Enjoy. And drive safe will ya?
Patrick: Why did they select you to interview me? Are they aware that I generally consider you a rockstar and am not as likely to yell at you?Drucifer:
Who knows how these things work. I was asked, I said yes, and here we find ourselves. As for being a rockstar, well, I have the musical skillz of a paramecium, so whilst the comparison is doubtless flattering, it's probably not entirely accurate. But I'll take it. Feel free to yell at me though, if it makes for an entertaining read!
It's always weird getting these pingpong things off the ground. Reminds me of a first date in a lot of ways. All the subtle social signifiers to consider, all the uncertain gestures.
Am I being too touchy? Am I not being touchy enough? Does my breath smell? Did I put on too much cologne or not enough? Should we go with water based lube or something a bit creamier? Is it appropriate to fist on the first date?
Maybe I should start at the start. I'm Dru: 24 year old male. Recently single (as amicable a breakup as one could hope for), currently a grad student in English / Creative Writing. I write stories mostly, though the odd poem slips in every once in awhile. I'm also working on a novel and I hope to pass it off as my creative writing thesis.
I have two cats who think they're people. I'm a Leo. I used to play sports and sometimes hump the cushions of my couch to practice the hip thrusts so integral to the act of coitus. I don't like the word 'teat' and I think my nose and chin are both way too big, and the naysayers to that are all in on a big conspiracy of which I'm not fully aware.
Your turn, hombre.
Patrick: Ah, but a rockstar in the metaphorical sense, referencing your long list of publishing credits and general tendency to rock my socks. It's something I envy and respect. But I suppose it's something you have worked for. I hardly ever send my work out, and the few times I do, the rejections scare me away.
Let me say that I prefer lotion over lube, but then again lotion doesn't work with condoms, so you better be clean. There's never a bad time for fisting.
Perhaps this is why they (they!) have selected you and paired us together: I am Patrick, 23 year old male, and I also primarily write stories with the occasional distraction of a poem. Even though I've had only poems published, that really isn't what I want to be known for. I feel that my skill lies more in fiction than poetry. As for a novel, I hope to write one this winter, when going outside isn't as big of a temptation.
I also have two cats, though they are not really mine--they're Michael's (my boyfriend). I'm a Scorpio and I've been told this fits. I never played sports but did in fact hump couch cushions (among other things). I hate my ears, for they are ridiculously and disproportionately large.
How do you feel about calamari?Drucifer:
I'm going to assume that by calamari, you mean the food and not some strange new kink that all the kids are up to these days. I'm neutral about all things octopus and squid: the texture doesn't agree with me, but if calamari is done right, it's a treat.
Hmmm, that came out of left field.
So you've got a boyfriend - long term? Living together? I dated a lesbian for five and a half years. Boy was that a treat. We still love each other, but what happened was best for both. Our sex life is one for the grandkids.
Monogamy isn't popular amongst the queer folk I know. Are you and the beau open or exclusive? Do you go to bars or prefer to stay at home? Have you ever watched Queer as Folk? Not to essentialize you in terms of your sexuality or nuthin, I'm just curious.
So how did you find your way to LM? Who do you love here, who can't you stand? (This is totally going to be the most scandalous pingpong that ever did live).
On the subject of sending work out and rejections, I find I go in spurts. When I first started, I sent everything out. Rejections stung, but I didn't go far beyond my means. Now I'm sending stuff to bigger markets and I feel like I'm on the cusp of really nabbing some snazzy publishing credits. But who knows - I suspect it'll always feel this way, except for Alice Munro and whoever else can mail their grocery lists to the New Yorker and have them published.
Patrick:
Yes. Michael and I have been together for almost two years, and we've been exclusive for about a year now, after a rough patch or two that consisted of me being a douche bag. I'm glad that we're monogamous, even though there is, of course, the temptation of really, really hot and easy guys.
On the subject of you dating a lesbian, I, as a homo, dated a girl for about four years. Pretty much destroyed her during that time, but I hear (from her, after I ran into her on the freeway [not literally] back in November ) she's relatively okay now--a new mother. I'm happy for her. And we do not watch Queer as Folk. I've never seen it. Is it good? And as far as going out or staying in goes, we kind of do both, but don't go to bars all that often anymore--it's kind of a boring scene. We try to go to house parties instead, or go camping or something.
