This new stage of creation has my adrenaline pumping, dopamine surging, and serotonin gushing. The pleasure is hard to describe but take my word for it, few endeavors bring me this much joy.
Showing posts with label students. Show all posts
Showing posts with label students. Show all posts
Friday, June 29, 2012
Joy, Joy, Joy, Joy of Drawing
This new stage of creation has my adrenaline pumping, dopamine surging, and serotonin gushing. The pleasure is hard to describe but take my word for it, few endeavors bring me this much joy.
Sunday, June 17, 2012
Status Report
Just finished page 289 (Eccl. 8:9) in Draft Four.
Each successive draft takes longer than the one previous. I would not have predicted this. I thought things would go faster as time passes. Alas, I am very wrong. The reasons for the slow down? In earlier drafts one could slop any old idea together. As one nears completion one becomes more careful knowing the days of editing are nearing an end.
Draft Four is 428 pages of hard copy with completed text, word balloons, and panel arrangements just waiting for pencil roughs. When I do the pencil sketches on Draft Four do I still call it Draft Four? Draft Five doesn't seem right. How about Draft Four, Part Two?
The stage (as I now imagine it) will be an angular, straight lines, interior class room. The characters will be lumpy and round and flexible. Lumpy characters on their angular stage will be "carried" in panels which themselves are angular, square, rectangle, and uniform. The six panel "grid" for each page gives me leeway to combine panels in about 6-8 configurations. But they're all very orderly and not cartoony at all. This raises an interesting question about graphic novels. When does the art serve itself rather than the text? I don't want to get so fancy with drawing that story flow is sabotaged.
Creating is evolution; evolution is creation. As I tweak dialog and word balloons I'm tantalized by the visual jokes I anticipate making (pictures on student tee shirts, caricatures, Power Point slide shows, lap top screens). The odd thing is....I don't know what those jokes will be but I'm confident they'll show up when I need them.
I purchased METAMAUS by Art Spiegelman. He won a Pulitzer for his graphic novel, MAUS. As I read METAMAUS I'm hoping to find tips on how I too can win a Pulitzer. There are so many differences between our creations that I'm not holding my breath. At the same time, I am highly inspired by his process. It took him eleven years! I'm giving myself one to two, max. He started when he was 24. I'm almost 60. Were I young I'd perhaps be more careful and thorough. Sadly, I gotta get this book done soon as there are other tasks I need to accomplish in my third third (age 60-90).
Each successive draft takes longer than the one previous. I would not have predicted this. I thought things would go faster as time passes. Alas, I am very wrong. The reasons for the slow down? In earlier drafts one could slop any old idea together. As one nears completion one becomes more careful knowing the days of editing are nearing an end.
Draft Four is 428 pages of hard copy with completed text, word balloons, and panel arrangements just waiting for pencil roughs. When I do the pencil sketches on Draft Four do I still call it Draft Four? Draft Five doesn't seem right. How about Draft Four, Part Two?
The stage (as I now imagine it) will be an angular, straight lines, interior class room. The characters will be lumpy and round and flexible. Lumpy characters on their angular stage will be "carried" in panels which themselves are angular, square, rectangle, and uniform. The six panel "grid" for each page gives me leeway to combine panels in about 6-8 configurations. But they're all very orderly and not cartoony at all. This raises an interesting question about graphic novels. When does the art serve itself rather than the text? I don't want to get so fancy with drawing that story flow is sabotaged.
Creating is evolution; evolution is creation. As I tweak dialog and word balloons I'm tantalized by the visual jokes I anticipate making (pictures on student tee shirts, caricatures, Power Point slide shows, lap top screens). The odd thing is....I don't know what those jokes will be but I'm confident they'll show up when I need them.
I purchased METAMAUS by Art Spiegelman. He won a Pulitzer for his graphic novel, MAUS. As I read METAMAUS I'm hoping to find tips on how I too can win a Pulitzer. There are so many differences between our creations that I'm not holding my breath. At the same time, I am highly inspired by his process. It took him eleven years! I'm giving myself one to two, max. He started when he was 24. I'm almost 60. Were I young I'd perhaps be more careful and thorough. Sadly, I gotta get this book done soon as there are other tasks I need to accomplish in my third third (age 60-90).
Monday, April 30, 2012
First Full Pages
Disclaimer: the faces are provisional, the word balloons need a new font (Comic Sans is over used) in all caps (as seems to be the industry standard) and they lack the tail thingy that lets readers know who is speaking. The coloring is haphazard, the pagination is convoluted (250 Publisher landscape pages = 125 Paint pages; not sure how to number them yet). My point in this exercise is to check the readability of the word balloons and to see if the background color makes them more legible. The text is in its second draft so further editing is in store.
Background. There are four characters in this thought unit, Mr Q (speaking the words of Ecclesiastes), the evangelical Christian girl who is sweet on the militaristic vet, both of whom are chided by the feminist with big hair.
Here are the results.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
"The Story Dictates the Cast," so says...
crime mystery writer, Janet Evanovich.
I agree. I cooked up a story and am creating characters to act in and carry forward that story.
However, in my case, pre-written dialogue dictates the story. I am not starting with a blank page but 400 or so pages each of which begins with another's quote. It's not the easiest way to create a novel, especially when those opening quotes are obtuse, contradictory, and mostly depressing.
What I am adding--humor, cartoons, philosophical and theological reflections--will hopefully make Ecclesiastes accessible to modern readers. I say "accessible," and not "understood." I'm not sure I understand it. I hope to empathize with and validate readers who puzzle over this strange book. Or who puzzle over the meaning of life. Or who are depressed or suffering or experiencing existential angst. I want to give persons of faith permission to raise questions of justice, science, meaning, sin, wisdom, death, suffering, and food.
I'm worried that I'm 100% irrelevant to my intended audience, university students. My dialog is loaded with boomer friendly illustrations so I'll lose 90% of twenty-somethings. Of the 10% that remain, I lose 7% for being too theological and 2% for being too philosophical. Of the remaining 1% .5% don't read, .4% gave up comic books at age 12, and the remaining .1% look like fans at a Bassnectar concert.
So why do I keep going? Ecclesiastes U is therapy for sadness. I didn't expect to end up visiting my wife in a nursing home at our young age, struggling to understand her words, or watching the glimmer in her eyes fade away.
In fiction story dictates cast; in real life stories crash upon, squish like a bug, and rattle the cast to their bones. This cast member, anyway. There's high probability that, once finished, this massive project will languish on a digital shelf, a fitting end to illustrating an absurd book inspired by an absurd disease informing an absurd life.
I agree. I cooked up a story and am creating characters to act in and carry forward that story.
However, in my case, pre-written dialogue dictates the story. I am not starting with a blank page but 400 or so pages each of which begins with another's quote. It's not the easiest way to create a novel, especially when those opening quotes are obtuse, contradictory, and mostly depressing.
What I am adding--humor, cartoons, philosophical and theological reflections--will hopefully make Ecclesiastes accessible to modern readers. I say "accessible," and not "understood." I'm not sure I understand it. I hope to empathize with and validate readers who puzzle over this strange book. Or who puzzle over the meaning of life. Or who are depressed or suffering or experiencing existential angst. I want to give persons of faith permission to raise questions of justice, science, meaning, sin, wisdom, death, suffering, and food.
I'm worried that I'm 100% irrelevant to my intended audience, university students. My dialog is loaded with boomer friendly illustrations so I'll lose 90% of twenty-somethings. Of the 10% that remain, I lose 7% for being too theological and 2% for being too philosophical. Of the remaining 1% .5% don't read, .4% gave up comic books at age 12, and the remaining .1% look like fans at a Bassnectar concert.
 |
| Fans of Bassnectar; not one graphic novel in the mix |
In fiction story dictates cast; in real life stories crash upon, squish like a bug, and rattle the cast to their bones. This cast member, anyway. There's high probability that, once finished, this massive project will languish on a digital shelf, a fitting end to illustrating an absurd book inspired by an absurd disease informing an absurd life.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Meet The Cast
This is the cast I combine and juxtapose to create a compelling narrative as students react/respond to Mr. Q's lectures. They are stand-ins, reading lines for whoever will play the future character. There is some jockeying and competition between these candidates; they each want the job. Staring in this graphic novel will be a great boon to their careers and fame. Final casting is still way off but I am impressed with the acting skills of these script readers.
