I'm glad I'm finally catching on so I can enjoy some of these real-life stories.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Little Fish Updates
Sorry it's been such a long time since I posted. You can blame part of that on Robin, who demanded that I fly back to Georgia for a visit week before last. Part of it you can blame on me and my weakness for not being able to decide between twenty different projects and trying to work on them all.
I do want to thank Robin for flying me back. We got to see the the new Harry Potter movie at the midnight premier (and once more after that while I was there). It was excellent, and the crowd was really into it. I dressed as Molly Weasley, who if you don't know, is the mother of the seven red-headed children, including Harry's best friend Ron and his future wife Ginny. She's such a fun character to dress as- I like to intimidate people and call them "dear" (only while dressing as Molly, of course). I also had a wonderful trip spending quality time with my parents and grandparents, and seeing some old friends. And I thank the Lord the flights went well! I am not crazy about flying, and this was my first time since before the terrorist attacks in 2001. This week, though, I was back in good ole Southern California and had to work a lot to make up for missing work the week before.
Something else which has kept me occupied since I got back was the deadline looming over me to finish a spec script for the Warner Brothers TV Writer's Workshop. A spec script is a script for an existing television show, and the one I wrote is for The Office. After a lot of last minute revisions this week, I was able to send in with my application what I feel is a solid script. Thank God! It was harder than I thought it would be, writing for an existing show. You have to know the show's history and characters very well. If I get into this program, it will be amazing, because they accept about 10 out of roughly 1000 applications per year. The program is a workshop every week for about 9 months, which is supposed to be a major stepping stone to television writing, so we'll see what happens. Prayer would be appreciated. Thanks!
I do want to thank Robin for flying me back. We got to see the the new Harry Potter movie at the midnight premier (and once more after that while I was there). It was excellent, and the crowd was really into it. I dressed as Molly Weasley, who if you don't know, is the mother of the seven red-headed children, including Harry's best friend Ron and his future wife Ginny. She's such a fun character to dress as- I like to intimidate people and call them "dear" (only while dressing as Molly, of course). I also had a wonderful trip spending quality time with my parents and grandparents, and seeing some old friends. And I thank the Lord the flights went well! I am not crazy about flying, and this was my first time since before the terrorist attacks in 2001. This week, though, I was back in good ole Southern California and had to work a lot to make up for missing work the week before.
Something else which has kept me occupied since I got back was the deadline looming over me to finish a spec script for the Warner Brothers TV Writer's Workshop. A spec script is a script for an existing television show, and the one I wrote is for The Office. After a lot of last minute revisions this week, I was able to send in with my application what I feel is a solid script. Thank God! It was harder than I thought it would be, writing for an existing show. You have to know the show's history and characters very well. If I get into this program, it will be amazing, because they accept about 10 out of roughly 1000 applications per year. The program is a workshop every week for about 9 months, which is supposed to be a major stepping stone to television writing, so we'll see what happens. Prayer would be appreciated. Thanks!
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Mozart and Me
As you probably guessed from my last post, I've been a little down about my writing and my dreams for the last few days. As I often do in times like this, I reminded myself of the lessons I learned from the movie Amadeus, about what can happen if I want success for myself too much or for the wrong reasons. I decided to re-run a post I ran awhile back on my other blog, The Queen of Perseverance. Hope it helps you, too!
It's been years since I saw the movie Amadeus, but I have to remind myself of some lessons I learned from it at least once or twice a month.
If you haven't seen the movie, here's a brief synopsis. In the beginning, Salieri is an up-and-coming composer who thinks he is writing beautiful music all for the glory of God. Enter Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, a vulgar young man with few morals or redeeming qualities--but with talent that Salieri knows he will never have. Streaming from Mozart, Salieri hears the kind of music that he wanted to write. But why would God give such talent and success to this horrible "creature," instead of to him, who wants to dedicate his music to the Lord?
That question eats at Salieri, until he eventually declares himself God's enemy. He manages to ruin his own life and Mozart's through his bitterness.
It's easy to condemn Salieri, but I have often felt the seeds of those same bitter thoughts starting to grow in me. Have you ever read a book or seen a movie that affected you so deeply that you were astounded by its beauty? That you went around thinking of it for days, feeling it resonating inside you, and yet--you knew it wasn't really worthy?
