• Home
  • Blog
  • News
  • Events
  • About the Author
  • About the Book
  • Bookstore
  • Reviews
  • Press/Media
  • Contact
  • Home
  • Blog
  • News
  • Events
  • About the Author
  • About the Book
  • Bookstore
  • Reviews
  • Press/Media
  • Contact
D.R. Ranshaw

D.R. RANSHAW

One Last Time

4/26/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
Today’s blog post just happens to be my 200th (ta da!). And in honour of that momentous occasion --- given that I tend to aim for a thousand-or-so words in each post, I’ve now written enough drivel to more than comprise a Compleat Novel purely out of blog posts --- I thought I’d come up with something really profound, kind of along the lines of Walt Whitman’s “Re-examine all you have been told; dismiss what insults your soul.” Or something.
 
So here’s how today’s earth-shaking reflection on The Cosmic All And Our Place In It came about. It started, really, all very innocently, as these sorts of things tend to do: in making just some of my casual day-to-day observances in my travels around the house, I noticed that one of our smoke detectors, those Silent but not Somnolent Sentinels of Sniffery, sported a label reading, “replace in 2021.” And on further inspection, it turned out another had the same warning affixed. (Please don’t tell me that I’m obviously suffering from Covid cabin fever or have way too much time on my hands --- I’m a 5 on the Enneagram personality inventory, and we 5s are variously referred to as Observer/Investigators, so my eagle-eyed inspections shouldn’t come as much of a surprise.) Yikes, I thought. Better get on changing those little sirens of impending doom post-haste. So I did, and had new ones ready to install only a day or two later. And as I climbed unsteadily up on my chair (wondering if that was really a safe thing to do at my advanced age and reflecting on the dramatic irony --- as only a slightly neurotic writer could --- that would result if I fell to my death while engaged in the act of installing life-saving household equipment), I saw that the new detectors, too, had their own warning labels affixed --- thoroughly bilingual labels, if you please --- saying they, in turn, will need to be replaced by 2032.
 
Hmm. 2032. Eleven years away. And verily, like the lark (or at least a vulture) at break of day arising, the thought rose unbidden from the wellsprings of his consciousness: that’s probably the last time I’ll change smoke detectors in this house.
 
Now, lest you think my thoughts entirely too Byronic, black and melancholy for this Spring day, let me pause in my thoughts on mortality and back up a little. Our family has lived in our current little slice of domestic tranquility in the ‘burbs for… let me see, 24 years this May. And my wife, who’s retiring from her own teaching career at the end of this June, has made it quite clear in recent conversations she doesn’t envision this house as our retirement home. (In case you’re wondering, I have no particularly strong feelings either way --- at least, not yet --- but lengthy marital experience taught me long ago that the musings of She Who Must Be Obeyed are to be ignored only at one’s extreme peril.)
 
So… yeah. Sic transit gloria mundi and all that. Funny --- well, strange, not really humourous --- how humans have this amazing tendency to ignore the passage of time and their own impending mortality, only to have it thrust in their collective faces by, sometimes, the most mundane, trivial things. Although don’t get me wrong --- frankly, that strikes me as a better way of being reminded of such things than a catastrophic, life-altering/ending event. But there you are, just merrily zooming down Life’s highway, noticing but not really paying attention to some of the wayside signs, and suddenly, the road’s blocked by a whole bunch of big-ass bright orange traffic cones and blinking lights, and the only route available is the off-ramp. It does give you pause, doesn’t it? Well, if it doesn’t, it should.
 
Now, I’m not getting all worked up about this. At least, I don’t think I am. Well, I’m trying not to, anyway. A departure from this house to another is likely at least a couple of years away at this point… because, for starters… you know, he said, gesturing apologetically and chuckling in a self-deprecatory way, the pandemic and all… and aside from such a trivial thing, it would probably take us at least two years to get our poop in a group and go through 24 years of accumulated stuff, deciding what to keep and what to discard --- including a whole pile ‘o stuff belonging to a couple of our adult children who have theoretically left home but inexplicably still seem to regard mom and dad’s place as some sort of ultra-convenient, discount (read: *free*) self-storage depot. (Oy.) And any number of things might happen between now and then to render the entire discussion moot. You know, like the zombie apocalypse or something. Or my wife might change her mind --- it’s been known to happen once or twice before --- and decide she likes living in a place where it’s winter for eight months of the year.
 
But… yeah. Ask not for whom the bell tolls… because it tolls for thee, buddy. And that right soon.
 
By the way… take this as a cheery PSA for the day, from me to you, and check the damned expiry dates (and working order, come to that) on your own smoke detectors. Because you never know.
 
And like my wife, you ignore them at your extreme peril.

0 Comments

The Childhood Choices We Make

4/12/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
Today’s musings begin, innocently enough, with the guitar pictured above. It’s mine, and in fact is only slightly younger than I am. But it’s been decades since I last looked on it, because, for all that time, it’s been safely leaning upright in a corner of my clothes closet, stowed away in its dusty black case. The same case, by the way, which kept it from harm as it (and I, of course) traversed our transit system --- an adventure on an electric trolley bus in those medieval days --- to head downtown for my weekly classical guitar lesson. I was only 12 in those far-off days, and going downtown, on the bus, by myself, required, I dimly recall, something of the courage Frodo had to summon heading off into the Wild. Yeah, I had a fairly sheltered life as a kid. Why do you ask?
 
(What prompted all this? you also ask, rolling your eyes. Well, last week, my youngest daughter needed some protection for her guitar as she took it to another city where she works, and, of course, it was good old dad to the rescue, volunteering The Ancient Case --- battered, dusty and well-used though it is --- for one more job. Hmm. I’m sure there’s some kind of literary parallel/comparison to be made to me somewhere in that image… but think I’ll forego that particular exercise today, thanks very much.)
 
Anyway, he said dismissively. The Ancient Case and any possible associated metaphysical analogy isn’t really today’s point. It’s the guitar, dude, and by extension, Childhood Choices We Make.
 
You see, my sister was heavily into ballet and other forms of dance When We Were Very Young. She was out --- well, it seemed pretty much every single night, though I’m sure if I asked her now, she’d accuse me of an overactive imagination (imagine that!). But she was at dance lessons a helluva lot. And I wasn’t --- not that I particularly wanted to be, I might add. No, no, for starters, in the so-called Wonder Years of the 1960s/70s, boys taking lessons in ballet and tap and so on required either a very special kind of courage, or at least an extraordinary ability not to give a tinker’s damn about what the world (read: mostly, their Neanderthal male confreres) thought about them. I didn’t have either that courage or that sensibility… besides, I wasn’t particularly interested in dance, anyway.
 
