Why do you write?

readerEvery author’s “How-to” book that I’ve ever read always has these 2 basics somewhere in the book’s depths:

Write what you know
Write for yourself

The “write what you know” part has never been an issue for me. While I love fantasy and the freedom it gives you; the story still has to be somewhat believable or no one will accept the premise and, thereby, the story. Therefore, writing what I know (or can at least research) is always the best course.

However, for the longest time I struggled with the “write for yourself” part of it. I mean, I didn’t need the story written down if I was writing for myself. I could picture the story in loving detail in my own mind, so why spend time scribbling it down unless I was planning on sharing it with someone else? And thus my dilemma. If I’m writing for someone else, then who? And if I’m not writing for someone else, then why bother?

It was very frustrating. So, I went through all those reasons of why write (it down). Why be a writer (of stories)? Fame…I don’t care if I’m famous; in fact, I prefer my privacy. Glamour…writing isn’t glamorous, it’s hard work. Riches…well, that one still grabs me. Sure, I’d like to be rich, or at least rich enough to quit my day job and do nothing but write and read stories. But then the stories become just another job. You have to create the stories to make sure the money machine keeps churning out the dough.

No, the real reason I decided to write the stories down was for those lonely, geeky kids whose only friends are those they meet between the covers of the books they read. This was a reality I knew very well. These lonely, geeky kids I saw in my mind’s eye were very much like me when I was young. (So, in a way, I guess, I was writing for myself.)

I was the kid whose best friends were the Hardy Boys, Ann of Green Gables, and every character that every piloted a space ship designed by Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, or Andre Norton. My friends lived in the local public library, and every week I would invite a half-dozen or so of them to my house. They would take me on the most wondrous adventures, and it would no longer matter if I wasn’t invited to some classmate’s birthday party, or if I wasn’t asked to participate in the games at recess. It didn’t matter because I was solving mysteries, stopping spies from taking over the country, or saving the world from some technological catastrophe.

Therefore, when I decided that I needed to share my stories, these were the people I had in mind as my audience. The kids who prefer (or need) to find their way through childhood and young adulthood by reading books. The kids whose imaginations can’t be contained inside of movies, but rather need to explore worlds of their own visualization but with the help of a good story and one or more characters they can relate to.

Once I figured this out, I realized I was writing for myself…just not in the way I initially thought or understood their statement to mean. It took me a bit of pondering and soul searching, but I really think I’m a better writer because of it.

I think every wannabe-author needs to take a look at those two questions. Then they need to really look inside themselves for the answers. Be honest with yourself; it’s not easy, but I think once you figure out why you really want to write stories and books, you’re ready to be a real author and not just a writer.

Dante’s Equation

emerging2A universal wave that defines our reality…that is the key plot item to a book I just finished reading. The odd thing is, that although it’s a book of fiction, it brings together several concepts I have researched and studied for years.

If you believe some of the studies I have researched, we (as individuals) are a composite of frequencies, and one part of our individual frequencies contain the “universal frequency” of our reality. It’s what links us to this moment and this place. If we altered that link, that universal frequency, we might suddenly no longer exist in this reality. Instead, we would be in a different reality—perhaps one that is so close to our current one that we would be hard pressed to identify the differences, but it would be different.

If we alter that linking frequency in one way, we’re in an alternate reality; if we alter it another, we move from the physical plane to what? The astral plane? After all, the physical plane is only separated from the astral plane by a small shift in frequency. For instance, if all of physical reality (all the streams of physical reality that exist) exist within a frequency range of 0 – 100, then the astral plane is probably 100.1 – 200. And each reality within the astral plane is a separate frequency, just as each reality in the physical plane is a separate frequency. So, while astral matter is more pliable than physical matter, I would image that there are still some common realities that people go to in order to learn certain lessons, such as the reality of a brimstone and fire hell, and the reality of clouds and angels—how common are those? Perhaps there are realities that mimic the various realities on the physical plane, so that experiences can be reworked and revisited and the lessons learned.

But back to Earth and this reality. If the whole physical reality is in a frequency between 0 and 100, then where is our reality…50 – 52, or 48 – 50? Maybe it’s not so close to the middle, maybe it’s more skewed than that…maybe we’re closer to 35 – 37 or 60 – 62.

And what happens to the me in the reality I shift to (provided there is a me there), if I’m able to shift my linking frequency? Do we meet and cancel each other out? Does my moving into the next reality, push the me that’s there forward or backward, creating one big chain reaction of pushing ad infinitum? And if I push the me from that reality out and take her place, then when (and if) I shift back to my own reality, does the other me slip back to her world, too? My mind boggles (which is an interesting game, by the way—do we have a headache yet?)

