Yes. Both "little person" and "Peeky Blinders" are short-cuts. Can you burn the language to suggest that the narrator's aspirations exceed his language skills? Aspirational people frequently use ALMOST the right ten-dollar word. For example, find a word that's ALMOST "achondroplastic" and have him use that wrong word. Likewise, as he unpacks the Blinders aesthetic, allow him to get words wrong. The reader will eventually recognize his errors and feel pity for him.
Good practice. Tom Spanbauer always called the first draft "shitting out the lump of coal." It's difficult and you're never very happy with the result. But after that you've got something whole to rework. That's the fun part.
From crowd seeding to transition devices to plotting and voice, I love this shit.
My long-time editor once told me that Gore Vidal and I were the only two writers who could really articulate their process. I was busting with joy to hear that.
And excellent scene, now nix the thought verbs and adverbs. Please
Consider just taking one scene and reworking it. Get your voice down before you tackle the larger book. Once you have a set of rules for the narrator's POV things will go very easily.
Have you seen the video of Gore Vidal and William F Buckley debating? I think at one point they started insulting each other. Will flat out threatened to punch or slap Gore. But they were scholarly about it.
Maybe the millipedes hallucinations were induced by her long suture scars? So she sees insects in her hallucinations as well, but has learned to enjoy it? Or it was her fetish to begin with hence the scars?
Something about the juxtaposition of exotic beauty and lowly insects fascinates me. It implies a power/fortitude that we can’t fully understand. If Danny can learn it, perhaps it will be the key to resolve a bigger crisis later?
Anyways, hopefully the comment doesn’t distract from the intended plot, but the mind, it runs amok!
When you give me permission to fuck with the language, a thought pops in the back of my head to say, "What if they don't get it?" Cause don't you have to have some amount of intelligence to be able to decipher something voicey? Or maybe I'm just thinking about Ulysses lol
Try to write intuitively, allow the context to determine the meaning. Don't finish sentences. For example:
"The kid with the ears from wrestling." Most people can guess my meaning. In fact one friend asked, point-blank, "Were you referring to Jay?" He meant a mutual friend with cauliflower ears.
Consider that our grandparents' language was almost always based on the physical. For example, "bit the bullet" or "he got my Irish up" or "that ship has sailed."
In recent history our language has become more abstract -- thought verbs -- maybe due to more schooling and the desire to sound smart. That's why much of my struggle is to find the older terms people used to depict thinking and emotion. Jettison the clinical language because the physical is always more effective.
"Shake it like a Polaroid picture" Those are great phrases.
I don't think it's about education or wanting to sound smart.
The evolution of metaphors, adages, and choice of language, verbal or written, can probably be tracked in a fairly straight line - my guess, not research - against the evolution of hunter / gathers, rural to metropolitan living, horse and buggy to steam engines, office to couch, and so on.
In the developed world, a large proportion of people, not the majority, but a lot, maybe 40 percent (anyone who could do their job at home during lockdowns), barely have to move in order to earn a wage or to maintain a good life. Any wonder that action language and metaphors become introspection or therapeutic or mere observation.
It's not even necessary to walk into a supermarket to hunt and gather, just poke at a device and all essential sustenance magically arrives on the doorstep.
Mad as a cut snake wouldn't be coined today, because hardly anyone has experience of needing to give a snake a good whack with a shovel. These days, they're not even allowed to.
In writing the September book, "Not Forever, But for Now," I used Brit slang throughout. Most of it dates from the Recency period, supposedly because that's when printing presses became common, thus people were able to disseminate and record more popular culture slang.
Whoever described this as a kitchen table MFA delivered via substack understated. A regular MFA student couldn't count on such thorough and professional feedback...and the tuition would be quite a bit more as well.
Not gonna lie, I had to sit and stare at MFA and work out what this was, haha. My brain just defaults to Multi-Factor Authentication now, and I was preeety certain it wasn't that.
