Kafka's Openers.

Franz Kafka, nothing short of a legendary author, is quite well known for his short stories, and especially for his novella, The Metamorphosis. Kafka wrote stories so applicable to modern life and so harrowing that the term "kafkaesque" is recognized in the english language, and is attributed to works akin to those of Kafka's. And so, as I'm sure you'd assume, there's been an innumerable number of essays on Kafka and his stories, ranging from his relationship with his father, to wild interpretations of The Metamorphosis. However, today I write of an aspect of Kafka's tales that I consider to be a fundamental one; his opening lines.

Indeed, while I haven't read Kafka quite as extensively as I likely should, out of all of the stories of his I've read, the majority have phenomenal opening sentences.  For the sake of familiarity, take for example his most popular work, The Metamorphosis. The Metamorphosis  begins with the line, "When Gregor Samsa awoke from troubled dreams one morning, he found that he had been transformed in his bed into an enormous bug." An undoubtedly powerful sentence, that take no time to invoke a sense of urgency, shock, and further wonder which facilitates reading of the tale. This immediate shock grips readers and digs unyielding claws within them dragging the readers through the story. You'd be quite hard pressed to find someone who finds that opening line uninteresting, in fact, I'd wager even those who have just read it in this post may seek out The Metamorphosis for further reading, or at the very least, more information on the overreaching dark nature of many of Kafka's stories.

The Metamorphosis isn't the sole story of Kafka's to feature these stark, effective openings either. Take for example the rather similar A Report to an Academy, another of Kafka's stories dealing with similar themes of captivity and devices such as anthropomorphized animals; "You have honored me with your invitation to submit a report to the Academy about my former life as an Ape." Again, the reader is immediately bashed with an intriguing statement to spark the story's beginning.  While it may not be quite as effective as the previous example from The Metamorphosis (It is largely considered his masterwork for a reason, after all.) it suffices for the same purpose, and display Kafka's propensity for such strong openers.

Now, these openers are not only important for pulling the reader in, for Kafka also does an excellent job at shaping the narrative around such statements. Kafka makes the opening statements the beginning points of his stories and forms the narrative from that point, as opposed to going into something akin to a flashback leading up to the point in which shocking opener occurs. Such style makes many of Kafka's stories read rather like "Flash Fiction" despite not meeting the short length restricted specific to the genre. I consider them similar in that Kafka often delves immediately into the primary action, and builds to the climax rather quickly. Background information and character history often reveals itself over time through the main action, rather than in a linear fashion with portions of the text devoted to each character. In the Penal Colony opens with the line " 'Its a machine like no other', said the officer to the explorer, as he surveyed the machine with a somewhat admiring look, although he was so familiar with it." a statement just as powerful in invoking interest as the previous examples, as well as one that provides little information about the two present characters. Though, as you can see, the reader is already exposed to Kafka's gradual method of revealing character related information through his implication that the officer knows this odd machine well, and yet is still awed by it. The story goes on further with similar tidbit reveals about character history, as the main action of a prisoner's execution occurs.

To summarize in a single overreaching point; Franz Kafka is a paragon of superior opening sentences that immediately introduce a main point of action and interest, and an excellent model as to how to mold narratives around such statements. So, if fellow writers ever find themselves lost at how to open a tale, especially one heavily oriented around the plot, I believe Kafka is the perfect author to turn to.

Introducing... The Brass Pestle

 I've recently begun work on another blog titled The Brass Pestle

It's primary goal is to essentially serve as a platform where modern aspiring writers may submit their work for unpaid publication, and hopefully receive some positive/helpful feedback.

Here's an excerpt from the About page:

"The Brass Pestle is an independent online publishing platform for previously unpublished, and published authors alike. Our goal is to foster enjoyment of, and promote modern day literature, as well as a culture of authors who may critique one each others works and improve together.We publish short stories as well as poetry. The best way to determine if your work is fitting for the blog is to read some of the others we’ve published! If you’d like for us to publish your work on the site, please visit the submissions page."

I encourage everyone who reads this post to check it out. There's some great work on  the site already, and it's thirsting for more! Feel free to submit via the submissions page.

Drexel's Week of Writing Conclusion

Well, as you might've guessed, the week of writing has been officially over for a few days now.

As a whole, it was an excellent experience, and provided excellent tidbits that may be utilized to enhance writing ability in a variety of ways.

I enjoyed reflecting on it, and surely hope I have the time to do a sort of week(ish) ling posting spree  again, in similar events, or as I stated in a previous post a specific topic on writing that is worthy of a week long dedication.

Nonetheless, it was great, and I hope anyone reading the blog has enjoyed my own reflections on Drexel University's 2012 Week of Writing, and hopefully derived some helpful information from them.

-By the way this is the first of the (from here on out) weekly Wednesday posts. Expect a much larger amount of content next Wednesday, this post was merely a formality of sorts, hah.

