Chapter Member
Spotlight
Profile
June 1998
Chapter Member Spotlight
Profile
June 1998
|
|
|
|
Ed Williams,
Director of our hosting site,
the Literary Arts Allied Collective
Ed Williams is a Renaissance Man. Creative in both the literary and computer arenas, he is a busy man. We're lucky to have finally corralled him for a few moments (a food bribe helps.) Ed has long been associated with writing and editing, going back to his first nonfiction article published while still a teen. Since then, he has published hundreds of articles on myriad subjects. His association with Sisters in Crime goes back to when we shared the same on-line service and Ed ran a writing workshop. This was followed by the formation of the Literary Arts Allied Collective Internet site in 1995, devoted to the literary endeavor. Fortunate for us, as this is where we found a new home. Ed continues to help us along, providing innovative touches, such as the slide show of Spotlight guests and the eye-catching red selection box, both on the public homepage.
Did I mention his sense of humor?
Ed's passion for fiction and the writing of fiction, comes through in the selections he has chosen to share with us:
Fiction is a lie. Fiction is the weaving of a deceit so devious that the reader, though knowing all is a sham, is coaxed into willing cooperation and into pretending what is false is real.
Fiction is truth. More than any journalistic reporting of facts, fiction reaches centuries-old places in the soul to illuminate archetypal issues of life; it is an iconography, intricate or ingenuous, that does more than convey information: it causes the reader to think.
Fiction is both Rasputin and Aristotle, both rascal and sage.
Ed Williams, The Scrivenery (1995)
The elder looked up from his carving, waved the knife. "You think you know the stories I tell, but you've never heard any of them before. If you only pay attention to what a story says with its eyes and mouth, you'll miss it entirely. The true story is the rhythm of its telling, the way it pulls bones and muscles back and forth until it's planted in you and you can call it back when you need it, walking or hunting or dancing. The use of the story is what it does in the air before your eyes."
Lawrence Smith, The Map of Who We Are (1997) (part of the American Indian Literature and Critical Studies Series.) The interview was conducted on May 23 by Louise Guardino for the Internet Chapter.
IC
Those selections blow me away. They illustrate why you are so good at challenging writers to think, and be creative, as you did with The Scrivenery. Tell us about The Scrivenery, how it came about and what the philosophy behind it was.
Ed
The Scrivenery first began, under a different name and with a narrower scope, in 1991 on a commercial, on-line service. Its migration to the World-Wide Web took place in 1995. Impetus to begin the project in 1991 came from a notion John Gardner espoused in his book, The Art of Fiction. Hang on; I have the quotation somewhere...I would begin, then, with something real -- smaller than a short story, tale, yarn, sketch -- and something primary, not secondary (not parody, for example, but the thing itself). I would begin with some of those necessary parts of larger forms, some single element that, if brilliantly done, might naturally become the trigger of a larger work -- some small exercise in technique, if you like, as long as it's remembered that we do not really mean it as an exercise but mean it as a possible beginning of some magnificent work of art.... And I would make the chief concern of this small exercise the writer's discovery of the full meaning of fiction's elements.... Working element by element through the necessary parts of fiction, he should make the essential techniques second nature, so that he can use them with increasing dexterity and subtlety, until at last, as if effortlessly, he can construct imaginary worlds -- huge thoughts made up of concrete details--so rich and complex, and so awesomely simple, that we are astounded, as we're always astounded by great art.
There was no intent with The Scrivenery to teach or pontificate (though I did manage some of that), nor to stimulate -- necessarily -- the creative muse. I saw a need for practical exercises, exercises that called for particular treatments of dialogue, characterization, imagery, point-of-view, setting, action, language, structure. So that's what we tried to do. I believe we even published someone named Louise Guardino in The Scrivenery. :-)
IC
That's all Gardner's quote? I'm astounded! It is something that must be read more than once, slowly, to absorb. Okay, that was the basis, but, still, you came up with a seemingly endless set of exercises, always with the apt literary quote as an explanation/example.