You know the kind I'm talking about. The stories that leave you grabbing for the Kleenex and rooting for the man to "follow his heart" and leave his wife for his mistress. Or maybe the story is noble, but the writer is an appalling mess. Sometimes I want to ask God--okay, sometimes I do ask God--why do you allow people with such harmful messages to have such talent? I would love to serve you with my gift, and yet it's so paltry by comparison. Why would you allow "them" such success?
And then I remind myself of Salieri. I have to wonder, if serving God had really been his desire, would he have reacted the way he did when he couldn't be the best? Did he really desire God's glory, or his own? And then comes the really tough question--are my motives any more pure than his?
Do you ever ask yourself these kinds of questions? How do we have the necessary drive and ambition to succeed in this writing business, and still keep our focus on God? Have you ever experienced something similar, when you felt that God was clearly choosing the wrong person to carry his message? (In other words, not you!) How do we respond if, even temporarily, God holds us back and chooses to gift someone else?
It's been years since I saw the movie Amadeus, but I have to remind myself of some lessons I learned from it at least once or twice a month.
If you haven't seen the movie, here's a brief synopsis. In the beginning, Salieri is an up-and-coming composer who thinks he is writing beautiful music all for the glory of God. Enter Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, a vulgar young man with few morals or redeeming qualities--but with talent that Salieri knows he will never have. Streaming from Mozart, Salieri hears the kind of music that he wanted to write. But why would God give such talent and success to this horrible "creature," instead of to him, who wants to dedicate his music to the Lord?
That question eats at Salieri, until he eventually declares himself God's enemy. He manages to ruin his own life and Mozart's through his bitterness.
It's easy to condemn Salieri, but I have often felt the seeds of those same bitter thoughts starting to grow in me. Have you ever read a book or seen a movie that affected you so deeply that you were astounded by its beauty? That you went around thinking of it for days, feeling it resonating inside you, and yet--you knew it wasn't really worthy?
You know the kind I'm talking about. The stories that leave you grabbing for the Kleenex and rooting for the man to "follow his heart" and leave his wife for his mistress. Or maybe the story is noble, but the writer is an appalling mess. Sometimes I want to ask God--okay, sometimes I do ask God--why do you allow people with such harmful messages to have such talent? I would love to serve you with my gift, and yet it's so paltry by comparison. Why would you allow "them" such success?
And then I remind myself of Salieri. I have to wonder, if serving God had really been his desire, would he have reacted the way he did when he couldn't be the best? Did he really desire God's glory, or his own? And then comes the really tough question--are my motives any more pure than his?
Do you ever ask yourself these kinds of questions? How do we have the necessary drive and ambition to succeed in this writing business, and still keep our focus on God? Have you ever experienced something similar, when you felt that God was clearly choosing the wrong person to carry his message? (In other words, not you!) How do we respond if, even temporarily, God holds us back and chooses to gift someone else?
Monday, July 13, 2009
My Life as Fiction
A few weeks ago, someone in my email writers group asked us if we could define metafiction. She had read in some publisher's guidelines that they were looking to acquire works of metafiction, which seems even stranger when you know what it is. Anyway, after ruminating on this term for awhile, I decided that the term "metafiction" could sum up my life--at least my writing life--pretty nicely.
If you google the term, you'll find all kinds of fancy, long-winded definitions, but here's my simple one. Metafiction is fiction about fiction.
For example, there's a Stephen King novel where the author's main character turns up on his doorstep. (And being a Stephen King character, proceeds to commit murder and mayhem.) And there's the recent movie with Will Ferrell and Emma Thompson, Stranger Than Fiction, in which a man starts hearing a voice narrating his life, and it turns out he's a character in Emma Thompson's novel.
I've decided that one reason I find the writing life so difficult is that I'm living a metafiction. I have this picture in my head that I've been carrying around ever since I was a child about what it means to be a novelist, and it bears no relation whatsoever to reality. It's a fiction about fiction.
This is how my mental movie goes. An idea for a story comes to me--or maybe it's a couple of characters. There's something beautiful and mystical about the experience. Maybe it comes to me in a dream, or a flash of inspiration. This story is beyond me and my paltry little experience. It gives me goosebumps just to think about it, and I'm sure it'll give you chills, too, when you're lucky enough to share it.
Step two, I'll spend hours alone but happy, translating my characters' story into words--lovely, poetic words that flow over the page like, like--well, like something beautiful and poetic. A mountain stream or something. You know.
Now comes the fun part. I share my creation with others. Like me, they're immediately pulled into the world of my story. Women fall in love with the strong, sensitive men I've created. Men are haunted by my mysterious femmes. They all want to know more--they have to know more! If I've only written the first couple of chapters, they spur me on to finish.
