The Process: Learning How to Really Write
by Michael Mohr
I
began my involvement with Clive Matson’s Oakland Writing Workshop back in early
November, 2011. It was when the Occupy Oakland stuff was still going on. I’ll
never forget that experience. I had just moved back to California, from Oregon,
and all hell was seeming to break loose in downtown Oakland, and, evidently,
New York City and across the globe.
There had been a call for Occupy
writing submissions by a guy named Clive Matson. I heard of this, wrote a few
pieces after joining the massive marches, and submitted a few to Clive’s
assistant in Frank H. Ogawa Plaza in downtown Oakland. The assistant assured me
that he’d get it to Clive. Within a week I’d received a phone call: I love this writing: I want you to come join
my workshop, Clive had said.
Thrilled, I showed up to Clive’s
house on 44th and Telegraph in Temescal, North Oakland. I’d never
done a writing workshop before, and I was terrified. There were about five
others, mostly older women. Then me, twenty-eight-years-old at the time, male,
still learning the writing ropes.
Clive, I soon found out, was a
master. He’d cut his literary teeth ages ago. Seventy-one, he’d been publishing
work since the early sixties. A poet at heart, he’d been on the fringe of the
Beat movement in New York, and had travelled to Europe on his own dime in his
twenties, doing tiny, spastic readings across the European continent for soup
or a place to crash. He’d gotten around.
Clive had a plethora of published
works, his most notable perhaps “Let the
Crazy Child Write!” released in 1998 by New
World Library. “Mainline to the Heart,”
written in his twenties about his nefarious heroin addiction as a youth, was a
potent and reputable anthology to the demented in us all.
In the beginning, I brought in
Occupy pieces. I continued to march and be moderately involved with the
“Movement.” But I soon began to realize two things: One, that my and Clive’s politics
were very different, and Two, that my and Occupy’s politics were very
different. One day, I simply showed up with fiction instead of Occupy material.
Clive didn’t bat an eye, and we went from there. Occupy had gotten me in the
door; fiction kept me there.
From that point on, the learning really
began. Getting to know the other members, I started to realize that writing was
a tricky and unreliable craft, one that needed discipline and open-mindedness
as a core to true growth. Clive was there to softly, and eventually, as he
noticed my growth sky rocketing, harshly push me forward into new and feral
literary lands.
Simple concepts began to infiltrate
the material I brought in: A stronger story arc (these were, at this point,
mostly short stories); more memorable characters; better, stronger, more
concise dialogue; more well developed scene, location, setting, tone, voice,
etc. Also, on the more technical end: Less use of overbearing adjectives and
adverbs. Being a stronger, more confident story teller in general.
As I grew, and as my writing
flourished, Clive and the other members in the group became more willing to give
critical, helpful feedback. And I became more willing to hear what they had to
say. It became less a feeling of having my heart beat against a wall when
someone criticized my material, and more like they wanted to see me succeed and
write truthfully. I began to trust Clive, the other members, and The Process.
Along this journey, I also realized
something else: I had a serious ability to give positive and helpful feedback
to other writers. This was something which, lacking the necessary confidence,
I’d never been comfortable doing before. But now I felt equipped. When others
would lack a strong “bow and arrow” type aiming in their story arc (Clive’s
favorite metaphor) I would call them out. Where’s your plot? I’d say. They’d
smirk. But they appreciated it, too. We all did. We were there to help one
another. This became a common journey, which was incredible because writing, to
me, had always felt like a solitary and lonely occupation.
And an interesting mix of writers it
was. One woman, Janit, was writing a beast of a science fiction novel. Nearly
six hundred pages deep, she’d ostensibly created a world full of nanos and
jungle creatures—villains and saviors interacting on the same unique planet.
Running undertones of psychosexuality and latent feminism, Janit’s work was
different. That was what made it shine.
Then there was Denise. She was and
still is a phenomenal author; a novelist and short story writer. She’s in her
sixties, has three complete novels and many short stories. She would bring in her
novel, in bits and pieces, and we’d critique. Wonderful, plot-driven prose with
strong characters and a setting which stood out as a character itself.
Mary was another woman in her
sixties who did mostly poetry, but realist fiction as well. Mary’s work was
dark. Her stuff came from an inner turmoil and a past life which would make
most of us squirm in our overly-comfortable seats. She had really been through
it. Her past, like an unlocked secret. Her poems were deep, cut rough like
harsh, rare gems. And her “stories” were like a piece of hell wrapped up in
Heaven—the writing sang about deeds done in ancient, ominous corners of her
past.
Then Roger. In his early seventies,
Roger was also a wonderful writer. He was working on a collection of stories
for grade school kids (his career had been in teaching) in which he’d describe
how to survive a catastrophe, and also how to survive in the woods. This was created
as fiction, in order to nurture the kids’ minds as well as educate them, while
at the same time reigning them in by touching their imaginations. Very
interesting project.