Drexel University's Week of Writing Event 3: Panel on Crime Writing

As of late the particular genre of "crime writing" has become quite popular among novelists and readers alike.  In an attempt to gain some insight to the genre's realm, Drexel University invited, Steve Volk(Author of Fringeology and writer/journalist for the Philadelphia Magazine), Albert DiBartolomeo(Author of The Vespers Tapes and Fool's Gold), and Michael Capuzzo(Author of The Murder Room and Close to Shore). All the invited guests have had great experience writing about crime, yet all approach it from the differing perspectives of fiction, nonfiction, and journalism. The panel that ensued included a solid number of well crafted inquiries, to which the panelists answered eloquently.

Due to the nature of the discussion, I've narrowed the covered topics to those that I believe fit to this blog, that is, those that particularly had to do with writing.

On the Nature of Crime and Human Attraction to it.

       This portion of the discussion began quite early on, and developed throughout the entirety of the event. I believe it was initiated with Dibartolomeo's sentiments that violence is an easy attraction for an audience when writing fiction. This in turn led to the very questioning of the fundamental reason as to why the average person finds crime and villainy so attractive. Steve Volk made a keen note that "The Joker is increasingly more popular than batman" and wondered, as we all did, what that indicates about our current society.  Eventually the group seemed to reach a consensus on the belief that the taint of crime lies within us all, however we learn to establish preventers, barriers of sorts that disallow us to succumb to our darker desires, in other words, moral fiber.  Capuzzo informed the audience that "psychopaths" are those with no such barriers, with unlimited options, no potential action they can take is seen as unallowable to them.  The group determined that crime's appeal is so great due to the very fact that we all posses criminal intentions and some point, but suppress them. Crime writing allows us to explore our dark fantasies, it offers a view into what may have occurred had we brought our devious plots into fruition on all of those occasions we've had them.
       Writers, especially crime or aspiring writers, should of course heed this information. It's undeniably useful when pondering where to go with a plot, or how to make a murderous character believable. The heart of crime is essentially the destruction of the aforementioned "barriers" that serve as our moral compass, and allow us to regard the effects we have on others. Therefore, in constructing a narrative it'd be wise to consider breaking a characters "barriers" as a means for inducing action. Take for example, Macbeth, in which Shakespeare's hero begins as a promising, good hearted thane of Glamis. Of course, Macbeth's barriers are broken down by the enticing prophecies the witches provide to him. Shakespeare provides MAcbeth with the particular motivation of power thirst. His barrier broken,  Macbeth begins down a gruesome path, and becomes a particular type of killer, one that was brought up in discussion which I shall soon address.

On the Writing Process with Particular Attention to Character


       Towards the discussions closing a final inquiry was made regarding each guest author's writing process. Albert DiBartolomeo was asked to describe his process with writing fictional crime novels first.  DiBartolomeo stressed his great focus on framing as the initial step in the writing process. He expressed the need for "consequential actions", ones that can put great stress on his characters and break them (Breaking the barriers).  Once the basic frame is complete DiBartolomeo begins crafting and developing the characters and their ties with one another, which he considers the driving force behind his novels. He finds his excitement not through the criminal actions present, as they may be considered common, but rather the relationships between those who commit the acts against each other, often of family ties, and how the events effect each character.
      Michael Capuzzo takes a similar approach to DiBartolomeo's but applies it  to the creation of interesting nonfiction narratives. Foremost he searches for a great story, much like the need for consequential actions that DiBartolomeo expressed.  He then, much like DiBartolomeo, develops interesting characters around the exciting plot. Capuzzo made an extremely intriguing point on the importance of interesting characters with the following statement; "Everyone knows a great story." In that respect, it is the characters that set a story apart, for everyone knows what makes an strong plot. Capuzzo also mentioned some archetypes of murderers, which I believe would be helpful when thinking about character creation;
The Power Killer- Kills in a thirst for power(to stay "on top", Macbeth),
The Ego Killer- Kills primarily from the view that he is always superior, causing lack of acknowledgement of such to be an insult.
The Vengeful Killer-  Kills in an act of revenge. A retaliation. (Allegedly OJ Simpson murder as revenge for the act of cheating in a relationship.)
The Sadistic Killer- One who kills for pleasure. Unlike the previous killers who have barriers that are broken from specific events, the sadistic killer's barriers are non-existent. He will go to any length to derive the pleasure he seeks. (Many serial killers and psychotics fit this bill)
     Lastly I'll cover Steve Volk's writing process, which differs quite a bit from the previous two authors as he is primarily a journalist, not a writer of novels, though he has written one entitled Fringeology. Being a journalist, Volk is heavily dependent on his many sources, that lead him to firsthand reporting opportunities. He often examines each story in relation to its potential fitting into the standard magazine/paper structure of 5 sections; Lead, Background, Return to present situation examined in the lead, Climax, and Conclusion. Volk used the analogy of a  chef choosing ingredients for a meal to describe his approach to the writing process. He likes to have a wide selection of events and information on a story to choose from, and determines what ingredients would make for the tastiest article. When describing his approach to writing his novel Volk claimed that it was very much the same as his article writing process, all the way down to the fitting of the work into a 5 section journalism format.
     The discussion on the writing process proved to be quite useful for myself, and I hope for other writers who attended the event. I hope as well that I was able to regurgitate some of the information well enough to be of use to readers of this site.  In summary, the discussion highlighted especially the extreme importance of character, and their structuring around plots. Prime information to have in mind that isn't strictly limited to the writing of crime works.