MAIN CHARACTERS (non of which have proper names yet; they're identified by predominant trait)
ENTHUSIAST This student loves Mr. Q regardless of how obtuse or self contradictory the lectures are. He's a loyal Golden Retriever type, fawning to a fault.
ANXIETY DRIVEN. This poor soul is whipped back and forth by Mr. Q's doom and gloom. I'm not sure of her back story (yet?) but she's hyper sensitive to threats, risk, and danger. She lives in perpetual fear, hyper vigilant to all worst case scenarios, which is all of them.
JOKER. Every sit com needs a wise cracking quipster. He's only in the class for a grade; his highest value is being liked as class clown.
PRE-LAW. This fine actress engages Mr. Q in a protracted discussion about estate planning. She got so fed up with his lack of cooperation that she leaves in exasperation.
DOOFUS. Joker tells jokes. Doofus is outrageous in his silliness. He's a champion of lost causes, ignorant of his own ignorance, and zealous to absurd proportions.
SENSUALIST. He loves sex, pleasure, wine and cigars and vacations. He's not above snorting a snoot full when the opportunity arises, which isn't often enough in his mind.
VEGAN PSYCH MAJOR. I know I'm not supposed to have favorites, but this lover of co-ops, organic foods, social justice, and psychology with feather ear rings and facial piercings fascinates me. She's too prickly for any romantic interests but I love this woman's opinions...which she shares effortlessly.
SCIENTIFIC MATERIALIST. This guy has zero tolerance for superstition, faith, or god talk. He's irritated by religion and the many unverified claims Mr. Q makes. This guy is a skeptic, atheist, logical positivist, and brilliant. A necessary and important player in any philosophical discussion.
HIP HOP ARTIST. Don't think only bling or gold teeth define this guy. He's brilliant, pissed, creative, intolerant of any bullshit, and a welcome addition to discussions of social justice, economics, and racism. Keeping a lid on his potty mouth is my biggest challenge with this guy.
EPICUREAN. Any mention of food in this class (of which there are many) and Mr. Epicurean is there. He loves Mr. Q's frequent carpe deum statements, "Eat, drink, and be merry."
FOIL. Somebody's got to move the plot along without a joke, wise crack, or philosophical profundity. That's this guy's job. I also think he's going to play a significant role in the future somehow. Of all the characters he's the most reposed. By contrast the others appear reactionary, frantic, and on speed.
FEMINIST. Another one of my favorites. Like the Scientific Materialist this character has little patience with fanatics. She's also the watch dog for patriarchy, sexism, and gender inequality. When we get to later chapters she's going to justifiably flip out. Stay tuned.
MILITARIST. In college on the GI Bill, this guy loves guns, force, and military might. So far he's only played a minor role but in upcoming chapters he'll go bonkers with many of Mr. Q's dovish comments.
AGED HIPPIE. How can we discuss death-saturated Ecclesiastes without a fan of the Grateful Dead? The 60s glory days are behind him but he's not deterred. He's still fighting the Man, the plastic people, and the rising cost of dope.
TEACHER ASSISTANT. While not identified as such yet--I'm only to chapter 5:10 in rough draft 2 and this character's true identity has not yet become public among the students; they think he's just a brown noser--this character is necessary to clarify some of Mr. Q's more obtuse statements. He'll give the wrap-up lecture (Eccl. 12). I use him sparingly but he comes in very handy when I need to make sure readers understand (though not necessarily agree with) what Mr. Q is saying.
MATERIALIST. This marketing and business major loves money. Discussions of social justice, existentialism, and death are irrelevant to him since his highest ambition is becoming a multimillionaire before he's 30.
FUNDAMENTALIST. Ah yes, how can we forget this key player? Her enthusiasm for absolute Truth works against her because Mr. Q is a moving target. She glibly writes off any philosophy that contradicts the Bible, which is often in this class. Her emotional fervency and closed mindedness do not earn her a lot of friends in this class. She's okay with that, however, as she wears her persecution complex on her sleeve. I'm trying my hardest not to create a straw man with this character.....
ACTRESS. This is the first (of many) students to drop the class. Her passion is happiness and the tenor of this class is so morose she bailed in the first week. She switched majors and chose a new career guaranteed to bring endless bliss, acting.
PARTY GIRL. Tanning, Cancun, drama, and her dad's largess keep this gal going. "This class sucks but I need the credits," she whines. But like all these characters we don't know what she'll be thinking by the end of this class. I can't wait to see what happens.
MAIN CHARACTERS (non of which have proper names yet; they're identified by predominant trait)
MILITARIST. In college on the GI Bill, this guy loves guns, force, and military might. So far he's only played a minor role but in upcoming chapters he'll go bonkers with many of Mr. Q's dovish comments.
AGED HIPPIE. How can we discuss death-saturated Ecclesiastes without a fan of the Grateful Dead? The 60s glory days are behind him but he's not deterred. He's still fighting the Man, the plastic people, and the rising cost of dope.
TEACHER ASSISTANT. While not identified as such yet--I'm only to chapter 5:10 in rough draft 2 and this character's true identity has not yet become public among the students; they think he's just a brown noser--this character is necessary to clarify some of Mr. Q's more obtuse statements. He'll give the wrap-up lecture (Eccl. 12). I use him sparingly but he comes in very handy when I need to make sure readers understand (though not necessarily agree with) what Mr. Q is saying.
MATERIALIST. This marketing and business major loves money. Discussions of social justice, existentialism, and death are irrelevant to him since his highest ambition is becoming a multimillionaire before he's 30.
Fleshing Out Characters
I've never played a role playing game although I once had an 11 year old boy client teach me how to play the card game Magic (or was it Pokemon? I forget). A conflict mediator and weak pacifist like me found the "No negotiations; I will crush you because I'm bigger, stronger, and more powerful than you" premise of the game a bit unnerving. I suppose my favorite game chess is no different; it too involves strategy, pieces with different powers, and the same object: conquer your opponent. But what sticks with me is the memory of how this kid was entranced with combining players with different skills and weapons in order to beat his opponent, wimpy me.
I had the same taste of excitement of role playing this morning. It's Saturday and after a full weak of conflict resolution I got up at 4:45 AM eager to tackle EU10 (Ecclesiastes 5:8-9). It's only 2 verses and the subject matter does not easily lend itself to harmless joshing and witty banter. It's about oppression of the poor, government corruption, and Mr. Q's callousness to it all.
But after honing the dialog (for the 2nd or 3rd time? I forget) I finally got to attach characters to each word balloon. I have a file called CLIP PAGES wherein are stored sheets of faces I've drawn; multiple images of the same face on each page. As I ponder each word balloon I peruse this cast of characters then clip and tape the face in the appropriate panel. Part of me winces; it just doesn't seem right for a grown man to find so much pleasure at cutting and taping pieces of paper. But another part of me soars like that 11 year old kid plotting to conquer the universe by combining characters' strengths.
Even though the faces I've drawn are not the final faces I'll use for each character I must admit: they are growing on me. In my next post I'll unveil for the very first time some of the regulars with a short description.
I had the same taste of excitement of role playing this morning. It's Saturday and after a full weak of conflict resolution I got up at 4:45 AM eager to tackle EU10 (Ecclesiastes 5:8-9). It's only 2 verses and the subject matter does not easily lend itself to harmless joshing and witty banter. It's about oppression of the poor, government corruption, and Mr. Q's callousness to it all.
But after honing the dialog (for the 2nd or 3rd time? I forget) I finally got to attach characters to each word balloon. I have a file called CLIP PAGES wherein are stored sheets of faces I've drawn; multiple images of the same face on each page. As I ponder each word balloon I peruse this cast of characters then clip and tape the face in the appropriate panel. Part of me winces; it just doesn't seem right for a grown man to find so much pleasure at cutting and taping pieces of paper. But another part of me soars like that 11 year old kid plotting to conquer the universe by combining characters' strengths.
Even though the faces I've drawn are not the final faces I'll use for each character I must admit: they are growing on me. In my next post I'll unveil for the very first time some of the regulars with a short description.
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Words, Pictures, Talent, and Creating People
Since beginning this graphic novel last December I continue to puzzle over several questions: am I creating a book with pictures or adding pictures to words? Do I have the time (not to mention talent) to pull this off? How does one create cartoon characters with subtlety, complexity, and depth?
Here are my musings about these questions so far (in order).
