Back of the Envelope

There's a post by Chad at Eternal Revolution discussing the idea that fairy tales have more truth in them than non-fiction:

If asked condescendingly whether I believe in fairy tales, I would answer with a resounding and unequivocating “YES”.

Actually, I believe there is a whole lot of truth in fairy tales. Oftentimes fairy tales are much more truthful and meaningful to me than the ‘real world’. I am convinced of the existence of abundantly more insight into the true innerworkings of our humanity in Lord of the Rings or Chronicles of Narnia than in Reality TV or 24 Hour Cable News...

Have you ever found yourself reading a fairy tale or some other mythology and have come across a thought that strikes a chord with your soul? I’m talking about a deep, emotional impact that’s triggered. The most eloquent non-fiction prose in the world cannot quite produce those moments of revelation. I think a large part of it is due to the fact that fairy tales (as well as other more creative outlets such as music and poetry) can transcend the limitations of language to communicate core truths at a gut level.

I write fantasy, and as such, I don't think of it in these terms. I think it's unwise of authors to think of their works as archetypal, or communicating something powerful to the very soul. That sort of hubris makes an author so absorbed in writing something meaningful that it's no longer any fun. The best writers communicate to the soul not by attempting to do so, but by writing their own souls.

As I've said before, I myself approach writing as a way to pit my hopes and fears against each other in a concrete way. Concrete doesn't necessarily mean hyperrealistic, so much as taking abstract ideas and philosophical arguments and connecting them with people and situations, giving them flesh and blood and seeing what happens. I often write fantasy and horror, first because I enjoy those genres, but secondly because I like having a broader stage. Writing "realistic" fiction means that I can pit a character against his inner demons, but not against real demons. That I can struggle with the idea of any human being superior to others, but not with the moral obligations of an objectively superior being. That I can bring defined cultures into conflict, but I can't define those conflicting cultures. To do what I need to do, to examine the hopes and fears that I need to work out in my writing, I need the freedom I don't find in realistic fiction. That, to me, is the purpose of speculative fiction, and that is why I write it.

Last night, the Park Street Writers' Group tackled the first four chapters of Eyes in the Shadow. This being my work, for the most part I kept silent and let them discuss it. They seemed to like it, but that doesn't mean that there wasn't a lot of criticism. Which is good, as the story won't get any better without it. They made some very good points, and came up with suggestions for two additional scenes which I think would greatly add to the story as a whole. They also made some suggestions which I don't agree with, which doesn't mean I get to ignore them. There are ways to address the difficulties they had with it other than how they suggested doing so, and I think that's what I'll try to do. As I think I've mentioned before, I do intend to do the second revision of this story, and when I do so, I'll be taking the advice from my group into account.

In the end, the question is when and how I want to publish this work. Unfortunately for my ambitions, Eyes is too short for a novel. If, in the course of the second revision, it grows from 50,000 to 80,000 words or more, then maybe it will be long enough. I don't want the story to be 37.5% fluff, however. We'll see what happens.

Update (10/11/2005): Corrected poor math. 80,000 is 60% bigger than 50,000, but if the additional material is all fluff, it's still less than 40% of the result.

David Long, the author of Ezekiel's Shadow, is discussing his book with J. Mark Bertrand on their respective blogs. Dave is currently an acquisitions editor for a Christian publishing company, and the purpose of this exercise is to teach writers how to look critically at their own works with an eye toward improving them.

I'm not sure if posting this on my blog will help, but I figure it can't hurt. For the last couple of days, my cell phone's informed me that I've missed a call each day. The caller hasn't left a message, nor has he or she managed to reach me. The originating phone number is area code 214, which I've discovered is a Texas number. Now, I'm not entirely sure if I know someone living in Texas--I have plenty of friends I haven't done a great job keeping track of, so it's entirely possible one of them made it there. It could also be a cell phone belonging to one of my friends living in the Boston area. I probably don't have the cell phone number of everyone who has mine, and I'm not upset if a friend who does know it gives it to another friend who doesn't. So it could definitely be someone I know trying to reach me. Or it could be an awfully persistent wrong number--my voicemail does clearly state who I am. Or it could be a telemarketer. Anyway, for future reference for anyone reading this blog whom I trust enough to give my cell phone number to, it's generally not good during workdays. For the time being, my work has a no cell phone policy, so you can't reach me by it during working hours. You can always leave a message, or try calling after work hours. Or better yet, send me an e-mail. I'm much better at keeping track of, and responding to, e-mails than phone calls anyway. Just use the blog's contact form.

Dave at Faith*in*Fiction talks a bit about the cliched use of symbolic character names:

Today, you might want to give a second thought to naming your character something obviously symbolic. Yes, Grace and Faith and Hope are women's names. And popular women's names. But, these names appear very often in submitted proposals. They don't stand out anymore. (Likewise, Cain as a villain's name, appears quite often.)

As always when someone complains about something they've seen in writing, I do a quick check to see whether I'm guilty. I think I usually steer clear of symbolic names, at least when it comes to first names.

In my Christian horror story, Eyes in the Shadow, the main characters' names were Ryan, Emily, and Dominic, all of which are free from symbolic connotation. On the other hand, Ryan's last name is Majison, which is significant, but more as a matter of family history than symbolism. It's a history I haven't explained yet, but hopefully I'll get there.

In my fantasy novel, first names are indications of nationalities. Aulus, Victor, and Gaius are Novar names, Kulsin and Sularin are Kairnin, and Micah and Nathan are Manuelite. Deslar, Talnek, and Anyua are Orcish names, although the an-sul Orcs tend to have more monosyllabic names, such as Gar. The only symbolic name I can think of is Principius, the last name of the Imperial family, which is derived from Principus, meaning first, as in the "First Man in Rome." Of course, that name comes from the fact that they are the Imperial famiy, and have been for centuries.

When writing my latest story, I wanted it to be as authentic as possible, so I went to the location of the central scene and took a few pictures. Here's one of the pictures I took:

This is the chapel at Massacusetts General Hospital. You can find more information about it here, but it's no substitute for actually visiting it. In some ways it struck me as kind of fake: the plastic candles with flame shaped bulbs, the lack of religious imagery, the windows with nothing but lights behind them (the chapel's actually in the center of the hospital, so the windows don't look outside). It was also hard to find, as it didn't appear on the floormaps in the hospital and none of the signs pointed towards it. Fortunately, the online floormap does show its location. However, there is a real sense of quiet when you're there, so much so that I was reluctant to break out the camera.