Divine Secrets of the Writing Sisterhood

Writing Romance: An Interview (And a Giveaway!)

2012-02-20T09:59:00.000-07:00

Like many English majors, I was brainwashed in college against reading any genre fiction. Growing up as a reader has involved letting go of that arbitrary prejudice and learning to enjoy a variety of genres: in the last year alone I've read a fantasy, a mystery, several YAs, and a thriller. Excellent writing exists across genres, and the tagline “literary” is no guarantee of artistic merit, much less reading enjoyment. This week, I’m delighted to introduce our readers to Gabi Stevens, author of the Time of Transition series, classified as “paranormal romance” and described by one Amazon reviewer as “a mix between contemporary romance and Harry Potter.” (Ms. Stevens has also kindly offered a book giveaway: see end for details.)

Q: When you tell people you write romance novels, what kind of reaction do you get?

A: Here are some of the actual quotes I’ve received and the answers I wish I could say in parentheses:
“When are you going to write a real book?” (As opposed to the fake one you’re holding right now?)
“When are you going to write something serious?” (You mean the ones that leave you feeling like you need Prozac?)
“How can you write such trash?” (I’m sorry you have such an opinion on novels celebrating love. How sad you’ve never experienced it.)

Here are some of the more positive ones:
“Oh, I love trashy novels.” (Then you won’t like mine because it isn’t trash.)
“Did your husband pose for the cover?” (Sure, because a middle-aged engineer is just who readers want to see.)
“Is it based on real life?” (Yes, just like Agatha Christie’s many murders and Stephen King’s encounters with preternatural beings and events. What part of fiction don’t you understand?)

I have to say that those reactions come from non-romance readers. People who read and enjoy romance are excited to meet an author. I’ve never had anything but a truly wonderful experience with readers. And it’s a large community. Romance comprises the largest segment of the fiction market. With sales exceeding 1.3 billion dollars in 2010, romance beats the next largest segment (religious/inspirational) by nearly 600 hundred million dollars.

The word is getting out however. There are now academic conferences on the romance novel, books on romance (Beyond Heaving Bosoms by Sarah Wendell and Candy Tan), articles and web sites.These examples are only a small sampling of information on Romance. Romance Writers of America (RWA) is a national organization with over 10,000 members with local chapters across the US and online.

Q: For a genre that has such strong and enthusiastic support, romance seems awfully misunderstood. What would you say is the most common misperception about this genre?

A: I’d like to address three misperceptions actually. The first is that writing romance is easy. Nathaniel Hawthorne said, “Easy reading is damn hard writing.” Authors who have never attempted it seem to think that they can pop out a romance novel in a weekend. Sorry, folks. We study our craft. We worry about characterization, plot, theme (I’m giving a talk on theme this summer at the RWA national conference in Anaheim in July), story arc, turning points, wordsmithing, conflict, etc. What one discovers if one studies the market, editors, and agents is that romance authors, especially the members of RWA are better prepared than other authors. They understand the business and the craft side of writing. Be prepared to learn a lot before you write romance.

The second is that the books are formula. And here it is: a romance is the story of two individuals in a central love story with a satisfying ending. Okay, genre romance tends to have the HEA—happily ever after, and that’s what people object to: that all the books are the same. What non-romance readers don’t realize is that the novels aren’t about whether the two characters get together; they’re about how the two characters get together. Within the genre are such varied subgenres as historical, which has its own subgenres such as regency, British, Scottish, western, medieval, etc; contemporary; romantic suspense; paranormal, including vampires, werewolves, ghosts, time travel, sci fi, and my own, fantasy; inspirational; category; and single title. There are light romances and dark ones, humorous and serious, short and long. One last thing about formula: I defy you to name a genre that isn’t formulaic. When was the last time you read a mystery where the detective ends the book by saying, “Oh well, I couldn’t solve it. Better luck next time”? A better word for formula is reader expectation. All genres, including literary fiction, have reader expectations, and if those expectations aren’t fulfilled, the book fails.

The third misperception is that romance novels are all about the sex. Porn for women. In my last book, As You Wish, the story is told in 306 pages. Of those, ten pages describe sex. That’s approximately three percent of the novel. And the rest is describing the characters’ clothing. Just kidding. There is an actual story. (I know. You’re shocked.) Depending on what type of book you pick up, the level of sensuality and the amount of sex will vary from having events occur behind closed doors to explicit erotic romances. And besides, what’s wrong with sex?

Q: As a big fan of Diana Gabaldon’s (quite sexy and wildly popular) Outlander series, I wholeheartedly agree! Next question: In researching sci-fi and fantasy, I discovered a number of rules, such as “each magical ability must come at a cost.” Each genre has such properties and peculiarities: what can you tell us about the romance genre?

A: If you are writing for the romance market, the book must have a couple and a happy ending. A book can be romantic but not be a romance (think Nicholas Sparks or Danielle Steele), or have a happy ending and not be a romance. Otherwise the parameters are wide open. I would contend that the best romance novels hold their own against the best novels in any genre. Yes, there are bad ones, but, really, every genre has bad ones. Great romance novels are sublime, just as any great novels are. Books one considers great comes down to taste (after grammar, sentence structure, etc.). We all have different tastes, which is as is should be. I would hate to have only one type of book to read. If you want to learn more about the genre, do check out rwanational.org. And if you’re planning on writing a romance novel, love them. It’ll show up in your writing if you don’t.

Q: When one of my manuscripts developed a strong romantic subplot, I went to the library and checked out a few books on writing romance. I think this is one thing that sets romance apart from the other genres: non-romance writers can turn to this genre for ideas on their own plots, because so many novels have a romantic element. This can't really be said for westerns, sci-fi, fantasy, or horror.

A: The point you bring up is why I find the critics’ and (snobby) readers’ reaction to romance so baffling. Love is such a central and deeply ingrained human emotion. So many, many stories focus on love of all kinds. So many great books have strong romantic subplots—look at Stephen King’s latest book, 11/22/63. Suzanne Brockmann gave a keynote speech that I was privileged to hear. She left us in tears. In the speech she said, when the towers were falling on 9/11, people didn’t call their banks, or their businesses. They called their loved ones to say that they love them. JK Rowling’s great villain (Voldemort for those of you living under rocks) is defeated because he cannot understand love.

Q: The process of deciding which genre to write in is rather mysterious to me. I am still genre-hopping, myself, trying to find the best fit. I've toyed with YA, fantasy, historical fiction, and that vague category known as "women's fiction." Paranormal romance is such a specific subcategory: what led you there? Is it because that's what you enjoy reading, or was it something else?

A: I loved reading since I was tiny, and romances specifically since I was 16 (I can still distinctly recall the first romance I read. My mother gave it to me—Johanna Lindsey’s Captive Bride. The second one I read was Kathleen Woddiwiss’s The Flame and the Flower. Woddiwiss’s book is widely acknowledged as the birth of the modern romance novel and changed women’s fiction forever). I also have a degree—two actually—in literature. I’ve always preferred genre fiction or 19th century fiction, and, well, one can’t write 19th century fiction in the 21st century, can one? Paranormal romance is a logical choice for me because I’ve studied the Grimm fairytales extensively, and many of the books I loved as a kid were paranormal—The Chronicles of Narnia, The Lord of the Rings, The Borrowers, The Phantom Tollbooth, the E. Nesbit and Edward Eager books, etc. (Just stop me now.) I’ve always loved mysteries as well, and went through a long period of reading horror, and still love science fiction. But romance remains my favorite and I have written historical romance as well under a different name.

The greatest thing about being unpublished is that you can genre-hop. You have the freedom to write whatever you wish. Once you sell a book, the publisher will want to see similar books from you. That doesn’t mean that you can’t someday write in other genres—many authors do—but bottom line is that writing is a business once you’re published (and should be before as well) and some of that freedom disappears.

Q: One thing my writer friends sometimes say is that they won't, or can't, consider themselves Real Writers™ until they get published. When did you first self-identify as a writer?

A: I finished my first manuscript after five years of picking it up and putting it down. It was a hobby, nothing more. I was still so far from being published, but having finished a manuscript was such a thrill, I immediately started on a second. Only after finishing my third did I really consider that writing was something I could see myself doing as a career. At that point I started a fourth manuscript, actively sought an agent, and joined writers’ groups.

While getting published is certainly one of a series of steps with different goals, I believe you must identify yourself as a writer before that event. Why? Because if you aren’t taking yourself seriously, taking your craft seriously, making goals for yourself, then you won’t get to the step of publication. Even before I was published, my kids knew that when I was writing, I was working. My husband respected my need to spend money I hadn’t earned from writing on writing. Because I was a writer. After publication, you’re just a published writer.

Q: What was the process of getting your first novel published? For example, was it the first novel you'd actually written, or did you have abandoned projects? How many queries did you send out before you got a bite, and how did you decide which agents to contact?

A: The first novel I sold was in fact my first manuscript, but it’s not that simple. I went back to my first manuscript and rewrote it after my fourth manuscript. And revised it more times than you can count. So really, it no longer resembled my first manuscript by the time I sold. I definitely have unsold manuscripts (three complete, four partials). They aren’t abandoned—due to changes in editors, the market, different stages in my career, they remain unsold or unfinished, but definitely not abandoned.

Once you’ve decided what type of novels you write, the agent search can begin. There are all sorts of databases to explore—on line and off. Make sure to do research. You don’t want to send a children’s book to someone who doesn’t represent that genre or fiction to a non-fiction agent. Look at the acknowledgments and dedications of books you love. Very often the authors will mention their agents. And join a writers’ group. Talk to other writers and find out their agent stories.

As for the queries themselves. . .I always laugh when an article appears about a best selling book and the writer drags out the number of times the author was rejected. Kathryn Stockett, author of The Help, was rejected sixty times and people are shocked by that number. I’ll tell you right here, that number is common and higher numbers are just as common. The opportunities for rejection abound. In one of my outings in this business, I was rejected closer to eighty times. What I give Ms. Stockett credit for is perseverance. My first agent gave me the following words of wisdom: There are three elements in a successful writing career—luck, talent, and perseverance. Of the three you need only two, but one of them must be perseverance.

Q: Regarding famous rejections, like Kathyrn Stockett’s and JK Rowling’s: I, too, have marveled that so many agents could turn down such obviously well-written manuscripts. Is there really such a glut of fabulous fiction out there that agents can afford to be so choosy? Then someone pointed out that these manuscripts may not have been nearly so polished when the authors first began pitching them. Perhaps the rejections came with feedback that helped the authors slowly revamp their stories into the current bestseller incarnations. What are your thoughts on that?

A: Frankly, editors and agents don’t have the time to give much feedback these days. Your manuscript has to be almost publishable when it comes across their desk because they don’t have the time to teach you. There are exceptions of course, but really you have to know the craft before you think of submitting. Learn, learn, learn. Write, write, write. This doesn’t mean that my agent or my editors haven’t helped me, but I do know the craft.

A large number of competent manuscripts cross editors’ and agents’ desk these days, and I can’t think of a worse adjective than “competent.” They want a manuscript that sings. And a manuscript that sings to one editor won’t to another. So much is subjective. So editors and agents choose what they like. I’ve heard enough editors and agents say exactly those words—they choose what they like—that I absolutely believe it. I also believe most of the stuff that hits their desks is terrible and not ready for publication. Not to sound mean or superior, but a lot of writers have an unrealistic opinion of their abilities. That doesn’t mean they can’t learn; it just means they aren’t ready.

Gabi Stevens writes paranormal romances. Her next book, Wishful Thinking, is the third book in a series featuring fairy godmothers and will be released April 24, 2012. The first two books, The Wish List and As You Wish are available now. Gabi would love to share her books with new readers. One lucky winner will receive a copy of The Wish List and another will receive As You Wish Just leave a comment here and a way to contact you. Winners will be chosen March 1.

You can find Gabi at www.GabiStevens.com, www.GabiStevens.blogspot.com, or on Facebook or Twitter.

Picking and Choosing Character Traits

2012-02-12T19:16:00.000-07:00

Raise your hand if you've ever read a novel, then went to see the movie and the first thing out of your mouth was, "She shouldn't be playing that role! That's not at all how I envisioned the character to look! Whoever cast this thing didn't know what the heck they were doing!" (Or more flagrant wording if you are so inclined.)

Yes, my hand is raised.

Jennifer Lawrence
in
The Hunger Games

When it comes to movies, nothing seems to annoy us more than when a beloved novel gets made into a film and gets miscast. But why? Well, a lot of it has to do with how we've interpreted the characters on the page, and believe it or not, most of us interpret those characters much differently than how another reader might. I've heard more than my share of grumblings over Jennifer Lawrence playing Katniss in the upcoming The Hunger Games film. She's to old, not the right build, not a strong enough actor to believably play the part, etc. Take a look at the movie poster, and I'll let you be the judge. I'd have to say my personal favorite to this day is Jennifer Lopez in Out of Sight, a sizzling story about a bank robber (George Clooney) and a US Marshal (Lopez) on a case to catch him in the act. The book was nothing more than a throwaway heist novel written by Elmore Leonard that I read a couple years before the film was made. In the novel, the US Marshal is a willowy blonde, nothing like how Lopez's character looks in the film. I'm sure you have a specific film character that to this day just bugs the heck out of you.

No matter how the film world ends up interpreting the characters we write in novels, we still need to take care in how we portray them. After all, it is the characters a reader falls in love with (just take a look at the Twilight series, because I don't believe it's the writing that's winning over fans). As writers, how does one go about crafting a striking character that will stand out to the reader and make the story come alive? Here are a few pointers:

Avoid clichés -- Don't make every cop crooked, every blonde busty, every school teacher gentle and sweet, or every lead male flawless in appearance and backstory. I once reviewed a novel (The Art of Murder by Don West) and the whole thing made me cringe. To this day, I think it's one of the most character clichéd books I've ever read. You want your characters to be unique. Give them qualities that will stand out to the reader, like a fascinating backstory or quirky characteristics. I recently heard a statistic about hitchhikers. Hitchhikers who wear ties are more likely to get picked up off the side of the road than those who don't. Well, then give your hitchhiker a tie!
Don't just focus on physical appearance -- Although we fall in love with a character at first sight (or first read) we always want to know what makes that character tick. What kind of story follows this character around? Is it a tale of woe? As the story unfolds, the reader wants to peel back the layers of what's hiding underneath. Make sure to give them that opportunity! Take the hitchhiker for example -- Why is he out hitching a ride in the first place? Why does he wear a fancy tie, and yet he carries a backpack on his back as a displaced homeless man would? Bring the reader to that point where they just have to know!
But don't be vague about physical appearance -- When characters tend to be poorly fleshed out in appearance, the reader tends to feel a sense of disconnect. Although I've never read it, I remember reading reviews about Toni Morrison's 2008 novel A Mercy, a novel that seems to have flat characters, mainly because she doesn't physically flesh them out very well. And a lot of times, this is why we get disappointed at the box office. The director just had a different vision of a vague character.
Give your main character a flaw -- Nobody relates to a perfectly written character, mainly because in the real world we all have flaws. As readers, we want to empathize with the main character. After all, we're invested in him/her for the next 300+ pages. This has a lot to do with those layers I spoke about earlier. The flaw could also be physical, like a bad memory or scars with a story the reader is definitely going to want to know. Back to my hitchhiker -- What if he has a mysterious tattoo on his hand that peaks the reader's interest? That marked-up piece of skin could be a clue to this man's past. What if it depicts something especially violent? Now the reader is going to wonder if the person who picked him up is having second thoughts about that misleading tie.

