"A story does not make a good movie. A good script does."
~ Kevin Costner
"The universe is made of stories, not of atoms."
—Muriel Rukeyser
____________________________
Guest Post: We Label People at Our Peril by Dennis Palumbo
It wasn’t until 1987 that
homosexuality ceased being categorized as a disease in the DSM (the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). Used as the
premiere diagnostic bible by mental health professionals and insurance
companies worldwide, the DSM has been predominately responsible for the
labeling of an individual’s behavior as regards whether it falls within
the range of agreed-upon norms. As such, it’s been both praised and
reviled over the years. Praised because of its concise descriptions and
categorizations of behavioral symptoms, and reviled because of its
reinforcement of stigmatizing attitudes towards those whose behavioral
is deemed “abnormal.”
In fact, there’s an old joke
about how clinicians use diagnostic labels to interpret their patients’
behavior. If the patient arrives early for his therapy appointment,
he’s anxious. If he’s late, he’s resistant. And if he’s on time, he’s
compulsive.
Nowadays, however, it’s
becoming clear that the joke may be on us. Due to the influence of both
broadcast media and the Internet, diagnostic labels are thrown around
quite casually by people who ought to know better (shrinks on TV news
programs) as well as by people who usually don’t (hosts of TV talk
shows, Internet podcasts and innumerable blogs). Moreover, like many
cultural phenomena, the ascribing of diagnostic labels follows the
dictates of trends.
Remember how every other child was diagnosed with ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder)? Now the “hot” new label is bipolar disorder (what used to be called manic-depression). Lately, you’re not cool if you’re not bipolar.
Remember how every other child was diagnosed with ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder)? Now the “hot” new label is bipolar disorder (what used to be called manic-depression). Lately, you’re not cool if you’re not bipolar.
To be fair, there’s some
good that has resulted from this expanding conversation about diagnostic
labels. Case in point: I was recently on a panel with a successful
businesswoman who claimed that until she’d been diagnosed with bipolar
disorder, she didn’t have a frame of reference for her inexplicably
erratic and self-destructive behaviors. Further, she felt that having
the diagnosis, and receiving the appropriate treatment to address it,
was what saved her life.
I completely understand her
position. I myself have patients who are calmed and even reassured by a
diagnosis that aligns them with others suffering the same symptoms. They
feel less alone, less alienated from how “normal” people behave. In
other words, they have a “handle” on it.
However, my concern is not
with how these patients see themselves. It’s with how clinicians see
their patients. How so many mental health professionals use diagnostic
labels to both distance themselves from patients and reduce them to a
set of conventionally agreed-upon symptoms. (At a clinical conference
years ago, a colleague, describing his practice, said, “It’s a nice
balance. I have three bipolars, a number of major depressives, and only
one borderline. Thank God.”) Obviously he didn’t see these folks as
patients. Hell, he didn’t see them as people. He saw them solely in terms of their clinical diagnoses.
Now I suspect (and greatly
hope) that this particular therapist’s attitude isn’t shared by most of
his colleagues. Yet his comment goes directly to my point. Namely, that
while I don’t exactly revile the DSM, I view its contents (and the
thinking behind it) with a great deal of skepticism. Not that there’s
anything wrong, per se, with labels. Nor with the idea of a common
vocabulary so that all us clinical geniuses can communicate with each
other. It’s just that, if we’re speaking honestly, diagnostic labels
exist for the convenience of the labelers. Which is fine, as far as it
goes. But how far is too far?
In my opinion, “too far” is
when labeling ventures into the arena of individual freedom; i.e., when
it threatens the concept of equality. How does it do this? By giving
clinicians the language to reinforce the views of the dominant culture.
To me, equality means just
that: all people are equal under the law, and in relation to each other.
Regardless—-as the saying goes—-of race, creed, or color. To which I’d
add sexual orientation, political beliefs, gender identification, and
choice of living singly or with a partner. (This last point is crucial.
One of the dominant culture’s norms is that healthy people are in a
relationship, or, if not, yearn to be. And that preferring to live
alone, or under the same roof with others but without romantic
attachment, is a sign of psychological disturbance.)
Equality means the right to
be what the British lovingly refer to as “eccentric.”
Equality means that thinking and living differently than how most others do is not a manifestation of anti-social behavior. Nor is it a silent condemnation of those living a more conventional life. In simplest terms, I’m saying that true equality means that a hermit living in a cabin in the woods is not necessarily suffering from a mental disorder (i.e., schizoid personality, with paranoid features). I’m not claiming he or she is not burdened by psychological distress. I’m just saying that such a lifestyle choice doesn’t in and of itself indicate a disorder. No more than it would a long-distance trucker who prefers his or her own company for weeks at a time.
Equality means that thinking and living differently than how most others do is not a manifestation of anti-social behavior. Nor is it a silent condemnation of those living a more conventional life. In simplest terms, I’m saying that true equality means that a hermit living in a cabin in the woods is not necessarily suffering from a mental disorder (i.e., schizoid personality, with paranoid features). I’m not claiming he or she is not burdened by psychological distress. I’m just saying that such a lifestyle choice doesn’t in and of itself indicate a disorder. No more than it would a long-distance trucker who prefers his or her own company for weeks at a time.
If we’re to truly support
and encourage equality, then we have to be skeptical of our inclination
to label. And it’s not just mental health professionals who fall prey to
this. We all do, to some extent. If a family member isn’t as
ambitious as we think he or she should be, we label it laziness. If a
friend finds the holidays so disturbing and anxiety-producing he spends
each Christmas season in a tent out in the desert, we label him weird.
I’ve even heard couples who choose not to have children labeled as
selfish.