I found LM via the benevolent Google Machine. I searched for "writing forums" and it was on the third or fourth page in those days. I felt that a board with a shred of intelligence and humor was slightly rare, and there were a few poems that caught my eye. I introduced myself and went about posting and was met with utter disaster simply because some people really don't know how to take the slightest bit of criticism if I'm not simultaneously sucking their cock, and I was about ready to leave. I didn't, though, and pretty much solved the problem by ceasing to comment on the works of others. I do it every once in a while when I feel that the author might actually listen to me, or if the poster is new and I'm trying to gauge their personality, but generally I don't waste my time. There are certain people who probably know who they are that I just don't comment on, one of which, a little bird tells me, is notorious for not listening to any critical remarks.
I suppose that while there are specific members of LM that I really do dislike, I think my main issue with the website is its overall tendency to avoid any serious constructive feedback. I'm not saying it never happens, but it just seems rare to me. Most of the comments I see in the poetry forum are "hey, I liked this, thanks for the read" or "S1 L2 should be 'and', not 'an'." It's strange, however, that when I've posted my works, I've received feedback that is more helpful than that. It's almost like when someone posts a pretty abysmal attempt at a poem, people simply give up and say "neat poem" rather than point out its flaws, and that's frustrating for me. Tell the author what they're doing wrong, don't simply leave me to do it and then contradict me by rewarding their efforts with lies. There are few things more frustrating here than when I take time to go through a less-than-perfect piece and suggest ways to improve it, rewrite it, whatever, and then someone else comes along and says "I think you should leave it just the way it is" AND NOT GIVE ANY REASONS WHY. As for other facets of the site, the debate forum is a source of eternal frustration, and the general method of over-moderation makes my blood boil.
Other than that everything is fine. I think Jen is my favorite here, despite her initial threatening PMs to me. Ha, if you ignore the caps, that says "threatening pms".
How did you find your way here, and what do you love and hate about it?Drucifer:
I think we share the same complaints about quality of criticism. I don't roam around the poetry section, except when someone asks me to read something, but in the short time I spend there I wrinkle my nose at the same useless comments. Don't get me wrong: any feedback is better than no feedback, it's just, if you're going to do something, do it right. Don't piss and moan because you think you're the next (wait for it - the sky falling) Bukowski. Whenever someone gets defensive about their work, I say fuck it (and fuck you).
I've been through countless workshops, scored countless rejection letters, and have been privy to some of the WORST, HARSHEST critiques ever. Man. I posted this one story on WritingForums.com about a girl who liked cutting when she screwed and holy fuck, some guy tore my head off. Rightfully so. Sure I was bummed for a little while, but I never got defensive. The bottom line is, a reader is a reader is a reader. You can't just pretend that it's their fault if your poem, story, whatever isn't working. It's up to you as a writer to figure it out.
How did I find my way here? I started off on one site, moved to another (where I also moderate), and from there Jen asked me if I wanted to moderate this place. Of course I did. Not many people know this, but before LM me, Jen, GiGi, and others had our own little yahoo group. We thunk ourselves the cool kids. Well, I'm happy to say that even though that group fizzled to shit, the same spirit and irrefutably coolness has been transferred here, to this place.
This'll probably make me unpopular, but one of the things I don't like about LM is that sometimes it seems like a social scene first, and a writing place second. Which is okay, I guess; I think I just come here for specific things, whilst doing most of my socializing elsewhere.
Ya know?
Patrick:
I'm with you on the sense of the harsher criticism and it being the writer's responsibility. I feel that a very large part of my skill and drive to succeed came from extremely caustic remarks on what I thought was good work. It's tough for some people to accept but it does work surprisingly well. That's why we tend to favor the harsher touch at Xenith and have examples of drivel turned poetry to prove it. You know what they (we) say. Xenith: It Works.