Need a lift?

Look for people in the real world who best reflect your main characters -- It doesn't hurt to envision a certain actor as that mysterious hitchhiker with tie and tattoo and thumb out for a ride. Who comes to mind? Maybe keep a picture of that individual on hand so you have a reference back to how he looks. It can make the writing process less confusing.

Those are just a few ways when it comes to crafting your characters, but what if you're still struggling to figure out if what you're creating is going to work? Since we tend to pick and choose character traits from people we know in our lives, then here's an exercise for you to try.

When it comes to the people in your life, who is:

The sexiest
The smartest
The most educated
The most emotional
The best well-dressed
The slyest
The dumbest
The most creative
The happiest
The saddest
The quirkiest
The most ruthless
etc.

The list could go on and on, but chances are, we know of someone who could fit into any one of those given categories. Don't be afraid to glean from the crop you have growing right in front of you. Your characters' pieces will fit together properly if you just know where to look. And hey, you might be able to figure out what the hitchhiker is really up to!

Do you struggle with creating believable characters? Do you have any tips you'd like to share when it comes to putting together a main character?

The Post-First Novel Syndrome

2012-02-05T09:30:00.003-07:00

I have been observing myself and my closest writer friends for some time now (they don’t know this, but I have!) We all seem to be stuck somewhere between our second/third novel and query limbo. And we’re all suffering from similar symptoms:

- Chronic disappointment
- Cynicism
- Inability to fully engage with other works of fiction
- Indecision about what direction to take
- Apathy/dread when asked about our work
- Mood swings with regards to publishing/writing
- Loss of “innocence” and optimism

To name a few.

All of these are indicators of a malady I like to call the “Post-First Novel Syndrome” (PFNS). Just like the loss of virginity, once a writer has finished that first novel and rendered it to the world, she will never be able to go back to that innocent era of carefree writing where there weren’t enough hours in a day to complete the stories sketched in her mind. The pleasure of writing without restrictions of word count, plot structure or character arc will never come back. The second/third-novel-writer knows now that he may not be the exception (like he thought as he heard rumors about word count, POV, or other atrocities) but he could—sadly—be the rule, and there may be some validity to the advice he didn’t want to hear back when he was immersed in first-novel bliss.

Once a first novel has left the safety of a writer’s hard drive to receive feedback from critique partners and industry professionals, a shift takes place in the novice writer’s psyche. Pain, surprise, denial, embarrassment are some of the first emotions she may experience—as tender as blisters in the palm of a child’s hand after playing at the monkey bars for too long. After some time, when rejection letters start coming in and a second novel has been written, a sort of numbness sets in—the callousness of too many recesses hanging from a metal bar. Except that this callousness is not tangible. It’s embedded in our souls and in our confidence (or lack therof) as writers.

Most manuals and classes focus on getting that first novel written. They call it a big accomplishment (and it is) but I haven’t seen a lot of advice on how to continue after/if that novel doesn’t get published.

And it’s harder to write once we’ve had a bitter taste of reality.

Trying to find a solution to this common dilemma, I came across a couple of interesting articles. One blames writer inertia on fear, while this one tries to shake us all from our comfortably numb state.

As agent Rachelle Gardner states in this post, the test of persistence doesn’t come when we’re writing and revising our manuscripts. It comes when we’ve gotten 40 + rejection letters and yet we continue to polish our manuscripts, start new projects, or query more agents.

They say this is the period where most writers get weeded out.

(Not while penning their first novel, like we would like to think.) I know many people dream of writing a novel and never do it, but THOUSANDS are completing novels every year, and they’re competing against us. They’re being persistent, while we commiserate. Or research. Or take time off. Or develop our platforms.

There was a time when you would have laughed if someone suggested that you implement a writing schedule to force yourself to sit in front of the keyboard every day. (You needed a schedule for everything else you were forgetting to do while you wrote your novel!) Sadly, your new cynic self may have to trick your brain into doing just that in order to get that next project written. Back when you started writing and you relied on a dial up connection, your internet visits were short, to the point, and then you logged off to focus on your WIP. You didn’t know what blogs were and Facebook were two separate words. You were able to focus and concentrate in your story. You were so productive.

Now, as a PFNS writer, you have many good reasons for not writing:

You’re doing research.
You’re busy and don’t have time.
You’re trying to be productive elsewhere.
You need time off to think and plan your next move.
You have priorities and writing is not one of them.

One of the things that helped me get out of my endless revision stage was to sit down with pony-tailed colleague and write down a list of concrete writing goals (with deadlines) for the fall.

Sample list:

Send manuscript to beta readers/critique partners by X-day (whether revisions are ready or not!)
Enter such and such contest on Y-day.
Query 10-20 agents by Z-day.

Doing this simple exercise with someone else gives you a sense of accountability and makes you realize, after you’ve completed your short-term goals, that you are making progress in your career—even if it’s in turtle steps. Another idea is to get out of your house and go to a library and/or café to write. This prevents you from constantly checking emails or going online for research (as a historical writer, I know how important research is, but I also admit that it constantly interrupted my writing momentum.) One last, but important, tip. Stop thinking about what Mrs. Agent or Mr. Critique Partner are going to think about your writing. Write for yourself. Tell yourself “nobody else is going to read this” (because, really, nobody HAS to read it if you don’t want to.) Remind yourself that you’ll fix it later. Give yourself permission to make mistakes.

In the end, though, it all boils down to being honest with yourself. Do you really want to be a novelist? Maybe it’s an old dream and the reality of a writer’s life doesn’t excite you as it once did. And that may be fine for you. You may find another passion. After all, writing is a gamble. This is not a four-year college where you know that if you work hard, you’ll be guaranteed a degree. No guarantees here. But if you're just shutting the inner voice that keeps telling you “what if” because it’s just too difficult/painful, you are the one who’ll be miserable. It’s your dream. No one else’s.

Please share your thoughts. Do you feel drained after years of writing/querying? Have you lost your love for writing or you still haven’t found another occupation as gratifying as the written word? Do you still see scenes in your mind? Are total strangers (potential characters) talking to you?

Pink Floyd - Comfortably Numb

Powered by mp3skull.com

An Invisible Alliance: Films, Books and Book Selling

2012-01-29T12:31:00.001-07:00

For thelast thirty years, I´ve been hearing that “books are dead,” “Hollywood is out,”“reading is out,” and that movie theaters should shut down since “nobody goesto movies anymore.” As of January 2012, movie theaters, Hollywood and virtualand physical bookstores are in extremely good health. Every year, newbestsellers hit the market; Hollywood buys the rights to such gems, turns theminto films and convinces the public to buy the book. It’s an almost circularritual that shows that, despite rumormonger warnings, written and audiovisualfiction have forged an invisible alliance that brings benefits to both.

Every timeI glance through the New York Times Bestseller List (Hardcover Fiction) I wonderhow many of those books will hit the screen in the years to come. An educatedguess would be that The Girl Who Kickedthe Hornet Nest, after meriting a Swedish screen adaptation, would followher sisters in the Larsen’s trilogy and become a Hollywood smash hit. A similarfate will befall upon A Dance withDragons, the latest entry of George R.R. Martin’s Song of Ice and Fire. It would be part of the blockbusting seriesthat HBO has dramatized under the title of Gameof Thrones.

A differentstory comes from scanning the Bestseller List for Trade Fiction. There you findseveral books that triggered off movies currently in theaters or DVD format suchas The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, TheHelp, and Sarah’s Key. Toillustrate my point, Jonathan Safran Foer’s ExtremelyLoud and Incredibly Close carries a caption following the title that says“a movie tie-in.” Shrewd businesspeopleat Amazon know that the public needs both the written and the audiovisualversion.

In New Yorkin the 80’s, my adoptive sister and I would go to the movies every Sunday, comerain or come shine. If the film wasbased on a novel, we would walk to the nearest bookstore (there was always aDalton´s around the corner) and buy the book version. It was the only way (evenin those early video days) to preserve the adventure we had just witnessed andbring it home to us. As a former librarian, I remember thousands of clientshurrying towards my reference desk to pop the question: “I have just watched X.Do you have the book?” It didn’t surprise me. It’s human necessity to combineall senses in order to appreciate a good tale.

For twomillenniums, everybody from kings to the hoi-polloienjoyed the theater as much as we enjoy television today. But after the adventof the printing press, the rich began to collect those plays in their privatelibraries. Everybody could watch a public performance of Romeo and Juliet or Webster’s TheDuchess of Malfi, but only the Duke of Something or Other could own them,bound in fine Moroccan leather, to be read at leisure.

The TwentiethCentury was the Era of the Novel, but it did not diminish the public’s need tosee their stories reenacted. Throughout the century, many bestselling novelssuch as Bram Stoker’s Dracula wereadapted for the stage. Even Uncle Tom´s Cabinwas turned into a play, aiding to spread abolitionist ideas.

The earlymoving pictures industry soon found plenty of script material on bookshelves.Even before Hollywood, even before the four-reel films were invented, books foundtheir way to screens. The first version of TheCount of Montecristo was made in Italy in 1908. The first version of Far From the Madding Crowd was made in Americain 1909. And in 1910, Mary Pickfordplayed Ramona in the first filmversion of the Helen Hunt Jackson’s novel. As feature films became longer and more sophisticated, audiences flockedto theaters to watch their favorite stories come to life on the silver screen.

Mary Pickford as the first Ramona Moreno.

For thelast hundred years, classics as well as current bestsellers have merited movie versions.In a way, the cinema has kept alive stories that would have faded in time. The arrival of television created anothermilieu for the recreation of popular fiction. The BBC’s vigorous efforts haveprevented Nineteenth and early Twentieth Century British fiction from fallinginto oblivion.

Recently, Ihad the chance to watch Lark Rise toCandleford. Based on Flora Thompson´s trilogy, this miniseries describesthe author´s experiences growing up in the English countryside in the early1900’s. It´s a nice story, but I can understand why it would be forgotten fordecades until the BBC adapted it in 2008. Now, you may find it in differentguises at Amazon: hardcover, paperback, illustrated, audio cassette, DVD, andthe Kindle version came out just last week. Flora Thompson´s descendants mustbe elated with the arrival of royalties from all those formats.

But notonly has the BBC had a hand in resurrecting authors. E.M. Forster is consideredto be one of the best British writers of the Twentieth Century, but by the1980’s, he was only known in academic circles. Sir David Lean’s A Passage to India made everyone familiarwith Forster's writing. Soon after, Merchant and Ivory would turn out delicateadaptations of Forster’s A Room with aView, Howard’s End, and Where AngelsFear to Tread. They became classics; they turned Helena Bonham Carter intoa star, and made the public aware of the existence of books behind those breathtakingfilms.

A Room with a View's trailer

The nextdecade would also mark the birth of a new bestseller novelist, all thanks toaward-winning versions of her work. Curiously, this writer, who would competein sales with J.K. Rowling and Stephen King, had been dead for over a centuryand her novels were written in the days of Napoleon. Nowadays, we all know whoJane Austen is. Her books have prompted thecreation of sequel novels, tons of biographies, parodies and a whole culturalmovement whose followers are known as ”Janeites,” not to mention film and TVseries inspired by her fertile fiction.

Pride and Prejudice's trailer (1995)

Not asthunderous as the Jane Austen Revival, but equally important, was the rebirthof Edith Wharton. Again it was linked to adaptations. Since her demise, MissWharton had been forgotten by Hollywood and bookstores. In 1993, the filmindustry remembered her in a double ration. The British adapted Ethan Frome with Liam Neeson andPatricia Arquette in the leading roles. But it was Martin Scorsese who would trulyrevive Wharton´s genius. That same year, he left his gangsters aside, andbrought out the most beautiful rendition ofThe Age of Innocence.

Two yearslater, the BBC adapted Wharton´s unfinished roman-a-clef, The Buccaneers with Mira Sorvino andCarla Gugino in the leading roles, Finally, in 2000, Gillian Anderson made us forget she was Agent Scully asshe went into Edwardian costume to playLily Bart in The House of Mirth. Fora full decade, Edith Wharton became again a bestselling author.

I wouldhave never read Edith Wharton if it hadn’t been for all those wonderfuladaptations. I would have never discovered Carson McCullers’ perfect prose if Ihadn’t seen The Member of the Wedding(1956.) If I ever dared to read those cumbersome Eighteen Century novels, Tom Jones and Clarissa Harlow, is because I fell in love with their heroes… Andthat with a little help from Albert Finney´s portrayal of Tom in the 1963 film and Sean Bean’s depiction of wicked Lovelace in the “Masterpiece Theater’s”version of Richardson´s epistolary novel. So, I am grateful for this invisiblealliance between screen and novels.

What bookshave you read just because you adored the film? What authors do you thinkdeserve an audiovisual resurrection? Do you experience the urgency, afterreading a good book, to see it come alive on a screen?

Why Writers Should Care about SOPA

2012-01-23T14:43:00.002-07:00

If you’re like me, then two weeks ago the words SOPA and PIPA made you think of this:

Delicious fried pillows of happiness, served with a dallop of honey

And now, unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know better, and SOPA might make you think of this:

The January 18 blackout

But have you thought about how the SOPA legislation might affect you as a writer? Until a few days ago, I hadn't thought about it, either.

Backing up a bit: SOPA, otherwise known as the “Stop Online Piracy Act,” is an anti-piracy bill that was being hustled along quietly through Congress until Wikipedia brought it to everyone’s attention. That company, and several others, blacked out their pages on January 18 in protest of the bill. (PIPA, or the Protect Intellectual Property Act, is SOPA’s Senate twin.) I followed the story with mild interest, sharing The Oatmeal’s own hilarious protest, and assumed that everyone was united in their opposition to this piece of legislation. Then, while reading through a discussion of the subject on Facebook, I came across a published author I know who offered a different point of view. Unfortunately, I was unable to arrange for an interview with her in time for today’s post, so I’ll have to paraphrase for now.

Arrr, matey: we be stealin' yer content

Piracy isn’t just something giant corporations have to worry about. It affects individual artists, too. This author’s books have been pirated. Illegal downloads of her intellectual property have not only cost her money, but cost her a book contract, she said. She directed me to this site, in which an agent laments the theft of his client’s books. His client (not the author I chatted with) is Charlaine Harris, known for the Sookie Stackhouse mystery series. Big companies like eBay, he said, don’t care about the rights of the little artist who's actually creating the content. They care about profits. So it’s hard to sympathize with these companies when they rail against SOPA. What are they doing to protect musicians, artists, and writers?