As a therapist in private
practice for over 25 years, I’ve grown to appreciate the vast
differences in temperament, relationship choices, communication styles
and even prejudices of my patients. Which means I’ve been forced many
times to challenge the orthodoxy of my own profession, and to pay
attention to the potential inequality underlying certain therapeutic
assumptions.
In the world outside my
consulting room, it seems that the more lip-service is given to the
notion of equality, the less actual practice of it there is. As a nation
and as a global community, we’re more divided than ever. Our politics
have become almost nothing but labeling, a divisiveness that
strikes at the heart of equality. Sectarian violence around the world is
a tangible result of one group of people denying the equality of
another group. Rather than a reaffirmation of Buber’s “I and Thou”—-a
relationship that can only exist in a context of equality—-people from
all walks of life are asserting that their rights, opinions and beliefs
have ascendance over those of others.
Put bluntly, to label is to
divide. To divide is to upend equality. And without a basic sense of
equality, there can never be the kind of social and cultural adhesion
that ensures what our Founding Fathers called “domestic tranquility.”
This is not to posit some Utopian love-fest among all peoples. That will
never occur. But I’m thinking more in line with something that the late
Martin Luther King said: “Peace is not the absence of conflict; it’s
the presence of justice.”
If we as a people are to
maintain the presence of justice in our society, then we have to view
our differences through the lens of equality rather than that of labels.
To label this individual as “bad” and some other individual as “good,”
based on their respective beliefs, sexual orientation or lifestyles, is
to render the former a non-person. And it is much easier to abuse,
threaten, even kill a non-person than someone you feel has an equal right to exist.
Of course, reaffirming that
all people are equal isn’t to say that all behaviors are equal. As a
society, we have a right to label certain harmful or exploitive
behaviors as unacceptable. Just as we have a right as a society to
determine how to bring to justice those who exhibit those behaviors.
But what I’m referring to is
something else. It’s the temptation each of us has to judge another,
merely against the standards of conventional society or measured against
our own idiosyncratic standards. To deny others’ equality as an existential right because
we dislike their religious faith (or lack thereof), are offended by
their choice of sexual partners, or reject their own stated gender
identity.
As human beings with
prejudices and insecurities (conscious or unconscious), we may be made
uncomfortable by one or another of these life choices. We may even find
them a sign that civilization is crumbling, or that every diverse or
otherwise unconventional choice is an assault on “traditional values.”
But that still does not rationalize inequality. Nothing does. Especially not knee-jerk appeals to religious freedom, patriotism and xenophobia.
Which brings me back to the
DSM, and how stunningly reductionist it can be when it comes to
providing diagnostic labels. The general public may be unaware of the
fact that, prior to the publication of each new addition to the manual,
mental health professionals can suggest new diagnostic categories to be
added to the list. One of my recent favorite suggestions is quite in
line with the constraints on freedom and equality that I’ve been
addressing.
Called “Political Apathy
Disorder,” this new diagnostic label was to be given to individuals
lacking an appropriate sense of social justice. Among the criteria to be
used when giving a patient this diagnosis are whether he or she lives
in a gated community, fails to take into account the impact on the
environment of a purchase, and refuses to vote in local elections.
Believe me, I’m generally not a fan of people who exhibit these traits,
but I’d never go so far as to label them evidence of a psychological
disorder. To me, this is just labeling—-or in this case, social
engineering—-to a disturbing degree.
In fact, a colleague of
mine, Dr. David Levy, once wrote a satiric essay in which he proposed a
new diagnostic category especially for mental health professionals. It
was called “Pervasive Labeling Disorder.” I can think of at least a few
fellow therapists who seem to suffer from it.
The sad fact is, I think
we’re all guilty at times of “Pervasive Labeling Disorder.” As I
mentioned above, it might even be woven into our very natures as humans.
Regardless, labeling is a potential enemy of equality. And we do so at
our peril.
As Benjamin Franklin once said, “Liberty is the one thing you cannot have without giving it to everyone else.”
——————————————————————————————————
Formerly a Hollywood screenwriter (My Favorite Year; Welcome Back, Kotter, etc.), Dennis Palumbo is now a licensed psychotherapist and author of Writing From the Inside Out (John Wiley). His work has been profiled in The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, GQ and other publications, as well as on CNN, NPR and PBS.
His mystery fiction has appeared in Ellery Queen’s Mystery Magazine, The Strand and elsewhere, and is collected in From Crime to Crime (Tallfellow Press). His acclaimed series of crime novels (Mirror Image, Fever Dream, Night Terrors and the latest, Phantom Limb)
feature psychologist Daniel Rinaldi, a trauma expert who consults with
the Pittsburgh Police. All are from Poisoned Pen Press.
David Lynch on Cinema
Cinema is a language. It can say things—big, abstract things. And I love that about it.
I’m not always good with words. Some people are poets and have a beautiful way of saying things with words. But cinema is its own language. And with it you can say so many things, because you’ve got time and sequences. You’ve got dialogue. You’ve got music. You’ve got sound effects. You have so many tools. And so you can express a feeling and a thought that can’t be conveyed any other way. It’s a magical medium.
For me, it’s so beautiful to think about these pictures and sounds flowing together in time and in sequence, making something that can be done only through cinema. It’s not just words or music—it’s a whole range of elements coming together and making something that didn’t exist before. It’s telling stories. It’s devising a world, an experience, that people cannot have unless they see that film.
When I catch an idea for a film, I fall in love with the way cinema can express it. I like a story that holds abstractions, and that’s what cinema can do.—David Lynch, from Catching the Big Fish
Transcript: President Obama on What Books Mean to Him
Doug Mills / The New York Times
|
Michiko Kakutani, the chief book critic for The New York Times, interviewed President Obama about literature on Friday at the White House. Here are excerpts from the conversation, which have been edited and condensed.