But I think, somewhere along the way, it must have occurred to my egalitarian parents that, in the spirit of equality, or at least equivalence, I should be offered the opportunity to do… well, something. Something out of the house, some kind of creative endeavour. So I recall my mother taking me downtown to look at a couple of places: a judo studio, and a music conservatory. Yeah, I know, I know. For the life of me, I cannot imagine how those two diametrically opposed endeavours figured on her list, but every once in a while, my sainted mother would do inexplicable, quirky things like that, God rest her soul, so there we were.
 
Now, I’ve written a time or six about how I was… well, a fairly quiet, intense… introverted… okay, nerdy… kind of kid in my youth. I’m a Myers-Briggs INTJ, so that shouldn’t really come as any great surprise --- though I’ve mellowed a lot over the lo, entirely too many years since my childhood, as We All Tend To Do, and a 34-year career as a secondary school teacher further smoothed off a lot of those sharp introvert edges. But to this day, I can’t fathom how my mother thought at that time that taking judo lessons would fit in well with either my worldview or my life philosophy: we toured the facility, and it appeared, to my horrified gaze at least, that it was heavily populated by the same kind of previously mentioned savage Neanderthal kids I spent much of my time avoiding/keeping-a-wary-eye-on at school. Did I really want to throw myself into that particular lions’ den? Well, that was a damned silly question: unlike Daniel of the aforementioned literary reference, I was under no illusions flights of angels would rush in to protect me. So I casually responded to my mother that no, thanks, we were done there and more than ready to move on.
 
The conservatory of music was, as you might imagine, a pretty different milieu --- kind of a Rivendell to the judo studio’s Mordor, speaking of literary references. And the man who’d be my instructor was a gentle, soft-spoken type with probably some introvert tendencies of his own. It was no contest, really --- perhaps there was something of a path-of-least-resistance kind of vibe at work --- and so, for the next three or four years, until high school commitments and increasing practice requirements for the guitar as I progressed up the skill level prompted me to abandon the project, I had a private half-hour classical guitar lesson every week, and also was required to practice each day for at least half an hour. I say “required to practice” because it was a chore. I did practice (most mothers are good at guilting their children into doing the right thing --- a survival tactic, I think --- but mine had an absolute gift for it) but never went one minute beyond the stipulated 30. I enjoyed classical guitar, in a mild sort of way, and was fairly proficient (though I loathed, with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns, the terrifying required public concert performances)… but overall, it was no burning passion, and without that spark waiting to flare into brilliant flame… well, as we all know, that kind of creative endeavour is destined to be stillborn. No, my creative passions, it turned out, lay elsewhere. (Three guesses, and the first two don’t count.)
 
But it’s led me to wonder, in an abstract way, how things would’ve turned out had I summoned my courage and agreed to take lessons at that judo studio. Would it have given me a sense of self-confidence I didn’t --- and wouldn’t --- possess for years? Or would it have turned me into one of those savage Neanderthals I so despised?
 
Ah well. Yep, The Childhood Choices We Make… AKA The Road Not Taken, I guess.
 
Of a sort.

0 Comments

The Two Deadly Character Ayes*

3/15/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
“In spite of our frequently laughable romantic notions about ourselves, most of us just want to be allowed to quietly live our lives in peace and plenty.”
 
This fine little philosophical gem appeared in my last post. (Yes, you read that correctly: my conceit knows no bounds as I have finally crossed the line, sunk to a new low, and started quoting myself. Oh, the humanity.) But I maintain the gem is true, despite indignant flak I took from a friend over it. “Laughably romantic notions?” she snorted. “Harsh condemnation, dude.”
 
Well, maybe. (Although truth often hurts. It might ultimately make you free, but it’s seldom painless in the process, mercilessly shining that piercing, brilliant beam of pure white light into the void and pinning you like a butterfly.) But let’s just unpack that admission a moment or six, shall we? We can even do it from a literary context, if that makes things easier/less threatening.
 
My favourite genre, and the one I tend to write in pretty much most of the time, is fantasy (science fiction is a close second). It’s been that way more decades than I want to count, ever since my sainted mother casually gifted 10-year-old me a relatively small novel whose first line read, “In a hole in the ground lived a hobbit.” (To this day, I’ve no idea why she gave me that copy of The Hobbit; while both my parents were very supportive of reading, fantasy was definitely not her preferred choice of genre --- not to mention there was also much less of it back in the Dark Ages. Unfortunately, she’s no longer around to ask.)
 
Now, in fantasy, it doesn’t matter whether your hero is a four-foot-tall Hobbit or a Man who is the rightful heir to the thrones of not one, but two separate realms --- we picture ourselves (well, I do, anyway) striding (no pun intended) alongside them, viewing incredible sunrises/sunsets and unspoiled wild vistas like massive, ancient forests, deep underground cities, windswept grassy plains extending forever in all directions… well, you get the general idea. Except…
 
…What writers conveniently tend to leave out, most of the time, is the fact that Tramping Through Said Vistas is a bloody uncomfortable, not to mention woefully hazardous, prospect, at least for the vast majority of us accustomed to creature comforts. (Spoiler alert: this is where the ‘laughably romantic notions about ourselves’ part of the quote applies.) Filmed versions of these Tramping Through Said Vistas really don’t help, either, as we gaze on our heroes after weeks in the bush, not a hair out of place, apparently not stinking to high heaven or starving to death on entirely unsatisfactory meals that haven’t a hint of gourmet in them, clothes miraculously clean and unscathed.
 
In other words, many of us follow this philosophy: “I’m all for hiking in mountain forests all day long… but at night, I want to retire to my hotel for a hot jacuzzi and sauna before heading over to the four-star restaurant, then bedding down in a nice warm bed in my climate-controlled room. I’ll watch dramatic rain/snow storms through the window, thanks.”
 
Also, most of us aren’t really cut out for the heroic life: walking half a world away to reach a mountain housing a very territorial, lethal, irritable dragon who probably isn’t at all interested in negotiating a treaty of mutual peace and coexistence… or walking half a world away, pursued by undead wraiths and other unfriendly creatures, in order to traverse a toxic desert wasteland so as to fling a magic ring into an active volcanic vent halfway up the side of a mountain… well, great to read about, or watch, but actually do it? Umm, maybe not.
 
