Blogcritic of the Month, December 2006: Richard Marcus
Published December 05, 2006
When I do research on something or somebody now, it's second nature to fall back on the old pattern of finding something to read about it, preferably as first-hand an account as possible that I can find on the web, which in the case of a writer or musician usually means their own website, and for news I'll usually use The Globe And Mail. For historical events I'll try to find at least two sources, an overview and one that substantiates the first; preferably ones that are as neutral as possible. Wikpedia is my usual starting point because they provide the best general overview of a subject. If I want any more specific detail on a subject I can usually find a link from there that will help, or I'll do a search relating to that specific topic.
I really enjoy the research aspect of writing a story, and if I'm not careful will sometimes get lost for a couple of hours just wandering around the web following a trail. In some ways it's like putting together the pieces of a novel, you find out the plot and the major characters involved in the action. The only things that stop me from going deeper and deeper into the story – researching all the individuals involved, etc. — are common sense and time constraints.
I spent years accumulating all sorts of bits and pieces of knowledge about subjects ranging from sports to the times of the crusades and honestly never really found much of a purpose for it. Now in the past few years that I've begun writing on an almost full-time basis, all those little bits and pieces are being put to use. It's like everything I have done up until now has been in preparation for what I'm doing, at least that's what I like to tell myself when I wonder what ever possessed me to become a writer.
If you had to restrict yourself to one type of writing (not that we'd want you to, mind you), which area would you be most content to work in, and why?
What a mean and nasty question. But actually it's not as hard as you think because I could make a case for writing about almost any subject under the Culture heading. That's cheating, I know, but I'd hate to have to choose to write in only one category because I would get bored so quickly.
I'm also tempted to say books and writing, but there would come a point where that would start to drive me crazy, because there's only so many books you can review without your brain snapping, and believe it or not, I do get bored talking about my own writing after a while.
So I would choose the Culture category because it is the most open-ended of the headings. In fact I'd say aside from reviews I would think that the Culture category is the one I write the most for anyway. It seems that the topics, even political ones, that interest me the most have to do with how we work as a society and the rules that we impose on each other in attempts to control the way we interact, and that's definitely culture-related.
- Blogcritic of the Month, December 2006: Richard Marcus
- Published: December 05, 2006
- Type: Interview
- Section: Culture
- Filed Under: Books: The Writing Life, Culture: Administrative, Culture: Arts, Culture: Media, Sci/Tech: Blogging
- Part of a feature: Blogcritic of the Month
- Writer: Lisa McKay
- Lisa McKay's BC Writer page
- Lisa McKay's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Uh oh. Back to back Canucks. We really need to plan this better.
Yea, Richard! Great write-up, great interview.
Congratulations. I really enjoyed reading about you, your writing, and your process Keep up the good work.
Holleee
do I really sound like that pompus beady canuck...
Thank you very much Lisa and all you other editor types for the honour. Considering all the folk who write on this site and have quite amazing things to say all the time it's enough to make a fella's head swell.
That is until his next article is put on hold for being sensless gibberish. Oh well that gives me about a day or two to revel in this.
Thank you once again,
cheers
Richard Marcus
Richard,
Congratulations! Well deserved!
The interview was wonderful reading and the collection of articles is inspiring. I especially appreciated your comment, Richard, that what you found most difficult is this:"getting the words on the page to be as exciting as they sound in my head." Really resonated with my experience, and your persistence has paid off, as evidenced in the quality of your work. Congrats!
Why, some of my best friends are Canadians...
Look, all decent patriotic Americans naturally hate beady-eyed Canucks with their heads so full of lies. Brother Marcus, however, does not indulge in the head full of lies part. He will tend to make somewhat different value judgments than me in some political areas (ie he tends to be more "liberal"), but he's highly respectful of facts and strives to seek truth rather than simply win arguments.
So then, as Canadians go, Richard Marcus ain't half bad. He's one of the good ones.
"Look, all decent patriotic Americans naturally hate beady-eyed Canucks."
Never got over having your blurters kicked from here to kingdom and back in the War of 1812, eh?
Time to bloody well forget that, Al, old boy, and move on.
STM, keep monkeying with US Americans, and we'll execute Terence and Philip again.
Canadians are already skating on thin ice as it is. If you read the fine print, the Patriot Act actually outlaws Canada. That whole country is just one Celine Dion album away from being the new Iraq.
Mate, I have often heard Canada described as "America's hat".
However, I have a copy of Mercator's correctional map of the world, which since north and south are nothing more than human inventions and no-one really knows what is top and what is bottom, has Australia and New Zealand at the top of the world.
The US of course is then below the equator, with Canada below that. Using this map, it is no longer America's hat, but America's undies.
I'm sure they prefer being the hat.
Lisa and Richard:
What an incredible piece. Lisa, you somehow encompassed the essence of Richard in your brief intro, including the formidable depth and scope of his work. And Richard, I felt like you were inside my head (or vice versa) as I was reading the interview--and if I read you right, that's one of the essential elements of what every writer strives for. You've got it in spades. Congrats!
How nice of Canada to allow Indigenous peoples use of their own land. How of them.
Seems racist to me when oil companies can go on Indigenous (Crown? Who wers the crown?) Land. Receive hugh tax breaks and I am sure lax environmental controls. Why can these companies sell or do whatever they want?
Ah, it's good to see that land owned by the Government in Canada is still called Crown Land (just like in Australia).
Much of it wasn't used by indenigenous people in the sense that we understand land ownership anyway. Therein lies the problem. A conundrum now being left to others to sort out, just like in the US, with varying degrees of success. Although mostly not.
I really like how he loves talking about himself!
Richard, congratulations Good Sir, and that interview was glorious also. It does the site no end of good to have folks like yourself on here. And what a lovely man, also.
Yeah, like the Inuit were going to extract the oil with their kakivak's. No offense. Congrats, Mr. Marcus. Montreal Canadiens - good man.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/56679)
Congratulations Richard! Thank you for sharing with us via the interview. Nice write-up as usual, Lisa.