That said, even he — and the author I spoke with — agree that SOPA and PIPA are over the top. The legislation, as written, is likely to cause more problems than it solves. This does not mean that piracy isn't a real problem, however — it is a problem, and one that could affect our livelihoods. Let us hope that with the additional attention on the issue of piracy, people won’t be satisfied simply with defeating these two bad pieces of legislation: they will work to find better ways to protect intellectual property. Let’s make the criminals work harder to steal an author’s work, without compromising intellectual freedom.

What is your opinion on SOPA/PIPA? Is there a way authors and other content creators can have their intellectual property better protected, without stifling Internet freedoms and enabling censorship?

How It's All Changed

2012-01-15T15:59:00.000-07:00

David Morrell and his many works.

Last weekend, I was fortunate enough to listen to David Morrell speak* about the current state of publishing. If you're not familiar with Morrell, then perhaps you're more familiar with a certain troubled and misunderstood Vietnam War veteran who was the main character of Morrell's fist novel forty years ago. First Blood, starring the titular character Rambo, spawned a successful 80s film franchise that most men still stop and watch in awe when flipping through the local cable channels.

I'm not here to talk about Rambo, but I am here to highlight some of the main points David Morrell makes concerning the past, present, and future of publishing. Morrell, himself, has seen numerous changes in the publishing industry over the last four decades, but none quite as dramatic and rapid as what he's seen in the past few years with the rise of e-books, the closing of major bookstore chains, and self-publishing.

To begin, let's take a trip into the past, way back to the 1980s. In 1986, the model for the promotional tour was invented. Before this time, authors didn't tour from major city to major city in a ten-week promotional tour that left them functioning in a haze and wondering when sleep would finally come. Most cities had their local authors and that was about it. The local bookstore (if there was one) was about the only place in town a person could find a book to purchase. The idea behind the book tours was to introduce new authors to other regions of the country. Initially, it was a grand success. But since the idea wasn't to make money off the tour, publishing houses knew they had to balance out the $15,000 price tag. This was to come through sales and recognition (i.e. an author finding his/her way to the top of The New York Times list). Eventually, the tours ground to a halt because the numbers weren't matching up. Book tours were not driving up sales, so by the late 1990s the extravagant city hopping came to an end.

The top ten publishers represent 72%
of the total market.
(2009)

About this time, 'The Big 5' was born. Major corporations thought it a good idea to buy into the publishing world. (I'm not sure why they thought this to be a good investment.) Basically, 'The Big 5' gobbled up all the little guys creating the top five publishing houses (recent data shows these to be Random House, Pearson, Hachette, Harper Collins, and Simon & Schuster). This meant that most other publishers out there (i.e. Doubleday, Knopf, Little Brown, Pocket, etc.) became divisions or imprints of the large publishing houses. For the author, if a book was/is submitted to the publishing house and is turned down, then it is turned down by every imprint or division under the publishing house's umbrella. This, of course, has made it harder for the author to get his/her work noticed by one of the major publishing houses.

Along with the birth of 'The Big 5,' came chain bookstores. They started in the mall environment where numerous people shopped everyday. (Who doesn't remember going to a Waldenbooks or a B. Daltons? On a side note, check out this sad article on a closing mall bookstore.) Because the bookstores had grown in size from the little bookstore around the corner to a larger location with a larger clientele, the incentive to write grand, long-winded tomes became quite the trend (even Morrell professes to have written one of his own with The Brotherhood of the Rose). Bigger stores meant bigger-looking books, thus pushing the less than 300 page novels off the shelves to make room for the 500-600 page doorstoppers.

A Borders flagship store in Ann Arbor, Michigan
(2005)

Before long, large brick and mortar stores were conceptualized and Barnes & Noble and Borders became anchor stores in strip malls. When you look back at the history of these monstrosities, it's interesting to see that Borders's (which was acquired in 1992 by Kmart) history as a major bookstore lasted less than twenty years. But why did they go out of business? Morrell says that it has much to do with an unsustainable business model. Books were just a small portion of sales for a business that also sold CDs (downloadable music is slowly killing the CD industry), movies (same goes for movies as for CDs), toys, and nicknack stuff that really doesn't need to be sold in a bookstore. In essence, Borders couldn't keep their boat afloat. And the same is happening to Barnes & Noble, who recently stated that Nook would be becoming its own company. Doesn't inspire much confidence towards investing in B & N now, does it?

Surprisingly enough, not all is lost. If anything, bookstores are reverting to where they were way back in the 80s. The local bookstores are once more blossoming. They can become important members of their communities by offering a knowledgeable staff (when was the last time you found one of those in Borders?) and author events that highlight local and national works.

Kindle Fire

And, of course, the industry would not be what we know it today if not for e-readers. Amazon, who tends to be hush-hush about sales, says they move at least 1 million Kindles a week. (At $79 a pop, many people found these under the Christmas tree.) In the last quarter, Apple shipped over 11 million iPads. 1.5 million Nook and Nook Colors have sold in the last quarter as well. Morrell says that he believes roughly 100 million people in the U.S. alone own e-readers. But with so many of these on the market, Morrell sees the market reaching its highest levels of saturation this year and then leveling off in the years to come. So what does that say about the future of e-readers? It's a pretty healthy forecast. E-readers and self-publishing have changed the game when it comes to getting published. But in a good way? I'll let you be the judge!

Are you one of the 100 million people who owns an e-reader or tablet? Has it changed your reading habits and do you see it co-existing with physical books? Do you believe e-readers have revolutionized the market in a good way? Do you like the idea of the massive brick and mortar stores becoming, once again, the mom and pop places around the corner?

*David Morrell spoke at the SouthWest Writers monthly meeting on Jan. 7, 2012. His speech was entitled "The Current State of Publishing."

BTW ~ If you're interested to read any tips on preparing for the LSAT, pop on over to The Random Book Review and see what I have to say about my experience.

Understanding Theme

2012-01-08T08:30:00.000-07:00

When I took a screenwriting class in college, one of the first questions the teacher asked us was:

“What is the moral of your story?”

Somewhat baffled, we exchanged glances and smirks. He surely didn’t mean one of those corny lines they tell you at the end of a fable, did he? He must mean something else.

Faced with a silent class, the teacher blatantly expanded. “You know, like ‘there’s no place like home’ or ‘love conquers all’?”

Most of us rolled our eyes. Yeah, why don’t we talk about something interesting like how do we format our scripts and sell them to start making millions. But the teacher pressed on. “Every story has a theme. Even the most banal ones are trying to tell us something.” He continued with a painful (and nausea-provoking) exposé of the theme of several beloved films.

Appalled, I ignored the guy and drove home.

Years later, after I’d explored novel writing with four drafts of a first novel and two of a second, I came to realize my teacher was on to something. As many of you know, the resolution of both of my novels has been a struggle and I had to rewrite the endings several times. In a desperate search for answers and knowledge (after producing a questionable ending for my latest novel) I embarked on a research odyssey where I read everything and anything with the word “ending” on it. I even wrote this post (shameless advertisement alert!)

Finally, I came across this line:

"You must resolve the core conflict, otherwise your premise will remain unproved.” (Donna Levin, Get That Novel Written.)

(Core conflict being the conflict implied by the premise.)

Ms. Levin cites Cinderella as an example. “The premise for Cinderella is beauty and goodness triumph over evil and ugliness… If the story of Cinderella ended before the messenger demanded to see the third sister, we'd be left with, beauty and goodness do something with evil and ugliness, but it's your guess what.” (Levin, Pg. 83)

Eureka! I’d found the source of my problem. My novel’s final scene had NOTHING to do with the original premise. I had simply written a scene about how I envisioned my main character to resolve her (physical) problem and live happily-ever-after. But it didn’t say anything about the human condition or her inner growth or her understanding of well, anything.

I reexamined my moral premise (because I did have one—I promise!)

Selfishness leads to destruction and pain,
but generosity leads to life and happiness

So what’s wrong with it? You ask. Well, it sounds very nice on paper, except that it’s a very abstract concept. How could I execute it in a way that was clear and touched my audience in an emotional way? Sure, I could have the protagonist engage in an ultimate, heartbreaking sacrifice in the last scene, but given that sacrifice often leads to suffering, how was my premise going to be proven? After all, my thesis stated that the protagonist had to have a happy ending as a result of her selflessness? And that was when my epiphany came: the problem wasn’t that my novel’s ending was predictable and it belonged to a different genre, the problem was that it had absolutely nothing to do with the premise because the theme was all wrong! There was no way to prove my thesis because I’m not sure that in practice ALL selfishness leads to destruction and ALL sacrifices lead to happiness.

To my surprise and delight, the theme of my novel had always been there. I just had to understand what I had been trying to say all along (I know it sounds crazy, but if you’re a writer you’ll understand what I mean.) Once I recognized the real moral premise, I knew how my novel had to end.

This experience taught me the importance of having a good theme from the beginning—as irrelevant as it may seem. It really does guide the development of your novel and eventually, its resolution.

In The Moral Premise (a book that, in my opinion, every writer should read), Stanley D. Williams states that in every film/novel there are two stories happening simultaneously. One is the physical one (plot) which consist of the actions the hero has to take in order to achieve his goal. The second story (theme) is the emotional arc the hero goes through during his journey, which is actually the “unknown goal” that changes him in an uplifting, touching, irreversible way. What I find interesting is that the emotional storyline may be in direct conflict with the hero’s physical goal—and he may not know it until the end. (In other words, what the hero wants is not always what he needs.)

The success of a work of fiction, according to Williams, is directly proportional to how much the audience agrees/identifies with the premise. If the premise is not considered valid by general consensus, a disconnect may happen between the audience and the story. This is why sometimes we leave a movie theater thoroughly disappointed and may not know the reason. The answer is simple: the message may not have been in tune with our own principles and values. Williams goes as far as assuring us that this disconnect with the audience often leads to box office failure.

I don’t know how true this last statement is, but I recently experienced a disconnect with a film that had a very interesting hook. (SPOILER ALERT!) In "Limitless", a man takes a pill that gives him 100% access to his brain. Assuming it's true that we only use 20% of this organ, the premise is absolutely gripping. Think of all the possibilities! From a starving writer with zero inspiration, he goes on to becoming a bestseller author. (Let’s set aside the fantasy that he has a publishing contract, an editor and an agent without having written a single word of his novel and let’s focus on theme.) As it turns out, literary greatness is not his objective anymore once his mental capacities are heightened. He realizes that his fantastic brain power can make him a lot more money that he ever dreamed possible, and through stock-buying and orchestrating big merges, he becomes a business success in a matter of weeks. Women fall like flies on his lap and he masters several cryptic languages at once. With this much power, you’d think he does something good for humanity, like find the cure for cancer or something worthwhile. But no, he spends his time making his personal fortune grow and escaping some dubious characters who want to steal his drug stack. As a viewer, I can tolerate most excesses in a character with the hopes that in the end, he’ll redeem himself. So I patiently waited for the moment where the self-centered hero would humble himself and change. Not the case of "Limitless." The protagonist eventually comes up with an endless supply of the coveted pill, gets his girlfriend back (plus more money that he could ever need) and crushes/betrays his former mentor. What was the moral premise here? Selfishness and greed lead to success?

"Limitless" had a riveting hook, but what did it say about humans in the end?

In contrast, let’s look at "Pride and Prejudice," a simple story about a man who's quick to judge a woman on her looks and lower social status. As the story progresses, Mr. Darcy realizes there’s more to Elizabeth Bennet than meets the eye and falls in love with her. When he reveals his feelings toward her, she’s too proud to accept his marriage proposal. (Click here to watch the scene.)

In the end, both of them realize how destructive “pride” and “prejudice” are, and “reject these vices” (to use Williams’ terminology). By apologizing and making amends, both of them “choose virtue” and have a happy ending. This premise is identifiable and true. How many of us haven’t, at some point in our lives, been guilty of excessive pride and prejudice?

The proud Mr. Darcy at the ball where he met Elizabeth.

Jane Austen sure understood the importance of a good premise. Two hundred years later, her books are still being read and translated to film, television and plays.

In conclusion:

Every story must have a moral premise that rings true to the majority of readers/viewers.
Said premise shouldn't be an abstract concept of what the world should be like, but something concrete most people can relate to.
The premise must be proven through consequences (good or bad) for our characters at the end of the novel.
A moral premise will give the writer a blueprint of where to go with the story, rather than just concentrating on the physical action and “what happens next.”

Can you think of other films/novels where you've disagreed/felt a disconnect with the theme? Can you think of the moral premise of your own novel and put it in one sentence? Do you come up with your premise first and then write your novel or do you realize what it is after you've finished writing (guilty!)?

Detectives from the past: The Charm of Historical Mysteries

2012-01-01T11:08:00.000-07:00

Recently,my incessant quest for historical novels has led me to a delightful discovery:the Historical Whodunit. It´s not surprising than in a decade when mysteriesand thrillers pack the bestsellers lists; the past provides an apt landscape forgumshoes from yesteryear.

For thelast five years, I have been doing weekly checks on the New York TimesBestseller lists, (Fiction). Thrillers and detective stories take more than half of its content. Apparentlythose are the genres Americans favor. Not only Americans, as the worldwide crazefor Stieg Larsson’s novels proves. Writing about crimes, past and present, hasbecome a lucrative business thus the historical detective story is bound to bewelcomed. Even well established mastersof the craft like Baroness James (better known as P.D James) are giving it a successfultry. Her latest endeavor Death Comes toPemberley has made it to the NYTBL.

As any JaneAusten fan would guess, this novel entails mayhem in the midst of the Darcy Familyof Pride and Prejudice fame. ElizabethDarcy (nee Bennett) has her Autumn Ball shattered when her brother in-law,dastardly Wickham, is murdered. One ofthe major appeals of the historical detective story lies in it havinghistorical figures, as well as famous fictional characters, in charge of theinvestigation. In fact, this is the second historical mystery inspired by Pride and Prejudice. Last year, Regina Jeffreybrought out The Phantom of Pemberley.

I cannottell the “why” behind worldwide obsession with crime fiction, but I canapproximate several reasons why the historical brand is doing rather well. For long, thrillers and mysteries were genresmostly appreciated by men. Due to the rise of woman sleuths and subgenres like cozymysteries, ladies have become addicts as well as writers of both present andpast detective fiction.

Historicalmysteries also provide escape from reality. There is no need to identify withcharacters or their problems. Such stories are made to feel out of the ordinaryand to give us a chance to flee away from everyday conflicts. So thecombination of both genres creates a fascinating mixture. For historicalfiction lovers, a murder thrown in the plot just makes the dish more palatable.For thriller lovers, the period atmosphere adds up to the story’s exoticism.

There arediscrepancies about who started this subgenre. Many claim that it was GeorgetteHeyer, mother of Regency Novels, who wrote the first actual historical whodunitin 1936. Called The Talisman Ring theplot takes place in Georgian England and it involves the dispute over a valued heirloom.With the publication of this combination of mystery and historical novel, Heyerset a path for suspense writers to imitate her. In 1944, Agatha Christie placedthe mystery of her Death Comes as the Endin Ancient Egypt and in 1950, John Dickson Carr followed suit with The Bride of Newgate, a suspense taleset in Napoleonic England.