Another concept I found in this novel that was interesting, was how the astral plane worked. Now the author didn’t call the realities where the different characters ended up the astral plane, but to me it was so obvious that no label was needed. When the protagonists were subjected to a pulse, it shifted their universal frequency link and each of them then found themselves in a world ideally suited to showing them their main life lesson.

Two found themselves in a world of wondrous technology, but what they found was that people didn’t matter, only the technology did. At first, this was great because they loved technology. However, the more they realized how little people meant, the colder and less ideal their “chosen” world seemed to them.

Another character who believed he knew what God wanted and never thought people showed enough respect (to him and to God) found himself in a world where the rules were so rigid and so strict that only blind obedience was acceptable. He soon found that this was not the type of faith that he wanted, nor the type of faith he wanted to foist onto others.

So, it went for each character, as they confronted the worst in themselves and came to realize how narrow and shallow they really were. Exactly the types of lessons you would expect to encounter in the astral planes.

Once they acknowledged the blinders that they had worn, they were able to return their individual frequencies to what they needed to be in order to return to their own reality.

Now, while the author took some liberties in the way she got them back to their own reality, and in how they actually get to the astral plane (she had them traveling to the astral plane as full physical beings), it was still a very thought-provoking and intriguing book. More than anything it makes me want to ask the author which of Nick Herbert’s publishings she has read, and what gave her the idea in the first place. I think it would be utterly fascinating to sit down and discuss some of these concepts with the author, to see where she got her ideas from, and what her feelings are about multiple realities.

So, if you love a book that will make you question and think, then I highly recommend that you read Dante’s Equation by Jane Jensen.

Is there proof of an afterlife?

Psychopomp 3D - DLS - 8pxls - 2

TNT has a new show starting in June called “Proof”. I must admit, I am intrigued…from the little bit I’ve been able to find about it, it sounds as if it could be interesting. The premise is this:

Rich old guy, afraid of death and dying, hires young doctor to research life after death and bring him proof that there is some sort of existence beyond this world. So, she investigates NDEs (near death experiences), psychics, mediums (and yes, there is a difference—psychics can read people’s energies, intuit possible future events, and sense other people’s emotions (among other things); while mediums speak to dead people), reincarnation reports, OBE reports (out of body experiences), hauntings, and other paranormal and death-related happenings in an effort to find “proof”.

Depending on how they treat the subject the show could be helpful in bringing death and dying out of the closet and into the light, or it could simply push it further into the corner of that dark, cluttered closet where no one will be bothered by it. I understand that it’s TV, which automatically indicates that any information it provides will be diluted and inundated with melodrama. However, there’s melodrama and there’s high-camp. If they go the route of camp and ridiculousness (ala the TV show, Ghost Hunters, or the movie, Ghost Busters) then they will do nothing to improve people’s understanding of physical death and spiritual life (not to mention, losing me as a viewer ;-}. However, if they stick with the melodrama, they might actually be able to help people understand that death is not scary, and what happens after the body dies is not scary.

As an escort to those newly transitioning from and to physical life, I can assure you that life goes on…in a different way than what we experience now here on Earth, but it does continue. I don’t know how anyone could actually prove that consciousness and “life” exists beyond the physical world, though. It’s not as if you can scribble it out in a formula, or build a measuring device that would definitively prove to everyone that life doesn’t end when the physical body dies. But then again, what is acceptable as proof is different for everyone. Some will accept only what they can see, hear, taste, or feel, while others what all the scientific jargon and formulas to back it up. That’s the type of person that even if you could them across the border into death and bring them back, they would find some other explanation for what they experienced. After all, people can only accept what they wish to accept; it’s the way our brains are made. If it’s outside our experiences and expectations, then we can either expand our acceptance factor and acknowledge it as something we never experienced, but could be true, or we can block it and find a more reasonable (to us) explanation to it—something that will fit within our mental model of what is real, possible, and true.

That’s why for some people there are miracles, and for others common occurrences. A child becomes gravely ill, and is treated by a modern healer and is cured—this can be a miracle to someone not familiar with or accepting of modern medicine; while for others it is just the natural occurrence and result of taking antibiotics. So, what proof would you need to accept that physical life isn’t the be-all end-all of existence, or do you already accept that this isn’t all there is?

WooHoo!

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00VPFEMRG

The paperback is now available, and the ebook is too. And to think, it only took 25 years!

For better or for worse, it’s out there now, just waiting for readers to find it.

 

Happy reading, Friends!