The Intimacy of Books

Something I've been thinking about lately is the difference between Theatre and Movies in terms of drama. In theatre, you have to be very expressive, almost to the point of melodrama, because your audience is potentially fifty feet away and straining to hear what you're saying in the first place. With movies, you can be up close and personal, showing every solitary tear sliding down the cheeks of celebrities.

I've been comparing the differences in the way broadway interprets a song in comparison to its movie counterpart, and I must say, it's very interesting to me. Oftentimes I'll like the instrumentation better in the movie version, but I'll like the vocals better in the broadway. I realize it's a rather sweeping statement, but things just seem to be put in much more expressive ways in theatre, because if you aren't over the top, then no one will catch what you're doing. A friend of mine said it this way, you basically have to pretend you're manic-depressive, either at the height of happiness, or in the depths of despair, and be able to switch from one to the other at the drop of a hat (not her exact words, but still).

How might this apply to the medium of books? When I think of theatre, movies, and books, I see them on a scale of intimacy. I see theatre as being the farthest away, movies the next closest, and books as being the most intimate.

Theatre

First off, in theatre you're distanced literally from the audience. Especially if you're in the cheap seats, you're not going to have an easy time catching all the little nuances and exchanges happening on-stage. There's no camera to show you what to look at specifically, and unless they use monologues and/or soliloquies, you don't get any inside glimpses into any one character's head.

Movies

In movies, you're one step closer, because you can see up close and personal how characters react to certain things and the feelings are more easily conveyed. Having said that, actors are put under even more scrutiny when the audience can see everything. In this medium though, it's still hard to get into a character's head without distracting the audience from the story.

Books

In books, you can get right inside the character's head, and indeed, in many cases you never leave. The whole story-world is rooted in one or a few character's perspectives. Rarely do you see objective, unlimited third person POV's anymore (I certainly don't see them). Readers don't really notice when you use interior monologue. It's not distracting at all to hear a character's thoughts on what's going on, and in fact, sometimes it's awkward if we don't get that. What's cool is that in books, authors get to play with so much more than just simply what they thought.


In books, you can write about the feelings of dread welling up like an acid being pumped into someone's stomach. You can talk about a character's whole being going limp as he watches the love of his life walk out on him. Things movies and theatre can't touch. But what does that say about audience expectations?

If in theatre you expect people to go over the top, and for movies to be a bit more down to earth in terms of performance techniques, what does that say about authors? For me, it means that my descriptions have to be bang on. It means that there is very little room for exaggeration and hyperbole when it comes to a character's thoughts and personality. If I'm going for a realistic portrayal of life. I need to know what I'm talking about, and I have to be believable.

When other styles of storytelling go about portraying 'real life' they have a significant advantage in that they can show real life almost instantaneously, and there's often room for exaggeration. They also have visual cues that give the audience instant setting and information on character. Books can do a lot more, for sure, but the question is, are you willing to wait for it? There's such a fine balance between telling what your reader needs to know and telling them what you want to show. The nice thing about novels though, is that you can do it. You can go deep with your protagonist, you can really delve into their psyches, but it takes effort, and it take skill. Something that you have to keep working at all the time.

What style do you prefer? Up close and personal? Or a bit more distant and dramatic? Does it depend on the genre? Share your thoughts!

Raring to go? Or Reluctant to Show?

Some things you need to know how to do before you do it. Like, skydiving. You need to know a little bit about skydiving before you jump out of a plane. 'Figuring it out' probably isn't the greatest idea.

This principle also applies to juggling chainsaws, heart surgery, and wiring a house's electrical system. These things require research, foreknowledge, and practice without having to do the real thing.

Having said that, if all you ever did was research how to skydive, you'd miss out on the whole point of researching... the dive itself!

I think this can also apply to writing. When you write a book, you don't send your first draft of the first seriously written piece of work you ever write. That thing is going to be full of junk 99% of the time. If you don't invest some real time into it, it just isn't going to work.

Getting a book published isn't just something you add to your list of things to do today. It's not for the faint of heart, and it's not for impatient people. I've been noticing this a lot lately.

There's so much practice that goes into this before you do the 'real thing' and go for an agent. I've personally been working seriously on the craft of writing for years. There are thousands of people who have worked much harder and longer than I have who are still unpublished.

I feel like most writers fall into one of two categories. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me like either we are:

A: Raring to go.

or

B: Reluctant to show.