Common factorslinked historical whodunits with Gothic Romances. Daphne Du Maurier’s Jamaica Inn (1936) set in 1820 Cornwallis a historical suspense, making it a forerunner of the subgenre. Many haveseen Dame Daphne’s work as an attempt to recover the Gothic Victorian style,but few have noticed her debt to Willkie Collins, one of the fathers of thedetective story. However, Du Maurier is considered a revivalist of the Gothicstyle. Her followers which include well known Sixties and Seventies authorssuch as Mary Stewart, Dorothy Eden and Victoria Holt were identified as GothicRomance or Romantic Suspense writers.

Such labelswere not applied to Robert van Gulick’s work. In the 30’s, at a Tokyobookstore, this Dutch diplomat cameacross a Seventh Century Chinese detective story featuring a certain statesman and criminologist named Di Renjie. DuringWorld War II, van Gulik translated into English that novel. It appeared in 1949under the title of The Celebrated Casesof Judge Dee. By 1959, Gulik was writing his own detective storiescelebrating the deeds of the sleuthing magistrate. This was the beginning of anacclaimed series (Gulik also drafted a series of comics based on Judge Dee)that lasted until the author´s death in 1967.

The personwho managed to dislodge the historical whodunit from its Gothic Romance or PeriodDrama labels was Edith Mary Pargeter. Under her real name she had been writing historicalfiction since the Sixties, but her literary career dated back to the Thirties andcrime fiction was her specialty. Following an unwritten law, Miss Pargeterpenned her novels under masculine pseudonyms such as Jolyon Carr, John Redfernand Ellis Peter.

It was under this last pen name that she wouldcreate her most famous detective: Brother Cadfael, protagonist of The Cadfael Chronicles that began in1977 with A Morbid Taste for Bones.The novel took place in Shropshire in the Twelfth Century during a turbulentperiod of British history. Cadfael was a monk with a taste for sleuthing, aidedby his immense knowledge of sciences and herbal lore learned from the Moslemsduring his crusader´s stage. These hugely popular series encompassed twenty onenovels written between 1977 and the early Nineties.

Cadfael hassince then inspired the creation of a flock of inquisitive medieval members ofthe clergy. There is Brother Athelstan, Sister Fidelma, Sister Frevesse and nowwe have Nancy Bylieau’s Joanna Cross, a Dominican nun living in the days ofHenry VIII. But detectives of yesteryear do not necessarily have to be membersof the Church.

In 1979,Juliet Humes under the pseudonym “Anne Perry” would publish her firsthistorical mystery, The Cater Street Hangmanfeaturing Victorian policeman Thomas Pitt. Perry, whose own life would be the subject ofKate Winslet’s film “Heavenly Creatures,” legitimized the subgenre and inspiredseveral other writers to deal with detectives from the past. She has continuedwriting into the current century, and DorchesterTerrace, her latest Thomas Pitt novel, is due to appear in 2012.

Morerespectability was granted to historical mysteries in 1980 with the publicationof The Name of the Rose; UmbertoEco´s acclaimed novel dealing with gruesome homicides at an Italian medievalmonastery. There have been other attempts to turn historical mysteries into highliterature. Patrick Susskind’s ThePerfume comes to mind.

In theTwenty-First Century, ancient murderers and law enforcers are alive and kickingin books from all over the world. Famed Turkish novelist Orhan Pamuk has givena try to the matter with his My Name isRed (2000) a crime novel set in XVI century Istanbul, and Carlos RuizZafon’s bestsellers could be considered historical mysteries.

On the otherhand of the spectrum, stand Anthony Horowitz and Laurie R. King and their insistencein reinventing Sherlock Holmes’s adventures. In the market you may findRegency, Victorian and Edwardian cozies, Medieval and Elizabethan whodunits,and detectives wearing togas or kimonos. There is a wealth of female amateurprivate eyes of all ages from spinsterish archaeologist Amelia Peabodyinvestigating murders in the 1920’s to 11-year-old Flavia de Luce sleuthing inthe England of the Fifties.

If thiswinter you run out of reading material, reach out and become acquainted withthe historical whodunit. But if you are already hooked in the subgenre, tell uswho is your favorite author and why do you do you think historical mysterieshave so many readers. Would you care to write a historical mystery? Which erawould you select?

Of Forests and Trees

2011-12-26T12:17:00.000-07:00

The EMT was framed in a now-glassless window. The night was filled with sirens and flashing lights, and it was bitter cold. “Hang in there,” he told me. Even with all his gear on, his teeth were chattering. “We’ll get you out soon.” I looked back at him and — after several failed attempts at speaking — managed to say, "It's okay. I'm going to write about this. I'm a writer."

I was seventeen. I understood viscerally then what it took me years to understand intellectually: that writing is a way of detaching yourself from pain. If you are reporting on an experience, you’re outside it. I’m not sure if all writers find themselves dissociating in this way when facing trauma, but I know I’m not the only one. While Susan Sontag was dying miserably of cancer, her son, writer David Reiff, says he refused to take notes on the experience of watching her, of suffering with her. “I thought that to do so would be to seek and perhaps gain a measure of detachment I neither wanted nor felt entitled to,” he wrote in a 2008 article for the British newspaper The Observer. “And for a long time after my mother died, I believed that I would not write anything.”

In fact, to create art that movesother people, you have to do nearly the opposite of detaching. You mustactively attempt to channel strong emotions, represent them in some way, andpull your audience into the experience. If you’re not feeling it, your readerswon’t, either. It’s a writer’s paradox: you need deep empathy, so you can feelwhat others are feeling and share it; but you also want detachment, so you canobserve accurately.

A few years ago, I took a class inmindfulness meditation, which culminated in a day-long retreat at a Zen center.Nothing but silent meditation. All day. Our instructor taught us that tosurvive this experience without running screaming from the room (which doeshappen), we had to become expert observers. Whatever thoughts were in ourheads, whatever itches were in our bodies, we had to accept them. Not react tothem, not try to change them, but simply observe them. With six weeks ofpreparation, I was able to build up enough meditation muscles to make itthrough the retreat and even enjoy it. I was aware of my own discomfort,ranging from muscular cramps to highly intrusive thoughts, but I could simplywatch these reactions. And they would pass.

From that class, I learned thatwriting and meditation have something in common: they are both about observing.Observation is the tool they use to bridge this paradox of extreme feeling andextreme detachment. By going straight into the sensation and then watching it,you are neither squelching it nor flooded by it.

Writing can be quite meditative forme in this way, which isn’t to say that it’s soothing. Sometimes, it’s quitethe opposite. But it is about feeling and observing. Writing takes those twoessential bits of mindfulness and tacks on a third: sharing. Looking back, Ithink one of the reasons I wanted to write about my car accident wasn’t just todistance myself emotionally from the situation, but to share the impact withothers: to distribute the load. If someone read my story and had been throughsomething similar, she might think, “I reacted that way, too. It’s not just me.I’m not alone.” And if someone read the story and hadn’t experienced anythinglike it, well then, he’d be that much closer to understanding it. Finding or creatingbits of shared humanity, especially in distress, is immensely comforting.

So this is the ultimate challenge of the writer: to be inside something completely, yet able to see the whole thing in perspective, as if from a distance. To be the forest and the trees, at the same time.

p.s. Hat tip to Suze for her recommendation of the book "Nerve," which sparked this post.

What Does Your Style Say About You?

2011-12-15T17:44:00.000-07:00

What comes to mind when you hear mentioned the following directors'/producers' names: Stephen Spielberg, Michael Bay, and Tim Burton? If you're a little bit of a director aficionado, then certain films and images come to mind. Here's what I think when each are mentioned:

Are you feeling a
little ghoulish?

Stephen Spielberg -- Has a knack for creating adorable and loving aliens, like the ones in Cocoon, A.I., E.T., and Super 8. He also loves creating sci-fi creatures that munch on unsuspecting scientists (Jurassic Park) and swimmers (Jaws) and pretty much anything that deals with World Wars (Schindler's List and War Horse). He's a bit of a softy when it comes to his main characters. Most often, when I see his films, if anything is lacking in the storyline, then throw in an alien!
Michael Bay -- Do you want something blown to kingdom come? Something that works well as a tent pole blockbuster (any Transformers film, The Island, Armageddon, Pearl Harbor)? Then Bay is the director for you. He likes to make a big summer splash at the movie theaters.
Tim Burton -- Ever get the feeling that the dead are watching you? Or maybe just some creepy guy with crazy hair and scissors for hands? Burton seems to enjoy the theater of the absurd. Look at just about anything on his long list of credentials -- Edward Scissorhands, Mars Attacks, James and the Giant Peach, The Nightmare Before Christmas, Ed Wood, or Corpse Bride -- and you'll see that he has a thing for the other-worldly part of life. And his go-to actors are, without a doubt, the lovely Johnny Depp and his longtime partner, Helena Bonham Carter.

Why, you may ask, am I bringing up these individuals? Because much like directors and producers of films, writers create their own style and voice. And those who do it well create a uniqueness to show how and what they write.

Let's try the above game with a few authors, shall we. What comes to mind when you hear mentioned the following authors' names: Jodi Picoult, Nora Roberts, Clive Cussler, or Stephenie Meyers?

Picoult:
Never one to avoid
controversies.

Meyers conjures up images of pasty vampires hanging out in a sunless Washington state. Picoult usually means a controversial subject of sorts laced with the threads of a believable storyline. Roberts creates a hit or miss atmosphere of romance (depending on which book you read of hers). And Cussler usually means adventure, whether in an airplane, on the high seas, or stuck somewhere in the middle of a desert. These authors have formed a style that reflects (or at one time reflected) their passion for the stories that have kept them awake at night, wondering what would happen to their heroine/hero if he/she married that man/sacrificed a kidney to save a sibling/got involved with the creepy kids at school/tried to get that bomb on a plane.

As newcomers to this game long won by the familiar names splattered across the covers of airport novels, we have to learn to make ourselves distinct. Style needs to reflect the writer's personality and voice. It also needs to reflect the audience. Take, for instance, writing a letter. One would use a different style if the letter was one of business, condolence, or complaint. We don't sit down and write the same letter to our dear sister and then pop the same one off to complain to the local dry-cleaner.

The same goes for your novel. Romance authors don't write in the same style (flowery and filled with visions of love) as would a detective author (find the bad guy and make him pay). If you want to be taken seriously in the writing world, take time to create your voice. Make sure your characters have what it takes to make the reader want to invest his or her time in the book. Have a plot that not only flows, but one that is also believable. Lastly, don't force something onto the page. If you think it feels like a seventh-grader wrote it, then so will every agent you query.

Writing is entertainment. If you're only entertaining yourself with the stories you write, then maybe you should rethink the writing gig. Let your voice be heard in a way that will set you apart from other authors, but at the same time not turn away prospective readers. It's a fine line to walk, but it's what must be done. After all, wouldn't it be nice to reach Spielberg's or Roberts' status?

Know your style and
let your writing voice
be heard!

Do you struggle with voice and style when it comes to your writing? What does your style say about you? If you haven't thought about it, then now's the time to do so!

The Theatre of the Mind: An Underused Tool

2011-12-11T12:13:00.001-07:00

This article contains spoilers for Oedipus Rex, Frenzy, Psycho, The Haunting, The Blair Witch Project, Life is Beautiful and Rendezvous in Black.

We live in a visual era. Most of our entertainment comes through sight. Even music nowadays needs to be accompanied with an eye-catching package (attractive singer, choreography, video with impressive effects, etc.) But there was a time when humans relied on hearing and imagination for entertainment. Think about the origins of storytelling; tales and legends were orally transmitted. Eventually, these stories were performed as plays (but notice how violent scenes happened offstage and the audience was left to see what happened in their mind’s eye.)

In the original Oedipus Rex, the audience never witnesses the moment when Oedipus gouges his eyes out after finding out he is, in fact, his father's killer. The scene is played offstage and narrated by the chorus.

When radio was the latest technology, families gathered in their living rooms to listen to their favorite shows. Their minds had to “fill in the blank” and imagine what the actors and settings looked like. Thus, the audience became an active participant of the story. In Latin America, radionovelas were the rage, and some aficionados still assert that the actors had superior diction and performances than their successors in telenovelas.

If we look at the history of film, there has been a noticeable evolution from innuendo to goriness. The fathers of Film Noir understood the power of overtone and audience participation and used these tools to maximize the effectiveness of their stories. Iconic director Alfred Hitchcock was well known for favoring “suspense” over “surprise.” He’s been cited with the following quote:

"There's two people having breakfast and there's a bomb under the table. If it explodes, that's a surprise. But if it doesn't..."

One of the techniques Hitchock used in his films was to let the viewer “fill in” the details of a violent scene. He called this "transferring the menace from the screen into the mind of the audience.” Two examples of this technique are seen in the films Frenzy (1972) and Psycho (1960). Halfway through Frenzy, as the audience is already aware of the identity of the “Necktie Murderer,” Hitchcock presents us with a scene where the serial killer—in his most charming self—escorts a woman to his apartment. Before shutting the door, he tells her “you are my type of woman,” the exact words he told his previous victim. The camera lingers for a bit in the hall after they go inside, then retracts down the stairs, through the front door and out to the street, where city noises and activity fill in. The crime only occurs in the viewer’s mind. [Click here to watch the scene.]

In Psycho, Hitchcock takes us into one of the most famous horror scenes in film history: the murder of Janet Leigh’s character in the shower. But notice how we never see the knife actually penetrating the woman’s skin or any gruesome wounds. Instead, Hitchcock presents us with a series of close ups of the victim’s face, the knife, portions of her skin, the curtain rod and blood going down the drain. [Click here to watch the scene.]

Alfred Hitchcock was considered the "master of suspense" for a reason. He was an innovator when it came to storytelling and many of his implemented camera techniques are emplyed by filmmakers nowadays.

Compare these scenes to the goriness of Saw or American Psycho. Another interesting comparison is the 1963 version of The Haunting versus the 1999 remake. In both instances, a group of people go to Hill House, an old mansion where supernatural activity is believed to take place. In the 60’s version, strange events center around one character (Nell) and the viewer is left to wonder if paranormal activity is really happening or Nell needs an urgent visit to the nearest psychiatric ward. The nineties’ version, however, is an expensive display of special effects and disturbing images, where nothing is left to the viewer’s interpretation.

Nowadays filmmakers rely more and more on “morbid fascination” to entice their audience instead of appealing to their intellect. Do we really need to see characters at their most intimate moments? (naked, having sex, going to the bathroom or throwing up?)

However, there are exceptions. A recent attempt to employ the viewer’s imagination as a tool is The Blair Witch Project, where three film students set out for the woods to find out if the legend of a local witch is true. Through eerie noises, witchcraft symbols and the disappearance of one of the characters, the audience must connect the dots and figure out what is happening. In the final scene, the camera pans in rapid motions as the main character frantically looks for her friends in an old shack. (Incidentally, this camera technique of mimicking a person’s gaze was pioneered by Hitchcock.) Bloody handprints, screams, footsteps and finally, the camera being dropped and laying still leads the viewer to conclude the movie ending.

