Showing posts with label secrets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label secrets. Show all posts

Friday, September 17, 2010

Telly, Telly, Telly


You know the Pens always have the coolest visitors, right?

Well, if you had any doubt about today's guest, Sean Ferrell, just read what Publisher's Weekly has to say about NUMB, which came out last month from Harper Perennial:


"In Ferrell's offbeat debut, an amnesiac joins a Texas circus where his inability to feel pain makes him a big-top hit and earns him the name Numb. After a haunting experience wrestling a lion, Numb and his best friend, Mal, give up the circus for life in New York, where they live in a crappy hotel and make a living as a lowrent one-man freak show. When Numb lands a talent agent and begins to move up through the layers of celebrity, he leaves Mal behind for a cast of characters including a blind artist girlfriend and bad news model Emilia. But in Numb's world, nothing hurts much at all, so Mal comes back and predictably turns things upside down..."

Is that a must-read or what? Sean is the author of prize-winning short fiction and lives in New York City. Read more here.


I have a friend who still gets mad at her sister when she recalls how, when she found out something my friend had done, something their mother wouldn't be pleased with, would stand across the room, point a finger, and whisper, “Telly, telly, telly.” My friend said it was all she needed to hear and she would lose her mind and run to her mother to reveal the deed herself.

Secrets have power. It takes effort to keep one inside. That effort charges the secret, making containment even more difficult, requiring more power, adding more power, and so on. An infinite feedback loop, one that promises to burst with revelation.

There is one way to cap the power of a secret permanently, to contain that energy with no hope of escape, to tap that energy and focus it in one tiny point, a singularity of interest. How to do this: Hint at the secret, write it down, and then—here's the hard part—walk away.

This is called “fiction.”

As a writer you may have an idea or a belief, a way of looking at the world. This is your truth. Your truth is your secret. If you were to blurt it out, walk around with it on a sandwich board, you might be listened to. Or you might be ignored. Or mocked. Or shunned. But if you hint at the secret, hint at your truth, write it down, and walk away...

Fiction that gives away the secret easily is, at best, a folktale; at worst, propaganda. Fiction that hints at the secret and then walks away is the fiction to which we return. Again, and again. Stories that point to a truth, but don't pin it down, are those stories that bend and shift as they get older. They aren't trite, they don't age. Stories that hint at the secrets they hold but don't plaster the walls with the answers are the ones that matter beyond their own era.

Was Hamlet mad, or faking it?

What does the white whale represent?

What is happiness? Truth? Wisdom? Reality? Innocence? Guilt?

A secret screamed from the rooftops is noise pollution. A secret hinted at is a lure. People go to great lengths to find out answers. They'll eavesdrop on conversations. They'll sneak through one another's correspondence. They'll read novels, stories, plays, poems, again and again and again. They know the story, but they want the secrets. The most successful stories are those that answer questions, but not all of them. The ones that give you most of what you looked for, that pull so many of the threads together that you can see the entire tapestry. But later, upon reflection, you realize that there is something the story is doing beyond the conclusion of plot, something beyond the character's needs and wants, something deeper.

The story is standing across the room, pointing a finger, whispering, “Telly, telly, telly.”

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Gigi Has a Secret

Well, this isn't exactly a secret, seeing as I'd share it with anyone who brings up anything remotely related to the subject. But I needed to find a way to talk about this amazing pair of boots I found last week (at left), so here's my not-so-secret secret pertaining to these boots:

I'm obsessed with Emma Peel from the '60s TV show The Avengers.

Only a few years after Della Street could only be Perry Mason's long-suffering secretary, Emma Peel was the equal -- and arguably superior -- spy partner of John Steed. (Though I was sad to learn the actress Diana Rigg was paid far less than Patric Macnee, but that's another story.)

Emma Peel was the epitome of the strong woman who was both beautiful and brilliant, not to mention able to physically incapacitate even the strongest bad guy. All while having an amazing sense of style.

Yes, watching old Avengers episodes makes me feel that all things in life are possible.

When I found this kick-ass pair of mustard-yellow buckled boots last week, I immediately thought of Emma Peel. I buy shoes rarely, but I knew I had to have these.

