I have nothing to add on Austen, but have to say--whee, Academic Decathlon! I was forever bitter that my freshman and sophomore years, the team went to nationals, but my junior and senior years, despite my best efforts (I medaled at state!) we placed *second* at state. Sigh.

---

my junior and senior years, despite my best efforts (I medaled at state!) we placed *second* at state. Sigh.

Aw! I don't remember we as a team actually placed at State; our real goal was only to beat our rival school...and I don't even remember if we did that. But I think I got a Silver in Essay at State one year.

---

Anyway, with mounting frustration at how dry my book has been thus far (and, hell, I don't even want to read it at this point), I decided to start rewriting it today with a faux-pompous tongue-in-cheek approach that I hope other people (such as, say, my editor, publisher, comrades, and player-haters) might also find fun. Continuum has been pretty lenient with the other writers, and I hope to enjoy some of that leniency. At the very least, I hope they don't sue me for smart-assery. What's your take, David?

Mi compadre! I had a similar epiphany last week where I was casting about for a voice that would tie together all the disparate bits and give focus to the much notes, and came up with a kind of unreliable narrator with issues. Which turned out to be the right idea, but too broad and I refined it a lot today and narrowed in on the tone which really makes a huge difference in a project like this.

I also just allowed myself the room to invent some stuff so it wouldn't get dry. (For example I just wrote up a fist fight between Doris Lessing and Kingsley Amis as a parenthetical side note.) I probably won't keep a lot of those things in the final edit but by giving myself that permission, the writing becomes livelier and more engaging to me (and by extension, the reader as well. I hope.)

At one point I was shooting for a narrative voice sort of like early sixties American literature: Pynchon, Hawkes, Barth. That's still a useful reference point (because they're all in some ways post-Beat - like Tom - and tonally I think their work is closer to Swordfishtrombones than anything else I know), but I was getting something closer to Woody Allen's loopy, bent intellectual 70s New Yorker pieces. (Not really comparing myself to Woody, of course, but if you've ever read his piece about The Lost Generation in Paris then you'll have some notion of how I came up with Doris Lessing and Kingsley Amis having a punchout, while Philip Larkin eggs them on.)

Anyway, I'm glad you've thrown off the shackles of your oppressive work and are now hacking at it with more glee. That's basically what I'm doing as well.

---

I loved the movie, and I've been meaning to read the book because of it.

Me too. I just got the DVD from a mysterious benefactor so I've been listening to bits of the commentary before bed.

re the scene that vexes P-C: Isn't it even more brutal the way it is in the movie, though? I mean, he goes in, but he doesn't do anything to the point; he just talks about work and leaves. From your description, it seems like the details were changed to fit the medium. If you just saw him standing out there in the movie, you don't know why he doesn't go in -- if it's because he's being sensitive or insensitive. Having him go in, speak to her casually, and then leave removes that ambiguity.

I saw that movie twice in a theater with a high school friend who was out of his mind. After the second time he said, "Hey, I noticed that there's kind of a romantic story going on there." He was watching it for the WW2 stuff. Seriously.

---

came up with a kind of unreliable narrator with issues.

No. Fucking. Way. No. Fucking. Way. This is exactly what I'm doing, and I also made up a Doris Lessing reference last night (because she was one of the early advocates for Idries Shah when the man brought Sufism to Swinging London). I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this.

---

No. Fucking. Way. No. Fucking. Way.

Heh!

This is exactly what I'm doing, and I also made up a Doris Lessing reference last night (because she was one of the early advocates for Idries Shah when the man brought Sufism to Swinging London).

Well, I don't really need the Doris as she's completely tangential to my story. JZ says Iris Murdoch would be a better choice anyway. Just stay away from John Hawkes, dude! Also while I'm at it, I'm putting in my bid for Krazy Kat, Baudrillard and L'Atalante. After that it's all fair game.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this.

I'm laughing! Don't worry - I'm sure they'll be extremely different books when we're finished. The source albums alone will dictate that, much less our individual writing styles.

---

I'm sure they will, but that's just amazing. Anyway, I think Lessing is fair game for both of us.

I'm putting in my bid for Krazy Kat, Baudrillard and L'Atalante.

You got it! Most of the references I've made are musical ones, especially wrong-headed and completely impossible ones.

Man! Ha! That threw me for a little loop!

---

re the scene that vexes P-C:

Hm. You have a point, Strega.

After the second time he said, "Hey, I noticed that there's kind of a romantic story going on there." He was watching it for the WW2 stuff. Seriously.

Ha! He should read the book. Like I said, every time I read it, I found a new layer.

---

The best, though, is that one afternoon, my AD advisor and I struck up a conversation about the different meanings of the title of The Remains of the Day. We were just talking after school; I don't remember why the topic came up. I'd never really thought about it, but we came up with some interesting ways to interpret the title.

Guess what one of the essay prompts at Regionals was?

That's a good story. I have a similar one. My speech Senior year - which rocked - was about the Frankenstein complex, as named by Asimov. The first body section was on the Prometheus story, and it's significance as a Frankenstein-type precursor.

The novel that year was Frankenstein. Guess what the essay topic at Nationals was?

I had a working introduction, first body paragraph, AND conclusion already written before going in, and barely needed to adapt it. Good thing, too, because the essay grading that year was a complete fiasco - the best writer on our team got a 500 for some reason, and one girl won five(!!!) objective medals but got a 400 on Essay, and ended up not making the top 3 overall because of it. Whereas I ended up medalling in Essay that year, by pure luck - I'm really not that good a writer.

Reading is good, though. I'm gonna read Kavalier and Clay soon, I think. When I"m done reading a bunch of reference books that will help me run an improv theater club at school.

---

The novel that year was Frankenstein. Guess what the essay topic at Nationals was?

HA! Awesome.

---