A collection of exercises (Starting From Scratch by Rita Mae Brown)

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

Original posting: Mon, 23 Aug 1993 18:00:05 JST

Starting From Scratch
Rita Mae Brown
Bantam, 1988

Exercises for Your Pleasure! (some free adaptation)

p. 101

...find people in the following age groups: 20-30, 30-40, 40-50, 50-60, 60-70, 70+. They must represent a mixture of sex, race, and class background. The assignment is to go out and interview them, asking the following questions:

1. What person or persons had the greatest influence on your life? Why?
2. How did you find the person you married, if you are married? What was it that drew you together? What kept you together or, if divorced, tore you apart?
3. When do you remember paying for things? Do you remember what a loaf of bread, a pound of butter, and a quart of milk cost when you were a child? What do you think of prices today?
4. Have you ever believed in an elected official? Why or why not? Are you politically active today?
5. What events outside your personal life stand out in your mind?
6. Where have you lived in your life? What place did you like the best?
7. If you had children, how did they change your life?
8. Can you recall expressions that you used as a young person that you don't use today, such as "bee's knees," "far out," "swell"?
9. If you could tell other people something and hope they would remember it, what would you tell them?

After review of this material, write a short story, in dialogue, between two of the people you have interviewed.

p.110

Write a short story about two gay waiters at the Last Supper.

p. 141

1. How many words and phrases can you find for death and how many for love?
(or)
How many words or phrases can you find for drunkenness and for sobriety, for women and for men? How about for drugged states of being?

2. Start by giving yourself imaginary parents (e.g. Shakespeare and Catherine the Great). Now take figures known to everyone - such as Jane Fonda - and give them imaginary parents. Next do this for your characters in a short story or novel you have recently written. What would you, your popular figures, or your characters talk about with their parents? What advice do the parents give when you go on a date? How about when you leave home for the first time?

2.5. Reverse #2. Give yourself imaginary children. Give public figures imaginary children. Put them in a situation where the child, the oldest, has misbehaved. Can you invent dialogue between parent and child? Lastly, do this for your own characters.

3. Take the Fool from Shakespeare's King Lear and Ariel from The Tempest. They meet after the end of their plays. Where? Why are they there? What do they say to each other. You may substitute two other characters from literature.

4. Wit comes from intellect, humor comes from emotion, and fun comes from imagination. Write three paragraphs illustrating each of these.

(my gloss - don't like those? pick some other aspect, slice out various shadings, and go to it...)

5. Part 1) write down, from memory, the current problems in the news. Part 2) find a newspaper from one hundred years ago, read it, then list the current problems then. Part 3) compare and consider.

6. Take axioms, sayings, or even corporate names and twist them. E.g. Old soldiers never die, just young ones; Be an Equal Opportunity Offender; Generous Electric. Twist words, if you like... consider anti-semantic.

7. Take phrases and make them visually funny while retaining recognition of the word or phrase's original meaning, plus the twist that gives it a new meaning. Then write a piece around it.

Rachel graduated summa cunt laude.
Theresa was whore de combat.
Lisa was piece de resistance.

(mine - Rot In Pieces - Jason's epitaph)

8. First, divide people into three general classes (upper, middle, lower). Subdivide as desired. RESEARCH class-distinguishing features through library work, personal observation, and interviews...

Identify at least:

a. How is English used?
b. How is money viewed?
c. What is the sense of the future?
d. How is living space utilized? Is it noisy or quiet?
e. If there is leisure time, how is it used?
f. Can you discern attitudes towards sex?
g. Can you discern attitudes towards religion?
h. Is there any way you can estimate alcohol or drug consumption? (what about attitudes toward either one?)
i. Are these people accessible, geographically and emotionally? (By who? How much?)
j. What is the level of formal education?
k. What aesthetic values can you discern?
l. Do these people have a class consciousness? If they do, how is it expressed?
m. After completing the exercise, do you feel you have learned anything? Were your assumptions called into question?

(my gloss - lots of these should include checking for attitudes towards what is discovered - i.e., how the people feel about it (if they even notice it) may be different than you expect...)

9. Make up book titles with brief blurbs on the content of the book. These can be funny or serious.

10. In fifteen minutes, write a sketch or short story in which there appears a restaurant place mat that has written on it one of the five following things:

a. A map of the area in which the restaurant is located
b. How to mix drinks
c. Palmistry
d. The Zodiac
e. Our Proud Heritage

11. In fifteen minutes, write a letter to a public or historical figure, living or dead.

11.5 Write a paragraph in first-person narrative. Then write the same paragraph in third-person.

12. Invent names and character descriptions to fit the names.

13. Pretend it's your last day on earth. Tell all the people you know what you really think of them. Next, take your characters. It's their last day on earth. What do they say to each other?

