Monday, October 31, 2011
Landscape of Story: A Guest Post by Kris Farmen
Friday, October 28, 2011
Ela: 49 Writers Weekly Round-up
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Clean Enough: A Guest Post by Leslie Leyland Fields
We begin the first net, which hangs heavy in the water, the leads weighted yet heavier by the rush of an ebbing tide. Above us the mountains of the Alaskan peninsula hover like clouds over the water. Every minute or so I look up from my hand-over-hand pull of the net and look around. We’re on the backside of our island, Harvester Island, a 400 acre teardrop that rises up to a single peak at 900 feet. The water is the Shelikof Strait, a fifty by three hundred length of water, fenced by mountain ranges on both sides, Kodiak Island on the one side, the Alaska Peninsula range on the other, as saw-toothed and lofty as any mountains I’ve seen in the world. They are one of the few fixtures in this world that remain in place. The water is always moving, carrying us the ten miles from one net to the other, one island to another, delivering the salmon we depend on to our nets. But the ocean currents are generous and indiscriminate, delivering more than fish.
After storms and especially high tides, the beaches bloom with mounds of ropy kelp, grasses, ribbons, saltwater succulents every shade of brown and green, all twisted into painful knotted bodies, a sudden garden of violence. Much of this makes its way into our nets, and is delivered to our hands. Our job then is simple---glean the kelp from the net. Every skiff length, we stop, our hands pulling at the grasses as if we’re milking cows or pulling weeds from a garden. Often, the skiff is filled with more kelp than fish. Today is one of those days. In just an hour, we are ankle deep in a harvest neither of us wants.
*
We have four nets still to go, but I am dreading the end of the pick, after we deliver our fish. One job will remain---bailing and cleaning the skiff. I know how it goes. Naphtali will throttle down and angle the rudder of the outboard at the sharp right, and we spin. Tight circles, all our momentum contained in spirals that cant the skiff, sending the wastewater to the low side of the floor. We squat on our haunches, begin scooping and bailing the slop of gurry, blood, scales, guts, kelp and jellyfish. It does not smell—but if left in the skiff even a few hours, it would begin the rank of the decomposing. All the skiffs do this, the eight skiffs under our banner, Fields Wild Salmon. My three other sons, my neice and nephew, the ten crewmen. But no one cleans with such intensity and thoroughness as my daughter. Like her father. But I cannot spin. I set my face to the bottom of the skiff, shutting my eyes against the twirling horizon, trying to fool my body into ignorance of this dizzying circus act. I’m too old to perform. Hail to Naphtali for keeping such a clean skiff, but my body can’t do it. Nor can my mind. In just a matter of hours, we will return to the skiff and begin hauling in all the same ocean detritus again, and just a few hours later, another futile spin, readying for another harvest of weeds, fish, and guts. Why must the skiff be this clean?
None of this is what I anticipated. Before children, if I had thought about being a mother someday and passing a heritage onto my daughter, I would not have envisioned this: the two of us out in a skiff, in orange raingear, slimed by fish guts, blood and kelp, the mountains and ocean rising up around us. I would not have imagined us killing fish instead of garnishing them; snatching salmon from watery jaws, shouting sea lions away from our nets, picking kelp until midnight. In a rosy glow, I place the two of us in the kitchen. There we are, within warm buttery walls, surrounded by appliances with dashboards and buttons just waiting to be controlled by the lift of our fingers. Engines that whir to life with a touch rather than a full-body yank on a six-foot pull cord. We are wearing matching aprons instead of matching raingear. Standing side by side while I demonstrate the roll of the pin, the fold of the dough instead of the slashing of kelp and the roll of jellyfish from the nets. Betty Crocker is there. We speak of literature, The Heart of Darkness, The God of Small Things as we braid a mound of challah. I teach her the science of yeasts and pie crusts, the brilliance of Indian curries. She learns to savor the artistry of food as I do, the unending beauty of colors and textures and flavors---this, the only domestic art that I love.