Luckily, they passed the important comfort test. I don't believe in wearing uncomfortable shoes -- who knows when one will have to chase a bad guy, right? Oh, this is real life? In that case, who knows when one will have to walk 5 blocks up a hill in San Francisco. There's really no need for impractical shoes.

But these boots have it all: rubber soled comfort along with the mod style of Emma Peel. When I slipped them on, I did feel I could accomplish anything.

Which turns out to be a good thing, because I'm in the midst of a major overhaul of the mystery I'm writing. Sometimes it's so overwhelming I think it would be much easier to just give up. But would Emma Peel give up? Of course not. She'd slip on these boots and know that all things are possible.


--Gigi

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Martha's Sekrit Secret

When I was a kid, I reveled in books and like any egoist worth her salt, I would often declare upon finishing, "That was good but I figured out the secret [twist/identity/bad guy] way before the main character did."

Now, as a writer, I realize - duh. That was probably the author's intent.

The release of a secret, the discovery of a truth, is a cathartic experience that we crave.

I used to hoard information in my stories, saving them for a Shyamalan twist at the very end that would leave the readers gasping.

I now believe it's more effective to let the reader in on the secret by the first third of the novel, a secret that the main character doesn't know, a secret the main character should know, has to know.

Why save a twist for the end when you can leave the reader yearning for catharsis with every turn of the page?

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

If I had a secret....


I try to be a fairly open person. I don't always succeed. I mean what I say, which is not to say that I am mean when I say it. I respect honesty. It's really difficult for me to lie. Really, really difficult. I may obfuscate, misdirect and evade answering directly but I don't lie.

Which brings me to secrets...which are frequently covered by lies.

So, if I had a secret, I couldn't tell you what it was because then it wouldn't be a secret anymore.

And I hate lying so you know it would be true.

Lisa

Monday, September 13, 2010

Name Quest, Part III

The Secret Saint

L.G.C. Smith

As part of an extended series of posts that originated with the topic of Names, I’ve been chronicling my discoveries about where my last name came from. Two weeks ago, I left off with the question of whom the not-so-randomly distributed Coddington and Cuddington parishes of the English Midlands might have been named for.


The twelfth-century mention of a St. Cotta in association with the Anglo-Saxon minster at Breedon-on-the-Hill in Leicestershire spurred me to try to find more traces of this elusive fellow. I boned up on British history in the early medieval period. I stuck my toe into the scholarship on the early English church. I became interested in Anglo-Saxon hagiography. Eventually, I discovered the Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England database (http://www.pase.ac.uk).


Using all these tools, I found a shadowy mid-seventh-century Northumbrian nobleman and abbot who looks like a candidate for the source of the place name Coddington. Here’s a summary of the evidence from textual sources.


Vita Sancti Wilfrithi or Life of St. Wilfrid, attributed to Eddius Stephanus, or Stephen of Ripon, early eighth century, 709-720 AD.


Wilfrid was a major force in organizing the early Anglo-Saxon Church in the mid-late seventh century. He was a hard-line devotee of Roman, as opposed to Celtic, practice, and he was a man of extraordinary energy and administrative ability. He also sounds like kind of a pill – not a meek and beneficent sort of saint. He comes across through the ages as arrogant, argumentative and relentless; the sort of man you might respect but not necessarily like. He’s also one of the most readily documented figures in Britain in the seventh century.


Wilfrid got his start in the Church when he was fourteen-years-old. He went to the Northumbrian Queen Eanflæd, wife of King Oswiu, to ask to be allowed to give himself to the service of God. Eanflæd granted him permission to do so, assigning him to “One of the king’s most loving and faithful companions, a nobleman called Cudda, had also resolved, on account of his paralysis, to give up worldly ambition and dedicate himself to monastic life at Lindisfarne. The queen commended the newly arrived Wilfrid to join him in the service of God and act as his servant.” (from Webb, J. F.; Farmer, D. H., eds. (1998), The Age of Bede: Bede — Life of Cuthbert; Eddius Stephanus — Life of Wilfrid; Bede — Lives of the Abbots of Wearmouth and Jarrow; The Anonymous History of Abbot Ceolfrith; with the Voyage of St Brendan (Revised ed.), London: Penguin Books.)