These books that you gave to your daughter Malia on the Kindle, what were they? Some of your favorites?
I think some of them were sort of the usual suspects, so “The Naked and
the Dead” or “One Hundred Years of Solitude,” I think she hadn’t read
yet.
Then there were some books I think that are
not on everybody’s reading list these days, but I remembered as being
interesting, like “The Golden Notebook” by Doris Lessing, for example.
Or “The Woman Warrior,” by Maxine [Hong Kingston].
Part
of what was interesting was me pulling back books that I thought were
really powerful, but that might not surface when she goes to college.
Have you had a chance to discuss them with her?
I’ve
had the chance to discuss some. And she’s interested in being a
filmmaker, so storytelling is of great interest to her. She had just
read “A Moveable Feast.” I hadn’t included that, and she was just
captivated by the idea that Hemingway described his goal of writing one
true thing every day.
What made you want to become a writer?
I
loved reading when I was a kid, partly because I was traveling so much,
and there were times where I’d be displaced, I’d be the outsider. When I
first moved to Indonesia, I’m this big, dark-skinned kid that kind of
stood out. And then when I moved back from Indonesia to Hawaii, I had
the manners and habits probably of an Indonesian kid.
And
so the idea of having these worlds that were portable, that were yours,
that you could enter into, was appealing to me. And then I became a
teenager and wasn’t reading that much other than what was assigned in
school, and playing basketball and chasing girls, and imbibing things
that weren’t very healthy.
I think all of us did.
Yeah.
And then I think rediscovered writing and reading and thinking in my
first or second year of college and used that as a way to rebuild
myself, a process I write about in “Dreams From My Father.”
That period in New York, where you were intensely reading.
I
was hermetic — it really is true. I had one plate, one towel, and I’d
buy clothes from thrift shops. And I was very intense, and sort of
humorless. But it reintroduced me to the power of words as a way to
figure out who you are and what you think, and what you believe, and
what’s important, and to sort through and interpret this swirl of events
that is happening around you every minute.
And so
even though by the time I graduated I knew I wanted to be involved in
public policy, or I had these vague notions of organizing, the idea of
continuing to write and tell stories as part of that was valuable to me.
And so I would come home from work, and I would write in my journal or
write a story or two.
The great thing was that it
was useful in my organizing work. Because when I got there, the guy who
had hired me said that the thing that brings people together to have the
courage to take action on behalf of their lives is not just that they
care about the same issue, it’s that they have shared stories. And he
told me that if you learn how to listen to people’s stories and can find
what’s sacred in other people’s stories, then you’ll be able to forge a
relationship that lasts.
But my interest in public service and politics then merged with the idea of storytelling.
What were your short stories like?
It’s interesting, when I read them, a lot of them had to do with older people.
I
think part of the reason was because I was working in communities with
people who were significantly older than me. We were going into
churches, and probably the average age of these folks was 55, 60. A lot
of them had scratched and clawed their way into the middle class, but
just barely. They were seeing the communities in which they had invested
their hopes and dreams and raised their kids starting to decay — steel
mills had closed, and there had been a lot of racial turnover in these
communities. And so there was also this sense of loss and
disappointment.
And so a bunch of the short
stories I wrote had to do with that sense, that atmosphere. One story is
about an old black pastor who seems to be about to lose his church, his
lease is running out and he’s got this loyal woman deacon who is trying
to buck him up. Another is about an elderly couple — a white couple in
L.A., — and he’s like in advertising, wrote jingles. And he’s just
retired and has gotten cranky. And his wife is trying to convince him
that his life is not over.
So when I think back on
what’s interesting to me, there is not a lot of Jack Kerouac,
open-road, young kid on the make discovering stuff. It’s more melancholy
and reflective.
Was writing partly a way to figure out your identity?
Yes,
I think so. For me, particularly at that time, writing was the way I
sorted through a lot of crosscurrents in my life — race, class, family.
And I genuinely believe that it was part of the way in which I was able
to integrate all these pieces of myself into something relatively whole.
People
now remark on this notion of me being very cool, or composed. And what
is true is that I generally have a pretty good sense of place and who I
am, and what’s important to me. And I trace a lot of that back to that
process of writing.
Has that continued to be so in the presidency?
Not as much as I would have liked. I just didn’t have time.
But you keep some form of a journal?
I’ve
kept some, but not with the sort of discipline that I would have hoped
for. The main writing that I’ve done during the presidency has been my
speeches, the ones at least that were important to me.
How has the speechwriting and being at the center of history and dealing with crises affected you as a writer?
I’m
not sure yet. I’ll have to see when I start writing the next book. Some
of the craft of writing a good speech is identical to any other good
writing: Is that word necessary? Is it the right word? Is there a rhythm
to it that feels good? How does it sound aloud?
I
actually think that one of the useful things about speechwriting is
reminding yourself that the original words are spoken, and that there is
a sound, a feel to words that, even if you’re reading silently,
transmits itself.
So in that sense, I think there will be some consistency.
But
this is part of why it was important to pick up the occasional novel
during the presidency, because most of my reading every day was briefing
books and memos and proposals. And so working that very analytical side
of the brain all the time sometimes meant you lost track of not just
the poetry of fiction, but also the depth of fiction.
Fiction
was useful as a reminder of the truths under the surface of what we
argue about every day and was a way of seeing and hearing the voices,
the multitudes of this country.
Are there examples of specific novels or writers?
Well,
the last novel I read was Colson Whitehead’s “The Underground
Railroad.” And the reminder of the ways in which the pain of slavery
transmits itself across generations, not just in overt ways, but how it
changes minds and hearts.