Ed
Well, thank you. But the set of exercises was hardly endless...as evidenced by the fact that some of them managed to go over-the-top enough to qualify for altitude records. The time, or lack thereof, to write the exercises -- and keep them original -- was largely the reason The Scrivenery was retired. And a big public thanks here to Leila Joiner and Ruth Nestvold for all their help while we were in publication.
IC
Maybe there was no intent to stimulate creativity, but no doubt that was a side effect.
Ed
I certainly believe you're correct. I firmly believe there is a "writer's mind"; a mind-set of observation, of creative gathering and gestation, that you cultivate by writing. Writing begets writing. You don't run out of ideas by pouring them onto paper; you birth two new ones for each one you're able to distill and express.
IC
Has the Lit-Arts Internet site achieved your intended goal?
Ed
Yes and no. We're a fish in the Pacific, so it's unrealistic to expect a great deal. The growth of the Internet has been incredible just in the few years we've been a part of it. And that growth has seen more and more literary activity and, thus, greater exposure to non-readers all over the world. So in that larger sense, yes, contrary to Kurt Vonnegut's opinions I believe literature is alive and well on the Net.
IC
What, then, do you see as the future of literature on the Internet?
Ed
I don't have a maven's cap handy. Vonnegut (whom I adore as a writer) has expressed his opinion that the Internet is killing good writing, that it's a death knell and, at least partially (along with a hundred channels on television) why he says he's written his last novel. On the other hand, Al Gore recently remarked that the Internet is bringing us a revolution in information more significant than even Gutenberg's printing press.I believe the truth is somewhere in between. "The truth is out there." ;-)
For the short run, the greatest benefit of the Net to literature is, I believe, its numbers. Recent surveys indicate over 60 million regular visitors to the Web worldwide.
IC
Haven't read Vonnegut's opinion. I have to ask if it was based on the sheer proliferation of "literature" on the Internet (glut/info-burn-out?), or if it had something to do with the awkwardness of reading from a tube rather than from one's chair/bed/bath?
Ed
On Vonnegut: Not the problem of reading from the screen. I think you're closer with "glut/info-burn-out." Can't speak for him, obviously, but I think it might boil down to, "300 million words of lousy writing don't equal 300 words of good writing." And with our society becoming more and more jaded with entertainment bombardment, there's truth there. Take a kid who just saw Godzilla, and had never seen the original Jaws, to see Jaws and he'd find it a yawner because the special effects are so unbelievable. For my part, I envision one high school junior who might not have access to a publication like, say, Conjunctions or the North American Review...or because of peer group pressure might not be caught dead reading it. But surfing the Net is peer-group friendly. And if he or she stumbles upon some miraculous stories, well, we may have a new convert. And maybe even a future writer we'll be reading twenty years from now.Is the glass half full, or half empty? There are more writers submitting work now than ever before; but there are fewer authors commercially published this year than last, and last year than the year before. With an optimist's view, I see the new media as a way for us as a society not to lose valuable voices we might otherwise. To turn my 300 million words thought around, "The loss of one important literary voice because of the commercial nature of mainstream publishing isn't worth 300 potboiler novels that have nothing to offer but a potential movie follow-on deal."
IC
But will the net come to the rescue? Has the net actually fostered bad writing, making it easy to be published or "self-publish" while providing wide accessibility?
Ed
No, I don't believe the Net is the life raft. But maybe it's a blinking light on top of Titanic's iceberg. As with everything on the Net, the trick isn't finding data, it's filtering data. The good is out there, but often all the rooting around needed to find it is unbearable. That's one of the reasons Frederick Barthelme, Mike Neff, and I started the Literary Arts WebRing. What the Net can do, I think, is provide a communication means between writers and small publishers. With major publishers--of which there are fewer and fewer--concerned only with the bottom line and booting out their tried and true (but low profit) midlist writers, and with technologies that allow less expensive book printing than ever before, I think we'll see a growth in small press publishers. They may be the life raft.