Clive, our hallowed leader, didn’t
read his own work. He listened to us rant and critique and comment, and pulled
us back in when we began to get off track, always reminding us of the time.
This is how it works. Each writer receives a
fair portion of the time. Said writer hands out copies of their work to each
person, reads their piece, then the group takes ten minutes to think about what
was just read and make written comments on the hard copy. After that, Clive
guides the workshop: We go page for page, and comment on what we “liked” on
each page. After this, the session is open for critical comments. The author at
this point is a ghost. He or she doesn’t exist. No one acknowledges the author.
The group speaks as if the author is not present. This is very effective. The
author can learn about what the group really thinks of their piece. This is
standard workshop protocol.
The first piece that I brought in
which got published was a story called Tightrope.
Tightrope is a short story about two guys in their early twenties, who live in
San Diego and decide, against all common sense and intuition, to go on a quick
trip to “good ole Mexico, baby!” Well, as you can already probably imagine, the
trip goes south. That’s putting it mildly.
The story, in its original
inception, was a staggering twenty-seven pages long. I was very proud of this
story, even in this stage of its development. One of the first things the group
said was: Cut the first two pages out. I was horrified. What do you mean, cut
the first two pages out? I felt like they were saying, go ahead, throw your
newborn baby out the window!
Well, terrified as I was, I followed
suit, and brought the thing back again, the first two pages gone, a distant memory,
wham: Out of this world!
Then they informed me that there
were way too many adjectives and adverbs used to describe the two main
characters. They were having trouble really seeing
these two young idiots, these two young guys who were hard drinkers, womanizers
and clueless wrecks. They wanted to believe the story worked, but weren’t sure
yet.
Ok. I troubleshot the whole story
and cut as many adjectives and adverbs as humanly possible. Brought it back
again.
Now the problem lay in the core:
What was the story really about? Think of
that Bow and Arrow, Clive reminded me. Pick
a target, aim, and fire directly at that target, Clive said,
satisfactorily.
Goddamn it.
But they were right, of course. I
went back again and really looked at what I had. Ok, there were entertaining
moments, tension galore, but what, really, was the STORY? I had to force myself to think about what the point was.
After doing this for a while, I realized that the tale was actually about the
“I” narrator and what he goes through, emotionally, during his journey after
waking up alone in a Mexican alley, having passed out drunk. That’s really what
the story was about. Not the two of them together. Not women. Not drinking. Not
the chaos. Those were the things I’d thought
the story was about. But it wasn’t what the story was actually about.
Ding-Dong: Blammo! That was a huge
revelation!
I went back, did some reconstructive
revising, then cut out anything (the bow and arrow) which truly didn’t NEED to be there; any extraneous
material which had been inserted, not for the reader, but, I found out, more
likely for the writer: Me. And when you’re writing for yourself and not the
reader; please, do us all a favor and don’t try to publish your work. Unless
you’re David Foster Wallace, of course. D.F.W. claimed to write for “No
reader.”
Tightrope
returned to the group, down to seventeen pages, cut from twenty-seven: New,
tight, concise.
The group loved it. They really fell
in love with the story, with these two characters, with the plot line. Now you have a story, Clive beamed. You’re getting it!
I was beyond exhilarated. I had done
the work. That’s what had happened. I had done the work and it had paid off
handsomely. There had always been a part of me which naively believed that by
being a professional writer, I’d somehow evade “real work.” This was the young,
early twenties, irresponsible American kid in me; what could I say? But,
joining Clive’s group, and really sinking my teeth into this whole process and
doing the real hard work of cutting, revising, showing up to the group on a regular,
disciplined basis: This was what being a writer really meant. It meant, just
like any other career, doing the deal. To be a plumber, you have to be trained
and take classes to become an apprentice. Why should writing be any different?
Because it’s “sophisticated?”
Bullshit.
Honestly what I was realizing was that my
youthful dream of Poof: Just becoming
a famous writer overnight, was, in all reality, just that: A dream. I’d be
lucky if I struggled most of my life to become a working, local author. And I
should be so lucky.
But the cool thing was that this was beginning
to sound very okay. This confirmed my desire to be a true writer—I was willing
to make a living doing it, the hard way. The only way. The true way.
Tightrope
finally got the Ok Signal from Clive and the group. I made a few more minor
alterations and cuts and began submitting it for publication. Within a month or
two, Alfie Dog Press, a U.K. online journal,
sent me an email. The editor was interested but had some minor changes they’d
like me to make. There were some overuse of adjectives, adverbs, etc, and some
minor syntactical changes needed.
I couldn’t believe it!
First off, I was thrilled and honored that a
journal wanted my piece. But also, I was shocked that there was still MORE to be cut and revised. But the fact
that an editor took the time to make these suggestions was also a pretty big
deal. Editors, I found out later, don’t always do that.
