Friday, December 30, 2011

Fart Jokes, Humor, and Dissecting Frogs

When someone asks me how to write humor, I often remind them that the world's oldest joke is a fart joke. (It's nice to know someone's keeping track of these things.)

If you can learn how to write a fart, you're there.

That's a bit glib, but it gets to the central problem with writing humor: many things are only funny because the situation makes them funny.

By the way: My eleven-year-old self would like an apology from everyone who ever lectured him using the words "That is not funny..."  He had historical precedent is on his side.  It's in the genome, nothing I can do about it; farts were funny in ancient Sumer!

(Nephews take note.)


To drag this up a notch from the archaeology of bodily functions, I was listening to an NPR interview with the great Canadian humorist Stuart McLean the other night. In the interview, McLean refused the interviewer's polite entreaties to analyse his humor.

He quoted E. B. White, who said: "Analyzing humor is like dissecting a frog; the frog dies in the process." He said that it wasn't his job to know how it worked, it was just his job to do it. And that stuck with me long after I turned off the car engine and the radio fell silent.

Somehow, when someone asks me how to write humor, or how I write humor, I can't bring myself to say "It's not my job to understand it, just to do it."


I want to understand it. Moreover, the teacher in me wants to be able to answer the question with something more than "Learn to write farts."

Exempting physical humor (which is almost impossible in written form) I see three common types of humor. It's really not that hard to be funny in real life, because almost all humor is physical, topical, anecdotal, or situational. The moments when you laugh so hard that you're literally ROTFL are usually a combination of all four.

(Someone keep an eye on the frog for me. Is it dead yet?)

If writing is supposed to be an honest reflection of our world, then most humor we write will be situational. Being funny in real life isn't that hard because it isn't about telling jokes, it's about a given moment when what happens is funny.  Farce is another thing entirely, worthy of its own frog... er... blog post.

For the most part, writing humor is and will always be about creating "You just had to be there" moments between your characters and your readers.  Some people can do this instinctively, what Stuart McLean called 'writing from the belly'. Some have to learn how to do it, and in order to do that, I'm afraid you're going to have to exploratory surgeries on some frogs.

Part of being a writer is examining our own lives and interactions, mining them for moments and ideas that will breathe life into our writing. In order to do that, we must take scalpel in hand and pull them apart at least a little.

Why was it funny when Aunt Bethany farted? If you accept that bodily functions aren't inherently funny, you're left with the incongruity, the surprise. Why was it a surprise? Because it was your prim Aunt Bethany? Because it was Thanksgiving dinner? Because she'd just told off your kid for doing the same thing?

If nothing else, watch a video or an episode of a good sitcom. Pick them apart and look at how they work. At first, you'll just be staring uncomprehendingly at the broken parts of a dead joke. Eventually, you'll start to see the function of each piece and how they fit together. Eventually, you'll be able to reassemble the joke, better, faster, stronger than before.

I guess you had to be there? Let me put you there...

In the meantime, don't tease the frogs.

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Holiday Break

Whether you celebrate Christmas, Chanukah, Kwanzaa, Solstice, or some other that I am unaware of, may the season be a blessed one, full of togetherness and  hope for the new year to come.

We celebrate Christmas here at Fool's Paradise, so I have a lot of Santa traps to put out before the big day, so I will be taking a short break from the blog to make sure we get him this year. If you don't see him, you'll know we got him.  

To all of you out there in Internetland, don't forget to be silly.

Scott Walker Perkins


Monday, December 19, 2011

The Safety Epidemic: Dear Mister President...

Dear Mr. President,

I hope this letter finds you and your lovely family well.

I wanted to share a story with you about something I noticed recently about our country. This should be of especial interest to you since, if memory serves, your daughter Malia suffers from allergies.

I was shopping recently when I flipped the bag of nuts over and found a warning label, alerting consumers that this bag of nuts, may contain nuts.


Quelle surprise.


The packaging might have been more effective if it read: "Fair Warning: Our lawyers may be nuts, and if you sue us for finding nuts in your nuts, you may be nuts too."

Don't get me wrong, I have allergies. They have put me in the hospital several times recently. Some of these allergies are terrible and could, conceivably, kill me. I and my wife carry epinephrine injectors with us at all times, just in case the worst should happen. And I want there to be product labeling that warns me when something might be hidden in my food that could kill me.

And I worry that too many senseless warnings are making us numb to the real threats. Can't we just agree that coffee is hot, knives are sharp, a jar of nuts may will contain nuts, and if it causes cancer in the state of California, it causes cancer everywhere?

I ask because I'm not sitting down to write you a letter today about healthcare, or FDA mandated warnings, or allergies. I want to talk about safety and risk.

America seems addicted to safety and our politicians - you included - are unapologetic enablers.

