Fantastic School Staff

My short story, Extra Credit, is available for purchase on Amazon. Fantastic School Staff features many great authors and is edited by Christopher G. Nuttall and L. Jagi Lamplighter.

Here’s the pitch:

Only enchanted treasure could drag a pair of master thieves back to school. Hired on as teachers, Pricilla and Chase must once again navigate the halls of Washington Academy, dodging teachers and students alike in order to steal Vivienne’s Locket. It’ll take all their skills, plus some extra credit, to pull off this heist.

If you pick up a copy, please leave a review!

I’ve learned a lot while working on this project. I wrote Extra Credit back in March of 2023, I was sick as a dog while finishing it and I didn’t have a whole lot of hope for it’s publication. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised! I hope you enjoy it!

I can’t thank the team at Fantastic Schools enough, working with them has been a real treat.

Adventures in Storytelling 5

Entry 4, Carpe editorem, occide, part 3.  

Now that I’ve confirmed what we already know, that writing is work worth doing; every correction, setback, and mistake makes you a better writer. We can talk about the tricky subject of taste.

I don’t like this is a delicate situation every writer will inevitably come up against. The way it’s handled can make or break a writer’s morale. Whether it comes from a friend, a random reader, or the worst critic of all—the self. Not liking something you’ve written can be disastrous.

I began editing P1 while embarking on a new career path. Unfortunately, I would abandon this career about a year and a half later, but during this period of my life I went through long stretches when I didn’t really do any editing or any serious work on P1. I worked on short stories at this time, although I also worked on Project Paisley’s second work, P2.

A stretch of alienation, as previously mentioned in entry 3, can put a lot of distance between the work and the writer. When I finally went back to P1 I found there was more to love than I had thought.

What I also learned is that there were plenty of things I didn’t like too.

This caused an…interesting crisis.

On one hand, P1 was almost exactly what I want in a fantasy epic. Political intrigue, sword fights, romance, an interesting magic system, etcetera. The problem was that all the cool stuff was tied up with a subpar b-plot that drifted into multiple directions and needed cutting or immediate tie-in.

I wish I could explain what this crisis looked like, but the only word that comes close is despair. I was extremely sad that I failed to bring this crucial plot material into the fold. It stuck out like a loose thread. Pulling it out unraveled parts of the story I wasn’t ready to give up. Leaving it there was a testament to my poor abilities.

After another month of wallowing, I eventually worked up the courage to take a look at my draft. It was still not great. But, this time around I noticed something. Attentive to the dislike I had for certain sections, I read them as a reader would and found myself thinking; “I would have done this” or “it makes more sense this way.”

I remember that it was a Saturday, sometime in Spring, during the COVID lockdowns when I could go outside during my at-home work day and get some sun. I resolved to fix what I didn’t like.

Armed with a blue pen and sheet of white computer paper, I made myself think about my work and how to make it better. I wrote notes, I crossed things out, I made sarcastic remarks to myself. I worked.

It was about this time when I began to see the value of planning. While my “pantsing” managed to hammer out an initial draft, I realized that it was that out-of-control creative process that tangled up the good ideas with the bad ideas. Somewhere between pantsing and planning, there is a happy middle.

When I write, I find that there is a gestational period between the initial idea and the beginning of the execution of that idea. It’s been as short as one evening and as long as several years. During this gestational period, I took up a practice I call wish-listing.

Over the next several days after that initial sit down, I added more ideas to my list. It’s only now that I understand what I was doing there. I was wish-listing.  

As far as those needed edits go, I eventually settled on a plan and began to put it into action. I’ve completed the first section requiring some massive rewrites. The rest will involve re-arrangements, cuts, and most likely, rewrites.

No one wants to rewrite thousands of words, but ultimately to solve the problem I created, I had to rewrite it. In order to work on these rewrites, I set aside other works in order to focus my energy on P1.

It’s been increasingly difficult to “get in the mood” so to speak. Working a full-time job can really put a damper on the creative flow. The same happens when I spend long stretches away from my work. I have to spend a little time getting back into the characters. To get back in the groove I use a tactic similar to pre-editing (entry 3) that I call previewing.

During preview I jump back to sections before the area I want to work on. Sometimes, I read things out loud. I try to capture the rhythm and voice of the character I intend to write. Jumping ahead can also help the process. Sometimes I takes an entire Saturday to recapture the voice I want. Other times, it’s easy. Since I can only find time to write on the weekends, this gives me a very short window in which to work.

This was a source of extreme anxiety for me. I began to feel like I was giving up without the dignity of throwing in the towel. My life was consumed by my 8-5. When most people use the weekend to unwind from their work week, I felt like I was starting my work—the real work, the work I love. This made me miss out on relaxation, on the unwinding required for a healthy work-life balance.

Worse, when I did relax, I felt guilty. I felt like I was procrastinating, shirking my responsibilities.

Suddenly, spending an hour reading a novel felt like I was wasting time not working on mine. Hanging out with friends had to be cut short because I had to go home and get something out on a page. I didn’t go hiking or take a walk or do any of the things I loved doing before my full-time.

I taxed my mental health and my physical health. Sleeping issues that I had dealt with in the past suddenly reared up, worrying me more. Something was going to break, and that something was me.

To make a long story short, the break didn’t involve my writing. There are personal factors that went into the long and dark winter that was 2021. Writing was my haven, the place I could control. The only thing in the world that made sense to me. I muddled through 2021, fought my way through the spring of 2022.

It was at the height of this breakdown that I finally gave in. I had toyed with Catholicism for years by then. In April, just a few days after Easter, I caved too the only force that could soften my stubborn heart. Christ struck tinder in the ash heap of my soul and for the first time in a long time I stopped worrying.

