Decades ago, I took a creative writing class at CU. Never mind that the professor (if I recall, a graduate student who seemed to have no interest in anything except his own writing) didn't like anything I wrote, most probably because he wanted work that matched his own style. I vaguely recall that there were a few things I got out of the class.
Like, be prepared to try explain to a professor the difference between Tome (a large old book), and Tomb (the dusty musty smelly dead place), or just use "so and so opened the book" rather than "so and so opened the tome" and have the professor insist that it should be spelled tomb. From this experience I concluded that his command of english was... Flawed. Despite his degree. It's colored my view of the higher education cartel since.
Like, Don't actually present a plot in "creative writing". The professor wanted stories in which nothing happened. Like much of the "literature" that is considered main stream by "Those who tell us what to like and write about it in the east coast newspapers". From this, I concluded that the kind of fiction I liked was dead. At least, that's what the professor wanted me to conclude. I'm afraid I kept reading books with (gasp) Plots...
Hmmm. Most of what I seemed to have gotten from that and other college level creative writing courses was negative. I came away from that experience with no desire to write after all the negative criticism of my work by that particular "Ivory Tower Elitist". It took me years to overcome that unpleasant taste in my mouth, and even then, only after much conversation with real writers, such as Mercedes Lackey, Robert Asprin, and Mel. White. Each of them saw something I'd written, crude as it was, and encouraged me to keep going. I wrote many games for the IFGS, the International Fantasy Gaming Society, games that required a plot so the players could participate in the story, many of them were considered good. I even got a game of the year award for Piper on the Hill. From that type of writing I started writing more and more detail about D'oril, and without realizing it, started developing my style. It only took me 15 years to recognize that my style had merit, and accept it within myself. I still have battles with the inner critic that the creative writing class implanted in my brain.
In the last couple of years, as I've approached FAA retirement in a couple of years, I've read a lot about writing, looking for ways to polish that style. Orson Scott Card, on his website Hatrack.com, mentioned in one of his earliest posts (As well as in the book on writing he authored) that a good writer reads. And I've read a lot. I've even gone back and reread a lot of stuff from my college days that I liked,(such as Marion ZImmer Bradley's Darkover novels), or read and scratched my head over, wondering if I liked it (Such as Arthur C. Clarkes Foundation series). The books and articles about writing have ranged from basics about story structure to the nitty-gritty nuts and bolts about grammar and structure. My writing technique has improved, I think, writing games for the IFGS probably has done a lot for that, especially in the area of developing plot. I've been working through a writing exercise workbook on my breaks at work. Besides working on character, setting, mood and description, my efforts have given me a bit of confidence in my ability to write about almost anything. Blogging has started my on the track to, if nothing else, writing about just that, almost anything, and to vary my style from serious (see personality topics or D'oril background articles), sarcastic (anything to do with the FAA), to humorous (such as Activationg the Wayback Machine, Mr. Peabody, or Spoonerisms).
THe only things I've not developed well, yet, are consistancy, and confidence. I keep blaming the FAA. Maybe it's time to look in the mirror. Time to hand the bagpiper that shilling.....
Clear skies,
Jim
Like, be prepared to try explain to a professor the difference between Tome (a large old book), and Tomb (the dusty musty smelly dead place), or just use "so and so opened the book" rather than "so and so opened the tome" and have the professor insist that it should be spelled tomb. From this experience I concluded that his command of english was... Flawed. Despite his degree. It's colored my view of the higher education cartel since.
Like, Don't actually present a plot in "creative writing". The professor wanted stories in which nothing happened. Like much of the "literature" that is considered main stream by "Those who tell us what to like and write about it in the east coast newspapers". From this, I concluded that the kind of fiction I liked was dead. At least, that's what the professor wanted me to conclude. I'm afraid I kept reading books with (gasp) Plots...
Hmmm. Most of what I seemed to have gotten from that and other college level creative writing courses was negative. I came away from that experience with no desire to write after all the negative criticism of my work by that particular "Ivory Tower Elitist". It took me years to overcome that unpleasant taste in my mouth, and even then, only after much conversation with real writers, such as Mercedes Lackey, Robert Asprin, and Mel. White. Each of them saw something I'd written, crude as it was, and encouraged me to keep going. I wrote many games for the IFGS, the International Fantasy Gaming Society, games that required a plot so the players could participate in the story, many of them were considered good. I even got a game of the year award for Piper on the Hill. From that type of writing I started writing more and more detail about D'oril, and without realizing it, started developing my style. It only took me 15 years to recognize that my style had merit, and accept it within myself. I still have battles with the inner critic that the creative writing class implanted in my brain.
In the last couple of years, as I've approached FAA retirement in a couple of years, I've read a lot about writing, looking for ways to polish that style. Orson Scott Card, on his website Hatrack.com, mentioned in one of his earliest posts (As well as in the book on writing he authored) that a good writer reads. And I've read a lot. I've even gone back and reread a lot of stuff from my college days that I liked,(such as Marion ZImmer Bradley's Darkover novels), or read and scratched my head over, wondering if I liked it (Such as Arthur C. Clarkes Foundation series). The books and articles about writing have ranged from basics about story structure to the nitty-gritty nuts and bolts about grammar and structure. My writing technique has improved, I think, writing games for the IFGS probably has done a lot for that, especially in the area of developing plot. I've been working through a writing exercise workbook on my breaks at work. Besides working on character, setting, mood and description, my efforts have given me a bit of confidence in my ability to write about almost anything. Blogging has started my on the track to, if nothing else, writing about just that, almost anything, and to vary my style from serious (see personality topics or D'oril background articles), sarcastic (anything to do with the FAA), to humorous (such as Activationg the Wayback Machine, Mr. Peabody, or Spoonerisms).
THe only things I've not developed well, yet, are consistancy, and confidence. I keep blaming the FAA. Maybe it's time to look in the mirror. Time to hand the bagpiper that shilling.....
Clear skies,
Jim
No comments:
Post a Comment