test

Experiments and Practice

I have been tidying up a few of my better, more current blogs and culling and killing a few of my old ones that never really got going.  I'm also thinking about creating a repository for a really old blog from 1999/2000 that's still hanging redundant and not editable,by cutting it up and republishing it into a new platform so that I will always have it (it could disappear anytime and it's been hacked to pieces by spammers). But a lot of that is to do with creating a writing legacy which is fine, but no one ever got rich playing with nostalgia I have to look forwards as well. So this is what I shall use this blog for.  It has survived but has some half decent work on it. It's not public (which is a relief) and I will continue to be private because what I would like to do is keep it on for experimental writing using the Future Learn writing examples I like as openings for possible stories. Yes, it's another one of those little practice areas - but this one could be very different. 

The idea will be to draw from the thousands of examples posted and try to develop them.  many of them won't go anywhere.  hardly any of them will be traceable back to their source such is the nature of editing. But as inspiration and ideas I can't think of a better way to practice. I'll try a few and if one gets me going i'll stick with it. Those that run out of steam will be shelved. Is this a good idea?  We shall see. 

Mirror Riff

A mirror is an object that reflects light in such a way that the reflected light preserves many or most of the detailed physical characteristics of the original light. This is different from other light-reflecting objects that do not preserve much of the original wave signal other than colour and diffuse reflected light.

The most familiar type of mirror is the plane mirror which has a flat screen surface. Curved mirrors are also used, to produce magnified or diminished images or focus light or simply distort the reflected image.


Mirrors are commonly used for personal grooming or self-admiration (in which case the archaic term looking glass is sometimes still used,) decoration, and architecture. Mirrors are also used in scientific apparatus such as telescopes, lasers, cameras,and industrial machinery. Most mirrors are designed for visible light  however, mirrors designed for other wavelengths of electromagnet radiation are also used.

Throughout history they have been composed of different materials. From polish stone to volcanic glass. Copper or iron polished up would constitute a mirror for some.  Anything that could generate a reflection. As the manufacturing process became ever more sophisticated - certain alloys were used to make a flat surface with appropriate backings applied to screen out what would otherwise be seen through the glass ensuring that the reflective process rather than transparency is achieved.

The concept of the mirror is an interesting subject for examination. An item designed and made for the specific purpose of reflecting a reverse but otherwise exact image of whatever appears in it. A looking glass, as it was once termed and to an extent memorialized by the Reverend Charles Ludwidge Dodson's (writing of course under the pseudonym Lewis Carroll) in the children's classic sequel to Alice in Wonderland in 'Alice Through the Looking Glass'. Both, incidentally are considered creatively symbolic stories full of clever playful logic yet wrapped up within the genre of seeming literary nonsense.

In through the story of the looking glass Alice climbs through the mirror and discovers a world of bizarre occurrences and eccentric characters perhaps indicative of what might be expected given the reversing perceptions of the looking glass or mirror. The book is a major piece of children's literature and we can thank Dodson's creative mind behind the idea that a world inside a looking glass or mirror can feasibly provide the out of kilter material for a story based in a fantasy world of illogicality. That's what the notion of mirrors can do. It was such a great idea it's not surprising that other creative minds have sought to emulate something of this. This includes a 1936 Disney Micky Mouse film called 'Thru the Mirror'  where the enterprising rodent also climbs through a mirror has a crazy adventure based on some of the exploits written about Alice, only to wake up realizing that he had been dreaming. It was always going to be a crazy adventure, I doubt that anyone would expect a sane story to develop from the inside of a mirror with it's seeming other-worldliness reflected from it.

Mirrors played a big part in the German Brothers Grimm  fairy tale  'Snow White' of course. Here we have the mirror taking on its own character - a living entity capable of speech and reasoning. The reflection of the person looking into it (a wicked witch) is assessed first to favour the questioner 'who is the fairest in the land?' Then (and this is crucial given that the 'magic mirror never lies) to the disfavor of the questioner which brings significant consequences and makes the story.

Before mirrors of course anything that provided a reflection serves technically as a mirror.  Narcissus was an early exponent. Son of the river god Cephisus and the nymph Liriope Narcissus was praised so much for his beauty it appeared to have affected his ability to show humility or gratitude, and could only really think highly of himself, shunning the love of his parents and becoming obsessed with his own face which he had seen reflected in a pool. And that's what mirror's or reflections might do according to story tellers and myth makers, they can be suggestive, can feed vanity as well as depict obverse worlds,

There are two things that spring to my mind when I read or hear the expression Hall of Mirrors.  One is the Victorian fairground attraction or end of pier entertainment of a room full of mirrors that are specifically constructed to produce distorted images for the entertainment. Viewers might see a grotesque caricature reflection of themselves - squashed together into a demonic dwarf or elongated into a unfeasible thin giant, or with the bulging head and deadened of Munches' Scream or feet bigger than any clown could muster. This is reflection as a source of humour - playing on the notion of vanity but your worst dreams realized with sometimes hilarious, other times frightening results. The other Hall of Mirrors of course - in terms of popular conception anyway - is 17th century Louis 14th one at the Palace of Versailles which as might be expected more concentrated on opulence than humour.