Am I going to tell you that I no longer complete an elaborate night-time ritual in order to fend off the Sunday Scaries? No, because that would be a lie. Am I going to tell you that I’m not anxious about my writing, or work, my personal life, politics—no, because that would be a lie. But I don’t let them control me anymore. Not even my writing gets to rule my life. I have a different King now and he wants me to write because he likes stories and wants me to like them too.

During 2022, while I worked through my personal problems, I let myself enjoy writing again. I set the P1 rewrites aside and worked on a couple short stories. When I went back to P1 I fell in love with the story and found a deeper appreciation for the work that I put into P1.

I finished the largest chunk of those rewrites back in August of 2022. There’s still more work to do. But I’m taking a break from P1. This isn’t the last entry regarding P1 and Project Paisley. But it is for now.   

Ultimately, what I hope you pick up here, dear reader, is that writing is hard. It’s hard work. Don’t let anyone tell you that it’s not. The effort and preparation that goes into writing is enormous. Editing is just as effortful and time consuming as writing itself—sometimes even more so. The emotional exertion can be just as detrimental to your heart, mind, and body as the physical toll of working that shitty retail job you hate.

But just like that job you hate; you have to do the work. The key to staying even-keeled is remembering the job you love is supposed to be done because you love it. You were asked to pick up this cross because the Man we nailed to it knows you can carry it.

Writing demands work, but it should bring joy.     

Above: The Marriage at Cana. Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld (March 1794 – May 1872). German. Oil on Canvas. House at Hamburger Kunsthalle.

Writers Must Read…the Prince

Niccolò Machiavelli’s the Prince

Someone once told me that Machiavelli’s little treatise, the Prince, was “baby’s first political theory.” It was a lame attempt to convince me not to read it, in leu of what, I never found out. Ultimately, I’m glad I disregarded such ignorant advice.

The Prince is probably one of the most useful, practical handbooks for vicious politicians who want to get things done. That quality alone makes it worthy of a writer’s attention. 

Niccolò Machiavelli is the man of our times, and if that sounds scary to you, its because you don’t know much about Machiavelli. That’s not your fault. Cultural references to Niccolò paint him as the mastermind of tyranny. He is the eminent philosopher on cruelty; a wicked, unscrupulous, conniving historical villain whose writings helped spawn the likes of Robespierre, Stalin, and Hitler.

The English nickname for the devil, “Old Nick” is thought to derive from Niccolò. Even now, the word, Machiavellian is used to describe those who excel in the use of calculating, unprincipled tactics whether in the Boardroom, on the House Floor, or in the office. A Machiavellian man is a crafty social climber, sophisticated only so far as it helps him achieve his ambitions, maybe he’s even sociopathic?

Niccolò Machiavelli has been painted with the same broad brush that we’ve come to expect when we hear the adjective bearing his name.

But the truth is far more complicated and far more interesting. The Prince is just one small piece of the fascinating life of Niccolò Machiavelli’s life.

Niccolò, as Aristotle said of all men, was a political animal. Politics was his bread and butter, literally, it was how he paid his bills, which were always growing larger as his income grew smaller. The Prince was written as a last-ditch effort to reenter the universe of politics that he loved so much.

This effort failed so catastrophically that this stalwart defender of republican liberty became synonymous with tyranny and realpolitik.   

Born in Florence in 1469 during one of the most tumultuous eras in Western history, Machiavelli, like most of his fellow Florentines, almost seemed destined to collide with greatness. He was born during a short period (1494 to 1512) when the Medici Family were deposed and the republic re-established.   

Our history books tend to refer to the Renaissance as one enormous event making it seem as if it occurred simultaneously across all of Europe. The truth is, it began in Florence generations before it ever reached France and England, or even her nearby neighbors of Venice and Milan.

The world seemed to revolve around Florence in the 15th Century; for example, the Florin was the most trustworthy currency in Europe at the time and saw wide acceptance and commercial use.  

But most importantly, Florence was a bastion of liberty. Florence was a republic and had been a republic since the 12th century. She wasn’t perfect, because no nation is perfect, and a citizen of modernity would have much to complain about regarding her Signoria, councils, and guilds.

Not all denizens of Florence were citizens, but the chosen few who were citizens, were granted unparalleled rights and responsibilities. In Modernity we tend to believe that liberty is do what you want. In Florence, a citizen was meant to do as they ought.

I won’t bog you down with anymore 15th Century Florentine politics, but by the time Machiavelli was born, twilight was upon the Republic of Florence and its political machine was an elaborate dance of payoffs, patronage, and surrogacy.

The Medici were expelled from Florence when, Piero, the son of Lorenzo de’ Medici the Magnificent, squandered all his father’s hard work by making a bad deal with the French. The Medici were forced to flee Florence. Florence resumed its tradition of republican government.

Machiavelli held many posts during this short period of the reassembled republic. He was a diplomat, a messenger, and even started a proper citizen-lead militia for the defense of Florence which, under his command, recaptured the rebellious city of Pisa.     

But, in 1512, the Medici returned at the head of a Papal-Spanish Army and Florence crumpled. The republic was dissolved by the victors and Machiavelli was deprived of office and exiled.

A year later, Machiavelli was accused of plotting against the Medici rulers. He was seized by the government and tortured. Despite the government’s best efforts to force his arms out of their sockets in a torture method known as corda, Machiavelli never broke. If he knew who was part of the conspiracy, or even if he himself was a conspirator, he refused to say and was released a few weeks later.

He returned to his exile, and it’s hard not to assume he was a different man after that. The man who once wrote bawdy plays, Discourses on Livy (the republican version of The Prince), and corny, lewd poetry, retired to the countryside and wrote The Prince.       