Raring to Go

These are the people who can't wait to get their novel published. They whip out their pens/laptops and write furiously until their nobel prize worthy masterpiece is born. This child, like an infant in a doctor's hands, is handed over to agent after agent in search of someone willing to bring him to adulthood. But no one is willing, 'cause this is one messed up kid.

Often when we're so eager to get something out, we overlook little errors, inconsistencies, or big picture issues. It's our baby after all. Of course it's perfect! What we don't realize is that not everyone sees this child through rose-coloured glasses. We need a healthy dose of reality. We need to wake up and realize that our work may just not be perfect after one draft.

Reluctant to Show

These people have the opposite problem of never taking their writing anywhere but the drawing board. They're convinced it will never be good enough, and that they must do continual edits on it. Before anyone can ever see it, it needs to be perfect. So it stays tucked in a desk drawer, never to be brought out, or sitting in an unmarked folder in the corner of the screen.

We're so afraid of rejection that we'll do anything to put off hearing the truth about our skill level. Yes. You may be average. No, you're probably not the next Tolkein. But you know what? THAT'S OK. No one really wants another author who wrote just like Tolkein. It would get old to have little identical copy cats of famous authors running around. Who would be left to reinvent a genre? Who would be there to make that next B-Level novel to satiate the masses of consumers of normal, run-of-the-mill books?

You may not be as great as you hoped. Oh no. But wouldn't you rather at least know than spend your whole life wondering? Wouldn't that be better?


What we writers need to do is find a happy medium. Somewhere between practicing forever, and never practicing at all. Somewhere between total confidence, and no confidence whatsoever. A place where we are free to make mistakes, but wisely choose to make as few as possible. A place where it's actually possible to get published.

All in all, a place of relative normalcy... whatever that is.


So what are you? Raring to Go? Or Reluctant to Show?

Can you put a price-tag on truth?

How much is the truth worth? What would you sacrifice to have it? What would you give up to share that truth? Would you give up your time? Money? Energy?

What about your job? What about your peace of mind? Would you give up your safety? Or someone else's safety?

How important is it to know the truth?

I guess that really depends on what truth we're talking about doesn't it?

If we're talking about the truth that I currently have ten plane tickets from various flights tacked to my wall, or the truth that as yet unpublished my novel Clone is a little over 75,000 words, you probably don't care too much.

If we're talking about a government conspiracy that's deliberately sabotaging every blonde's education so that they're barred from going to university, you'd probably care quite a bit more. So I suppose these questions are all going to end up being quite relative to each person depending on what truth they have in mind.

But what about just the concept of truth? Not one specific truth, but the idea of it. There are lots of people today who would argue the fact that truth can even exist, they may be reading this post right now. How do you feel about that? Do you want to fight for it? Do you care?

I know I do. It's actually one of the issues I explore in the book I'm seeking to get published. The desire to know the truth, and the desire to share that truth with others for no other reason than to have the truth out there. Simply because it should be. Is that a bad thing? Lots of people in the book think so.

We live in a society where secrets are some of the most valuable things we possess. We guard them with our lives. Hoard them like gems. Our privacy is something so precious to us that we will fight tooth and nail to keep it. I think a lot more people are concerning themselves with making sure the truth will never surface than to see the truth come out. And what has that done for us? Not a whole heck of a lot. It's created an untrusting, closed, distant society where no one really knows anyone else.

In some genres - like mystery - deceit, and veiled truth are the most valuable things of all. The whole point of the book is that you don't know the whole truth. So I guess in some situations we actually take pleasure out of not knowing the truth. After all, who doesn't enjoy a surprise birthday party every once in a while?

Even still, sometimes I really wish that there could be no more secrets. I just wish that the whole truth were always out there 24/7. Things would be a lot simpler. Sincerity would be a real thing again. Survivor would never work.

"Are you in an alliance with Jen?"
"Yep."
"And are you going to vote me out tonight?"
"Yep."
"Well, I'm thoroughly disappointed but not surprised. I'll go pack my stuff."

Oh ya, great suspense. But I digress.

I guess what I'm saying is, I would love for the truth to not just be a moment, or a particular phrase, but a state of being. I think that's what God's will would be for us. to live in complete truth with one another, and in so doing, draw nearer to him. To never keep any hidden sin in our lives, and always confess it openly.

