Thursday, April 9, 2009

Writing Life, Part Two: A Literate Lineage

In an email last year, my mother intimated to me that she didn't feel that they had contributed significantly to my writing skills. (Such as they are.) I wish to say here and now, in front of God and these witnesses... Au contraire!  

I'm still trying to decide if she meant she didn't want credit for all this... (it's a bit late for that, don't you think?)  

We'll set aside the fact that dad accidentally taught me to type partly because he didn't like my messy handwriting and simply point out that my upbringing (as previously noted) was quite literary. 

Both of my parents tattooed the love of reading into my psyche. Mrs Robinson and the English teachers that preceded her may have taught me to care about the difference between "it's" and "its", but that doesn't get mom and dad off the hook.  

My friends will tell you that I talk about my parents a lot and with good reason. They brought to me the worlds of Dr. Seuss, Richard Scarry, The Hardy Boys, Encyclopedia Brown, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Mark Twain, H. Rider Haggard, and the rest. I came to be aware of a wider world than that of our small town in Missouri. Mark Twain alone (who was also coincidentally from a small town in Missouri) made me believe that this was something I could do too. We went to libraries instead of sitting at home watching TV. 

I wanted to be well read because it looked like A Good Thing To Be. In our house, it was the only way to be.  

Mom & dad also taught me funny. But that's more than how to tell a joke. I was introduced not only to Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck, but to Red Skelton and Jack Benny. I learned that being funny didn't require a four-letter vocabulary and that clever was better than brassy (the most important lesson any writer can learn in my opinion) and not to bite off a subject I can't chew. 

It's appropriate that my first published short story was a humorous lark about daylight savings time being used to avert Armageddon. 

I also learned that "neatness counts" and if I can't write it neatly, then type it. I got all that somewhere, and I don't really think I got it at school. I couldn't have because honestly, I wasn't really paying that much attention in class. (ahem)  When my fourth grade teacher challenged my authorship of a paper, dad went to bat for me. "Yes, a fourth grader really can write like that..." Incidentally, I began my first novel that year. (I recall it later caused trouble with the administration because it was an action-adventure kids-are-smarter-than-adults kind of novel and they didn't approve of such notions.)  

Most writers I know are readers who read something somewhere along the way and say "Psht! I could do better than that!" This is generally followed by someone who says, "Really? Then maybe you should." For me, it was my parents, who told me it was ok to be a writer as long as I got my homework done first. (Not that I ever did...) 

Parents who make it a Good Thing to be well-read, literate, and well-spoken are forming adults who hold the same values even if we don't seem to be getting it at the time. I'm not sure my parents appreciate how rare they were when compared to the parents of my friends in highschool and college. No matter how you cut it, parenting as much as anything made me a writer. 

Sorry, mom. You're just going to have to accept your share of the blame... er... credit.

-Scott 

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

A Journey Through Bookland (redux)

I'm not sure I can quantify what it is that I like about books. It's rather like explaining the merits of a root beer float to someone who has never had one... or doesn't like them. (Gasp! Tell me those people don't really exist!) There are some things that you either feel or you do not.

Much like the nuance and subtle nose of a fine not-too-sweet, but full-bodied root beer, Bookhunting is one of those things that cannot be fully appreciated by or explained to those for whom a book is something you read and then throw in the pile for your next garage sale or trip to the local Goodwill.

Not that there's anything wrong with that sort of behavior. If no one ever got rid of their books, there would be nothing for me to hunt for and I... well, I would be sad. Just don't actually throw them away and we're good.

There are certain things that I particularly love about books. The frustrated thrum of the pages as they reach the apex of their arc and fall upon the page before it, staccato reminders that these ideas are contained but not tamed; they constantly seek to escape. The faded glory of spent gilding, hidden deep in the heat-stamped recesses of aged leather. The scent that wafts past my nose as the pages of an old cookbook flee my thumb, faded memories of a thousand thousand dinners (many of them obviously unsuccessful). Old typefaces laid long ago with handset lead type, tarnished gilt edges and worn marbled endpages... I could go on, but the single thing I love most about books must certainly be: the hunt.