Wilfrid is an important link in the scarce and scattered mentions of Cudda. Because we know the dates of Wilfrid’s life, we can broadly estimate when Cudda lived to see how that correlates to what we know about the seventh century foundations of the Coddington parishes. Wilfrid lived from 633-709 AD, so in 647 when he was fourteen, Cudda was clearly an adult. We don’t know how old he was, but it seems reasonable, based on Stephanus’s text, to assume he might have been considerably older than Wilfrid. It’s well within the realm of probability that he would have been old enough to take a lead in organizing the Coddington minsters in the late 620s when the Cheshire sites first appear in church records.


Bede’s Life of Cuthbert (from The Age of Bede, cited above)

Cudda is also mentioned in hagiographical material on St. Cuthbert, but in quite a different manner. In contrast to the rather modern sounding factual report from Stephanus, Bede ties Cudda directly to the miracle of Cuthbert’s incorruptible body. In Chapter 17, Bede reports this tale, which he had directly from “Herefrith, a sincerely devout priest and present abbot of Lindisfarne.” Cuthbert reputedly gave these instructions to the monks of his community when he knew he was dying: “When God takes my soul, bury me here close to the oratory, on the south side and to the east of that holy cross I myself put up. To the north of the oratory you will find a stone coffin hidden under the turf, a present from the holy Abbot Cudda. Put my body in it, wrapped in the cloth you will find there.”


If this is the same Cudda who was Wifrid’s master, and I think it is, it’s unlikely he gave Cuthbert this stone coffin. He was probably dead long before Cuthbert came to Lindisfarne. However, I don’t think the thrust of this text is primarily historical. Its purpose appears to me to be to link a lesser saint, Cudda, with Cuthbert, who was a much bigger deal. Whether it was Bede or his informants who sought to bolster Cudda’s cult is impossible to say. Someone was tending to keeping Cudda’s memory alive. Perhaps the center of his cult was the shrine of St. Cotta at Breedon-on-the-Hill, which lies in the center of Mercian territory around which the Coddington parishes are located.


It’s significant that Cudda is identified here as an abbot and not a priest or bishop. Abbots didn’t have to be ordained, nor did they necessarily give up their lands and secular responsibilities. Later in the seventh century, both royal and noble families founded monasteries run by members of their families, including women. Monastic rule was not uniform in the first half of the seventh century. As the Anglo-Saxon Church came into being, there were a lot of irregular practices, including married clergy. Being an abbot was as much about administration as it was about teaching.


No mention is made of where Cudda’s minster or minsters might have been. Of the known early Northumbrian minsters (with the exception of Lindisfarne), most were founded in the last half of the century, and he isn’t on the lists of abbots. Bede and other Northumbrian chroniclers would not necessarily have been interested in or able to find out as much about Mercian minsters, partly because Northumbria and Mercia were rival kingdoms through most of the seventh century. Also, the Mercian kings didn’t convert until quite late. The Coddingtons look like good candidates for Cudda’s network of minsters, even if Bede might not have been familiar with them in the early eighth century.


Another very old text, the Durham Liber Vitae, which is believed to have first laid upon the altar at Lindisfarne and moved with the monks when the late eighth century Viking attacks forced them to flee with St. Cuthbert’s incorrupt body, eventually settling their community at Durham, contains a list of abbots. Cudda is the second name on this list. He wasn’t an abbot at Lindisfarne, but if he retired there, as the story from Stephanus goes, and he was an abbot, it would make sense to find his name there.


The last text where Cudda is mentioned in in Willibrord’s Calendar of Echternach. Willibrord was a Northumbrian missionary to Frisia. He was a student of Wilfrid’s and he included several Northumbrian saints in his calendar. Cudda appears here as Cydda (I’ll spare you the linguistics this time, but it’s almost certainly the same name) and his Feast Day is given as July 28th or 29th. No one seems to know who he is, but I would lay odds this is Wilfrid’s teacher, the venerable Abbot Cudda, a Northumbrian nobleman who revived an older British monastic network that had been laid low by Æthelfrith of Bernicia – who was probably a cousin. Cudda nurtured some of the earliest English minsters in an era scholars know little about.