But for so many people that will never happen, because we're fearful. We're scared of what might happen. We like our secrets. We like that no one really knows us because if they did they'd know just how messed up we all are. Does that mean I never have secrets? No. Because I'm not perfect either. I'm just saying it would be a lot easier to be truthful if that was just the norm.

I can only speak for myself, but I know I'd give almost anything to have the truth. The real cold hard truth all the time. Our world would be a much better place if we could just be honest with each other.

I guess the real question is, could we handle the truth all the time?


So what do you think? Truly? How valuable is the truth?

Characters don’t run your story

SO, I realize it’s been forever since I last posted.  Mostly I’d like to say that’s because I’ve been super busy.

Mostly it’s because I’ve been super lazy.

It’s one of the strangest feelings when you say you’ll get back to something once things are normal again, and then you realize your normal is gone. I kept saying once I was back into the swing of things I’d be back into writing, but not going back to school for the first time in my life meant things would not go back to the way they were. That took some getting used to.

ANYWAY.

So over the summer, as those of you who know me will know, (and of course I have a HUGE following of people who don’t know me, so don’t feel left out if you’re part of that group that numbers in the millions, if not dozens of people) I was teaching English at a Quebec summer camp. (I should write another post about how annoying lots of random notes in parentheses can be). I enjoy talking about this camp for a number of reasons. It was a big part of my life for a few months, and I find it easy to pull analogies out of.

This particular analogy is about characters telling the author what to do. Some writers claim that at a certain point, their creations just run amuck, and do whatever they want, and that the author has no control. I will admit that there was a time when I indulged this kind of thinking, but NO MORE. This is really a very nonsensical thought. (And not for the reason all you non-writers out there are thinking). It’s not because your works can’t develop a life of their own, it’s because you as the author should know much better than your creation what’s good for them.

When I was teaching English, there were some things my kids liked to argue about that were just plain wrong.

“BUT SEVEEEEEEEEEN!!! They would wail. “You don’t say ‘I am 12 years old’, it’s ‘I have 12 years old’!!! Everyone knows that!!!” Now, in French, if you were to literally translate what they were saying, they’d be right, because that’s how it’s said in French, but they didn’t fully understand the English version, and so we argued about it. Many of them still don’t believe me. Another day, I was discussing contractions, and when presented with the two options “You’d not”, and “You wouldn’t” 100% of the class voted for the former as the more proper version. Clearly, you don’t let students run the class, and in the same way, you clearly don’t let characters run your story.

So what if Sally wants to jump off the bridge because her stupid werewolf boyfriend dumped her for an X-Men? She’s not gonna kill herself two chapters in! She’s your protagonist! And you know better than she does! You know that in the end she gets to take that werewolf down with a silver bullet to the chest in that awesome Western Showdown you’ve got going on in Chapter 73!

“BUT HER EMOTIONS!!!” You whine.

“SO WHAT?!” I calmly reply. You need to learn to work around her emotions to get her through, otherwise you’ll just end up with garbage in the end. Letting your characters be real is one thing, letting them take over is another thing entirely. Don’t give in to imaginary-peer pressure.

Say ‘No’, to character enabling.

Have you ever heard of authors claiming their characters are running the show? What are your thoughts on this? Is it crazy? Genius? Pitifully psychotic? Let your voice be heard!


*SIDENOTE* - To all my awesome Quebec friends, just so you know, anytime I mention my crazy times with my francophone students I am in no way trying to offend any of you. Just wanna put that out there. I LOVE YOU GUYS!! :P

An update from Quebec

Sorry I didn't post anything last week, I really was going to, but then I was kinda busy with ACTUALLY WRITING MY QUERY LETTERS!! *ahem*. I need to control myself. But seriously! I finally stopped putting it off and just did it which was awesome. I'm waiting for a reply from the agents I sent it to, and am trying to find new ones all the time. Part of me says I should wait and see if any of these agents tell me how I can improve my letter so that I can send a better one to my next batch of agents, and another part of me says the odds of that happening are quite slim so I should just send out what I've got and hope for the best.

While I'm figuring all that out, I thought it might be fun to do a little list of things I like, and things I don't like here in Quebec.


Things I don't like:

1. Being introduced as English (See last post)

2. Humidity. I'm pretty sure this speaks for itself. It's funny how since I got back from Mexico nothing's really seemed hot or humid like it did before, but humidity still sucks. Especially when you're trying to sleep.