Another example is the Italian film Life is Beautiful. Roberto Benigni spares us the grief of seeing the main character executed by German soldiers and we only witness his death by listening to the gunshots being fired after they have taken him offstage.

Undoubtedly in novels “the theatre of the mind” is more active than in any other medium, but very often writers “spell out” things for the reader, leaving little to the imagination. In writing classes and manuals, we are taught to use all five senses in our descriptions (visual descriptions being the most commonly employed). But we are rarely taught how important it is to trust the reader’s intelligence by leaving things out, or the effectiveness of not letting a character see, but only hear, what is happening and letting the reader roam the dark corners of his mind.

Film Noir writer Cornell Woolrich was an expert at this. (Hitchcock based Rear Window on Woolrich’s short story “It Had to Be Murder.”) In his novel Rendezvous in Black, a man seeks revenge over the five men he blames for the death of his fiancée. Every year on the date of his girlfriend’s death, he kills an important woman in the life of said men. Before the last “rendezvous,” the potential victim is taken away to safety on a ship (as the detective who’s figured out the connection between the women warns her of the situation.) The woman-in-question, Martine, is blind. When May 31st has passed and it appears as though she will be saved, she perceives a presence in her cabin. For seven pages, Woolrich extends the tension of Martine going through the motions of merrily getting ready for dinner to realizing the killer is in the room with her and there is no escape. Woolrich expertly describes her thoughts and movements in her dark world as she tries to figure out if an intruder is really there. When he grasps her hands, the reader is left to imagine what happens next. On the next scene, we learn that since the ship was traveling to Hawaii, the doomed date hadn’t passed yet and Martine has died.

I confess that in my own writing, I have a tendency to over explain. But fortunately, my beta readers point out these instances to me. As storytellers, we should understand the choices we make in our writing. Violence is, at times, an important component in fiction, but is it always necessary to use gory details? Why do you think filmmakers are resorting to the lowest common denominator? (the “morbid fascination” appeal). It’s true that we now have the most impressive technology of human history, but is it necessary to display it in every movie?

Go ahead, Kill your Darlings! On the Subject of Torturing Characters.

2011-12-04T11:31:00.001-07:00

Most novice writers have heard the advice: “Make your characters suffer!” Aside from nudging us to give in to our most sadistic impulses, the advice seems a bit exaggerated. Should we, twisting the meaning of Stephen King’s injunction, “Kill our darlings?” What rationale deems it necessary?

We all understand the need to sometimes bump off a main character. What would be the point of The Great Gatsby, Romeo and Juliet and Don Quixote if their protagonists had lived to ripe old ages? Don Quixote would have ended in the madhouse, Gatsby in jail and Montagues and Capulets would go on feuding in the streets of Verona, until Doomsday. Death in novels always has an objective, to teach the reader (as well as other characters in the book) a moral lesson. Whether is Anna Karenina jumping in front of a train, or Sydney Carton climbing to the guillotine, there is a moral behind their death: It is a far better thing to die than to go on sinning or leading a dull meaningless life.

Gatsby´s murder

In Little Women, Beth March’s last days are a study in fortitude, but her death is also a rite of passage for Jo. After her sister´s demise, Jo grows more sedate, less impatient, and much more aware of virtues and values. Thus she becomes the right companion for worthy professor Baher. But Beth, Dickens’s Little Nell and Uncle Tom are boring characters. They are icons of suffering, archetypical victims. We don’t really cry over their woes. Because they endure their pain with almost inhuman resilience and resignation, we cannot identify with them. And that is the first good reason not to subject your character to Chinese torture.

We want our favorite characters to get a break, to get angry at life’s injustice, to fight back not to be beaten down and turned into martyrs. It´s why Jo March will always be more memorable than Beth. It´s why we love when Eliza hops over ice blocks to escape from slave catchers. She is the most outstanding character in Uncle Tom’s Cabin, much more than the poor old slave whose name appears on the title.

Eliza's courageous flight

I particularly resent killing characters just to make another character suffer. Don Quixote gives a lovely speech and dies in his bed, but it is poor Sancho whom I mourn. His master has gone to fool’s heaven, but he remains on earth bereft of all the promises the Knight offered him, he has no island to rule, no riches to share with his family, no illusions. That is truly heartbreaking. I wonder if Cervantes realized how unfair he was to Sancho.

Don Quixotes death

Was Hemingway aware of his unfairness to his characters in For Whom the Bells Toll? This classic Spanish Civil War tale describes the efforts of Robert Jordan, an American Professor fighting for the Loyalists, to blow up a bridge. The action takes place in a couple of days. Robert knows and we know that he´ll die. Therefore, we like him, but we don´t grow too attached to him

Robert and Maria

However, during this time, Robert meets a young girl named Maria. She has undergone every possible horror. She´s been uprooted from her home, her parents had been shot and she has been raped by the Fascists. Robert and Maria become lovers, he dies, and ... I am furious! What´s the point of making Maria suffer again and again? If at least she had been killed fighting alongside her lover, but to experience a bit of happiness and then greater loss? That is sheer cruelty.

Homer ends The Iliad with Hector’s death. Surely not an eye is dry after hearing of heroic Hector vanquished by Achilles who adds insult to injury by defiling his enemy´s corpse. That is sad, but sadder still is the fate of those left behind. And it took several centuries before Euripides dared to describe, in his plays Andromache and The Trojan Women, what Homer didn’t bear to do in his time: the fall of Troy, the murder of Hector´s parents, and the sorrows of his wife. Besides losing her man, Andromache has to see her only child tortured to death, while she is raped and forced to become a conqueror’s concubine.

Hector and Andromache
Bottom line, forget Hector (even if played by scrumptious Eric Bana), the one that really deserves our pity is Andromache. So I understand why Homer doesn’t tell us her terrible ordeal, or why Wolfgang Petersen gave her a happy ending in his film version of The Iliad. Isn’t that evidence enough that hurting loveable characters has a limit? Why advise it then? There are those who claim that mistreating characters adds conflict and suspense to the plot, and suffering make characters evolve and grow. It reminds me of Victorian teachers who beat their students to make them strong.

I am the first to recognize Tolstoy’s genius but I don´t understand why he creates such a marvelous dashing character like Prince Andrei Bolkonsky in War and Peace, just to make him unhappy, and finally kill him. To me, War and Peace ends with Bolkonsky´s death. I don´t care about dense Pierre or fickle Natasha. I can’t share their happiness since it is based in Andrei´s departure. The author must have realized his blunder because he ends his novel, not in Pierre and Natasha´s domestic bliss, but in Bolkonsky´s son vowing to grow up to be worthy of his father.

Natasha and Andrei

I love William Styron’s Sophie´s Choice, and I love Sophie despite her victimization at the hands of her creator. Throughout that thick volume we see Sophie suffer everyday. Not only does she bear the scars of her Auschwitz past, not only does she carry a guilty secret, but she goes through a daily ordeal living with a pathologically jealous lover (and schizophrenic to boot).

Eventually, Stingo (the narrator) pulls her away from abusive Nathan, and offers her redemption, but Sophie, after revealing her horrible secret, chooses death. All the torments she has endured, including her part in the death of her children, have not made her stronger or better suited for life. Strange but her suicide is a relief, I am happy her pain is finally over. Is that what we get from torturing characters to the point of no return? We want to mercy kill them!

Excuse me if for a moment I wander into self-reference. As a child, I loved visiting with my mother´s side of the family, a bunch of enigmatic but extremely generous people. Once, I must have been around nine years old, one of the uncles offered to take me to see the latest Disney’s flick. Full of self importance, I informed him that I was “too old” for cartoons. Now I only enjoyed “movies so moving that made me cry.” He looked at me as if was demented. “Why? The whole point of going to the pictures is to have fun,” he said ”not to suffer.” I didn’t realize it back then, but all these mysterious relatives, who spoke in odd languages among themselves and had funny numbers on their arms, had seen enough suffering to last them a lifetime. Now they wanted their entertainment to be “fun.”

As serious readers we shun superficiality, we demand realism, we wish for conflict, we need to see our characters struggling against odds, but we also long for balance. We want our beloved characters to prevail, to be rewarded for everything they have gone through. We want a glimmer of hope! That´s “fun."

Don´t you agree? Were you ever upset or disappointed by a novel or film where characters went through too much unnecessary angst or had an undeserved unhappy ending? As a writer how do you maintain equilibrium between chastising and rewarding your characters?

The Cage of Myself

2011-11-27T20:44:00.001-07:00

Pretty homemade bars

There was a time, not too long ago, when I loved to write. All I wanted to do was write. I preferred writing to socializing, cooking, and even eating. Which is saying something, because I really love eating.

Then something happened, and I still don’t know what. About a year ago, it became harder to write, and about six months ago, the writing machine in my head began shutting down almost entirely.

I am now at a complete standstill. I am locked in a cage of my own making, of my own mind. Somewhere in the depths of me, there might be a key — there must be — but that sucker is well hidden.

This is distressing, to say the least. I’ve tried various tricks to free my inner writer: reading excellent fiction, reading how-to-write books, trying out writing prompts, reviewing my works-in-progress, joining NaNoWriMo, and finally, simply forcing myself to sit down and pound out words. “Even if it’s terrible,” I said to myself, “do it anyway.” I granted permission to write crap, to write a string of nonsense words, anything. I figured if I faked it for a bit, my little prison might open. At least, the gap between the bars might widen a tiny bit.

I figured wrong.

This is not writer’s block. At least, not the way I understand it. Writer’s block is when you can’t think of what to say next, isn’t it? When you lack inspiration. I know what needs writing. I write in my head every night as I drift off to sleep. I already have a first draft of one novel mostly written. I’ve got an outline, solid characters, and a trajectory of scenes. It really should be quite straightforward.

No, this is not writer’s block: it’s more like writer’s phobia. When I sit at the computer and open up Word, I feel nauseous. Literally sick to my stomach. Even the icon for Word, that little blue W, makes me break out into a cold sweat.

The stuff of nightmares

White Page of Doom

It’s not just with fiction, either: I got it writing my last non-fiction piece — and normally that’s work I can knock out practically in my sleep. I got the shivery-jivvers today, too, when I readied myself to write this blog post. I moped around the house for fifteen minutes, moaning to my family, clutching a cup of tea in my chilly hands, before I worked up the courage to face The White Page of Doom.

I never thought this would happen to me. I used to zone out at parties or school functions, daydreaming of my characters, desperate to get back to my computer so I could write more, more, more. I was so smitten with the act of creation; it felt like falling in love. It was blissful. It was maddening.

I miss it.

I’m not sure what to do next. Faced with a lack of alternatives, I’ve accepted that there’s nothing I can do. As I’ve watched the end of NaNoWriMo ticking by, I’ve hit a point of fatalistic ennui. A sad kind of acceptance.

But! There is a silver lining to my little cloud of writerly doom. I have a feeling, for no good reason whatsoever, that this phobia (or whatever it is) will pass. I have a feeling that not only will the ability to face the white screen come back to me, someday, but the joy of writing, the obsession of it, will come back, too.

I just hope it doesn’t take too long. I don’t want this cage getting too comfortable.

The Mysterious World of ... Ghostwriting

2011-11-20T14:55:00.000-07:00

Lions and Tigers and Bears, oh my! No, silly. There's nothing scary about ghostwriting, unless you consider the lack of recognition many of the "real" authors receive.

Let's play a little game, shall we. Can you tell me which one of the following five books has been written by someone other than the name slapped on the front cover?

Unless you cheated and looked at the links above, then you might not know that all of them have been ghostwritten. (Here's a link to "The Top 50 Ghostwritten Books" if you'd like to see more.) Perhaps you're thinking about taking on the role of ghostwriter, or maybe you're searching for the perfect ghostwriter to write your self-help book, series, or memoir. If this sounds like you, there are a few things you'll need to know.

What is a ghostwriter?

According to Toni Robino's essay,* "Secrets of Ghostwriting and Collaboration Success," this is what ghostwriting boils down to:

❝...a ghostwriter gathers the author's original materials and research and turns them into a book, based on the author's specifications (if the book will be self-published) or the publisher's specifications (if the book has been sold through the proposal process.) Theoretically, although ghostwriters do conduct interviews and undertake additional research, they do not contribute their own thoughts or ideas to the content of the book.❞

Robino later goes on to say:

❝Do not overstep your boundaries as a ghostwriter by adding your own thoughts to a book, unless the author specifically asks you to do this.❞

Book Series: Rainbow Magic fairy books are
all by Daisy Meadows, who is really
four women.

While researching the topic of ghostwriting I learned that the majority of what's ghostwritten can be broken down into three main categories:

Book Series -- In this category, you'll see books from longstanding series such as The Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew. A more current example would be the Rainbow Magic series for grade school-aged girls. All of them are written by Daisy Meadows, but according to goodreads, "Daisy Meadows is the pseudonym used for the four writers of the Rainbow Magic children's series: Narinder Dhami, Sue Bentley, Linda Chapman, and Sue Mongredien."
Celebrity "Autobiographies" and "Memoirs" -- Ronald Reagan's life story would fall into this category as would just about any other celebrity autobiography out there (grant it, there are a few who write their own life stories). A well written memoir or autobiography needs the proper writing skills behind it, and this is why many celebrities turn to ghostwriters. I found a little humor in a Wall Street Journal article -- "Fascinating Story, but Who Wrote It?"✠ -- "Earlier this month, the Borders bookstore at Time Warner Center hosted a reading of 'Fall to Pieces,' a memoir by Mary Forsberg Weiland, the former wife of rocker Scott Weiland. As photographers snapped pictures of the author, another woman stepped up to the podium. 'Hi,' she said. 'I'm Larkin Warren, and I was Mary's midwife on the project." I think the role of midwife is an appropriate way of describing the work of ghostwriters.

One of the biggest questions
plaguing the free world today:
Did Ronald Reagan really write
his own autobiography?

Writers under a popular author's name or author's novel series -- In this category you'll find long-time authors doling out rights to other authors who want to continue a series under the original author's name. A couple of recent examples are The Race by Clive Cussler and Justin Scott and Locked On by Tom Clancy and Mark Greaney. In both instances, Scott and Greaney would be considered the main authors, but in order for the books to sell they are written in a popular series (like Clancy's Jack Ryan series) and titled under the bold lettering of Cussler's and Clancy's names.

Can you see Mark Greaney's
name in teeny tiny blue?