It’s impossible to say if the story I’ve constructed is historically accurate or not, but I’ve been astounded to find it hold up, strengthen even, as I continue to learn more about this period of history. Starting from a name, I discovered a fascinating tale that connects farther back than I could ever have dreamed. Cudda was all but lost, but his name persisted for fourteen hundred years, concealing secrets for me to slowly untangle. It’s been a satisfying quest, and it’s not done yet. At some point, I’ll have to write this up in academic lingo with all the proper arguments, references and citations. It would be nice someday to see St. Cudda’s name back on the lists of Anglo-Saxon saints.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

Street Side Confessionals





--Adrienne Miller


I’m going to go way out on a limb here and assume that you’ve never killed a guy in a knife fight in the alleyway behind a Gas-N-Sip. I know, it’s a big show of faith. Especially for some of you. I don’t need to name names. You know who you are. 
And if you did, I don’t want to hear about it. People have called me all kinds of names, but I’m still pretty proud that “accessory after the fact” hasn’t been one of them. 

unless you’re Ron Burgundy and the Channel 4 news crew, I don’t want to know about it
Chances are your secrets are more banal. You lust after someone who’s off limits. You daydream of forgetting all your adult responsibilities and indulging in all manner of reckless and drunken revelry. Maybe you get a little thrill every time you forget to empty everything out of your basket at the store. 
What ever your particular kink is, how tiny or big, chances are that there are legions of others that share it. But it sure doesn’t feel that way at the time, does it? While your dirty little secret is burning up inside you, you’ve convinced yourself that you’re a freak, and, if anyone--anyone normal, that is-- were ever to ferret out your secret shame, an outcast.
While I’m not Catholic, most of my father’s family is, and I grew up intrigued by all the ritual and symbolism of the faith. What really fascinated me was the confessional. Every week my grandmother stepped in to that little box and let out all of her secrets. Then she would come out, kneel down for a while, fingers and lips moving in tandem around her well-worn rosary beads. And that was that. All transgressions forgiven. She was done, and off we went into the van for a day a fun. 

Now, I’m sure there are layers of complexity that my mind didn’t fully wrap around. Shades of shame and judgement that as a non-participant I glossed over. But, hell, I still love the basic concept.
I don’t want to offend, but imagine a secular confessional, a place that you could pop in and anonymously unburden yourself. I don’t mean like therapy, nothing too deep. Surface guilt only. Just the little candle flames of private shame, that if left alone will build over time into a raging wild fire. I'm imagining instant, soul-relieving gratification. Something along the lines of,
“I didn’t want the guy at the drive thru to think I was a fat pig, so I made it sound like one of the two hamburgers I was buying was for someone else.”
“I pretended that someone was beeping through on call-waiting so I could get off the phone with my mother again.”
Or if you’re me,
God knows I want to be cool, but I just can’t stop loving Bryan Adams. Seriously, have you tried not singing along to Straight from the Heart? It’s nearly impossible!”
don’t judge me

Tuesday, September 7, 2010

Rachael Confesses All the Time

I'm a compulsive confessor.

Which isn't to say I don't want to keep secrets. I do. I plan to keep secrets all the time. It would be a lot easier not to tell Lala that I hit a post while driving her car. I just plan on not telling. And sure enough, as soon as she walks in the door, I go red in the face and say, "I dented your car -- I wasn't going to tell you but now I am," as fast as I can string the words together.

It's as if as soon as I have the thought, "don't tell," I get this wild compulsion to TELL RIGHT NOW. I tell too much, more than anyone wants to hear. If I'm late, I don't say gracefully, "Sorry, traffic." I say, "Oh, my God, I'm sorry, I completely forgot today was the day, and I didn't remember until I got the Google reminder, and by then I'd walked the dogs and had to take a shower, and then I broke a glass and had to sweep it up, and then I couldn't find your address, but BOY, am I sorry."

Even online, there have been times I've confessed to things perhaps I shouldn't have. I just did a Google search on Yarnagogo (my other blog) + Confession, and I got a whole list of 'em. And thanks to the miracle of the internet, I've now remembered: a truly awkward kiss; the time I tried to take a photo of myself in the elevator at HarperCollins and dropped it instead, breaking into pieces that I picked up JUST before the door glided open to reveal my editor's lovely assistant; the fact that I love America's Next Top Model (don't judge); the revelation of my crush on Chris Baty of NaNoWriMo fame; my unabated lust for Anthony Bourdain.

