Welcome to Literary Ashland

Follow

Chris Scofeld is a writer, teacher, world traveler, and cellist living in Eugene, Oregon, with her husband and two goldfish. She is a former special education, art, and preschool teacher who grew up in Portland and has lived in Cambridge, MA, and Puerto Angel, Oaxaca (Mexico).

Chris Scofeld has worked with Ursula K. Le Guin and Tom Spanbauer and she writes Young Adult, Literary and Adult Fiction. Scolfeld is being recognized this October by the Pacific Northwest Booksellers Association as one of ten new Northwest novelists. You can visit her website at http://chrisscofieldauthor.com/

Chris Scofeld will read at the Schneider Museum of Art in Ashland on October 8 at 7 pm and at Tsunami Books in Eugene in November (together with authors Melissa Hart and Miriam Gershow). She will also be featured on a panel on young adult novels and identity at Wordstock this year.

We sat down to talk about her debut novel, The Shark Curtain, which features a startlingly original hero–Lily Asher.

EB: I just finished The Shark Curtain and really enjoyed the book. How did this story–and this novel– come about?

CS: Thanks, I’m pleased you liked it. I worked on SHARK, on and off, for years; I wrote short stories and started other novels when I wasn’t working on it . . . How did it come about? Inspiration, for me anyway, is two-thirds daydream, one-third memoir. After a while, your stories have lives of their own and SHARK was particularly tenacious. As for its heroine Lily, I’ve known her for so long time now, I don’t remember how we met.

EB: Lily Asher has an active imagination. Is that they key to surviving adolescence—or life for that matter?

CS: Lily has a hyperactive imagination but something else is going on too. Something bigger than her, something possibly “supernatural” for lack of a better word. In the past her visions and behaviors might have labeled her as possessed or even a witch. These days, she’d more likely be labeled autistic or schizophrenic.

Lily lives in and out of her skin. Throw adolescence into the mix, and it’s even more difficult to predict what she’ll do next. Despite her love for her family, her growing desire to be accepted at “the watering hole,” and her need to be free of the visions and behaviors that isolate her as much as give her comfort, Lily knows how painfully different she is. Thankfully she’s an artist and her art (stories, illustrations, shoeboxes) is a tool, a conduit, a way to hold on to her sanity as well as her uniqueness. While the end of the book is hopeful, it’s also troubling—she realizes she will always be an outsider and it’s clear the visions will do what they damn well want with her. She thinks she’s finally run off SOG (Son of God) but what about the writing on her frosty window? What happens when you’re ready to cut the crazy lose, but the crazy isn’t done with you yet? There’s lots going on in The Shark Curtain. I hope the readers will see beyond a weird kid acting weird.

EB: Are there autobiographical elements here? Are you Lily Asher?

CS: SHARK is as close as I’ll get to writing a memoir.

EB: You’ve set the story in the 1960s. I’m curious about that choice…

CS: I was 17 when I graduated from high school in 1969, so I know what the culture was for a teenager back then. I also thought setting Lily’s intimate struggles against such a big canvas of change, gave The Shark Curtain more depth. Lily struggles to be honest with herself and her family, just as the demonstrators and the disenfranchised struggled for truth and transparency in the civil rights movement and the Vietnam War.

EB: Can you tell our readers a bit about the title?

CS: It’s a metaphor that runs throughout the book. The reader is introduced to it in the first chapter when Lily watches scuba diver Mike Nelson (the fictional hero of the popular 50s-60s TV show “Sea Hunt”) confront a shark under water. The “shark curtain” is where the blurred water (along with its possible danger) finally becomes clear. It’s where the unknown and reality meet, where reality finally asserts itself.

EB: I was a young adult in the 1960s so the period details were a particular fascination for me: Sea Hunt, The Name Game song, Hai Karate, My Favorite Martian, Bonanza, and much more…. How did you research all that?

CS: I didn’t research the details , I remembered most of them. I was a TV baby and spent a lot of time soaking it up—from Edie Adams to the 1968 Democratic Convention. Up until my adolescent pot consumption got in the way anyway. Of course, when I wasn’t absolutely sure about something I googled it. Even so, one of my editors early on found a mistake. Basically I trusted myself on most of it. Writing is all about learning to trust yourself. AND your unconscious.

EB: Why did you choose the young adult genre?

CS: I didn’t. My literary agent didn’t pitch it as YA either, it was my publisher’s idea. Akashic Books wanted The Shark Curtain but they wanted it for their YA Black Sheep catalog. Akashic, along with editor JL Powers, got me excited about YA.

I’m not a YA reader but I’m becoming one. There’s wild, rich, genre-stretching stuff being written for YA readers these days, by some very talented writers too—established YA writers as well as popular adult fiction writers like Neil Gaiman and Sherman Alexie. Of course YA isn’t new: Jules Verne, Robert Louis Stevenson, JR Tolkien even Ursula le Guin wrote for “mature youth” long before that.