Then there are those who ghostwrite just about anything else, from self-help books to short stories to cookbooks. But how do you know if you could succeed at being a professional ghostwriter? Robino says you need to treat writing as a business and the more you learn about running a business, the better off you'll be. Here are ten things Robino says you need to learn before going into operation:

Assess Your Writing Skills -- The more published you are the better your odds are at landing a deal.
Make Your First List -- Who are the experts you know and are they pioneers in their fields? Resist the urge to contact these individuals until you are professionally prepared for your meeting.
Prepare a Professional Package -- This should include your resume, bio, services you offer, writing samples, and different styles and topics.
Set Your Rates -- Know how fast you can write a final copy, and remember the chapter isn't finished until you've edited, polished, and proofread it. Also, be aware of what first time ghostwriters make -- anywhere from $1,000 - $8,000.
Polish Your Interpersonal Skills -- Practice listening closely to what the client wants without interrupting.
Know When to Run -- Not every book will be a good match.
Close the Deal -- Make sure you sign that contract and don't be afraid to ask questions.
Capture the Author's Voice -- I good way to get a sense of the author's voice is through taped interviews.
Create and Keep Deadlines -- Stay accountable to the deadline.
Ask for Referrals -- The best way to market yourself is through word of mouth marketing from clients who are satisfied with your work.

If you're still wondering of ghostwriting is a good fit for you, then I encourage you to read up on the subject. Toni Robino's essay is quite insightful on the matter and there is plenty of info out there on the web for you to devour. If you do decide to jump into the mysterious world of ghostwriting -- Best of Luck to You!

Are you interested in ghostwriting or have you ever done similar work? If so, what was your experience like? Would you encourage other writers to become ghostwriters?

*"Secrets of Ghostwriting and Collaboration Success" by Toni Robino can be found in the 2010 version of Jeff Herman's Guide to Book Publishers, Editors, & Literary Agents.

✠"Fascinating Story, but Who Wrote It?" by Joanne Kaufman was published in The Wall Street Journal on Dec. 1, 2009.

Time to open your surprise package!

2011-11-18T11:47:00.003-07:00

Dear Friends and Followers,

I know we’ve been keeping you in stitches all week, but the time has come to reveal our great surprise (s).

The first has already hit your eye-. How do you like our new design? Feel free to comment.

Second as you may see above this message, we have opened a new gadget, a Sisterhood Forum. Come, visit us and learn what it is all about. We hope it serves you well and you turn it into your home.

Third. Now you may follow us on Twitter @DSWSisterhood. Become our followers and tweet us all you like.

And then there is a bonus. Sister Violante has finally decided to crawl out of her lair and let you know her true identity. Se shall be posting and replying in the forum under her real name “Maria Elena Venant”. For bureaucratic ad technical reasons (e-mail, avatar, etc.) she’ll continue to blog under her “Violante” nick. But now you know who she is and may contact her at exviuda2003@yahoo.com or follow her at @malenav2010.

Well, that’s it folks! It´s your turn to comment, follow, ask, etc.

With all our affection

The Sisterhood

The Marriage of Art and Craft

2011-11-14T17:12:00.002-07:00

I come from a traditional art formation. From ages fourteen to eighteen, I studied in the afternoons under a renowned painter in my country. We focused on watercolors and pastels, and did collective exhibits at the end of every school year. My earliest mentor was ruthless about color and proportion. Any mistake in our rosa cromática meant we had to repeat the entire project and no matter how much my girlfriend and I begged, we couldn’t advance to color pastels or watercolors (much less the human body) until our still-life charcoal drawings and color combinations were flawless. The word “repita” (repeat) became his trademark.

An early painting by Cesar Tacco. With the years, he became more impatient and would take painting “field trips,” where he would do a series of quick landscapes in watercolors (without preliminary drawings).
“Watercolors are demonic,” he used to say.

From my maestro I learned that mastering technique is fundamental for every artist. He believed that without drawing or color foundations, a painter could not excel in his craft, even if he would end up becoming an expressionist or abstract artist—the case of my late uncle, Ramiro Jácome, who studied classic art and slowly developed his style, known as “feismo.”

My uncle once told me that an artist never stops learning. (Photograph by Carsten Behler)

When I moved to the US to go to college, I entered the School of Fine Arts, but things were quite different here. The focus of most art classes was self-expression—even in the lower level courses. One of my instructors told me that the only way to produce art was if you had something to say. Otherwise, it was an illustration—a profane word that silenced the entire classroom and left the student-in-question red with shame. There was not a lot my eighteen-year-old self had to say about the world other than shyly pointing out to a couple of my peers that their drawings were disproportionate or too much water was making their acrylic paintings look muddy.

Part of the evolution of an artist is to find his own style. In editorial illustration, the goal is to make quick and simple drawings to catch the reader’s eye (people don’t spend a lot of time looking at newspapers illustrations.) To me, this has been one of the hardest challenges as an artist. During the brief period I worked at the Illustration Department of this newspaper, my boss used to say that in order to reduce a drawing to its simplest form or “deconstruct” it, you had to be a proficient draftsman. (In Spanish the abstraction/simplification of a figurative drawing is called “desdibujo.” It is the aim of many editorial illustrators to achieve this.)

An editorial illustration by Pancho Cajas.

I believe that novel writing is not that different from painting, except that in the visual arts, an (accidental) mistake is a lot more obvious than in the written word. I didn’t always believe this. When I turned to writing fiction, I thought that because I was literate and had good ideas, I could publish a novel. With time and many bumps along the road, I came to realize that craft is just as important as ideas, enthusiasm and dare I say, talent. But like with painters, there seems to be a prejudice among writers that too much technique equals less art. They don’t realize that technique is just a tool to help them express their ideas better.

Let’s take a look at what Nobel Prize winner Mario Vargas Llosa says on this issue:

“The mysterious thing we call talent, or genius, does not spring to life full-fledged—at least not in novelists, although it may sometimes in poets and musicians (the classic examples being Rimbaud and Mozart, of course). Instead it becomes apparent at the end of many long years of discipline and perseverance. There are no novel-writing prodigies. All the greatest, most revered novelists were first apprentice writers whose budding talent required early application and conviction.”
(Letters to a Young Novelist, p.13)

Peruvian author Mario Vargas Llosa poses in front of a "desdibujo" of him.

Part of the problem is impatience. We don’t want to waste time reading books about the seven basic plots, the hero’s journey, or a long list of rules (~shivers!~). We just want to write! After all, literature is not math, right? It’s not a matter of equations and formulas.

True, writing is not a science, but there is a method to storytelling nonetheless, a plot structure and archetypes which have worked for centuries. Wouldn’t the aspiring writer benefit by knowing why this is? (This is not to say that more experimental works of fiction won’t work, but like in painting, a strong foundation will give the writer the training and experience to be able to evolve in whichever way he chooses and find that coveted “voice.”)

If we want to be published we must come to terms with the fact that literature is not just an art form, it’s also a business (which equals appealing to a large group of people and yes, turning our thoughts and words into a commercial product). Like many art students I encountered during my college years, many writers seem to believe that novel writing should be unrestricted and inspired by an intangible source. One of my dearest friends and colleagues equates writing with having sex. She says too much explanation and instruction can “kill the mood.” I agree that spontaneity plays an important role in writing (there’s an undeniable magic to storytelling that is what makes it so enthralling—and addictive—to both writer and audience.) But I also think that, like in any other art form, we must learn how to use our tools and look at the masters (and our peers) to better understand what resonates and what doesn’t. This may mean having to put up with “how-to-manuals” and “rules” (all blasphemous words in the writer’s lexicon). Even if you think you’ve learned everything there is to know, there may still be something new, a bit of undiscovered information that may come to you in your hour of need (or insomnia) and spark an Aha moment that may just bring a solution to your story’s dilemma.

Yes, writers of the world, art and craft can work together! The left and right sides of your brain are not sworn enemies, and information (even if it’s not applicable to every case, or even if you disagree) won’t necessarily block you or take away from your creativity—but it will make your writing decisions informed ones so you can create your own desdibujo. It’s not about NOT breaking the rules, it’s about knowing them before you break them and doing so with a purpose. Like my husband says: "You can't think outside the box if you don't know where the box is."

For more about my art mentors:

Articles about Cesar Tacco (in Spanish):

La acuarela es demoníaca

La muerte visitó al pintor ecuatoriano Cesar Tacco a los 86 años

Cesar Tacco dejó un legado de amor

On both Cesar Tacco and Ramiro Jácome:
Pequeña Antología de Quito en el Siglo XX

Articles about Ramiro Jácome (in English):
Short Biography
Ecuador Cultural Essentials The Arts

Samples of Ramiro’s artwork

Comprehensive analysis of Ramiro's art (in Spanish):

Ramiro Jácome o la honestidad creadora

Pancho Cajas caricatures:

http://panchocajascaricaturas.blogspot.com

Coming soon...to a blog near you

2011-11-13T05:07:00.001-07:00

The Divine Secrets of the Writing Sisterhood Blog is happy to announce a double incoming surprise to take place very soon. Always looking forward to assist our faithful fandom (and to hook fresh followers as well!) we have prepared new and thrilling changes. What are those? You can’t even imagine! Stay tuned and in a little while your patience shall be rewarded.

To be continued…

The Sisterhood

Nothing New under the Sun: Plagiarism, Literary Cloning or Inmortal Formulas?

2011-11-06T15:13:00.002-07:00

Whether it deals with vampires, conspiracy tales, or the old-as-ages Macguffin, formula plots sell and are here to stay. Most bestselling books, films and even television series will elicit replicas in the never-ending search for sales and ratings. But do literary formulas grow old? When do they become immortal archetypes, and why some bestselling ideas never bring forth clonification?

There is nothing wrong about formula. Just call it “genre” and make it respectable. Without formula we wouldn´t have great detective mysteries, great love stories or complex genres like science fiction or fantasy. Details vary, but you always have the same ingredients. The art consist in combining the basics, and reaching out to an audience hungry for a story similar to the one that just captured its imagination.

Recently, I read that part of Boardwalk Empire´s appeal lies in that it attracts The Sopranos’ large fandom. All the producers had to do was take elements that had turned The Sopranos into a hot series and reset them into another milieu: Atlantic City in the Twenties. But not all winning formulas are ripe for imitation.

Boardwalk Empire o What if Tony Soprano had lived through The Prohibition?

Few television series have merited the accolades that befall on Mad Men, and yet one would expect a thread of series cloning that bitter view of Madison Avenue in the 60’s. Recently there were two attempts (PanAm and The Playboy Club) to recycle that nostalgic fad. Both have poor ratings, showing that mediocre reproduction does little honor to the real McCoy.

The Real Mad Men: Beware of cheap imitations

But the search for novelty is becoming exhausting and futile. The Biblical proverb “there is nothing new under the sun” applies even to literature. Most fiction is, to some extent, formulaic. It’s why many of us have turned to fantasy, the last refuge of originality. However, even in Fantasyland you will run into the “copycat syndrome.”

We live in the Era of Fangs. A plethora of vampires lurks on our TV screen, in Hollywood blockbusters and hide between the pages of bestselling novels. All over the world, writing about vampires has become a lucrative business. As long as readers remain mystified by bloodsucking protagonists, the vampire formula will live on. Universal folklore has plenty to offer in vampire habits and etiquette, so variations on the subject are inexhaustible. It´s why Count Dracula, The Cullen Family and Sookie Stackhouse’s paramours are so different, sharing only a thirst for human plasma.

Eric and Sookie, a far cry from Dracula and Minna Harker.

The problem is that several of the current vampire yarns are too similar for comfort. Sometimes they are nothing but duplications of a successful novel, and publishers aid in the plagiarism scheme by even using the same marketing techniques. A good example is Claudia Gray’s Evernight. Its cover is a blatant New Moon's take off.

Some of us who do not care to read or write about vampires (werewolves are my game) just hope and wait for the craze to go away, because formula is not forever. The best plots have their day of reckoning. There is an unwritten law that popular books (as well as film and miniseries) will spawn clones, but the formula can be done to death.

After J.K. Rowlings struck gold with Harry Potter, cutesy teen witches and wizards flooded the literary market. A plot centering on a brooding maladjusted adolescent that found her/his secret powers at boarding school was tried and tried all over again, until it ran its living time. Now, no respectable agent would touch a manuscript that deals with such a tedious, predictable and overly-tried subject.

Not all fantastic elements have expiration dates. The quest for a particular object, otherwise known as Macguffin (according to the late Alfred Hitchcock), has been around since the Holy Grail, and you may find it in all genres not only fantasy. Historical fiction, thrillers, adventure and detective stories twirl around various documents, parchments, utensils, gems and even statues, think of The Maltese Falcon. Although agents may clench their teeth at reading another tale of a magical object that needs to be found in order to save the world, the Macguffin has become an immortal archetype.

We tend to associate the fad of conspiracy tales with the publication of The Da Vinci Code. But secret societies, mysterious agendas and Templar mysteries have been around since Sir Walter Scott. A serious writer like Umberto Eco made a name for himself mixing all those elements that have made Dan Brown rich and infamous. But since Eco was considered a “high literature” master, nobody would dare accuse him of being formulaic or using worn out literary premises.

In truth, those premises are not really worn out; you may still refresh and refine them. Sadly not all writers do it. It´s much more comfortable to rewrite the same formula with just the necessary variations to prevent plagiarism. The main problem of this semi-plagiaristic craze is that it encourages sloppy style, mediocre storylines and cardboard characters. That is why “formula” has become a bad word in the writing community.

The industry’s lame excuse is to cry out “the public demands it!” But we readers are the first to notice when our favorite themes are cloned mercilessly. For fifteen years, I was a bodice-ripper addict. I read and collected the best of the genre, eschewing dull imitations. Eventually it came to my attention that even some of my favorite authors were displaying signs of writing fatigue.

By the time I grew out of my obsession with the genre I was conscious that Rosemary Rogers’ heroes were all mean, chauvinistic pigs and her heroines were a bunch of promiscuous losers. With Beatrice Small, the boredom arrived when I found myself reading the same bedroom scene sequel after sequel.

Have you gone through a similar experience? As a reader, how can you tell when even your favorite formula is growing stale? And as a writer, how do you battle the need to be innovative while trying to pay homage to that novel you so much love? After all, imitation is a form of love.

Show & Tell

2011-10-31T10:41:00.002-06:00

They don't have to tell the audience there's a problem

“Show, don’t tell.” Writers hear this advice so often, it must become permanently tattooed on our brains. But what does it actually mean? When we tell a story, we are telling it. We’re using words, after all. So how can a writer show a story?

The trick I use is to envision my scene on a stage. I become a playwright. This prevents me from engaging in two bad writing habits: long-winded explanations, and endless interior monologue. The former is something we tend to do at the beginning of a story; we want to establish context, so we info-dump. But you can’t info-dump on a stage, unless you have a Greek chorus up there explaining everything (frowned upon these days). You have to present your story with action: characters must move, speak, do.

Staging the scene takes care of another common narrative problem: the tendency to hang out in the POV character’s head, thinking, feeling, remembering, plotting. We have to do this sometimes, and the ability to do it is one serious advantage literature has over stage. But a little goes a long way: you don’t want to bore your audience. Forward momentum in a story comes almost entirely from action. Emotion needs to be dramatized as well: an actor on a stage can’t look at the audience and announce, “So, like, I’m angry in this scene, OK?” He has to show his anger with action; with his body, with his words. Put your guy on a stage: imagine how you, as stage director, would have him communicate his feelings.

