Home » Chuck Palahniuk » Page 2

Tag: Chuck Palahniuk

On Killing Adjectives and Thought Verbs

After listening to one of my sermons, a good friend pointed me to an article by Chuck Palahniuk on Thought Verbs (hence my current binging on Palahniuk’s books). The application to my own preaching was clear.

For example, Palahniuk writes,

Thinking is abstract.  Knowing and believing are intangible.  Your story will always be stronger if you just show the physical actions and details of your characters and allow your reader to do the thinking and knowing.  And loving and hating.

Don’t tell your reader:  “Lisa hated Tom.”

Instead, make your case like a lawyer in court, detail by detail.  Present each piece of evidence.  For example:

“During role call, in the breath after the teacher said Tom’s name, in that moment before he could answer, right then, Lisa would whisper-shout: ‘Butt Wipe,” just as Tom was saying, ‘Here’.”

Another example:

From this point forward – at least for the next half year – you may not use “thought” verbs.  These include:  Thinks, Knows, Understands, Realizes, Believes, Wants, Remembers, Imagines, Desires, and a hundred others you love to use.

The list should also include:  Loves and Hates.

And it should include:  Is and Has, but we’ll get to those, later.

Until some time around Christmas, you can’t write:  Kenny wondered if Monica didn’t like him going out at night…”

Instead, you’ll have to Un-pack that to something like:  “The mornings after Kenny had stayed out, beyond the last bus, until he’d had to bum a ride or pay for a cab and got home to find Monica faking sleep, faking because she never slept that quiet, those mornings, she’d only put her own cup of coffee in the microwave.  Never his.”

Instead of characters knowing anything, you must now present the details that allow the reader to know them.  Instead of a character wanting something, you must now describe the thing so that the reader wants it.

All this reminded me of something I had read from C.S. Lewis regarding adjectives. Lewis writes,

Don’t use adjectives which merely tell us how you want us to feel about the things you are describing. I mean, instead of telling us the thing is “terrible,” describe it so that we’ll be terrified. Don’t say it was “delightful”; make us say “delightful” when we’ve read the description. You see, all those words (horrifying, wonderful, hideous, exquisite) are only like saying to your readers “Please, will you do my job for me.” (Letters to Children, p. 64)

The application is simple for the writer and the preacher. Stop simply telling and start showing.

In a college literature class I got into a (friendly) kerfuffle with a professor over Jonathan Edwards’ sermon Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. He said it was graphic to the point of being unhelpful. I said Edwards was doing precisely what Lewis and Palahniuk are talking about. That was a great part of the effectiveness of Edwards’ preaching. He was relentlessly imaginative and descriptive. The two go hand in hand after all. Palahniuk gives examples for the writer, let me share a few for the preacher.

Instead of saying, ‘God is sovereign,’ say something like, ‘all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?”

Instead of saying, as I’ve heard so many preachers say, ‘The correct response is faith,’ say, ‘Though you have not seen him, you love him. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory.’

I heard a preacher dealing with Exodus say, ‘You cannot be a Christian and live like an Egyptian.’ Wouldn’t it be better to show us what an Egyptian looks like rather than simply making the assertion? Thomas Watson described them this way: ‘The Egyptians were not a warlike but a womanish people, imbecilic and weak, yet these were too hard for Israel and made a spoil of her.’ That says a lot more about what we are not to be.

One of my great problems as a preacher and a writer is that I tend to unpack the things that don’t need unpacking while failing to unpack the things that actually need it. If you have similar issues, perhaps it’s time to work on killing thought-verbs and adjectives.

52 Novels (6): Doomed

My goal is to read a novel a week in 2015. I’ve made it to 6.

-Chuck Palahniuk, Doomed

Doomed is the second novel in what is going to be a three part series about the character Madison Spencer. I wrote about the first book, Damned, HERE. I am not going to get into any details about the plot. I’ll just share a few of my big takeaways.

The story is pretty much crazy. You have to have a fairly strong stomach to deal with Palahniuk. I happen to like his writing quite a bit, but I would be very careful in recommending him. The fact that I write about something doesn’t mean I necessarily endorse it completely or that I would want someone to rush out and pick up the book.

The book reads like a running blog, with virtually every entry beginning, ‘Gentle Tweeter.’ I found humor in this for some reason.

The series is in some sense following the paradigm of Dante. Damned covers Hell, Doomed Purgatory, and the third volume will deal with Heaven. Purgatory in this story ends up being the earth itself, as Madison doesn’t make curfew on Halloween (the one night out for the souls in Hell) and finds herself stuck roaming the earth.

The big idea of the series starts to take shape in this volume around an interesting thought-experiment. Palahniuk is playing with the idea of reconciling God with Satan. If the two were to be reconciled, his main character Madison hypothesizes, then Hell and suffering would be moot. It’s an interesting thought-experiment. Almost medieval, which is fitting since Dante’s paradigm comes into play.

Of course I wouldn’t recommend taking theology from a novel, though there are some novels that have quite good theology. The idea is about as theologically incorrect and impossible as it could be, but it’s an interesting thought nonetheless. It’s like Parent Trap, only God and Satan are the characters being drawn together. This doesn’t actually happen in Doomed, but the plot begins to take shape. We’ll have to wait for the next book to see how it develops.