There are also beautifully written YA novels with an international, social justice focus—fiction and nonfiction books about young people caught up in war or racism or poverty, books with heart that are realistic but hopeful. The book blog www.thepiratetree.com is a great resource for both YA and children’s books like that.

My novel The Shark Curtain is considered YA-Crossover but the majority of my readers, and those attending my readings, are adults. That’s GREAT of course but I’d love to get teenage feedback on SHARK too.

EB: I’m an adult, more or less, but The Shark Curtain took me back. Did you also have adult readers in mind?

CS: Absolutely. Not only because it’s set in the 60s, but because of some of the questions SHARK poses. I don’t understand why some books with younger narrators are considered adult while others aren’t. Why were Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close and The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time both marketed as adult fiction and The Shark Curtain wasn’t? All three books have teenage narrators and the stories are told in first person. All three books deal with serious matters—death, family, forgiveness, identity.

Of course those distinctions are made by people who know the business better than me.

EB: What’s next for you?

CS: It was suggested that I write (another) YA novel, which I am. It’s very different from SHARK. I’ve also been making notes on a contemporary western (adult) ghost story I started a while back. I’d like to finish an (adult) murder mystery I started too. All three projects—the new YA novel, the ghost story and the mystery are fun departures from being inside Lily’s head. I’ve never attempted a ghost story or mystery before—it’ll be a challenge to see if I can pull them off!

EB: You also are a short story writer. What the difference for you between novel writing and short story writing? Does one have certain advantages over the other?

CS: Big questions. Most of my short stories average between 15-23 pages so they’re not very short, and the longer ones are still in progress so, again, “short” is a relative term. I always write more than I need (backgrounds of characters etc) so novels are probably my natural strength. My Dangerous Writer mentor Tom Spanbauer once said to me, “I bet you’ve never had writers block have you? “ No, I never have. Knock on wood—writing is a mysterious compulsion and I don’t want to queer anything.

As a reader I love the focus of a short story, the way the author drop-kicks you into another world where every word and action counts, yet you don’t necessarily know what’s going on. If it’s well-written you’re quickly sucked in, you believe, you’re transported. Writing a short story is like being inside a stretched skin, a drum maybe. The walls are right there, there’s only so far you can go, but there’s so much music between here and there. Know what I mean? It’s all about control.

A touching, well-crafted short story is a beautiful thing. But then so is a touching well-crafted novel. They’re just different animals.

EB: What are you reading right now?

CS: I hope to start either The Buried Giant by Kazuo Isaguro, or The Book of Strange New Things, by Michael Faber tonight. New novels by two of my favorite writers. Lucky me!

EB: Thanks for talking with us.

CS: Thank YOU.

Follow

Gary A. DePaul has a Ph.D. and Ed.M. from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Department of Educational Organization and Leadership and completed his bachelor’s degree at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. He has two decades of experience as a manager and scholar of management, has worked as a manager in fortune 500 companies, and consults with organizations to improve leadership practices. He is a Certified Performance Technologist (CPT) and a CPT application reviewer and presents at such associations as the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI), the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), and the Association for Talent Development (ATD).

He recently published Nine Practices of 21st Century Leadership: A Guide for Inspiring Creativity, Innovation, and Engagement.

EB: How did you get interested in leadership? And what motivated to write Nine Practices of 21st Century Leadership?

GD: For most of my academic and professional career, I only had a casual interest in leadership. Even when I studied Situational Leadership® II and Servant Leadership, I hadn’t developed a strong interest. It wasn’t until I listened to James C Hunter’s The Servant Leadership Training Course audiobook that I realized that leadership is something bigger and more important than what I traditionally had been taught. Within a few months of listening to this audiobook, I started discovering new themes in leadership that radically differs from tradition themes. The more I learned, the more passionate I became about the research and discovery of what is involved in serious leadership thinking and practice.

EB: What did you discover in the course of the research?

GD: In the past thirty years, leadership has radically evolved from what we traditionally think of leadership. I contrast the difference by labeling the older way as traditional leadership and the new way as 21st Century Leadership. I identified 13 traditional leadership assumptions that can cause more harm than good. I also identified seven leadership principles, 26 new beliefs, and nine distinct best practices. Here’s some of what’s new:

• 21st Century Leadership emphasizes interactions between leading and collaboration while de-emphasizing roles such as leader and follower.
• Management involves accomplishing goals through others. That’s not what leadership is about. Leadership is about helping others mature their mental and moral qualities, capabilities, and behaviors. This is a fancy way to say that leadership is about building character.
• Leadership is action that focuses on others and not yourself.
• The practice of leadership is bi-directional. By helping others build character, you inadvertently build your own character.
• Everyone can practice leadership regardless of role.
• Sharing your own mistakes builds your credibility and helps others trust you more.
• Leadership doesn’t reside in one person or one role. Fully evolved teams consist of everyone practicing leadership and collaboration.
• Teams and organizations that are fully practicing leadership effectively are more productive and work in environments that promote safety, engagement, creativity, and innovation.