That leads us to a very important question: so… how do we get people and protagonists to undertake the insanely dangerous/adventurous?
 
Well, most people --- and most literary characters --- must be jolted into action by what Will referred to as ‘the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,’ and that jolt has to be powerful enough to overcome what I’ve just now christened ‘The Double I Curse of Character/Person Demotivation.’ (Quite catchy, don’t you think? Definitely destined to become a catchphrase in psychological texts and writing manuals everywhere.) What are these two concepts residing in the ninth letter of the alphabet? Well… (drum roll, please): Inertia and Inadequacy (ta da!).
 
Never mind what Mr. Webster might have to say, Inertia is one of the prime forces at work in the lives of pretty much all real people and literary characters alike. It’s the tendency to leave things alone, let them just bumble along, regardless of whether they’re proceeding well or poorly, because it takes too much time, effort or energy to change things. I like to envision inertia as the great slab of sticky rubber cement most of us are plastered to life’s tapestry with.
 
Likewise, my homegrown definition of Inadequacy is it’s the idea we’re not big enough, or important enough, or gifted enough, or attractive enough, or skilled enough, or courageous enough… (again, you get the idea) to make any kind of difference… so why bother even trying? This is a far more negative concept than Inertia; in fact, it must rank as one of the most pernicious curses we as a species labour under… we, or any other literary species you’d care to name.
 
And what jolt can overcome these two dreaded forces? Well, that’s easy: I call it ‘Immediate Personal Threat’ (another catchphrase destined to become a classic, I’m sure); that is, something that, right now, threatens our lives or our way of life, or the lives of our loved ones. It doesn’t matter what literary situation, what literary character you look at, pretty much all of them are motivated by some sort of Immediate Personal Threat. (“Gah! That damned Ring could put the Devil’s own lieutenant in charge of all of us by next Tuesday! We gotta do something about it, right now!”)
 
Frodo: I will take the Ring, though I do not know the way.
Me: You will? Gosh, that’s swell! No worries, here’s a scenic map of beautiful suburban Mordor, complete with scenic attractions. See? There’s Mount Doom, right there… along with scheduled eruption times! Have fun storming the castle, kid!
 
I just love a happy ending.
 

0 Comments

Understandably Unpleasant Characters

2/22/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
A fellow Tweeple --- someone who follows me on Twitter while I reciprocate (I’ve no idea whether that’s an official term, BTW) --- was recently musing about literary characters who are unpleasant, but understandably so, given their backgrounds. It got me to musing…
 
(And as Will so famously said, thereby hangs a tale.)
 
Unpleasant characters don’t have to be villains, you know. They’re not always twirling their moustaches, laughing maniacally while placing bound damsels in distress on railway tracks… not unless you want to deal with unbearably hoary old clichés, anyway. Which, in this day and age, when jaded, world-weary readers/viewers seem more aware than ever of tropes, plot twists, and cliché, I advise strongly against. Because, really, unless we’re channelling some saccharine saintly type, we ALL have unpleasant sides, don’t we? Perhaps Even Me. (And frankly, even saccharine saintly types can be quite unpleasant as they sanctimoniously proceed through life, reminding the rest of us, overtly or covertly, how woefully imperfect we truly are.)
 
Most unpleasant characters are, I think, that way primarily because of what SF author Robert Heinlein light-heartedly but accurately referred to as life’s ‘Surprise Party and Practical Jokes Department’ i.e., the ‘slings and arrows of outrageous fortune’ life routinely chucks at us tends to have a marked effect on our dispositions, outlooks, and actions. (Yeah, I know all about the ‘nature vs. nurture’ debate. While people can be jerks from day one, I think what goes on in and during their lives has a greater impact.)
 
Even protagonists can be UUTs (Understandably Unpleasant Types --- pronounced oot, I’ve officially decided). Personally, I don’t recommend making a protagonist an UUT… it’s important for readers to be able to like and relate to protagonists, and many of us, I think, at least labour under the delusion we’re nice people more or less all the time. (That’s called rationalization, folks, and humans are mostly past masters of rationalization.) But I can think of at least two protagonists who are UUTs. Are they effective? Well, Vox Populi, Vox Dei, I say… AKA The Reader Must Decide:
 
Edmund Pevensie is one of four sibling protagonists in C.S. Lewis’ classic children’s fantasy The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe from the Chronicles of Narnia series, and Edmund is certainly an UUT. He’s angry, mouthy, rebellious --- quite a jerk, in sum --- which is, actually, played up more in the stunningly gorgeous 2005 film version. In fact, we can go further than mere jerk, because he betrays his three siblings and quite literally goes over to the Dark Side, at least for a while, before eventually, smartening up and getting redemption. (To be fair, he doesn’t initially understand the precise nature of the deal he’s making with the White Witch.)
 
So what is it making Edmund understandably unpleasant? Well, to start with, there’s a war on --- the Second World War, and he and his siblings are evacuated out of a London being bombed nightly by the Luftwaffe.  So… dislocation, separation from parental unit, relocation to an unknown environment not particularly conducive to children… check, check, check. Let’s also not forget he’s the third-born of four children. Now, as a first-born myself (I know… you’d never be able to tell), I can understand only intellectually what it would be like to be in the middle of the pack --- not the oldest/bossy star first child, not the youngest and ‘cute baby’ to be spoiled, just part of the Great Unwashed scrabbling for attention in the middle --- but I know there’s a great deal of literature out there discussing the psychological millstones of being a middle child. And once you get started on a certain path, even when you realize it’s heading off a cliff, a great many of us find it hard to swallow our pride and admit our mistake.
 
My second UUT of the day is (perhaps more controversially, although I’ll go with Kingsley Amis on this one --- he said if you can’t annoy someone, what’s the point of writing?) …Katniss Everdeen, of Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games trilogy. I need to be honest up-front: I don’t like Katniss very much. I find her sullen, apathetic, and totally unwilling to accept the role that’s (admittedly) thrust upon her… right up to the end of the entire tale. She doesn’t want to take up any kind of leadership function, and allows herself to be manipulated by forces around her. Now, before you unleash all kinds of invective about how wrong I am and how Katniss is the greatest thing since sliced bread and how dare I take this attitude… sure, you’re entitled to your opinion… as am I. How is she different from Edmund? you ask. Well, Katniss is the sole protagonist, not one of four, and more importantly, unlike Edmund, she doesn’t undergo any great character epiphany by story’s end.
 