It’s what you said in your farewell address about Atticus Finch, where you said people are so isolated in their little bubbles. Fiction can leap —
It
bridges them. I struck up a friendship with [the novelist] Marilynne
Robinson, who has become a good friend. And we’ve become sort of pen
pals. I started reading her in Iowa, where “Gilead” and some of her best
novels are set. And I loved her writing in part because I saw those
people every day. And the interior life she was describing that
connected them — the people I was shaking hands with and making speeches
to — it connected them with my grandparents, who were from Kansas and
ended up journeying all the way to Hawaii, but whose foundation had been
set in a very similar setting.
And so I think
that I found myself better able to imagine what’s going on in the lives
of people throughout my presidency because of not just a specific novel
but the act of reading fiction. It exercises those muscles, and I think
that has been helpful.
And
then there’s been the occasion where I just want to get out of my own
head. [Laughter] Sometimes you read fiction just because you want to be
someplace else.
What are some of those books?
It’s
interesting, the stuff I read just to escape ends up being a mix of
things — some science fiction. For a while, there was a three-volume
science-fiction novel, the “Three-Body Problem” series —
Oh, Liu Cixin, who won the Hugo Award.
—
which was just wildly imaginative, really interesting. It wasn’t so
much sort of character studies as it was just this sweeping —
It’s really about the fate of the universe.
Exactly.
The scope of it was immense. So that was fun to read, partly because my
day-to-day problems with Congress seem fairly petty — not something to
worry about. Aliens are about to invade. [Laughter]
There
were books that would blend, I think, really good writing with thriller
genres. I mean, I thought “Gone Girl” was a well-constructed,
well-written book.
I loved that structure.
Yeah,
and it was really well executed. And a similar structure, that I
thought was a really powerful novel: “Fates and Furies,” by Lauren
Groff.
I like those structures where you actually see different points of view.
Which I have to do for this job, too. [Laughter]
Have there been certain books that have been touchstones for you in these eight years?
I
would say Shakespeare continues to be a touchstone. Like most teenagers
in high school, when we were assigned, I don’t know, “The Tempest” or
something, I thought, ‘My God, this is boring.’ And I took this
wonderful Shakespeare class in college where I just started to read the
tragedies and dig into them. And that, I think, is foundational for me
in understanding how certain patterns repeat themselves and play
themselves out between human beings.
Is that sort of comforting?
It
gives me a sense of perspective. I think Toni Morrison’s writings —
particularly “Song of Solomon” is a book I think of when I imagine
people going through hardship. That it’s not just pain, but there’s joy
and glory and mystery.
I think that there are
writers who I don’t necessarily agree with in terms of their politics,
but whose writings are sort of a baseline for how to think about certain
things — V. S. Naipaul, for example. His “A Bend in the River,” which
starts with the line, “The world is what it is; men who are nothing, who
allow themselves to become nothing, have no place in it.” And I always
think about that line, and I think about his novels when I’m thinking
about the hardness of the world sometimes, particularly in foreign
policy, and I resist and fight against sometimes that very cynical, more
realistic view of the world. And yet, there are times where it feels as
if that may be true.
So in that sense, I’m using writing like that as a foil or something to debate against.
I’ve read that Lincoln loved Shakespeare his whole life, but when he was dealing with the Civil War, reading the history plays helped give him solace and perspective.
Lincoln’s own writings do that. He is a very fine writer.
I’d
put the Second Inaugural up against any piece of American writing — as
good as anything. One of the great treats of being president is, in the
Lincoln Bedroom, there’s a copy of the Gettysburg Address handwritten by
him, one of five copies he did for charity. And there have been times
in the evening when I’d just walk over, because it’s right next to my
office, my home office, and I just read it.
And
perspective is exactly what is wanted. At a time when events move so
quickly and so much information is transmitted, the ability to slow down
and get perspective, along with the ability to get in somebody else’s
shoes — those two things have been invaluable to me. Whether they’ve
made me a better president, I can’t say. But what I can say is that they
have allowed me to sort of maintain my balance during the course of
eight years, because this is a place that comes at you hard and fast and
doesn’t let up.
Is there some poem or any writing or author that you would turn to, say, after the mass killings in Newtown, Conn., or during the financial crisis?
I
think that during those periods, Lincoln’s writings, King’s writings,
Gandhi’s writings, Mandela’s writings — I found those particularly
helpful, because what you wanted was a sense of solidarity. During very
difficult moments, this job can be very isolating. So sometimes you have
to hop across history to find folks who have been similarly feeling
isolated. Churchill’s a good writer. And I loved reading Teddy
Roosevelt’s writing. He’s this big, outsize character.
Have you read a lot of presidential biographies?
The
biographies have been useful, because I do think that there’s a
tendency, understandable, to think that whatever’s going on right now is
uniquely disastrous or amazing or difficult. And it just serves you
well to think about Roosevelt trying to navigate World War II or Lincoln
trying to figure out whether he’s going to fire [George B.] McClellan
when Rebel troops are 20, 30, 40 miles away.
I watched some of the civil-rights-movement documentary mini-series “Eyes on the Prize” after the election.
It was useful.
You do see how far we’ve come, and in the space of my lifetime.
And
that’s why seeing my daughters now picking up books that I read 30
years ago or 40 years ago is gratifying, because I want them to have
perspective — not for purposes of complacency, but rather to give them
confidence that people with a sense of determination and courage and
pluck can reshape things. It’s empowering for them.
What books would you recommend at this moment in time, that captures this sense of turmoil?