EB: What are the implications of this new thinking for large organizations?

GD: Several organizations provide leadership development for managers and executives. Not only do these programs exclude individual contributors, they tend to be more about management and traditional leadership. If organizations want to earnestly develop leadership within their ranks, they need to rethink who should receive leadership training, the training content, and how training is delivered.

In addition, those in charge of diversity initiatives and the strategy portfolio should leverage the principles, beliefs, and practices to improve their outcomes. Just as important, owners of diversity, strategy, and training should harmonize how they leverage leadership. Doing so greatly improves positive results.

EB: You introduce a series of metaphors: being a detective, doctor, guide, and gardener. What was your idea?

GD: At a glance, readers can gain insight into what’s involved in the nine best practices of leadership. At the very least, I want to stimulate curiosity so readers would explore why I chose a particular practice title.

Here’s an example of how I title one of the practices: In Develop Like Scouts, readers discover that this practice involves “scouting” for new ideas and talent. Think of a baseball or football scout. Teams need to search outside their team to find insightful methods, techniques, and resources that promote development and improve productivity. Sometimes, this is achieved by recruiting new talent to the team – talent that brings new ways of thinking about how the team works.

EB: Who is the audience for Nine Practices of 21st Century Leadership?

GD: The audience is anyone who wants to improve their leadership capabilities. Everyone can apply these leadership practices in their role, so the audience isn’t limited to managers and executives.

Another audience are researchers and scholars. In the book, there’s a wealth of sources to support researchers’ valuable work and their achievement in advancing the leadership field. In the book, I have about 80 quotations, more than 150 table notes, more than 400 endnotes, and more than 135 bibliography references, so there’s plenty for researchers and scholars to leverage.

EB: How is leadership different from management?

GD: If you survey 100 leadership experts, they’ll agree that there’s a difference between leadership and management. Ask them to explain the difference, most will have difficulty doing so.

Here’s the short and simple answer (I’ll blog about the long version in the next month or so):

Management serves three functions: Set goals, design, and monitor. This happens at three organizational levels:

• Organization
• Process (typically includes project management)
• People

You could have executives managing the overall organization, process managers, project managers, and people managers. These management roles are formally assigned to employees by human resources (HR).

In contrast, leadership is something that HR cannot assign. Although you might hear some describe senior executives as having leadership roles, that’s inaccurate. Many executives fail to practice leadership regardless of having a leadership label. Everyone can practice leadership (or not) regardless of role or career level.

Leadership involves a set of practices that you apply to any process or action that is assigned to a specific role. For example, CEOs create and maintain the vision statement of a company. That’s a management task. Therefore, creating a vision statement can be accomplished with or without practicing leadership. A CEO not practicing leadership might create a vision statement during a retreat with his or her direct reports. That really isn’t how leadership is practice at the CEO level. However, a CEO that practices leadership might incorporate the input from employees at all organizational levels and leverage employees to refine, improve, and own the vision statement.

Here’s another way to think about this: Managers of people hire, fire, promote, demote, “micromanage,” conduct annual reviews, and increase/decrease pay (just a few managerial tasks). Leadership has to do with how you perform these tasks. How a manager acts when reviewing someone’s performance differs substantially depending if the manager practices leadership or not.

EB: What makes a good leader, or a great one?

GD: People who are good at leadership study leadership principles, beliefs, and practices and then attempt to apply leadership to their role. People great at leadership do the same. However, they also collect feedback (direct and anonymous) about how well they practice leadership. They then create one to two objectives to improve their leadership practices based on their feedback.
Those good at leadership casually and infrequently study leadership. Those great at leadership continuously strive to learn how they can improve and regularly set objectives for improving their leadership practices.

EB: You also talk about continual growth for leaders. Why is that important?

GD: Here are three reasons why continual growth is important:

1. Arrested development. People tend to develop skills until they are satisfied. Once satisfied, they discontinue to develop. The challenge of leadership is that most people stop developing their leadership capabilities too soon and are, at best, partially successful at practicing leadership. Leadership is so complex, you would need a lifetime to really master the practices. However, mastering a few can substantially make a positive difference. Continue to improve and your impact will be extraordinary!
2. Old habits. Anyone who studies habit theory knows that old habits never disappear fully. People can easily regress to old habits without realizing it. This includes practicing leadership. Anyone can slip back to using coercion or traditional leadership practices that are easier than practicing 21st Century Leadership.
3. Evolution. In the past 30 years, the leadership field has radically changed and continues to evolve. I’m excited about the developments in the next couple of decades, and if you’re serious about practicing effective leadership, you’ll want to keep current with what’s developing in the leadership field. Doing so might make a substantial difference in how you effectively serve others.

EB: Thanks for talking with us.

GD: Thank you for this opportunity.