And I have indeed noticed that LM does come across as a social site above a writing site, which probably stems from what we've been discussing and the surrounding attitudes. But, there's a lot to be said about community as well.
I'm going to ask a very basic question. You've mentioned wearing the influences of Nabokov and some others that I forget (Nabokov stands out to me because... well, he stands out against all other writers ). Who are your favorites? (if you have them.) What are some of your favorite novels?Drucifer:
Favourite novels! I love that question, because I get to talk shop, something I relish. I have a few novels I'd consider favourites, books like Midnight's Children, The Adventures of Kavalier and Clay, Barney's Version, The World According to Garp, Portnoy's Complaint, A Complicated Kindness, Fun Home (a graphic novel), Lolita, and the recently added The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao. In my younger days I loved Kafka, JD Salinger and Bret Easton Ellis, but I don't think I'd consider them favourites.
One of the things I prize in fiction is daring; I love writers who take risks. That's probably why Salman Rushdie is one of my favourite writers. He's got huge balls, he does. Same with Nabokov. I like Zadie Smith too, just because everytime I read her stuff I think, sweet shit, this is amazing. I have a soft spot for quirky narrators, too, which shouldn't come as a surprise, given the books I've listed as favourites.
I think I like writers who write the same kind of stuff I do, or at least have similar interests (like pedophelia! er, kidding, kidding). I used to try hard to write this subtle, Alice Munro-esque stories where little happens in the way of narrative, but by the end you've been affected somehow. I've come to the conclusion that that's not me. I love writing about larger than life characters, people who are weird and unusual but have the kinds of problems everyone else has.
What about you? Who turns your literary crank?
Patrick:
It's funny you mention Midnight's Children. I read 99% of it and absolutely loved it, but for some reason I couldn't finish it. I'm really not sure why. The last chapter felt tedious, for some reason. It's something I very much regret because it is a very good book. Nabokov is also a favorite, though I favor Pale Fire over Lolita, but love both in their entirety. I also really enjoyed Ada, or Ardor: A Family Chronicle, despite it very much going over my head; but to be fair, that was over two years ago. The only other work of his that I've read is Despair, and I thought it was a little weak.
I really, really love José Saramago. Like most Americans, I was introduced to him via Blindness, which is an amazing book. I then tried to read The History of the Siege of Lisbon and hated it vehemently. But, as it was for school, I gave it a second shot and fell in love with it. I consider it one of the absolute greatest books I've ever read and have gone on to read other work by him. He's a kind of wizard, I've decided. Other novels I really love are:
Gabriel García Marquez (there is supposed to be an accent above the "a" in Marquez, but my alt. command 1696 isn't working...) - One Hundred Years of Solitude; Love in the Time of Cholera
Italo Calvino - If on a winter's night a traveler
Saul Bellow - The Adventures of Augie March
William Faulkner - The Sound and the Fury
As for poetry, Anne Carson and Pablo Neruda are probably my two favorites.
I see what you're saying about writing on a grand scale. I've noticed that my stories tend to waver on the fence between the Munro and the Marquez (accent?!). I've written really outlandish things and really mundane things. I hope both of which affect the reader in some way, in the end, but who knows.
Okay, now for a better question: who do you hate in the world of literature (or what disguises itself as literature)?Drucifer:
Who do I hate? Hummmm, well, I always alienate both sides of the literate spectrum by expressing my distaste for Jane Austen and Chuck Palahniuk. The former is just a matter of taste - I can get down with plain Jane's artistry. Her subject matter just bores me. Chuck Palahniuk, though, is another story.
In my opinion, he's a weak writer with a ridiculously effective marketing team. Had Fight Club the Movie not been made, we wouldn't have heard from him again. Oh, my knees quiver and my dick hardens whenever I think about that glorious alternate history. My reasons for disliking Chuck's stuff are semi-complex. Like, I wish we could take his ideas and transport them into the mind of someone more technically capable. The fact that I admire his imagination makes me dislike his shoddy technical ability that much more.
