Truth is truth - to the end of reckoning.

Adaptation of a Stephen King quote: All fiction is a lie, and good fiction is the truth inside the lie.
I've found in past writing experiments (and we're talking strictly fiction, here, people - the stuff I really love) that the truth always shines through.
By truth I mean this: the things I believe, the principles I base my life on, the hardest core bits of me that will never break up no matter the intensity or pressure from the outside. I think we can argue that fiction is fabricated so it can be completely separated from the person who made it up (and we do argue this to protect ourselves - from pre-judgements, from pigeon-holing, from criticism).
But at the same time, I think it can be argued that creators - no matter what medium they use - must infuse the work with some of themselves. A sculptor cannot create a piece of art without touching the stone, running his hands over the planes and textures, dripping sweat onto its surface, scraping his knuckles against it. In the same way, a writer cannot write a piece of fiction without leaving traces of herself in the work.
I would have it no other way! While it makes the writing process infinitely more painful - picking at threads of your soul and weaving them into a story other than your own leaves you frayed, to say the least - the end result carries that ring of truth that we all search for in books. It becomes a human work that speaks the same language as its readers.

All of this is going somewhere, I promise.
I've been encouraged to join NaNoWriMo this year, and I have. I'm terrified. I don't think I've ever written for a month straight. I am full of stories, though, and the terror is tempered by a building excitement.
So if you're interested (thousands of people all over the world writing 50,000 words in one month? curious...!), you're welcome to follow me: here at the WriteMe blog and on Twitter @ScribbleMeJ. Beginning November 1st, this blog will be a scratch pad for the NaNo process. I'll try to get the fancy word count widgets and such, but I make no promises (I suck at computers).

By fairy hands their knell is rung.

I've been schooled this week.  In words, I mean.  And I totally blame being sick for my failing wits.

First, "soporific" means "sleep-inducing" (which even my mom knew!).  I guessed something along the lines of "droning," "over-indulged," or "soaking in."  [Editor's note: Just because I provide three different definitions for a word doesn't mean I'm confused.  It just means that I'm really good at making stuff up, and the stuff I make up is really creative and rather convincing.  You know you're jealous.]

Second, "querulous" means "contentious, prone to argument."  I was close with "whining, protesting; a feeble attempt at contradiction."

Third, I learned this morning that it's "jibe," not "jive."  As in, "The story you told about your mom's vacation doesn't jibe with the photographic evidence of her whereabouts that weekend."  And "jive" has always made so much sense!  (Think about it: dancing - one set of facts either dances well or doesn't with the second set of facts... Sad loss.)  Although it must be noted that I prefer the British English spelling of it to the American English: gybe vs. jibe.


In other news, I've had a lot of downtime this week (what with my mind being clogged and work being slow).  So I've indulged in a lot of fiction reading.

I re-discovered the Endicott Studio website, managed by Terri Windling, Ellen Datlow, and Ellen Kushner (to name a very few).  It is a collection of visual, literary, and academic explorations of the Mythic Arts - I've literally lost myself within the pages of it for the last week.  I've been reading through the Journal of Mythic Arts' fiction and non-fiction archives.  [Second Editor's Note: This site is of particular interest to me; my college thesis examined re-centering myth and fairy tale.  I've immersed myself in all things mythic for the last 6 years at least.]

So after reading all morning, I came home yesterday with a panicky urge to re-read my two favorite books of all time: The Hero & the Crown and The Blue Sword, both by Robin McKinley.  They were not on my shelves!  I searched, but know my book filing system, and they weren't there.  All I could conclude was I'd loaned them out (God knows why), and they hadn't come back (for the same reason most loaned books don't come back).  I penned the dogs in the kitchen and bolted to Grumpy's (my old place of employment and the nearest used bookstore), but only came up with The Hero & the Crown.  It will do for now, but I must find another copy of The Blue Sword - these are the only two books I've ever read more than once.  I must have them on hand at all times!  [Third Editor's Note: Only librophiles will understand this compulsion - I can't explain it.  But I have never felt more urgent about reading a book than I did yesterday.  And I couldn't rest until I'd found it.  I almost considered driving across town to the accursed McKay's.  Almost.]

Their hearts and sentiments were free, their appetites were hearty.

Robust.

I hate that word!  Ok, I don't hate it, but I strongly disapprove of the way it's been misused recently.  "Robust tool," "robust system," "robust software platform," "robust this," "robust that."  It's killing me!

I hold that robust should be used for
1. Men
2. Coffee
3. Beer
and in that order.

I'm done.

We must learn to welcome and not fear the voices of dissent. (Fulbright)

Malcolm Gladwell is speaking at UTC tomorrow evening here in Chattanooga.  I'm excited! I first heard of him four years ago - the speaker at our graduation ceremony quoted some ideas from Gladwell's book, Blink. Since then, I have read Tipping Point and have the other two on my list (Outliers is the third).

The way I understand him, Gladwell is an economist who studies trends. Only he doesn't study economic trends (he touches on them), but I would categorize his as "social" trends.  So naturally social media came up this week in an article he wrote for The New Yorker.  Summed up, he says:
Facebook is an emotional support because it's easy and removed, but people are reluctant to do more than "thumbs up" a cause or group.


Social media has no hierarchy, no controlling structure; it's herd mentality at best. How much long-term success can a stampede of information bring about?


Gladwell concludes:
"It makes it easier for activists to express themselves, and harder for that expression to have any impact. The instruments of social media are well suited to making the existing social order more efficient. They are not a natural enemy of the status quo. If you are of the opinion that all the world needs is a little buffing around the edges, this should not trouble you. But if you think that there are still lunch counters out there that need integrating it ought to give you pause."

Read more at The New Yorker.com.


I'm looking forward to hearing Gladwell speak.  It's refreshing to hear a logical, no-nonsense approach to trending ideas these days.

Hey, Mike. Can't afford punctuation.

Ford's recent commercial really grates on my nerves.  They have skads of money, but somehow the ad got through the copy editors with terrible punctuation.  Mike's face shows up (and he's cute - I like Mike), but he says (far too fast for expression), "People say, Hey, Mike. Why Ford. Why now."  Except some brilliant director thought, "If people could visualize these words, they would retain them and then be able to recall the rest of our promo!"  So he threw the words in next to Mike's face.  And what they ended up with was something akin to a toddler's version of sledding: Daddyandmegoeddownthehillfastanditwassomuchfun!

"PeoplesayHeyMikeWhyFordWhynow."

Granted, if someone had written it as "People ask, Hey Mike - Why Ford? Why now?" maybe the question marks wouldn't have been overlooked.  Saying implies periods.  Still.  I have no respect for an international company with the size (and reputation) of Ford that can't properly punctuate its commercials.

How hard can it be.