3. The fact that I can't stay here for long. This essentially means that as much as I want to make deep connections with friends here, and I want to love all the kids that come to camp, I know that it's going to end all too soon. I've already gone through this a few times, and it's not fun. Have you ever tried explaining to a four-year-old that "No, I probably won't be back next year" and "Well... maybe I'll see you again soon...." It makes you feel awful. I hate doing it. Friends are a little better, but it still sucks to know that the likelihood of seeing them again soon is slim.

4. No piano. No flute. No bassoon. I'm not really sure what I was thinking when I decided "Ummm... the bassoon really is kinda big, and I'd have to pay for extra baggage with it. I'll just leave it in Calgary!" Idiot. I miss playing the piano so much. I don't have any instruments here except my laptop, but c'mon, that's not an instrument that's just a piece of technology that can mimic what an instrument can do. It's just not the same.

5. No public transit. I didn't expect this to be on the list of things I'd miss before leaving Calgary, but I really do miss my alone time. It's not like I don't have any alone time any more, I just have to get it when I can. In Calgary my life was very pleasantly predictable and scheduled. I knew when I'd be alone, when I'd be with friends, when my work was (always the same time), and even where I had my 'wiggle room' spaces. That basically means I had a spot in the schedule for unexpected, or pre-planned unique events that would change from week to week. Here, I kinda just do spur of the moment stuff. "Well, I could  go do that, or maybe I could do that, or..." But this kind of freedom isn't liberating for me. It's immobilizing. Being able to do anything means I do nothing. Weird, I know, but that's kinda just how I work.


Five things I love about being in Quebec

1. I'm finally able to practice my French again. I really do love French as a language, and I love speaking it. It'd be great to be bilingual one day, but I don't imagine that'll happen anytime soon. It's kinda hard to be immersed in a language when you're working at a camp teaching English five days a week.

2. Getting Francophone children to say my name.
"Hi, what's you're name!?"
(child giggles) "insert child name here."
"Oh! Cool, my name's Seth!"
"Set?"

If I'm being nice, I'll say "Yeah, that's good!"
But some days I really just want a good laugh.

"No no, it's SeTH."
"Ooohh. SeTSH." (spit flying everywhere)
"Okay, put your tongue here" (I demonstrate)
(child giggles, then puts tongue where instructed)
"TTTHHH"
"PBTHSHTHPBT" (spit flying again)
"Good! Okay, now SeTTTHHH"
"Se- (a sound that is like a cross between sneezing and drowning... not sure how to represent that with letters.)"
"Perfect!"

Need I say more? This is basically one of the best ways to spend time talking to children I've found. Adults usually just laugh awkwardly and don't try to say it, or say it once, laugh, and then never say it again or stick to Set. They're no fun. :P

3. POUTINE. 'nuff said.

4. The kidlets. I've always loved working with kids, it's really fun, and sometimes rewarding. There have of course been a few kids I would have rather not had to deal with, but there are others who honestly just made me say "Can I adopt you, please? Like, right now?" And then they'd look at me, and say "QUOI??" (What) and then I pick them up and run around with them. It's kinda tiresome to be doing it so week after week, but it's still good. I'd much rather be doing this than mowing lawns or roofing.

5. Chillin' with my sister. I haven't been able to do anything with my older sister for a really long time, so having the summer to just do all kinds of stuff together (mostly watching Heroes and sitting around) is really great.


 So that's my life in Quebec! I hope all my friends and family across the country are doing well. Can't wait to get back to Calgary, but in the meantime, I'll enjoy my time here. It's hard work juggling camp, writing, and down time, but I'll manage. For now, I'll hopefully post again soon, but if I'm not posting, you can basically assume I'm busy doing some other writing duty. Maybe my next entry will be less about my experiences in Quebec and more about writing.... ya, that might be a good idea. :P

This is Seth, he's English!

Hello all! It's another wonderful day in Quebec. Day camp is going well, and I feel like me and my sister are starting to get in the groove of things. We know our rhythm, and it's working for us. Now it's just a matter of choosing what stuff we're going to teach and what activities to do with the kids each week! This post is part "here's how it's going here in Quebec" part "here's how it made me think about writing and stuff."

So here goes. Being relatively new to the area, I meet new people all the time. This doesn't bother me as a general rule, what bothers me is how it comes out most of the time. Usually when I'm introduced to new people here, it goes something like this.

"This is Seth, he's English!"

When this is translated into French, and then back to English, it comes out as

"This is Seth, he's mentally handicapped! So make sure to speak nice and loud, use small words, or refrain from conversing with him at all!"