For some reason I can't comprehend, he's taken it upon himself to pen these sometimes inane essays on craft. Sage advice included therein are, go to great lengths to submerge the pronoun 'i, saturate your stories with random factoids to 'give your readership confidence in your narrator,' or (surely the worst) repeat words or phrases to create (wtf?) a chorus. What's the purpose of the chorus? To irritate me?
Granted, much of his essays are solid, good advice. Unpack scenes. Show not tell. Etc. That kind of thing. But you can ALWAYS tell who gobbles up ever drop of Chuck's essays. They're the ones who repeat the same phrase every third line ('This is not a hallucination'), or who spend more time on vomiting up useless facts than developing characters ('John put his head down on his pillow, which was made from sheepskin, a product that's not actually made of sheep, it's actually made in a factory, out of this chemical, mixed with that chemical, and there once was a sheep that could do complex math problems by stamping its feet, a sheep that lived in 1978, the same year...), or by their conspicuously poor understanding of how tense works, such that in the span of a sentence we go from the past, to the present, to the future, and back again for no apparent reason. Oh, and comma splices. Chuck has made them vogue.
Regardless of whether you like Palahniuk's writing (and there is much to like), for fuck's sake don't try to rip off his style. Not only because I'm telling you it blows ass, but because even if it doesn't, it's his, not yours, and what works for him - his voice or whatever - ain't going to work for you.
Finally, I don't like Bukowski all that much and feel that he's ridden so hard because of his persona. Some of his poetry appeals to me, but he's a pisspoor prose writer. I'd rather read Hubert Selby.
So, now that I've alienated everyone reading this and successfully painted myself as a crotchety old conservative, let's move on
Patrick: I often tell people--namely teenagers--that if you're just starting to read, start with Palahniuk. It's flashy enough to draw your attention and generally keeps beginners interested. Then, as time moves on, said beginner can move on to real books.
I sort of think that Bukowski functions in pretty much the same way. He's a caricature of a serious writer that pretty much gets by on what some would deem "sexy" poetry.
It's funny you mention Palahniuk's influence, because for a while it seemed that almost everything I was critiquing had elements of his writing, to which I would simply annotate with "BEWARE OF PALAHNIUK". I read Choke several years ago and generally enjoyed it. Then I read Survivor and felt like I had dejä vu. Then I compared both to a short story I had read previously--"Guts", I believe--and pretty much concluded that his way of manufacturing fiction with the same tired components irritated me. It infuriates me that the public is so ignorant as to make literary rockstars out of writers like Palahniuk. The very idea that millions of people think he's a brilliant man makes me ill.
It's funny you mention Hubert Selby Jr. I haven't read anything of his in years and I'm sort of afraid to. I used to think he was a fantastic author and Last Exit to Brooklyn stayed on my list of favorite books for a very long time, but now I'm sort of wary of it all. Over the years I've grown to distrust that entire movement, but it's hard to tell, sometimes, if there really are pearls in the talentless abyss--Burroughs amongst the Kerouacs, Selbys amongst the Ginsbergs. Speaking of Ginsberg, I generally consider him the worst of all the famous poets.
Here's an irritating question regarding writing:
The other day I was writing in my journal (which is an actual notebook--weird), ruminating on my place in the world of writing, when I realized that I pretty cannot articulate what makes literature successful. I generally know it when I come across it, and I'm very much able to spot the failures when I encounter them, but I couldn't even attempt to describe those parts of the brain and heart that it satiates when done correctly. I liken it to instinct, but that's somewhat inadequate because it's something that I've had to develop over time. Have you ever been able to do this? Is it an unrealistic expectation on my part? I feel that it's a weakness of mine because it interferes with my ability to pinpoint and define problems in the works of others and myself. This realization came after some reflection on the sterility of my fiction: I was wondering how my work fails while the works of others succeed. What do you think?Drucifer: To be honest, I'm not all that concerned with isolating what parts of the reader's brain and heart that good fiction'll stimulate, and while I'd love to know how to stimulate those phantom parts each and every time I sit down to write, I don't think it's possible. I've went into works guns blazing, ready to hate every word, and come out with my jaw dropped. Alice Munro's stuff comes to mind. Stylistically and on the level of subject matter, she's so far from my thang it's almost laugh-out-loudable. Yet I find her work profoundly affecting every time I read it. To take an example from the other end of the spectrum, all preliminary signs (and excerpts I read prior to its release) pointed to me loving Rivka Galchen's debut novel, Atmospheric Disturbances. The premise is nuts, the narrator is quirky, and the ideas circulating the novel are thought provoking. The verdict? I hated the fucking thing.