You'll note that not very many of the things I mentioned are true of new books. That's not to say I turn up my nose at new books; I've purchased rather a lot of them and spent rather more than my fair share of hours in both Borders and Barnes & Noble. It's just that in the days of Internet bookselling the hunt for a new book simply isn't much of an adventure.

Whatever it is that draws me to these aged agglomerations of paper, ink and ideas, beyond the contents or the authors, there is the object that supports all those things. There is gilding and sewing, headbands and backboards, cloth and leather, paper and paste, the tactile certainty of the ineffable thing. And of course, there is the quest to find the thing.

The new guys in the big spaces lack several small-but-crucial features I cannot do without. For one, they don't have the bell over the door that jangles when I walk in. I love that about second-hand and rare bookstores. They all have that bell. Like it comes with the kit or something. A jangly bell, ten thousand useless backlist titles, a cat and ten genuine nuggets to bury among the dross.

In my wallet at any given moment is a short list of titles that I'm looking out for. In my head is a much longer list of 'target of opportunity' titles. Most of them are on my list simply because I want to read them. Or because they have some sort of personal meaning to me. Most have very little in the way of resale value. Periodically, I get to throw the list away and make a new one. Because I generally find what I set out to find.

My dad taught me that. Never a day went by when he didn't have a list of books in his wallet. It was as mandatory as his driver's license. When we were cleaning out the house after he died, we found a small pile of booklists, squirreled away in drawers and between the pages of books. And he had thousands and thousands of books, rooms, and boxes, and lockers, and an entire attic full of books. Because patience and persistence and a willingness to shift the stacks at auctions will eventually bear fruit.

If it exists in the Pacific Northwest and someone is willing to part with it, I will eventually run across it. 

But that's not what keeps me hunting... it's the things I find beyond the musty book exchanges with cats and jangly bells. Things I find when I'm not looking or that I didn't know I was looking for in the first place.

At the Goodwill in Port Orchard, Washington I struck just such a vein of gold. Journeys Through Bookland was published in 1909 and edited by Charles H. Sylvester. It's a 10-volume reading plan for children and their parents to wade through the classics of western literature. Each book is bound in grey-green cloth with a beautiful art nouveau design gilded and embossed into the covers and spine. Each story begins with an illuminated capital and is lovingly illustrated with fanciful engravings and halftone plates.

They've been given pride of place in my collection (and an honor guard of Iron Bunnies as you can see).

There's something about holding an old kid's book that you don't necessarily get when you're holding a copy of Joyce or Proust. It takes very little effort to envision the bright young minds that were inspired by these books, youngsters in pre-modern kit, knee-pants or ruffles. Young minds leafing through the pages while sitting on velvet chairs stuffed with horsehair. Youngsters who went on to become moms and dads in their own right. And farmers and pharmacists, barristers and bootleggers. (Yes, bootleggers, it was printed in 1909 after all!)

Were they bought for a boy by his father ere he took ship for foreign climes, off to fight in the trenches of a War alleged to End All Wars? Was it then passed along in turn as the boy became a man and took his turn against the Germans in '42? Was it the first glimpse of print for a girl in an age when women weren't supposed to read such things? Or were they an item of furtive erudition in a time when it was ill-advised for a person of color to seem too educated, hoarded in hope of a better tomorrow?

So much has happened since these books were published, so many stories lie between the lightly-yellowed pages. Stories I can never know but only imagine.

Whatever their tale, the books I found were obviously treasured by someone for over a hundred years before the finally ended up in the donation pile. Short of holding a family Bible in your hands, you cannot ask for a more poignant cross-section of a life. Every old book has a story to tell. Beyond the story it contains, there is the story that it supported, the life that it led before it came to me.

I'm not sure why I love and collect children's books but I do. Probably because that's when I discovered the simple joys of a book.

Without an effort, I can drum up memories of the dim stacks of the Sedalia Public Library, staring up through the wavy glass at the outline of my dad's feet as he browsed the adult sections above my head. There was something comforting about the basement space in that monolithic old Carnegie building on Third Street, at the foot of that grand old staircase. I spent innumerable happy hours there as a kid, looking at pictures of tanks and helicopters, occasionally glancing up to see if dad had shifted to a new section. (Yes, there was an astonishing number of children's books dedicated to weapons of mass destruction in those days and I think I probably read enough of them to become a UN weapons inspector.)