I know it's not that bad, but it always bugs me when I'm introduced like that. People automatically assume that I can't carry a conversation or something because French isn't my first language. Granted, I'm not fantastic, but if given the chance I can usually hold my own. I know it's probably really obvious based on my accent alone, but saying it as a way of introducing me feels awkward.


Thinking about this lately made me think about how characters are introduced in novels. Usually you want to introduce a character doing something normal. Waking up, going through their work day, starting school, doing something that most people can relate to. Even if it's a book where the character is going to be doing a ton of stuff that you can't relate to (blowing up cars, flying spaceships etc.), it's important to establish a baseline where the reader can feel connected to the character.

In the series that I'm planning, one of the characters that plays a major role in a later book has a fairly significant handicap, and I try to keep it hidden for as long as possible, because in my thinking, the moment you slap a handicap on someone, you distance your reader from them. That guy's in a wheelchair? Oh, he's not like me. He's blind? Well, I don't have a clue what her life must be like.

He's English? Well, I guess he's not really just like any one of us.

Now, understand this. I'm not saying that anyone here has snubbed me, or made fun of me intentionally just because I'm not French. After people have been given some time to get to know me I'm usually fine except for a bit of a language barrier. The problem I run into is instead of the usual distance of "They're new, I don't know them." There's the additional hurdle of "They aren't like me, we can't understand each other." This makes it a lot harder to close the gap and go from acquaintance to friend. It takes that much effort on both ends to really form a connection.

I think the same can be said about characters in a novel. First impressions are super important. If you put up barriers between yourself and the protagonist right at the start saying "I'd never do that. What kind of person is this? I don't understand them!" It'll be a lot harder to care about them later.

Now, I could probably go on, but I'm beat from a long week, and even longer weekend (somehow), so I need SLEEP. Which unfortunately and inexplicably escaped me this afternoon when I tried to nap. Therefore, goodnight all, and have a great week!

Right now, I want to know, what do you think of first impressions? Have you ever had a first impression that turned out to be the exact opposite of what you thought? Post a comment about it!

But that's not really where the story starts...

So, I recently watched a movie that finally illustrated to me why piling on the back story is a bad idea. Now, I'm not naming any names, but this John Carter guy has a lot to learn when it comes to opening sequences.

So it all began with - but wait, first you have to know about this other thing where I did this... no, it's still not back far enough. Where it REALLY starts is -

And so on.

Eventually, I'm pretty sure it got to backstory within backstory within backstory within backstory. This guy's on mars, and then you go back to 18th century New York (Don't quote me on the date), which goes back to The wild west somewhere, which goes back to mars at an earlier time, which goes back to his old life with his wife.

I was starting to wonder if the story would ever start! Thankfully, it did get better, and the end result was a movie that I more or less enjoyed. Having said that, I personally think it could have done with a bit less backtracking.

When you get into writing in a serious way, and actually start doing real research in it all, one of the things any experienced writer or agent will say is don't use a lot of backstory at the beginning of your novel. Give your readers a chance to actually care about your characters before you tell us all about what happened before the story started. Because at the end of the day, backstory stops your story. Dead in its tracks. When used properly, it can be really effective in giving the reader a better understanding of your characters, and can even help clarify the plot, or motivations.

The problem I had with the first half-hour or so of this movie was that it didn't really start for me until they finally decided to stop jumping back in time. Once they did that, they kept moving forward at a proper pace, but before that happened I was just left continually wondering when it would go back to the start. This kept me from actually engaging in the movie. Once the narrative found a consistent pace, it was fine.

This has just solidified in my mind the importance of starting at the right place when telling a story. You need a place that catches your attention, and makes you want to read more. You need a place that you could call to some extent the beginning. I've heard it said like this. Your first chapter is a contract with the reader. The rest of the book is going to be like this. If you stuff that chapter with backstory, you're just misleading your reader into thinking that it's something it's not. You can't make the first three chapters of your book filled with car chases, beautiful women and war and then reveal that actually this is a story about what this guy's life is like in his retirement home he went to 50 years after all of that. I didn't buy this book to hear about Bingo and Pea Soup.

I guess what I'm saying with all of this is that like I've said before, consistency is key. You need consistency in tone, and pace. Backstory completely throws off the pace of the book/story, and if you start out with a lot of it, you run the risk of throwing off your readers and making them feel duped. Or worse, just plain bored.