Thanks for sharing your story. Right away I was drawn in by the tension of the narrator being probed at by latex gloves. And not being able to move his arms. It's just like hello, welcome to hell, and it has my attention.
I like all the in-scene action. Followed right along, and the cutting of the adverbs is a quick and easy fix. In a lot of cases, it's just a matter of switching out the adverb for the action or dialogue that shows the exact adverb you wanted to use.
OMG the EARWIGS??!! I freaking hate earwigs, so Nicely Done. Followed by a millipede???? The only bug that can make my husband squirm.
Really love the examples of unpacking Chuck provided. And showing how to redirect passive voice by putting the action onto the objects. "The metal pinched" for example. Also found helpful the pruning to show where tension was unintentionally cut. And the confirmation that yes, readers want to be figuring out what is happening as they go.
And once more, just have to give you props for all the tension throughout.
Nice work, great job. Hope you are having a blast writing this.
Thanks for sharing Jay. In conversation I have a terrible habit of over explaining things and I still struggle with the impulse to do this in my writing.
Yes. Both "little person" and "Peeky Blinders" are short-cuts. Can you burn the language to suggest that the narrator's aspirations exceed his language skills? Aspirational people frequently use ALMOST the right ten-dollar word. For example, find a word that's ALMOST "achondroplastic" and have him use that wrong word. Likewise, as he unpacks the Blinders aesthetic, allow him to get words wrong. The reader will eventually recognize his errors and feel pity for him.
Good practice. Tom Spanbauer always called the first draft "shitting out the lump of coal." It's difficult and you're never very happy with the result. But after that you've got something whole to rework. That's the fun part.
From crowd seeding to transition devices to plotting and voice, I love this shit.
My long-time editor once told me that Gore Vidal and I were the only two writers who could really articulate their process. I was busting with joy to hear that.
And excellent scene, now nix the thought verbs and adverbs. Please
Consider just taking one scene and reworking it. Get your voice down before you tackle the larger book. Once you have a set of rules for the narrator's POV things will go very easily.
Have you seen the video of Gore Vidal and William F Buckley debating? I think at one point they started insulting each other. Will flat out threatened to punch or slap Gore. But they were scholarly about it.
"Insulting" is putting it lightly.
Loved the term "crypto-Nazi" in that debate. I think Vidal invented it.
Vidal did invent it. Crypto-Nazi was my favourite part of that one too
I hope the girl has been high since frame one. She just knows how to live with the leggy bastards.
I assumed the bugs were a hallucination, so she might experience something different,
Maybe the millipedes hallucinations were induced by her long suture scars? So she sees insects in her hallucinations as well, but has learned to enjoy it? Or it was her fetish to begin with hence the scars?
Something about the juxtaposition of exotic beauty and lowly insects fascinates me. It implies a power/fortitude that we can’t fully understand. If Danny can learn it, perhaps it will be the key to resolve a bigger crisis later?
Anyways, hopefully the comment doesn’t distract from the intended plot, but the mind, it runs amok!
"Gloves Off" is a "kitchen table" MFA via Substack.
Oh gosh, Chuck is looking to beat the adverbs outta me lol
Very informative, as always.
Love your note about intentional misuse of words as the only way to transcend standardized language.
That's one of the fun things about art, I think - learning the "rules" so that you can break them.
Exactly. Then you have to fight to defend your "breaks."
Strong writing from Rollins and really useful comments from Palahniuk. I learned a lot.
When you give me permission to fuck with the language, a thought pops in the back of my head to say, "What if they don't get it?" Cause don't you have to have some amount of intelligence to be able to decipher something voicey? Or maybe I'm just thinking about Ulysses lol
Try to write intuitively, allow the context to determine the meaning. Don't finish sentences. For example:
"The kid with the ears from wrestling." Most people can guess my meaning. In fact one friend asked, point-blank, "Were you referring to Jay?" He meant a mutual friend with cauliflower ears.
"Keep the boner present." - I'm always telling people this. And they're always like, "Who are you?" and "This is why I hate taking the bus."
