Contrivances

I’ve been thinking about the issue of contrivance in fiction, how it works as the everyday fabric but can be used as a point of criticism. This is to say, for beginners, what does it mean for a piece of work (book, TV show, play etc) to be critiqued as contrived (as in “Oh that was such a contrived scene…”).

It’s hard because it’s in the very nature of something fictional to be, on a very basic level, inherently contrived. Fiction is fiction. Whether it’s happening between two robots on a faraway planet, or under our nose, it’s not real, though it might feel so, even if it is accurately based on the truth (not going to get into autofiction here).

To use a good concrete example, I’m thinking of the three seasons of the popular streaming show The Bear. In particular, their respective finalés. It goes without saying that if you haven’t seen The Bear and have been meaning to, you might want to skip this (and if you haven’t seen The Bear, I heartily recommend it). Also worth noting that I’m only focusing on the finalés. Season Two, for example, might have (for me) the weaker ending, but I found it generally more interesting than Season Three.

At the end of Season One, our chef protagonist discovers, amidst the chaos of running a busy sandwich shop and facing imminent bankruptcy (and someone nearly going to jail for manslaughter), not to mention his own bouts of post-traumatic anxiety, that the chef’s dead brother (and former owner) had hidden around $300,000 in tomato sauce cans, communicated to the chef in a cryptic suicide letter. The restaurant is not only saved, but plans are laid for a high-end version. Was it a stretch? Sure, but I didn’t really care because somehow it seemed deserved. Perhaps it’s because it reveals a very tender emotional thread, consistent with the other episodes, as the chef contends with the mystery that his brother was to him, and the hole of grief he feels around losing him.

Season Two ends with the launch of the renovated incarnation of the restaurant, as the chef contends with small margins and high expectations while balancing a budding romantic relationship with a family friend. Everything is riding on opening night and the chef, in mid-service, winds up locked in the walk-in freezer when the handle breaks off on the other side. Alas, he cannot carefully control the chaos happening outside and has a meltdown with his cousin on the other side of the door, who’s comparing the chef’s neuroticisms to his mother, who had literally driven her car into their family home the other night.  It’s funny, because on paper there’s clearly less outward contrivance in this finalé than Season One…and yet it didn’t work as well.

So what does this mean? I suppose it’s when something goes from the natural contrivance of fiction into an area that doesn’t feel deserved, either by flaws of logic, lack of genuineness or consistency with the whole. When it doesn’t work it doesn’t give me reason (or enough reasons) to “believe” that it’s a natural part of the landscape, no matter how far it may reach. It respects the limits of the world it resides within. Or another way of putting it: if I feel a bump in the road, convince me that it’s part of the ride. The more bumps, the more convincing I might require.

One of the things with the finalé of the Season Two that doesn’t work is the unbelievability of the chef getting locked in the freezer in the first place. Anyone who has worked in a restaurant (hello) knows that walk-in freezers have a release button on the inside that opens the door precisely because of such situations. It also lacks the comparatively symphonic threading together of Season One. Despite spreading the spotlight throughout the season to other characters, it comes back to the chef and his obsessive (likely traumatized) behaviour, his relationship with himself, his split responsibilities to his restaurant and to his girlfriend who is sitting at a table while all this is happening, waiting for him to acknowledge her. What bugged me mostly consisted of the chef squaring off with his cousin. What was this trying to achieve, I wonder? It felt like a too-convenient device to force a confrontation, where the cousin literally calls-out the chef’s unresolved inner challenges. Maybe because it was kinda lazy, given the confidence of the show overall? It’s a little too on-the-nose, even didactic, compared to the show-don’t-tell way in which Season One handled things. Am I saying it was bad? No, it just uses a plot-device that feels stolen from the 80s.