Writing Courses

I have signed myself up for yet another writing course.  Again I have chosen the OU but this time instead of having to find nearly a thousand pounds for each course this one is a freebie which I have to say brings its own little quirks and challenges. Because it's free - I tried the same course this time last year but didn't get beyond the first two weeks due to family matters - and because it's a subject (writing) that everyone thinks they can do - it's massively over subscribed. This contrasts hugely with the paid for courses which stream students into groups that are structured and supervised  and then into sub groups that are so small the group for the duration of the course they are more involved with your life than friends and family. Tight little groups which are controlled and administered by a single tutor  a competent teacher of creative writing who is happy to give you one to one tuition through any medium of your choice. The relationship resembles that of an experienced parent and a troublesome but eager brood.  The free courses like this one are too big too unwieldy - no-one will ever get to know anyone.  The students are from all over the country and indeed the courses are open to students from oversees too. I've seen stories written in Spanish German and even Chinese, though I fear they will be writing for the most part to themselves in what is definitely a feedback structured course. 

The first assignment of this free course involves students writing a paragraph which mixes up factual and fictional elements. If you follow the brief to the letter this will be a paragraph with 3 fictions and a legitimate fact, followed by a paragraph with 3 facts and a fictional element, It explains that you can write about anything as long as stick to this basis premise which predictably some people apply rigidly, and others like me take a looser approach.  I always use these assignments as basic prompts preferring to spend more time thinking about the writing than the rules. Others get themselves bogged down by trying to everything to the letter, sometimes quite literally. I don't know which approach is the best ultimately. I can't sit here and feel that my life has been an unqualified success applying my version of how to tackle a problem I only know that my instincts are always to go for the bigger picture and not get weighed down by associated detail. 

According to the assignment, students can write about anything and indeed looking at some of the examples, this has been embraced with such imaginative and creative zeal the course writers should be giving themselves several rounds of applause.  This is a good start for the course generally. The last time I checked there were over 3,500 examples  - at least 600 more examples since yesterday.  Every single time I check there is a new batch of stories or paragraphs waiting to be read and assessed as worthy of either a 'like'  (such a modern construct that every single thought a person might have is critiqued based on how likable something is) or commented on (which rather suggested the writer has prompted the reader into an emotional response of some sort) or if really impressive the earning of a follower who checks a box requesting a direct link to every other piece of work the writer does. 

I think I have that about right. So, it's on with course and the unzipping of the creative juices that reside within me - I hope. My intention is to take a full part in the assignments which should include the offering comments to others' efforts. This will be in part altruistic but also to keep me thinking creatively and putting those thoughts down in words. A word of caution to myself because it always happens - I need to be dispassionate about how my work or how the comments I make are received.  All that matters is that I'm doing something and learning in the process. 

Advice To Self

As I write this I'm wondering if there is any escape from the recent obsession with a UK TV programme called Strictly Come Dancing, It seems to be everywhere, discussed and referred to with nauseating regularity. Typically discussed in terms of  this or that person's journey and who's turn it is to be next, typified by the  'have you done Strictly yet?' questions that splatter the sofas of breakfast time TV presenters. But then I realize actually it's only really a big thing on the very thing that created it, the chattering media. No one down the pub talks about it. No one in the workplace cares a hoot about who's in and who's out.  People at dinner parties aren't pushing the usual subjects like career prospects, property values, or children experiences to one side in favour of this celebritie's dress or that professional dancers hotness or who should or should not be there in the performing crucible of the dumbed down, chum-fest that is so popular with certain people within the media is now only known by the cognoscenti as  'strictly'. Bit like MacDonalds losing the 'I'm Loving It' lyric  in favour of the whistle as a sole jingle.  Or Nike removing the word Nike and maintaining only the swoosh. We're so big, so successful so ubiquitous, this seems to say, you only now need a subtle hint as to our greatness and popularity.  If you don't know who we are by this piece of stylized shorthand get with the planet.