“Men who are anxious to win the favor of a Prince nearly always follow the custom of presenting themselves with the possessions they value most, or with things they know especially please him; so we often see princes given horses, weapons, cloth of gold, precious stones, and similar ornaments worthy of their high position.”

[The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli, letter from Machiavelli to Lorenzo de’ Medici]

The Prince was written to help revitalize Machiavelli’s career and help him reenter the political realm.

To an urbane Florentine like Machiavelli, exile was the worse than death. It’s very difficult to categorize exile to a modern mind. Part of what makes it so terrible is the danger that the “out there” represented to people before the invention of modern firearms, inexpensive maps, and waterproof matches.

While Machiavelli spent his exile in the genteel countryside, it was far from the wild, debauched nights he’d spent with the friends of his youth and even further from the palace intrigue of Florentine politics.   

He dedicated the Prince to Giuliano di Lorenzo de’ Medici, the third son of Lorenzo de’ Medici the Magnificent, in hopes of gaining entry to the old, but newly reestablished, halls of power.

The book would go unpublished and, presumably, unread, until after Machiavelli’s death.

During the Middle Ages and Renaissance, humanist writers were obsessed with writing books and philosophizing on “what makes a good prince.” The question became a genre of itself, known as “Mirrors for Princes” and usually focused on how a prince ought to be educated, what virtues make for a good leader, etcetera.  

Machiavelli simply took that idea to its natural conclusion, asking instead, “how does one become a prince” and “how does a prince keep his power?”

While his contemporaries wrote treatises on the best Christian virtues and behaviors to instill in a young king-in-waiting, Machiavelli’s work can be summed up easily as: be a lion, unless you must be a fox.

“So, as a prince is forced to know how to act like a beast, he must learn from the fox and the lion; because the lion is defenseless against traps and a fox is defenseless against wolves. Therefore, one must be a fox in order to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten off the wolves. Those who simply act like lions are stupid.”

[The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli, Chapter XVIII: How princes should keep their word]

“Those who simply act like lions are stupid.” A lot of writers would do well to heed this line.

One of my least favorite tropes is the over-the-top tyrannical king who rules his people with a bloody iron fist.

Part of my problem with trope of the Tyrannical King is that it is often misused. The writer makes their Tyrant King viciously murder friend and foe alike, they surround him with sycophants and bootlicks, and never consider (beyond the needs of their protagonists and plot) how these actions might affect the ruling ability of a king.

Machiavelli has an entire chapter about those who win their power by crime. He uses an example from antiquity, Agathocles, a man who through treachery and crime, rose to become the ruler of Syracuse. Of this tyrannical king, Machiavelli said this:

“It cannot be called virtue to kill one’s fellow-citizens, betray one’s friends, be without faith, without pity, and without religion; by these methods one may indeed gain power, but not glory. For if the virtues of Agathocles in braving and overcoming perils, and his greatness of soul in supporting and surmounting obstacles be considered, one sees no reason for holding him inferior to any of the most renowned captains. Nevertheless his barbarous cruelty and inhumanity, together with his countless atrocities, do not permit of his being named among the most famous men. We cannot attribute to fortune or virtue that which he achieved without either.”

[The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli, Chapter VIII: Those who come to power by crime]

The limp, ill-used Tyrant King is a villain, he does villainous things. He tortures little girls for fun and kicks puppies when he’s bored, his life is debauched with wine, women, and blood. He is evil, he is a tyrant and that is the extent of his character. His wickedness stems from the writer’s need to contrast the goodness of their hero with the malfeasance of their villain.  

But one moment of thought and a writer may realize that a king who lets his troops slaughter villages, rape townspeople, and burn farms will soon find his army starving. Starving solider soon turn on that king. This idiot lion, this misused trope, has the potential to be interesting, but much like the tyrant’s strategy, the story is not sustainable and it’s not interesting.

Instead, writers should heed what Machiavelli says next:

“Some may wonder how it came about that Agathocles, and others like him, could, after infinite treachery and cruelty, live secure for many years in their country and defend themselves from external enemies without being conspired against by their subjects…

I believe this arises from the cruelties being exploited well or badly. Well committed may be called those (if it is permissible to use the word well of evil) which are perpetrated once for the need of securing one’s self, and which afterwards are not persisted in, but are exchanged for measures as useful to the subjects as possible. Cruelties ill committed are those which, although at first few, increase rather than diminish with time.”

[The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli, Chapter VIII: Those who come to power by crime]

Well-committed cruelty—what a concept! Imagine a villain who wins loyalty and love like a hero. Now there’s a story I’d love to read.

“It is to be noted, that in taking a state the conqueror must arrange to commit all his cruelties at once, so as not to have to recur to them every day, and as to be able, by not making fresh changes, to reassure people and win them over by benefiting them.”  

[The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli, Chapter VIII: Those who come to power by crime]

The chapter concludes, warning would-be tyrants that those who fail to act decisively and craftily (like a lion or fox), should be prepared to always keep a knife in their hands at the ready, because someone will always be trying to shove one into their back.

“…a prince must live with his subjects in such a way that no accident of good or evil fortune can deflect him from his course…”

[The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli, Chapter VIII: Those who come to power by crime]

Eyes on the prize. Don’t let innate cruelty get in the way of the goal. If you want to write a believable, canny, terrifying Tyrant King, I suggest you take Machiavelli’s advice.

Most of the Prince is like this, salacious advice for how to be cruel without being too cruel. But that’s the easy was to read it. There are some historians and philosophers, like Erica Benner in her book Be Like the Fox, who believes that Machiavelli’s intentions with the Prince were far more noble and far more underhanded than we think.

What if Machiavelli was writing a book to tell the liberty-minded what to expect and how to treat tyrants? What if Machiavelli’s Prince is actually a handbook for heroes?