Where do they go from here? Well, Season Three manages to be the least capital-D dramatic of the three, but that might have to do with the reality of the overall arc of the series. They’re establishing themselves now. To grab terminology from group dynamics, The Bear went from storming (Season One), to norming (Season Two), and then performing (Season Three). In Season Two they launched the new restaurant without it burning down. In Season Three the pressure seems to be more existential, namely figuring out how to chase a Michelin star without skimping on the chef’s exacting quality, while needing to maximize table turnover in order to break even. The chef’s story is less centred overall, but the finalé features him–already experiencing anxiety attacks as he anticipates the first critical reviews of the restaurant to be filed–having a post-traumatic episode as he comes face-to-face with the chef he trained under, who cruelly undermined his self-worth–all while attending the closing of another mentor’s establishment.

I don’t have any big issues with the direction of Season Three; creating an emergency for the sake of having, say, Season One’s manic energy would seem somehow disingenuous here. I think it’s a sign of confidence if a show can shift gears without resorting to tricks. If anything felt off, it was the repeated depiction of the chef’s meltdown, his manic inner thoughts projecting themselves onto his world. After a while they didn’t serve to deepen or develop our understanding of what the chef was experiencing. Okay, meltdown, got it. Where does this wind up on the contrivance scale? Contrived? Stylistically perhaps, but not in terms of plot or story.

Anyhow, thank you for joining me on this thought exercise!

A cafe table (Voodoo Child on College St.) whereupon sits an Americano, glass of water. The sun shins in.
Share

Lou Reed: The King of New York, by Will Hermes

Lou Reed is like a magic uncle to me. His voice was there in my teens when I was very alone, feeling vulnerable and misunderstood. My real entry point was a best-of cassette, Rock and Roll Diary: 1967-1980 . It was there that I not only discovered his solo material (uneven a collection though this release was), but discovered his seminal early band, The Velvet Underground (with John Cale, Sterling Morrison and Moe Tucker). His voice managed to cut through the bullshit and yet was supernaturally intimate. It was through this intimacy–the inherent heartbreak in his poetically-charged lyrics and his speak-sing voice, the lurid provocation of (what we would now call) his queerness–that I fell under Lou Reed’s spell, and I count myself among many. Another best-of (I was a teenager, forgive me) was Walk on the Wild Side: The Best of Lou Reed, which was a more even introduction to his 70s solo material. I told myself, there was no way you could listen to his live version of Coney Island Baby and not feel an elemental longing combined with a stubborn conviction in the idea of salvation by love.

Lou’s work was uneven, perhaps not by his stated standards, but with each album (and each decade) you just didn’t know what you were going to get. And yet, even that was cool. He was the coolest person on this earth. Go ahead, Lou, release the Bob Ezrin-produced Berlin, and album of fantastically depressing yet inspired songwriting. Put out Metal Machine Music, the sonic equivalent of a root canal. If you were looking for iterations on his most well-known album, Transformer, he was already onto something else, and often something polarizingly different. Perhaps solipsistic, perhaps self-intoxicated, perhaps self-annihilating. Perhaps lost in the mid-80s, writing MTV pop songs with production standards that don’t age well.

The height of my appreciation for Lou Reed came as he released New York in ’89, when the quality of his output (and production standards) levelled up while I was turning nineteen. It combined his assured poetic chops with acidic social critique and a fuck-tonne of guitar. This was followed by Songs for Drella, to this day one of my standalone favourite albums. Brimming with empathy but with a Velvet-y stripped-down sonic aesthetic (that I wished the acoustic-driven “Unplugged” trend at the time embraced), it was a collaboration with his former collaborator, John Cale; an ode to their mentor (and one-time producer) Andy Warhol, who had recently passed.

I should probably talk about Will Hermes biography of Reed. And, in a way, I am. It’s a weird feeling, reading the intimate (and finely rendered) details about someone who was a spiritual role model in so many years of my life, especially under so many situations that seemed beyond my control.

