The Creative
A few pieces I wrote for The Creative, an advertising community publication in Buffalo, NY.
Interview with Paul Zelinsky
Every year since 1937, the American Library Association has awarded the Caldecott Medal to the artist who has created the most distinguished picture book of the year. The 1998 Caldecott Medal went to illustrator and author Paul Zelinsky for his retelling of the classic tale Rapunzel. 1998 Caldecott Committee chair John Stewig spoke highly of Zelinsky's work, citing its "Richly detailed oil paintings (which) convey dramatic emotions and feature distinctive architecture, lush landscapes and authentic costuming of Renaissance Italy."As a child, Zelinsky never really considered the possibility of becoming a book illustrator, though his elementary school days are filled with memories of collaborations with classmates on drawings. Leaving "Igglebeania" and "Squigglebeania" behind, he attended Yale University, where he took a course with Maurice Sendak which later inspired him to pursue a career in children's books. He also received a graduate degree in painting from the Tyler School of Art, in Philadelphia and Rome. Zelinsky currently lives in New York with his wife and two daughters, where his 1998 Caldecott Medal joins three previous Caldecott Honor Awards for Zelinsky's illustration of Hansel & Gretel, Rumpelstiltskin and Swamp Angel.
The Creative: The Caldecott has been called the children's book equivalent of winning the Pulitzer Prize. Do you think of yourself as one of the best, if not THE best, children's illustrator?
PZ: I'm extremely happy to have won this year's Caldecott medal. Still, I'm very aware of my artistic inadequacies; more than anyone else is, I hope. I certainly don't look at myself as THE best children's illustrator around. In all honesty, sometimes I think of myself as one of the better ones in this country, and sometimes I don't at all. There couldn't be one best illustrator anyway--there are too many apples and oranges out there to compare them with each other. Besides which, with my training in art and not illustration, I tend to love the great artists (a lot more from the past, I must say, than the present) rather than the great illustrators, to the extent that there is a distinction. I admire many of both, though, either for their work in general or for certain skills I wish I had.
The Creative: You researched Rapunzel extensively. How important was the research, and how did it affect the final artwork?
PZ: It was important to me to research the story because I wanted to know what I was dealing with. Even if I hadn't planned to retell it, if I had gotten permission to use some excellent existing translation from the Grimms, I would have wanted to know where that tale came from. It happens that researching Rapunzel led me to the discovery that it was not even a real folktale. As I wrote in the book's note on the text, the Grimms created their Rapunzel by paring down a German translation of a 1697 literary "conte" by a French noblewoman. This Mademoiselle La Force had taken large portions of her material from Petrosinella, one of a famous (1634) collection of Neapolitan tales. So although I'm sure I wouldn't have been taken to court if I had located my Rapunzel in New Guinea, I thought it made excellent sense to place it in Italy, in the century before Giambattista Basile published Petrosinella, and even to try to evoke the style of the art of that period. The research inspired the pictures, though I don't think of it as determining them absolutely.
The Creative: Discussions of your Rapunzel have suggested the presence of some fairly adult themes, including the "discovery of adult love," "possessiveness," "spiritual confinement" and a "struggle for self-reliance." Are these themes something we can expect children to grasp?
PZ: My expectation is not that the child should grasp any concept in the story -- a didactic expectation -- but that the story should grasp the child. If that happens, it is for a reason; something in the story has resonated with something in the child. And if it is a feeling about a relationship with a mother, fine. The chances are that the child won't know or care what creates the response anyway. I'm interested in the book, the object, the response it creates. But it isn't a medium I use to encode messages so that they can be decoded by grownup readers. Well -- then again, sometimes I do throw in a thing or two like that, but it's just for my own amusement. One scene in Rumpelstiltskin shows the little man standing by a pot of flowers as the queen incorrectly guesses his name -- and all the flowers have symbolic significance, taken from "The Language of Flowers." All but one, that is, which I made up for no particular reason. Sometimes it is nice to do what Sesame Street has been so successful at, and aim a little something over the heads of the smaller reader, just to make what might be the hundredth reading of a book a bit more interesting and palatable to the one doing the reading.