Scott McCloud and Wil Eisner have probably described the significance of words influencing drawings, drawings influencing words, and the interplay between them. Rather than read other's opinions on this subject, however, I'm learning by doing. Currently my words are only slightly influenced by my sketchy thumbnails, doodles, and drawings. Someday soon I hope my finished words will be improved as I add pictures.
Jodi Bergsma said in my last post (and I misquote), "I'm too busy writing to read books about writing." If I were 20 I'd make the time. But I'm in a race against the clock and am relying on 60 years of reading and drawing to carry the day. I read recently, "A picture is worth a thousand words, but try saying that in a picture."
In How We Decide author Jonah Leher made an interesting observation. The chess computer that beat Gary Kasporov was a terrible back gammon player, and the computer that beat the world's leading back gammon player would lose at chess. Leher's point? Unlike computers that can do one thing very well, the human brain can do lots and lots of things reasonably well. I take comfort in this. I can't write, cast, act, direct, design, philosophize, do theology or psychology, draw, or tell jokes like pros, but I can do each of those things somewhat. The combination of these tasks is what'll make this graphic novel unique.
Finally, isn't "complex cartoon characters" an oxymoron? As I create the actors in this fictional drama I must choose how many layers of personality to give each one. Currently I've divided the cast into many, many uni-(not di- or tri-) mensional characters. One character loves money, one loves jokes, one loves sex, and one loves Jesus. One loves social justice and one loves scientific materialism. One is a feminist and one is a gun toting vet. One is an aging hippy enthralled with conspiracies and drugs; another is pre-law. On and on the list goes. I'm showing no restraint in creating characters. It's actually quite easy. God used dust, I use ink.
My problem from a literary point of view: how many characters is too many? This is a graphic, not Russian, novel. I want readers to care about a few likable characters rather than feeling overwhelmed by dozens of them. The cast of FRIENDS had six main characters with dozens of secondaries. Can I do the same? As is, I've got hundreds of secondary but no main characters. Combining several disparate traits into one person adds complexity and realism; we've all got sub-personalities. But can those characters come to life with all their multiplicity, layers and conflicting desires in a comic book?
We'll just have to wait and see. The process is sheer bliss.
Here are my musings about these questions so far (in order).
Scott McCloud and Wil Eisner have probably described the significance of words influencing drawings, drawings influencing words, and the interplay between them. Rather than read other's opinions on this subject, however, I'm learning by doing. Currently my words are only slightly influenced by my sketchy thumbnails, doodles, and drawings. Someday soon I hope my finished words will be improved as I add pictures.
Jodi Bergsma said in my last post (and I misquote), "I'm too busy writing to read books about writing." If I were 20 I'd make the time. But I'm in a race against the clock and am relying on 60 years of reading and drawing to carry the day. I read recently, "A picture is worth a thousand words, but try saying that in a picture."
In How We Decide author Jonah Leher made an interesting observation. The chess computer that beat Gary Kasporov was a terrible back gammon player, and the computer that beat the world's leading back gammon player would lose at chess. Leher's point? Unlike computers that can do one thing very well, the human brain can do lots and lots of things reasonably well. I take comfort in this. I can't write, cast, act, direct, design, philosophize, do theology or psychology, draw, or tell jokes like pros, but I can do each of those things somewhat. The combination of these tasks is what'll make this graphic novel unique.
Finally, isn't "complex cartoon characters" an oxymoron? As I create the actors in this fictional drama I must choose how many layers of personality to give each one. Currently I've divided the cast into many, many uni-(not di- or tri-) mensional characters. One character loves money, one loves jokes, one loves sex, and one loves Jesus. One loves social justice and one loves scientific materialism. One is a feminist and one is a gun toting vet. One is an aging hippy enthralled with conspiracies and drugs; another is pre-law. On and on the list goes. I'm showing no restraint in creating characters. It's actually quite easy. God used dust, I use ink.
My problem from a literary point of view: how many characters is too many? This is a graphic, not Russian, novel. I want readers to care about a few likable characters rather than feeling overwhelmed by dozens of them. The cast of FRIENDS had six main characters with dozens of secondaries. Can I do the same? As is, I've got hundreds of secondary but no main characters. Combining several disparate traits into one person adds complexity and realism; we've all got sub-personalities. But can those characters come to life with all their multiplicity, layers and conflicting desires in a comic book?
We'll just have to wait and see. The process is sheer bliss.
Sunday, April 15, 2012
Progress Update and Boomer Reflections
After a difficult week slogging through EU5 (Eccl. 3:1-15), I finished touching up the gen-y-affirming script, carefully positioned and outlined each word balloon, and attached appropriate characters to all the word balloons.
Then this weekend I finished EU6 (Eccl. 3:16-22) with script and characters. I'm happy with the results, confident that another edit or two will make a good script even better.
I've printed EU 7 (Eccl. 4:1-12) and EU 8 (Eccl. 4:13-16) with placed and outlined word balloons awaiting dialog editing and assigning speakers to each word balloon (my delightful project this week).
What slowed me down last week was the realization that the dialog I'd created was straight from my boomer brain and too antiquated for my intended audience (20 somethings). Thankfully, I've got a character (working name: Aging Hippie) who will be my voice concerning all things 60s related.
Interestingly, I watched The Way this weekend. The main character, Martin Sheen, is a man in his 60s who traveled to Spain and he met a woman in her 20s (?) who was angry and said to Sheen,
I was somewhat taken aback by this jab. Either I'm naive, or blessed with friendly acquaintances in their 20s. I'm not used to being the butt of another's animosity. With no recollection of any attempt on my part to screw anyone over I feel I've been unjustly criticized. (Maybe I'm being too sensitive; after all, she didn't say it to me).
On my next edit I plan on expunging all gen-y, off-putting comments from my ancient brain. To replace them perfectly I'd need to interview current university students but do not plan on doing so. This project is growing in size and I'm going to sacrifice perfect dialog in favor of completion. A graphic novel with less than perfect dialog is better than no graphic novel at all.
First draft: 68 or 69 large pages with hand written dialog.
Second draft: Publisher pages with six panels and typed dialog.
Third draft: Publisher pages with polished dialog and Scotch taped characters (EU6 brought me to page 97).
 |
| Sample page from EU5 (page 74) |
Then this weekend I finished EU6 (Eccl. 3:16-22) with script and characters. I'm happy with the results, confident that another edit or two will make a good script even better.
 |
| Sample page from EU6 (page 96) |
I've printed EU 7 (Eccl. 4:1-12) and EU 8 (Eccl. 4:13-16) with placed and outlined word balloons awaiting dialog editing and assigning speakers to each word balloon (my delightful project this week).
What slowed me down last week was the realization that the dialog I'd created was straight from my boomer brain and too antiquated for my intended audience (20 somethings). Thankfully, I've got a character (working name: Aging Hippie) who will be my voice concerning all things 60s related.
Interestingly, I watched The Way this weekend. The main character, Martin Sheen, is a man in his 60s who traveled to Spain and he met a woman in her 20s (?) who was angry and said to Sheen,
"Hey Boomer! You know, as in Baby Boomer? You have all of the signs of that desperate generation taking its last breath trying to screw the rest of us over one last time. The only thing missing from you, Boomer, is one of those stupid looking pony tails and collection of James Taylor songs on your ipod."
He said, "I love James Taylor, and I don't have an ipod."
I was somewhat taken aback by this jab. Either I'm naive, or blessed with friendly acquaintances in their 20s. I'm not used to being the butt of another's animosity. With no recollection of any attempt on my part to screw anyone over I feel I've been unjustly criticized. (Maybe I'm being too sensitive; after all, she didn't say it to me).
On my next edit I plan on expunging all gen-y, off-putting comments from my ancient brain. To replace them perfectly I'd need to interview current university students but do not plan on doing so. This project is growing in size and I'm going to sacrifice perfect dialog in favor of completion. A graphic novel with less than perfect dialog is better than no graphic novel at all.
First draft: 68 or 69 large pages with hand written dialog.
Second draft: Publisher pages with six panels and typed dialog.
Third draft: Publisher pages with polished dialog and Scotch taped characters (EU6 brought me to page 97).
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Variables In NarrativeLand
Check this out: as I continue to scrutinize every word in EU1 (the first section of my graphic novel covering Ecclesiastes 1:1-11) I am struck by how many variables I'm going to be juggling here and in the next 23 sections.