How sickening is that kind of arrogance? But if you watch TV or more accurately BBC you could easily be forgiven for thinking that being a contestant on this programme is the most important direction any human being could possibly go - are they doing or have they done or are they due to take some future part in Strictly. You cannot escape it - news readers, sport stars, presenters, singers, actors;  or wives or husbands or sons or daughters or mothers or fathers of any of the above. If you watch BBC or listen to the BBC or read any populist news paper or magazine you will be bombarded with 'news' about these individuals journeys. The judges are everywhere: from advertising butter or supermarkets, to being given there own reality shows. The participants are generating cult followings based on how good or how awful they are. Jeers and cheers mean the same thing - you're all celebrities and now you've reinforced your image further in our minds for good bad and indifferent we will never forget you because you are now so famous because you have forced or been forced ineluctably into our lives.

But only if you pay attention to these things. Elsewhere there are great swathes of space where there is nary a feather boa trumped up celebrity tear amid the sounds of strained metaphors dressed in vaudevillian outrage.  No silly costumes or posturing hairstyles or prattles about journeys. No crap about overcoming adversities or finding 'my selves ' or loving every minute, this person, this dance this experience and it  is all so amazing amazing amazing. My advice? Just steer into other stuff. Watch Netflix and watch or re watch Breaking Bad. Check out a box set of the Sopranos (something like 85 episodes over 7 years.) Or The Wire, or Rome or I Claudius or... Game of Thrones for goodness sake. Or tune into the Travel Channel and re-watch all of Michael Palin's Around The World series. Failing that turn off the TV and go to the theatre and watch Journey's End or French Without Tears or anything on stage that doesn't break out into song and dance. 

A Few Notes About The F

Ok So I have agreed against my own advice and my own beliefs, to help my wife with her writing project. My concerns have been that it's very much her project based on her own imaginative idea; she has a clear idea about how she wants it to look when its completed, and, like her I have absolutely no experience in writing fiction for children. That said it hasn't been all about her waiting for me to say yes. Where we are now is very different from where we were several months ago. She has already commissioned an author to write out an outline and devise basic characters - and to that extent, the story is complete. That is to say there is a beginning and an end with a semblance of a plot and some roughly drawn characters built around the original idea behind it and the motivational factor that has driven it.  But that's it. Currently it is no-where near good enough to bother a publish for more than a few minutes at best. So here are my reasons for thinking this and a few notes that might form the basis of how I'm going to have to re-write it.

The plot idea is sound enough if a little trite and tested: grandparents go back in time through a secret well that stirs under a carpet in the old peoples club they attend. They have chosen a period during WW2 where on arrival they are able to relive their experiences. Nothing is mentioned about other periods - the story focuses not on time travel generally only on time travel specific to this story's purpose.  As a plot device it's OK because it allows the children to accidentally or by design join their grandparents in that time zone which allows the story to be told. 

Questtion 1, why do the grandparents even want to go back in the first place? Or does this not matter? Possible solutions would be that it makes them feel young again. Shakes off all the aches pains, woes and worries of old age. Great, that's probably motivation enough for them. 

Question 2. whose story is this? We have five main protagonists in the children it seems. One has to be dominant and sufficiently idiosyncratic to capture the minds of the readers. She or he has to be either likable and earn our sympathy, or a complete cad whose going to get his or her comeuppance. Others might have different traits, characteristics and idiosyncratic ways all of which might be subsidiary to main character. Think Rodney's defining characteristics in F and H,naivety, gullibility, innocence and a wariness and weariness of his brother Del compared to Del's defining characteristics which really  make the show, chancer, wide boy, problem maker, problem solver, an ultimate failure with but with armfuls of pathos and bathos. Dell is the show, Rodney a support act. 

Question 3.  Point of view. Could it be done better in the first person? Or is the sense of omniscience better suited to the children's story format. Can we have access to one child or characters thoughts? If we are then we are establishing a story told using the third person subjective. The real question at the moment is - which one exists already?  I need to try and work it out. It appears to be omniscient - a kind of god like all knowing narrator is looking at the action as if he has just peeked under a stone and found all this going on and is telling someone else about it. 

Question 4. What striving is  in evidence to make this story original in the telling. Language used, humour employed and poetic cadences that might appeal. 

Question 5.  The characters need to be distinct. All need to be different from each other, and novel in their own way. There is only one Alice (In Wonderland). If I tried to write another Alice story I would have to write pages about her character as she is (as in all classic literature) complex, flawed, specific and many other things in order that she might seem real. 