At some point, the second most amazing thing happens since the day the story first exploded into my mind. Totally out of the blue, someone who is reading a sample of my work not only falls in love with it, but has a cousin who's an acquisitions editor...or is an acquisitions editor herself. You get the picture. A little divine intervention and I'm on my way. Published!
After I'm published, there's not necessarily fame and fortune. But there are readers. There are friends who now share this world I've created, who want to live there with me, who love my character-children as much as I do. Again, the bond is almost mystical. Something larger than life is at work here.
If you're not laughing too hard to read, you have by now seen my problem. REALITY.
Reality is that thousands of other writers have created worlds and people that they love, too. Editors have seen them all and are jaded. If what you've come up with isn't almost bizarre, it's been done before. If it is bizarre, they don't know how to sell it and don't want it.
Most people who read your story will be far more interested in how you wrote your sentences than in those strong men and mysterious women you've invented. All that babbling brook poetry stuff? Forget about it! Show don't tell, use active voice, don't use gerunds, blah blah blah.
Sigh...
In my own defense, I hope you noticed that my metafiction isn't so much about me being worshiped as a great writer or making millions of dollars. That would just be a bonus.
Seriously, my dream has always been about making connections. I really do feel that my characters and stories have brought me so much joy, and I'm so fascinated by them that I long to share them. I yearn for "playmates" who will play in my garden with me.
I don't think the whole dream can be real, but some of it can. Maybe if I concentrate enough on active voice and showing not telling and all that, I really can wow an editor. Maybe. One of these days.
Or I can leave all that behind, never get published, and maybe find a like-minded group of Geeks to read my little stories and play in my Garden.
Question is, which part of the dream do you go for?
If you google the term, you'll find all kinds of fancy, long-winded definitions, but here's my simple one. Metafiction is fiction about fiction.
For example, there's a Stephen King novel where the author's main character turns up on his doorstep. (And being a Stephen King character, proceeds to commit murder and mayhem.) And there's the recent movie with Will Ferrell and Emma Thompson, Stranger Than Fiction, in which a man starts hearing a voice narrating his life, and it turns out he's a character in Emma Thompson's novel.
I've decided that one reason I find the writing life so difficult is that I'm living a metafiction. I have this picture in my head that I've been carrying around ever since I was a child about what it means to be a novelist, and it bears no relation whatsoever to reality. It's a fiction about fiction.
This is how my mental movie goes. An idea for a story comes to me--or maybe it's a couple of characters. There's something beautiful and mystical about the experience. Maybe it comes to me in a dream, or a flash of inspiration. This story is beyond me and my paltry little experience. It gives me goosebumps just to think about it, and I'm sure it'll give you chills, too, when you're lucky enough to share it.
Step two, I'll spend hours alone but happy, translating my characters' story into words--lovely, poetic words that flow over the page like, like--well, like something beautiful and poetic. A mountain stream or something. You know.
Now comes the fun part. I share my creation with others. Like me, they're immediately pulled into the world of my story. Women fall in love with the strong, sensitive men I've created. Men are haunted by my mysterious femmes. They all want to know more--they have to know more! If I've only written the first couple of chapters, they spur me on to finish.
At some point, the second most amazing thing happens since the day the story first exploded into my mind. Totally out of the blue, someone who is reading a sample of my work not only falls in love with it, but has a cousin who's an acquisitions editor...or is an acquisitions editor herself. You get the picture. A little divine intervention and I'm on my way. Published!
After I'm published, there's not necessarily fame and fortune. But there are readers. There are friends who now share this world I've created, who want to live there with me, who love my character-children as much as I do. Again, the bond is almost mystical. Something larger than life is at work here.
If you're not laughing too hard to read, you have by now seen my problem. REALITY.
Reality is that thousands of other writers have created worlds and people that they love, too. Editors have seen them all and are jaded. If what you've come up with isn't almost bizarre, it's been done before. If it is bizarre, they don't know how to sell it and don't want it.
Most people who read your story will be far more interested in how you wrote your sentences than in those strong men and mysterious women you've invented. All that babbling brook poetry stuff? Forget about it! Show don't tell, use active voice, don't use gerunds, blah blah blah.
Sigh...
In my own defense, I hope you noticed that my metafiction isn't so much about me being worshiped as a great writer or making millions of dollars. That would just be a bonus.