Mr. Q's utterances are fixed; I am putting into his mouth direct quotes from Ecclesiastes.
Student utterances are fluid; I am putting into their mouths whatever I want. Juxtaposing students and Mr. Q opens an infinite array of possibilities. In response to Mr. Q's quips, quotes, and phrases can I choose from a wide variety of students. Will the respondent be the
Where on the scale of agreement with Mr. Q will each of those candidates fall?
Mr. Q's utterances are fixed; I am putting into his mouth direct quotes from Ecclesiastes.
- life is vanity
- money is the answer to everything
- eat, drink, and be merry
- the eyes are never full
- time and chance happen to us all
- fear God
- and over 400 other direct quotes
Student utterances are fluid; I am putting into their mouths whatever I want. Juxtaposing students and Mr. Q opens an infinite array of possibilities. In response to Mr. Q's quips, quotes, and phrases can I choose from a wide variety of students. Will the respondent be the
- class clown?
- scientific rationalist?
- evangelical Puritan?
- anxious existentialist?
- hedonist?
- or any of the other 100+ candidates?
Where on the scale of agreement with Mr. Q will each of those candidates fall?
- fully embracing with enthusiasm?
- Considering an embrace?
- Benign neglect and neutrality?
- Disinclined to embrace?
- Rabid opposition, fully rejecting, resisting even to the point of walking out in protest?
- And do the students move up or down the scale of agreement over the course of the novel?
Will student responses be:
- funny?
- serious?
- thought provoking?
- contrariwise?
- illuminating the inherent obscurity of many of Mr. Q's words?
How will students interact with each other?
- forming alliances?
- forming competing affiliations?
- insulting?
- flirting?
- ignoring?
Even though I've written 400 pages of responses to Mr. Q's every utterance, I've yet to make those student responses cohere, tell a story, and make sense. This classroom will not be home to a surreal fever dream, a psychedelic flight of fancy, or random images without direction. I'm writing a novel with beginning, middle, and end.
By the way, 400 pages sounds unmanageable but actually I'm juggling it all pretty well so far. Ecclesiastes isn't War and Peace, The Diary of Samuel Pepys, or Lord of the Rings. It's only 222 verses and I believe will be turned into an interesting and visually engaging tale of philosophy, theology, and psychology.
If I can get all these variables organized.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Let the Editing Begin!
I've laid aside my 69 hand drawn pages with doodles, scribblings, and first draft text and am now working exclusively with the 25 Publisher files, each page of which has six panels.
The first of those 25 files was opened this week for the first time since I wrote it last December. As mentioned, I did NOT review what I wrote on purpose; I wanted to "flesh out" the whole narrative arc first.
That first file (named EU1) contains the text from Ecclesiastes 1:1-11 and is 19 pages long. Here's what I'm discovering.
1. One of the characters in this fictional graphic novel speaks text that I did not write. This is perhaps unique in story writing. I am given dialog I cannot change, alter, or edit. Mr. Q speaks and I deal with it.
2. As a writer I react to, interact with, and make my actors act upon Mr. Q's words. Think of a grain of sand in an oyster....I hope to create pearls around that often aggravating irritation.
3. The me who interacts with Mr. Q has one brain, but that brain has neural multiplicity. Just like a shopper looks at a used car through various lenses (cost, mileage, color, MPG, leg room), I looked at Mr. Q's words through a variety of lenses, none of which was explicit or discreet. I just read quip from Mr. Q and jotted whatever came to mind. After 3 months I came up with 400+ pages of random reactions.
4. Now that I'm revisiting my random reactions I'm sorting through them, bunching them according to common themes, and shaping characters from those common themes. For example, many student quotes were silly, off the cuff comments (like Chandler on Friends). Other quotes were absurdly serious, deferring, and loyal to Mr. Q (like Dwight Shrute on the Office). Still other quotes were panicky and reactive (think of the anxious Chicken Little). There is also an aging hippie, a vegan foodie, and a scientific materialist who embraces atheism. There are also bit parts played by an agnostic, Earnest Hemingway, a pregnant student, and even me in a cameo role (a conceit I copy from Alfred Hitchcock).
5. This seems like an odd way to create characters. I've never taken a creative writing course or asked any novelists how they come up with their characters. Maybe they all start with words/point of view and then figure out age, gender, costume, back story, and appearance later. I somehow had the notion that writers start with a body and give it attitude and then words; I'm staring with words, giving the speaker of those words attitude, and someday will flesh them out in 2-D. (If this were a play or movie it'd be 3-D).
6. As I plow through those 19 pages of random quips and quotes I'm adjusting the size of the word balloons so they are uniform (Publisher has a nifty "shapes" tool which I use to outline the text boxes with round edged rectangles). I'm also mindful of pagination; I'll start EU2 with page 20.
7. I then printed a paper copy of those 19 pages and read and reread them all in one sitting trying to imagine the flow, how this narrative arc is getting launched, and the trajectories that are being established. Since this is the first scene, readers will be making many important assumptions, so I gotta get 'em right. I want all the loose threads to eventually be tied up.
8. The decision to not draw anything yet (faces, rooms, desks, lap tops, costume, etc) forces me to stick with character development via ideas. I'm imagining characters as pure thought (like Plato's or Jung's arch types). Only later will the word become flesh (or in this case, ink).
9. Since I do not plan on including any chapter divisions (a decision I may reverse), I do plan on helping readers distinguish each passage (what Bible scholars call a pericope) by coloring the backgrounds differently. In the case of EU1, text 1:1-8a will have a different color background from 1:8b-11.
10. Editing text on paper is easier for me than on a screen. Seeing my dialog on a page as future readers will see it (the finished product will be a book, not an eBook--another decision I may reverse), I have greater empathy with my readers. Consequently, I'm astonished at how much editing I did on EU1. The text is now (so it seems in this moment) crisper, snappier, and funnier. This is evolution at work; much of the first creation survived, but natural selection has not been kind to many other of those first words--extinction! The remaining words are fit for survival. During this geologic era at least.
It strikes me just now (as it often does when I mix metaphors or create clunky prose) that if I were an English teacher teaching creative writing I'd love to stumble upon this blog wherein students can listen to one guy's creative process.
But then, I've been overly influenced by that nutty quote by Edgar Allan Poe, "If you find yourself being burned at the stake be sure to jot down all your experiences." I not only love to create but I love to describe the creative process, an experience very unlike torture.
The first of those 25 files was opened this week for the first time since I wrote it last December. As mentioned, I did NOT review what I wrote on purpose; I wanted to "flesh out" the whole narrative arc first.
That first file (named EU1) contains the text from Ecclesiastes 1:1-11 and is 19 pages long. Here's what I'm discovering.
1. One of the characters in this fictional graphic novel speaks text that I did not write. This is perhaps unique in story writing. I am given dialog I cannot change, alter, or edit. Mr. Q speaks and I deal with it.
2. As a writer I react to, interact with, and make my actors act upon Mr. Q's words. Think of a grain of sand in an oyster....I hope to create pearls around that often aggravating irritation.
3. The me who interacts with Mr. Q has one brain, but that brain has neural multiplicity. Just like a shopper looks at a used car through various lenses (cost, mileage, color, MPG, leg room), I looked at Mr. Q's words through a variety of lenses, none of which was explicit or discreet. I just read quip from Mr. Q and jotted whatever came to mind. After 3 months I came up with 400+ pages of random reactions.
4. Now that I'm revisiting my random reactions I'm sorting through them, bunching them according to common themes, and shaping characters from those common themes. For example, many student quotes were silly, off the cuff comments (like Chandler on Friends). Other quotes were absurdly serious, deferring, and loyal to Mr. Q (like Dwight Shrute on the Office). Still other quotes were panicky and reactive (think of the anxious Chicken Little). There is also an aging hippie, a vegan foodie, and a scientific materialist who embraces atheism. There are also bit parts played by an agnostic, Earnest Hemingway, a pregnant student, and even me in a cameo role (a conceit I copy from Alfred Hitchcock).
5. This seems like an odd way to create characters. I've never taken a creative writing course or asked any novelists how they come up with their characters. Maybe they all start with words/point of view and then figure out age, gender, costume, back story, and appearance later. I somehow had the notion that writers start with a body and give it attitude and then words; I'm staring with words, giving the speaker of those words attitude, and someday will flesh them out in 2-D. (If this were a play or movie it'd be 3-D).