As all children must do, I grew up and transferred to the upper floors with my dad. Bought my own books, started my own private library to match his. And as I sit here staring around me at the books on my shelves, I wonder what stories the antiques have to tell, and I ponder the stories that those new books of mine will one day acquire. But that's a thought for a future bookhunter.

I have some childhood reading to catch up on that has nothing to do with helicopters... or tanks.

-------
What were your favorite books as a child? What books do you collect (if any) and if you don't collect the books you read, I'm curious as to why? Leave your answers in comments!

Comment

The comments function seems to be repaired. Now we can have a conversation! Don't forget to go to Out Liars and post your Must-Read list! We're striking a blow for cultural literacy!

Monday, April 6, 2009

Quotable (I really miss this guy...)

“The artist brings something into the world that didn’t exist before and he does it without destroying something else.”

~ John Updike

--- Photo by me. It's a beautiful sunny day in Washington...

By any other name, 'tis a different thing.

Was Shakespeare right? Does a rose by any other name truly smell as sweet? Apparently not. This NPR story is absolutely fascinating and might just change your mind about how much of an effect the way we speak, write or read about something changes the way in which we perceive it. Anyone with any level of interest in language should listen to this (follow the link).

Coffee Break

Before there were drip pots, percolators, French presses, and fluid bed roasters... there was the frying pan.

 The Burke Museum and the Seattle Times take us back to the Ethiopian roots of coffee as ritual and social lubricant.

 Very cool.

Random (Literary) Thoughts on a Monday Morning...

Pages to Type is out there in the trenches, sifting through the reports of the new Al Gore book and posthumous Michael Crichton tomes to bring to light the underreported nuggets of real gold which have been largely overlooked by the rest of the world. Little Cheese Today I bring you the story of publishing's greatest prize... Bookseller.com has closed the voting and tallied the votes and awarded the Diagram Prize for Oddest Title of 2008! The winner is... The 2009-2014 World Outlook for 60-Milligram Containers of Fromage Frais Setting aside the fact that the book rings in at a whopping $795.00 at Amazon.com, (Holey swiss cheese, Batman!) the book is a critical look at cheese packaging in light of global environmental awareness et al. Which is nice. But what none of the stories I've read about this address is how much demand there really is for a 60 mg container of cheese? Unless my calculations are way off, that's .002116 ounces of cheese. It's not a typo either unless it originates on the cover of the book. So... is there a market for syringes of cheese that I don't know about? Kinda makes you want to read the book doesn't it? Yeah, ok, not really but I'd like someone to read it and report back. Any volunteers? Didn't think so. Rumors of my Retirement... The rumored retirement of the Mark Twain of Latin Literature, Gabriel Garcia Marquez are apparently greatly exaggerated. According to his hometown newspaper (by way of Reuters booknews), Gabo is too ornery to retire and and wants the worldwide press corps to get off the lawn!
...the author answered the phone call from El Tiempo, he said: 'Call me later. I'm busy writing." ~The money quote from Reuters
Where would literature be without our curmudgeons?

Sunday, April 5, 2009

Simplicity Sunday

I don't usually blog on Sundays. For some reason, my brain shuts off the blogging function at 11:59 pm on Saturday night and it doesn't usually reactivate until sometime Monday morning. So honestly, I really don't have anything to say on Sundays anyway.

If it wasn't for the BEDA vow I wouldn't even be here. (Now I sound like Dante. "I'm not even supposed to be here today!") 

Because it's Sunday and my mind is in "simplification" mode, I thought it would be fun to think complexly about simplicity. (Go with me on this one.) Finding the simplest way to tell any story is part of the magic involved in getting from idea to finished story (or blog post for that matter).

I like simple things. Typewriters, fountain pens, hard copies of books. Too much complexity is bad for us, I think. It builds up until it overwhelms us and we find ourselves bereft of hope in a world awash in widgets designed to do things for us which we can no longer remember how to do ourselves or recall why we did them in the first place. As it is in life, so it is in writing.