None of this has happened. But this day, at the end of the pick, Naphtali turns the skiff over to me to devise my own bailing performance. I throttle up to full bore, then angle the arm to the right, then the left, a zig and zag sufficient to lean the sides for the scoop and bail. Naphtali bails. Like this, I cut a jagged swath home from the nets to our island. The skiff is clean enough today.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Andromeda: Obituary for an ebook pioneer and free reading from the 1910s
Michael Stern Hart (1947 – September 6, 2011) was the founder of Project Gutenberg and is credited with inventing the ebook, in 1971. Perhaps one reason we know his name less well is that his goal was never to make money with snazzy brandname products, but rather to make literature as free and available as air.
As a student at the University of Illinois in the early 1970s, Hart was given access to a powerful mainframe computer, with computer time valued at $100 million. According to a New York Times obituary, Hart tried to think of a project worthy of that power and conceived of sharing information – a concept distinct from data processing.
According to the New York Times: “After attending a July 4 fireworks display, (Hart) stopped in at a grocery store and received, with his purchase, a copy of the Declaration of Independence printed on parchment. He typed the text, intending to send it as an e-mail to the users of Arpanet, the government-sponsored precursor to today’s Internet, but was dissuaded by a colleague who warned that the message would crash the system. Instead, he posted a notice that the text could be downloaded, and Project Gutenberg was born.”
(A single mass-distributed text document crashing an entire system – I love that concept!)
Over the next decade, Hart typed the Constitution, the King James Bible, and Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland into the database. To consider how far we’ve come in this digital age – and how much we take for granted – consider that it took until 1997 for Hart to create the first 313 ebooks for Project Gutenberg. Today, 36,000 books are available free at the site, not counting the thousands of books available for free at partner sites. Hart was a visionary, and it took the rest of the world a few decades to catch up with his vision.
My own take on this subject – as a person who straddles the line between Luddite and pragmatist – is that I’ve gotten accustomed to reading from a Kindle only in the last six months. My children each received Kindle e-readers as a gift last year, from an uncle. They still haven't taken to the devices, but I tried one with limited interest. Then, about two months ago, I started on a new reading project I call “Reading the Century.” I’ve started reading one American novel per publication year, in more or less chronological order, from 1911 forward, with an emphasis on books that shaped or reflected the culture of the time, whether or not they have proved longlasting (and it’s fascinating to see which books have indeed lasted, and why).
The books I’ve read so far are: Ethan Frome by Edith Wharton (1911); Princess of Mars by Edgar Rice Burroughs (1912); O, Pioneers! by Willa Cather (1913); The Eyes of the World by Harold Bell Wright (1914—a megabestseller of the time now entirely forgotten, for very good reason); Herland by Charlotte Perkins Gilman (1915); Chicago, poems by Carl Sandburg (1916, not a novel but an exception I made for a very lackluster publishing year); The Job by Sinclair Lewis (1917—a much better mostly-forgotten book, about a working girl in New York City) and The Magnificent Ambersons by Booth Tarkington (1918, delightful).
Two things hit home from the very start of this idiosyncratic project: One, there weren’t very many novels published in the 1910s compared to now. Especially when one limits readings to American authors, the pickings are slim until about the 1930s, when American literature exploded. In some years, I was forced to choose between mostly forgotten books – and in so doing, found my way into reading amazing, previously overlooked gems, like Herland, an overtly political, feminist utopian novel from 1915, in which three male adventurers discover a hidden Amazonian society in which women have asexually reproduced for two millennia and managed to create a fertile and happy world, completely without men. The contrast between that book and the awkwardly written, chest-thumping Princess of Mars (to be released as a major movie under the title John Carter this summer, by the way) was extraordinary and revealing.
The second thing I realized picking my way through the 1910s was that many books were tricky to find-- unless one settled on reading them in ebook form, in which case they were instantly delivered and absolutely free. “Now” and “free” are hard to ignore. So far, I’ve read five of my eight “Century of Reading” books in digital form.
It’s one thing to weigh the prospects of reading a recently published physical book (which I prefer) or its ebook counterpart. It’s another thing to dig into our American past and realize some books from a century ago could have been lost entirely if not for belated reprinting (Herland, which first appeared in serial magazine format, didn’t appear in book form until the 1970s) or translation into digital format by volunteers.