The Creative: Children have changed, particularly in the past 20 years, with the advent of video games, the television-as-babysitter, and now the Internet. Is it a struggle to illustrate books for children in a world in which children are growing up so much more quickly?
PZ: Children have changed on the exterior, but I don't think human nature is changed by any of those influences. I don't illustrate books for what I think children want or even need. I try to make books that feel right to me, that affect me as deeply as possible, and I hope that the feeling carries over to others. Hansel and Gretel is about small children in a big world, about the feeling that parents might not be there for you, about doing for yourself and finding pleasure in it. Is this any more foreign to the children of here and now than it would have been in Germany two hundred years ago?
The Creative: In an era of Barney, the Teletubbies and the Power Rangers, can Rapunzel, Hansel & Gretel and Rumpelstiltskin still hold their own?
PZ: They're strong stories, though I hardly feel qualified to state why they've lasted so long, and I have no certainty that they will continue to last. You can be pretty sure that even if they are vanquished by Teletubbies and Power Rangers, those television presences won't themselves last for the ages. The Grimm brothers wanted to write down their tales because they saw that an oral tradition of passing down stories was being lost. I guess they were right. Now it's possible that a written tradition of passing down stories is also disappearing. I'll be surprised if the best of the traditional tales don't become a part of what television transmits to children, if only because of television's endless appetite for subject matter.
The Creative: Hollywood recently re-interpreted the stories of Romeo and Juliet and Cinderella. It's been said that your own Rapunzel was interpreted in a modern way. Is re-interpretation essential to finding new life for new audiences in classic fables?
PZ: I was just reading an article about Gus Van Sant's new "Psycho," which perhaps offers the alternative to what you are suggesting -- recreating a known work of art with the intention of not reinterpreting it. Really, though, I don't think of what I did as reinterpreting an old classic -- and certainly not reinterpreting with a modern twist. If there were an existing illustrated version of Rapunzel that looked just right to me, I wouldn't have made this one. I saw one kind of meaning in the Grimms' Rapunzel, and another in the French tale, and yet another in the Neapolitan. My version came from some of each of them, and my interpretation of the sorceress would probably have been perfectly acceptable to Mlle. La Force, if not Wilhelm Grimm.
The Creative: What's the future of the industry look like?
PZ: When I started illustrating children's books some 20 years ago, the field of children's book illustration had extremely low status in the adult world. It's amazing to me that now there are so many professional artists, even, who want to illustrate books for children. Here's the only advice I have that might be helpful: remember that book illustration really works when it honors the story above everything. You have to be so wrapped up in the story that your pictures carry a reader all the way into its world. It's all about the story--and it's not about the illustrator.
Interview with Bruce Bendinger
The night prior to his engagement at the Calumet, I managed to wriggle my way through the purgatory of a hotel help desk and pin Bruce Bendinger down where he was staying, despite both of our busy schedules. He had two seminars to prepare, and I had a concert to attend, which turned out to be a mistake anyway, since the lead singer smashed up the stage and left 35 minutes into the show, and...erm...sorry. Tangent. Anyway, we talked for a little over a half hour, and Mr. Bendinger told me about the copywriting business, the meaning of life, the cure for cancer, and exactly what the heck is REALLY going on with "The X-Files," anyway. The bits about writing are here for your enjoyment. The rest is available for four easy installments of $99.95.The Creative: Like myself, and many other writers, you wear several hats. You write books, you write ad copy, you do seminars...Which do you prefer, the writing or the seminars?
BB: I think I like both. It's a dynamic system where one helps the other. Actually doing the writing helps me talk about how to do it, and teaching others how to do it helps me learn more about the process itself. It's self-reinforcing. I think being forced to think about problems in a larger sense makes it easier to solve your own problems, and as I watch young men and women wrestle with finding their way into the marketplace, it helps me to understand the business better.
The Creative: How is business, come to think of it? Is there really work to be found, or should I dig out my nametag, and clip-on bow tie?