Science has taught us that at the heart of complexity, things begin to simplify once more.

All computers are - at their core - just little switches turning on and off as the 1's and 0's of the programmer's code tell them to. The web page you are looking at is the result of two numbers combined and recombined in nearly infinite patterns to tell the machine you are using what to show you. Adenine, thymine, guanine and cytosine are the four nucleotides from which DNA is made. Every DNA helix is a combination of those four "letters" of our genetic alphabet. By combining and recombining these four letters, DNA creates an elegant structure which is unique for each of us. This is why Maureen is different from John, who is different from Hank, who is different from me.

The similarities make us homo sapien, the differences make us who we are. Only four nucleotides are scrambled in seemingly random fashion to the point where each person is truly unique from the other.


A couple days ago I pointed out (and not for the first time) that the great works of our literary canon were written with the same letters as those works which the literary critics consider "lesser". The same twenty-six letters Elmo sings about on Sesame Street go into the creation of every book, every short story, every Twitter post by everyone with words to say whether it be Shakespeare or Wired Magazine.

Even the literary canon -- despite its apparent complexity -- begins to simplify once more as we reach into its DNA.


Think about that: An alphabet of 4 letters can make 6.7 billion unique "words". Mindbogglingly complex, yet so simple at its core that our language cannot quite capture it. So let's bring it back to writing, shall we?

Let us take two somewhat random words from our language: wild and driven.


Our alphabet (the English alphabet for our purposes) has twenty-six letters, which you could also theoretically combine an infinite number of ways. Despite this, the Oxford English Dictionary lists only a little over 172,000 unique letter combinations that form recognizable words. From that impossibly large number of possible combinations, we have extracted only a bit over 172,000 ways of combining letters under the prescribed rules governing our language to actually create meaningful and arguably beautiful results.

From the complexity of a near infinitude of possible combinations of letters, we derive 172,000 possible words. From those 172,000 possible words Shelley selected 25 to create this stanza of his poem. By themselves they are nothing, combined in this way they are poetry. From the complexity of an infinity of choices to the simplicity of a stanza of a poem about the autumn wind.

The trouble with writing is that people try to make it too complex. Load each word with dire portent, as if the future of humanity hangs upon the one that follows it. Too much complexity and our minds freeze and we're back to our little boat, adrift in a sea of needless complexity.

The magic of writing is derived from weaving a spell of words, a web to capture the imagination of your reader. Each strand of the spell is created from the correct words, the simplest words available to tell your story. Mark Twain once said that "the difference between the right word and the nearly right word is the difference between lighting and a lightning bug." Listen to Twain. He was the master of discerning the difference between lightning and bug.

People push and pull against the strictures of the medium -- find them too complex. Its and It's, adverbs are bad, participles shouldn't dangle and neither should prepositions, and what the hell is a gerund anyway? OMG!! But it's the structure of our language that allows us to think the simple thoughts within a complex matrix.

Without structure, your infinite letter combinations would not make the least bit of sense. Neither Twain nor Shelley would be able to make something out of it and our language would be worse than useless.

This is what rules do; they reign in the chaos. The mores of our language; spelling, syntax, noun, verb, adjective, punctuation, etcetera, allows language to be something more than an inarticulate jumble of letters. So from nature that we derive the guidance we need to follow with language. All existence as we know it, pared down to just four nucleotides, a finite alphabet with infinite possible combinations arranged together like our poem into an elegant simplicity to create all of us.

Stripping away the rules wouldn't make our lives easier, it would make them more complex. Anarchy would giving rise to greater variety, yes, but varieties and mutations such that we wouldn’t be able to reproduce ourselves and our species -- or our literature -- would collapse under the weight of its own complexity. Despite the grumblings of you and millions of writers before you, it isn’t the complexity of our language that vexes you; it’s the enforcement of the simplicity necessary to keep it comprehensible.

So when you sit down at your keyboard to write, whether it's a blog post, a novel, or a poem, keep in mind that the simplicity of the medium is your greatest advantage. The constraints of our language are not walls, but guidelines to get you to the next right word.

Simplicity is beautiful in its complexity, isn't it? May all your words be lightning instead of lighting bugs.