I’ll admit that the evidence is found more in the life and other writing of Machiavelli, but within the Prince there are some interesting passages regarding republican government and how an elected Prince can hold onto the power given him by the people.

“A man who becomes prince by favor of the people find himself standing alone, and he has near him either no one or very few not prepared to take orders…

The people are more honest in their intentions than the nobles are, because the latter want to oppress the people, whereas they only want not to be oppressed…

…it is necessary for a prince to have the friendship of the people; otherwise he has no remedy in times of adversity.”     

[The Prince, Niccolò Machiavelli, Chapter IX: The constitutional principality]

Later on, Machiavelli goes on to encourage princes to start citizen-militias! Common wisdom states that a tyrant who arms his civilians will soon find those arms used against him.

Why would a man believed to be as evil as Machiavelli, a supporter of cruel tyrants, advise those tyrants that you can’t have good laws without good arms and that with good arms, good laws follow?

Whether you’re writing heroes or villains, Machiavelli’s little book on Princedom is excellent primer on practical politics. Your tyrants will become savvy, cruel, and clever. Your heroes will be wise, cunning, and vicious. You’ll write lions who easily transform into foxes.

Niccolò Machiavelli’s the Prince is an absolute must read for writers. It’s short, it’s punchy, and its one of my favorite books by one of my favorite historical figures.

I like the Penguin Classics version, translated by George Bull. It’s very readable, dispenses with some of the clunky phrasing, and includes historical notes in the back. However, it is also available from the University of Baltimore for free here. I used both translations for the quotes above.

[More Writers Must Read]

Above: Morte di Niccolò Machiavelli. Cesare Felice Giorgio Dell’Acqua (22 July 1821 – 16 February 1905), Italian Painter. Oil on canvas. Housed at the Revoltella Museum, Trieste, Italy.

Archetypes of Scripture, Fated Meetings at the Well

The trope is called “meet-cute.” I hate the name of this trope. I can’t really tell you why I don’t like the name, maybe it’s because I really just think it’s romance lampshading under a different name? Either way, I prefer the Chinese/Japanese concept of the red string of fate.

However, I’m not going to focus on the many variants of this specific trope. I’m really looking for the barebones, basic, down-to-the-studs archetype. For the purpose of this essay, we’re going to call this plot device the “fated meeting.”  

The highlighted action of this trope, as we’ll see in the readings, is change. The meeting at the well is a vehicle for alteration of state, whether physical, mental, and/or spiritual.  

There are three fated meetings I want to dissect. Two from the Old Testament Book of Genesis, and the final from the New Testament Gospel of John.

Rebecca at the well

We’ll start with Genesis 24, the Marriage of Isaac and Rebecca. Here’s a quick summary of the events leading up to the fated meeting.

Shortly after the death of his wife, Sarah, Abraham calls a servant to his side and commands him to swear an oath that if he [Abraham] should die, the servant will see to it that his son, Isaac, does not marry a foreign woman. Abraham asks the servant to “go to my country and to my kindred and take a wife for my son Isaac.” [Gen 24:4 RSV-2CE]

After some reasonable negotiations, the servant swears to go to the city of Nahor in Mesopotamia. He takes camels laden with gifts for the future bride and her family. When the servant makes it to the city, he finds a well and makes the camels lay down in the evening. Evening is a time when the women of the city come and fetch water for their households.

The servant then prays:

12 O Lord the God of my master Abraham, meet me to day, I beseech thee, and shew kindness to my master Abraham. 13 Behold I stand nigh the spring of water, and the daughters of the inhabitants of this city will come out to draw water.14 Now, therefore, the maid to whom I shall say: Let down thy pitcher that I may drink: and she shall answer, Drink, and I will give thy camels drink also: let it be the same whom thou hast provided for thy servant Isaac: and by this I shall understand, that thou hast shewn kindness to my master. 15 He had not yet ended these words within himself, and behold Rebecca came out, the daughter of Bathuel.

[DRV 24:12-15]

We get a small description of Rebecca, she is “exceedingly comely” and a “beautiful virgin.” She passes the servant and fills up her water jar. On her way back up the road to home, Abraham’s servant runs out to meet her:

17 And the servant ran to meet her, and said: Give me a little water to drink of thy pitcher. 18 And she answered: Drink, my lord. And quickly she let down the pitcher upon her arm, and gave him drink. 19 And when he had drunk, she said: I will draw water for thy camels also, till they all drink. 20 And pouring out the pitcher into the troughs, she ran back to the well to draw water: and having drawn she gave to all the camels.

[DRV 24:17-20]

Hauling water is hard work, what Rebecca is doing here is extremely generous. Now, certainly, Rebecca sees these camels laden with gifts and, being a perceptive woman, would know that helping this man could be to her benefit. It is possible to be both simultaneously generous and shrewd. There are no other women mentioned in this passage, but we should assume them there and all but Rebecca are passing the servant by.   

Fetching water from the well is a social affair. Women go in groups. It’s a time for gossip and giggles. While the other women move on, heading home before it gets dark, Rebecca fills the trough for the camels to drink. She may even be risking her reputation here, it’s not normal for a woman to be alone with a strange man and in ancient societies, it was a sign of infidelity, regardless if sex occurred or not.

21 But he [the servant] musing beheld her with silence, desirous to know whether the Lord had made his journey prosperous or not. 22 And after that the camels had drunk, the man took out golden earrings, weighing two sicles: and as many bracelets of ten sicles weight.23 And he said to her: Whose daughter art thou? tell me: is there any place in thy father’s house to lodge? 24 And she answered: I am the daughter of Bathuel, the son of Melcha, whom she bore to Nachor. 25 And she said moreover to him: We have good store of both straw and hay, and a large place to lodge in.26 The man bowed himself down, and adored the Lord.