Now I know what you want to ask me. Do I use backstory in my book? Yes. But, I don't use it often, and I definitely don't use it right away. That's one thing I've tried to implement from what I've read from the 'experts'. I think it can be great when used sparingly. Like cinnamon. Too much, and it just leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

When, if ever, has backstory put you off a book or movie?

PS. HAPPY CANADA DAY!!!!!

I'm Back! ...Kind of.

I mean, I'm in Canada now, just not Calgary. :P

Greetings my illustrious, loyal, numerous blog followers! Where has the time gone? It seems like forever ago that I last posted.

First off, let me say that Mexico was nice, but as far as I'm concerned, Canada is WAY better. I'm currently reading The Wizard of Oz for the first time, and I thought what it said was actually very fitting. Yes, I know what you're thinking "There's no place like home.", and that IS what I was going to say, but there's more to it than that.

In the book, there's a conversation that Dorothy and the Scarecrow have that doesn't appear in the movie. Dorothy is walking through Oz with the Scarecrow, and she sees the amazing flowers and trees and everything is really colourful. Dorothy explains how everything in Kansas is gray, and the only people around are her aunt and uncle. The first chapter explains that the only thing that brings Dorothy joy is her dog Toto... and Toto is IN Oz with her!

When Dorothy is asked why she is so eager to get back to Kansas, she says simply that "There's no place like home." I don't know why, but after that context was given, the statement held a lot more weight for me.

In Mexico I saw palm trees, beautiful beaches, and had tons of amazing food. But none of that matters to me, because at the end of the day it's not my home, and there really is no place like home. There's some kind of intrinsic value to it that pure setting can't beat. When you have a place where you feel you can truly belong, where you have friends, and a life ahead of you, no beach in the world could possibly be worth more.

*sniff* *sniff* I'm getting all emotional now!

But seriously, I really like Canada. Like, A LOT. So I think that I'm gonna stay a while.

As for blogging, that may not be quite as consistent as I'd hoped it could be. As my internet connection here is VERY touchy. There may be some days when I won't be able to post on the right day, but just know that I'm still here, and I'm still doing... writer stuff. As well as leading an english camp. So that'll be fun! Tomorrow's my first day. Wish me luck!

Photoshoots, Planes and Good-Byes Oh My!

So this could have easily been two posts, but I figured I'd stick to my two posts a week thing and combine the two. So here goes. Light stuff first.

Last Saturday I went out with a great friend of mine, Hannah, and did a bit of a photoshoot in downtown Calgary! It was so that I could have some more professional-looking images of myself to put on things like MY BLOG, the back cover of my future book, book proposals, etc...

What I didn't expect was for it to be such a fun and hilarious time of just goofing around and taking pictures in random areas that you'd never expect would turn out.

So here's a few of my favourites from that day. Calgarians, can you spot where they were taken? :P

One thing I loved about the whole thing was that there were some places that I really honestly did not think were going to be good settings for photos. But they turned out really great! They were some of the most obscure spots ever, but they were awesome, and I'm so glad we did them.

It's funny how often we skip over random places in our everyday life never stopping to see the beauty of it all. We never bother to look beyond the mundane to see the extraordinary because we've convinced ourselves already that it's not there. We subconsciously "know" that something as normal as a mirrored wall isn't worth our time.

This trip has definitely made me more aware of my surroundings, and I actually find myself thinking about other possible venues for photoshoots. I think more than half the fun was just doing wacky shots and running all over the place together. Thanks Hannah for an awesome time! It wasn't even close to being as awkward as I'd feared it might be! (People only stared at us a couple times. I almost felt like an actual celebrity! :P)





Now to Planes and Good-byes.

*Sigh*

This is honestly so sad for me to say, but this is my last blog post from Calgary for quite some time. I won't be back here till September.

I KNOW. September.

I'll try to keep posting lots, but I can't make any guarantees at this point. I'll definitely be taking at least a week hiatus while in Mexico, but after that who knows. Hopefully by the time I'm settled in Quebec I'll be able to get re-established into my routine of blogging.

I'm really not looking forward to being gone for so long though. It feels like I'm some kind of toffee being stretched between hungry children. I have people I want to be with on both sides of the country and in the middle, but never before has the division between them seemed so significant.

I really think what a friend of mine told me tonight is true. When you go into a new situation where you don't know anyone, you become super attached to the people you do latch on to. You feel so lonely at first that anyone you can get along with you stick to like glue and hold on for dear life. It's as if you don't have any life-lines, so you anchor down as soon as you can, and the friends that you make are all really important to you really quickly.