Your scene: here

Showing takes extra effort, so it’s no wonder we prize it so, especially when it’s well done. Showing draws the reader into the story on an emotional level, by encouraging her to experience it.

There's a flip side to this excellent advice, however. As a young writer, I heard “show-don’t-tell” so many times I started to get carried away. By the time I’d demonstrated how very worried my poor protagonist was (studiously avoiding the word “worried” meanwhile, because that’s telling), I’d written two paragraphs instead of one word. My writing was becoming bogged down with all the showing. Showing is dramatic, but it can also be inefficient. Some things simply need to be established quickly, so we can move the story along.

I still struggle with this line. In fact, it’s probably my biggest writing struggle after "sit butt down at computer and start typing." What bits of my story need straightforward narration, and what bits need to be dramatized? There are so many choices to make. What about you? Have you ever been told you need to show more and tell less? How have you applied the advice — and has it changed your writing?

That's one way to intrigue your audience

Five Reasons I Still Believe in Traditional Publishing

2011-10-23T15:57:00.000-06:00

"That is one heavy bag of wishes you've got there!"

Nowadays, when it comes to getting your novel traditionally published, most writers believe it holds about as much merit as believing in Santa Claus. When we first start out, we dream of that instant success. We envision agents fawning over our manuscript, quickly signing us, even quicker yet getting us a publisher, the huge advance and, of course, that book tour we're going to take that goes from New York City all the way to the star-studded mania of Hollywood. But then we grow up. The shininess of this wonderland quickly fades into a swift-kick-in-the-pants reality. There is no shiny wrapped present under our tree, containing our fantastic masterpiece. This getting an agent thing is harder than we thought!

And so it should be.

Honing your craft as a writer is no easy task, to which just about any serious writer can attest. Sure, we write those first few crappy stories and we think they're brilliant, but then we do the one thing we were unprepared to do. We start querying agents. And we get rejection after rejection after rejection. Now, I'll admit, most agents give very little feedback anymore, which is a bit disheartening. And because so many first time novelists are either a) too scared to put their work out there for others to read, or b) so frustrated with the persistent rejections, they tend to turn to self-publishing in the e-book format.

I've stated before in previous posts that I have nothing against the wonderful world of e-books. I do, however, take issue with what's flooding the self-published e-market. If anything, a lot of what's out there is taking the writing world down a few pegs. Thus, why I still believe in traditional publishing. Yeah, you know -- the kind where an agent, editor, and publisher are involved. Here are five good things that come out of having an agent and being persistent when it comes to getting traditionally published:

Agents work as filters -- For a long time, I couldn't figure out what was really bothering me about self-published works, but then I attended a writers' meeting where the speaker spoke on how agents function. They are the filter to a seemingly endless line of aspiring work. We may not all agree on what constitutes good literature, but we can all agree that when we've read a satisfying novel we are happy to see it was published. True, some junk still gets out there when it's run through agents and publishers, but it was never so prevalent ten or fifteen years ago as it is today.
We are not all business men and women -- I cannot tell you how many blogs and websites I've read about those who took the self-pub route and just ended up frustrated. These authors came to realize that, although they may be good writers, they confessed that they knew nothing about balancing finances, keeping track of sales, promoting their book at every turn, etc. In one blog I read, the author confessed to so many sleepless nights over whether the book was selling or not that she became physically sick. Sure, we do have to handle much of the promotion responsibility now, but wouldn't it be nice to have someone extending a helping hand whenever you needed one?
Agents are contractually bound to root for you -- You get your own personal cheerleader, otherwise, the agent would never have taken you on in the first place. The self-pub route can be lonely. You (and usually your husband or wife) end up being the cheerleader for your team. Your agent wants your work to sell, so he/she will be pushing, pushing, pushing to get it out on the market. Encouragement always helps.
Other writers tend to take you more seriously -- Because the self-pub industry has become so flooded (and many of us have read some of those new "authors"), there's a certain kind of stigma that goes along with it. I've seen those looks some self-published authors get and I find it hard to take. And I'm just the bystander! The writing market is like any other entertainment market. We'd be hard-pressed to buy a low-quality rock album cut in someone's garage with horrible acoustics, and yet, self-published authors of all genres think their work should be taken seriously even if the work is filled with glaring errors. Until the self-publishing industry learns how to turn a filter on again, unfortunately, this stigma will always be there.
Deadlines make it feel like a true profession -- When we self-publish, we have no real deadlines. We make them up as we go along. A real agent or publishing house is going to set limits on our time. They will want things when they want them, and that means our butt is going to be in that chair each day pounding out a manuscript. If, as writers, we want our careers to be taken seriously, then we need to treat them as such.

Like many of you out there, I've struggled with getting my work published. It's no easy task. The thought to self-publish has crossed my mind, but every time I feel there is something holding me back from doing so. And I think that "something" relates back to the five things I mentioned above. I want to be taken seriously, not just by an agent or publisher, but also by my peers and the writing community at large. Personally, I don't believe self-publishing is what it's all trumped up to be by the hard-core believers. If it was, then why do so many self-pubbed authors still crave traditional representation? Because one of these five points causes this craving. The luster might wear away the more "grown-up" we become with our writing, but there still remains a wish. And don't all of us want our wishes to come true?

Some basic light literature all would-be authors need in in his/her arsenal:

I'm asking for it! Give me your feedback when it comes to self-publishing and the e-book market. Do you still believe in traditional publishing? Why or why not? Would you add any useful points to my list?

This is The End, Beautiful Friend*

2011-10-16T22:20:00.004-06:00

Note: This article contains SPOILERS for the following films/novels: The Perfect Storm, Little Women, The Age of Innocence, Gone With the Wind, Love Story, Romeo & Juliet, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, My Girl, Titanic, Stella, Juno, My Best Friend’s Wedding, Lonesome Dove, Life is Beautiful, Inception, Alice in Wonderland, Wizard of Oz and several Nicholas Sparks’ novels.

They say all roads lead to Rome. Mrs. Margaret Atwood must believe this statement since a few years ago she made a very good point: there is only one authentic ending for any story. For her hypothesis, read Happy Endings.

Since not every novel can end with the death of all its participants (unless it’s The Perfect Storm), we have to come up with a spot to end the story before the inevitable happens. But where? At what point should we stop tormenting our characters and type “The End”? They say that a satisfactory ending is fundamental in storytelling. A reader will forgive a slow beginning or even a sagging middle, but NOT a poor ending. Sounds easy enough, but how do we achieve that “surprising inevitability” everyone talks about? How do we please our audience when everyone has different tastes? Is it even a matter of pleasing or making a strong statement about the human condition despite the audience’s expectations? I’m afraid I don’t have a perfect answer (in fact, I’m struggling as-we-type with the ending of my second novel) but perhaps a glance at different novel endings—those we have liked and disliked—may give us (me!) a clue of how to find the ideal conclusion for our masterpieces.

Happy, sad or just plain confusing?

Many stories end with the happy nuptials of the protagonists after they’ve overcome innumerable ordeals and tribulations. Other novels (most of them written by callous men such as Shakespeare, Nicholas Sparks, Erich Segal, Herman Raucher, Jorge Isaacs and James Cameron) end with the tragic death of one of the lovers. But what about those in-between/vague endings where the couple inexplicably part ways much to the reader’s astonishment and heartbreak? Would these stories have had equal success had they had different, perhaps jollier, endings?

Good thing you're happy, Jo, because many of your fans--including this one--did NOT approve of your final selection and how quickly you forgot Laurie!

In The Age of Innocence, why did Newland Archer walk away from his beloved’s apartment without even stopping for a cup of tea after twenty six years of separation?

“Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn!” Would we have still loved Gone With the Wind if Rhett had never said those infamous words? Perhaps Margaret Mitchell was trying to give us a clue of the ending with the book’s title.

I still cry when I watch this heartbreaking scene in Love Story.

But Sir William, must both of them die?

What if you’re not writing a love story?

It seems that stories that focus on one character’s journey or growth give the writer more freedom on how to end it. I’m talking about coming-of-age stories or those that focus on a character overcoming a minor or big flaw, such as George VI’s stammer in The King’s Speech, Forrest Gump and his low IQ, Juno and her unwanted pregnancy, Benjamin Button and his reversal growth problem, Vada and her strange connection to death and loss (My Girl). The commonality I see in these endings is that all these characters eventually come to terms with their problem and overcome it (all but poor Benjamin Button, who, let’s face it, was doomed from the beginning.) There is also an issue of “inevitability” here. Juno’s pregnancy has to come to completion as does Benjamin Button’s life. The question here would be: did the protagonist achieve his/her goal and if so, was the end result satisfactory? Did he/she grow as a result?

In My Girl, Vada had to grow up the hard way.

The self sacrificial hero

These are the kinds of endings that leave the audience in absolute silence at the end of the show or book (except for a sob here and there.) We love them, but at the same time they make us lift our heads to the skies and yell in despair: “Why?”

Not sure I’m brave enough to attempt this kind of cruelty in my own writing, but it may be worth a try. After all, it’s these poignant endings that leave an audience captivated. (Ever heard someone say “I love this movie. I cried so much with it!”?)

In Titanic, Jack gives up his space on a floating door so that Rose can survive.

In Stella, a mother renounces to be part of her daughter’s life so she can have a better future without her.

In Juno, the young heroine gives up her baby for adoption because she knows he’ll be better off with an adult mother.

Those twisted minds

We cannot forget the masters of suspense and film noir Alfred Hitchcock and Cornell Woolrich. These guys sure knew how to twist our expectation with jaw-dropping conclusions to their very dark stories. They didn’t want to leave their audiences with a smile. They wanted to provoke thought. They wanted to surprise. How do readers respond to unexpected endings? (Probably well since The Twilight Zone was a very successful show.) Current examples of this kind of ending are The Sixth Sense, The Village and The Others.

In comedy the only twisted ending I can think of is in Julia Roberts’s film My Best Friend’s Wedding, where the main character doesn’t get the guy. (But then again, maybe this was a “character-growth” story?) What are your thoughts on this? Is it acceptable to have a “unhappy” ending in a romantic comedy?

And how about those endings where the protagonist dies and another one must take the lead, like in Lonesome Dove or Life is Beautiful?

How very sad was the day Augustus McCrae left this world.

I don’t get it!

What about those endings that leave the audience bewildered and we need hours of conversation (or therapy) to figure out what the writer was trying to tell us (or a website with graphics to explain the story’s ending.) Click here for an interpretation of Inception's ending. I wish The Ring also had an explanation website!

Did that elusive totem stop spinning after Inception ended? Was the protagonist still dreaming?

Oh, crap, it’s not over.

Don’t get too happy that the blood and guts spread throughout your movie screen are no longer there. When you watch a horror film, the final scene (guaranteed) is a lurking shadow behind the only character left alive or a hand climbing out of the tomb.

Don’t worry, folks, it’s just a dream.

Need I say anything about these endings? Do the names Alice and Dorothy give you a clue?

Now to recap: What do you think makes a good ending? Do you favor happy love stories or sad ones? Is a novel considered more “literary” if it has a tragic ending? Do you mind predictability (good guys always win)? Can you think of a memorable ending that was unexpected or particularly touching?

* To enjoy the soundtrack for this post while you read, please press the play button.

The Doors - The End at emp3

Characters to Die For: Why Do We Love Them?

2011-10-09T16:11:00.002-06:00

Melanie and Mammy, my favorite GWTW characters

Despite the constant requests for action-filled scenes and plot-oriented novels, there are still those who are drawn to fiction because of the creatures that inhabit it. Well-loved books are linked to solid and loveable characters that capture an audience’s imagination. What is the appeal behind those fictional individuals? That is a question I pose to all of us character-oriented readers. While waiting for your answers, I’ll try to provide some reasons that lead me (and hopefully others) to get hooked on characters.

After much thought, I arrived to the conclusion that I will read a novel over and over again, to the point that it merits a place in my lengthy list of favorite works of literature, for two reasons: atmosphere and characters to die for. Usually the bond developed between readers and those characters stem from four emotions: identification, empathy, admiration and fascination.

Identification: The reader relates to the character, they share common traits, mores or tastes. They may share similar backgrounds, cultures, faith, and ideologies. Sometimes a character could be confronting a problem, dilemma, or situation similar to what the reader is undergoing. They may even be in the same line of work. I remember enjoying Anne of Windy Poplars much more than Anne of Green Gables, because when I read the Lucy Maud Montgomery’s novels, I was teaching at an all girls’ school. I could and did relate to Anne’s teaching experiences and her problems with her students.

Empathy: The character goes through a situation totally alien to the reader, but the latter understands the character’s motivations and imagines he/she would do the same in that situation. I have never attended a witchcraft school like Hogwarts, yet I know if I had, I would behave just like Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter series.

Admiration: The reader looks up to the character for his/her guts and values. No matter how hard or painful they are, the reader lives vicariously through the character´s experiences.

Beth March is the least loved of the Little Women, but when I was very ill, a couple of years ago; it was she whom I selected as a model of valor and endurance. I also loved Melanie in Gone with the Wind because she possessed both, physical and spiritual courage unlike Scarlett who was a moral coward.

Beth March's last days
I have always admired characters that are willing to stand up for their beliefs even if it causes them grief. As a I child I adored Ligia in Quo Vadis because she was willing to live in poverty rather than become a dissolute Roman patrician’s concubine, and Ivanhoe’s Rebecca threatening to jump from a window rather than surrendering to Sir Brian’s lust moved me to tears of respect. And even though it breaks my heart, I stand with Julia at the end of Brideshead Revisited when she refuses to divorce, in order to marry her true love, because it goes against her Catholic faith.

Julia's Farewell in Brideshead Revisited

Fascination: This is an old quirk of mine. Since childhood I was in the habit of developing crushes on literary heroes. My mother claims that I was in love with Sinbad, the Sailor before I learned to read!

Though embarrassing to confess, I am sure there is more than a bookworm out there who uses protagonists as reference for ideal lovers. Or maybe a fictional character does remind you of an old flame. Then there are characters that represent our secret object of desire, but are only safe to encounter between the pages of a book. My list of fictional paramours (going back to my childhood reading material) is huge, from Hector in The Iliad to Ari Be Canaan in Leon Uris’ Exodus, from Petronius in Quo Vadis to Stendhal’s Julien Sorel.

Eric Bana playing Hector in Troy
Now that I have shown you mine, show me yours. What does a character have to do for you to get hook on him/her? And what fictional people do you admire, feel close to, or have fallen in love with?

Perilous Pleasure: The Difficulty of Writing Sex Scenes

2011-10-02T21:02:00.000-06:00

I’m not a squeamish person, but when I get to the point in my stories where a sex scene seems like it belongs, I find a sudden urge to go brew yet another cup of tea. Or wash the dog. Or pay some bills. For a while I blamed my hesitation on some sort of latent prudishness, but I’ve since decided it has more to do with the inherent dangers of writing a workable, readable sex scene.
It’s very difficult to do well.

In one sense, writing a sex scene is like writing any action scene: you’ve got to choreograph it properly, make sure the emotional stakes are in place, and keep the level of description in line with your genre — and thus with the reader’s expectations.