[DRV 24:21-26]

The servant muses, watching her, amazed that he might have fulfilled his master’s wishes. Once he knows who she is, he adores the Lord for his good fortune. Rebecca returns to her home and the servant follows. He is brought into the house and offered food and lodging, but the servant will not eat until he has told his story:

45 And whilst I pondered these things secretly with myself, Rebecca appeared coming with a pitcher, which she carried on her shoulder: and she went down to the well and drew water. And I said to her: Give me a little to drink. 46 And she speedily let down the pitcher from her shoulder, and said to me: Both drink thou, and to thy camels I will give drink. I drank, and she watered the camels.

[DRV 24:45-46]

I want to note here that it’s a common structural trope for the Israelites to repeat things. They only repeat things that are very, very important. That’s why we’re getting a repeated play-by-play of the event we just read.

This is for practical reasons. Most people at the time couldn’t read, repeating something in a slightly different way helps them to remember that which is important. There is also a poetic quality to it, after all, Genesis is a work of Hebrew poetry.

Once the servant finishes his tale, he receives his answer:

50 And Laban and Bathuel answered: The word hath proceeded from the Lord, we cannot speak any other thing to thee but his pleasure. 51 Behold Rebecca is before thee, take her and go thy way, and let her be the wife of thy master’s son, as the Lord hath spoken.

[DRV 24:50-51]

Rejoicing, the servant gives out the gifts to Rebecca, clothing her in fine raiment, silver, and jewels. He gives gifts to Rebecca’s brother, Laban, and her mother. He and the men with him eat and drink and celebrate for three days. After three days they ask to return to Abraham in the land of Canaan. There is resistance from Laban and his mother at first, so they ask Rebecca what she wants. Rebecca says: “I will go.”     

61 So Rebecca and her maids, being set upon camels, followed the man: who with speed returned to his master. 62 At the same time Isaac was walking along the way to the well which is called Of the living and the seeing: for he dwelt in the south country. 63 And he was gone forth to meditate in the field, the day being now well spent: and when he had lifted up his eyes, he saw camels coming afar off.

64 Rebecca also, when she saw Isaac, lighted off the camel, 65 And said to the servant: Who is that man who cometh towards us along the field? And he said to her: That man is my master. But she quickly took her cloak, and covered herself.

66 And the servant told Isaac all that he had done.67 Who brought her into the tent of Sara his mother, and took her to wife: and he loved her so much, that it moderated the sorrow which was occasioned by his mother’s death.

[DRV 24:61-67]

One suspects that during their travels and during the three days spent in Nahor, the servant has been telling Rebecca stories about Isaac. Her willingness to go to Canaan after three days suggest that she is already interested in Isaac and once Isaac hears the stories of Rebecca, he takes her as his wife and “loved her.”

There a lots of women in the Bible, not all of them are strong like Deborah, or generous like Rebecca, many of them are misused by the men around them, all of them are sinners. Many are mentioned in genealogies and then never mentioned again.

Rebecca stands above them all, because Rebecca was loved. Even David did not “love” Bathsheba. Jacob did not love Leah the way he loved Rachel. While disorder always makes its way into the story, it seems that this fated meeting works out as the trope intends.

Jacob meets Rachel

The second fated meeting is between Jacob and Rachel. Jacob is the son of Isaac and Rebecca. He has fled his father and brother at the behest of his mother. Jacob is a cheater. He is his mother’s favorite child while his brother Esau is Isaac’s favorite. Using trickery, (his mother’s idea, she is a shrewd woman), Jacob steals a blessing meant for Esau from his aged and blind father.

This isn’t the first time Jacob has pulled something like this. Jacob and Esau are twins, which is a topic for later discussion, just know that their relationship is contentious to the point that Jacob fears the wrath of his brother and runs away from home. This is, of course, a little micro-example of the hero’s journey, but let’s remain focused on the well.

Jacob journeys into the east, where his mother’s kin dwell. He stops at the well where several shepherds are waiting for the rest of the flocks to be gathered so that they can water the sheep. There is a large stone over the well’s mouth, suggesting that the shepherds must wait for the other shepherds in order to move the stone. Jacob asks them if they know his kinsman, Laban:

“Yes,” they replied, “and here is his daughter Rachel, coming with the sheep.” He [Jacob] said, “Look, it is still broad daylight; it is not time for the animals to be gathered together. Water the sheep, and go, pasture them.” But they said, “We cannot until all the flocks are gathered together, and the stone is rolled from the mouth of the well; then we water the sheep.”

[RSV-CE 29:6-8]

I suspect Jacob hopes to move the shepherds along so that he can speak to Rachel alone. In the end, he rolls the stone out of the way. He then waters the sheep under Rachel’s care.

Then Jacob kissed Rachel, and wept aloud. 12 And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father’s kinsman, and that he was Rebekah’s [Rebecca] son; and she ran and told her father.

13 When Laban heard the news about his sister’s son Jacob, he ran to meet him; he embraced him and kissed him, and brought him to his house. Jacob told Laban all these things, 14 and Laban said to him, “Surely you are my bone and my flesh!” And he stayed with him a month.

[RSV-CE 29:11-14]

Laban offers to give Jacob wages for his work.

16 Now Laban had two daughters; the name of the elder was Leah, and the name of the younger was Rachel. 17 Leah’s eyes were lovely,[b] and Rachel was graceful and beautiful. 18 Jacob loved Rachel; so he said, “I will serve you seven years for your younger daughter Rachel.” 19 Laban said, “It is better that I give her to you than that I should give her to any other man; stay with me.” 20 So Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed to him but a few days because of the love he had for her.