Having said that, I grew up in Nova Scotia, I love the place, and I love the people too. The simple fact of the matter is I don't live there anymore, I live in Calgary. That's really hard for some people to hear, but you have to understand that this is not some kind of 'us vs. them' thing of who can get Seth to themselves, it's just about where God's putting me right now. I feel like I'm meant to be in Calgary, so that's where I'm gonna be. This summer I'm gonna be in Quebec working with my sister whom I love dearly and want to hang out with lots before she goes and gets married.

I'm trying to think of ways to relate all of this back to writing, but to be perfectly honest I just don't feel like I want to right now. It's all so close to home, and all so real that it's hard for me to step back and just say "That makes me consider how this relates to my dreams of getting published..."

 Saying good-bye has never been easy for me. Villa du Carmel, Encounters with Canada, Park View Education Centre, Saint-Prosper, Bridgewater, and now Calgary. The one huge thing that's been super helpful in learning to cope this time 'round is the fact that I'll be coming back for sure. So many times I've had to explain to little kids that I wouldn't be there for them next time. It killed me to say good-bye to my Terrain du Jeux in Saint-Prosper. It killed me to say good-bye to all my Encounters buddies. (I still stay in touch with a few, here's to Sue and Jess! :D)

All that to say, I'm gonna miss all of you guys, and I wish there could be some way for everyone I know to just all live in the same place so that I could be with everyone. It's not fair that cloning hasn't been approved for use by the general public. One of these days...


Feel free to comment on any photos you like, and if you want to see more I'll see if I can make a page on here with a wider selection of the good ones I got. Do you have anything to add on the subject of goodbyes? Leave a comment below. See ya in September Calgary! It's been a blast!

Good Afternoon Good Evening and Good Night!

One of my all-time favourite movies (as in, in my top ten) is The Truman Show. If you haven't seen it, you really should. It's one of those movies that just blows your mind. For me, it was like the Matrix, or Inception... for others, not so much. What can I say? One man's junk is another man's treasure.

Those of you who haven't seen this movie, I will briefly describe what it was about. Basically, this guy Truman was adopted as an infant by a corporation to be the star of a reality TV show in which he would star. But he has absolutely no idea this is happening. He seemingly goes through life normally, unaware that every person he's ever met is an actor, and everything he's ever done has been seen by millions. The story follows his journey to discovering the truth, all the while questioning what 'real' really means.

I love this movie for so many reasons. One of the things I like is how it jabs at the way our culture is so transfixed with reality TV, and what that's doing to our outlook on life. The audience seems completely unconcerned with the fact that this man is being manipulated and controlled for his entire life without consent for their entertainment. Sure they might be distressed when Truman is being battered near death in his sailboat in the storm the producers made for him, but they show only as much concern as they would any other character from a movie or TV show. They don't stand up demanding the producers to put a stop to it, they don't cry out in outrage. They just watch. Glued to their screen, wondering "Is he gonna make it?"

Another reason I like it, is because the idea that everyone you've ever met is an actor is a profound idea. What if your entire life was a lie? How would you possibly know? I think the producer put it best when he said (forgive me if it's not exact) "We accept the world with which we've been presented." So what kind of world have you been presented with? Is there a possibility that it's all been a lie?!?

Like I said. Mind blowing.

One other interesting tidbit, is that this movie doesn't really fit snugly into a genre. At least not to me. It's kind of a love story, kind of a drama, kind of a comedy, but not a rom-com, and not a fluff piece...

It's just a story. And a darn good one at that.

Through the majority of the film, Truman is driven only by his own determination that something is not right with his world. Everyone is against him, and yet he cannot discern a single antagonist to act against. He's not really working to overcome some great evil, or right some terrible wrong, he's just searching for the truth. With everything he has in him. To me, that's really inspiring.

One could also argue that he's driven by his desire to see Sylvia again, and I would be okay with that interpretation. However, personally I think the search for truth is just as important to him as his potential relationship with the woman he loves.

So what am I trying to say with all this? That sometimes, a book is just a book. I think we do a disservice to many books when we slap a label on them. Now, I understand that we can't just not label books, because then, where would we put them in the bookstore? General? That would get crowded pretty fast. No. What I'm saying is, I don't think we should get so hung up on genre when it comes to what books we'll read.