For the first time in my reading life, I feel truly grateful for ebooks. With that thought in mind, a belated cheers to Michael Hart, a largely unsung visionary, who realized that computers and literature might one day go hand-in-hand.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Alaska Research – The Digital Divide: A Guest Post by Michael Catoggio
Monday, October 24, 2011
Greater Expectations: A Guest Post by Featured Author Kris Farmen
Friday, October 21, 2011
Ela: 49 Writers Weekly Round-up
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Andromeda/Your Turn: What are you reading (online) now?
So I'd like to ask you: help us freshen up. What blogs have you discovered? Are you using online sites and social media in a different way lately? Talk to us about the AK perspective on this, or just share your thoughts. Innovators, mavens, and Luddites all welcome.
To warm up the dialogue: Earlier this week I discovered "The Quivering Pen," David Abrams's blog, which includes book reviews, book giveaways, literary reflections, and a weekly feature called My First Time, "in which writers talk about virgin experiences in their writing and publishing careers, ranging from their first rejection to the moment of holding their first published book in their hands." Abrams, who lives in Montana and calls himself a "book evangelist" (gotta like that), is a reader of this blog and a graduate of the UAA [correction: UAF!]MFA program. He has a forthcoming novel about the Iraq war, called Fobbit (Grove/Atlantic). Abrams also writes for January Magazine.
*
There was lots of talk at the recently-concluded Frankfurt Book Fair about the digitalization of the book and increasing potentials for interactivity. All over the world this month, people seem to be talking about the idea that the most important relationship will not be between the writer and the publisher, but between the writer and the reader. People are buying more books online and doing more impulse-purchasing of books (especially easy with ebooks), and Amazon continues to rattle its mighty chains as a force for swifter and more direct delivery of content to consumers. As the NYT reported four days ago, Amazon has stepped up as a publisher and will bring out 122 titles this fall in both physical and ebook form. They're even paying out some big advances -- $800,000 to actress/director Penny Marshall, for starters.
Amazon isn't the only one flexing its muscles. Readers seem to be doing the same, championing their own roles as taste-makers and critics by posting their own reviews at Amazon and Goodreads, for example. (Old news, yes, but not old news when it's starting to change who gets published, and where, and for how much money.) Readers can track down their favorite authors on Facebook (I know I've "friended" several of mine) and Twitter, and will expect more and more direct access to enriched content, to authors, to opportunities not just to read, but to somehow engage with the reading process in more social ways.
And finally, starting today, the writer will get a kind of power previously limited to publishers: fast access to sales information. As the LA Times reported, Amazon announced it will give authors access to previously expensive and essentially inaccessible Neilsen Book Scan data, which tallies about 75% of overall sales. Now, an author can sweat over their book sales in closer-to-real-time terror! More significantly, seeing where copies are being sold and when can help authors tailor their own marketing efforts, both physical and virtual, and monitor if certain experiments (an online book tour or virtual book discussion, for example?) had any real effect. What will authors do with that information? As one author who has felt left in the dark on many an occasion, I'm fascinated to watch.
My question for you: Are any of you actually seeing any of this happening? If you're an author with a book coming out soon, what are you doing to fit into this changing social media world? If you're a reader, are you starting to demand more? What aspects of this Brave New Literary World do you love, and which do you loathe?
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Andromeda: POV -- Why it matters for writers
Some writers have point-of-view, or POV, figured out from the first moment they conceptualize a story. Many more have to actively, consciously work out the POV problem, deciding who should be telling the story, and how: a complex decision that involves not only “person” (first, third, or rarely, second), but also complex issues involving multiple choices along a continuum: omniscience versus serial first or limited third person narrators versus close, limited third, single-character subjectivity. And that doesn’t even take into account the possibility of using an unreliable narrator.
Unlike so many other elements of writing, which can be massaged or patched over at many points in the revision process, POV demands attention early. It shapes everything: characterization, story, voice. POV rules are made to be broken, but a wobbly, uncertain POV is the first sign that a story isn’t working. When a writer figures out exactly how she wants POV to operate in her story – and especially when she figures out how to do something she’s never done before – the ground shifts. It can be a breakthrough for the work in question. It can be a breakthrough for the author’s entire oeuvre.