[RSV-CE 29:16-20]

Rachel, like Rebecca, is loved. Jacob works diligently for his Uncle, increasing Laban’s wealth and flocks with the expectation that he will be married to Rachel at the end of seven years.

But something happens. It’s Leah, Rachel’s sister, who Jacob ends up married to. In the morning, when the deception is seen, Jacob is outraged.

And Jacob said to Laban, “What is this you have done to me? Did I not serve with you for Rachel? Why then have you deceived me?” 26 Laban said, “This is not done in our country—giving the younger before the firstborn. 27 Complete the week of this one, and we will give you the other also in return for serving me another seven years.” 28 Jacob did so, and completed her week; then Laban gave him his daughter Rachel as a wife. 29 (Laban gave his maid Bilhah to his daughter Rachel to be her maid.) 30 So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah. He served Laban[c] for another seven years.

[RSV-CE 29:25-30]

What goes around, comes around. But all this trickery is to the determent of the characters involved. Leah is aware of her position in Jacob’s household. Rachel is the favored wife, and there is nothing more painful than knowing that you play the consolation prize in someone else’s love story.

31 When the Lord saw that Leah was unloved, he opened her womb; but Rachel was barren. 32 Leah conceived and bore a son, and she named him Reuben;[d] for she said, “Because the Lord has looked on my affliction; surely now my husband will love me.”

[RSV-CE 29:31-32]

“Surely now my husband will love me.” Meet-cute indeed. Human relationships are messy things. And while the story of Jacob’s immediate family has a happy ending, the rivalry between Leah and Rachel, made possible by Jacob’s clear favoritism, leads to his sons conspiring to murder their brother, Joseph.    

The Samaritan Woman

Our final fated meeting is set in Samaria, near the city of Sichar. Jesus of Nazareth stops at a well dug by Jacob. It’s noon and Jesus is tired and thirsty. There is no one around, he sits by the well, and sees a Samaritan woman, coming, alone in the heat of the day, not the coolness of evening, with the other women.  

A Samaritan woman came to draw water, and Jesus said to her, “Give me a drink.” (His disciples had gone to the city to buy food.) The Samaritan woman said to him, “How is it that you, a Jew, ask a drink of me, a woman of Samaria?”

[RSV-CE John 4:7-9]

Its important to know that Samaritans and Jews do not get along. The Samaritans hold to only the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, the Pentateuch, that is Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy and exclude the rest of the Prophets. The Jews held that the Samaritans do not properly worship God and the Samaritans held that the Jews don’t properly worship God. The Jews reverence Mount Zion and the Samaritans reverence Mount Gerizim. The Samaritans are the ancestors of foreign settlers in Israel during the Exilic Period. There is no love between these two people.

By the traditions and biases of his people, Jesus shouldn’t be speaking to this woman, let alone asking her for a drink. But Jesus is the hero par excellence. He is on his hero’s journey and he will not be stopped by archaic rules and prejudices. He speaks to her:  

10 Jesus answered her, “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” 11 The woman said to him, “Sir, you have no bucket, and the well is deep. Where do you get that living water? 12 Are you greater than our ancestor Jacob, who gave us the well, and with his sons and his flocks drank from it?” 13 Jesus said to her, “Everyone who drinks of this water will be thirsty again, 14 but those who drink of the water that I will give them will never be thirsty. The water that I will give will become in them a spring of water gushing up to eternal life.” 15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I may never be thirsty or have to keep coming here to draw water.”

[RSV-CE John 4:10-15]

This event concludes with Jesus telling the woman to go and get her husband and come back. She tells him that she doesn’t have a husband and Jesus says “You are right in saying, ‘I have no husband’; for you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband.”

The Samaritan woman came to the well alone. She was alone with a strange man. She’s been living with a man who is not her husband. She is an absolute outcast from her society. And Jesus, being the Messiah, knows this. He speaks to her anyway. A good hero is not moved from his quest, not for anything. At times he may doubt it, he may retreat to the desert for clarity, but he should never step off it—that is the path to villainy.

The woman returns to the city to tell the people what she has been told.

28 Then the woman left her water jar and went back to the city. She said to the people, 29 “Come and see a man who told me everything I have ever done! He cannot be the Messiah,[e] can he?” 30 They left the city and were on their way to him.

[RSV-CE John 4:28-30]

The people see Jesus and listen to him and they believe that he is the long-awaited Messiah. This is in sharp contrast to his own people, who do not believe in him. 

Well, Well, Well

These are three very similar, very different fated meetings. As we view these stories as stories, we see the well as a plot contrivance. Don’t take “plot contrivance” negatively. It’s a device that allows writers to get the plot moving. The well is a meeting place, an ancient singles bar, if you will.

Its no different from a character missing the bus and meeting his future wife at the stop. He’s never late and she’s always late. She’s beautiful, but he can’t stand how she never in a hurry. He’s handsome, but she can’t keep up with his fast-paced lifestyle. For all their disagreements and future conflict, missing that bus was the best thing that ever happened to them.

What makes a plot contrivance effective as a storytelling element is the ultimate symbolism behind the device in use. Let’s continue with the bus metaphor.

Let’s say that the man loves timeliness, he loves to be orderly and well-kept. He is “married” to his work. He’s never missed a day and he’s never been late. But after a hard night of working on his company’s latest project, he fails to properly set his alarm. He lives in a city where having a car is impractical. Missing the bus on the morning of an important work meeting is catastrophic to him.

The woman is laid back and calm. She bounces from job to job because she’s easily bored. She’s currently a waitress so missing the bus isn’t a huge deal, she’s more than happy to move onto the next gig. Missing the bus is just another opportunity for her to roll with the punches. Seeing how uptight the man is, she offers to help him navigate the subway. They get lost instead and it’s the best worst day of the man’s life. There are consequences of course.  