That said, the ability to isolate what parts of a story work and which don't is an important skill to have, both as a reader of literature and a writer. That's one of the things forums like LM are good for; you can tell who's lazy and uncritical and who's sharp by how well they can answer the questions, does this work, and if not, why? I used to waffle in my critiques, because it's tough to break an emotive feeling down and say sincerely that I feel this because of that. Your story fell short because of this. My own story didn't achieve its design in this way, because of that.
It's tough not only because you're taking an abstract feeling and making it concrete, but also because that process is hella risky, since it leaves you so open to misinterpretation and the inadequacy of language. That's why I always respect well thought out reviews, even if I believe they're utterly full of shit. Come to think of it, the ability to surmount the inadequacy of language is what makes good fiction, in a nutshell. The ability to take emotion and make it concrete without looking stupid.
You know, your own writing is always, and will always be, a total leap of faith. I'm forever looking at current projects and saying, this is the best thing I've ever done. Of course, that's not always the case (would that it were!). Sometimes your fiction is going to seem sterile. That's part of the game. It's only a problem if you, the writer, are sterile, a word that conjures up an inability to give birth, to create. In other words, total fucking stasis, which is balls any way you cut it. My writing philosophy has always been, you can't be afraid to write bad. Take risks on every corner. Work without a net. Learn from your screw-ups, but never waiver in your willingness to make them. Especially at our age. In the literary world, we're mere infants.
Practically speaking, if you think your writing has grown stale, do something completely unexpected, something you're utterly unprepared for and unqualified to do. Write a story about a severed foot that falls in love with a pair of gloves that has in turn fallen in love with a woman (whoops, already done: pick up a copy of Neil Smith's amazing [and right fucking risky] collection of short stories, Bang Crunch, to see if and how he pulls it off). Take part in the great literary passtime of challenging yourself beyond your means. I have a friend of mine who works through the same shit in her work all the time. The same themes, the same questions, the same characters. The details blur, but it's always there. She's had a few things published in a very respectable literary journal, so what she does, she does well, only she's clearly hit a wall; she's perfected this one story to the max, as sharp as it can possibly get. THAT, my friend, is sterility, and until she's willing to look stupid and try something new, she ain't goin' nowhere.
Hmmm, all that made me sound like a crotchety old pedantic fuck. Let's spice it up a little bit. How much does your sex life filter into your fiction? Is that sentient twelve inch double headed dildo fact or fiction?
Patrick: My sex life isn't all that private, as one may already know, however it filters into places that people rarely realize. The dildo is a cold, hard fact, of course.
Many of my recent works of fiction seem to deal with homosexual characters, including the two novels that are on my plate (one of which I hope to write this winter). I wrote what I consider to be my best short story to date back in early July and it was essentially a gay love story (with lots of sex in it, as one might expect from me). I suppose one writes what he or she knows. Most of my heterosexual characters were irritating, unrealistic, and based almost entirely on myself when I was in a heterosexual relationship: miserable, self-loathing, suicidal, etc. If they weren't based on me, then they were completely flat. Most of my characters are bits and pieces of myself, in some form or another.
When I was younger I wrote a few pieces that made me really horny. Now I tend to avoid that because I get distracted while writing and just wander off to masturbate.
How about you?Drucifer:
I tend to avoid writing about my life, at least directly. When I feel like I know the characters intimately, in real life, I tend to get lazy and not flesh them out. I think some of my best stuff is about characters who are far removed from my experiences: women, older folk, inanimate objects, etc. For my first workshop here at the university I actually submitted a story from the perspective of a teenage lesbian who falls in love with her language tutor. Everyone was like, buh? It went well, though, and right now I'm trying to pimp it out to a few literary journals.
