Writing

I feel ever more compelled to write and write and write.  Here and everywhere and to make things again.  Fantastic.  It feels fantastic.  I owe some factors for this motivation but I’m not getting into them, they need to be addressed specifically and personally those that can be. 

But what’s more exciting is that I discovered my movement.  The thing about writing, for me, is that it the passion that flows through me for it is not the singular motivating factor, not the single great piece of the whole puzzle.  This is the key to humanity and all its endeavors.  The greatest of anything is not someone with a singular passion or singular talent or a singular intelligence or adeptness, but one who takes and nurtures all of them together and focuses them at once.  This is why I’m great at the things I do.  I’m a great actor because I have the talent and the knack, I have the passion for it, but I’ve also cultivated a very defined and refined skill, it is a craft as well as an art. 

This is a minor, RC-Cola based rant to keep me awake at boring work so I apologize if it’s a bit scattered.  Anyway, so besides wanting to write things that challenged minds and hearts and moved the world or people in it, to try and make art from my work, I also knew from art museums and literature and great professors of both that the craft of it was just as important and elevated something from simply powerful to a masterpiece…a masterpiece requires a mastery of something Dr. Buschen once said.  I agree.

I’ve always had the topics lined up in my head and structure, for me now that I’ve finished my college years, has become a refined and understandable thing and I’m very good with my structure.  Everything is placed in the book for a reason and where it is placed is just as important…the words are not alone any longer, the entire formation and formula of novels and literature is crafted to indicate something.  This works less with my plays, at least the One Acts I’ve crafted, these were mostly simpler vignettes….I need longer works to really develop a consistant structure, something that can be truly appreciated….it mostly remains for the novel anyway since there you can see the format clearly.

This is all just a precursor to the point.  The point is this: I’ve discovered my "ism."  I have long lamented that we had reached a plateau for writing, we had gone through classical, romanticism, naturalism, modernism, post-modernism, realism, futurism, metafiction, all these various artistic and literary movements which spawned novels and ideas and have left us with no real place unexplored.  I’ve mulled around names, and while this is backwards and it is critics that generally give out such things, I’ve always worked backwards when it comes to art and writing. 

Interpretivism was originally my goal, to make everything relative, but it’s too difficult and while I’m going to attempt to make as much of my literature open for interpretation, I think intepretivism is perhaps too narrow a place for my schizophrenic writing.  I write like I act, adopting a persona as the writer…not being simply myself, but an extension of the style and motifs of the novel.

But what I thought since Casino Royale and other such things, is a new idea.  We’ve allowed so many years to pass as we’ve developed that our culture, standards, thoughts, and beliefs have been so altered that the old works have become semi-stale in certain ways.  They are historical relics to a great many people, people uninterested in learning things irrelevant…so now we’ve begun the contemporary remake, and as much as I detest the horridly done remakes, I’ve realized that perhaps they’re onto something.  21st century classical art.  We begin again…reset the entire system to attempt to mold our current world under the beliefs of classical literature and art.  We begin again and progress, trying to explore new ideas….21st century romanticism…..21st century modernism…..we attempt again to reflect our lives through the various ‘isms’ gone stale.  We must forever recognize the original classical period as important…its values will be adhered to in our current time and it gives such pieces added relevance as they are no longer just simply something we’ve outgrown, but a marker from the first progression.

I think of it another way.  As classical literature was the pupae stage and post modernism into metafiction and on was the butterfly, so now we change it that each different ‘ism’ are all pupaes gestating and developing over an even greater span of time.  So then that romanticism is simple the pupae of romanticism and not the chrysalis of classical literature. 

What do you think three or four readers?  I think I’m onto something.