For the man, the bus is a symbol of his fast-pace, highly regimented life. Forgetting to set his alarm shows us how much of his life is consumed in work. In his exhausted state, he fails to set it right. Our leading lady is the catalyst to the disorders that occur with missing such an important work event. She has also become the source of his happiness. The tension between those two symbols—chaos and joy—is the story people want to read.       

So, what’s in a well?   

I don’t think I need to impart the importance of water to a desert people. Men guarded their wells with viciousness—to steal from a tribe’s well was to sign a death warrant. You are literally stealing that tribe’s life, water they need to sustain their flocks and their families. Losing a well in war could destroy a tribe. Cities grew up around wells so that this source of life could be protected by the tribal group.  

Women go together to the well, they share gossip, advice, and jokes. They play matchmaker for each other, discuss their children, their husbands, and family problems. It’s at the well that they go about the natural and normal business of running a household and therefore, civilization.

A well is a place of refreshment, where the tired and thirty rest in the shade and the cool waters. It’s a miniature oasis, a small sip of paradise to come.

Rebecca drew water from the well for the Abraham’s servant. She put aside her family duties to help a stranger, watering his camels and refreshing him. She is generous, but sees the chance to build her own household, increasing the wealth and connections of her family. She is going about the important business of civilization, selflessly providing the sweat of her brow. Before Rebecca was even born, it said to Abraham that God would make a great multitude of him. His descendants would number the stars.

It’s women like Rebecca, who draw out of themselves, the life sustaining water that nourishes a tribe. The well is a plot contrivance, a place to meet, an active symbol of what is occurring in the life of these characters. She’s a girl who goes from her father’s house to work and run her husband’s house. Our man above misses the bus because he’s missing out on life.

Rachel too is going about this important work. She is caring for her father’s flocks and all that entails. Then, Jacob comes and does the same, increasing and caring for Laban’s household and wealth. For his work, he is tricked—but the trick is a direct result of his untrustworthiness. Wells can be deep and even treacherous.

A stone covers the well where Jacob and Rachel met, perhaps to keep people and animals from falling in and drowning? Jacob rolled away the stone only to fall in. Stuck with unhappy, quarrelsome wives, no doubt he felt like he was drowning.

Our man who missed the bus must eventually face the consequences of missing work, marking a massive change in the relationship between the man and the woman. He must count the cost of meeting her.

Then comes Jesus, the Messiah. He knows the depths of every well. He knows a calm surface hides a muddy bottom. The Samaritan woman was alone at the well, she was cast out from society for her sins. He asks her for a drink—breaking all propriety—because she is worth something, even if she doesn’t feel worthy.

The living water he offers her is spiritual. It will clean away everything, even the sins she commits in the future.

Water is a source of life, we drink it, but we bathe in it too. Water makes us clean, it refreshes the hot and tired, when heated it warms the heart. Jesus has come into this woman’s life and given her a taste of that life-giving water; he changes how she sees herself and the world around her.

Our man who missed the bus has a met a wild girl who arouses his love and takes him on an adventure. Work won’t satisfy him ever again.

I said above that I dislike the name “meet-cute.” I still do. But this trope is a powerful one. Meeting in a silly or cute or awkward situation is a plot contrivance, but that is how we get characters to meet. In order to move the plot or get the message across we must get the characters to come together because in meeting they make change.

Tropes are anchors. As readers, we latch on to them, seeking their familiar shapes, but we allow ourselves to be surprised by the colors and the little details that differ with every story. As writers, that is what we must do.

Take a trope, color outside the lines, make it your trope—pretend like no one has ever done this before and own it. We’ve got three radically different meaning out of these Biblical fated meetings, three different changes. Never assume a trope is worthless because it’s been done before. It’s your characters, their personality and circumstances, your details and written style that make the story.

Above: Rebecca et Eliézer. Alexandre Cabanel, 28 September 1823 – 23 January 1889. French Painter. Oil on canvas. In private collection.

Adventures in Storytelling: Interview w/ Richard of IronAge Media

For this entry in Adventures in Storytelling, I’m doing something a little different. Instead of focusing on myself and my journey, I want to turn our attention onto a less well-known part of Storytelling, namely, publishing.

Richard Wilson is the founder of IronAge Media. Recently, his new magazine ANVIL: An IronAge Magazine was crowdfunded and released in July of 2023. In the interest of full disclosure, I was a backer of issue 1 and, my short story, Afflicted: Nourritures les Ver, will be published in ANVIL issue 2 which will be released this coming October. Although fundraising has ended, you can still purchase copies “on demand” via Indigogo.

The point of this series has always been to share tips, tricks, and struggles in the same way someone might journal a travel diary. Richard is on the bleeding edge of a new era of literary endeavor and I think we can learn a lot from his side of the adventure.

Independent publishing has become the norm and pulp style magazines are seeing a resurgence in online circles. While I’m not sure that the traditional publication industry is entirely down for the count, its certainly exciting to see new blood in the literary world.

I’d like to thank Richard and everyone at IronAge Media for consenting to this interview. Working with this team has been an awesome experience. I’ve learned so much from the interactions I’ve had with Richard.    

Let’s get into it.

The Interview

Tell me a little about yourself. Are you a writer, artist, or is Anvil Magazine your first creative endeavor?

Well I’m certainly not a writer, and although I have done plenty of painting and sketching in the past I wouldn’t identify as an artist. Prior to ANVIL I had worked on a couple of personal projects that would qualify as creative endeavors, but all of them were digital and coding focused. A few small video games and mods, some coding projects, and even a metaverse for a bit. However, ANVIL was the first thing I’ve personally made a serious effort to bring to market.