Seriously, my dream has always been about making connections. I really do feel that my characters and stories have brought me so much joy, and I'm so fascinated by them that I long to share them. I yearn for "playmates" who will play in my garden with me.
I don't think the whole dream can be real, but some of it can. Maybe if I concentrate enough on active voice and showing not telling and all that, I really can wow an editor. Maybe. One of these days.
Or I can leave all that behind, never get published, and maybe find a like-minded group of Geeks to read my little stories and play in my Garden.
Question is, which part of the dream do you go for?
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Make-Believe Characters and Our Own Character
From my earliest memories, I’ve tended to get WAY too caught up in stories and characters. Since most of you out there are writers and readers, you probably know exactly what I mean. But recently, I started thinking about some of the characters that I loved most, especially when I was young, and noticed a common theme.
Almost all of the characters that I became really obsessed with and sort of lived through vicariously appeared on the surface to be weak, ordinary, or even downtrodden. But in reality, there was something special and larger-than-life about them. You know, sort of the Clark Kent/Superman thing, although Superman never became one of my passions.
One of my first major obsessions was, embarrassingly enough, Hogan’s Heroes. (I was only seven or eight years old, so give me a break!) I just adored it that the Nazis thought they had these guys as their prisoners when in reality they were successfully running a spy and sabotage ring right under their noses. I used to make up stories in my little head about the war ending and Hogan and Company revealing what had really been going on. Ha!
Then when I was 11 or 12, I fell in love with a couple of cowboys in a TV Western called Alias Smith and Jones. Or at least, they appeared to be a couple of cowboys. But Joshua Smith and Thaddeus Jones were really the famous outlaws Hannibal Heyes and Kid Curry, or as the blurb at the beginning always said, “the two most successful outlaws in the history of the west. And in all the trains and banks they robbed, they never shot anyone. This made our two latter-day Robin Hoods very popular. With everyone but the banks and the railroads.” The two were trying to go straight in the show, but my favorite moments were when occasionally someone discovered who they really were—usually someone who had been trying to push them around and take advantage of them and suddenly realized they were in a heap o’ trouble!
Then came Luke Skywalker, the dorky farm boy who was in reality a Jedi in the making. And not just any Jedi, but the son of the evil Darth Vader.
And so on, and so on.
I started thinking, what does this reveal—if anything—about my character? (First of all, it probably shows I watched too much television. Although I read all the time, including a lot of those girl detective books, the obsessions tended to be over TV and movies. Hmm…)
Anyway, maybe this isn’t all that unusual. After all, isn’t most fiction about a seemingly ordinary person thrust into some extraordinary situation? Well, maybe—although I seem to be attracted to the outrageous, larger-than-life stuff—outlaws and famous spies and Jedis with a destiny to save the universe.
I thought maybe it was just that I was a dorky kid who longed to be special, who imagined how great it would be to shock everyone by revealing my true identity, and just show all of them! And that probably is part of it.
Then a few days ago, I started going through a book on the different personality and temperament types—a book which is part of Jeff Gerke’s course on creating characters—and it gave me even more to think about.
This is getting lengthy, so I’ll tell you more next time.
But what about you? Are there particular characters that you identified with when you were a kid? Can you see a common thread in the characters you love?
Almost all of the characters that I became really obsessed with and sort of lived through vicariously appeared on the surface to be weak, ordinary, or even downtrodden. But in reality, there was something special and larger-than-life about them. You know, sort of the Clark Kent/Superman thing, although Superman never became one of my passions.
One of my first major obsessions was, embarrassingly enough, Hogan’s Heroes. (I was only seven or eight years old, so give me a break!) I just adored it that the Nazis thought they had these guys as their prisoners when in reality they were successfully running a spy and sabotage ring right under their noses. I used to make up stories in my little head about the war ending and Hogan and Company revealing what had really been going on. Ha!
Then when I was 11 or 12, I fell in love with a couple of cowboys in a TV Western called Alias Smith and Jones. Or at least, they appeared to be a couple of cowboys. But Joshua Smith and Thaddeus Jones were really the famous outlaws Hannibal Heyes and Kid Curry, or as the blurb at the beginning always said, “the two most successful outlaws in the history of the west. And in all the trains and banks they robbed, they never shot anyone. This made our two latter-day Robin Hoods very popular. With everyone but the banks and the railroads.” The two were trying to go straight in the show, but my favorite moments were when occasionally someone discovered who they really were—usually someone who had been trying to push them around and take advantage of them and suddenly realized they were in a heap o’ trouble!