One of the reasons that our national anthem pairs "land of the free" with "the home of the brave" is that the two cannot exist without one another. Risk is inherent in freedom. In a free society, there are always risks. Free speech means the risk of someone saying something we disagree with. The right to a presumption of innocence means that a guilty person might go free in order to ensure that the innocent person does as well.

And we accept those things.

Because we are the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Before I started my writing blog, I spent some time in the trenches as a political blogger. I wasn't very good at it, because I was and remain far too reasonable to succeed in that field. I'm not a firebrand for either the right or left, I'm just a guy trying to raise a family and carve out some space to write his books. This blog was meant to be a place where I don't need to be political. A place where I could talk about writing and nothing but writing.

Then my government tried to pass a law that would turn my homeland into a battlefield and simultaneously strip me of my unassailable right to due process. A law that could condemn me or one of my countrymen to indefinite detention if someone with sufficient clout were to accuse me of being a terrorist. Not prove me a terrorist, mind you, just the accusation would require indefinite military detention.

No trial, no confronting my accuser, no airing of the evidence against me, no jury of my peers. Detention in a military prison 'for the duration of hostilities' in a war in which there are no clear goals or metrics for measuring victory, and therefore no end in sight.

Why would my government do this? Why would you sign it?

Because our government, because your office, has become so accustomed to the idea that the citizenry wants to be endlessly protected to the point of absurdity. Because you seem to genuinely think that we want to be so coddled that we need a warning label on a bag of nuts telling us that it may contain nuts. Because the public has been trained to believe that safety is a right that must be defended with tear gas and infinite detention. That freedom is fragile rather than resilient, that it is so important to protect the Constitution that we should keep it under glass -- where we can see it, but safely out of reach.

I don't want to be that safe.

I want to take up my rights in one hand and my obligations in the other and I want to strive for the ideal that made this country free and brave.

I want to make something abundantly clear: I do not for a minute think that you or anyone in our current government means to misuse this law. I have no doubt in my mind that this is undertaken with the best of intentions.

But if the last eleven years has taught us anything, it's that you cannot predict, nor can I, what the world or the country will look like eleven years from now. Or twenty. Or thirty. And the laws that you sign today have force and effect beyond the limits of your term in office and any of our terms on this Earth. None of us can say for certain how future politicians will use this bill or whether and how this interminable "War Against Terror" might end.

The precedent being set here is chilling. If not for me, then for those who follow me. The implication that the unalienable rights endowed by our creator, supposedly enshrined in our constitution can be set aside in the passion of an historical moment us nothing short of a violation of your oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

I voted for you in hopes of better.

My forefathers risked everything for this country. Grandparents and great grandparents fought and died for the preservation of this country. They were challenged by their government to stand up and fight, to accept the risk inherent in their citizenship and the obligation to the world and to those who would come after them. This is not to say that our country has always done the right thing. Japanese internment and HUAC spring to mind. A law similar to this one was vetoed by Harry Truman in 1950 and then overridden by congress. But every time we have done the wrong thing, the thing that later generations regretted and had to apologize for, it was done out of fear.

The British humorist Douglas Adams once noted that human beings are unique in their ability to learn from their mistakes, as well as their apparent unwillingness to do so.  But then, he also said that anyone capable of getting themselves elected president should on no account be allowed to do the job.

You have a chance to prove him wrong on both counts.

As a constitutional scholar, you know these things, and yet here we are anyway. You are faced with an historic chance to stand alongside the great leaders in history who brought their people a sense of shared sacrifice for a common ideal, or to become another also-ran.  You are facing reelection soon, and what I am asking for is a definite risk to your quest for a second term, but you once said you would rather be a great one-term president than a mediocre two-term president. It's time to prove it to us.

I think that most Americans are waiting for the chance to step up and the vocal few who want to hide under their bed until someone from the defense department sounds the all clear... well, I'm not willing to live by their standard. This country may contain nuts; It's right there on the package.

I believe that America can be both free and brave at the same time. I believe that we must.

Just as I accept that I may be killed by a psycho who slips through the system because the rights of the accused are protected in this country, so too do I accept the idea that I might be killed by a terrorist because I refuse to shred the founding documents that made this country worth defending.

I once told the Bush administration that if torturing someone will save me, don't bother, I would rather die. So too do I tell you: if my absolute safety comes at the expense of our Bill of Rights, then don't bother to save me. Because whether or not I ever stood before a magistrate and took the oath required of naturalized citizens, I understand that it applies to me anyway. I know that I can, should, and must support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; bear true faith and allegiance to the same; bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; and perform other work of national importance.

And I take this obligation freely and without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.

Veto the NDAA and any subsequent bill that comes to your desk stripping Americans of their right to due process. Because there really is such a thing as being too safe.