I knew he could be, to put it lightly, difficult. He didn’t suffer fools. And yet as someone now in their 50s, with a lot of life experience and self-reflection, I’m inherently prone to interrogate phrases like this. Basically: isn’t that another way of saying “asshole?” They weren’t always “fools,” but people he knew, people he had a history with. Hermes’ accounts of Reed severing ties indirectly, through third parties, with figures no less important to his life (save career) than Warhol and Cale–even his wife, Sylvia Morales–are difficult to read. Difficult because, and perhaps I’m doing him too much a service in saying this, but in many ways he represents the sort of insecure artist that many have inside of us. The part of us that is more comfortable sending a witty indirect riposte than having the balls to actually sit down and speak with someone face-to-face, consequences be what they may.

He was artistically uncompromising and yet simultaneously his best enemy, hindered in no small way by spending the better part of a decade-and-a-half deeply entwined with chronic substance use (heroin, yes, but mostly alcohol with amphetamines). His songs came from deep injury and his MO was deeply insecure, lashing out, burning bridges, yet consistently championing the works of those around him he admired with the fire of a thousand teenagers (The Ramones, Talking Heads and most recently, Anohni).

This isn’t a book for a casual fan (if that’s possible to be). And yet, for those of us who are–in whatever way–beholden to Lou Reed’s music, no matter how inconsistent (note, my favourite solo album is Street Hassle, which is a deeply fucked fin de 70s meltdown, capped by the brilliant title track), no matter how maddening yet believable a depiction, what Hermes is able to show of Reed’s character is consistently inconsistent. A collection of contradictions almost built to self-destruct. A middle-class Jewish kid from Long Island who became known for the seedy NYC underground, a queer role model uncomfortable with his self-promoted ownership of that attribute. Someone who wanted it both ways: to be a provocateur, but without an instinct to reflect on the consequences.

Despite his self-destructive instincts, despite his sometimes terrible treatment of the people closest to him–including allegations of occasional physical assault of partners–I wept while reading Hermes’ deeply tender account of Reed’s passing by liver failure, accompanied by his longtime partner and soulmate Laurie Anderson, alongside local Toronto musician Kevin Hearn. It served as a sort of closure for me, a decade after the fact, helped by the unparalleled intimacy of the source material and the author’s judiciously light touch with prose when others would have opted for the sort of ham-fisted poetry Reed himself would’ve sneered at.

I’d like to mention that Lou Reed: The King of New York is not only a thorough document of a vital force in 20th century popular and alternative music, but an intimate glimpse of the 60s and 70s New York zeitgeist, as well as a compelling portrayal of the inherently dangerous world that those who belonged to the LGBTQ+ community faced (such as shock therapy for those young men institutionalized for being gay).

A brief note to Hermes, should he come across this: in the future please refrain from making the all-too-common mistake–particularly among American writers–of name-checking cities like Prague and New York City, only to refer to a concert in the same paragraph as happening “in Canada.” Um, we have cities, too.

[Update: I’ve been meaning to write this review for a while, and of course it turns out the day I pressed “publish” just happened to be Lou Reed’s birthday. Go figure.]

Share

Self-promotion

Hate it. Hate. I hate it. *spits poison from wound*

Promoting myself sometimes/always feels like putting on a clown suit and yodelling “Hey everybody, something I wrote that I think is good was published,” while squeezing a bulb horn and yuk-yuking my way until falling through a manhole.

I think it — this notion that self-promotion is a kind of fool’s errand — can come down to two things: a socially internalized idea of “selfishness,” and social anxiety.

A big part of it is the visibility. I have social anxiety, though some people who know me may not clue into this, and while it’s way better than when I was younger (thank you, therapy and age) it’s not non-existent, especially on days when I’m feeling conflicted about whatever personal or work-related conflict is afoot. But this is just part of it, a facet of a more complex whole.