Then came Luke Skywalker, the dorky farm boy who was in reality a Jedi in the making. And not just any Jedi, but the son of the evil Darth Vader.
And so on, and so on.
I started thinking, what does this reveal—if anything—about my character? (First of all, it probably shows I watched too much television. Although I read all the time, including a lot of those girl detective books, the obsessions tended to be over TV and movies. Hmm…)
Anyway, maybe this isn’t all that unusual. After all, isn’t most fiction about a seemingly ordinary person thrust into some extraordinary situation? Well, maybe—although I seem to be attracted to the outrageous, larger-than-life stuff—outlaws and famous spies and Jedis with a destiny to save the universe.
I thought maybe it was just that I was a dorky kid who longed to be special, who imagined how great it would be to shock everyone by revealing my true identity, and just show all of them! And that probably is part of it.
Then a few days ago, I started going through a book on the different personality and temperament types—a book which is part of Jeff Gerke’s course on creating characters—and it gave me even more to think about.
This is getting lengthy, so I’ll tell you more next time.
But what about you? Are there particular characters that you identified with when you were a kid? Can you see a common thread in the characters you love?
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Operation: Work for Joss Whedon
This Friday, I started a hopefully unique campaign to draw attention to myself as a writer who should be working for Joss Whedon. For those of you who are not familiar with his work, he has written primarily for television, and is the creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the film and the series, Angel, Firefly and Serenity, my own personal favorites, and most recently, Dollhouse. During the writer's strike, he wrote and produced a comedy/musical for the web called Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog, and because of his large fan following and the quality of the writing, it became a huge success, proving that writing for the web is an important part of the industry and that writers should be compensated accordingly.
I love the genre of his writing. Fantasy and sci-fi are the main area of interest for my own artistic focus. Someone back in Atlanta, who lived out here for several years, told me that she landed a job working for a famous actor by calling his office every day. Finally, she became his personal assistant, and was eventually given small roles in some of his films. I thought this sounded like a fine idea, and Joss Whedon is the name that came to my mind as the one on whom I wanted to focus my efforts.
So, this past Friday I began the campaign. I sent in my first resume and cover letter to his company, Mutant Enemy Productions. I tried to make it clever and funny, and I imagine how he and his writers will gather around and read it and have a good laugh. They will see from my letter what a super writer I am, and that I need to be made a part of their staff post-haste. Or, maybe not. It is possible they won't notice this immediately. It may take a little while. Therefore, I plan to send in a resume and cover letter each week. Perhaps the letters will begin to tell a story, or suggest subliminal influence. Perhaps one will simply say "Please hire me," 50 times. I see it going one of two ways- he takes out a restraining order, or he gives me a job.
Also, I started a Facebook group called "Joss Whedon Should Hire Kristi to Work for him", and I am trying to get as many people to join as possible. I'm hoping this will drum up some attention from his people.
I am putting this in God's hands, and will see what happens. I'm not sure if this is something I'm supposed to do, but I do hope that soon I will be able to start making my living from my art. I am so thankful for my current job, but I hope to be able to use my mind and my talents, and not just my hands.
I love the genre of his writing. Fantasy and sci-fi are the main area of interest for my own artistic focus. Someone back in Atlanta, who lived out here for several years, told me that she landed a job working for a famous actor by calling his office every day. Finally, she became his personal assistant, and was eventually given small roles in some of his films. I thought this sounded like a fine idea, and Joss Whedon is the name that came to my mind as the one on whom I wanted to focus my efforts.
So, this past Friday I began the campaign. I sent in my first resume and cover letter to his company, Mutant Enemy Productions. I tried to make it clever and funny, and I imagine how he and his writers will gather around and read it and have a good laugh. They will see from my letter what a super writer I am, and that I need to be made a part of their staff post-haste. Or, maybe not. It is possible they won't notice this immediately. It may take a little while. Therefore, I plan to send in a resume and cover letter each week. Perhaps the letters will begin to tell a story, or suggest subliminal influence. Perhaps one will simply say "Please hire me," 50 times. I see it going one of two ways- he takes out a restraining order, or he gives me a job.
Also, I started a Facebook group called "Joss Whedon Should Hire Kristi to Work for him", and I am trying to get as many people to join as possible. I'm hoping this will drum up some attention from his people.