Yours sincerely,

Scott Walker Perkins
Photo by Scott Perkins, ©2008 


Thursday, December 15, 2011

Kinetic Text: Ira Glass on the Creative Process

I meant to post this video when I first found it and then I forgot about it a few times. This is excellent advice from Ira Glass of This American Life fame. It's aimed at the beginner, but just as important for the middler, or or even those of us who've made a living at this and are still assailed by the occasional (or more than occasional) doubt.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

The Internet Is a Strange & Magical Place

An amusing aspect of having a character in one of your novels named after an historical figure is the number of hits your blog receives from school kids looking for information for a school report.

<Waves hand> This is not the Howard Carter you are looking for. </waves hand>

At least I deal with the mummy thing in the first chapter or two. I'm still having fun imagining the kinds of reports that sort of 'research' might generate. "Howard Carter discovered King Tut's tomb and then went on to defend the earth from an alien invasion, using an army of robots and a recipe for instant pudding."

I'm not a history teacher, but for my money, that should be an A+ paper.

Yes, I've been looking at my blog stats again. Yes, I'm blogging about blogging again.

I apologize. I'll go back to other stuff in the next post, I promise.

I used to ignore blog stats that Google coughed up for me (mostly because they made me sad) but then Blogger incorporated them into the actual site and it became a one-click thing. Which means that I've been forced to acknowledge that I'm no longer talking to myself.

It also provides endless amusements and quite a bit of head-scratching because it lists the search terms that got some of you here. My favorite search terms of this week are: "eschew your words carefully".  Now, that certainly sounds like me, though I don't recall saying it.

It almost lost out to "legal pen feathers law desk" which somehow got three people to my blog this week. How? I HAVE NO IDEA! But it's true.  And I'm happy to see you! Please leave a comment. I'd love to write more about these legal feather desk pens.

The internet is a strange and magical place.

Monday, December 12, 2011

Amazon's Latest News Cycle: Grinches or Goofs?

Does Amazon have any Public Relations people on staff? I mean... at all? Maybe some advisors of some sort that play the Jeff Goldblum role and say "Sure you can do that, but should you?"

If they do have such people, are they ever allowed to attend meetings? And if so, why don't they ever say "You know this is going to make us look like the Grinch that stole Christmas, right?"

Sometimes it seems like Amazon is a machine purpose-built for creating internet rage. They remotely deleted copies of George Orwell's Animal Farm and 1984, they delisted LGBT titles or recategorized them or... something, they got in a very public spat with MacMillan that made all of us wish they'd fight in private like civilised people, and now... now they're paying you not to shop with mom & pop.

Well... sort of.

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Dr. Villainous Deeds: An Online Approach to Character Creation

Hidden somewhere in every narrative is the author that created it.  As Oscar Wilde observed "Every portrait that is painted with feeling is a portrait of the artist, not of the sitter."

Which should probably alarm me, because one of characters that people best know me for is a mad scientist and self-professed evil genius.

Some people have an inner child, I have an inner mad scientist.

For those of you who have read Howard Carter Saves the World, you know Dr Villainous Deeds as Howard's mad science teacher (in every sense). But he's much older than that. Before he became comedy relief for that novel, he was 'tried on' for size in several ways to make sure I could embody that sort of silly/evil character in a believable fashion.

Before I could commit to writing a novel about him, I needed to get inside his scary, freaky, head and see how he ticked.

Under normal circumstances, I 'try on' new characters in a series of short stories or vignettes.  Each time the character appears in these short pieces, there are subtle changes as I learn how they move through their worlds and interact with the people they meet.  I find my way into their skin and fill it out until they become as real as ink on a page can be.  Only then do I commit them to a longer, more complex storyline.

I did this with Howard Carter and his friends, I did this with Ashleigh MacLeod, and I did it with a host of other characters that never grew into actual novels because what the short stories taught me was that I didn't want to live with them through 90,000 words.

Doctor Deeds called for an entirely new approach.

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Research: The Gateway Drug

Research is a gateway drug for procrastination. The secret to writing is putting new words on a page, not obssessively noodling with the words already there. On your first draft, make something up or put a pin in it and move on.

This year, I was a pedestrian walking alongside the freeway that is NaNoWriMo, and as I watched the authors whizzing past, ignoring my outstretched thumb, I noticed something... a lot of them stopped. Not for me, or because their book ran out of gas, but because they felt like they needed to know the number of bolts in the nosecone of an Ares rocket, or the exact color of the bed sheets in the Lincoln bedroom, or did Gladstone really have a Gladstone bag?

And all too many of them exited their novels, went up the steps into the library that is the internet... and never came back out.  And the few who did had trouble starting their novels again.

I'm a huge fan of libraries, both personal and public, and the Internet really is an amazing tool for researching your novel. Within easy reach of this chair, I can find the lineage of Galileo Galilei and detailed instructions on lock picking, plus everything in between.

But if I hit a section of my novel where I need to show Galileo's grandmother picking a lock, I don't reach for either of those books. Either I know it or I don't, and if I don't, I write "Galileo's Grandma picks lock." highlight it in yellow and/or append a footnote so I can find it again and move on.