I
should probably ask you or some people who have had time to catch up on
reading. I’ll confess that since the election, I’ve been busier than I
expected. So one of the things I’m really looking forward to is to dig
into a whole bunch of literature.
But one of the
things I’m confident about is that, out of this moment, there are a
whole bunch of writers, a lot of them young, who are probably writing
the book I need to read. [Laughter] They’re ahead of me right now. And
so in my post-presidency, in addition to training the next generation of
leaders to work on issues like climate change or gun violence or
criminal justice reform, my hope is to link them up with their peers who
see fiction or nonfiction as an important part of that process.
When
so much of our politics is trying to manage this clash of cultures
brought about by globalization and technology and migration, the role of
stories to unify — as opposed to divide, to engage rather than to
marginalize — is more important than ever.
There’s
something particular about quieting yourself and having a sustained
stretch of time that is different from music or television or even the
greatest movies.
And part of what we’re all having
to deal with right now is just a lot of information overload and a lack
of time to process things. So we make quick judgments and assign
stereotypes to things, block certain things out, because our brain is
just trying to get through the day.
We’re bombarded with information. Technology is moving so rapidly.
Look, I don’t worry about the survival of the novel. We’re a storytelling species.
I
think that what one of the jobs of political leaders going forward is,
is to tell a better story about what binds us together as a people. And
America is unique in having to stitch together all these disparate
elements — we’re not one race, we’re not one tribe, folks didn’t all
arrive here at the same time.
What holds us
together is an idea, and it’s a story about who we are and what’s
important to us. And I want to make sure that we continue that.
I know you like Junot DĂaz’s and Jhumpa Lahiri’s books, and they speak to immigration or the American Dream.
I
think Lahiri’s books, I think DĂaz’s books, do speak to a very
particular contemporary immigration experience. But also this
combination of — that I think is universal — longing for this better
place, but also feeling displaced and looking backwards at the same
time. I think in that sense, their novels are directly connected to a
lot of American literature.
Some of the great
books by Jewish authors like Philip Roth or Saul Bellow, they are
steeped with this sense of being an outsider, longing to get in, not
sure what you’re giving up — what you’re willing to give up and what
you’re not willing to give up. So that particular aspect of American
fiction I think is still of great relevance today.
Introducing Ken Atchity's Master Class in Storytelling
For Every Author Who Wants To Master Storytelling:
"Our innate ability to tell stories not only makes the world evolve, but is the foundation of great, unforgettable books. This extraordinary course will help all storytellers."
What you will learn:
Ken Atchity is a best-selling author, writing coach and L.A. based movie producer whose accomplishments include
Teaching:
Here's Exactly What You're Going To Get With The Master Class In Storytelling:
AND IT'S 100% Risk-FREE!
If MasterClass In Sorytelling doesn't deliver on its promise you WILL receive a full refund, This Is A No Quibble Refund Policy!
Because I know what it's like to struggle, when you're an outsider in the industry, and because I want to do everything I can to help you succeed, TODAY we're giving you everything listed at a special price of just $39! That's right, that a 50% discount for a LIMITED TIME ONLY.
Order Now!
Claim your copy of this exciting and informative NEW Master Class from Ken Atchity!
Total Value: $78 - for the basic course, but you won't pay that price. Your price is $39.
"Our innate ability to tell stories not only makes the world evolve, but is the foundation of great, unforgettable books. This extraordinary course will help all storytellers."
What you will learn:
- Master the art of storytelling
- What is a story
- What is a storyteller
- How to harness your innate storytelling vocation
- What is the value of stories
- What stories do for us
- What are the storyteller's responsibilities
- What you need to do to create great stories
Ken Atchity, on the set of
"Angels in the Snow"
Teaching:
- Former professor of comparative literature and teacher of creative writing at Occidental College and UCLA
- Fulbright Professor at the University of Bologna
- Produced nearly 30 films in the past 25 years for major studios, television broadcasters, and independent distribution.
- His documentary special for Discovery Channel, based on the New York Times bestseller “The Kennedy Detail” by Jerry Blaine & Lisa McCubbin, was nominated for an Emmy.
- Has worked in nearly every part of the entertainment and publishing industries
- Nearly two dozen of his clients have been NYT Bestsellers.
- An author who has been on the inside of the publishing industry and knows how it works
- An author of over 20 nonfiction books and novels
- An experienced writing coach who has helped literally hundreds of writers to find a market for their work by bringing their craft to the level of their ambition and vision
- He was a book columnist for The Los Angeles Times Book Review
- He is the founder and co-editor of DreamWorks: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Dreams and the Arts
This
Master Class In Storytelling shares a lifetime of secrets learned by,
and from, the most successful writers and creative industry
professionals globally.
Ken Atchity is uniquely qualified, as a best-selling author and writing coach, to help you understand everything you need to know and do to master the power of storytelling.
And
- Ken Atchity is the author of these six best-selling guides for writers:
- Video Training that will change your attitude
- A Discussion Forum Online
- Fast track material so you are not overloaded with material you DON'T need
- No padding, just what AUTHORS NEED to learn, FAST
- A guide to removing the roadblocks to your success as a storyteller
- A program that will set you up for long-term success
- Access to Full Course Online, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week
- You can take this course when you want
- No deadlines for completion
- Additional Support, If You Take That Option
- Please see the list of modules further down the page for even more detail!
AND IT'S 100% Risk-FREE!
If MasterClass In Sorytelling doesn't deliver on its promise you WILL receive a full refund, This Is A No Quibble Refund Policy!
Special Pricing When You Order Now
The total value of what you're getting today is $78, for the course. But the good news is you are NOT going to pay that price.Because I know what it's like to struggle, when you're an outsider in the industry, and because I want to do everything I can to help you succeed, TODAY we're giving you everything listed at a special price of just $39! That's right, that a 50% discount for a LIMITED TIME ONLY.