I am putting this in God's hands, and will see what happens. I'm not sure if this is something I'm supposed to do, but I do hope that soon I will be able to start making my living from my art. I am so thankful for my current job, but I hope to be able to use my mind and my talents, and not just my hands.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Why Does It Work: Lost?
As I've mentioned before, I didn't start watching the TV show Lost until recently. Kristi had been wanting me to watch so I could discuss it with her but I figured I had missed too much to jump in late. I knew enough about the show to know that the plot is very complicated.
Then Kristi played dirty. She gave me season one for Christmas, knowing I would be hooked. And I was. When I reached the cliffhanger ending of that season, I had to rush out and find the next, and so on until I was caught up with everyone else and able to watch last week's season five finale along with the rest of the world.
In fact, since Kristi's now in a time zone three hours earlier than me, I saw the finale before she did! A friend said I should text her and tease her by saying I was going to tell the ending and spoil it for her--but make up something really outrageous instead of telling the truth. Trouble is, you can't make up anything more outrageous than the show itself. That story just gets weirder and wilder as it goes.
So why do so many ordinary people seem to love it, to be totally addicted to it? As a writer, I really want to figure this out. Here are just some of the puzzling, writing-rule-breaking characteristics of the show.
Flashbacks!
Anyone who's been writing long enough to get their first critique knows that flashbacks are a no-no. I've heard them called the instant mark of amateur writing, because they break into the flow of the action and take you out of the story. Yet, not only is Lost built around flashbacks, but those flashes at times seem to intentionally jerk you out of an exciting, climactic moment.
If you haven't watched the show, you probably at least know it's about a group of survivors of a plane that crashed onto a mysterious island. Each week, the episode flashes back to one character's earlier life in brief episodes that punctuate the events taking place on the island.
The island is fraught with intrigue and dangers--from mysterious forces, wild animals, other people who were already on the island. One of our protagonists might be attacked by someone with a knife, and in the middle of that action we'll be jerked back to his previous life as he sits calmly on the couch having a conversation with his mother.
And then there are the flash forwards. At some point, the brief scenes of the characters' previous lives give way to episodes from the future, about their lives after the island. When this first starts happening, you aren't necessarily aware whether it's future or past. In one of the most bizarre turns I've ever seen, during the action on the island, there are flashes about two of the characters, a married couple. The woman is in the hospital giving birth and her husband is rushing around, trying to get to the hospital, so you of course think this is all the same event--flashing forward to their having a child after the island. At the end of the show you discover that they were in two totally different time periods. The husband's scenes were a flashback and the wife's a flash forward!
Descent into Geekery!
Then there's the fact that we started out with a story that seemed a little mysterious, but still...it was going to be about a group of survivors, their relationships, and their attempts to get back to civilization, right? We've all seen it before, from Swiss Family Robinson and Robinson Crusoe to Cast Away with Tom Hanks.
Turns out that's not what the show is like at all, and in the last couple of seasons it took a turn into what I have heard called "sci-fi geekery," complete with time travel and strange magnetic field "incidents" and the like. I'm particularly interested in these developments because an agent at a conference told me that one of my books wouldn't work because of a similar development. He said that readers can't start off feeling they're reading about suspense or even about ghosts or the supernatural and then be taken off into science fiction developments. And yet, Lost is one of the most popular things out there. Are TV audiences more flexible than readers? Was the agent wrong? Or are people giving up on Lost after these developments, too?
This brings me back to my original question. Why does this show work?
I have several humble theories. One is that people love a mystery, and I'm not speaking here of the who-dun-it kind, like who killed Colonel Mustard in the library with a wrench. I'm talking about the big, eternal kind of mysteries. What lies beyond our ordinary sight? Do we have free will or are we doomed to fate? Is there some sort of battle between good and evil that we're caught up in, whether we can see it or not?
I think that's why the flashbacks--and forwards--fly. It's generally in those scenes that you make a sudden realization about some of those questions. Where something completely unexpected is revealed about the characters' connections, or decisions that led them to the island, or events that make it appear they're all being manipulated by an unseen hand. So in some ways, that calm flashback may be more exciting than the knife fight it interrupts.
The fact that the developments, and even the story-telling techniques, are so unusual makes everything fresh and surprising. It's like a ride on a roller coaster, where any minute you may be jerked around a corner or feel the bottom drop out of your stomach as you slowly crest a hill and then plunge. You hang onto every conversation, every development with a smile on your face because you know that any minute something totally unexpected will occur.