IC
The Literary Arts WebRing: a guidepost to those other sites worth visiting. This also implies that you do much rooting around yourself, searching out the worthwhile sites. How do you manage this with your, very, full schedule?
Ed
I don't root much. We achieved critical mass with the WebRing some time ago, and we now receive unsolicited requests for admissions at the rate of about a half dozen per week. In the past year, we've admitted only two members that came to us this way. There are five members on the Ring's Governing Board, the site selection group, so we don't have to do much individual rooting around. ;-)
IC
Tell us, have you laminated and put in a prominent place of display your first published piece, the op-ed published when you were a teen?
Ed
First published piece: Hardly laminated. Stuck in a photo album or some such. But then, I don't throw away rejection slips, either. In fact, I have some old writings I desperately hope no one ever finds. Maybe it's time for some spring cleaning.
IC
Want to tell us what you do in your other, nonliterary, life? The one that keeps you so busy?
Ed
Not really. That's the boring, but income-producing one. I work as an Information Technology manager for a Fortune 500 company.
IC
You've written many nonfiction pieces on myriad subjects. How about fiction -- do you write any fiction?
Ed
The real answer is, "No." I'd like to say yes, and I can say "used to," but I have to be honest with myself and admit that I've written no fiction in years. You'd have to have a monumental library close by to find any of my dusty stuff. Last one was a story called "This Last Flower" in the Jacaranda Review, '93. The only thing current is a little short-short that was to have appeared in a Barnes & Noble hardcover anthology as long ago as October '96. Got my check on time, and maybe I'm grateful the book has never been published. That way I can say my next piece will be published soon in hardcover.
IC
Is there a title to this yet to appear book so that we can keep an eye out for it?
Ed
(^_^) Heh. Frankly, I wouldn't be watching for it. I have a feeling it will never be published. Besides, it's intended to go straight to the remainder bin as soon as it's out. And there are 364 other writers in the same tome. Heh.
IC
How did your association with SinC come about?
Ed
You have the current and illustrious president of the SinC Internet Chapter to blame for getting me involved. I first became aware of SinC when the on-line chapter first started on the now defunct GE network. I joined just prior to the Chapter's move to the Internet. I support SinC's precepts. "Egalitarian" is a word I love but often misspell.
IC
Oooh, egalitarian, huh. The members will be so pleased to hear that!The SinC-IC mailing list has become quite popular. Tell us about the effort you and Karen Cooper and others expanded on that project!
Ed
I have very little to do with the future of the SinC-IC mailing list...so watch for explosive growth in the near future!Seriously, we made several starts and stops on the list using the resources at the lit-arts.com domain. The list has grown tremendously with really no direct marketing. At the moment there are 327 subscribers to the list. That kind of growth begs for a more sophisticated means of delivery. Barbara Paul, Sandra Brewer, Karen Cooper, and Sand Magnuson are the driving forces behind what will soon be unveiled as a new and improved SinC-IC mailing list. Watch for it at a theater near you. You'll like it.
IC
What's the best aspect of your SinC-IC membership?
Ed
I believe, and I don't think I'm alone in this, that it's the virtual community afforded by the Internet Chapter that's the most appealing aspect of membership. Unlike a geographic chapter, I can log-in and see what's going on at any time, day or night. Conversations on the private Message Boards are fresh to me no matter how much later I find them than the time they were originally posted. I've yet to meet any of the Chapter members face-to-face, but I've known some of them for as long as six years. The Internet Chapter is the way we keep in touch, and it's available to me whenever I switch on the PC.