Order Now!
Claim your copy of this exciting and informative NEW Master Class from Ken Atchity!
Total Value: $78 - for the basic course, but you won't pay that price. Your price is $39.
P.S.
Never before have you had such a unique opportunity to have this PROVEN
expert take you by the hand and help you get in the right mindset to
write great stories.
This introductory price of $39 is a "Buy it NOW before it's gone" offer... so act now!
We
are a Partner Member of The Alliance of Independent Authors, the
leading independent author association in the world and adhere to their
Code of Conduct, verified & enforced to ensure authors get value for
money from service providers.
Sci-Fi Icon Robert Heinlein Lists 5 Essential Rules for Making a Living as a Writer
In his 1947 essay “On the Writing of Speculative Fiction,” Heinlein refers to these “two types” of science fiction as “the gadget story and the human interest story.” The latter kind of story, writes Heinlein “stands a better chance with the slicks than a gadget story does” because it has wider appeal. This advice sounds rather utilitarian, doesn’t it? What about passion, inspiration, the muse? Eh, you don’t have time for those things. If you want to be successful like Robert Heinlein, you’ve got to write stories, lots of ‘em, stories people want to publish and pay for, stories people want to read.
Heinlein spends the bulk of his essay advising us on how to write such stories, with a proviso, in an epigram from Rudyard Kipling, that “there are nine-and-sixty ways / Of constructing tribal lays / And every single one of them is right.” After, however, describing in detail how he writes a “human interest” science fiction story, Heinlein then gets down to business. He assumes that we can type, know the right formats or can learn them, and can spell, punctuate, and use grammar as our “wood-carpenter’s sharp tools.” These prerequisites met, all we really need to write speculative fiction are the five rules below:
1. You must write.
2. You must finish what you start.
3. You must refrain from rewriting except to editorial order.
4. You must put it on the market.
5. You must keep it on the market until sold.
You might think Heinlein has lapsed into the language of the realtor, not the writer, but he is deadly serious about these rules, which “are amazingly hard to follow—which is why there are so few professional writers and so many aspirants.” Anyone who has tried to write and publish fiction knows this to be true. But what did Heinlein mean in giving us such an austere list? For one thing, as he notes many times, there are perhaps as many ways to write sci-fi stories as there are people to write them. What Heinlein aims to give us are the keys to becoming professional writers, not theorists of writing, lovers of writing, dabblers and dilettantes of writing.
Award-winning science fiction writer Robert J. Sawyer has interpreted Heinlein’s rules with commentary of his own, and added a sixth: “Start Working on Something Else.” Good advice.
Read more
Heinlein spends the bulk of his essay advising us on how to write such stories, with a proviso, in an epigram from Rudyard Kipling, that “there are nine-and-sixty ways / Of constructing tribal lays / And every single one of them is right.” After, however, describing in detail how he writes a “human interest” science fiction story, Heinlein then gets down to business. He assumes that we can type, know the right formats or can learn them, and can spell, punctuate, and use grammar as our “wood-carpenter’s sharp tools.” These prerequisites met, all we really need to write speculative fiction are the five rules below:
1. You must write.
2. You must finish what you start.
3. You must refrain from rewriting except to editorial order.
4. You must put it on the market.
5. You must keep it on the market until sold.
You might think Heinlein has lapsed into the language of the realtor, not the writer, but he is deadly serious about these rules, which “are amazingly hard to follow—which is why there are so few professional writers and so many aspirants.” Anyone who has tried to write and publish fiction knows this to be true. But what did Heinlein mean in giving us such an austere list? For one thing, as he notes many times, there are perhaps as many ways to write sci-fi stories as there are people to write them. What Heinlein aims to give us are the keys to becoming professional writers, not theorists of writing, lovers of writing, dabblers and dilettantes of writing.
Award-winning science fiction writer Robert J. Sawyer has interpreted Heinlein’s rules with commentary of his own, and added a sixth: “Start Working on Something Else.” Good advice.
Read more
The Writer's Digest Guest Post: How to Design Your Novel For Film Adaptation
Mid-career novelists seeking representation complain that none of
their books have been made into films. At any given moment, we in Los
Angeles have literally stacks of novels from New York publishers on our
desks. Going through them to find the ones that might make motion
pictures or television movies, we—and other producers, managers, and
agents—are constantly running into the same problems:
But if you regard your career as a business instead of a quixotic crusade, you should be planning your novel at the drawing board to make it appealing to filmmakers.
Revise accordingly.
Though I’ve observed the phenomena for several decades now, it still surprises me that even bestselling novelists, even the ones who complain that no one has made a film from their books yet, don’t write novels dramatic enough to lend themselves easily to mainstream film. It’s a well-known, but lamentable, phenomenon in publishing that, with very few exceptions, the more books a novelist sells the less critical his publisher’s editors are of his work. So time and again we read novels that start out well, roar along to the halfway point, then peter off into the bogs of continuous character development or action resolution.
A publisher invests between $25,000 and $100,000 or more in publishing your novel. A low-budget feature film from a major Hollywood studio today costs at least $50 million. There is, from a business point of view, no comparison. Risking $50 million means the critical factor is raised as high as can be imagined when your book hits the “story department”—much higher than the critical factor of even the biggest publishers. Hollywood studies what audiences want by keeping track, in box office dollars, cents, and surveys–what they respond best to.
If you want to add film to your profit centers as a novelist, it would behoove you to study what makes films work. Disdaining Hollywood may be a fashionable defense for writers who haven’t gotten either rich or famous from it, but it’s not productive in furthering your cinematic career or building your retirement fund.