Also, oddly enough, I think it's important that we know there's a definite ending coming. There is an actual story and a plan and a purpose, which will be revealed. I can't stand those shows where people wander around in search of a goal (like getting off the island) year after year with no end in sight, and have totally unconnected episodes and adventures.
My pastor even mentioned this in a sermon a few months ago--the fact that Lost's ratings had started to sag but when it was announced that they would definitely finish up the story and end the show at a certain time, the ratings went back up. My pastor was connecting this to the fact that people grow weary and discouraged when there appears to be no purpose, no goal. But we know the end of our story, of God's story, so we should be encouraged.
So what about all of you? Do you watch it? Love it? Hate it? Did you give up on it when it seemed to change direction? Did you see the season five finale? I'd love to hear what you think.
Then Kristi played dirty. She gave me season one for Christmas, knowing I would be hooked. And I was. When I reached the cliffhanger ending of that season, I had to rush out and find the next, and so on until I was caught up with everyone else and able to watch last week's season five finale along with the rest of the world.
In fact, since Kristi's now in a time zone three hours earlier than me, I saw the finale before she did! A friend said I should text her and tease her by saying I was going to tell the ending and spoil it for her--but make up something really outrageous instead of telling the truth. Trouble is, you can't make up anything more outrageous than the show itself. That story just gets weirder and wilder as it goes.
So why do so many ordinary people seem to love it, to be totally addicted to it? As a writer, I really want to figure this out. Here are just some of the puzzling, writing-rule-breaking characteristics of the show.
Flashbacks!
Anyone who's been writing long enough to get their first critique knows that flashbacks are a no-no. I've heard them called the instant mark of amateur writing, because they break into the flow of the action and take you out of the story. Yet, not only is Lost built around flashbacks, but those flashes at times seem to intentionally jerk you out of an exciting, climactic moment.
If you haven't watched the show, you probably at least know it's about a group of survivors of a plane that crashed onto a mysterious island. Each week, the episode flashes back to one character's earlier life in brief episodes that punctuate the events taking place on the island.
The island is fraught with intrigue and dangers--from mysterious forces, wild animals, other people who were already on the island. One of our protagonists might be attacked by someone with a knife, and in the middle of that action we'll be jerked back to his previous life as he sits calmly on the couch having a conversation with his mother.
And then there are the flash forwards. At some point, the brief scenes of the characters' previous lives give way to episodes from the future, about their lives after the island. When this first starts happening, you aren't necessarily aware whether it's future or past. In one of the most bizarre turns I've ever seen, during the action on the island, there are flashes about two of the characters, a married couple. The woman is in the hospital giving birth and her husband is rushing around, trying to get to the hospital, so you of course think this is all the same event--flashing forward to their having a child after the island. At the end of the show you discover that they were in two totally different time periods. The husband's scenes were a flashback and the wife's a flash forward!
Descent into Geekery!
Then there's the fact that we started out with a story that seemed a little mysterious, but still...it was going to be about a group of survivors, their relationships, and their attempts to get back to civilization, right? We've all seen it before, from Swiss Family Robinson and Robinson Crusoe to Cast Away with Tom Hanks.
Turns out that's not what the show is like at all, and in the last couple of seasons it took a turn into what I have heard called "sci-fi geekery," complete with time travel and strange magnetic field "incidents" and the like. I'm particularly interested in these developments because an agent at a conference told me that one of my books wouldn't work because of a similar development. He said that readers can't start off feeling they're reading about suspense or even about ghosts or the supernatural and then be taken off into science fiction developments. And yet, Lost is one of the most popular things out there. Are TV audiences more flexible than readers? Was the agent wrong? Or are people giving up on Lost after these developments, too?
This brings me back to my original question. Why does this show work?
I have several humble theories. One is that people love a mystery, and I'm not speaking here of the who-dun-it kind, like who killed Colonel Mustard in the library with a wrench. I'm talking about the big, eternal kind of mysteries. What lies beyond our ordinary sight? Do we have free will or are we doomed to fate? Is there some sort of battle between good and evil that we're caught up in, whether we can see it or not?
I think that's why the flashbacks--and forwards--fly. It's generally in those scenes that you make a sudden realization about some of those questions. Where something completely unexpected is revealed about the characters' connections, or decisions that led them to the island, or events that make it appear they're all being manipulated by an unseen hand. So in some ways, that calm flashback may be more exciting than the knife fight it interrupts.
