In which I spill the tea on the creative activity I work on (when I'm not writing) for the November 2024 IWSG.

This is my last post for the year. I hope that those of you who are working hard on your novels this month are proceeding nicely. As for the rest of you, may you have a holiday in which Mariah Carey doesn't scream too much "All I Want for Christmas" in your ears. I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

Today is post-election day aftermath. It is also the first Wednesday of November 2024, and this means it is time for our Insecure Writer's Support Group posts. If this is the first that you have heard of this blogging phenomenon, you can read and sign-up for it at this LINK.

What is the Purpose of the IWSG?: It is to share and encourage. Writers can express doubts and concerns without fear of appearing foolish or weak. Those who have been through the fire can offer assistance and guidance. It’s a safe haven for insecure writers of all kinds.

When do y'all post?: The first Wednesday of every month is officially Insecure Writer’s Support Group day. So, on that day you should post your thoughts on your own blog. Some ideas for what those posts could entail are 1) you could talk about your doubts and the fears you have conquered, 2) you could discuss your struggles and triumphs, and 3) you could offer a word of encouragement for others who are struggling. Being a part of this blogfest means being involved. So, you should visit others in the group and connect with your fellow writers. A good rule of thumb is to aim for a dozen new people each time and return comments. This group is all about connecting. Be sure to link to this page and display the badge in your post. And please be sure your avatar links back to your blog. Otherwise, when you leave a comment, people can't find you to comment back.

The X (formerly Twitter) handle the Insecure Writer's Support Group uses is @TheIWSG and the hashtag is #IWSG.

The awesome co-hosts for the November 6 posting of the IWSG are Diedre Knight, Lisa Buie Collard , Kim Lajevardi, and JQ Rose!

Now, every month, the IWSG announces a question that members can answer in their IWSG post. These questions may prompt you to share advice, insight, a personal experience or story. If this is what you want to write about, you should include your answer to the question in your IWSG post or let it inspire your post if you are struggling with something to say.

But remember, the question is optional :)

November 6 question - What creative activity do you engage in when you're not writing?

When I'm not writing I write things for my homebrew setting in Dungeons & Dragons. Over the years, I've built a secondary ruleset that overlays the primary rules of 5e+, and these books contain all the flavor of my homebrew world. I've also digitized maps to make them available to display on 32-inch monitors, and I've come up with all sorts of spells, abilities, classes, and you name it. It's fun to just sit and watch tv and think over a new ability and write it down, revise it, and then think about what it might look like with someone playing it. I think that's where I get the most enjoyment: in the theorycrafting. It is my jam.

Thanks for visiting my blog this year. I will be back for the January 2025 edition of the IWSG. Hopefully (by then) things have settled down a bit politically in this country. But I'm honestly not counting on that.

Let us all take a moment to appreciate the art of Greg Hildebrandt.

I learned that last week, the artist Greg Hildebrandt passed away. When I first heard of the "Brothers Hildebrandt" I felt that their surnames were certainly meant for great artists. It's the kind of name that you'd expect to see on an oils and acrylics line of paint in your local art store. Certainly Star Wars fans are familiar with their work from a painting of Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia. It's notable that they did this project without even having seen the movie. I read somewhere that Lucas had promised them that they'd only have their art on a few promo materials, but then it just got slapped on everything until they finally had to sue to get paid (and I think it was only for like $2,000). Hildebrandt was also the guy that gave Luke Skywalker abs that Luke never had.

Every fantasy reader, even those not familiar with them, has probably seen elements and themes of their work popularized in other materials and art. Here (for example) is the Balrog from Fellowship of the Ring. 

And then there's the depiction that Hildebrandt did of the Argonath (Lord of the Rings), which was a monument of two enormous statues carved in the likenesses of Isildur and Anárion standing on either side of the River Anduin at the northern entrance to Nen Hithoel. It marked the northern border of Gondor, and nearby to the south were previous outposts, Amon Hen and Amon Lhaw.

For me, I think the one thing that always drew my eye (about their work) was their use of light and shadow. Many of their paintings have this high contrast to them to really sharpen features while adding a kind of magic to the whole mix. Oftentimes, the shadows in their landscapes feel cool to me (low temperature as opposed to "awesome"). Maybe it's because they would oftentimes drench their shadowy landscapes with a kind of blue tone. The Hildebrandt's dabbled in just about anything that would take their art. Here's a picture from a Superman comic book that was illustrated by Greg Hildebrandt:

And they also lovingly illustrated the Sword of Shannara by Terry Brooks, basically turning his first outing as an author into an illustrated edition. I don't know any authors who get this kind of treatment so early in their careers. From what I've read, Random House was just really trying to mine the market of people who wanted "something else" after consuming The Lord of the Rings.