Again, to be fair (the ‘understandably’ U in our acronym), Katniss never asked for any of it. She didn’t want her sister selected as tribute; she didn’t want to have to volunteer in her place; she didn’t want to be forced to kill others in a bread-and-circuses gladiatorial arena on live TV; and she certainly didn’t want to become the face of an entire rebellion. I get that. Most of us wouldn’t want any of it, either. In spite of our frequently laughable romantic notions about ourselves, most of us just want to be allowed to quietly live our lives in peace and plenty. But… when you are The Protagonist… when greatness is thrust upon you… well, as a reader, I want a little more can-do attitude and a little less pouty teenage angst. You know, more along the lines of a Frodo Baggins, whose basic response on learning he’s been handed the Supreme Booby Prize i.e. a one-way suicide jaunt to Mordor AKA Hell on Middle Earth, is, “Well, sh*t, guys. (Pause.) Haven’t got a clue how to get there. But… (longer pause) … okay, I’ll do it. ‘Cause it’s gotta get done.” Yeah, that’s the attitude I want.
 
So suck it up, Katniss; you’re the Katalyst.
 
(Sorry. Awful pun. I’ll show myself out now.)
0 Comments

Bombadil Days

2/1/2021

2 Comments

 
Picture
These are Bombadil days.
 
This was the thought which popped, quite unbidden, into my consciousness the other day while I was vacuuming. (A task I frankly loathe, but decades ago, my wife and I divided up that part of household chores… she chose the wet cleaning, and I chose the dry. Note to youngsters: of such equitable divisions of labour are sound marriages made.) Now, I’ve no idea how or why this very random --- and very odd --- snippet wormed its way up through the vaults of thought, but, like most writers, I’ve come to expect and encourage such snippets when engaged in purely mechanical endeavours. Most of the time, they’re nothing if not entertaining, and sometimes, they’re actually useful with regards to writing.
 
Of course, you know Tom Bombadil. From J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings (LOTR). What? You don’t know Tom Bombadil? Minor Character Extraordinaire? But… oh, wait, I know: you only watched Peter Jackson’s film version of the tale, didn’t you? You heathen. You Didn’t Read The Book, did you? he said, pointing an accusing finger of condemnation. Sigh. No, Tom Bombadil wasn’t in the film version. Jackson cut him out because he felt Bombadil did nothing to advance the plot. Which, on one level is true, but on others, not. We can discuss that later… or another time.
 
Anyway. Tom Bombadil appears early on in The Fellowship of the Ring, which is the first book of the trilogy. He’s humanoid, and lives in a very old, first growth forest called (surprise!) The Old Forest. Tolkien does a marvelous job describing this shaggy, overgrown aggregation of trees and other miscellaneous foliage, where the trees are unsettlingly self-aware --- in fact, one in particular, an old willow tree called (surprise!) Old Man Willow, is downright malevolent, and traps our redoubtable hobbits, who have been traversing The Old Forest in an attempt to avoid the agents of evil hot on their trail. Tom Bombadil shows up in the nick of time to save our hobbits from a gruesomely woody death, and then takes them home with him to meet the missus, a water sprite named (surprise --- no, really) Goldberry. They stay at Bombadil’s house for a couple of days before continuing on their journey.
 
If none of this is (a) familiar to you or (b) rocking your world right now, the main thing you need to take away from it all is that Tom Bombadil doesn’t venture beyond the borders of The Old Forest. Ever. It’s like that’s his quarantine bubble, and he absolutely refuses to travel outside it. Given that there’s no pandemic raging in the rest of Middle Earth (nothing, either along prosaic Covid lines or anything more florid, like Poe’s The Red Death), we’re not really sure why he draws this line. He doesn’t say, and Tolkien never explains Tom’s travel reluctance. Visa problems? Surly border guards? Poor airline food? We don’t know, and Tom ain’t sayin’.
 
Now, the Bombadil analogy to our current collective situation will only stretch so far… after all, most people don’t particularly want to be quarantined on home turf. But Tom is, in a sense, self-isolating… not from a virus, just presumably from a plague of negativity and evil. (Introverted writers don’t count in this whole thing… we’re the people who feel like we’ve been training for lockdown our entire lives. Oh, please, Br’er Fox, don’t make us stay at home to write in the peace and quiet!) In fact, most of our population is going a little squirrelly --- which is about the politest I can be --- regarding lockdowns and restrictions. In fact, it really does make me despair about the capacity of the human race to solve other major problems confronting our survival as a species. I mean, we can’t even all agree that wearing a small piece of cloth on our faces is a good thing. Or that staying home will save lives. Or so will vaccinations. No, no, we’ve got to rant and rave and froth and bubble about freedom (most people don’t, apparently, understand what it's really all about --- they think it’s just having all the cookies and eating them whenever you want… without having to share) and individual liberties and crackpot conspiracy theories and lions and tigers and bears, oh my. Sigh. I think we could do with more Tom Bombadil in our world today: he’s content where he is, doesn’t let the cares of the world get to him, enjoys and appreciates his beautiful wife, and, basically, doesn’t sweat the small stuff. Or the big stuff, come to that. And he seems to understand what so many people do not: that nothing lasts forever. I’m sure that one day, he’ll look around those shaggy old trees and decide it's time for a wee bit of a stroll beyond those (admittedly self-imposed) boundaries; that whatever it is that’s made him self-quarantine all this time is no longer a threat, and a boat cruise down the Anduin sounds just about right.
 
So chill, people. Just try pulling together for the common good.
 
For a change. 
2 Comments

Slaying the Dreaded DEM

1/18/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
‘And hast thou slain the DEM?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Calloo! Callay!’
He chortled in his joy.
                -with sincere apologies to Chuck Dodgson (AKA Lewis Carroll)
 
You know, even the ancient Greeks knew about it, to the point where it received a Latin name --- they didn’t use the Latin, of course; theirs was, unsurprisingly, in Greek, which is, frankly, a lot less pronounceable than Latin --- which is to say none of this is meant to be a disparagement of Greek intelligence, I hasten to add, merely an observation that it’s been around a very long time.
 
What is IT, you ask? Why, the dreaded Deus ex Machina (DEM), of course, more fearsome than a bad tempered, three-headed dog guarding the underworld… or, as writers say: faster than a speeding gerund… more powerful than a split infinitive… able to leap Oxford commas at a single bound!
 