Promoting oneself shares some Venn with “networking,” a word which can cause some people to feel the urge to vomit, largely owing to prolonged exposure to those who are just a little too slick and creepy — and sometimes strangely successful — in social situations. How can one be oneself-with-others in a way that is flexible — reasonably invested and and curious — which also makes room for our strangeness; our quirks and idiosyncrasies? I’m not convinced it needs to be the exclusive domain of the neurodivergent or the anxiety-having, who are more attuned to this idea owing to their need to otherwise “blend” in social environments. I think, for many people in the general population, being ourselves-with-others can sometimes feel like a series of situational disguises. Just how coherent are our identities? Is “identity” just an ever-shifting amalgam of self-adjustments to our social environment?

Anyhoo, self-promotion is a similar sort of pain. I don’t want to be that guy (insert image of shameless author plugging their wares to an annoying, kinda desperate degree and taking little interest in, you know, community). And yet it’s kinda naive to think that people will just find your work through a random series of adventures (though that can happen in real life, albeit often on an infinitesimal level).

Look, I will admit I’m luckier than 99% of writers out there: I’ve had the opportunity to visit several cities across the country promoting my books*. I was interviewed by Gil Deacon on CBC Radio*. However, not unlike crowd-surfing (IYKYK), in no time the glow fades out, your ass is on the floor and before you know it you’re abruptly just another chicken scratching at the same yard. (* thanks in large part to my publisher’s travel and publicity grants)

So, I suppose, a thesis: I promote my work because I think it’s good and I would like to encourage people to seek it out if it appeals to them. That sounds pretty straight-forward, right? This isn’t a particularly revolutionary or provocative statement.

This is where “selfishness” comes in, at least for those prone to this idea. I’m not talking about healthily putting one’s interests to the front burner, but rather the idea of self-promotion as an egotistical pursuit, an unchecked desire to put ourselves first in a gross, narcissistic, oxygen-depleting way. There are many reasons for having this play in our thoughts, particularly if you’ve been raised in environments that use guilt and shame as a means of “correcting” behaviour that strides to stand out (let alone celebrate personal accomplishment).

So, yes, doing something perfectly acceptable such as promoting the short story or essay or novel we wrote, the beast that took untold (unpaid) hours of our time to craft, can come across as craven and attention-seeking if we’re feeling less than confident, or struggling with self-worth issues…which, while acceptable within the purview of human complexity, is also kind of silly.

Writers, put your work out there. Shout about it from the rooftops. I might also suggest that, working in the same principle, you put forward the works of your peers along the way. We all deserve to have our works appreciated, and there’s no way of doing this without sticking our necks out in public — it is, I think, part of being an artist, whether or not we are comfortable with it.

Share

The End of 2024

It’s been an eventful year, insofar as there seemed to be a lot going on and yet seems to have passed by quite quickly.

I’m happy to have completed revisions to my next novel, The Stars Align for Disco Santa, and passed it on to my agent (who I hope reads it soon, but he’s a busy man). Fingers crossed that in 2025 it does the rounds of publishers and finds a suitable home. Otherwise, as writing goes, it’s been liberating. As well as the novel, I’ve been seriously working on an essay about my uncle’s guitar and the sordid personal story surrounding that. As I might’ve mentioned previously, it’s the sort of personal essay that requires much more contemplation (not to mention exploring my own blind spots) than even a novel. There’s nowhere to hide with something like this, not when you’re writing about yourself. I’ve had essays published before — one of them made 2017 Best Canadian Essays — but it wasn’t nearly as vulnerable as this piece; there’s so much woodshedding (to use a guitar term) involved, and yet I’m happy with how it’s coming, even if it hurts to reach into the places it needs to go.

I also began in earnest on a fourth novel, which is coming along well. It takes place just a little bit in the future and seems to be drawing out a lot of my more philosophical thoughts about society and the erosion of democracy. The main character is a psychotherapist who finds herself immersed in an unspooling drama while attending a professional conference. It has a title, though I’m too superstitious to reveal that before it’s been vetted by my agent.

I had hand surgery in October, which was an emotional experience for me (speaking of unspooling), combined with the pressures of my work. The good news is that I’ve given myself a couple of weeks away from the office to let things coalesce. The trick, as I’ve touched on over at my professional blog, is not to overwork myself. In short, there’s no winner if I’m dead at the finish line.