6. As I plow through those 19 pages of random quips and quotes I'm adjusting the size of the word balloons so they are uniform (Publisher has a nifty "shapes" tool which I use to outline the text boxes with round edged rectangles). I'm also mindful of pagination; I'll start EU2 with page 20.
7. I then printed a paper copy of those 19 pages and read and reread them all in one sitting trying to imagine the flow, how this narrative arc is getting launched, and the trajectories that are being established. Since this is the first scene, readers will be making many important assumptions, so I gotta get 'em right. I want all the loose threads to eventually be tied up.
8. The decision to not draw anything yet (faces, rooms, desks, lap tops, costume, etc) forces me to stick with character development via ideas. I'm imagining characters as pure thought (like Plato's or Jung's arch types). Only later will the word become flesh (or in this case, ink).
9. Since I do not plan on including any chapter divisions (a decision I may reverse), I do plan on helping readers distinguish each passage (what Bible scholars call a pericope) by coloring the backgrounds differently. In the case of EU1, text 1:1-8a will have a different color background from 1:8b-11.
10. Editing text on paper is easier for me than on a screen. Seeing my dialog on a page as future readers will see it (the finished product will be a book, not an eBook--another decision I may reverse), I have greater empathy with my readers. Consequently, I'm astonished at how much editing I did on EU1. The text is now (so it seems in this moment) crisper, snappier, and funnier. This is evolution at work; much of the first creation survived, but natural selection has not been kind to many other of those first words--extinction! The remaining words are fit for survival. During this geologic era at least.
It strikes me just now (as it often does when I mix metaphors or create clunky prose) that if I were an English teacher teaching creative writing I'd love to stumble upon this blog wherein students can listen to one guy's creative process.
But then, I've been overly influenced by that nutty quote by Edgar Allan Poe, "If you find yourself being burned at the stake be sure to jot down all your experiences." I not only love to create but I love to describe the creative process, an experience very unlike torture.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Mr. Q Has Left The Building
Just a quick note of self congratulations. Tonight I finished the last of Mr. Q's lectures (12:8). I first put pen to paper December 21, 2011. His departure 3 months later, ends like his arrival, with him muttering "meaningless, meaningless."
If I draw this thing correctly, there will be a tinge of cinematic drama in his departure. The class has dwindled by attrition (many if not most couldn't hack his outrageous claims and walked out or dropped the class) but the few who remain have become stalwarts of Qoholeth the Teacher.
I gotta say I was sad to see him go. This is a good sign. If I, probably the most exasperated "student" of all, grew fond of the the old buzzard, I hope readers will, too.
All that's left now is to bring the TA to the front of the class and have her wrap up the loose ends (and do damage control)! Ecclesiastes 12:9-14 are not the words of Qoholeth but of an editor who added their commentary on the lectures just delivered.
I'm highly persuaded the book of Ecclesiastes is loaded with additions, glosses, and inserted verses by persons other than Mr. Q, but for artistic purposes I've made all those (often contradictory) comments come from the mouth of Mr. Q. It's possible the giant leaps and flip flops are the machinations of a double minded soul, or even a moody and intentionally enigmatic singular author, but I think not. Readers of the graphic novel will never know this, only those who bother themselves to read this blog, the behind the scenes look of creation at work.
Mr. Q has left the building. While he's gone I'll reread his entire lecture, tweaking the student comments, and designing his body, size, shape, attire, cranium and facial features.
If I draw this thing correctly, there will be a tinge of cinematic drama in his departure. The class has dwindled by attrition (many if not most couldn't hack his outrageous claims and walked out or dropped the class) but the few who remain have become stalwarts of Qoholeth the Teacher.
I gotta say I was sad to see him go. This is a good sign. If I, probably the most exasperated "student" of all, grew fond of the the old buzzard, I hope readers will, too.
All that's left now is to bring the TA to the front of the class and have her wrap up the loose ends (and do damage control)! Ecclesiastes 12:9-14 are not the words of Qoholeth but of an editor who added their commentary on the lectures just delivered.
I'm highly persuaded the book of Ecclesiastes is loaded with additions, glosses, and inserted verses by persons other than Mr. Q, but for artistic purposes I've made all those (often contradictory) comments come from the mouth of Mr. Q. It's possible the giant leaps and flip flops are the machinations of a double minded soul, or even a moody and intentionally enigmatic singular author, but I think not. Readers of the graphic novel will never know this, only those who bother themselves to read this blog, the behind the scenes look of creation at work.
Mr. Q has left the building. While he's gone I'll reread his entire lecture, tweaking the student comments, and designing his body, size, shape, attire, cranium and facial features.
Saturday, March 24, 2012
The Challenge of Writing Humor
First the good news about writing humor. Unlike the stand up comic, extemporaneous quipper of bon mots, or off the cuff jester, humor writers have time to think, edit, and rewrite their material.
Now the bad news: how do we know what's funny? I sit alone in my living room, silent but for the sound of our gas fireplace, the neighbor's chickens, and Saturday morning traffic on the road by our house. I read a line from Ecclesiastes, imagine how a classroom of modern university students might respond, then search for a play on words, surprise twist, or witty conundrum which I hope readers will find cleaver if not outright humorous. I know my limitations and don't even try for hilarity, knee slapping guffaws, or belly laughs. Ecclesiastes isn't the right setting for prat falls, slapstick, squirting flowers or joy buzzers. My ambition is for readers to smile. Which, given the somber and gloomy tenor of the book, will be a great accomplishment. I'm aiming for gallows humor with heart.
Here's a prime example of the difficulty of writing humor. I just completed writing the dialog for section 22 and the final verse (10:20) says this: "Do not revile the king even in your thoughts; or curse the rich in your bedroom because a bird of the air may carry your words, and a bird on the wing may report what you say."
These words beg for comic treatment. Here's what I've done; let's see if it still has merit after it marinates several weeks (I'll do the second edit once the first draft is done). Bear with me; dissecting humor is, Mark Twain said, like dissecting a frog.
Section 22, Page 22
Panel 1: Mr. Q, Do not revile the king.
Panel 2: Student, There goes talk radio.
Panel 3: Student, There goes punditry.
Panel 4: Student, There go editorials, blogs, and satirical parodies of pomposity.
Panel 5: Student, Just when incivility is becoming an art form Mr. Q squashes it.
Panel 6: Student, Political party pooper.
Now the bad news: how do we know what's funny? I sit alone in my living room, silent but for the sound of our gas fireplace, the neighbor's chickens, and Saturday morning traffic on the road by our house. I read a line from Ecclesiastes, imagine how a classroom of modern university students might respond, then search for a play on words, surprise twist, or witty conundrum which I hope readers will find cleaver if not outright humorous. I know my limitations and don't even try for hilarity, knee slapping guffaws, or belly laughs. Ecclesiastes isn't the right setting for prat falls, slapstick, squirting flowers or joy buzzers. My ambition is for readers to smile. Which, given the somber and gloomy tenor of the book, will be a great accomplishment. I'm aiming for gallows humor with heart.
Here's a prime example of the difficulty of writing humor. I just completed writing the dialog for section 22 and the final verse (10:20) says this: "Do not revile the king even in your thoughts; or curse the rich in your bedroom because a bird of the air may carry your words, and a bird on the wing may report what you say."
These words beg for comic treatment. Here's what I've done; let's see if it still has merit after it marinates several weeks (I'll do the second edit once the first draft is done). Bear with me; dissecting humor is, Mark Twain said, like dissecting a frog.
Section 22, Page 22
Panel 1: Mr. Q, Do not revile the king.
Panel 2: Student, There goes talk radio.
Panel 3: Student, There goes punditry.
Panel 4: Student, There go editorials, blogs, and satirical parodies of pomposity.
Panel 5: Student, Just when incivility is becoming an art form Mr. Q squashes it.
Panel 6: Student, Political party pooper.
Mr. Q's comment, like most of his comments, crash against 21st century life. On this page I'm trying to point out how difficult it would be to follow his advice to "not revile a king." The conventional interpretation of this verse among many religious folks, "Don't badmouth the president," a sentiment with which I generally concur (due more to my conciliatory nature than any theological or political conviction). I enjoy Steven Colbert, Bill Maher, and John Stewart. And I defend their first amendment right to make jokes about politicians. But my point on page 22 is to use the students as foil and call attention to the difficulty of following Mr. Q's command. Blending two phrases ("political party" and "party pooper") is the sort of word play I enjoy.
