Gettin’ Your Hard Game On

IFI’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but even I know that putting sex and violence into your content is the sure way to become popular. But because I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer I don’t do that. Not usually. Sometimes people think I do, but I don’t. That doesn’t even make sense, does it? Either it’s there or it’s not there. Either there’s liftoff or Houston we got a problem. It’s been scientifically proven: you cannot be just a little bit pregnant. But I beg to differ.

I’ll show you what I mean. This past weekend I hosted a playwrighting workshop in my hometown. I write fiction, my fourth novel is coming out in August, blah, blah. You’ve heard all that before. But I’m taking a break to write strictly dialogue—my favorite part of any story. Let’s not go into the arrogance of thinking I can simply dash off a few he saids/she saids and call it a play. The point is, I had one of my first attempts at this artform critiqued this past weekend.

The result? I was duly  reminded of the arrogance of passing off a few pages of conversation as a play. I was rebuffed, rebuked, chided, scoffed at, humiliated, crucified, immolated, flayed alive, and drawn and quartered. Finally I was requested to leave the theater. Fortunately I’m a masochist and enjoy that sort of thing. There’s nothing quite like having your intestines boiled before your own eyes first thing in the morning.

I limped home, enjoying my pain. Then the night closed in. The curtains on the outside world were drawn, leaving me to my own sordid thoughts. Before I knew it, it was two a.m., the thinking hour. I tossed and turned, haunted by one particularly acidic comment. It kept replaying in my head, even as I couldn’t get my head around it: it did not compute.

The comment came from an angry man who stood up and stated, “there’s one thing in your play that had no business being there. This thing did not further the action. It did not contribute a thing. I’m talking about the hard-on. It had no business being there.”

I nodded my head and muttered something about it probably had been put there by somebody to say something about the character’s character. Or maybe the dynamics of the marriage. In my own head I was writing off the old sourpuss as a prude, a Podunk morality pusher that didn’t like anything racier than Disney.

But that didn’t make sense and that’s why I couldn’t get to sleep. There was a cognitive dissonance rolling around in my brain. See, the play opens with the married couple completely in the nude, and that hadn’t bothered the guy. It wasn’t the sex at all. He just felt the hard-on was misplaced.  He felt it didn’t need to be in a play about environmental disasters. In his mind, I was just trying to shove in a little sex or violence to get the numbers up.

As if!

Continue reading

Advertisements

Mind Meld at sfsignal.com: Point of View in Genre fiction

I’m opinioning today at sfsignal on the subject of point of view in genre fiction. It’s a very serious topic and not to be taken lightly. You can imagine the results:
http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/2012/08/mind-meld-point-of-view-in-genre-fiction-part-i-of-ii/

Here’s the question:

Q: As you see it. What are the strengths and weaknesses, for character, worldbuilding and setting in using 1st or 3rd person (or even 2nd?) Omniscient or limited? And how about the time frame of the tense, past or present or even future?

What kinds of Point of view do you prefer to write in? What types of POV do you like to read?

Here’s my answer: Incredible stories, (i.e. those not easily believed, (i.e. most of speculative fiction)) should always be told in the first person. Always.

It goes downhill from there. Check it out.