Question 6. Is humour going to be a strong element? If so you need to bust your guts to be funny. How to do this?  One way is to invent characters that will help.  Make them haughty, egotistical, foolish, odd, moody, anything at all - but make them something rather than outlined, empty stock or poorly constructed.characters who don't breathe, fart, swear, get pissed off, say stupid things etc:  make them work for you. Have e a think about those kids.  the one in charge is BOSSY/ORGANISED/IN CHARGE but also needs ENCOURAGEMENT and is more vulnerable than appearances suggest.  The Quiet one has great ideas but is loathe to mention them. Is artistic and a great problem solver - but weak physically. The Clever one isn't as quiet as clever as he thinks though has a mind full of facts/tales/information/ideas that make him an excellent story teller.  One of those intelligent idiots perhaps. Others have too much energy and enthusiasm - or too little. (they could change to form surprises).  Characters - they need to be consistent. They have to act and speak in character. Some change is good and often change is applauded - vital.  But only within the context of the story. People can learn - but fundamentally characters have to remain in character. If one of the five is smart - they aren't going to say stupid things. If one is bossy, they aren't all of a sudden going to become reserved and unsure. Not unless that's the purpose of the story. Watch the characters for consistency. Handle change carefully - a new strength/overcoming weakness  is always a good way to go. 

Language. Find the appropriate language style and stick with it. Unless the plot demands it - in which case fine - begin as you mean to go on. 

Pace.  Keep things moving and happening.  Action is always good. Stop occasionally if appropriate - but start again sooner rather than later. Turn a paragraph of description into a tweet sized observation.

The characters have to be specific and well drawn they have to breathe.  To this end we have the school marmish Olivia, The smarty sceptic William, the excitable, day dreaming Sam, the charismatic though slightly dim Ben, the bookish Scarlet. But round them more fully. Find out which one has the bloody stick. I'm thinking Sam for the win here. 

Another Poetry Writing Lesson

I'm always interested in little exercises to inform the hidden poet within (in my case so well hidden, internal thermal imaging cameras combined with extreme endoscopy probably wouldn't find him, it)). But here is another from the series: 'how to become a poet.'  It's about the avoidance of cliche and provides ways in which one might hone oneself to become a natural at always looking for the original and the sloughing away of the stock phrase.

Lesson: How to Improve a Cliché
I will take the cliché “as busy as a bee” and show how you can express the same idea without cliché.
(presumably someone thought that bees looked about as busy as anything they'd ever seen before -plus of course Bee begins with the letter 'b' which helps make it snappy and memorable.  But its time is done).

Determine what the clichéd phrase is trying to say.
In this case, I can see that “busy as a bee” is a way to describe the state of being busy.
Think of an original way to describe what the cliché is trying to describe.
For this cliché, I started by thinking about busyness. I asked myself the question, “What things are associated with being busy?” I came up with: college, my friend Jessica, corporation bosses, old ladies making quilts and canning goods, and a computer, fiddlers fiddling. From this list, I selected a thing that is not as often used in association with busyness: violins.
(so not for this writer 'busy as a bee'  they are looking for something of their own.)
Create a phrase using the non-clichéd way of description.
I took my object associated with busyness and turned it into a phrase:

(And here it is) “I feel like a bow fiddling an Irish reel.”

This phrase communicates the idea of “busyness” much better than the worn-out, familiar cliché. The reader’s mind can picture the insane fury of the bow on the violin, and know that the poet is talking about a very frenzied sort of busyness. In fact, those readers who know what an Irish reel sounds like may even get a laugh out of this fresh way to describe “busyness.”
(so homework!) Try it! Take a cliché and use these steps to improve it. You may even end up with a line you feel is good enough to put in a poem!

As mad as a hatter. As white as snow. As hard as a rock. That kind of thing.  Like with the example I won't simply look for a new simile, but to resent the figurative comparison in different ways. Irate and red-faced he exploded himself through his front door with such venom he called easily have left a cartoon shaped hole of himself behind.  I could still hear his rage-filled shouts and animal snorts five minutes after he was gone. Actually I might have got rather carried away there - mad as in hatter means bonkers not rage. Perhaps he turned up wearing a tartan pair of shorts attached braces, long luminous socks, ballet pumps and a sombrero and little else. He seemed to be having an argument with himself. People turned their backs when ever he approached lest they caught his eye and were drawn into an unwanted conversation with someone who seemed if harmless, slightly mad. Not sure how that would sit in any poem - but I suppose the idea here is to work at cliche killing for whatever purpose.

The War Against Cliche

You should murder your darlings,
don't love them too much. You
must harden your eyes
and stiffen to kill your little ones,
who sit prettily born but formless, still.
Before the blood has dried,
before your knife of blue and blood has dried,
slash and slice and cut those sleep-filled
fillers, squat and squalidly sat, 
pregnant with old meanings,
relics now spent of energy. 
Ghosts of imaginations.