Antonya Nelson, author of Bound: A Novel, tries to figure it out before she starts writing. But that doesn’t always work. She told interviewer Susan McInnis, “I have written fifteen or twenty pages only to realize, This is not this guy’s story. I have to stop and tell it from the wife’s point of view.”
Twenty pages doesn’t sound so bad considering the months – even years – that some writers spend tinkering. Just over a decade ago, author Zoe Heller had the idea to write a novel about a love affair between a woman teacher and her teenaged pupil, based on a scandalous real-life case then in the news. That idea would turn into a clever and intelligent novel, Notes on a Scandal (also known as What Was She Thinking?) and a movie starring Cate Blanchett and Dame Judi Dench. It was Heller’s second novel–and it would become her “breakout” book–but like most writers, she didn’t find the perfect approach right off the bat.
In an interview with the UK Guardian, Heller explains:
I made a number of false starts with the book–writing it from the teacher's point of view, from an omniscient, third-person perspective and so on–until, a couple of months in, it occurred to me to tell the story in the voice of Barbara, an older colleague and friend of the badly behaved teacher. Philip Roth once described novel-writing as a process of "problem-solving," and for me, the discovery of Barbara offered a solution to several problems all at once. It was a great "aha!" moment. I felt straight away that I knew Barbara inside out, that I "had" her voice. It was one of those rare instances in my writing life when I was positively eager to get to the computer and start work every day
Ann Patchett had written several respected books before she authored the one that finally jetted her into the literary limelight, where she has remained. The key to that novel, Bel Canto, was mastering a new element of POV: using omniscience, or the “god-like” ability to see into every character’s heart and mind (and into the future as well). Omniscience was more commonly preferred in 19th century novels—a natural match for an apparently more stable world in which God, State, and The Author all spoke loudly. But its profile dropped in the modern novel, which favored intimate portraits of the individual mind and a less clear authorial (or authoritarian) presence. Even so, some of our most literary contemporary authors have rediscovered the power of omniscience, which can create a broader scope and more liberating fluidity in narrative.
In a 2002 Writer’s Chronicle interview, Sarah Anne Johnson asked Ann Patchett whether Bel Canto, her first omnisciently written novel, felt like a huge leap, in terms of craft. She answered:
Huge. It’s what I’ve always wanted to do. It is exactly the thing I haven’t been able to pull off in my last three books. … I didn’t know how to do third person (in her first two novels), and I didn’t know how to do omniscient … (Bel Canto) was like a piece of knitting. I’d work on it fiercely for two weeks, and then I’d put it in a drawer for three months. Every time I finished a chapter, I felt like it was over-- I didn’t know where to go next. … It was just sheer will. So it took me a lot longer."
Bel Canto has a cast of sixty characters and a plot that revolves around terrorism and music. It is an emotionally expansive book, an operatic book. Being able to move in and out of many characters’ minds was essential to telling such a sweeping story. But balancing all those POV shifts isn’t easy. Patchett said, “There has to be an easy flow between point of view. You also don’t want to create a situation where the reader is more interested in one character than another."
What I take away from these three talented writers is not—as the POV-astute Henry James might have wanted to tell us—that one POV is more powerful or correct than any other. What I learn from Nelson, Heller, and Patchett is that mastering and employing POV requires a willingness to experiment, to be uncomfortable, to match form and technique to content, to start all over. POV requires learning the rules and then bending them; it requires learning everything you can about craft, only to realize you don’t know quite what you need for your next story. And that’s okay. Writing always demands just a little more than we’re able to provide at any moment. That’s how we keep moving forward.
Andromeda Romano-Lax is the author of The Detour (Soho Press, Feb. 2012), a novel set in Italy 1938, told in the first-person by a German narrator, reflecting back on the road trip that changed his life. Her current work-in-progress employs an unreliable, third-person narrator with occasional first-person vignettes written by a peripheral character. Regardless of how many novels she writes, Andromeda expects that she will never finish learning about POV.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
The Pen’s Power: A Guest Post by Marybeth Holleman
Monday, October 17, 2011
A Little of that Human Touch: A Guest Post by Featured Author Kris Farmen
Friday, October 14, 2011
Ela: 49 Writers Weekly Round-up
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Andromeda: Why POV matters to readers
One of the first books that ever rattled my very inner core was a simple chapter book about a boy being bullied. I’ve tried for years to remember the title and author, but can’t. I was in fifth grade or so when I read it, and don’t trust my memory about the details, only about the delayed impact. The impact came after I read the second book in the series (if it was a series, rather than one book with two distinct parts): the same story told from the bully’s perspective.