BB: It's good news, bad news, as always. If you look hard enough, there's work to be found. The traditional advertising business is contracting, and there are always new media and marketing organizations offering many new opportunities. The changing nature of the business means that these new organizations are often one of the best places to find work. In particular, there are some growth areas in the economy to watch out for. Everything from a health care organization needing an infomercial on "How to Be Healthy," to a new business needing a promotional video. There's a larger view of the field of communication for business recently. One of the things that's really interesting is the speed of change. The business is simultaneously concentrating and becoming less concentrated. TV commercials are being done by large advertising companies as well as smaller companies. There are more expensive ways to do it and cheaper ways to do it. The possibilities are expanding.
The Creative: I assume technology is primarily to "blame" for these changes?
BB: Your mailbox is the recipient of new technologies all the time, and desktop publishing, the television set...all of these things have changed a lot. For example, on television there may be fewer opportunities to do national commercials, but more local people are now starting to advertise on TV, thanks in part to the increasing affordability of video software. Today, Radio Shack has all the stuff you need to get started in the publishing business. Ten years ago, you couldn't have run your own publishing business on your desktop.
The Creative: I presume that this new explosion of technology is not just affecting the writing business, but writing itself? How has the business changed over the last twenty years or so?
BB: Well first of all, there's more writing out there...science fiction has a whole new batch of writers, lots of them women, some of whom are smashingly good. There's an explosion of media and writing, and some of it is quite good, as well as an explosion of opportunity. Technology does affect writing, but it has also affected the recipients of the writing. In literature, you're driven by the artist, and in journalism, the event drives it. In marketing communications, it's the receiver. The whole nature of "consumption of media" and the consumers themselves have changed, ranging from how you literally reprogram the younger generation with TV and the remote control. It's "Honey I Rewired The Kids." Technology has changed the input, and the ads are changing to catch up with how the receivers are changing due to technology.
The Creative: Thanks to this technological boom, I'm as guilty of the "I own a Macintosh computer; ergo, I am a desktop publisher" syndrome as the next guy. What do you use for your writing? Are you still banging out the copy on a typewriter? There are those who refuse to use a computer because they're afraid of the affect it might have on their writing.
BB: I own a Macintosh. I was a very early adapter, actually; I got my first one in 1984, when they first came out. Primarily for the GUI (Graphic User Interface), truth be told. I think for the most part, editing improves writing, and if people's editing doesn't improve their writing, there's a problem. There's often so much time invested in writing, and if changing and editing is too time intensive then there is a barrier to change. Desktop publishing and home computers make editing and changing a lot easier. I certainly feel that they improve the process.
The Creative: Speaking of Macintosh...you've worked for them in the past. Maybe you can answer this question: WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM? What did they do wrong?
BB: (laugh) Apple computer...a fascinating question. Their situation is interesting...I think the main problem with Apple is that they're not sure whether they're a hardware or a software company. The two are so wrapped up in each other with Apple. Apple needs to focus more and decide what they are. I think that has a lot to do with their current business situation. But Apple has their niche. Advertising is one small business that is pretty much Mac dominated, because it's a graphically driven, creative business.
The Creative: Speaking of creativity, you've been called one of the "Top Ten Creative People in the United States." It seems to me that it's a very hard thing to rate creativity...do you agree with the label you've been given? What do you consider "creative" besides yourself?
BB: You know, it's an easy handle for people to wear...being called "creative." They asked who the players were, and my name was mentioned. I was like 27 years old, working at Leo Burnett, and having some good seasons when they took that poll. It was more like "how quick you did it," and not necessarily "how good it was." Now I say "Hunh?" as I go through all the minutia on my résumé, and my eyes sort of glaze over. It's kind of meaningless now. You want creative people now, look at the people who are doing stuff like Nike ads. Who are they? Who's doing stuff that I like? Those are the real creative people. It's easier to "keep score" with things like that.
The Creative: Obviously you did something right if you're teaching other people about creativity and writing today. What are you all about, exactly, and is it really possible to "teach people to be more creative?"
BB: OK, what am I about? It's like this. Yes you can teach everyone to be more creative. Certain people will always have more innate skills, and neurological and environmental things are going on of course, but there is a "software" than can be taught, a non-linear processing tool. What I'm giving people as I go around is other conceptual models to take what you already know and process it in new ways. I give you new software, new ways to look at the world you do business in, new ways to handle information. The interesting thing is that all of the hardware of our business has already been downloaded to all of America, via DTP, home computers, etc. What I "download" is the software that people don't have, so that everyone can learn to use their hardware better.