Finally, the main plot of this volume is that Satan has used this little girl Madison, whose parents are super rich, super famous, global stars, and religious environmentalists as well, as the figurehead of a new religion on the earth. She is an unwitting Anti-Christ. The idea that someone could be unwittingly dragged into such a position is a fascinating one.

You can listen to Palahniuk talk about the story HERE. He’s always very, very interesting to listen to.

52 Novels (3): Damned, by Chuck Palahniuk

I’m trying to read a novel a week in 2015. I’ve made it to three.

This book is about a 13-year-old girl, Madison Spencer, who goes to hell. It is the first book in what is meant to be a trilogy. So, you get maybe a hundred pages of The Breakfast Club in Hell. It’s an interesting concept. I almost wish that concept would have come full circle throughout the course of the book. It gets dropped at some point. It would have been interesting to see the hellish prisoners raising back to their cells, trying to get back before some demon caught them out frolicking. But that doesn’t happen.

Instead, Madison becomes a telemarketer. Yes, we find out that dinnertime telemarketing calls comes from the inhabitants of Hell. From there, she has a major run in with Satan himself. Her encounter with Satan will shape the rest of the story as it unfolds in the second volume of the trilogy (Doomed) and the third, which is yet to be released.

There’s some unnecessary vulgarity (vulgarity could probably be in all caps). But you expect that from Palahniuk. I call it unnecessary if it doesn’t advance the plot. And there’s certainly one blatant incident that adds nothing to the plot.

The digs at wealthy modern environmentalists are amusing. For instance,

If there was a Hell, my mom said you’d go there for wearing fur coats or buying a cream rinse tested on baby rabbits by escaped Nazi scientists in France…

There are many, many good little jabs akin to that one. The book also provides some jabs at the over use of anti-depressants. So, if you’re a big-time environmentalist or a big-time user of anti-depressants, this book my provide you with some food for thought, if it doesn’t blind you with rage.

The major refrain of the book is,

No, it’s not fair, but what makes earth feel like Hell is our expectation that it should feel like Heaven. Earth is earth. Dead is dead. You’ll find out for yourself soon enough.

This reminded me of something Chesterton wrote:

It is commonly in a somewhat cynical sense that men have said, ‘Blessed is he that expecteth nothing, for he shall not be disappointed.’ It was in a wholly happy and enthusiastic sense that St. Francis said, ‘Blessed is he who expecteth nothing, for he shall enjoy everything.'(St. Francis of Assisi, p. 87).

This book is nowhere near being as good as Fight Club. That almost goes without saying. Would I recommend it? Only if you meet the two requirements I listed above and were mentally equipped to handle some raunchy stuff.

52 Novels: (1) Fight Club

Fight Club, by Chuck Palahniuk

I’m trying to read a novel a week. This is number 1. As usual, I will not be writing reviews of the books I’m reading. I am giving my impressions and applications; things I take away from the book. Here’s ten conveniently starting with the letter ‘s.’

1. Sleep: If you know what it’s like to have insomnia, or even extreme fatigue, you can immediately relate to the nameless narrator. That’s the first thing that sucked me into the story. Feeling like you don’t know if you’re awake or asleep; having days, weeks run together in a sort of blur.

2. Sissies: That’s the next big sticking point. Men culturally neutered. Men shopping for furniture. Men living in highrise apartments. Men stuck sitting at desks. Men needing a good fight. This book is a scathing indictment of a culture that suppresses manhood.

3. Schizophrenia: It’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde without the magic and the medicine. The battle of good versus evil in one person; the tendency of the evil to dominate.

4. Sympathy and Sobs: I haven’t read Palahniuk’s book Choke yet, but I’ve surmised it’s about a man who feigns chocking in order to gain human contact and sympathy, as well as money. The nameless narrator of Fight Club is desperate for human contact. He blubbers like a baby in the arms of a cancer-riddled bodybuilder. Support groups, in which he has no real business, support his sanity. This again is a scathing critique of a culture that knows little about true affirmation and community.

5. Shock: Don’t read Palahniuk if you don’t want to be shocked. And not all the shock is good or even needful in my opinion; but sometimes it’s necessary.

6. Soldiery: Project Mayhem. Men are ready to join a cause; better make sure it’s the right one. Here it’s the cult of personality. And HERE it’s often the cult of personality.

7. Salvation: Or perhaps anti-salvation. Rebirth or anti-rebirth. One of my favorite lines in the book has to do with the narrator constantly traveling by plane for his job. He’s awake, he’s asleep. He wakes up and he’s in a totally different place. He says, “If I could wake up in a different place, at a different time, could I wake up as a different person?” It serves as a beautiful foreshadow to the rest of the book. I’ll devote another post to that line of thought.

8. Shrinks: Heaven is a Psych Ward. God is a psychiatrist. At least, that’s what the narrator thinks in the end.

9. Superman: It’s a tale of boredom; of man’s need to rip off his suit and tie like Superman. The only thing is that this ripping off of the suit and tie results in an epic of nihilism that produces exactly the kind of superman Nietzche pointed to – a man wholly of this world. His heaven is a Psych Ward after all.

I would hesitate to recommend this book to someone who isn’t very mature. It’s rough. But it’s also quite disturbingly beautiful. I read it twice. Should I even mention that it’s better than the movie? But the movie is pretty good.