In my last post, I discussed the problem --- or non-problem --- of cliché in writing. (I’d include a link to it, but seeing as how it’s right above this one… just scroll to it, fer cryin’ out loud.) I came to the conclusion that, while we might roll our eyes at cliché, there’s nothing particularly wrong with it in writing --- as long as we don’t use it like a 2x4 cudgel to hit the reader over the head. (Maybe a toothpick, instead. A blunt one.) Because, as I pointed out, for most of us pathetic mortals, life is just one long string of clichés i.e. the reason why clichés become clichés is because they happen so damned often to so damned many of us. People are not nearly as clever, creative, original, or funny as they think. (Trust me, I know --- boy, do I know: several eons ago, as a fresh-faced university student, I spent several summers working as a teenage Mountie in a historical park, and people’s comments as they came through the exhibit… not clever. Nope. Not creative. Definitely not creative. And after about the thousandth time hearing the same damned witticisms… not funny. I’m still scarred by the experience, lo, many decades later. Set me on the long road of disillusionment about the Common Man or Woman, it did. Oh, the humanity.)
 
However… cliché is not the same as DEM, not at all, at all. For the handful of you who’ve never heard of DEM --- the Latin phrase translates out as ‘machine of the gods,’ by the way --- it refers, at least as far as the ancient Greeks were concerned, to the plot device of resolving a play’s conflict by lowering an actor playing one of the gods from a machine suspended above the stage so he/she could dispense immediate judgement and quickly bring the play to a resolution --- in a highly artificial manner that left the audience muttering in their beards (and beer) about how damned unrealistic that would be in real life. It’s since become a phrase signifying creative bankruptcy on the part of a writer: What’s that? Painted your protagonist into a corner and now your significant other is calling you for dinner, and you can’t figure out a logical way to rescue the protagonist from the sticky situation you wrote? No problem! Throw some totally arbitrary, unrealistic person or circumstance into the mix and get ‘em out! Piece of cake!
 
Folks, when someone in your audience stands up and points the stern, Fickle Finger of Condemnation at your work, shouting out, “J’accuse! J’accuse you of DEM, you silly pig-dog! Merde!” (or words/thoughts to that effect), you’re in big trouble --- and it’s probably time to look discretely for a side exit, so as to make your getaway ahead of the outraged mob howling for blood. Why?
 
Well, look: as storytellers, we rely on a lovely little phrase I learned back in the Dawn Times, when I was just a wee young writer wannabe: the willing suspension of disbelief. (Ain’t that beautiful? Wish I could claim it as my own, but alas, I can’t. Its origin is lost in the mists of prehistory. Well, my prehistory, anyway.) Now, you can write all sorts of outlandish situations, settings, and characters… as long as you make them, and their actions, believable. You can write about mythical creatures, like dragons (or gryphons, in my case, he said disingenuously/shamelessly), unicorns and honest politicians ---- well, maybe not that last, let’s not get too carried away --- and, as long as you make the context you place them in logical and believable, your audience will accept them. SF writer Harlan Ellison coined the phrase for this whole concept interior logic, and that’s pretty bang-on the money.
 
When you engage in DEM, you violate the concept of interior logic. For example, when I was a kid, I watched this happen Every Single Week on the Batman TV series of the Dark Ages i.e. the 1960s. (And I’m still scarred from that, too. Fair riddled with neuroses, I am.) Every week, the writers set up some kind of mammoth cliff-hanger… you know, grisly, unavoidable death… no way out… curtains and all that. And then, the following week, when I breathlessly tuned in again (same Bat-time, same Bat-channel), those same writers found all kinds of ridiculous DEM to blithely whisk Batman and Robin out of their lethal predicament faster than a speeding… oops, wrong superhero mantra. Well, pretty damn fast, anyway. Never took longer than the teaser, so we could spend the entire episode building up to the next cliff-hanger, and so on. Even as an (admittedly precocious) child yet to reach my tenth birthday, it didn’t take me long to see the awful cheat in this.
 
Now, I know we’re not talking Tolstoy here, but… come on, guys. You can’t do this to your audience. I hereby designate DEM a Crime Against Literature.
 
If you get your protagonist into a spectacular crisis with no apparent way out… if you don’t want to just kill them off in the manner of George R.R. Martin… then you’ve got to construct reasonable, rational ways of extricating them from said crisis.
 
To do otherwise is… well, ‘tis a crime not to be borne.
 
Oy.
 
 

0 Comments

Is It All Cliche? And Does It Matter?

1/4/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
“For God’s sake, let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the deaths of kings: how some have been depos’d, some slain in war, some haunted by the ghosts they have deposed, some poisoned by their wives, some sleeping kill’d, all murthered.”
                -Will (of course), writing in Richard II (Act III, Scene ii)
 
See? There ‘tis! he crowed triumphantly. Even in Will’s day, they knew all about cliché and stereotype. Thus it hast ever been, thus ‘twill ever be. Selah! Selah!
 
Ah, right. Anyway… cliché… something on my mind since watching Netflix’s enormously popular The Queen’s Gambit (TQG). That’s not quite the putdown it might initially seem. Let me start by briefly recounting the Sad Tale, complete with spoilers.
 
Poor Beth, a 1950s girl orphaned young. Her mentally ill mother commits suicide --- evidently tries infanticide, too --- by veering their car into oncoming traffic. Miraculously, Beth survives. (There’s a father around, but he wants nothing to do with Beth, so, hence, the orphan tag.)
 
Beth winds up in a state-run orphanage. It’s not exactly Dickensian, but definitely on the scale, with the kind of institutionalized grimness we’re accustomed to from countless novels. Beth is a solemn, introverted sort --- today we’d likely say she’s on the autism spectrum --- who, quite early at the orphanage, discovers chess, learning it from the janitor… and takes to it like the proverbial duck to water. She is, quite simply, a natural. A whiz. A prodigy. A savant. She displays an astounding ability to play and mentally map out whole sequences of upcoming complex moves --- hers and her opponent’s. Unfortunately, at least partially, this ability is augmented by tranquilizers the orphanage daily dispenses like candy to inmates (hey, it is the ‘60s), sowing the seed for a very unhealthy dependency.
 
Beth is ultimately adopted by an alliterative married couple, Allston and Alma. It quickly becomes evident Allston wants nothing to do with her, that the adoption was Alma’s idea, who also, BTW, has an unhealthy relationship with pills (and alcohol) --- though, to be fair, much less was understood about their harmful effects, 60 years ago.
 