Until this point, I’d just fallen into fiction, happy to surrender to the enchantment of an imagined world, unable to stand outside and see them as “made” things, shaped by a living author. But reading this second book, it somehow became clear. The writer decided to tell the same story from the former antagonist’s point of view! What can I say? It hit me like a freight train. I read the book and understood why the bully was the way he was. The facts hadn’t changed; the perspective had. This seemed like an essential key to life. We call it empathy of course; I didn’t know that word at the time. I just knew that a book (or a series of books) was a fantastic way to achieve this effect, because it allowed you to step completely into the mind and life of another person–even the person you thought was the “bad guy.”
As adult readers and writers, we’d say, “Well, of course.” But there was no “of course” for me. It seemed like a miracle that changed books, and changed the way I perceived the real world outside of books. I actually encountered some brief bullying around this time, from a big, sullen girl from another class who liked to push around kids, and who caught me one day standing in the center of a jungle gym. She rallied all her gigantic (okay, probably four-and-a-half-feet) thugs around the metal contraption and they taunted and pulled at my hair. The principal found out and “Barbie” and I both got in trouble–go figure–though at least we managed to avoid the infamous principal’s discipline paddle. (A bit of a sadist, that one.)
The next time I saw her on the playground, I walked up to Barbie and said hi. We started talking. And strange but true: I left school that day with Barbie’s phone number scrawled in barely legible numbers (she wasn’t the brightest kid, I realized) on a damp little slip of paper. I never called, but she never bothered me again, either. I remember thinking that if I just tried to imagine what she was really like from the inside of her own skin then I didn’t need to be afraid of her. If the fear didn’t show on my face, I could walk up to her, and if I walked up to her and started talking, it was different from being hunted down, and something would change. And it did.
Bullying stories rarely turn out that easy. But as a reader and a writer-to-be, that little episode meant a lot to me. Through my reading, I could get to understand a lot of Barbies –and many other people as well, including people who lived in different places or even in different historical periods. (A year later, I’d start reading books by Jane Auel, about prehistoric people living in caves who were–and weren’t–like people I knew. Mind-blowing!)
Growing up, my mother often cautioned me not to “be a mind reader” or expect her to be one, either. But in truth, we’re all mind readers. In her book Why We Read Fiction, Lisa Zunshine merges cognitive science and literary theory to suggest that reading minds–practicing it, dealing with successively greater challenges of understanding–was important in our evolutionary history and one reason we still get such pleasure today in reading novels. Fiction helps us see inside others’ minds, often many of them in a single book, tracking people’s thoughts (and quite often, errors), and even what imagined people are thinking about other imagined people, on up through many layers of mind-reading and source-tracking complexity.
Regardless of what point-of-view a work uses, that viewpoint stretches our abilities to imagine, empathize, and practice those mind-reading skills that happen to be one of our brain’s favorite activities. It’s amazing to know what a bully is thinking–or a murderer, or a cavewoman, or a man from Mars. It’s instructive and entertaining to read a multi-generational saga told in alternating viewpoints (or recounted by an omniscient narrator), in which we get such contrasting views from siblings, parents and children, men and women. It’s inherently satisfying to view the world through even one intelligent but otherwise ordinary mind that is different from our own.
Next week I’ll talk more about how playing with POV has created breakthrough moments for some of my favorite authors.
Andromeda Romano-Lax is teaching a 49 Alaska Writing class about POV called “Perspectives and Viewpoints” on Tuesday nights from October 25–November 8. Registration required.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Breaking News: Alaska has a National Book Award finalist!
http://www.mediabistro.com/
Should be on the NBA site soon.
Congratulations, Debby - and thanks for placing us on the literary map, during Alaska Book Week, no less!

