Similarly, D'Vari embraces other suggestions, such as Jung's collective unconscious and Isaac Bonewits' theory of the "Switchboard," in which there is a network of "interlocking metapatterns" of everyone who has ever lived or who is living now, "expressed as constantly changing and infinitely subtle modifications of current telepathic transmissions and receptions." Talk about a Matrix, dude.
Some of the exercises she suggests—such as interacting with a character via dialogue, "meeting" your character, the "what if" scenario, and creating scrapbooks or diaries for characters—seem far more reasonable than others (such as meditation, hypnosis, or entering the "creativity-producing alpha state"). But then again, D'Vari herself thinks that one cannot discount the connection between creativity and dreaming:
At UCLA, I took part in a study myself, which attempted to prove the correlation between telepathy and dreams. The study involved a fellow student measuring my REM (rapid eye movement) with technical equipment and a long cord from another room so she could monitor when I entered the dream state. At that point, she was to open a sealed envelope containing four images. Her job was to focus on the images, even sketch them, so that she could transmit them to me in my dream. When my REM suggested I was leaving the dream state, she would buzz me. I was to wake up and write my dream.When I saw distinct correlations between my dream and the images, I was not surprised. Like many of the writers I interviewed who used dreams as a way to get inspiration for their novels and screenplays, I’ve had prophetic dreams since I was a child. To me, this confirms my own theory that beyond a creativity vehicle, dreams are a conduit, or tunnel, between two or more worlds. In the dream state we can glimpse other realms and explore other realities, as well as confront our characters in a safe, neutral meeting ground.
I think one can have a more mundane view of dreams than D'Vari, and still incorporate much of her work in terms of character development. To be honest, I am much more likely to agree with game designer Raph Koster who, in his book A Theory of Fun for Game Design, noted that studies of the brain reveal that dreams are largely a manifestation of an ongoing effort of the mind to master certain patterns—hence recurring dreams, or dreams in which a person is performing the same activity again and again. Regardless, D'Vari's tips on creating a character's backstory and internal and external worlds as a way to ground the character more fully in a sense of reality are quite practical.
Article comments
1 - DrPat
"Tools is tools." This sounds like a useful toolbox for a fiction writer, whether or not one agrees with the philosophy that informed every tool's development.
2 - Rodney Welch
I find this a very inspring post, although not for the reason you might think. The very idea that there's a creature out there named Marisa D'vari, hawking something called a More Personality System, makes me want to run like hell in the opposite direction. It sounds like a very, very rich subject for parody -- like something you'd see in one of Bruce Wagner's Hollywood novels, except that it's a little too ludicrous to be believed. Alas, given the usual shit churned out by Hollywood, why should it? We live in an age of manufactured, pre-processed art, and have for quite some time.
3 - Bill Wallo
Dr. Pat: I tend to agree with you. And what's more, a good craftsman never blames his tools. ;)
Rodney: I thought about making the observation in the post that in terms of characters, one could do worse than to study D'Vari herself. As for your final observation, after reading Heath and Potter's Nation of Rebels, I am far less inclined to worry about "manufactured, pre-processed art" and more likely to look for that which I enjoy. Such charges are frequently a disguised form of social elitism (no accusations regarding present company, of course), and I have decided to try and refrain from belitting "mass society" given the fact that in doing so I may well be guilty of attempting to establish a measure of social distinction for myself by signaling my separation from the "herd of sheep" when in point of fact, we're all sheep headed in one direction or another.
4 - Rodney Welch
That sounds hopeless and despairing and cynical. Merely refusing to follow in lockstep behind the Marisa D'varis of the world does not make you an elitist. It reminds you that you are an individual. Today's motto: write, think read and watch in such a way as to offend, upset, frighten and confuse the tiny world of Marisa D'vari and its resident termites.
5 - Bill Wallo
Actually, I don't regard it as hopeless, despairing, OR cynical. Instead, it largely frees one of any obligation to follow the cultural elites who like to define artistic expression in a particular way.
Having grown up in an artistic environment and knowing many, many people who play the "art game" as a way to obtain social status and define themselves in distinction to the "uncultured" sheep of the world, I am free to recognize the merits of whatever I wish - be it Spider-man instead of Sideways or Battlestar Galactica instead of House or The West Wing.
It is certainly possible to poke a bit of fun at D'Vari (hey, I thought I did a time or two in the post itself). And the idea of a trademarked "personality system" is certainly problematic if you regard it as a definitive formula for writing (something which I do have a serious problem with). By and large, however, she does not advocate a specific "formula" for writing as much as she believes writers ought to understand personality "typing" in working on their characters. I think that's a reasonable approach, whatever the rest of her contentions.
6 - DrPat
Perhaps Rodney is mistaking the process of creating fictional characters with the practice of typing real people, Bill.
I think it's fair to use the tools develop to categorize people (however much you diasgree with personality typing, as I said) to make your fictional creations more believable, more like someone you would meet outside the pages of a book.
7 - Pat Cummings
This book review has been selected for Advance.net. You’ll be able to find this and other Blog Critics reviews at such places as Cleveland.com’s Book Reviews column.
8 - Elvira Black
Bill: I agree with you wholeheartedly about the "art game" and cultural elitism. I have the feeling that Rodney has not read the book itself (admittedly, neither have I) but his snap judgment seems a tad too knee-jerkingly resentful, even downright nasty, to seem objectively valid. Conversely, this review made me inclined to believe that this book would prove to be a fascinating and useful read indeed.
9 - Rodney Welch
My point, DrPat and Elvira "I'll Believe Anything" Black, is that shit like this is for unimaginative people who write dull, paint-by-numbers movies. If that describes you, by all means use it.
10 - Jan Christensen
The whole premise of this book is that people are consistent to type. How boring that would be! My main complaint lately with much fiction writing is that the characters never do surprise me, and that there is no spark in the writing. Although I believe in certain "rules" for writing, such as not a lot of switching of POV and using good grammar, for example, I find books and articles such as this which suggest a formulaic approach might dampen down the beginning (or even the more experienced) writer's ability to put imagination in the piece. So, although this might be an interesting excercise to do with characters, I'd be very careful doing so as not to lose spontaneity and spark.
11 - Neil Schell
If you haven't read the book, how can you possibly pass judgement on it?
Creative minds use whatever sparks them. I agree with your viewpoint of formulae writing but if you haven't read the book you really have no right to criticize. Read it first. Then tell us what you think.