For the new year, I see myself being a little more public-facing as a writer. I’ve been toying with the idea of facilitating a seminar for authors, focused on how to read for an audience. This is a long-brewing idea that I’ve kicking around for a few years now, inspired (if that’s the right word) by the fact that so few authors seem to know what to do when they’re reading their work for an audience, which ends up doing themselves and their work a disservice. If I can swing it I’d like to aim for the spring. It’s a way for me to give back to the community (I plan to make it pay-what-you-can just to cover costs, with whatever proceeds remaining going to a local charity).

Of course, politically and socially, there appears a storm approaching, and I don’t know what to do about that except to direct my powers as an artist toward addressing it in whatever way I can that might (if I can make a wish) allow people to understand how we got here, or at least put the spotlight on those who have done a better job of describing this better than I can.

I wish you, dear reader, the best for the new year. You have more power than you think you have, and I hope you find a way to channel it in such a way as to cut through the divisiveness of our time. I think community is important, and ultimately this concept is more powerful the more local and intimate its location.

Share

Hands On

Hand update: I’ve got a pretty gnarly scar, but there’s progress. Two weeks ago they removed the stitches from my palm, and I would not wish that pain and discomfort on anyone (note: they can’t anaesthetize your hand for this).

Psychologically I’ve been up and down. I’ve had to work through a feeling of being violated, of having to re-familiarize myself with what my hand can do (via physio) while fighting the fear that I’m going to pull or tear something in the process of rehabbing it back to where it should be.

While this has all been going on the political world south of the border has erupted into a swirl of chaos and condemnation. It’s a type of deja vu, considering we went through four years of this already. In the end, one of the people running for the presidency represented change and the other chose stability; the problem of course is that stability is hard to defend (let alone promote) when the candidate in question is trying to be a celebrity-endorsed centrist while there are so many voices in the mainstream media complaining about a left-wing cabal sacrificing the sanctity of American values. Frankly, it’s only a matter of time before the same debate amps up on this side of the border (it’s basically already here), what with a thoroughly mediocre Prime Minister playing out his third term similar to a sitting duck Biden, with little regard for the public malaise around his party. Cooler heads prevail when there are reasons to stay the course and our current PM struggles to even sell his wins let alone address his weaknesses.

When I wrote my third novel, The Stars Align for Disco Santa, it was during the worst year of Trump (2020), and was certainly influenced by many of the things that have now come to fruition: authoritarian politicians abetted by corporatist tech companies running roughshod over and unveiling the frailty of democracy, exposing how much of the West is protected by evidently feeble gentlemen’s agreements and empty platitudes of decency. In other words, if Harris had won, my book–soon to be doing the rounds of publishers via my agent–would’ve still been relevant, but reflective of a dark time in society now past. Now? It seems more pertinent than ever, which is terribly sad (an understatement), but here I am.

You write the book you have to write. By the time it hits the market you have no say on how trends will have changed in the interim, how the landscape and zeitgeist will have shifted. When my first book was picked up by Wolsak & Wynn, I had to wait nearly three years before it was published; in that time the media landscape seemed inundated with time travel narratives, so that when The Society of Experience finally came out the conceit felt certainly less unique than during the years I’d spent writing and polishing the manuscript. In short, you really have no choice but to deal with it, and I can only hope that, by the time Disco Santa does the rounds, publishers will see it as rising to the occasion.

Share

A note about the note

I recently added a note to the welcome message at the top of this here blog:

A small request: I don’t have a Patreon, and I’m not interested in placing ads here, so ultimately whatever time I spend posting here I do on my own time and dime. I would be so thankful if you could visit my Goodreads page and, if you like my work, please consider rating it. You don’t have to write a review if that’s not your thing (although that’s mighty appreciated).