I'll be the first to say that I write sci-fi, but I'm really not a hard-core sci-fi fan. Before you crucify me, let me say one thing in my defense. I have read many sci-fi books, and what I've found, is that the ones I like,  I really like. And it's because they have really cool ideas, or great characters, or plots that drive you to read on forever. What I don't like, is when either A. The book is so focused on the setting that it neglects to develop anything else, or B. When a book gets boring, or complicating beyond belief. What is my point in saying all that? Simply this.

I like good books.

I will not say I like sci-fi but not romance, or I like thrillers but not spy books. I'm just a fan of well written books. It really doesn't matter to me what kind of book it is. I just want a good story. So, bringing it full circle, I like the Truman Show because it's a great story. And on top of that, it proves that you don't have to be a stereotypical genre piece to be good at what you do. If you just tell your story the way it's supposed to be told without giving in to the gimmicks of the genre, you'll do far better in the long run in making a great piece of art.

Having said that, not many people know what The Truman Show is. Is that because I'm alone in saying it's great, or because it didn't fit into a nice little box that people could understand and gravitate towards? But I digress.

I'm gonna leave you with that. What do you think of genre? Do you think it's a necessity to fit a label, if only for convenience's sake? Should we embrace a new way in which we don't have to label everything? Or is this topic only relevant to the few books that actually have trouble fitting into specific categories?


PS. I didn't get to say goodbye to everyone here in Calgary yet, and I know my time is short. So in case I don't see you, good afternoon good evening and good night! :D

Internal Conflict

Inside my body a war rages on.


Between good and evil
Between darkness and light
Between antibodies and the flu


It's a bloody mess inside my arteries, hemoglobin scattered everywhere, poor little parentless platelets running scared. It's chaos. But let's get straight to the heart of the matter with one question. Is this struggle against a foreign body all in vein?


I'm sorry. I should be locked up in a cell for my careless use of puns.


Anyway, I'm planning on keeping this short so I can get lots of rest tonight. I just wanted to say how this cold reminded me of what a realistic character always needs. External, and Internal conflict.


External


My external conflict in this case is my battle against a cold. I know, that sounds like it's going on inside my body, but it's something that manifests itself in a physical, visible way, so I count it as external. If others can see it, then I think it's external. Also, external means it's against something other than yourself.


Characters that are never conflicting with anything around them are boring, uninteresting, and very unrealistic. Most people don't have too much difficulty with this one. You need to have something opposing your hero, or else nothing will happen. There won't be any action.


Internal

This is the one that gets people sometimes. For example, you probably didn't guess just by what I said here that I had some internal conflict going on where part of me actually wanted to be sick did you?

It's true! Part of me was saying last night "I actually kinda hope I am really sick tomorrow. Because then I'd take the day off work." Now, don't get me wrong, I love my job, it's a great place to work. However, I'm leaving in a little over a week, and with all the stuff that I have on my plate right now, a day off right now would be really nice.

Having said that, I probably would have just slept the whole day if I had been really sick. That's fine for the most part, except for the whole being sick part.

The reason why I had this conflict, was because of my opposing values.

1. I love being healthy.
2. I love having days of rest.

Last night, these two values were at odds with each other, because I knew that I could only really have one thing. Either I'll be healthy(ish) tomorrow, and work and get really tired, or I'll be sick enough to take the day off to rest. In this particular case, I didn't actually have a choice in the matter, but that's really moot at this point.

What's important is that this conflict changed everything. This conflict was what made my thoughts even slightly interesting to listen to. If you're inside a character's head for any length of time, it better have some wicked stuff going on in there, or else you're gonna put me to sleep. If all he's thinking is Oh no, I better beat this cold! Then woop-dee-do, wow, he doesn't want to get sick.

If the princess is in a tower, and Prince Charming wants to kill the dragon to rescue her, then that's great. But if he's only rescuing her to appease his controlling mother who wants him to marry the enchanted princess instead of his little village sweetheart, it's suddenly more interesting. Why is he doing it? Does he actually care about this princess' fate? What is it about the village girl that's so appealing? And why is he so concerned about what his mother thinks?


Clearly Mr. Charming has a lot to think about besides fighting dragons. And that makes you want to read about him. At least that's the kind of thing I'm looking for.


There it is! Short and sweet. Now I'm going to fight this monster for all I'm worth, because as much as I hate working while under the weather, I hate letting people (including co-workers) down more.