Dilettante or Thug?

Webster defines the first as a “dabbler in the arts,” the second as “a gangster or tough.” Is it possible for both to describe the same person? Am I or am I? I have always struggled with the contradictions in my nature, the seeming walking contradiction of my personality, partly truth and partly fiction.

As previously written, I relish physical contact, in many ways, and do not shy away from physical confrontation. I also love musical theater, my favorite being “Les Miserables,” mainly because I saw it from a seat in “the stalls” in the West End of London with my brother. I wore cleats to play baseball and football in high school, but I also wore loafers to see “The King and I” at the Memorial Auditorium. Why is there this dichotomy in my personality and where did it come from?

Conflict is a key ingredient in any narrative; it makes the story interesting, contributing to tension that ultimately results in climax. Internal conflict is something we live with everyday. As a writer, my inner conflict is whether to write what I want or what sells. Lately I have been writing romance; because it is fun, because I am able to get published and because I learn from it. Anyone who has read my dreck knows it is tame, but, I am tempted to write more graphically.

I guess, while sitting here pondering my writer’s navel, my concern is whether I should be more graphic in my efforts at romance. Should I maintain my dilettante’s detachment or embrace my inner thug and write graphically? Hmmm, what do you think? Either of you, feel free to answer.

Spike