Section 22, Page 23
Panel 1: Mr. Q, Even in your thoughts.
Panel 2: Student, I can’t question political leaders even in my mind?
Panel 3: Student, There goes freedom of thought.
Panel 4: Student, (deep in concentration)
Panel 5: Student 2, What are you doing?
Panel 6: Student, Tear gassing the protesters in my mind.
Reviling the king (or president) is important in a democracy (even though I sometimes cringe at the lack of civility, gravitas, and respect due hard working, civic minded, public servants). But I do not agree with this statement at all. I'm sure Mr. Q meant well...but c'mon. We can't even think about criticizing the government? I do not concur. Hopefully this comes across in a gentle (and witty?) way. (NOTE: I am doing my best not to lock my graphic novel in time and space by naming current events, an increasingly difficult challenge in this year of presidential election, national discombobulation, and economic woes. Political tensions are at a fever pitch and I'm so tempted to jump into the fray...but I want Ecclesiastes U to transcend the year 2012).
Section 22, Page 24
Panel 1: Mr. Q, Or curse the rich in your bedroom.
Panel 2: Student, If I want to curse the rich in my bedroom I
will.
Panel 3: Student (looking like Groucho Marx), How they got in my bedroom I’ll never know.
Panel 4: Student, Those without bedrooms curse me because I’m
richer than them and I don’t care.
Panel 5: Student, Cursing is a spectator sport.
Panel 6: Student, I wonder who the 1% of the
world’s richest people curse.
One of the current events I'm avoiding mentioning in this book is the Occupy Wall Street movement, where protesters, saying they represent 99% of the population, are asking the richest 1% to pay more taxes. Amid this dialog has erupted a real anger toward the super rich. I do not share that anger. Rather than embroil these students in that debate I riff on the "curse" theme. The student dialog in Panel 4 is as close as I get to declaring my colors on this issue. If a rich person got rich ethically, good for them. And while I wish they'd pay more taxes, the underdeveloped world could occupy Ferndale and just as easily ask me (lower middle class by American standards) to share my wealth with them. So, the ethics of wealth distribution is a thornier issue than I can solve here. My point is to help readers read and grapple with Ecclesiastes, not engage in discussions of redistribution of wealth.
Section 22, Page 25
Panel 1: Mr. Q, Because a bird in the sky may carry your words.
Section 22, Page 26
Panel 1: Mr. Q, And a bird on the wing may report what you say.
At this point I'm really stumped. I'm not proud of what I've done; and I'm not sure it'll survive the next edit. I planned to draw a bird visiting (caricatures of) Trump, Gates, Buffett, and a dozen other of the world's richest men (whom I'll find on Google). That bird will be cursing these rich dudes. However, those curses are lifted from a fabulously funny web site, The Luther Insulter. I couldn't muster the gumption to criticize these wealthy men so I used Luther's insults. It's incongruous, since Luther was insulting religious heretics. Plus, I'm not sure those rich dudes deserve such invective. Yet I'm stuck with this damn bird who's gotta say something to somebody.
The humor muses have abandoned me. Writing humor isn't pretty.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Dividing Chapter 9
According to that 1919 commentary (A Gentle Cynic by Morris Jastrow) section 20 is comprised of ten verses, 9:1-9:10. Since I'm using his outline I get out my scissors, scotch tape, and large sheet of paper (# 54) and begin cutting and taping those verses on the left hand side. I do this while sitting in my living room, cushioned lap board on my lap, coffee cup, cell phone, and fountain pens on the small table next to me. I'm comfy, serene, in a meditative and contemplative state. My task today is to divide each verse into smaller chunks for the students to respond to. Let the dividing begin.
Ecclesiastes 9
John Stuart Mill said, "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides." I'm going to try to compare these two comments.
5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing;
This verse irritates me; I've had to untangle his contradictions so often I'm getting bored. This concerns me. If I get bored readers will too.
they have no further reward, and even their name is forgotten.
In an earlier chapter we batted around the existential quandary of extinction, obliterated memories, and the angst of pointlessness. I'll revisit that notion again. I've felt the sting of being forgotten since my wife contracted Alzheimer's dementia and her memories of me are fading. It's very painful. I'm scouring every word of Ecclesiastes looking for hope. I trust that some breakthrough awaits me, us, him.
6 Their love, their hate and their jealousy have long since vanished;
Here comes more of the pessimism. What a gloomy frame of mind. It's hard to say (as do many commentators) that this comment emerges from sarcasm, Satan, or disconnection from God ("under the sun" is understood by many as "secular humanism"). I reject all those theories....but have yet to come up with a theory of my own. Pondering continues.
never again will they have a part in anything that happens under the sun.
Ditto.
Ecclesiastes 9
1 So I reflected on all this and concluded
I make this the first meme to come from Mr. Q's mouth in this section. Throughout Ecclesiastes Mr. Q describes in astonishing detail his "research." He was a thoughtful, intentional, empiricist, scientist. Not sure what new response I'll have students make to this comment yet but I am steering readers attention to the fact that this guy was no armchair scholar; it's almost (but not quite) like he was doing double blind control group experiments.
that the righteous and the wise and what they do are in God’s hands
Well this certainly deserves comment by students. Soft determinism runs through Ecclesiastes although in this verse it looks like hard determinism to me. Is God responsible for what the righteous do? I don't know but being in God's hands is to me a comforting thought.
but no one knows whether love or hate awaits them.
Mr. Q has dropped so many zingers like this throughout the text that I've lost count. It's Mr. Q's acknowledgement of the mysterious future that appeals to me.
2 All share a common destiny—the righteous and the wicked, the good and the bad, the clean and the unclean, those who offer sacrifices and those who do not.
This is one of the lengthier verses I'll put into Mr. Q's mouth. The more words the larger the word balloon and the smaller the panel space in which to draw. I could make a separate page for each of these four comparisons but my initial thought is that doing so will bog down the flow.
As it is with the good, so with the sinful; as it is with those who take oaths, so with those who are afraid to take them.
I feel the same way about these additional comparisons. It's possible to riff on all six of these binary characters but the bigger literary (and exegetical?) question, "What do I make of his assertion that there is no ultimate difference in the destinies of these twelve individuals?"
3 This is the evil in everything that happens under the sun: The same destiny overtakes all.
It's clear from Mr. Q's previous comments what he thinks of this assertion: it's evil. If he were here I'd ask him several questions: "Why does this bug you so much? Are you sure the same destiny awaits everyone regardless of their virtue or turpitude? Didn't you say earlier that there are some advantages to being righteous? And by the way, why DO you keep contradicting yourself? Have you seen your manuscript lately? How much of what you wrote is still in tact and how many insertions have others made?" The questions never end!
The hearts of people, moreover, are full of evil and there is madness in their hearts while they live, and afterward they join the dead.
At this point in my cut and tape project I've kept the above text in one word balloon. I may later change this because Mr. Q makes two comments that beg for student reaction: "full of evil" and "madness in their hearts." The ANE notions of depravity and insanity deserve comment. I'm not sure yet if I'll address both of these in one strip or give each comment its own strip.
4 Anyone who is among the living has hope
Mr. Q's positive comments are so rare I give them a place of their own. The overall tone of the book is pessimistic, glum, and depressing so I highlight every upbeat phrase that I can.
—even a live dog is better off than a dead lion!
Mr. Q's positive comments are so rare I give them a place of their own. The overall tone of the book is pessimistic, glum, and depressing so I highlight every upbeat phrase that I can.
—even a live dog is better off than a dead lion!
John Stuart Mill said, "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides." I'm going to try to compare these two comments.
5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing;
This verse irritates me; I've had to untangle his contradictions so often I'm getting bored. This concerns me. If I get bored readers will too.
they have no further reward, and even their name is forgotten.
In an earlier chapter we batted around the existential quandary of extinction, obliterated memories, and the angst of pointlessness. I'll revisit that notion again. I've felt the sting of being forgotten since my wife contracted Alzheimer's dementia and her memories of me are fading. It's very painful. I'm scouring every word of Ecclesiastes looking for hope. I trust that some breakthrough awaits me, us, him.
6 Their love, their hate and their jealousy have long since vanished;
Here comes more of the pessimism. What a gloomy frame of mind. It's hard to say (as do many commentators) that this comment emerges from sarcasm, Satan, or disconnection from God ("under the sun" is understood by many as "secular humanism"). I reject all those theories....but have yet to come up with a theory of my own. Pondering continues.
never again will they have a part in anything that happens under the sun.
