March 8, 2010

Thomas Jefferson’s Library at the Library of Congress

Filed under: Book Discussion,Writing — Brian Triber @ 10:08 am

A note of interest. The United States Library of Congress, those clever cutting-edge librarians in Washington DC, have just made available the catalog for Thomas Jefferson’s Library online. While the books themselves are rare, and not available for online browsing, they are linked to the LoC card catalog, which gives full descriptions of each. Still, it’s interesting to thumb through the categories, and titles like “Experiments and observations on electricity, made at Philadelphia in America” by Benjamin Franklin, “The History of Chess, together with short and plain instructions any one may easily play at it without the help of a teacher” by Robert Lambe, and “Hermes or A Philosophical Inquiry Concerning Universal Grammar” by James Harris, Esq., to discover the kind of works that made our third President tick.

Share

March 3, 2010

The Gulls’ Lament

Filed under: Writing Sample — Brian Triber @ 1:41 am

One of my first completed works, The Gulls’ Lament was written first as a poem in 1994, then expanded into a one-act that was produced as part of the 1994 Playwrights Platform Festival of New Plays.

For information on the production, click here.

For the original poem, click here.

For the script in its entirety, click here.

Share

March 1, 2010

The Box of Death

Filed under: Writing — Brian Triber @ 10:20 am

We’ve all seen it before: an amateur performance of Shakespeare or Neil Simon at a community or high school auditorium. The actor stands center stage, delivering Hamlet’s existential “To be or not to be…” speech, and his arms flail, he paces the stage like a caged animal, and the meaning and intensity of what should be a pivotal scene of the play is lost.

The same thing can happen to your writing. The hero is at the pivotal moment of the story, about to seize the damsel in distress from the clutches of the evil Doctor Devious when he spots his long lost knuffle-bunny on Devious’ trophy shelf. A million thoughts run through the hero’s mind, but only one runs through the reader’s — why is the writer derailing the story with all this unnecessary detail?

What am I talking about? Unnecessary descriptors. These are those marvelous turns of phrase that sprout up in the first draft and have to be weeded with a blow torch. Even though they may appear to grow into a flower of indescribable beauty, they’re really poisonous vines that trip the reader up and choke the life out of the story. Here’s an example:

There, on Doctor Devious’ shelf, caked with a fine layer of silver residue and nestled among the ample dust bunnies, sat another bunny — Jake, Dirk’s long-lost childhood knuffle-bunny, his ears ravaged by mammoth moths, droopily shielding his eyes from the imminent death of his former owner.

So, how is this problem solved? In theater, one way we solve all the wasted energy is to use a game called the “Box of Death.” In our version, a box about a foot square is chalked onto the floor, and the actor stands in the center. He or she then performs the same scene they have just flailed about, but are not allowed to leave the box or raise their arms upon penalty of death (or a good fifteen minute timeout.) The result is a more concentrated performance. Without all of the emotional energy draining away from the scene in unfocused movements, the actor’s voice becomes stronger, more intense, and the lines become more believable. Then, movement can be added back in, but only planned, intentional movement that visually echoes or amplifies the scene.

This method can be applied to writing. The Box of Death, instead of being chalked onto the floor, is inked onto the page, around the subject, noun, and object in the sentence. Only as many words as necessary are added inside the box to get the sentence across, and descriptors are eliminated except where they are needed to make the sentence work in context of the paragraph, the page, and the story. The resulting sentence has gigawatts more energy, drawing the reader through to the next sentence:

Dirk gasped. His long-lost knuffle-bunny peered at him beneath a layer of dust from Doctor Devious’s book shelf.

Cleaner? Yes. More tension? Yes. More movement? Yes.

Next time you find your story bogged down, think about what’s really necessary to tell the story, and use the Box of Death to resurrect your story’s momentum.

Share

February 8, 2010

New Copyright Office Rules Regarding Online Content

Filed under: Copyright — Brian Triber @ 11:43 am

According to an article in the Library of Congress Weekly Digest Bulletin, Issue 384, the Copyright Office has new interim rules regarding copyright of online content.

The most important information to be gleaned from the new rules is that: a new category has been created for online serial content: a formal description of that content will be forthcoming (although it is intended to include online magazines, newspapers, and other content analogous to physical serial print media); requirements for submission to the Copyright Office will be forthcoming, ostensibly because electronic copies are identical and the wording of the old law’s description of a Best Edition doesn’t apply in the same manner; and because electronic files are easily duplicated, there is a question of process regarding submission of two copies of the electronic work, as currently required by the print portion of the law.