I made the suggested changes (she used red
tracking on Microsoft Word to show me her desired revisions) and re-submitted. Tightrope got published! I was ecstatic.
The originally twenty-seven page story finally made it into the journal, after
several months of work-shopping, as a thirteen page story. Fourteen pages were
cut! And I hadn’t known where my story actually started or even ended: My group
had to show me that! And not to mention the assistance of the Alfiedog Press editor.
This reminded me of the collaborative effort in
writing. It may seem like a solitary endeavor, and it is to some extent. But
when all is said and done, writers ultimately have to surround themselves with
other writers and workshops and editors in order to really find out what the
hell they actually have to offer.
From there I went on to publish several more
stories, in different journals and magazines. I learned how to write a “bow and
arrow” arc; how to describe a character; how to use back story effectively and
not lose your reader’s attention. This became easier. Also, I learned how to
work with editors and how to cater to their suggestions, which were always
strong ones and helped my writing immensely. I think one of the hardest things
for writers is not being able to see their own work objectively. That’s why
it’s so important for us to join critique groups; take creative writing
classes; meet up with others and share our work.
Not only have I gained a lot of insight through
my own work and being a part of the group within this framework, but I’ve
gained a lot through others in the workshop as well. Figuring out how to tell
another writer that their character is one dimensional, or that their setting
is bland, weak, irrelevant, is hard. But I’ve gotten pretty damn good at it,
because they give me feedback on my
work; I have to return the favor. It’s an uncomfortable thing, criticizing
other people’s personal writing. You don’t want to offend anybody, and you
don’t want to encourage recrimination. Nobody likes to feel bullied. Especially
in a writing arena. We writers are sensitive.
But learning how to do this has been key in my
progress as an author. If I can’t honestly tell you what I really think of your
work, then I won’t be able to take your feedback, either. And then I’m pretty
much dead in the water. Nothing will get done if there’s no honesty, no
authentic critique, no voice/opinion expressed.
Clive has been a good voice of reason in these
moments—times where he senses that maybe the writer, for whatever reason, is
unsure how to say what he or she would like to say. Then he can jump in and
save the day by using his own expertise to assuage the situation. I think what Michael is trying to say, Denise,
is that your tone needs to be more serious for this kind of story. And I’d have
to say, I agree. A quick wink and a nod confirm we’re on the same literary
page. And Denise nods, too, her face a blanche white, mouth a tight line, but
her eyes still have that miniature sparkle, that indicator that she
begrudgingly understands.
The hardest thing is when one of us brings in
something which really doesn’t work at all. It has been rare but not unheard
of. Sometimes the creative wheels get stuck: Could be the stress of work; the
mundane week; the kids; school; something happening in your life; whatever.
When this happens, Clive sort of lets it swing around on its own. We have less
to say; the session for that writer ends a little bit more quickly that day,
and they understand intrinsically that what they’ve brought in is subpar.
It’s alright. It happens.
I used to think that getting a story published
would be the most exciting thing in the world. And don’t get me wrong—it’s
fantastic! And Alfie Dog Press even
pays money! That’s a typical modern writer—being thrilled that they will get
paid (hardly anything) for publishing their work.
But the truth is that it’s just a small stop at
the fruit stand, along the long and dusty road of career writing. There is so,
so much more road to explore, to drive through, to learn about. It’s not about
the destination: It’s about the journey. Someone told me that once and it
annoyed the shit out of me. But it’s true, I get that now. And man, have I
grown.
Nine of my short stories, along with several
poems, are published now. I have a blog which is doing well:
Michaelmohrwriter.com. I am interning with a Bay Area literary agency. Things
are moving for me in the writing world. It’s all because I started saying yes. Because
I let go of my childish notion that things “should” be a certain way. That I
should get my novel published because I’m so goddamn special.
Writing, just like anything else in life, is
about hard work. It’s about determined persistence. It’s about saying yes and
not giving up, no matter what. It’s about using resources like workshops and
instructors like Clive Matson as leverage to push your own literary boundaries.
It’s about networking and connections. It’s about faith. Really, it’s about
finding out how much, how badly, you want this: To be a writer. Really: To be
an author. I wrote a creative non-fiction piece, which is on my blog, called Are you a Writer or an Author? which
delves more deeply into this notion.
So I leave you with that sentiment: That writing
is both a job and a passion. And that I have found out where I stand. Growing
up is weird enough, let alone doing it as a writer. We like to chronicle our
growth through publicly displaying our struggles on the page. Rather bizarre,
if you think about it.
But I have grown up. And I have found myself as
an author. I’m on the path.
Are you?
***
For more information about Clive and his workshop, please visit his website:
matsonpoet.com; and his blog: matsonpoet.com/wind/
No comments:
Post a Comment