Ditto.
7 Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart,
Another ray of sunshine amid dark clouds of doom and gloom.
for God has already approved what you do.
Another theological puzzle.
8 Always be clothed in white,
For sheer comic relief I'm going to have fun with this one...Tom Wolfe, the Pope, brides, white socks.... It's Mr. Q's intent to affirm happiness despite all this doom and gloom...but the oddity of such a comment begs for response.
and always anoint your head with oil.
How does one apply this custom in the 21st century?
9 Enjoy life with your wife, whom you love, all the days of this meaningless life that God has given you under the sun—all your meaningless days.
Another long blurb from the mouth of Mr. Q, rich with provocative ideas.
For this is your lot in life and in your toilsome labor under the sun.
"Lots" remind me of lotteries which remind me of randomness which contrasts with destiny and fate. Lots to untangle here (no pun intended).
10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might,
As gloomy as Mr. Q is, he was no nihilist. He apparently found enough oomph (by faith?) to get a stiff upper lip and make the best of a bad situation. Viktor Frankl did so in Auschwitz and David Livingston did this while suffering in Africa.
for in the realm of the dead, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.
Sadly, I'm confronted with yet another conundrum. Did or did not Mr. Q believe in an after life? At times yes, at other times, no. Can't wait to see how I slog though this quagmire yet again without boring myself or readers.
NOTE: Each of those purple quotes will appear in the first panel of a six panel strip. Therefore, these ten verses have been expanded to 21 strips. No wonder the estimated size of this graphic novel is massive.
Another ray of sunshine amid dark clouds of doom and gloom.
for God has already approved what you do.
Another theological puzzle.
8 Always be clothed in white,
For sheer comic relief I'm going to have fun with this one...Tom Wolfe, the Pope, brides, white socks.... It's Mr. Q's intent to affirm happiness despite all this doom and gloom...but the oddity of such a comment begs for response.
and always anoint your head with oil.
How does one apply this custom in the 21st century?
9 Enjoy life with your wife, whom you love, all the days of this meaningless life that God has given you under the sun—all your meaningless days.
Another long blurb from the mouth of Mr. Q, rich with provocative ideas.
For this is your lot in life and in your toilsome labor under the sun.
"Lots" remind me of lotteries which remind me of randomness which contrasts with destiny and fate. Lots to untangle here (no pun intended).
10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might,
As gloomy as Mr. Q is, he was no nihilist. He apparently found enough oomph (by faith?) to get a stiff upper lip and make the best of a bad situation. Viktor Frankl did so in Auschwitz and David Livingston did this while suffering in Africa.
for in the realm of the dead, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.
Sadly, I'm confronted with yet another conundrum. Did or did not Mr. Q believe in an after life? At times yes, at other times, no. Can't wait to see how I slog though this quagmire yet again without boring myself or readers.
NOTE: Each of those purple quotes will appear in the first panel of a six panel strip. Therefore, these ten verses have been expanded to 21 strips. No wonder the estimated size of this graphic novel is massive.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Dan Harmon's Community (TV show) and Me
Will I pull this off? We'll see.
The Creative Process
Here's a brief summary of the creative writing process. As mentioned in recent posts, I've written "dialog" for chapters 1-6. There are 12 chapters in Ecclesiastes so at this half way point I jump in at Ecclesiastes 7:1.
Mr. Q says, "A good name is better than perfume."
I muse over this, pondering what a classroom of 20-somethings might think of this statement. I know how the class has responded to the first six chapters of Mr. Q's lectures so I'm not entirely adrift; there are precedents, patterns, and familiar (although still nondescript) characters.
I jot a student's initial response, "Finally Mr. Q is giving us something practical we can use." (There's been a history of complaints by the students regarding Mr. Q's pointless laments about the pointlessness of life).
Another student chimes in summarizing what they think Mr. Q is getting at, "A reputation that stinks can't be eliminated with cologne."
Another says, "A pleasant impression that lasts comes not from a bottle but from good behavior."
A fourth says, "It's better to work on our insides than our outsides."
This is all pretty benign stuff and is my attempt to flesh out the point of Mr. Q's words. Knowing, however, what Mr. Q's next words will be I set up a gag with student number five, "Thank you, Mr. Q! My hopes for this class have been restored." (end of six panel strip).
(beginning of next six panel strip). Mr. Q: "And the day of death is better than the day of birth."
I softened the first half of verse one (perfume comments) in order to highlight the hard edge of the second half of verse one, "death is better than life" to which student five on the previous page now laments, "My optimism just vanished."
Frequent readers of Ecclesiastes may gloss over the absurdity of Mr. Q's last comment. My ambition as a writer/artist is to say, "Not so fast! Did you hear what Mr. Q just said?" With dialog and (eventual) cartoons I hope to give Mr. Q a voice, a hearing, an opportunity to explain himself (through student's words) for his outrageous comments and Ecclesiastes 7:1b is one of the more outrageous.
I'll record the completion of this teacher/student exchange in my next post. But first another note concerning process. There are 222 verses in Ecclesiastes. If I chop each in half (or thirds) and give each it's own six panel cartoon strip, I'll be creating between 450 and 500 strips. Since the setting of these strips is inside a university classroom there will be no car crashes, leaps from tall buildings, or exotic beach scenes. It's going to be a lot of talking heads. This sounds boring so my ambition is to create exquisite caricatures and dialog.
To keep the dialog crisp and engaging I will expunge every superfluous word, arcane reference, and lumbering sentence. To do this I am walking the fine line between past, present, and future. I know what I've written in the first six chapters (past) so there is some context (present). And I have a general grasp of what Mr. Q will say (future). But...I do not look ahead more than a few verses to see what's coming. The circle of light cast by a flashlight illumines one's steps only a few feet at a time; the scope of light I'm working with is only a few verses at a time. I really do feel like I'm groping in the dark, step by step, verse by verse, slowly marching to the end of chapter 12.
Once dialog for all 12 chapters is complete I'll do "grand" editing, checking for flow, lags, lulls, and lumpy prose. For example, I introduced Mr. Q's TA in about chapter five which was a mistake. She should be introduced earlier since her role will be to elaborate on Mr. Q's utterances.
So this is the process. Next post: how I turned perfume and death days into grist for philosophical reflection.
Mr. Q says, "A good name is better than perfume."
I muse over this, pondering what a classroom of 20-somethings might think of this statement. I know how the class has responded to the first six chapters of Mr. Q's lectures so I'm not entirely adrift; there are precedents, patterns, and familiar (although still nondescript) characters.
I jot a student's initial response, "Finally Mr. Q is giving us something practical we can use." (There's been a history of complaints by the students regarding Mr. Q's pointless laments about the pointlessness of life).
Another student chimes in summarizing what they think Mr. Q is getting at, "A reputation that stinks can't be eliminated with cologne."
Another says, "A pleasant impression that lasts comes not from a bottle but from good behavior."
A fourth says, "It's better to work on our insides than our outsides."
This is all pretty benign stuff and is my attempt to flesh out the point of Mr. Q's words. Knowing, however, what Mr. Q's next words will be I set up a gag with student number five, "Thank you, Mr. Q! My hopes for this class have been restored." (end of six panel strip).
(beginning of next six panel strip). Mr. Q: "And the day of death is better than the day of birth."
I softened the first half of verse one (perfume comments) in order to highlight the hard edge of the second half of verse one, "death is better than life" to which student five on the previous page now laments, "My optimism just vanished."
Frequent readers of Ecclesiastes may gloss over the absurdity of Mr. Q's last comment. My ambition as a writer/artist is to say, "Not so fast! Did you hear what Mr. Q just said?" With dialog and (eventual) cartoons I hope to give Mr. Q a voice, a hearing, an opportunity to explain himself (through student's words) for his outrageous comments and Ecclesiastes 7:1b is one of the more outrageous.
I'll record the completion of this teacher/student exchange in my next post. But first another note concerning process. There are 222 verses in Ecclesiastes. If I chop each in half (or thirds) and give each it's own six panel cartoon strip, I'll be creating between 450 and 500 strips. Since the setting of these strips is inside a university classroom there will be no car crashes, leaps from tall buildings, or exotic beach scenes. It's going to be a lot of talking heads. This sounds boring so my ambition is to create exquisite caricatures and dialog.
