Proactive'r'us
Sep. 17th, 2009 07:41 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
blatherskiteOne of the things I read each month, cover to cover, is Locus Magazine, which specializes in reviews of the best written science fiction and fantasy. (Click here to visit Locus online, their online cousin.) The magazine is highly recommended if you care at all about writing in these genres. Locus has some of the finest reviewers in the business; Gary K. Wolfe, in particular, rocks my world. (Gardner Dozois I mostly just skip. Sorry, G.D. You never much impressed me as editor at Asimov's either.)
In the August 2009 issue, Mary Robinette Kowal has the following to say about theater (italics in the original):
Now I don't want to be critical, since what I've read of Kowal's work is better than I aspire to attain in my own writing, but when I pondered that statement, it occurred to me that this quote mostly describes what I consider to be bad acting. I suppose it's possible to act convincingly in that kind of entirely passive way, but all the characters I enjoy the most don't just react: they act. The smarter ones actually keep an eye on the road ahead, and think about what's coming so they can take action before action takes them. That's called being proactive.
One of my favorite examples of this was when Canada's former prime minister, Pierre Trudeau knew that his time as leader was coming to an end, knew that he'd thoroughly worn out his welcome after many years in power, and knew that if he stuck around, he'd take it the chin—or in the balls, depending on how pessimistic you imagine he was. By all accounts, there was no love lost between Trudeau and John Turner, an up and coming Liberal Party member at the time. From the scant evidence, Trudeau seems to have manipulated things behind the scenes so that when he stepped down, Turner would quickly take his place—just in time to catch it on the chin (or in the balls, depending on how optimistic you think Trudeau was being). Turner lasted less than 3 months in office—one of the shortest terms in Canadian history.
You've got to admire that kind of proactivity, even if you do feel a bit sorry for poor Turner.
A friend asked me a few months ago what my goal was in writing fiction. I thought about it for a moment, and responded that I didn't really have any theme—that I mostly wrote what my muse suggested. But after reading the Kowal quote, it occurred to me that there probably is a theme to most if not all of what I write: my protagonists, even if they start out reacting to something, eventually make the choice to stop reacting and start acting—to take matters into their own hands. They may win, they may lose, but at least they decide to do it on their own terms. (Cue the Sinatra...) That's doubly true of my nonfiction writing, which is all about helping writers and editors to help themselves.
See for yourself how that's working for me in my fiction. Be proactive, and bring a few friends.
In the August 2009 issue, Mary Robinette Kowal has the following to say about theater (italics in the original):
"In theater, we say 'action is reaction': that in order to be acting, you have to be reacting. So what interests me is putting people into situations that you can imagine anyone being in... And their reaction to it is what interests me most."
Now I don't want to be critical, since what I've read of Kowal's work is better than I aspire to attain in my own writing, but when I pondered that statement, it occurred to me that this quote mostly describes what I consider to be bad acting. I suppose it's possible to act convincingly in that kind of entirely passive way, but all the characters I enjoy the most don't just react: they act. The smarter ones actually keep an eye on the road ahead, and think about what's coming so they can take action before action takes them. That's called being proactive.
One of my favorite examples of this was when Canada's former prime minister, Pierre Trudeau knew that his time as leader was coming to an end, knew that he'd thoroughly worn out his welcome after many years in power, and knew that if he stuck around, he'd take it the chin—or in the balls, depending on how pessimistic you imagine he was. By all accounts, there was no love lost between Trudeau and John Turner, an up and coming Liberal Party member at the time. From the scant evidence, Trudeau seems to have manipulated things behind the scenes so that when he stepped down, Turner would quickly take his place—just in time to catch it on the chin (or in the balls, depending on how optimistic you think Trudeau was being). Turner lasted less than 3 months in office—one of the shortest terms in Canadian history.
You've got to admire that kind of proactivity, even if you do feel a bit sorry for poor Turner.
A friend asked me a few months ago what my goal was in writing fiction. I thought about it for a moment, and responded that I didn't really have any theme—that I mostly wrote what my muse suggested. But after reading the Kowal quote, it occurred to me that there probably is a theme to most if not all of what I write: my protagonists, even if they start out reacting to something, eventually make the choice to stop reacting and start acting—to take matters into their own hands. They may win, they may lose, but at least they decide to do it on their own terms. (Cue the Sinatra...) That's doubly true of my nonfiction writing, which is all about helping writers and editors to help themselves.
See for yourself how that's working for me in my fiction. Be proactive, and bring a few friends.