Between my work in education and publishing, I've had the opportunity to meet a number of people of a very interesting artistic bent.  Such as Scott, a student I work with periodically in the writing center, who, turns out, is a prominent (or as prominent as one can be in his area) origami artist. 

Origamist?  Origamipod?  Origamizoid?  (I am a big believer that any word becomes cooler with the addition of the suffixes -pod or especially -zoid.)

After sharing my thoughts on the nature of debate and argument and the epistemological tug of war between the human head and heart, he told me about his uncommon medium of expression.  Apparently, he is quite good.  Good enough to make money at it and have shows both locally and across the country, including at least one in New York.  After looking at his website, I would go so far as to say he is exceptional. 

Scott is an interesting guy who describes himself as a big fish in an extremely small pond.  I, on the other hand, am far smaller and in a much bigger body of water.  A lake, maybe, or perhaps even a sea.  Probably not an ocean.  And I am approximately the size of the fish served other fish destined to be appetizers for big fish. 

Maybe I should try origami? 

But I am by nature a one-trick-at-a-time pony.  By this I mean I like to work on one thing at a time creatively, from beginning to end, without stopping or interruption if I can help it.  My preference is to start a book and write it to completion without dividing my time between projects. 

I do all my research and planning and thinking and rethinking and note taking and outlining.  Then I sit down and write the first three chapters, as a rule.  I then write a synopsis, my first comprehensive treatment of the story.  Using that synopsis, I write the rest of the novel, beginning to end, outlining each scene or chapter about a day before I write it.  Once the rough draft is done, I usually give it a little time to cool before starting revision.  I then do my three or five or eight revisions until I feel I can't see any changes that clearly make the book better.  Then I write the proposal package, research agents and publishers, and submit.  Only then do I move on to another project.   

Recently, I haven't had the luxury of focusing on one project at a time.  Instead, I've been bouncing around every which way.  I made it about 70% of the way through my latest novel (a middle grade fantasy based on Babylonian dragon mythology) when I received the opportunity to contribute to the Writing for Charity anthology, available next month.  More details here.  So I put that off as long as I could to keep working on Babylon then put the book aside and wrote and revised the short story over the course of three days.  I'd been thinking about it in odd moments well before that, of course, and I'm fairly pleased with the result.  Not sure if they'll use it for the anthology, but I think so.  If they do, look for the legal deposition of the troll from The Three Billy Goat Gruffs.  That's mine.  While I'm on the subject, I'd like to plug this event again: $45 ($25 half day), excellent workshops by fantastic authors such as Shannon Hale, Tracy Hickman, and Dan Wells, among others, writing critiques from these same authors, as well as a meal and silent auction on everything from manuscript critiques to dinner with authors.  You should be there.  More information at the site listed above.

Back to the jumble of my last few work weeks.  Stopping the newest novel for the short story wouldn't have been that bad--if I hadn't received a request for a manuscript revision from one of my dream agents at the same time.  That, of course, took priority, so using her comments and some very kind and rapid feedback from some great writers and better friends, I revised the entire manuscript and resubmitted.  Still waiting on the result. 

So that catches us up to the present.  Right now, I'm finishing off a polish on my literary Korean ghost story, the manuscript revision requested in partial by the agent, and about to transition to a final revision on my latest completed work with a focus on a few specific localized issues.  Then I'll write the proposal package and start submitting.  And then, finally, back to my Babylonian story.

This is not my preferred method of work.  But having been through it, I think it maybe should be, at least in certain ways.  I'm getting a lot done very quickly, and I like that rate of production.  Plus, an unexpected benefit has come from revising texts after they've cooled for weeks or even months, which I've never done before.  I'm finding added perspective has come from that amount of time away from the texts, which isn't surprising in theory but is still startling to experience for the first time. 

So here's what I'm thinking for the future.  I still want to work on one thing at a time, as that is clearly how I do my best work.  But I think I'll abandon my dedication to one work in process straight through the entire process without diverting my attention.  When I finish a rough draft, I may set it aside while I pre-write and draft my next novel.  I'll then go back and revise and send out, then revise and send out the second, then repeat the process.  Or I may do an initial revision to address obvious problems I'm aware of after drafting before giving the text time to cool and moving on to my other project.  Not sure yet.  But I'll work it out.

So ten books in and my process is still evolving.  Apparently, necessity is the mother of invention.  Who knew? 

And as you certainly did not notice, my font size on the blog is now legible.

I've never made it secret that LTUE is my favorite conference of the year, and this year lived up to the expectation--with the exception that I didn't get to attend nearly as much as I would have liked.  In fact, I was probably only at UVU for two hours of time beyond my panels all weekend.  So that's a big frowny face on an otherwise typically exceptional LTUE.  For all those who attended and I either missed completely or managed to toss a hurried word or two before rudely rushing off, please know that I missed talking with friends, old and new, a lot.  I promise to try to be more available at future conferences and hope I get more changes to talk.