Allston, callous bastard extraordinaire, has an affair and abandons Alma and Beth. Fortunately, Alma is shrewd enough to realize Beth’s chess abilities can prove lucrative if she wins tournament prize money, and so becomes Beth’s unofficial manager/agent as they criss-cross the USA, playing in competitions where Beth steamrolls over a host of fragile/misogynistic male egos. (In the ‘60s, competitive chess was almost exclusively a male domain, and to have a girl --- ooh, ick, cooties! --- be so much better than guys was… well, inconceivable.) In fact, the world chess championship doesn’t look out of reach.
 
Of course, this heady scenario must suffer unfortunate complications. Alma’s alcoholism (which she exports to Beth) and prescription drug abuse eventually catches up to her, and she dies --- in Mexico, in the middle of a tourney. Oops. Teenage Beth has to cope with all the grisly machinations involved with such an event, complicated shortly thereafter by a severe crisis of confidence frequently afflicting supremely confident people who discover, to their stunned, dismayed surprise (gasp!) they aren’t infallible --- and have feet of clay, to boot.
 
Additionally, Beth’s own very unhealthy relationship with alcohol and prescription drugs catches up with her, too, and she crashes (metaphorically) in heavily dramatic fashion. She retreats to her home, going on a spectacular bender that threatens to undo all she’s accomplished thus far in her young life --- including the upcoming world championship in the USSR.
 
Fortunately, she’s rescued by friends (including former competitors) who convince her to pull it all together. They patch her up and send her off to Moscow, complete with CIA handler, where she both charms the repressed populace and manages, in a final, climactic battle, to defeat the Soviet champion, thereby winning the world title. Yay, Beth! You go, girl.
 
(That wasn’t very brief, you note disapprovingly. Shut up, I explain. It certainly was, given we’re discussing a seven-hour tale. And I left a lot out... except a spoiler or six. Oops again.)
 
So… a plethora of characters and situations, many of which fairly smack of cliché. You know: po’ little strange orphan child makes good, tearing down a lotta stereotypical barriers and people along the way, etcetera, etcetera. Beth’s kinda like The Little Engine That Could of chess.
 
But before rushing to the conclusion I hated TQG, let me disabuse you of that right now --- and thereby hangs the tale, as Will might say. Or at least the point of today’s little epistle.
 
Sure, there’s a grab bag of clichés in TQG, and I recognized this early on, but (here’s the punch line) … It Didn’t Matter. Why? Well, a couple of reasons.
 
First, the story was extremely well told. The characters and narrative were absorbing. I’ve sat here a while trying to generate a pithy aphorism concerning how you can tell when a storyline involves riveting cliché, and when the cliché simply makes you want to puke because it’s so grindingly bad… and I’ve come up empty. All I can say is that, like true love, you know it when you see it. TQG was a story (about chess, for crying out loud, not an activity usually associated with acute visual/auditory spectator stimulation) that more than held my interest over those sevenish hours. (Yep, I play chess. The set I inherited from my grandfather is in the photograph, incidentally.)
 
Second, when you get right down to it… life is, for most of us plebes, one long string of clichés. People are not nearly as clever or original as they like to think. Clichés happen so often, to so many of us. That’s why they become clichés. We may get tired of them, but they keep on happening. And, you know… long before a fellow named Christopher Booker wrote a book about it, people recognized --- or at least maintained --- there are, really, only about seven story plots in all literature. So… like haters gonna hate, clichés gonna happen.
 
Does it matter? No, as long as writers aren’t rubbing our collective noses in it. We try to write unexpected situations and plot twists, but I begin to wonder whether that’s possible anymore.
 
But it’s not as important to me as it once was. 

0 Comments

Revenge Redux

12/7/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
In my last post, I was ruminating on the concept of revenge (and if you haven’t already, I strongly and respectfully suggest you really should read it before proceeding any further with this one, to get the full benefit of my soaring prose, wit and wisdom… or at the very least, the thrust of what the hell I was babbling on about). Revenge is a concept which has motivated, I think, more characters, and propelled more plots than even --- possibly --- love, though I’m the first to admit I have no empirical data to back up such a heretical notion. But in my own defence, I’d like to point out that one of the (many) distressing things about humans is that, frequently, it tends to be the darker side of our collective psyches that seem to motivate us, far more than the nobler side --- a truism I take no particular pleasure in asserting, I assure you.
 
I was using a PS4 video game called The Last of Us 2 as my ‘text,’ you’ll recall, and posed a question at the end of the post which I glibly said I couldn’t answer at that moment, because I’d used up my allotted word count for the day (to my wife’s extreme annoyance, who thought that a facile excuse… though the real reason was that I wasn’t sure, myself, how to answer it, so employed one of the writer’s favourite tricks i.e. playing for time.) The question I asked was why Ellie, the protagonist, couldn’t bring herself to complete her Grand Quest Of Revenge even as she was poised at her moment of triumph.
 
So thanks, Constant Reader, for waiting a week --- even if it was involuntarily. For being such a patient little carbon-based unit, here’s your answer… after my week of reflection:
 
Because, ultimately, in the midst of a brutal, bloody battle she’s actually winning --- as I said, she’s within seconds of snuffing out Abby’s life by drowning the lass --- Ellie has, I think, a bit of an epiphany. Even in the midst of raging combat, which I grant you is not a time normally associated with thoughtful introspection. But, you know, epiphanies don’t have to be lengthy, convoluted skeins of philosophical thought; they can be blindingly quick and obvious flashes of insight, too. And it is that insight which hits Ellie like the proverbial freight train:
 
What the hell has this unending quest for revenge bought or accomplished? (Besides numerous deaths wrought in various grisly manners, that is.) Has it brought peace? It has not. Has it brought redemption? Definitely not. Perhaps most importantly, has it brought resolution, some kind of ending acceptable to the person wreaking the revenge? Most. Assuredly. Not. And seeing all those questions answered in the negative, then, we (or any thoughtful character who’s more than just a mindless killing machine --- paging the T-800!) have to ask ourselves: just what the hell has been accomplished?
 