Read more
Brian A. Klems is the editor of this blog, online editor of Writer’s Digest and author of the popular gift book
Oh Boy, You’re Having a Girl: A Dad’s Survival Guide to Raising Daughters.
Follow Brian on Twitter: @BrianKlems
Sign up for Brian’s free Writer’s Digest eNewsletter: WD Newsletter
Listen to Brian on: The Writer’s Market Podcast
This guest post is by writer/editor/literary manager/producer Ken Atchity. Atchity
has made hundreds of film and television deals for storytellers wanting
their books to be films–including movies, series, and reality
shows–since he began producing in 1987 after retiring from his tenured
professorship at Occidental College. Also, as literary manager his
authors have logged nearly twenty New York Times bestsellers. His own
most recent novels are The Messiah Matrix and Brae Mackenzie. Dr.
Atchity is also the creator of the free on-demand webinar presentation
“Sell Your Story to Hollywood” for aspiring storytellers available at realfasthollywooddeal.com.
Common Problems in Novel-To-Film Adaptation
- “There’s no third act…it just trickles out.”
- “There are way too many characters and it’s not clear till page 200 who the protagonist is.”
- “I can’t relate to anyone in the book.”
- “At the end, the antagonist lays out the entire plot to the protagonist.”
- “There’s not enough action.” Not just action but dramatic action.
- “There’s nothing new here. This concept has been used to death.”/“We don’t know who to root for.”
- “The whole thing is overly contrived.”
- “There’s no dialogue, so we don’t know what the character sounds like.”
- “There’s no high concept here or a new way into a familiar concept. How do we pitch this?”
- “There’s no real pacing.”
- “The protagonist is reactive instead of proactive.”
- “At the end of the day, I have no idea what this story is ”
- “The main character is 80, and speaks only Latvian.”
- “There are no set pieces.”
But if you regard your career as a business instead of a quixotic crusade, you should be planning your novel at the drawing board to make it appealing to filmmakers.
Characters
Characters are the most important element of the story and should generate the action, the setting, and the point of view. Your job as a writer is to give us insight into each and every character in your story, no matter how evil or virtuous his or her actions may be. Characters are the heart of the drama.- Give us a strong protagonist whose motivation and mission shape the action and who, good or bad, is eminently relatable—and who’s in the “star age range” of 35-50 (where at any given moment twenty male stars reside, and maybe ten female stars; a star being a name that can set up the film by his attachment to it).
- Make sure a dramatist looking at your book will clearly see three well-defined acts: act one (the setup), act two (rhythmic development, rising and falling action), and act three (climax leading to conclusive ending).
- Express your character’s personality in dialogue that distinguishes him, and makes him a role a star would die to play.
- Make sure your story has a clear-cut dramatic premise, e.g., unbridled ambition leads to self-destruction or you can’t go home again.
Revise accordingly.
Though I’ve observed the phenomena for several decades now, it still surprises me that even bestselling novelists, even the ones who complain that no one has made a film from their books yet, don’t write novels dramatic enough to lend themselves easily to mainstream film. It’s a well-known, but lamentable, phenomenon in publishing that, with very few exceptions, the more books a novelist sells the less critical his publisher’s editors are of his work. So time and again we read novels that start out well, roar along to the halfway point, then peter off into the bogs of continuous character development or action resolution.
A publisher invests between $25,000 and $100,000 or more in publishing your novel. A low-budget feature film from a major Hollywood studio today costs at least $50 million. There is, from a business point of view, no comparison. Risking $50 million means the critical factor is raised as high as can be imagined when your book hits the “story department”—much higher than the critical factor of even the biggest publishers. Hollywood studies what audiences want by keeping track, in box office dollars, cents, and surveys–what they respond best to.
If you want to add film to your profit centers as a novelist, it would behoove you to study what makes films work. Disdaining Hollywood may be a fashionable defense for writers who haven’t gotten either rich or famous from it, but it’s not productive in furthering your cinematic career or building your retirement fund.
Read more
Brian A. Klems is the editor of this blog, online editor of Writer’s Digest and author of the popular gift book
Oh Boy, You’re Having a Girl: A Dad’s Survival Guide to Raising Daughters.
Follow Brian on Twitter: @BrianKlems
Sign up for Brian’s free Writer’s Digest eNewsletter: WD Newsletter
Listen to Brian on: The Writer’s Market Podcast
10 Questions to Ask Yourself if You Want to Write a Book
1. Publisher or self-publish: The publishing world has changed dramatically in recent years and the Internet has made self-publishing considerably easier. If you self-publish you have full control of your book, but also bear all costs. A publisher is harder to secure and will have control over some decisions, but also absorbs many costs (e.g., printing, distribution, cover art) and also gains access to critical distribution channels, including identifying outlets to review your book.
2. Agent or no agent: With an agent you give a portion of your royalties to them. Literary agents work on a commission basis and are incented to find you the best deal so that their payout increases when you sell books. Though you give up some of your royalties, an agent is often your best chance to get your book proposal reviewed by a major publishing house.
3. Publicist or no publicist: Publicists bring access that is hard for many people to get on their own. They identify media outlets such as television shows, newspapers, and podcasts to bring valuable exposure to you and your book. The best publicists can cost tens of thousands of dollars and you will have to consider if their services are worth it to you.
4. What is the book's "hook": Every book needs a quick and compelling hook that captures attention. This is always needed to draw in potential readers/buyers, but also literary agents, publishers, and publicists if you go that route.