Now to my panels.  I was on two, which isn't as many as I'd like--but they were good ones.  The first was Evil in Fiction with a great line up of three good friends--James Dashner, Jennifer Nielsen, and Jeff Savage (J. Scott Savage)--and criminal psychologist Al Carlisle.  Al was outstanding, and James, Jen, and Jeff contributed their typical greatness (and I mean that).  I moderated and they all made it very easy.  The panel was fun for us and, I believe, fun and helpful for the audience, which was most complimentary afterward.  It just worked. 

I like to end each session report with a little nugget on how to write the subject covered.  So, evil in fiction: Evil isn't only useful in epic fantasy, where you can get away with evil personified in the form of orcs or malevolent gods, or horror of many types.  Evil can be the jealousy your teen protagonist feels for a best friend, or the callous strategy employed by your Fortune 500 CEO regardless of the effect on his workers, or your heroine getting her perfect man to open up his heart and then stabbing him as hard as she can out of fear he will hurt her first.  We tend to call evil that which is really just a familiar emotion or desire intensified beyond our ability to understand it.  But get passed the particulars of the most evil actions, boil them down to simple basic emotions, and they will to some degree resonate with shadowy corners inside us.  Jung said that we all have our shadow self.  So to use evil in our stories all we have to do is put ourselves in a character's situation and find that dark, uncomfortable, negative emotion, be it hatred, or fear, or selfishness, and do what civilization tells us not to: make that feeling the priority.  What would happen if that overrode our conscience?  Our reason?  What if that hierarchy wasn't simply real, what if it were right?  And what if every action that stemmed from that motivation was then utterly logical, completely appropriate?  The teen is right to be jealous because she recognizes good in her friend that others refuse to see in her; the CEO knows his company is the life of every employee, and so the concerns of any one or few employees is not worth considering; the heroine is certain to be hurt by her man, all men, and so her action is only protective.  It's easy to write about evil that is alien, something outside and beyond our understanding.  Often it is far more powerful to create evil that resonates with something inside us, that tempts us as it tempts our characters, and this type of evil can be used in any story.

So, onto my second panel: The Principals of Suspense with James Dashner (again), Jeff Savage (again), Berin Stephens, and Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury.  I've been on panels previously with all these people, with the possible exception of Kathleen, who I've always respected a great deal.  This panel went just as smoothly as the first and was somewhat easier for me, as Jeff handled the moderator duties.  That meant all I had to do was talk, which I can do.  We fielded more questions from the audience this go round, and I think people appreciated that.  It felt to me like another successful panel, hopefully both helpful and fun.  I know it was fun to be on it.

How to write suspense?  Don't leave out too much!  Everyone seems to get the fact that suspense hinges upon something unknown that gets the reader anticipating, either fearing something won't happen or that something will.  That's true.  But perhaps the most common weakness I see in the stories of aspiring writers, especially in their beginnings, is leaving out too much.  When you omit too much of what is going on and why it doesn't generate interest and suspense; it creates confusion, antipathy, and resentment.  You can't generate suspense by giving people nothing to care about.  They have to understand enough of your story and about your characters to project possible answers to the one or two expertly withheld pieces.  You want anticipation, not confusion.  To anticipate, the reader has to have enough of the puzzle to make educated guesses about the whole image.  Keep too many pieces off the table, no anticipation.  So here's a good rule of thumb: generate suspense by having one or two SPECIFIC questions you want in your reader's mind at a time.  If the reader is thinking about the questions you want when you want and not other things, you almost certainly have them feeling suspense.  If they are wondering about things beyond those deliberate one or two questions, you've created confusion.     

Great LTUE, as always.  It was nice to see those of you I saw, and I hope to have more time to mingle at conferences in the future.

I nearly died Saturday night.  That is an exaggeration, but I'm not sure to what degree.  But good news before bad: the annual Writing for Charity event in Provo, Utah is now open for online registration.  This is a truly fun event for a great cause, not to mention a rare opportunity for aspiring writers to learn from published pros.  If you're interested, see the conference's marketing blurb below:

"Online registration is now open for the fourth annual *WRITING FOR CHARITY* conference!  Have your writing critiqued by professional authors ON SITE! Fabulous workshops! Very affordable! Lunch provided! A silent auction with amazing things to bid on.... all donated by the authors. Items include advance copies of novels, lunch with authors, manuscript critiques, and much more! Come schmooze with writers for a great cause--putting books in the hands of underprivileged children. March 17, 2012 (that's St. Patrick's Day) at the Historic Provo Library. Check out the website for more information: www.writingforcharity.blogspot.com."

I'll be at Writing for Charity for the first time this year, and I'm so excited it might be unhealthy.  I believe I'll be teaching a workshop and doing critiques, if you're interested.  It should be a lot of fun with a lot of really good writers.  If you can make it, you wont' be disappointed. 

That I get to participate in the Writing for Charity event is one of the roughly ten billion reasons I'm glad Amy and I didn't die Saturday night.  What happened?