Having said this, it appears that the most important unknown in this regulation is the question of the categories of media, and what constitutes each category. While this is a no-brainer for organizations like the New York Times, or Boston Globe, it raises all sorts of questions for blogs, information-sharing web sites, teaching sites, and marketing sites. What makes this unusual to me is the timing. It has literally taken decades to start developing these rules. Bulletin board sites have existed since the 1970s with unique content that has been de facto protected by existing copyright laws, and the law of the land up until this new rule has been that anything published by a content provider on a web site is copyrighted as of the time it was posted online.

The complete text of the proposal can be found here: Copyright Office Adopts Interim Regulation on Mandatory Deposit Governing Certain Works Published Only Online

Share

February 7, 2010

The Jubjub Birds

Filed under: Writing Sample — Brian Triber @ 9:59 am

My one-act play The Jubjub Birds has been added to my Writing Samples page.

This was written in 1998 and received its first production by Ubiquity Stage in 1999. For more information about the original production of the show, click here.

Share

Review of The Who’s “Tommy”

Filed under: Writing Sample — Brian Triber @ 9:46 am

Back in 1993, I wrote a review of the original touring company production of The Who’s “Tommy”, titled Tommy Rolls into Boston with Raves.

The review, posted on my Writing Samples page, was originally published in the December 17, 1993 issue of the Everett Advocate.

Share

January 28, 2010

The Beat Goes On

Filed under: A Writing Journal,Club 1692,Writer's Block,Writing — Brian Triber @ 10:25 pm

I’m making a big dent in this edit of the manuscript (Rev 9.4), but it feels like it just isn’t going fast enough. Yesterday I began rewriting the dressing room scene, in which Paul was originally attacked by Gideon after he has an initial conversation with Christopher’s ghost. My plan was to add a scrying scene with Avery where the first pawn shop scene (where Paul pawns Avery’s ring) is flashed back to, since Paul can’t recall having pawned the ring. The two ghost scenes needed removal, since they happened too fast on the heels of one another, and there’s no way Paul could handle three otherworldly happenings in one scene. As it is, I have to go back and rework his initial conversation with Christopher, which I’ve already moved into the preceding scene, to make Paul’s reactions more believable.

The difficulty I’m facing right now is one I’ve experienced before and have just now realized that I’ve hit again: Inertial block. This is when I sit down to start writing and can’t quite get going. It’s almost but not quite writer’s block. In this case I know exactly what has caused it. I stopped writing in mid-sentence without knowing exactly where I was going next. This is a very easy block to avoid, had I been more mindful that I was heading in that direction.

So, to overcome the inertia, I’ll probably erase a couple of sentences, rewrite them, and pull myself back into the scene. This is a case where rereading is a necessity. I know some writers advise never to look at what you’ve already written, but that advice generally applies to first drafts – not manuscript doctoring. In this case, I know where the scene has come from, where it’s heading, and what should happen next, just not how to get there.

Back to the playground…

Share

January 26, 2010

Cherry Sour with Bitters ©2007 by B. H. Triber

Filed under: Writing,Writing Sample — Brian Triber @ 10:12 pm

Cherry Sour with Bitters is a piece I wrote in 2007 that sat on a shelf for a while. It was subsequently entered in the 2008 OUT Short Fiction Contest.

The short story is about the relationship between a drag queen and her supportive lover the evening after a show. I particularly like the atmosphere of the piece. Originally it was a kind of character study of Avery from my novel-length manuscript Club 1692, but there are many differences, not the least of which is that Avery, a former college professor, is much more independent that Cherry, and has been through many more trials, making her much tougher than Lee press-ons.

The short story can be found on my Writing Samples page.

Share

October 25, 2009

Revision 9 of Club 1692 MS Completed

Filed under: A Writing Journal — Brian Triber @ 11:41 am

As of this past Friday, October 23, the 9th revision of my manuscript has been completed. Asides from a few papercuts off the freshly printed pages (incurred while stacking the sheets for the 3-hole punch) I have emerged relatively unscathed.

Emotionally, I feel like I was lust hit by a car. That is, I am numb and trying to get my bearings. With no more work to do on the actual  manuscript (well, not really, but I’ll explain that later) I am now planning out the next project – NaNoWriMo 2009.

Now, I hear you ask, Revision 9? In actuality, with the subrevisions of the MS thrown in, it’s actually more like 12. But you’re probably wondering how all this is tracked. When I began this project a couple of years ago, I started with Rev 1. This was my first draft, and my baseline. From there, whenever a major change to the MS was made, such as shifting entire chapters, cutting or adding scenes, or incorporating redlines from a full reading, the Revision was incremented — numbers are, after all, cheap.