No matter what their assignment was to illustrate, I feel like the Hildebrandt brothers showed up to paint something as realistic as it could be portrayed, given the many fantastic elements of their overall portfolio. With Greg's passing, there aren't too many artists of this era that are left. I can think of a handful: Boris Vallejo, Julie Bell, and Michael Whelan (I'll be really sad when Whelan passes on). Michael Whelan actually retired until Brandon Sanderson showed up with a truckload of money and dumped it on him to illustrate his books. I can't blame Sanderson. Whelan (in my opinion) was the best in the business, and it was probably every artist's dream to get a Whelan cover. Since people were/are just throwing millions of dollars at Sanderson, I think the money came so easy that he could just feel free to splurge on whatever his heart desired. Sanderson could have diamond studded window wipers if he wanted. Anyway, I'll leave you with this movie poster for Clash of the Titans that I really liked (illustrated by Greg Hildebrandt). It's weird to think that this era of art is gone, but as I've often said, "Everything in life is temporary. Even us."

Did George Lucas invent the Prequel?

Did George Lucas invent the prequel? I remember when he announced that there would be prequels to his iconic Star Wars trilogy way back in the mid-90's. It was one of those rumors that grew and grew until you started seeing chatter of it on the primitive thing we called "the internet." I remember seeing the first trailer for the Phantom Menace and how Apple's website was the best place to go to view them in a thing called "Quicktime." But I honestly don't remember if there were such things as "prequels" before The Phantom Menace. Now, of course, they are everywhere.

The latest thing that I saw that is getting a prequel is the movie/story of It by Stephen King. I kind of wonder why they are doing a prequel. The latest adaptation of It was successful. I've seen the first one but avoided part 2 simply because I don't much care for scary movies. However, I kind of wonder what could possibly be told in a prequel to It other than "more of the same." From what I understand of the monster, it reappears every 27 years or so (I can't remember the exact timeline), kills a bunch of kids, and then goes dormant again. So, in an It prequel, I'm guessing we shall see more kids being killed and an attempt to fight back at some point that doesn't go well because It survived (obviously). I may not be seeing this prequel though from the correct vantage point. Maybe the fact that it is a retread of the story is the point. Folks want "more of the same" but maybe just slightly different enough that there can be some surprises.

My blogging friend Alex over on his IWSG post for the month of October said that prequels are kind of an odd thing because you always know how they will end (he was specifically talking about Rings of Power). And you know what? He's right. They are kind of an odd thing. I mean...we knew that the little kid named Anakin had to turn into Darth Vader at some point. But seeing it happen on screen was kind of fulfilling. I really liked Christensen's performance (to be honest), and I liked how pouty Anakin was. I think it actually made Darth Vader a bit more menacing, because you just know he's not altogether a sane person who is just choosing to be evil. He's kind of crazy, and was pushed into that by trauma that he couldn't deal with properly, nor did he have access to any kind of mental health care that might have helped him to deal with it.

Obviously, nostalgia is an important reason for why prequels exist in the first place. But it may also be due to the structure of storytelling. Oftentimes in traditional storytelling, you have the bulk of the tale that leads to a climax, and then once that is over, the story quickly ends. With a prequel, you can still have that very satisfying ending way off in the future, but now you've got more ground to develop different characters, and to set up what may have led to that really satisfying conclusion in the distant future.

Anyway, I guess when I started writing this post, I wanted to know if George Lucas invented the prequel. I don't know for sure, but I do know that if you "Google" the term prequel, you come up with nothing but links to articles discussing the Star Wars prequels. That might be reason enough to say that he invented it. If so, I think that's pretty neat. George had a lot of great ideas (obviously), but inventing "the prequel" has affected movies in such a way that it honestly is comparable to someone inventing "color for film." Like...I'd compare it to being on that big of a scale. It's like someone taking the peanut butter and jelly sandwich and inventing "the Uncrustable."  You just don't know how good the idea is until its suddenly there and you realize that you can't live without it.