I'm not sure if any of this needs to be made public. But I do it anyway, because a compulsive confessor loves nothing more than an even higher box from which to yell her confessions. It also explains why I've been having so much fun writing this collection of essays that will be coming out from Chronicle next year. All I'm doing is confessing. Everyone understands and empathizes with shame -- I would argue that emotionally, love and hate are the only two emotions as important as shame in making people act the way they do. So it's interesting to be taking my life apart, peering into its nooks, blowing dust off things that made me blush long before I learned how to truly confess.

Side note: Admission of culpability is difficult for some, yes (not for me), but overall it's easier than admitting one was wrong. They're two separate things. I can admit I've screwed up and made a mistake. I won't keep it a secret. I'll be the first to point out my fault -- I want to confess it before you find it out. But I'm not as good at admitting I was wrong. That's what I'm working on now, and I can tell you, it's slow going. And hey, that's admitting a secret I'm not comfortable with right there.

It feels good. And it just goes to show.

Monday, September 6, 2010

Secret Poison

by Sophie

SECRETS

It would be hard for me to convey just how much I hate secrets. The greatest hurts of my life have been due to things unsaid, terrible truths that lay thick on the ground all around while those who tried to ignore them were crippled by their own shame. Secrets are especially damaging to children, whose struggle to understand the world in the face of partial truths and lies is made near-impossible, and whose attempts to shift their understanding to fit the flawed picture can result in invisible emotional deformities that can cripple them for their entire lives.

Naturally, this sort of sad landscape is rich with story potential, and I suppose it's no surprise that I'm most comfortable there when I'm writing. And I think the inexhaustible thirst of the reading public for revelatory stories, addiction memoirs and abuse stories and even dark thrillers with unspeakable crimes at the heart - I think this reflects a collective longing to understand and best the homely horrors of everyday life as practiced in our society. And I'd go a step further and say that the reader of this type of fiction is not just looking for the catharsis of seeing a victim rise above her torment - but also recognizing a core darkness that is present in the villain or antagonist of the story, the abuser or the addict or the killer.

It's a sad but basic truth that victims and perpetrators, especially when the former is a child, have muddy relationships. The villain steals innocence, sometimes intentionally, sometimes despite himself. The child is stamped forever with the shape of his particular darkness. Extrication never returns the victim to the same state she was in before, and that is why pat endings to thrillers are never very satisfying - we know, deep in our hearts, that the child rescued from the killer's clutches, who is seen reunited with his mother in the last frame of the book with the handsome sheriff looking on - we know that child is a changeling, that this is only the first page of a new book that cannot end well, one colored with a whole catalog of shame and terror and self-recrimination and doubt.

(As just one of thousands of examples, I'm currently reading DRINKING: A LOVE STORY by Carolyn Knapp, a chronicle of her years of alcoholism. One of the most compelling things I took away from the book is Knapp's painstaking insistence that there was nothing dramatically wrong with her childhood, just a general lack of closeness and a vague sense of secrecy, of things witheld. At times we learn of small hidden dramas later discovered by the now-alcoholic adult Carolyn, but one senses that it was the more diffuse and general sense of things unsaid that created the emptiness Carolyn filled with drink. That is, of course, just my reading.)

So: secrets -> inner life minefield -> great potential for fiction.


My own kids have probably suffered an overabundance of truth as a result of my determination to avoid the deception snares. We laugh about it now, but I am sure that there were many times when an evasion or even a gentle fabrication might have sufficed. I've outed people and habits and history that could probably have been left to rest with no great consequence. If I could start parenting over again I'm sure I'd make different choices. But I was well-intentioned, and I think I got the basic point across - truth is best.

That said, I confess now to being an incurable secret-keeper. I'd say we all are, but speaking just for myself, I fail every day in my professed hope to be more open. I'm secretive for convenience' sake, to save feelings, to get what I want. I even, though I try *really* hard not to, keep secrets from myself, the most damaging ones of all. But I'm getting pretty good at recognizing it. By the time I'm dead I intend to be an open book.

Of course there are lovely secrets, the sort that are accompanied by blushing and quickened pulses and mysteriously-signed notes...and I'll leave those for my sunnier Pens to plumb.