Allow me to show a slice of publishing’s sausage factory. I don’t like corporate behemoths for many reasons, but for the purpose of this argument it comes down to anti-competitiveness. And yet, unquestionably, Goodreads equals traffic and visibility for authors. That’s the reality. When people provide positive ratings and/or leave comments, that boosts the odds of more people discovering my work. Goodreads is a nice way to say hey thanks (or whatever your version of that is) if anything here interests you. I’m not going to stop you from trying it out, however I’m also not going to slam you over the head with this sort of request.

There are other ways to get the word out, of course. I mean, while I’m here, there’s nothing more awesome than bumping into someone who’s read one of my books, so feel free to spread the word the ol’ fashioned way: word-of-mouth. 

I also accept that, despite being a bit of an introvert, I could do more to get the word out, like advertising this blog a little more on social media. The irony is that I feel self-conscious driving people toward my blog, this place on the internet where I post things for the general public to see. Anyhoo, that’s me.

Share

Yay Surgery

I have a genetic condition, called Dupuytren’s Contracture, or perhaps more cool, Viking Disease. Below, you see two photos. The first is my left hand, unaffected. The second is my right hand, very much affected.

Left hand (normal)
Right hand (bad)

A hallmark of the disease is a thickening of the tissue in the palm of one’s hand (though it also can affect the pads of your feet, which I also have, yet it’s not serious). Normally, as it gets more pronounced (it’s chronic), the thickening of the tissue ends up pulling the fourth and fifth fingers inward, making it eventually difficult to operate equipment (or shake hands!). What makes mine a little more odd is that it’s affecting my thumb, pulling it inward. In the above photo of my right hand, that’s literally as far as I can expand my hand, whereas my left can go much further (not exactly pictured).

And so, at the end of this month I have surgery booked. I trust the surgeon, who specializes in this type of procedure, but it doesn’t take away from the fact that I’m going to be without effective use of my hand for upwards of three months. I have no clue when I’ll be able to comfortably type using my right hand, which means that — you guessed it — when it comes to writing it’s going to be difficult. I might try voice-to-type software (which comes with most laptops and phones), but I’ll be honest: I’m not looking forward to any of it.  I don’t like surgery, period, and I sure as hell don’t like invasive cut-open-your-hand-with-a-small-risk-of-nerve-damage surgery. However, my options are…bleak. The worse this gets, the higher the likelihood the skin around my thumb will contract given there’s less room for it to move, which means permanent contraction.

This all said, I’ve been lucky. The last time I had invasive surgery was the removal of all four of my wisdom teeth when I was at the tender age of eighteen. I’ve never broken any bones (but boy have I been close) and I haven’t had to have anything stitched in this time.

Anyhoo, I hope to keep posting here, but perhaps without the regularity…or perhaps more regularity if I find it keeps me sane. Wish me luck!

Share

Pankaj Mishra

Last week I had the pleasure of seeing journalist and essayist Pankaj Mishra deliver a rousing speech at the Royal Ontario Museum, as part of his being awarded the 2024 Weston International Award. Mishra most recently wrote an excoriating piece for the London Review of Books on The Shoa After Gaza. In his writing and arguments I really appreciate his combination of intellectual principle, and clarity, two things that don’t often combine as elegantly as in Mishra’s prose.

His speech was wide-ranging, and I would do it injustice to attempt summarizing it. That said, broadly, it was about the problems with Western media and it’s inability to capture situations such as what’s happening in Gaza without appearing to sanitize the language used to talk about inhumanity, or to display a complete lack of curiosity about the welfare of brown and Black bodies. How difficult it seemed for mainstream American journalists to talk plainly about the militarized crackdowns on protests in their own country.

One of my takeaways is that there are a lot of mainstream journalists and institutions who are beholden to a liberalism that attempts to peddle a singular neutral truth and is completely unable to work with complexity (such as multiple perspectives).