The main exception was Rev 3. This is the revision I first sent out to my writers group and a select group of readers. For purposes of feedback, I saved this into an Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) file with each line numbered individually. (This was entirely for ease of common terminology, as we liked to call it back in the Quality Assurance trenches.) After that, every revision, up until Rev 8.1 were full revisions.

8.1? Okay, here’s where it seems like things get tricky, but it really isn’t . At about Rev 8, the MS was fairly stable. It was at this point that a few changes had to be incorporated on several occasions, but not enough change to warrant a full revision. So, by numbering the revisions 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, I was able to incorporate various redlines without getting confused over which Rev 8 I was working on.

What was left? A full out-loud read-through of the manuscript. To speed things up here, I took Rev 8.4 and ran the Macintosh’s Speech feature on the the file while I read along in hard copy with a red pen. The trick here was that almost all (note, I say “almost”) problems were minor things like repeating the same word three or four times in a paragraph, or missing or wrong punctuation – that kind of thing. Since the computer kept reading at its own pace, I had no choice but to shut off my right brian and let my left brain do its work and circle all the errors.

Now, an explanation as to what this means regarding writer’s block. Usually, writer’s block can be caused by the left brain (logical) being too critical and not allowing the right brain (creative) do its work without overly-worrying about spelling, punctuation, whether the writing is as good as Tolstoy’s, etc. By the end of the project, I had managed to completely shut out my left brain when writing, which meant I had some difficulty turning it back on. The technique I ended up using was to force myself to think only in terms of identifying problems, not offering the solution to them.

From this point on, as I identify errors in the MS (which there will be), thy will be rolled into Rev 9.1. What does this mean exactly? This means that when I finally send out a copy of the manuscript to an agent, it will be Rev -. Rev -? This is a baseline revision. Once I hit this point,only an act of Congress will cause any changes. In other words, if there is a request from the publisher, or the agent, etc. to fix something, ,from this point forward the manuscript get letter revisions, such as Rev A. This makes it easy to figure out what stage of development the manuscript is in, and also lets me track its distribution better.

So, where do I go from here? Hopefully I’ll be adding entries to the blog on a more regular basis. NaNoWriMo 2009 is coming up in just a few days, so I’ll be getting in gear for that. (I’ll be posting that battle toward Zero Draft on the Blog as well.)

Long term, beginning in November, I spend at least two hours a day, if not more, finishing off the query letter. That should take 2 weeks max (probably  bit optimistic, but this is still part of the learning curve.) This will be followed by getting the querry letter out to all the agets I’ve already selected and researched. The goal is to have those letters and emails sent by end of November.

Following this, I will sit down to write a few sample chapters and scenes for the project after next. I have found that my own writing process requires a lengthy gestation period to determine wether a story idea has sea legs. After writing these sample chapters, I’ll shelve the project and work on the next project, whose working title is “SCREW”. (Not a very good working title, but it’s sufficient for now.) This was a manuscript I had written several sample chapters for a few years ago. The next step here is to analyze what I’ve got, do character sketches, then re-plot the story using notes I’ve collected over the years. This process should take a few months at least. From there? We’ll see when we get there. Probably a new first draft.

As I mentioned earlier, I will try to keep this blog going a little more frequently. The last part of the writing process was all-consuming, and I even dropped out of sight from family and friends. Now that I’ve been through the wringer once, I know what to expect next time, and I’ll be able to schedule everything that needs to get done in a more sane manner.

Share

May 7, 2009

Change of Focus

Filed under: A Writing Journal,Writing — Brian Triber @ 8:29 pm

So, having gone through a mini-meltdown following the Muse & the Marketplace, I have come to the realization that I need a vacation from the current piece I’ve been working on for the last year — Club 1692. I’ve gotten far too close to the material and can’t gain enough perspective to perform proper edits (cutting scenes wholesale, etc.).

So, I’ve decided today to shift focus to the next novel. At the very least I can plot it out and explore some character studies. I’ve already got a few scenes written from years ago, so I also have the task of figuring out which, if any, can be kept, and what additional scenes I can envision in the work.

This actually began last night at around 2:00AM when I opened Dramatica Pro for the first time in a year (you could hear the gears in the software grinding the motes of dust in their teeth). While working the story-form in the software, I discovered a wonderful relationship between the antagonist and the helper character that I hadn’t considered before. That went into both my notes and Dramatica.

We’ll see where this change of tact leads. At the very least, if Club 1692 ends up going nowhere, it helped me get through the 1st draft portion of the writing process. Sadly, I haven’t found a really good resource to describe working through the 2nd draft. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Share
« Newer PostsOlder Posts »