Well… a few things: Ellie has sacrificed her relationship with her partner on the altar of revenge. It’s very possibly destroyed the family they were building (the story ends on a somewhat ambiguous note, so that’s not entirely clear, depending on what she decides to do next). It hasn’t brought Joel, the character she embarked on this bloody path for, back from the dead. It’s left Ellie physically mutilated (Abby bit off two of Ellie’s fingers in the climactic/inconclusive final fight) and unable to play the guitar --- which has a special emotional significance to her, given it was a favourite instrument of Joel’s, and he taught her how to play. (Unless she learns to play the guitar left-handed, which is doable, I suppose, but as someone who played classical guitar in the far-off halcyon days of my youth, I can assure you it would not be an easy task to rewire the brain pathways involved. Naw, I’m kidding: they weren’t particularly halcyon days, just the genesis of numerous traumas and subsequent neuroses. Oy.) And speaking of which, it’s left Ellie an emotionally devastated cripple. We’re waaay past the point of mere PTSD here. In fact, querying whether she’ll ever be emotionally whole again is a very valid thing to ask.
 
So… tallying up the scoresheet of what’s been accomplished, what’s been lost and gained, we’re left with a simple, bleak conclusion: Nothing Good, Just A Whole Lotta Heartbreak And Devastation. And so… she doesn’t complete her self-imposed task of killing Abby. Can’t, really. Yep, personal illumination’s really a bitch at times, you know. Or if you want to put it in biblical terms, yeah, the truth will indeed set you free… but frequently will also mightily piss you off in the process.
 
Watching Ellie at story’s end, as she wanders through the vacant home she shared with her partner and their kid (a home completely empty except, significantly, all Ellie’s stuff --- ooh, what a coldly mute testimonial that speaks volumes), you have to wonder what she’s feeling, because it’s kinda heartbreaking to watch. And we want to ask her, “Was it worth it, Ellie?” (Well, I did, anyway.) And I’m not being holier-than-thou… while most of us haven’t embarked on epic quests of lethal revenge --- at least, I hope not --- we’ve all had a vengeful thought or six in our lifetimes, and can relate to what the poor girl’s done. Especially in a society where all law and order, all the restraining mechanisms of civilization we’ve grown so smugly complacent about, have broken down completely.
 
But if Ellie hasn’t read Frankie Bacon’s essay on revenge, which she undoubtedly hasn’t, I’ll put tongue firmly in cheek and say that perhaps she should have read her Tolkien, for it’s to him I’ll give the last word today:
 
‘It is useless to meet revenge with revenge; it will heal nothing.’
 
Are you listening, Ellie?

0 Comments

Stabbing From Hell's Heart

11/30/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
re venge (ri venj’) vt. to inflict harm in return for an injury
            -Webster’s New World Dictionary
 
A strange concept, really, when you stop to consider it… like many human characteristics and motivations: someone hurts us (in any number of appallingly creative possible ways, alas), and so we want to hurt them back, in some kind of perverse quid quo pro. Why, though? How is that possibly supposed to fix/heal/restore-balance-to-the-universe? The definition above is good at explaining the what, but doesn’t even attempt the why. Well, in the 2002 film of Alexandre Dumas’ The Count of Monte Cristo (a marvellously clever adaptation I highly recommend, even though it takes a number of liberties with Dumas’ original story), the protagonist, Edmond, explains why he doesn’t want the people who destroyed his life simply murdered: “Death is too good for them. They must suffer as I suffered. They must see their world, all they hold dear, ripped from them as it was ripped from me” and I think that’s about the best, simplest rationalization for revenge you’re likely to get. In other words, if I’m going to suffer, you’re damned well going to suffer, too… at least as much as me, and preferably more, as punitive punishment for starting the whole thing in the first place. If I hurt and you caused it, I want you to hurt, too.
 
But in his famous 1625 essay on revenge, Francis Bacon came out against it, for several reasons: it’s illegal and immoral; it focuses on stuff done in the past; it carries grievous consequences against the avenger if caught; and perhaps most importantly, from both moral and literary perspectives… it just leads to more revenge i.e. it initiates a cycle of bloody acts, as the first wrong is avenged by a second, which leads to a third, and so on ad inifinitum. Whether he actually believed what he wrote… well, who can say? He was a contemporary of a certain writer named Will, who also had a few things to say about revenge in… oh… quite a lot of what he wrote. Because revenge is a great character and plot motivator. Just ask Hamlet… or Lear… or Iago… or Macbeth… or…
 
I’ve been musing on this topic because I’ve just finished a couple of stories, in two different mediums, which both focus on revenge as their primary motivator. And they’re both extremely well done. We’ll focus on the first one today.
 
The Last of Us 2 (TLOU2) is a PlayStation video game released earlier this year. As the ‘2’ should alert you, it’s a sequel to the 2014 original. The first TLOU takes place 20 years after a plague --- considerably nastier than the current one we’re dealing with --- has essentially collapsed modern society. Joel, a small-time 50-something smuggler, is tasked with ferrying 14-year-old Ellie across the decayed remains of the US… because, it emerges, Ellie is the only person immune to the infection’s gruesomely lethal effects. If she can be delivered to a group called the Fireflies, maybe a vaccine can be crafted from her. So Joel and Ellie --- who initially loathe each other --- unwillingly set off from the Boston Quarantine Zone on their epic trek. By the time they actually reach the Fireflies in what’s left of Utah, their relationship has grown to the point they’ve effectively bonded in a father/daughter relationship. The good news on arriving: yes, a vaccine can be harvested from Ellie. The bad news? The process will kill her. Joel must make a split-second decision, with vast, historic ramifications. Does he acquiesce and quietly leave Ellie to her fate, knowing we’re talking about salvation for the entire human race? Or does he play the protective father, throw humanity to the winds, and save Ellie’s life?
 
It’s probably no great surprise (especially to any parent) he does the latter, fighting his way through the Firefly installation and rescuing Ellie, killing a whole swatch of Fireflies in the process --- including the doctor who’s about to perform the vaccine removal process on an unconscious Ellie. The denouement is their successful escape to a survivors’ settlement in Wyoming.
 
TLOU2 takes place five years later, and guess what? Yep, turns out the doctor Joel killed had a daughter, Abby… and she’s been searching for Joel ever since. Doesn’t appear she’s read Bacon’s essay, because she’s obsessively determined to avenge dear old dad. Which she does: Joel dies a pretty horrific death at Abby’s hands --- with Ellie forced to witness. The people travelling with Abby want to kill Ellie, too, a pragmatic if not overly merciful move overruled by Abby and her on-again, off-again boyfriend. They came for Joel; mission accomplished, and it’s time to be on their way. End of story.
 