To keep the dialog crisp and engaging I will expunge every superfluous word, arcane reference, and lumbering sentence. To do this I am walking the fine line between past, present, and future. I know what I've written in the first six chapters (past) so there is some context (present). And I have a general grasp of what Mr. Q will say (future). But...I do not look ahead more than a few verses to see what's coming. The circle of light cast by a flashlight illumines one's steps only a few feet at a time; the scope of light I'm working with is only a few verses at a time. I really do feel like I'm groping in the dark, step by step, verse by verse, slowly marching to the end of chapter 12.
Once dialog for all 12 chapters is complete I'll do "grand" editing, checking for flow, lags, lulls, and lumpy prose. For example, I introduced Mr. Q's TA in about chapter five which was a mistake. She should be introduced earlier since her role will be to elaborate on Mr. Q's utterances.
So this is the process. Next post: how I turned perfume and death days into grist for philosophical reflection.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Adjunct Grist for the Mill
It's very hard for me NOT to start drawing yet. The delicious anticipation of seeing how pictures will enhance, change, and challenge the dialog is what eggs me on. It's like building a brick wall but making the bricks first. The shape of the wall will be determined by the number and shape of the bricks I create. But these bricks are living in that the dialog informs the character AND the character will inform the dialog. But as I said, I'm making myself write a first draft of the dialog before character development.
I do have rough ideas of who the students will be. There will be philosophy majors of course (since Mr. Q teaches in the philosophy dept). But there will also be pre law, marketing, English, and science majors. I also get to throw in players, materialists, Tea Partiers, aging hippies, hedonists, home school students, and computer gaming geeks. Mr. Q will have a TA, useful to me as the one to elaborate on Mr. Q's more confusing utterances.
Earnest Hemingway will make a cameo appearance (quoting his book The Sun Also Rises, taken from a line of Ecclesiastes). I think I'll refrain from putting in Timon from the Lion King saying, "It's a circle of life sort of thing," since animals in the class room is a bit too far fetched.
Yesterday I took a one day art class just for the fun of it and the 20 year old kid teaching it (a fabulous artist, by the way) was covered in tattoos and wore a hooligan hat. Here he is sans tattoos drawing on a Cintiq tablet and interactive pen.
The class, all 20 somethings, wore beanies, hoodies, and tight jeans. Since I'm an old guy unaccustomed to schmoozing with students 1/3 my age (I'm almost 60), I jotted phrases the teacher used which I hope to put into the mouths of the students in my graphic novel. The list included these gems:
Crappy
Do you want to know my truth?
I'm gunna be raw, honest, real
I'm like Simon Cowell, brutal and honest
Go crazy
Knock yourself out
His stuff is insane
There's good pizza and bad pizza
The music of the Black Keys is awesome
I sell tee shirts
It's really cool
I know, it's retarded
Good on you
Not sure how many of these I'll use but they'll come in handy, I'm sure.
I do have rough ideas of who the students will be. There will be philosophy majors of course (since Mr. Q teaches in the philosophy dept). But there will also be pre law, marketing, English, and science majors. I also get to throw in players, materialists, Tea Partiers, aging hippies, hedonists, home school students, and computer gaming geeks. Mr. Q will have a TA, useful to me as the one to elaborate on Mr. Q's more confusing utterances.
Earnest Hemingway will make a cameo appearance (quoting his book The Sun Also Rises, taken from a line of Ecclesiastes). I think I'll refrain from putting in Timon from the Lion King saying, "It's a circle of life sort of thing," since animals in the class room is a bit too far fetched.
Yesterday I took a one day art class just for the fun of it and the 20 year old kid teaching it (a fabulous artist, by the way) was covered in tattoos and wore a hooligan hat. Here he is sans tattoos drawing on a Cintiq tablet and interactive pen.
The class, all 20 somethings, wore beanies, hoodies, and tight jeans. Since I'm an old guy unaccustomed to schmoozing with students 1/3 my age (I'm almost 60), I jotted phrases the teacher used which I hope to put into the mouths of the students in my graphic novel. The list included these gems:
Crappy
Do you want to know my truth?
I'm gunna be raw, honest, real
I'm like Simon Cowell, brutal and honest
Go crazy
Knock yourself out
His stuff is insane
There's good pizza and bad pizza
The music of the Black Keys is awesome
I sell tee shirts
It's really cool
I know, it's retarded
Good on you
Not sure how many of these I'll use but they'll come in handy, I'm sure.
The Writing Process
I photocopied the book of Ecclesiastes from the New International Version (NIV). I then cut out each verse (or portion of a verse) and taped it to a large piece of paper (14" x 18") in a column on the left hand side. With pen in hand I then muse, interact, create dialog of what certain students may think about what Mr. Q just said. Here are some photos of those large "first drafts."
I don't expect viewers to understand any of this. I add it simply to document how chaotic the first draft is. This is important to note because there's tremendous freedom in giving one's self permission to "do it wrong." I know this dialog is going to go through several refining processes so I'm not worried about perfection or getting it just right.
Also, I am disciplining myself to write student dialog without looking ahead. That is, I'm putting myself in the shoes (sandals? flip flops? fancy boots?) of the students as though hearing Mr. Q for the first time. This is difficult (since I've read Ecclesiastes for years) but I feel it's necessary to "discover" what Mr. Q is saying as he says it.
I don't expect viewers to understand any of this. I add it simply to document how chaotic the first draft is. This is important to note because there's tremendous freedom in giving one's self permission to "do it wrong." I know this dialog is going to go through several refining processes so I'm not worried about perfection or getting it just right.
Also, I am disciplining myself to write student dialog without looking ahead. That is, I'm putting myself in the shoes (sandals? flip flops? fancy boots?) of the students as though hearing Mr. Q for the first time. This is difficult (since I've read Ecclesiastes for years) but I feel it's necessary to "discover" what Mr. Q is saying as he says it.
Tasks Accomplished So Far
I've read six commentaries on Ecclesiastes as well as a number of related works (I'm currently reading Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl and just finished Tom Sawyer where Mark Twain puts in Huck Finn's mouth these Ecclesiastic-like words, "Bein' rich aint what it's cracked up to be. It's just worry and worry, and sweat and sweat and wishin' you was dead all the time").
I've plotted the "story line" of the graphic novel as follows:
Setting: university classroom packed with students of all and no philosophical/theological persuasions.
Professor: Mr. Q. Q stands for Qoheleth, the author of Ecclesiastes.
Dialog: Mr. Q will stand in front of the class and his word balloons will contain every word/phrase of Ecclesiastes. Readers (hopefully) won't know his "lecture" is really taken from a written manuscript; few things are as boring as listening to someone read their speech. Students will then discuss with each other their impressions, reactions, and puzzlement over Mr. Q's unorthodox philosophy.
Title: I began calling the graphic novel ANGST 101. I then changed it to HAPPINESS 101. I dropped that and settled on ECCLESIASTES U. This is subject to change as well but that's the working title at present.
Humor: I'm no Conan O'Brien but I do aspire to balance the pessimism of Mr. Q's lectures with the wit and wisdom of class members.
Layout: As I create this classroom dialog between Mr. Q and a variety of students, I'm typing text into six panels in Publisher 8.5" x 11" (landscape). Mr. Q gets first panel, each of his sentences beginning with a capital Old English font. Student reactions take up the remaining five panels. Here's a sample taken at random.
Current status: I have written the dialog for Ecclesiastes chapters 1-6. I've six chapters to go.
I've plotted the "story line" of the graphic novel as follows:
Setting: university classroom packed with students of all and no philosophical/theological persuasions.
Professor: Mr. Q. Q stands for Qoheleth, the author of Ecclesiastes.
Title: I began calling the graphic novel ANGST 101. I then changed it to HAPPINESS 101. I dropped that and settled on ECCLESIASTES U. This is subject to change as well but that's the working title at present.
Humor: I'm no Conan O'Brien but I do aspire to balance the pessimism of Mr. Q's lectures with the wit and wisdom of class members.
Layout: As I create this classroom dialog between Mr. Q and a variety of students, I'm typing text into six panels in Publisher 8.5" x 11" (landscape). Mr. Q gets first panel, each of his sentences beginning with a capital Old English font. Student reactions take up the remaining five panels. Here's a sample taken at random.
Current status: I have written the dialog for Ecclesiastes chapters 1-6. I've six chapters to go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)