IC
If you could, who of these authors and/or creations would you most like to spend time with, and why?Hemingway and/or Jake Barnes
Shakespeare and/or Puck
Charles Frazier and/or Inman
Ian Fleming and/or James Bond
Ed
Oh, Shakespeare, hands down. I agree with Harold Bloom (love him or hate him on other issues), that Shakespeare is the center of the Western Canon. I can imagine no other figure in history that I'd like to hover around for a few days.
IC
What's the most memorable book you've read?
Ed
Most memorable book? Argh. Tough interviewer. If I had to select a single title, I suppose it would be Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury. I struggled to come to terms with the novel when I was young. I can't necessarily deem it my favorite book, but I think it was the one that opened my eyes to literary experimentation. I think it first showed me that a treatment to defamiliarize the subject could actually reveal more of it.
IC
You are a literary man!
Ed
No, I'm no literary guy. I'm afraid that's like accusing Isaac Newton's chimney sweep of being a mathematician. I hover around it, but I'm a few bricks shy of being there.
IC
Is the rumor true that if you were to live your life over again, you'd become an actor?
Ed
An actor? I sincerely doubt it. Were I to live my life over again I'd try harder to select a wealthy family so I wouldn't have to chase manna and could do other things. But an actor would be right out, I'd say.
IC
Tell us what a few of your favorite words are and why?
Ed
Words? Hah. Now you're in trouble.Metonymy, synecdoche, litotes, chiasmus...all because I like words about words, rhetoric.
Logamnesia: forgetting words. Because it's happening to me as I get older.
Sesquipedalian, because for some reason I can spell long words easier than short ones.
Oh, one more. "Crwth." Because it has no vowels and I stumped someone with it once. It's an ancient musical instrument.
IC
Putting my eyes back, can you say "Crwth"?
Ed
Crwth? Of course: SER-wuh... Wait. SER-wi... No, no it either. SER-phbbt. Dammit. Even though I'm of Welsh ancestry, no, I can't say stuff like that. ;-)
IC
What animal would you most liken yourself to?
Ed
A tiger. Not for the obvious reasons. Domestic house cats are more closely related to tigers than any of the other big cats. So that's how I imagine my two spoiled furballs view me: an oversized cat of whom they can demand food, shelter, and attention.Heh. Other than that, I'd say I alternate between being a raccoon and a sloth. ;-)
IC
A sloth! ?? Why because of its eating habits?
Ed
No, a sloth because of its lounging habits: I work hard, and I relax hard. (smile)
IC
What time period would you most like to live in if not the current, and why?
Ed
What time period? You may want to strike this question, because the answer will bore the bunny slippers off you. The present. Reliving the past would be useful only to correct mistakes or arrange to win the lotto. Reenactment doesn't interest me. The future? I have enough trouble trying to adapt to the pace of change right now, while I have a grounding in the evolving of the familiar. So I'll take what I got and not look elsewhere.
IC
Is there any question you wished I'd asked?
Ed
A question I'd wished you'd asked? No. No elaboration from me.But I do want to know this: Can I now interview you? It's time we saw you on this side of the desk.
IC
Uh uh. [ed: Once tortured, they want to be inquisitor!] What last thought would you like to leave with us?
Ed
Last thoughts. Hm.When we opened taking about The Scrivenery and I looked for the Gardner quotation, it reminded me of another that I used in the publication. This one is not by a writer, but by the Japanese artist Hokusai. However, I think it's a good one to pin on a writer's wall as a reminder that literature is a process, not just a product, that we continue to develop and learn as writers our entire lives -- or at least we certainly should:
I have drawn things since I was six. All that I made before the age of sixty-five is not worth counting. At seventy-three I began to understand the true construction of animals, plants, trees, birds, fishes, and insects. At ninety I will enter into the secret of things. At a hundred and ten, everything -- every dot, every dash -- will live.
IC
Well, Ed, many thanks for consenting to an interview and allowing us your time on this holiday weekend.
Ed
Thanks, Louise. Been swell.
To see previous Spotlight Profiles, click here.