As for sex, I don't write much about it. I'll write stories where romantic love is at the center of the narrative, but I rarely write actual sex scenes. It's kind of ironic, because I'm a staff writer for an erotica website (Blackheart Magazine). If I am writing about sex, it tends to be in some kind of humorous, or self-deprecating manner, versus writing to be turned on or to turn others on.
So how do you feel about writers appropriating voice? I mean things like the whole JT LeRoy debacle, where this HIV+ young queer male hustler turns out to be a straight middle aged woman. Is that acceptable, writing in the voice of someone 'in the margins'?
Patrick:
I think it's a bit of a sensitive issue, whatever that means. The JT LeRoy thing is a good example, because once upon a time, "he" was my favorite writer. The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things is still lurking somewhere on my list of guilty pleasures and was, at one time, my favorite book. I think that writers creating other writers that they write through can be an interesting way of expressing oneself, however in the JT LeRoy situation, I think it did more damage than good. There were thousands of people who thought that JT was a real person who had survived the most traumatic of childhoods. They sent him gifts and wrote him stories of their own and pretty much gave them something to care about, which is all amazing--getting that much out of writing--but when it all came apart and Laura Albert was revealed, it really shattered a lot of the fans' ideals. Suddenly the person that they loved so much just through writing didn't exist anymore. I don't know. I think that Laura Albert should have realized the harm in the situation, regardless of what her intent was.
It is interesting, though, that JT LeRoy was a beautiful and engaging writer, but when it was revealed to be Laura Albert, the work because sensationalist trash. Makes you wonder if one really can separate artist and art all that easily.
I don't know if that was the actual aim of your question--if you meant writers taking on the personas of their creations or simply the idea of writers writing in voices that aren't their own. If it's the latter, it can be an interesting exercise in empathy, but it also has a tendency to descend into clichés and stereotypes very quickly. One thing, for example, that I really try to avoid writing about in any depth is drugs. I have never done drugs and have actually never been high or stoned, nor have I had more than five drinks in my life. It would definitely be a challenge for me to write about someone enslaved by chemical addiction, but I don't know if I could ever pull it off. I'm not that empathetic. Sex, on the other hand, I can write about. Give me sexual deviancy any day and I'll crank out one of my generic pieces on shame excitement and suffering. I try to avoid that, these days.
When you sit down to write something, what do you know? Do you have a vague plot outline ready? Do you know what moods/emotions you want to communicate? Do you know what you want your story to say? Feel free to keep this a secret and not say anything: a magician shouldn't reveal the mechanics behind all the tricks. (I hate bad magician metaphors. I really don't know why I use them.)Drucifer:
Ah, the inevitable muse question. Where does it come from? How? Do you work with an outline?
The answer to those questions is, yes (maybe? sometimes?). There are times when I know what's going to happen ahead of time and it comes to pass. There are times when I think I know what's going to happen and then something else takes over. Then there are times when I just write without thinking about anything. Incidentally, this last method usually produces the best results.
I'm working on a novel right now and I've found it beneficial to have a general sense of what the plot's about, where it's going to go, but also leave the door open for change. It's always a challenge to refuse being tyrannical about your plots. Maybe it's a 'literary fiction' thing where there are less conventions to work with and guide your story.
What about you?
I just got a pm pointing out that it is in fact October 1st, so we might need to cut this one short.
Patrick:
I generally spend a while taking notes and jotting down things that I want to appear in a story/novel/poem, then try to sketch a basic plot/event outline. I sort of create scenes and images in my head, separate from each other, and then piece them together in an outline. I like to think that I know what is going to happen. Surprises in my writing frighten me, but I should probably get used to them.
Alas, I received that PM as well. Such a pity. I really stand by my belief that months should be longer.
Either way, it was nice conversing with you over the last few weeks. Hopefully this won't be our last conversation. Also, if you ever want to read my fiction, I'd be happy to send you something or point you in the right direction. I'm a habitual deleter when it comes to having my work on this site.
Until next time!Drucifer:
Stay fit and have fun!
(Cheers!)
Member Concerns and Business