Did you know that using tap water in a wet humidifier can, over time and without you even realizing it, build up mineral deposits it can then use to spew out poison?  Well, it can.  I woke up at 2:00 a.m. in the morning coughing.  Didn't think much of it at first, but then Amy joined in the hacking.  Neither of us stopped.  As the fog of sleep faded I grew aware of a strange tightness in my chest, like a slick had blanketed my lungs, making breathing harsh and difficult.  Neither of us knew what was going on, but I gathered my senses enough to assume it had something to do with our bedroom.  So we left.

Camping out in the living room, we tried to figure out what was happening and catch our breath.  Then I noticed I was cold.  Really cold. 

I don't get cold very easily.  Never have.  I was one of those idiot teen boys who waited for the bus in the middle of Utah winter while wearing shorts.  I almost never get sick, in spite of my indifference to dressing appropriate for the season.  So it was an odd sensation, that moment I realized, "You know, it's freezing."  Turns out I was freezing.  Amy is much more susceptible to cold than I am, but she told me she didn't feel cold, not a bit.  I was shivering so violently I could barely talk.

I bundled up in two blankets and, when that didn't work, Amy brought me two heated pads and another blanket.  She turned up the heat and then lay on the couch by my side, watching over me as I tried to keep from cracking down the middle from the cold and my quaking.  I think I must have slipped in and out of awareness, because all I remember is bursts of heat and cold and sudden aches from lying on one side or another until I shook myself so sore I had to move.

In a few hours the chills left.  The room was furnace hot, and I told Amy she could kill the heat, much to her relief.  Both of us were still struggling with tightness and tingling in our chests, and she had a roaring headache, but the worst was over. 

There was some hangoveryesterday, but I think we're both back to normal now, thankfully.

Turns out that the humidifier we use in our room (the dry Utah climate has hammered Amy since her return from North Carolina) had caused it all.  Tap water plus filter not cleaned as it should be can equal a makeshift chemical weapon dispenser.  The mineral deposits proliferated in the air can cause all our symptoms plus more.  Thankfully, I woke up fairly early into the night and we were able to get out of the room's tainted atmosphere.

First task after work today: clean every inch of the humidifier with bleach.  And we'll only fill it with filtered water from now on.

So there you have it.  Keep your humidifiers clean and running on only filtered water so you don't die.  Consider it a public service announcement.  And come to Writing for Charity! 

Pretty much nothing, I hope. 

At this moment, I am doing research online into the form, style, format, etc. of legal depositions from a variety of situations and legal cases.  I will apply my new-found knowledge in a short story I will soon be writing for a really outstanding charity event done yearly in Provo, Utah.  The Writing for Charity event was started a few years ago by a local guild of professional authors to which I belong, the Utah Children's Writers and Illustrators.  The event should be pretty impressive this year, with a conference including critiques from successful novelists, workshops and breakouts, a huge book signing, and even an auction.  I don't know if Shannon Hale is offering a lock of her hair to the highest bidder, but if you have to have that, the only place you have a prayer is this event.

As part of the event, a number of authors are contributing to a special themed anthology.  I won't say more than that, beyond this little niblet: the character being deposed in my story will not be human. 

Now,  as I return to work, I submit this blog post as evidence that I have reptented myself from my past as an abusive blog depriver.  

And to my new version of my old site.  I'm sorry for the long, long, long, long, long, long time between active posts, and for the intermittent construction page appearance shifting to the really ghetto tatters of my former blog.  If it needs to be said, I've had some technical complications.

The solution to which is this, a whole new site built via a new platform that will (cross all flexible digits) eliminate all the issues I had with my old site.  For those of you who find your way here again, thanks so much for coming back.  For anyone new, congratulations on fantastic timing.  You avoided the online version of the Abomination of Desolation that was my old site. 

Everything previously available is still here, plus a few cool additions.  You can still sign up for my email list, see my immediate schedule, and monitor recent blog posts on my home page.  Particulars about Green Dragon Codex are available in the Clint's Work section, along with a free sample chapter and a brand new option for ordering signed copies of GDC directly from this site.  (The purchase option through Google Wallet isn't q  My future work should be available this way as well.

The For Schools tab includes information on school visit assemblies and programs, as well as study and curriculum guides for Green Dragon Codex free for download and directions on educational discounts on the book.  The Mentoring and Editing section outlines my services as an editor, teacher, and lecturer as well as my rates.  Under About Clint you'll find my somewhat flippant biography, my calendar of events, and my curriculum vitae outlining my qualifications as a lecturer and teacher.  The Essays section is just that, essays on writing free to the public.  (If anyone has a question about writing that is interesting enough, I might write a new essay and post it on the site for them.)  And we finish up with my Contact Page and this Blog. 

So there were are, at least for the present.  I'm always considering new additions and fresh material, and I promise to try my best to blog more often.  There's certainly a lot to mention since I was last here.  Or there.  On the last site that was here before this site.  Which is the same site.  Sort of.

Anyway, Welcome and/or Welcome Back!