The Creative: Aren't these things being taught at schools...at work? Why does someone like you have to teach people this "software?"
BB: A big problem we have is time compression. Companies are becoming less able to train people, so I'm trying to give learning to people that need it. Companies are less able to teach what needs to be taught due to downsizing. Training programs are gone, and at the same time the workloads and workdays of people that are left after downsizing are getting rougher. It's nuts. There's nowhere near the kind of help that I got twentysome years ago at Leo Burnett. Simply put: people need help, and I offer what many of them need.
Bruce Bendinger at The Calumet
Strings of blinking lights, video screens, wires and projectors greeted those arriving at the Calumet on October 21, leaving them all wondering whether Bruce Bendinger was a famous copywriter or a Captain of the Starship Enterprise. Doubt evaporated when Mr. Bendinger had trouble turning on the overhead projector, and needed help operating the VCR.Nationally-renowned copywriter? Yes. Able to pilot a United Federation of Planets Starship? No, but after all, the 75-or-so onlookers weren't there to sharpen their technological skills; they were there to learn the tricks of the copywriting trade from one of the best in the business, "The Man Who Wrote The Book."
Tangible panic set in as Bendinger calmly drew circles and squares and triangles on the overhead projector, followed by obscure formulas like Q2+R2+S2+P3. Many gasped, wishing they'd taken more algebra and geometry courses in college, instead of all those Shakespeare and Graphic Design courses. The concern was unfounded, as Bendinger quickly demonstrated the real reason behind those diagrams and formulas. As it turns out, sometimes it takes shapes and formulas to make words and ideas flow more easily. Teaching new ways to think about old ideas is Bruce Bendinger's game.
Most writers, it turns out, are pretty good writers; where writers get in trouble, said Bendinger, is when they have to solve problems. Problems like how to get an audience's attention can be easily solved with three other A's: an Awareness of the situation, an Attitude shift and definitive Action to make things right. Learning the R's of a situation (how an audience is Responding, knowing that people pay attention to what holds Relevance to them, gauging their Reactions, and building a better Relationship with advertisers) may sound simplistic, but it's something many had not thought about until Bendinger mentioned it.
If there was one central theme of Bendinger's seminar, it was in building better relationships, and knowing more about advertisers and the audience than many of them know about themselves. "Rubbing data all over your body" and wallowing in words and sentences is not nearly as important as focusing on the personal truths and key relationships in the business. From making sure that there's someone in the room who can say "yes" when you're discussing an ad, to knowing that an audience has different ways of thinking and feeling about things, what Bendinger offered were the keys to becoming a more successful copywriter.
Who is your advertiser? Who do they want to be? What is the reality of the situation, and what is the relevance of the product being sold? What sight and sound images can best help sell the product you're writing about? What sorts of people go to the place where your product is sold? Common questions all, but Q2+R2+S2+P3, despite its simplicity, can take an ad campaign out of the realm of "finding new ways to use old ideas" and into the realm of "new ideas about old themes."
Bendinger's ideas aren't necessarily new in and of themselves. He used them himself years ago, successfully, on campaigns as varied as those for Tide, Pizza Hut, Sunkist, Archway Cookies and Popeye's. The key to becoming a better copywriter, he would have us believe, is to use his keys and thought processes to trigger new ideas and insights. New ideas, it seems, are the key to selling products to an audience that has "caught on" to the advertsing around them. Knowing about the actual process can result in better writing and better responses. Utilizing new technologies can help in communicating with the people who use that technology every day; the audience.
Ultimately, what the seminar gave those who attended was not a list of "Do's" and "Do Not's", but rather a series of mental thought patterns to inspire new and better ideas. Rather than give his audience answers, Bendinger gave them more questions. Who is your audience? What are you selling, and to whom? Where do you stand now, and where do you want to be?
Using what Bendinger offered, the answer to that last question can most certainly be "Number One." And I ain't making another Star Trek reference.