Content vs. Consistency

Not too much by way of forward momentum in this journey since (roughly) this time last week, but as I’ve continually posted each week since starting this blog, I might as well continue.

But should this be the case?

There are times when I scramble for a topic or theme to write and end up with quasi-rambling musings on random things. Then again, as the entries are written directly into WordPress and posted with minimal edits, while the content may not be substantial (or make any sense to the casual reader – is anyone there?) the consistency of posting something is met. There are other times when ideas and musings flow readily, often inspired from Real World events, or the handful of television shows I watch, which (usually) segue into (vague) tidbits about my works-in-progress.

Then there are those rare times when the Muses weave their magic, and interesting (I hope) paragraphs of literary work emerges. There was a time when I had attempted (twice) to use writing prompts as a launching pad for story ideas – the momentum didn’t last (too) long, yet those samples remain posted within this blog.

Regardless of which scenario happens each week (thus far), actual!writing happens on a weekly basis, which keeps the literary engine running, to use a somewhat cliche metaphor. Then again, (to continue with the aforementioned metaphor) if the fuel that feeds the engine is not of the highest quality, is there a point to keep using it? If the gasoline is watered down to ensure the tank is always full, then the journey stalls until the engine reaches a station where there is actual fuel to produce some forward momentum.

This metaphor actually makes sense in the context of my blog writing journey thus far – and it was one I just thought up as I was writing it (and would make for an interesting side story to that fabled Meta Series).

Anyway.

Distractions and Real Life tend to get in the way of the plotting and pondering and eventual writing, even though the mental writing chugs along at a rate too complex to jot down. The infinite variables and the consequences that occur from those variables blend into something Completely Different, and keeping track of the who, what, where, when, why and how gets complicated. Sometimes as soon as the thought (masquerading as a quasi-epic epiphany) emerges, several other tangents flutter about, helping and / or hindering the original idea.

There may be some value to write an entry when I have something meaningful to share. Then again, I’m not sure if there are any followers out there who look forward to reading these weekly entries. Comments are few and far between, so I’m not certain if anyone will notice, given Real World events, and the billions (?) of other bloggers out there.

So, the consistency of writing blog entries each week may cease, but hopefully when the next entry does emerge, there will be content that will bring about some actual forward momentum.

Until next time.

Whenever that may be.

Advertisements

Rewriting History

Well that was a dramatic way to end the season.

Spoiler Alert: This entry contains mild spoilers for the Game of Thrones television series, specifically for the season seven finale. As the eighth (and final) season will air sometime in 2019, there will be time enough to (re)watch the series and analyze the narrative and character arcs to speculate how the epic series saga will conclude.

Anyway.

There were loads of game changing events within the seventh season itself, the bulk of which happened in the 80 minute season finale, many of which have the potential to alter everything that is true within the Game of Thrones universe. The viewers are privy to certain knowledge that shifts the perception of certain characters, and will no doubt have immense impact on the Great War against the Night King, who now has his own dragon that blasted away a part of the Wall, and the army of the dead. The motivation behind the Night King’s quest to invade Westeros is (still?) unknown, which makes this enemy difficult to decipher, and thus is an adversary with whom the protagonists cannot reason. Also, Littlefinger’s “trial” and subsequent death were wholly satisfying and long overdue.

The season seven finale also revealed that the perception of history and of those involved can be distorted to suit those who write and tell it. After all, it’s been said that “history is written by the winners”, and the winners would obviously want to cast themselves (and their actions) in a favorable light, if only to justify those actions (which are almost always negative if seen from an objective vantage point). There will be those who cling to the lies and half-truths to the bitter end, even if they’re told the truth, and there are those who knew (and told) the truth, but were labeled as being delusional for doing so, who will feel validated once others believe that truth. (The ranger of the Night’s Watch who survived the White Walkers’ attack, only to be executed for desertion, deserves an apology for telling the truth).

But I digress.

The notion of rewriting history to fit the perspective of the victors is not a new concept in the writing process – telling a story from a different point of view is a staple in storytelling. Another popular saying (though I don’t know who coined the phrase) is that there are always two sides to every story – though I’d argue that there are three sides: “your” side, “their” side, and the truth (which can be a either of the aforementioned sides, a hybrid of those two sides, or something completely different). Depending on whose version of the truth you believe (or choose to believe), one will be the hero, the other the villain.

Or both can be heroic or villainous, depending on the situation.

As seen in the Game of Thrones series, the characters are complex – not one of them are exclusively “good” or “evil”, though Ramsay Snow Bolton, Walder Frey and Joffrey Lannister Baratheon (to name but a few) are exceptions to this notion.  History (and those who write and tell their story) will cast its characters accordingly, even though history (and historians) should be objective, despite the attempts to whitewash or exclude certain aspects of history for the advancement of a social or political agenda.

As the MASC(D) Chronicles (my novel series saga that has been oft-mentioned yet hardly ever elaborated upon) will 96.8% be set in an alternate universe based off changing one historical point in time, the perspective from which to tell the story, and the perspective from which to impart that version of history will be a challenge. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive – the narrator’s perspective and opinions need not match those that are accepted by society (and probably should not, as the friction between the two opposing forces adds tension to the overall narrative).

Researching real history and plotting and pondering the causality from the aforementioned divergence has occupied my time, though internal writing never stops (writing and rewriting scenes and scenarios is exhausting within the head space, and would consume scores of notebooks, notepads and a flash drive or two). The main characters are developing, with their allegiances and opinions shifting from one side to the other.

Perhaps I’m overthinking it all, taking a simple (ghost) story and morphing it into a complex (alternate historical) puzzle, but aren’t all the best stories complex and full of twists and turns?

The challenge begins, and the (long) wait for Season eight of Game of Thrones continues (and I think the wait for the next series of Doctor Who with Thirteen is a long one too)

Might as well spend the time plotting, pondering, researching and writing.