A Verbal Tactic

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

original posting: Fri, 10 Sep 1993 18:00:05 JST

[I promise, down near the end, I'll get to a writing exercise. Bear with the background, ok?]

Recently I tore into the tactic of "If you don't do X, then you must be Y" (with X something the speaker desires and Y as some generally unacceptable characteristic or property). In that case, I overstated and attributed it to men (X being letting the man have his way with her, and Y being frigidity).

On thinking about it a little more, I realized this is a particular example of a more general verbal tactic used by both sexes in many situations. Let me abstract a bit.

There seem to be four variations:

If you don't do X, then you are Y (X desired, Y ugly)
If you do Z, then you are Y (Z undesired, Y ugly)
If you do X, then you are Q (X desired, Q wonderful)
If you don't do Z, then you are Q (Z undesired, Q wonderful)

The expected or desired response is for the other person to make a statement about their self-concept - "I'm not Y" or "I am Q", with implicit agreement to the if part. I.e., the attribute (desirable or undesirable) is emotional bait, covering the hook of the implication and the first part (the if - I've forgotten the formal logic name).

E.g., The woman says "If you don't marry me, then you must be a homosexual." The man's (perhaps) shocked response of "I'm not a homosexual!" leaves her free to imply, "Then you'll marry me!"

I think the negative attribute forms (the Y forms above) tend to be used more simply because they are stronger - they challenge the self-concept (if the Y is well-chosen), making it more likely that the victim will fall into the trap.

Just for fun - here are some alternative responses I could think of, and a little of the reasoning... assume the statement is "If you don't do X, then you are Y (X desired, Y ugly). [Variations are left as exercises for the studenten:-]

(the first two responses seem to me the strongest)

1. Psychological - "When did you start to worry about you being Y?" This is very subtle. In many cases, the choice of Y as something you won't want to be is a reflection of personal anxieties. By returning this fear to the owner, you are upsetting the whole thrust of the first statement in a way which is likely to strongly challenge their self-concept. The most likely responses are "We're not talking about me" or "I'm not worried!" Either way, your next step can be turning the talk back to the original speaker, with a focus on their fears - and forget about what they wanted you to do. Notice that this response in no way agrees (or disagrees) with the original implication - it changes the ground of the discussion completely.

2. Agree with Y - "Well, I guess I'm Y then." This requires a fairly strong self-concept (since you are verbally agreeing to disreputable, nasty, filthy habits or attributes). Fairly powerful response. It does have the unfortunate weakness of agreeing with the original implication. A variation might be "Well, I guess I must be Y IN YOUR EYES then" - which insinuates that the original implication may be wrong, and that the attribute is a personal judgement instead of a general truth.

3. Reversal - "And if I do X, then you are P" This presents the original speaker with a dilemma - should they counter the attack on their self-concept or try to get back to the original charge? The weakness in this response is that it implies agreement with the original statement. Also, if at all possible, P should be chosen to complement Y - either an exagerrated contradiction (frigid - sex-crazed), a simple inverse (frigid - impotent), or totally unrelated (frigid - brainless).

4. Trivialization - "So every time I don't do X, I get more Y?" Absurd examples - "So if a rock doesn't do X, it's Y"; "does that mean your pillow isn't Y?"; are also good, but be careful. This response has the weakness of implying agreement with the original statement, unless the examples are quite obviously incorrect (e.g. the rock one is weak!).

5. Counter to assumed accuracy - "I don't think being Y depends on doing or not doing X" This is a direct counterattack, which will probably break down into a fight over being right or wrong. Of course, the whole question of doing or not doing X may get lost in the fight.

So - one verbal tactic is making this argument "If A, then B" where B is bait for the other to strongly disagree (or agree) with. The implied agreement (or disagreement) with A is what the original speaker is really after, though.

Exercise(s) in Dialogue

1. Think of some other examples of this tactic.
2. Take two characters (mother and child, husband and wife, whatever). Give one of them a statement of this form. Run through several versions of what happens after that.
3. Try taking two characters and starting them with a statement of this form, with the responses. Now try the other three variations of the statement. Do you need to change the responses? How and why?
4. (bonus) Think of some other verbal tactics. Analyze why they work, and what possible responses (outside of the ordinary) are. Share your results with the class.. er, with the list.

I suppose this is "micro-writing" technique. Sorry if it is too small for consideration.