I was in touch with Laurie Scheer over the last few days and she had some wonderful news. Her book proposal was accepted by Michael Wiese Productions and she will be submitting the manuscript to them before year’s end.
         I assume that will put the lie to my statement on the Tools page that, “Laurie does not have a published text on writing techniques or fundamentals of dramatic what-have-you’s.” With luck, writing fans, such a text will be in print before long.
         Hooray for you, Laurie Scheer! May the Muse whisper softly in your ear at just the moment it is needed.

          I was reading online today an article about the unintended consequences of the massive (and non-traditional) approach the Federal Reserve has taken to stimulate the economy, namely buying 83 billion dollars worth of bonds every month (at least I think that’s the number).
         I traded interest rate futures for eighteen years and while I didn’t understand everything about what I was doing, I had to understand some of the jargon and had to try to make money trading opposite people who supposedly were working the levers of change when it came to interest rates, Federal and private.
         Even with that background and experience, I was lost reading today’s article. I have no idea what currency interventions and/or currency policies other countries might be pressured to undertake to offset the negative impacts of our government’s policies on their national financial well-being. Near the end of the article, after I was totally confused and frustrated by the dense writing, the article’s author (and shame on me for quoting the article without crediting him or her) said this:

          Many analysts worry about the efficacy of such policies, given the long history of failed currency interventions around the world that often, by revealing a country’s financial weakness, have attracted speculators rather than deterred them.

         The deputy central bank governor of Brazil, which has employed capital controls to stem rapid inflows in recent years, suggested they have likely helped to temper monetary pressures the country is now facing. Luiz Pereira struck a lighter note in making his point.

         “If you’re throwing a party and you want to be more selective in allowing guests into your own party, probably you will have fewer people running for the exit doors if something goes terribly wrong,” he said.

         “If no restrictions were placed on the guest list,” he continued, “the party gets too wild too soon.”

         “When you try to select your guests, you want the ones who come [to] stay longer without getting too drunk.”
(and that was the last line of the article)
          The temptation is always to “explain,” but sometimes you just have to tell a story and when you get to the end, turn off the mike and walk away. Congratulations Luiz Pereira – well done! (and thanks for clarifying Brazil's actions)

           I was chatting with Wally today – that’s my close friend Wally (Walter) Dykema – and mentioned an online piece I had read about the ways in which screenwriting skill set is valuable to novel writers.
            To which Wally said, “Duh!”
            “The writer of the article talked about the tight constraints on a screenplay’s structure, how the story has to be well-built.”
            “As opposed,” Wally said, “to flowery prose and extended raptures of internal dialogue.”
            Wally and I both tend to be more than a little critical of flowery prose.
            “So what about you?” Wally asked, “Have you been using screenwriting tools as you work on ARC?”
            To which I said, “Duh!”
            “And that’s been enough, or are there some things screenwriting tools can’t help with in a novel?”
            “Everything a screenwriter learns gets in the way when he or she has to actually write out emotional reactions – internal dialogue stuff.”
            “And how did you lick that?” Wally asked.
            “I’m not sure I have it ‘licked’ but I got a good piece of advice from Pat LoBrutto that I think helped. ‘The character’s voice in internal dialogue should sound like it does when she’s talking out loud.’”
            When I paused, Wally asked, “But . . .?”
            “Some of the things she says internally, she would never say in public.”
            “Cool.”

          I was reading an article the other day about how Blake Snyder’s “Save the Cat” is destroying creativity in the world of movies. Seems to me that fifteen years ago it was how Chris Vogler’s “The Writer’s Journey” was doing much the same thing (and before that Joseph Campbell’s “Hero with a Thousand Faces.”)
         The passionate online responses were, to my thinking, a little over the top. Reading a book is not the same as being sold into slavery. Learning a new way to think about your creative projects doesn’t mean you must recant all your previous ideas.
         Maybe a couple short stories:
         There once was a man whose only tool was a hammer. To him everything looked like a nail. (that was a really short story, eh?)
         There once was a property owner who hired the man with the hammer to build her a house. It didn’t turn out so good. Her neighbor engaged a contractor who promised a wonderful house – cathedral ceilings, bay windows, spacious closets. She didn’t know her contractor believed time spent mastering his tools would stifle his creative vision. That house turned out worse.