The amazing season finale last week felt almost Biblical. We discovered that two entities have been warring over the island, and whether people can be allowed to live there, for centuries. One seems to be benevolent and good and on the side of the humans. The other is jealous of the good one and longs to overthrow him, and we discover he's been deceiving and using the people on the island in this attempt. In fact, he has sometimes pretended to be the good one when he appears to them and gives them instructions. Sound vaguely familiar?
The fact that the developments, and even the story-telling techniques, are so unusual makes everything fresh and surprising. It's like a ride on a roller coaster, where any minute you may be jerked around a corner or feel the bottom drop out of your stomach as you slowly crest a hill and then plunge. You hang onto every conversation, every development with a smile on your face because you know that any minute something totally unexpected will occur.
Also, oddly enough, I think it's important that we know there's a definite ending coming. There is an actual story and a plan and a purpose, which will be revealed. I can't stand those shows where people wander around in search of a goal (like getting off the island) year after year with no end in sight, and have totally unconnected episodes and adventures.
My pastor even mentioned this in a sermon a few months ago--the fact that Lost's ratings had started to sag but when it was announced that they would definitely finish up the story and end the show at a certain time, the ratings went back up. My pastor was connecting this to the fact that people grow weary and discouraged when there appears to be no purpose, no goal. But we know the end of our story, of God's story, so we should be encouraged.
So what about all of you? Do you watch it? Love it? Hate it? Did you give up on it when it seemed to change direction? Did you see the season five finale? I'd love to hear what you think.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
The Benefits of Being Scatter-Brained
I can't remember who this quote is from. (Naturally, as you'll understand if you finish reading this post.) But some famous person once said he would give a million dollars to be able to read Huckleberry Finn for the first time again.
I understand that sentiment. The thrill of discovering a truly great book, one that resonates with your soul and you know will be with you forever, is a rare experience. I have an advantage over this famous unknown person, however. I've always been a trifle absent-minded and fuzzy in the memory area, but as I approach the Big 5-0 (two weeks from tomorrow!), this condition seems to be getting more pronounced. But hey, that's great! In the past, I could put Huck Finn down for five or ten years, pick it back up, and it was almost the same as brand new. Now after six or eight months, I'm ready for a second read.
I love Agatha Christie books. I went through all of her Miss Marple's and Hercules Poirots some time ago. Now, I can pick one of them up and re-read it, and it's great. I don't have a clue who done it. Or how. Or why.
This is also an amazing ability for me as a writer, because after a brief period of time away from something I've written, it's a complete surprise to me. It's almost as though someone else wrote it.
Case in point. In 2008, I worked on my weird, gothic novel for the first six months or so. Then I had to put it down to write the romance novel I promised my agent. Now that I've finished with that, I picked up the rough draft of the gothic suspense and started reading it. What fun! I couldn't believe I'd written a lot of what I read--and I mean that in a good way. The plot hooked me, I liked the characters, and I'm dying to know how it will end.
Of course, that could be a problem. I'm not sure I remember how it ends. I didn't quite get finished with the draft last year, you see. I took notes, but they're sort of cryptic. Hmm...
I'll let you know how it goes.
I understand that sentiment. The thrill of discovering a truly great book, one that resonates with your soul and you know will be with you forever, is a rare experience. I have an advantage over this famous unknown person, however. I've always been a trifle absent-minded and fuzzy in the memory area, but as I approach the Big 5-0 (two weeks from tomorrow!), this condition seems to be getting more pronounced. But hey, that's great! In the past, I could put Huck Finn down for five or ten years, pick it back up, and it was almost the same as brand new. Now after six or eight months, I'm ready for a second read.
I love Agatha Christie books. I went through all of her Miss Marple's and Hercules Poirots some time ago. Now, I can pick one of them up and re-read it, and it's great. I don't have a clue who done it. Or how. Or why.
This is also an amazing ability for me as a writer, because after a brief period of time away from something I've written, it's a complete surprise to me. It's almost as though someone else wrote it.
Case in point. In 2008, I worked on my weird, gothic novel for the first six months or so. Then I had to put it down to write the romance novel I promised my agent. Now that I've finished with that, I picked up the rough draft of the gothic suspense and started reading it. What fun! I couldn't believe I'd written a lot of what I read--and I mean that in a good way. The plot hooked me, I liked the characters, and I'm dying to know how it will end.
Of course, that could be a problem. I'm not sure I remember how it ends. I didn't quite get finished with the draft last year, you see. I took notes, but they're sort of cryptic. Hmm...
I'll let you know how it goes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
