David M Henley

What if there were vampires?

Found a very interesting and amusing thought-experiment over on Lawyers, Guns and Money where they asked what the government reaction ot the existence of vampires might be.

The thing outside of the thing

I'm not sure if this is the place for this, but I've had a few ideas like this kicking around. What can you not do with dots and lines? The attached pdf is sort of a visualisation of the internet and interactivity in a chaotic/complex network (Complexic?).

Download Thing outside the thing

Editor's Blog 21.11.09 "Born to Write"

There was a brief blog post on mediabistro recently and it started with:

"Are people born writers? Or are writers created by years of practice and strong teachers?"

to which I'd like to respond:

"People aren't born writers; they just die that way."

The Inheritors - Book Review

Faber and Faber re-released an old William Golding title recently, to which I was drawn by fond associations of The Lord of the Flies.

This is an interesting experiment where the author is observing a small group of, presumably, Neanderthals as they encounter a tribe of what is, presumably, early homo sapiens. This was written, or copyrighted, in 1955, so for the time, and even for now this is an interesting premise to follow, and the writing is a strange mix of anthropological observation and an artistic impresion of the thoughts and viewpoint of the Neanderthals.

    Golding's use an imperfect narratorial style is great for demonstrating a step between animal thought and human language, and though at times he is obviously obfuscating so as to present the limited mental range of the Neanderthals, the overall breadth of vocabulary betrays this as an affectation. I'm glad I read it, but, to be honest (or IMHO), I got thouroughly lost in the action scenes and description.

This lit a kind of sunshine in Lok's head. He opened his mouth wide and laughed and talked at the people, thought there was little connection between the quick pictures and the words that came out. He saw Fa laughing back at him and Ha smiling gravely.

Definitely worth reading for historical interest and one can appreciate that Golding had more than a passing interest in investigating the human-as-animal, and also because we rarely see such an exploration of style and concept these days.

Editor's Blog, 28.10.09 — Exposition

It seems I have entered a parallel world where exposition is a good thing. Almost everything I have read recently, be they submissions, manuscripts in development or published works (bestselling and otherwise), has led me to conclude that I must have been misled, and that exposition is not a sign of bad writing.

    At the moment I'm struggling to pick up a book, or "manuscript", which is the fetal form of a book, that isn't page after page of what the authors should have kept to themselves. It's as if everyone became addled over that simplest of maxims: Show don't tell.

    ...or was that tell don't show?

If we're going to get literal about it, exposition is all there is when communicating. But the exposition I speak of, in the pejorative sense, is the blatant and clumsy revelation of information. There are many ways to present your story, and the information the reader needs to know to follow it; you can either weave the this into a glorious tapestry which is a pleasure to behold and experience, or you can just dump all that wool into a formless pile. You can either caress your lover, or stick it to them.    

    Of course, sometimes a little exposition can't be helped, but one should try to keep it minimal and subtle. You don't introduce your first character and recite their dossier, as if each paragraph was a prescribed bullet point to show how rounded you've made them, and oh what a good understanding of people and the world you have. Where they went to school; where, when and how they had their first kiss, lost their virginity, got badly hurt once, had a spooky experience; what lead to their divorce; all the small and — God I wish they were — interesting details that deliver on a platter the personal problems that will be driving their character arc for the length of the story.

    You certainly wouldn't do it for the next character and the one sitting in the car beside them, and in fact every character that comes along. To translate the crime of exposition, I would say that you should know you're being boring if you're explaining. If you're lecturing on your characters and their history, stop; it might not be important to the story. Show me the characters, let me meet them. Don't lecture me about them and their unclosable gestalts. Otherwise you'll just end up with a pile of loosely linked words with a superfluous narrative.

    Which is perhaps the style of the time. I hope it passes.