No, really, keep the Lance Armstrong shirt on.
What a great breakdown.
Love these Gloves Off. Can't get enough. Reveals how the core of fiction is action, action, action, and action verbs, action verbs, action verbs.
Consider that our grandparents' language was almost always based on the physical. For example, "bit the bullet" or "he got my Irish up" or "that ship has sailed."
In recent history our language has become more abstract -- thought verbs -- maybe due to more schooling and the desire to sound smart. That's why much of my struggle is to find the older terms people used to depict thinking and emotion. Jettison the clinical language because the physical is always more effective.
"Shake it like a Polaroid picture" Those are great phrases.
"Beat it like a red-headed stepchild"
"Shake it like a British nanny"
There’s something about these two sayings... Can’t quite put my finger on it.
Hey, I'm married to an Irish. I hear this stuff all the time.
I’m going to pretend I didn’t read that so I can gatekeep.
Did you eat your corned beef and cabbage?
Still eating it. And breathing it. That smell never goes away.
This is amazing insight--comparing old language with today’s...
An astute observation, as always.
I don't think it's about education or wanting to sound smart.
The evolution of metaphors, adages, and choice of language, verbal or written, can probably be tracked in a fairly straight line - my guess, not research - against the evolution of hunter / gathers, rural to metropolitan living, horse and buggy to steam engines, office to couch, and so on.
In the developed world, a large proportion of people, not the majority, but a lot, maybe 40 percent (anyone who could do their job at home during lockdowns), barely have to move in order to earn a wage or to maintain a good life. Any wonder that action language and metaphors become introspection or therapeutic or mere observation.
It's not even necessary to walk into a supermarket to hunt and gather, just poke at a device and all essential sustenance magically arrives on the doorstep.
Mad as a cut snake wouldn't be coined today, because hardly anyone has experience of needing to give a snake a good whack with a shovel. These days, they're not even allowed to.
I grew up with "Mad as a wet hen."
In writing the September book, "Not Forever, But for Now," I used Brit slang throughout. Most of it dates from the Recency period, supposedly because that's when printing presses became common, thus people were able to disseminate and record more popular culture slang.
Whoever described this as a kitchen table MFA delivered via substack understated. A regular MFA student couldn't count on such thorough and professional feedback...and the tuition would be quite a bit more as well.
Tom charged each of us $20 per weekly workshop. In 1990 that seemed like a fortune, but it was the smartest money I ever spent.
I disagree. You know those brown leather pants you got with your Fight Club money? Those were the best investment ever lol
If you can wear a 28-inch waist I will send them to you. Due to the covid lockdown I'll never fit into them again.
Not gonna lie, I had to sit and stare at MFA and work out what this was, haha. My brain just defaults to Multi-Factor Authentication now, and I was preeety certain it wasn't that.
That’s a fact!
Hey Jay!
Thanks for sharing your story. Right away I was drawn in by the tension of the narrator being probed at by latex gloves. And not being able to move his arms. It's just like hello, welcome to hell, and it has my attention.
I like all the in-scene action. Followed right along, and the cutting of the adverbs is a quick and easy fix. In a lot of cases, it's just a matter of switching out the adverb for the action or dialogue that shows the exact adverb you wanted to use.
OMG the EARWIGS??!! I freaking hate earwigs, so Nicely Done. Followed by a millipede???? The only bug that can make my husband squirm.
Really love the examples of unpacking Chuck provided. And showing how to redirect passive voice by putting the action onto the objects. "The metal pinched" for example. Also found helpful the pruning to show where tension was unintentionally cut. And the confirmation that yes, readers want to be figuring out what is happening as they go.
And once more, just have to give you props for all the tension throughout.
Nice work, great job. Hope you are having a blast writing this.
Thanks for sharing Jay. In conversation I have a terrible habit of over explaining things and I still struggle with the impulse to do this in my writing.
Whew, incredible advice. What a read. What a journey. Love that you take the time to do this, Chuck.
Yes. Thanks Chuck.