A Quick Note, Serialization of Posts

I've determined, in an effort to induce a bit of formality on the blog, to serialize posts. In other words, readers can expect a blog post on a certain day of the week, every week, in order to  allow for a more reader friendly environment, in which blog viewers know when to expect new content. Hopefully this will eliminate any shade of what I imagine is an annoying sense of sporadic posting, causing sporadic viewing, and all around confusion.  So here's the deal;

Wednesday's: Every Wednesday of the week, starting this week, shall be when I publish a main blog post for the week. However, if I have a multitude of content that I'd like to put out that week I may post some write up's on Monday's, Tuesday's, and Thursday's as well. Therefore...

Friday's: Shall house posts with links to all of the content published during that week, enabling  easy access to anything that may have been initially missed. 

I'm also juggling around the idea of doing "theme" weeks, in which one post regarding a specific topic shall be published everyday of the specified week. (Similar to this week's coverage of Drexel's Week of Writing.)

And that's about it. 

Remember, a new blog post every Wednesday!

Drexel University's Week of Writing Event 2: Philosophy and/as Literature

The second event at Drexel's 2012 Week of Writing was the first of, hopefully many to come, events during the week focused on philosophy. Philosophy and Literature have always had a significant connection, the subject this particular panel aimed to address. Drexel University invited members of the philosophy department at Richard Stockton College of New Jersey to present their thoughts on philosophy and literature and serve as panelists for the event.
   
       The first speaker, Melanie McLeod, focused her presentation on a basic introduction to philosophy, and the importance of critical thinking. Criticism, fostered by critical thinking, was defined in not one, but two categories; private face and public face. Private face refers specifically to the relationship between thought and reasoning, whereas public face boasts the relationship between language and reasoning. With this in mind, Ms. McLeod made the excellent point that literature acts as a display of both. The author first takes part in private face criticism, through the ideas the writer determines to explore through the literary work (clearly a concept that is open to critical though, such as man's selfish nature is a prerequisite.) The author then participates in public face through the use of language in written word, conveying his thoughts to others, who in turn are receptive and as a result likely participate in their own private face on the author's ideas. Therefore, literature promotes critical thinking.  An excellent defense against those pesky people who fail to see the point in literary study or production. (hah!)
        After the conclusion of Ms. McLeod's presentation Peter Hagen, another guest speaker from Stockton, began his. Mr. Hagen's presentation was excellent, and would be of keen interest,(I think) to writers and literature enthusiasts of all types. The presentation revolved around Mr. Hagen's own experience as a college advisor, and his efforts to utilize his degree and knowledge in literature to support his work in aiding students. He made point that all students, and on a larger scale, all people, are akin to unfinished texts, to be worked on and written. Mr. Hagen also professed that he had in fact seen some degree of manifestation of famous fictional characters, such as hamlet, in his clients. What I believe Mr. Hagen advocated with his speech was essentially the importance of literature, and it's accessibility for application to work and world philosophies. In addition, Mr. Hagen's sentiments served as a keen reminder to myself that a huge portion of writing has to do with observance. As writers we examine, and as Ms. McLeod stated, criticize the world around us. We take our observations in from our reality and utilize them, criticize them, and relay them.
       Both presentations were excellently executed, and provided a healthy dosage of insight. Dr. Roger Jackson was to present next, unfortunately I had to attend to other duties and could not remain for his presentation. If the previous speakers were any indication, however, I'm sure he delivered interesting ideas with the best of eloquence.

This concludes the coverage of Drexel University's Week of Writing 2012 events for today, 5/21/12. The next post on the Week of Writing shall be published on 5/22/12.

Drexel University's Week of Writing Event 1: Marathon Reading

The Week of Writing at Drexel University erupted today beginning with a Marathon Reading event. Writers who claimed victory in the preceeding Drexel Publishing contest were invited to read their works to a small audience. The pieces themselves were very good, and there existed a nice representation of both prose and poetry.

What was most interesting to note, however, was the degree of leniency and difference readers took when reading their work. Some took on an informal position, often adding verbal asides in the middle of their work, such as ones that provided some background on inspirations for their works or opinions.  Such asides are not present in the written text, and could be interpreted as an augmentation, that is some additional content, to the performance of reading the pieces not found in the act of reading the work.
         Yet such "agumentation" undoubtedly detracts from a potential structuring of the readings as performances. These asides, though related, break the narrative, in essence disrupting immersion. I think there's a value to both, and certainly the writers who read today demonstrated the truth to such a sentiment, but I am perplexed upon which may be better. Are informational asides during a reading valuable, and offer something extra to the listener? Or is the experience more enjoyable when the piece is read without a break from the narration and particular vocal fluctuations to enhance the narratives pathos?  Perhaps certain pieces, or authors even, are more suited to one of such reading practices more than the other?

It was an interesting event, not to mention a chance to hear some great writing.