Who are your favorite writers or books? Favorite video games, comics? What type of media inspires you?  

That’s a big question. Early in life the Dinotopia books by James Gurney were particularly influential in my love of reading and I believe they hold up as beautiful artistic works as an adult. The original Dune series, The Book of the New Sun, and Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance were all works that I chewed on in my high school years, in addition to the usual high school assigned reading torment and more casual fun of older scifi.


For readers who might not be familiar, in your own words, what is the Iron Age? 

I’ll steal from myself in the first issue of ANVIL: The Iron Age is a decentralized movement of independent creators, across genres and mediums, circumventing traditional producers to create the kinds of entertainment that they want to see.


Do you think there’s a real hunger for original IPs?

I think there’s a hunger for something different. Before mega-corporations started buying up IPs like startup competitors, I think there was a much broader range of ‘taste’ within those legacy franchises and people didn’t feel any need to look around. Now if you want something aside from boardroom, corporate approved mediocrity wearing your childhood franchises like a skinsuit, you really have to look to new, original IPs.


What is the philosophy or guiding principle of IronAge Media?

Become the culture! Pragmatically that means bootstrapping the new media ecosystem as best as I can.


What made you want to start a magazine? Was it a spur of the moment decision or was it something you had always dreamed of? I know you have a talented team working with you, were you friends before IronAge Media, or did you just come together as a group of like-minded people? (i.e. how did this team get assembled?)

It was relatively spur of the moment. I hadn’t considered starting a magazine in January, but I was looking at actionable ways to achieve some broader goals I’d been thinking about. As for the team, Daniel and Jake were people I met early in the process of growing IronAge Media, and it was just a matter of looking at people who I knew I’d work well with and also had the skill sets I needed.


How did you settle on the name, Anvil? Is it symbolic or just cool?

Both. It was the first thing that popped in my mind when I was thinking about the magazine. Symbolically and thematically on brand for the Iron Age. I agonized over a lot of other names when I discovered an old communist rag was called ‘The Anvil’ back a hundred years ago, but I ultimately decided I’d rather go with my instincts and re-appropriate the term.


The first issue of Anvil Magazine far surpassed its original monetary goal, how does that feel? Were you surprised or did you know there was a desire for the kind of stories that Anvil promises?

It was immensely humbling more than anything else. I wasn’t necessarily surprised that people wanted it, I felt confident in the product, but I was surprised that I was able to get enough attention to communicate what it was to people and that those people were willing to trust me to deliver on that message.


What was the hardest part of getting IronAge Media and Anvil magazine off the ground? What was the most fun? And what was the most rewarding?

For me the greatest difficulty of IAM has been articles. I’m not a writer by practice, so writing a review or article for the site is far more time consuming than it should be, which is why I’m so appreciative of people who send in content. As for the most fun I’d definitely say the image prompts. Those were a decision I made on a whim and have proven to be a major part of the community building of IAM, and in many ways lead directly to ANVIL. Regarding ANVIL, by far the most difficult part of it has been fulfillment so far. I know a lot of people see the big number on the campaign and think it translates to big dollars for me, but when it comes to hourly rate, I definitely screwed myself over. The success of ANVIL of course has been an amazing and at times surreal experience that opened up a lot more options for what else I’d like to do. Certainly seeing authors happy to be published and readers excited about the magazine has been a very rewarding.


What are your future hopes for Iron Age Media? Do you have any plans to see IronAge Media branch out beyond Anvil Magazine? Do you see Anvil as a herald of a new age in media?

Expect to see the IAM site rebuilt soon to give users a more modern, slick feel. The overall brand is already moving into some new projects. One which will be public later this year, another that has a much longer timeline.

My goal for ANVIL has always been to create a place for consumers to find enjoyable works by new authors and artists they will love. I find that there’s a lot of (justified) complaining about consumer habits in the indie world, but I hope a brand like ANVIL can work as a stepping stone to draw in new buyers who know they aren’t happy, and just aren’t sure where to find that originality they’ve been missing.


I always end my entries of Adventures in Storytelling with a lesson I learned or a piece of advice I found helpful. Are there any lessons that launching Iron Age Media and ANVIL1 taught you?

Be a rational optimist and, the fastest way to learn if something is viable is to do it. There are a million failed websites and tens of thousands of failed magazines. If I had been negative about this I never would have tried. Instead I took a risk, put in the work, alongside other hard working folks, and now I can say that indie creators have made money and gained fans thanks to the project.


Do you have any advice for writers, artists, publishers?  

The potential market for new media is huge. Focus on your work and getting that work in front of buyers. Another person succeeding doesn’t take money out of your pocket, our current, globally networked economy is just too big for that. Doesn’t mean seeing crap succeeding is any less frustrating, but don’t let it drive you to harm your own goals.


Any final thoughts to share? Where can my readers find you?

Thank you for the opportunity to publish Afflicted! My wife and myself both enjoyed the character of Amélia Mitre and the interesting world you’ve placed her in. Your readers can find me at IronAge.Media and follow the links there to my various socials. I stream on Sunday evenings if you’d like to chat with me as I do something relaxing.


Again, I want to offer my heartfelt thanks to Richard and everyone at IronAge Media. Working with IronAge has been a awesome and humbling experience. It’s my hope that we work together in the future.

To sum up Richard’s great advice, remember:

Be a rational optimist. The fastest way to learn if something is possible, is to do it. Drop the negativity, take a risk, put in the work, and surround yourself with a cadre of other hardworking folk.

The potential market is huge, other people succeeding isn’t taking success from you, even if it hurts to see mediocre work rise to the top.

Above: The Blacksmith’s Studio. Albert Brument, French, 1883-1901. Oil on canvas. Housed in a Private Collection.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