5. Who is the target audience: Don't try to pretend your book is for everyone - all books have a more targeted market. If you decide to use a publisher they will want to know exactly whom you are targeting and how big the audience is. They will also want to know how your book is different from similar books that have been written and if it has relevance to sell outside your home country. The target audience will also help you decide who to ask to "blurb" or endorse your book.
6. Write or ghost write: You would be surprised how many books are written by someone other than the stated author. Ghost writers are sought after and can make anyone come across as a gifted writer. Authors may not have time to write a book or find that a professional writer is better able to capture the voice they want to convey.
7. What is my platform: This one must be alive well before you publish your book. You must consider the best way to bring visibility to your book and contemplate platform options such as your standing as a well-known expert, your social media presence, professional speeches, access to different constituencies, etc.
8. What are my goals: Consider the reason you are writing a book to help hone your focus, especially because the outcomes are not always connected. You might want to make a lot of money but not care about getting great reviews. You way just want to build your brand by getting your name out there. You may want to achieve critical acclaim for your book even if it doesn't make a lot of money (think Indie films). Not everyone can be a NYT best selling author, but you can be pleased with the outcome if you know your goals in advance.
9. What format will the book be: You have many options. It can be hard cover, paperback, eBook, audio, small, large, etc. If you self-publish consider the costs of developing multiple formats, particularly hard cover and paperback.
10. How much time will you commit: The reality is that a book once published is there forever. In addition to the time it takes to write (or work with a ghost writer) you will also need to spend time promoting the book. You must consider you ability and willingness to travel, speak, go to book signings, and otherwise invest your time to market and sell your book.
No series of decisions is right for everyone and you must consider your particular situation and goals. One last tip: don't get too fixated on the title of your book - it often changes as the writing process progresses, especially when you have a publisher and and editor.
Read more
7 IMMEDIATE STEPS TO BECOME A BESTSELLING AUTHOR by Laurence O'Bryan
Believe!
Believing in your writing is the critical first step. If you’ve invested in your craft and worked hard at making the best book possible, take this first step. I am a bestselling mystery author. My first novel, The Istanbul Puzzle, reached #26 overall on Amazon Kindle U.S. sales in September 2016, after being published for over 3 years. It was also #1 in three crowded categories.
I put this success down to two things: a well written book in a popular genre, and online promotion using the tools we will talk about in this seven step report. Yes, I was published by Harper Collins, but they dropped me in 2013, and would never have published me if I didn’t have a blog and a Twitter account.
I self-published the latest novel in my mystery series. My recent status as a best seller is all down to diligent work online, which I will describe in this report.
The following are the key steps we recommend you undertake to use social media to help you become a best-selling author:
- Define your objectives
- Plan how to get your online activity done, and still be able to write
- Set aside resources
- Develop personal guidelines on your use of social media
- Plan how your content will be generated
- Decide how you will monitor the results
- Implement
James Patterson Makes Good On $1M Promise To Indies
Less than 10 months from the day James Patterson swore a million-dollar promise, he has kept his word. The best-selling novelist announced he has donated about $437,000 to 81 independent bookstores — a gift that completes his plan to donate $1 million of his own money to support independent booksellers.
"We're in a juncture right now where bookstores as we have known them are at risk," he said. "Libraries as we've known them are at risk, publishers are at risk, American literature is at risk, as we've known it, and getting kids reading is at risk."
The recent gift marked the third phase of his campaign, and it brings the sum of his donations several thousand past his goal. To date this year, Patterson has donated $1,008,300 to 178 bookstores across the U.S, with no strings attached. Publishers Weekly offers a list of the indies included in the third round, and the School Library Journal details how one of them plans to use the funds.
"Here's to more parents and grandparents coming to their senses and giving their kids books —yes, books — for Christmas and other holidays," he said. "Here's to local governments waking up to the fact that bookstores and libraries are essential to our way of life. Here's to media coverage of books, booksellers, and publishers, and to a wiser, more literate America. Happy holidays to one and all!"
Book News: Apple Enters A New Round In E-Book Price-Fixing Fight
In its attempt to obtain a foothold in a market long dominated by Amazon, Apple ran afoul of antitrust law.
Apple is sliding back under the judicial microscope Monday in a legal challenge that could bear big implications for the e-book market. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is slated to hear the company's appeal of a verdict that found it guilty of violating antitrust law.
Last year, a federal judge ruled that Apple had knowingly facilitated a price-fixing conspiracy with the five major publishing companies: Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster. In a bid to pressure Amazon — then and now a goliath of the e-book market — Apple and these publishers had agreed to set the price of e-books higher than Amazon's preferred price. The judge denounced these agreements as collusion, rendering her verdict in no uncertain terms.
"The evidence is overwhelming that Apple knew of the unlawful aims of the conspiracy," U.S. District Judge Denise Cote wrote in her opinion. To believe Apple's case, she continued, "a fact-finder would be confronted with the herculean task of explaining away reams of documents and blinking at the obvious."
While the publishers settled their side of the case early on, Apple has vowed repeatedly to keep fighting. The latest round is expected to help clarify the legal line drawn between friendly business agreements and outright collusion.
As Philip Elmer-DeWitt notes in Fortune:
"When the Department of Justice charged Apple with conspiring to fix the price of e-books, the case was widely seen in both Silicon Valley and New York publishing circles as an error of enforcement.
"Why was Apple, a giant in its own right but a new entrant in the e-book market, being prosecuted and not that other giant, Amazon? ...
"But when District Judge Denise Cote sided with the DOJ and ruled that Apple had violated the Sherman Antitrust Act, what had been a question of enforcement became a question of law."
Although Monday's hearing is expected to last about an hour, a ruling won't be rendered for several months more. And Elmer-De Witt says a verdict against Apple could very well mean this case is headed to the Supreme Court.
Read more
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)