Personally, there are two current journalistic trends that drive me crazy:

  1. Talking about smartphones and their effect on youth, where “smartphone” for all intents and purposes is clumsily subbed in for what is largely “social media”. By using it as a catch-all I feel we’re shielding social media companies from social responsibility. There’s no compelling research that shows an adverse affect on youths with smartphones — they can distract, but they can also help people connect.
  2. Columnists who trip over themselves to make sure that the left and right are equally to blame for what ails society, despite widespread right wing terrorism on the climb, a literal fascist running for re-election, and all the while the people who own our social media accounts — some of whom, like Facebook, prevent people in my country from distributing news articles to each other — are libertarian billionaires.

Share

Book Three Reveal

So, as I mentioned last month two months ago, I had delivered Book Three to my agent. He has since added it to his fall catalogue, in time for his yearly trip to the Frankfurt Book Fair. So, in light of the fact that this is now real and legit, I thought I’d (finally) reveal what Book Three is.

The real title is The Stars Align for Disco Santa.

The synopsis I wrote for the catalogue is as follows:

“Marcus is living the dream. Quite literally, it turns out. One fateful day at his tech startup, he finds a sticky note on his desk containing a cryptic message about his ex-girlfriend that draws him into a labyrinthine quest through chaotic film sets, sailing the violent waves of Lake Ontario on a virus-infected author cruise, destined to land on Monster Island . . . only to discover he’s been working in a stupor as a bookstore employee all this time, under the effects of a powerful medical prototype that has created a life-like inner world for him to experience, a world drawn from his and others’ memories, including his ex-girlfriend, Marta, and his mysterious half-sister, Jocelyn, who happens to be the architect of the experiment.

Evoking the hit Apple TV+ series Severance and reminiscent of Murakami’s The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, The Stars Align for Disco Santa is a heartfelt satire of misplaced desire and the limits of our control, a fast-paced novel that is as much about family and grief as it is an offbeat joyride through the not-so-funhouse of the psyche, asking the question: What matters?”

The cat is out of the bag now, and I no longer have to use “Book Three” to describe this! I am released!

Share

Priorities

Being in-between projects, I’ve had some time to reflect on a number of what’s next ruminations. Such ruminations aren’t always healthy. There are a lot of people out there who don’t know how to kick back, and feel the compulsion to thrust themselves into the next thing, whether or not that’s what’s best for them.

I’m a fairly compulsive writer. When I don’t have a novel in the works (in whatever stage) I have a short story kicking around. That said, it’s also mid-August (so much for weekly blog entries — sorry, folks) which is historically, in my professional world as a psychotherapist, the time of year when people take stock. Summer is fading, vacations have been taken, the world of work is growing louder after a prolonged period of sunshine and chilling. For those with children, school is beginning. For those in corporate settings, the fourth quarter looms to the degree that there might as well be a target on December…even though it’s August. And because I’m human why shouldn’t I experience some of this?

Sure enough I’ve begun to give some thought to where my priorities should be. As a shrink, I’d like to advertise my Business Therapy side project more, as it’s steadily gaining traction and promises to keep me engaged (after twelve years I needed something to mix things up in my practice). As a writer, I’m weighing applying another grant due in September (and no, my previous attempts this year haven’t borne much fruit), but also looking for markets that offer a venue for satire (so far: not many explicitly are looking for humour, which kinda sucks). Personally, I want to find the right balance between staying active (because I’m half-cattle dog, basically) without over-committing to activities that I won’t be able to fulfill to my satisfaction. I like growth, but don’t want to find myself exhausted in its pursuit.

Balance, man. <- this is a line from the beginning of my recently-delivered novel (aka Book Three), which stands in contrast to what the protagonist, Marcus, ends up experiencing. I have to say that this book feels like the most honest thing I’ve ever written (outside of my short story from 2015, Second World). It’s ultimately about figuring out “what matters,” even if the answer is something that doesn’t get 150 likes on social media. As I wrote in my notes, it’s about being okay with what might end up only being “ok.”

On this note, I hope you’re holding up okay, and taking moments for yourself to take stock, even though that can be intimidating.

Share