Except, of course, it’s not, just as Frankie Bacon predicted. Ellie sets out with her BFF to track Abby and avenge Joel’s murder… and yes, folks, weeee’rrrre off! Embarked on the Revenge Carousel, that never-ending round-and-round cycle of perpetual retaliatory attacks!
 
Now, the interesting thing occurring at the game’s finale is that, after all the slaughter and destruction, Abby and Ellie finally square off against each other. Like two superpowers engaged in Cold War games, they’ve spent most of the storyline engaged in proxy wars, killing subordinates left, right and centre, but now, there they are, Actually Fighting Each Other (gamers refer to this as a ‘boss fight’), quarter neither given nor expected. They’re both physically and emotionally exhausted, burned out to the core by their mutual hatred, ready to settle this once and for all.
 
But they don’t. Abby, near death from the ordeal of being captured and enslaved by another group, is weaker than Ellie --- who’s also had a pretty harrowing time tracking Abby down. After rescuing Abby solely so she can kill her, Ellie finds, to her stunned dismay… she can’t finish the job. Keep in mind that Ellie, like Melville’s Ahab, has had this single-minded obsession of revenge against Abby, her own Moby Dick, for months.
 
So… why can’t Ellie complete her self-set task of revenge?
 
Well, I’ve reached my self-imposed word quotient for today… so that’s a discussion for next time.
 
Same bat-time, same bat-channel.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

0 Comments

The Adventures of Nerdy Kid

11/2/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Once upon a time… a very long time ago now… (much more than last Friday, with apologies to A.A. Milne) … a young Nerdy Kid loved to be read to, and lo, his parents encouraged and fostered this love, perhaps because, coming from hardscrabble working-class English families, especially during the lows of the Great Depression, they recognized the value of literacy. Or maybe they just liked to read. Or maybe it was just a way of keeping Nerdy Kid quiet.
 
Once he mastered the art of reading for himself, Nerdy Kid read all kinds of stuff… whatever he could get his grubby young hands on, really (he was the sort who’d read the sides of cereal boxes at the table if there was nothing else available… which there usually was, leastways at breakfast and lunch, because his parents didn’t seem to mind his reading at the table… although, many moons later, his wife would; but that’s a story for another day).
 
Anyway, I was digging through Nerdy Kid’s voluminous archives the other day --- but no need to worry about break and enter, or anything sinister like that, because, as you’ve surely guessed by now, Nerdy Kid was, of course, once upon a time (more decades ago than I’d like to admit, so don’t ask), Me. As is usually the case in such situations, I sought something else entirely, and quite serendipitously, came across the comics pictured at the top of this post. Classics Illustrated Junior --- which seems a little backwards, don’t you think? Junior Illustrated Classics seems much more logical, but you can see the title just as well as I can --- numbers 511 and 546. Of course, there weren’t really 546 of these literary gems… the listing inside reveals 75 titles, but I guess it’s more impressive to appear to have waaay more than that, so a little journalistic license seems to have occurred. And look at the price! The princely sum of 15 cents each! Well, it’s a princely sum if you’re ten years old and you get a weekly allowance of 25 cents each Saturday… although a quarter stretched a whole lot further back in the Dark Ages of my childhood. Yep, sure did. My paternal parental unit would bestow unto me my quarter after Saturday lunch, I believe, and I would thereupon hie myself ‘round the long, U-shaped suburban crescent on which we lived to the local drugstore, where 25 cents would get me a comic --- which were usually twelve cents, but the Classics Illustrated Junior ones were a whole three cents more, so it was a bit of a splurge to purchase one --- and some candy. Sweet Tarts, Love Hearts, maybe a little chocolate (even then, the Force/Lure of Chocolate was strong with Nerdy Kid). Then I would return home to read my new treasure whilst consuming my sugary confections. Life was so much simpler then. Even if it was mostly in black and white.
 
Now, here’s the thing: my comic collection bit the dust decades ago during a misplaced fit of adolescent smug superiority, when I decided comics were literary trash. And given how much collectors will sometimes pay for decades-old comics nowadays, I regret that smug superiority very much, I can tell you. (And several other things, too, but that’s also a tale for another day. Maybe.) So… I’m not really clear why these two comics were spared the axe. It wasn’t accidental, I can assure you: even back then, my young anal-retentive mind simply did not work that way. Nope, there must have been something else at work. So I sat down the other day, temporarily abandoning my search, and gave myself over to these two comics to reacquaint myself with them, to reach out over several decades and the mists of Time and attempt to reconnect with Nerdy Kid. Why did he like these two comics enough to keep them? What was the appeal? I’m quite sure he had several more titles in the series.
 
Well, that was easy, actually. To start with, you can call them fairy tales if you want, but they were Fantasy genre tales. I would have been intrigued by various elements:
-the clever, anthropomorphic cat in Puss in Boots, totally comfortable talking with humans… and no, this had nothing to do with Antonio Banderas and the glibness we were shown in Shrek. The comic follows the plot as told by the 17th century French author Charles Perrault, one of the fathers of the fairy tale as we know it --- and does it in a mere 28 pages of pictures and text, which is pretty impressive, when you stop to think about it. We’ve got castles, wicked wizards, a scheming feline, a beautiful princess… all the elements for rip-snortin’ good fantasy are there.
-the teeny, tiny elves (probably my first exposure to this literary species, so different from the ones who would later capture my imagination in Tolkien’s works), sneaking into the poverty-stricken shoemaker’s shop and expertly crafting shoes overnight, to the mystified consternation of the shoemaker and his wife the next morning. Something very… precise in the procedure. (Also in 28 pages --- and while I know you can’t plot a curve from only two points, I’m already sensing something of a pattern here.)
 
Even today, so many revolutions around the sun later, I still feel the pull they would have had on Nerdy Kid’s embryonic imagination, goading him on not only to read stuff like that, but maybe create his own, to write stuff like that.
 
Yep. That’s why Nerdy Kid saved those comics: to remind himself of Beginnings later on (much later on), so when he was No Longer Very Young, but a little… used up by life… frayed around the edges (rather like those comics) … he would Remember.
 
And Dream (still).
 
And Create.
 
And he did.
 
Does.
 
Will.
 
                

0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>

    D.R. Ranshaw's Blog

    Author of The Annals of Arrinor series.  Lover of great literature, fine wine, and chocolate. Not necessarily in that order.

    Archives

    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly