Maps to Anywhere

       As I was reading maps to anywhere, many of the stories stood out to me, though some more so than others.  I really enjoyed reading it, I found it more enjoyable than most other creative nonfiction essays we have read so far.  They make sense to me, they aren't some entirely abstract foreign concept.  I feel like Bernard Cooper went for the greater connection with his reader, rather than alienating them just to strive for a more artistic feel.

       One of the essays that I enjoyed was on the air, how he spoke of the futuristic cities that are always depicted as bright, clean, floating cities.  He spoke of how he wasn't fond of the cities, how the urban jungle, the less than perfect underground scene was preferred.  Then he started to talk about the Hindenburg's crash, and a man who witnessed it, survived it.  How he would paint him, with such detail the the scene around him.  How "...his passionate voice gave me chills. He said, "Disaster," and his voice shattered. He said, "Oh, no. Please, please," and you knew he wanted to stop time..." I love his description, how he portrays even the most horrible disasters so well.

       Utopia is similar to On the Air.  He talked about the different ideal families, and how he wished for them when he was little. He would play his his miniature sets of people and would go about the day playing with them, being the perfect family.  Cooper started by saying he was always set into a certain routine, something most people are, how he would rather go home than try and maneuver his was through unfamiliar streets to find a library.  I think the way he spoke of the different ideals of the perfect family during childhood really resonated with me. Things might seem like theyre better on the other side, but that isn't always the case, it's often best to love what you have.

       I enjoyed reading this and feel like analyzing it further could really help me come up with even greater insight to the author, as it does seem like a personal type of essay compilation.  I think Cooper did a good job portraying the everyday actions of people, and the wild imagination of children, how they see the world so differently than those that have grown up.

Polaroids

       Lamotts writing piece was all about development.  It is the most important aspect of a story, and can make or break it.  The use of a Polaroid was very well done, saying how you only really know what your story will turn out to be after you've started to really write it.  Stories develop as you write them, and slowly begin to reveal themselves as more substantial things than you previously had been aware of.  If you were undecided whether or not a character would make a life altering decision, keep writing.  Do no decide yet, simply write and let the character, or the actions of the world around them decide.  I did enjoy this piece.  It was entertaining and held real value to it.
       Lamott split the work into three main sections, Character, Plot, and Dialogue.  All three are incredibly important to a story, and there cannot be a well written piece without all three.  They all develop as time in the story passes.  You learn facts and background information on certain people, which leads to revelations on why they acted in the way that they did.  Suddenly a character who seemed evil at first, is not so evil after all, just forced into a situation they did not want to be in.  It can help progress the story along and develop the entire thing!  Character, dialogue and plot are essential to a well written story.
       Dialogue is the characters discussions.  It is what they are thinking without being in their head, it is what they want to convey to others, even if the truth is still locked away in their thoughts.  This gives you a very basic impression on the characters you're looking at.  At first it may be unclear who the character is and what their intentions are, but a well written dialogue can help alleviate the uncertainty.  It helps with person to person interaction, going from bone dry robotic conversation and gestures, to a heartfelt speech of how one feels for the other.  It gives life to the story, and more often than not makes the entire world come out of the pages.  It helps you connect and get a sense of how each person in the story feels about the other.
       Character is probably the most important part of the story.  While plot and dialogue make the story, character is necessary.  There is nothing to have a story about, if not for characters.  They are the essence of the story.  The good, bad, and well... slightly neutral.  Your characters should develop as you do, or the story does.  You gain experiences through life, and should use them to help character progression (assuming it fits well with the story).  Characters age, and gain their own "personal experiences".  Lamott described it as, your characters are not your own.  They live a life outside the story and you simply record what happens when they enter your story. It helps to think about their lives even while they are not in the story, this is another way to further development.
       Plot is also important.  It is the story.  Plot is what you want your story to be about.  It is how it will develop and conclude.  Plot can be a solid, concrete idea, or something much more fluid.  It can be the base of everything, or change with your story.  It is meant to flow, it should not be rough and unstable.  Lamott thought it was strange for authors to claim to know what the climax of their story was, right from the beginning.  It seemed to be a very "tunnel vision" type of writing.  There would be no room for development or new ideas for plot.  They would race to the climax of the story, ignoring possible sidetracks leading to better changes and progression.
       I enjoyed reading this.  It was a bit of a wake up call as a writer.  It made me realize that I need to broaden my horizons and not to think so linearly as I write.  I have a feeling I will be referencing this more than once while I continue to write stories, whether they are two pages or two-hundred, these ideas are always going to be important to a writer.

Juice

       I read Juice and I will admit I could not discern what she was going on about.  I found it to be, not confusing but just plain strange.  I could not make heads or tails of the POINT of it all.  She was rambling about trains and street signs and people disappearing and about someone sleeping with the eighth sleep.  It seemed, to me, that she was trying to inject metaphors and symbolism into situations that did not necessarily need them.  I found it to be very back and forth.  It seemed choppy and not entirely well put together.  There was no description of character, environment or place.  She described something as people assuming the mountains they lived in were in the south based on the way they talked about it, but it wasn't.  Giving no real description to the place.  There were no names of actual characters either.  She had the sister, the lover, the brother.  No real solid characters to grasp, which I believe a short story should have. 

       I find this hard to call a book of short stories or short fiction.  In my opinion, a story needs to tell something, has to have some sort of point to it.  This had nothing.  It seemed to be entirely composed of brief thoughts, and that was it.  They were short  thoughts fluttering by, rather that a narration of  a story.  This was more or less a diary of different people.  Some characters lived in a town where people focused on sleep, with their first and second and third etc. sleep.  I would rather classify this as some  sort of poetry.  I didn't get a lot out of this book either, sad to say.  I spent most of my time reading it, trying to determine what was going on.  I just could not follow it.  I can't say how it all tied together though.  All the chapters seemed to have their own unique take on things.  Translation seemed to be Native American, or some other indigenous early civilization.  Proportion Surviving was about a man who loved drinking juice, then the apples stopped growing or something and he was having great issues, calling it the apple crisis.  No Through Street was about people in a small town obsessing over some street signs the main characters sister painted for the city, who eventually started producing more works.  At the end it turns out it wasn't her sister producing the work, which was kind of confusing.  First Sleep was about sleep.  I couldn't really tell the significance of each individual sleep.  Was first sleep sleeping for the first time or was it the first stage of sleep? There was no description.

       I found it incredibly hard to get through this book.  I kept stumbling my way through it, not really finding any meaning anywhere.  I believe if we were to discuss this in class and dissect it, I may be able to make heads or tails of just, something, anything in this book.  Maybe I'm looking too deep and there aren't any huge details and hidden meanings.  Or perhaps I'm not looking deep enough, only going into the shallow parts of it, barely scratching the surface on something that could be considered a great piece of art.  Either way I hope to gain some sort of meaning from this book, sooner or later.  

Fiction post

       Lamotts one rule for writing and writing well was to just write.  I've heard that more times than I can count, and I know it is a rule that works for people.  But to just write?  Wake up in the morning, sit down at a computer and put thoughts onto a page, simply to put thoughts onto a page seem.  That idea, though I've heard it more times than I really care to know, seems so foreign, so alien to me.  It isn't something I feel I would be able to do properly.  I can't see how just sitting and writing is supposed to help.  I understand that it is supposed to "train your unconscious to kick in for you creatively" but, why?  What good is it to kick in if there are simply no ideas there? All this advice seems to help me with, is writing thoughts that are in no way connected.

       I believe Lamott did bring up some excellent points though, especially in the Shitty First Drafts section.  It is best to write any idea you have down.  No matter what it seems like, or how bad you may think it actually is.  If there's an idea you need to write it and follow.  No one writes perfectly on their first try, even if they attempt to tell you differently.  Everything comes with patience and practice.  In this, I can see parts of Lamotts advice useful, and could potentially work for me.  When I write, I usually like to start off an idea that I had.  I write that idea down no matter where it will end up in the story.  I then work from that, I build backwards and forwards from that point.  When I feel that I have a proper base, I start from the beginning, and try and work my way towards that idea, and form an ending afterwards.

       As for the fiction story readings, I quite liked them.  They were short but entertaining, especially "Wallet"  by Allen Woodman.  Some were sad, and many of them had to deal with couples getting sick, and one of them dying, like "Survivors" and "Morning News".  Others were just peculiar, like the Mystery stories by Sharon Krinsky.  They almost sound like poems, but make a bit more sense.  I just find them all to be strange.  There was a hand shaking talking cat, a man deciding if he should pay for other peoples plate of strawberries, and someone thinking their discarded poems should be placed in a china cup.  They're short, and not entirely connected, but they don't feel out of place.  They aren't confusing, just short but complete thoughts.  I think I rather enjoyed the Mystery Stories.

        I really can't wait to get into the fiction writing.  Fiction has interested me much more than the poetry, and I really hope we get into some very interesting short fiction stories.  I'm curious as to what we will be studying and writing about, especially with such short time left already.  I hope its good!

Poem 53

       I chose to write a response to Ted Berrigan's poem 53.  From what I have read, I don't really enjoy Berrigan's work.  The thoughts seem to bounce around the page and run rampant, switching direction and changing tempo every other line.  Spacing of words and sentences were a bit of a put off as well.  I couldn't tell if there was a concrete purpose to the individual spacing or if it was for simple aesthetic appeal.
     
       I think that because of this, I found looking into poem 53 all the more entertaining.  I enjoyed breaking it down line by line, attempting to find the meaning behind it all.  From what I could gather, it was about young 'love'.  He often hinted at sex and the consequences of careless teen flings.  The line that stood out the most to me would have to be "O' wet kisses, the poem upon the page can tell you about teeth you've never dreamed could bite, nor be such reassurance".  It sounds as if it were almost advice from past experiences.  He has dealt with unplanned pregnancies and the burden it can bring on teenage parents.  The consequences of sex being the "teeth you've never dreamed could bite".

       Perhaps this could be taken as a forewarning.  The last line itself is "Who can say no to it later?"  Though  Berrigan just told the reader of the possible unplanned outcomes sex and young love, he acknowledges that no one will deny it later.  Humans will resort back to their basic instincts and needs, and the sex will continue.    Watch what you do, it could come back to bite you in the future.

Introduction,

Hello,
    I'm Ian, and this is my blog.  I am currently in the Introduction  to Creative Writing course for the spring semester at EMU.  I thought this course would be a good halfway point between the Art and English courses, which is my main reason for entering the course.  Hope to have a good time in class!