But sex scenes pose a special challenge to the writer: they’re inherently going to evoke a stronger reaction from readers than your average action scene, except perhaps an especially violent one. It’s the oldest essence of our evolutionary past: run or reproduce. The most basic stuff is also the likeliest to fall flat if you do it wrong. With that in mind, here are some tips.

This might not be what you're going for

• Don’t go on and on. There’s only so long you can whitter on about this body part meeting that body part before you bore the reader — or worse, make her laugh. If you want to write a comical sex scene, that’s fine. But if you think you’re writing the most passionate scene since Lady Chatterley’s Lover, and your reader is sniggering like a fifth grader in sex-ed class, you’ve done something wrong. The longer your scene goes on, the more at risk it is of becoming unintentionally hilarious. Keep it short. (If you don’t believe me, read John Updike’s “Rabbit, Run.” Great novel generally, peppered with horrible many-page sex scenes.)

• There’s a difference between sex and romance. Sex is just body parts interacting. Romance is about relationship. Certainly there is a place in many novels for simple, straightforward sex: but if the characters are important, then their relationship is more vital than what their bodies are doing. Or, to put it another way, their bodies should be expressing what they feel, how they interact, what they mean to each other. It’s usually better to spend more time on sensation and reaction — the perception of events — than in describing the events themselves.

A lot can be conveyed with setting and intimation: don't overdescribe

• Match genre to level of description. I’ve noticed that Pulitzer-prize winners can’t write sex scenes. (See Updike comment, above.) If anyone can think of an exception, please list it, because I’m genuinely curious if my theory holds up. I suspect that writers who are poetry-minded, who are seeking to capture the sublime, fumble badly when it comes to the profane. They can do love scenes, sometimes, but need to dance around sex itself — or skip it entirely. Commercial fiction writers are often much more adept. The best writer I can think of, offhand, at choreographing and pulling off complicated (and engrossing!) love scenes is Diana Gabaldon, in her Outlander series. She blogged once that her fans often thank her for helping their marriages — more than most fiction writers could hope for!

• Avoid crude terminology. This isn’t about prudish modesty. Certain words light up a danger zone in the normal human brain, and so must be used carefully lest you elicit an unintended “ick” reaction from your reader. The exception to this is if your character would naturally use a particular word. If you really feel you must use certain terminology to remain true to character or situation, do it — but be aware of the pitfalls. Otherwise you can use the anatomically correct terms, the less-crude everyday terms, or write around the nouns and focus on reaction.

• Know why you’re including it before you write it. Don’t throw it in there for no reason — or worse, as a cheap way to titillate the reader. She won’t fall for it. A sex scene, like any scene, must highlight character, create tension, move the plot forward, elicit a mood, or perform some other vital storytelling function.

What about you? Do you struggle with writing these potentially difficult scenes? Do you feel pressured to include them, or exclude them, from your writing? What authors do you feel handle this aspect of writing well?

Inspirational Words from Ira Glass

2011-09-30T07:45:00.000-06:00

What nobody tells people who are beginners — and I really wish someone had told this to me . . . is that all of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. For example, you want to make TV because you love TV. There is stuff that you just love.

So you have really good taste. But you get into this thing where there is this gap. For the first couple years you are making stuff… but what you’re making isn’t so good. It’s not that great. It’s trying to be good, it has ambition to be good, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, your taste is still killer. And your taste is good enough that you can tell that what you’re making is a disappointment to you. It’s still sorta crappy.

A lot of people never get past this phase. They quit. But the thing I would say to you with all my heart: most everyone I know who does interesting, creative work, went through years of this. We knew our work didn’t have this special thing that we wanted it to have. Everybody goes through this.

If you are just starting this phase, still in this phase, getting out of this phase, you gotta know it’s totally normal and the most important, possible thing you can do is do a lot of work. Do a huge volume of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week or every month you know you will finish one story. You create the deadline. It’s best if you have someone waiting for the work, even if it’s somebody that doesn’t pay you. It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions.

In my case, I took longer to figure out how to do this than anybody I’ve ever met. It takes a while. It’s going to take you a while. It’s normal to take a while. And you just have to fight your way through that.

Ira Glass is host and producer of This American Life.

Content vs. Craft: The Dumbing Down of the Literary World

2011-09-25T14:48:00.000-06:00

"The years passed, mankind became stupider at a frightening rate." (Narrator from Idiocracy)

What's a guy of average
intelligence to do
in the dumbed down future?

I have something that has been bugging me lately. I've often wondered if perhaps it's just me, but I don't think so. With many things I read, and most often times conversations in which I happen to get involved, there is a remarkable lack of attention paid to grammar. Now, I know as an English-speaker in the United States that we tend to have a certain pride when it comes to our overall English language. But that's pretty much where our pride stops. Having studied a second language for much of my college career, it didn't take me long to realize that when it comes to grammar, American English speakers, for the most part, couldn't care less. This lack of attention and enthusiasm is reflected in the way literature is being written today. Don't believe me? Well, let's take a look at some recent activity going on in the publishing world.

Let me preface this article by first saying I have nothing against the wonderful industry of e-publishing. I believe the ever-increasing popularity of publishing books in this format is due, largely in part, to the fact that it makes novels more available and easy to access on just about any mobile platform. (Hey, I have a Kindle and I enjoy it!) However, I do take offense with some authors who believe just about anything is publishable and, yeah, anyone should be happy with it and not rip it apart. Those who believe this way, believe the content (i.e. their story, the creative idea behind his/her work, the saturated genre) is fine the way it is, and that the craft (i.e. the wordcraft, the language, the actual plot, the beauty in which one creates the story, the actual prose) isn't all that important. In other words, if the story is dumbed down for the reader, who cares? I care, and so should any serious writer/reader out there.

Why have my hackles been raised? For two reasons: firstly, celebrity (or celebutante) authors, and secondly, a recent article pertaining to a poorly written e-book series getting snatched up for traditional publication.

The Truth About
Diamonds
by Nicole Richie

Although there are a few who can pull it off (and I'm not talking about autobiographies, I'm talking fiction), for the most part, celebrity authors just don't have what it takes. Ones who make me cringe are those such as Lauren Conrad (according to Lisa Schwarzbaum of EW.com -- "Is there anything LC can't do? Well, uh, yes. Write a 'novel.'"), Pamela Anderson (according to Blogcritics.org, "Pamela Anderson's recent tome is unlikely to toll any bells in the halls of academia,") and Nicole Richie with her "reality fiction" (one commenter at Amazon.com said, "How this was published when real authors are struggling just to get their work read is amazing."). These "authors" lace their plots and storytelling with glitzy, superficial worlds that don't really speak to most readers. These "creations" are mostly "reality fiction," meaning the novel has become a vehicle they use in order to spill the beans about their own lives. These works are wolves in sheep's clothing and rarely do they carry any depth when it comes to crafting a great novel. And rarely do they last more than a few months on book shelves. For some reason, because someone like Snooki has an MTV audience, therefore she must make a great writer (here's an article about her novel A Shore Thing. Classy.). Hmm.

Virtue
by Amanda Hocking

I think the final straw that broke this camel's back is an article I read in *Entertainment Weekly. Two authors, Minnesota native Amanda Hocking and former insurance salesman John Locke, have been making waves in the self-publishing world. Hocking, who writes supernatural romance, recently signed a $2 million deal with St. Martin's Press, and Locke has moved more than a million downloads with his detective crime series. The quality of the writing is what really hit a nerve. Article writer, Rob Brunner, has this to say about Hocking's writing:

❝Hocking, it's safe to say, is not a stylist. Her work reads like a high school creative-writing assignment, full of typos and misused words and lifeless language. But while wordcraft may not be her thing, Hocking definitely does have something. Despite its faults, the trilogy zips along pleasantly enough, and although the books aren't remotely in the same league as Harry Potter or The Hunger Games, they do poke at the same pleasure centers.❞

And as to Locke? This is what Brunner has to say:

❝The latest, Vegas Moon, features characters with forced-funny names like Dr. Phyllis Willis and Fast Eddie Pickles, and a flimsy plot about a lethal computer chip implanted in Creed's brain gets padded out with a weirdly detailed pasta recipe and an impassioned defense of airport baggage handlers.❞

When, as readers, as purchasers of novels, did we start asking for dreck like this to be a proper representation of skill in an industry where almost anything goes nowadays? (After all, Hocking and Locke are at the top of the unrepresented self-published game.) When did we become complacent about shelling out those $3 or less for these e-books? We have a voice, and those of us who enjoy quality literature should use our voices by not throwing away our dollars on junk, because that's about all that some of this "literature" is -- junk. I don't know about you, but I'd rather keep visiting the local library where all my choices are free and I can usually see what I'm getting into.

In the case of Amanda Hocking, as a writer, I would have been excited to hear how oftentimes belittled self-publishing landed her a fantastic deal with St. Martin's (because I truly believe there are some great self-published works out there), but when I continued reading the article I felt disgust more than anything else. I often hear people say, "Why, I should write a book. I'd make soooo much money." I just shake my head. But then a story like this crops up and I think, "Yeah, you should write that book, Mr. I-have-no-idea-how-to-even-do-it. How much worse could your writing possibly be?" After all, if Hocking and Snooki can pull it off, then anybody can pull it off. Right?

In my opinion, anyone who wants to self-publish needs to do the same amount of legwork that one would do if he/she was going the traditional route. Have a critique group and beta readers, know your genre, get all the feedback that's necessary in order to have a finely crafted creation. If you want to be taken seriously, then treat your writing seriously. Then, it would be worth the few extra bucks people would be willing to pay to read something memorable.

What about for you? Are you wasting your dollars on a high caloric diet of literary junk? Do you feel there is an influx of badly crafted work hitting the self-publishing world? Should there be a better way of regulating it now that the so-called gatekeepers (agents) of the industry no longer work as filters? Feel free to point out any grammatical errors in this article!

* The article, "The Hottest Self-Published Books," can be found in the July 29, 2011 issue, #1165.

✿ Also, for an upcoming article I'm looking for anyone who has done work as a ghostwriter. Feel free to e-mail me at writing.sisterhood@gmail.com!

Congratulations Sister Lorena!

2011-09-20T14:59:00.001-06:00

The Sisterhood is happy to announce, and congratulate, our Sister Lorena Hughes for being one of the winners at the recent Annual SouthWest Writers Writing Contest.

Sister Lorena’s novel “The Black Letter “ was awarded First Place in the Historical Novel Category.

http://www.southwestwriters.com/contestAnnual.php

May this be the first of many awards!

How To Handle Negative Criticism

2011-09-18T16:06:00.005-06:00

Let’s face it. Criticism sucks. None of us want to hear a long list of things we did wrong (especially with something as personal as writing). We don’t always admit it, but what we’re really hoping for when we submit our beloved babies for evaluation is a pat on the back and something along the lines of: “This is a masterpiece like no other. Go ahead and open a bank account for all the profits this book will generate.”

Unfortunately, this never happens. And if it does, the comment probably came from a family member or close friend (aka: people who love you and think you’re awesome, which you probably are, but that is irrelevant here.) More often than not, our “objective” critiquers—colleagues, teachers, agents or editors—will come back to us with a list of grievances the size of Russia. The effects can be devastating. They can range anywhere from shame, frustration, anger, sadness, self-doubt, self-deception, or all of the above. You may also experience a sort of indifference or numbness (if you’ve been exposed to this kind of criticism too many times—in the form of rejection letters, for example—but in my experience, this is a rare occurrence.) The most common emotions after a negative critique are pretty intense. After all, your life-long dreams are being crushed in a matter of minutes. These emotions are normal and I believe happen to all writers at some point in their careers. Some survive this bitter episode, but others may question their writing abilities and give up altogether.

Don’t let this happen to you! Here are some of the techniques that have helped me make the best out of a negative critique.

1. Don’t get defensive

In my own experience with critiquers, defending my work didn’t lead anywhere. The initial impression the writing caused cannot be changed. Even if you change the reader's mind later with an explanation, you cannot change what they thought while they were reading. Knowing what this initial impression was can help you determine if you're coming across how you intend to.

When you get defensive, you're in a position where you're not really listening to suggestions. You're just thinking of how the other person is wrong and you're right. A back and forth between writer and critiquer is not productive for either one. The end results are not the best: either you lose your beta reader or they stop being honest with you to avoid the drama.

2. Give it time

Your first reaction when you get a critique (be it written or verbal) will probably be surprise (after all, if you thought you’d made a mistake, you wouldn’t have done it, right?) The second may be one of the following: frustration (“such-and-such doesn’t get my work”), shame (“how could I have made such a stupid mistake? Must defend my work immediately so critiquer doesn’t think I’m an idiot/bad writer”) or anger (“how dare evil-critiquer judge my work so harshly when he a, b and c in his novel!”)

My advice is to detach yourself as much as humanly possible (for the moment) from your novel/critique and just listen/read the notes without responding (unless you plan to be gracious when you open your mouth/type back.) Thank your critiquer, grab your manuscript and leave the premises immediately before your ego responds prior to having a chance to process the unpleasant information. The longer you take before reacting to your critique (be it by making the suggested changes, ripping your manuscript to pieces or insulting those who dared criticized your protagonist) will make your decision more objective. The time you should wait really depends on the person. It has taken anywhere from days, to weeks, to even months before I could really grasp the criticism without emotion.

3. Go back to your notes

After you’ve cooled down, it’s time to go back to your critiquers’ comments. Reread everything they’ve told you. You will realize this time that either your critiquers were way off with their comments, or they were actually right and their suggestions will make your work stronger. Either way, you will see that whatever they told you wasn’t as inflammatory as you originally thought.

4. Evaluate suggestions and value of critique

Now that you’re back to your charming and reasonable self again, you’re in a position to evaluate whether or not the solution(s) your critiquers offered will make your manuscript better. Make the easy changes first (those suggestions you had no problem with). If you’re not ready to make a big change, DON’T do it. Give it more time, but keep it in the back of your mind.

If you’re comfortable with your critiquer and know this disagreement was temporary, then continue working together, but if the experience left a bitter taste in your mouth, you must evaluate if this person’s style will work for you. (More on this later.)

5. Take more time off and reread work

Now that you’ve implemented the suggestions you agreed with, give your mind a rest for a few days (the longer, the better, especially if the change was a big one.) Work on other projects or other portions of the novel. What you want to achieve with this break is to become as objective as you can be in this subjective endeavor.

Once you’ve created enough distance, read your entire manuscript so you get an overall sense of your story’s progression, and see if the applied changes flow well with the rest of the novel. This is the true test of whether the criticism you received was on target or not.

Final thoughts

At some point in our relationships with critiquers, there needs to be an objective evaluation of whether they’re a positive or a negative influence on our writing (this doesn't mean that a critiquer who always likes your work is necessarily a positive influence, or one that is always pointing out your mistakes is always negative.) What, IMO, determines a good relationship is whether or not after a constructive critique (which, as earlier established, you may not be ready to accept/understand/open your mind to right away) you are still encouraged/enthusiastic about your writing and after implementing the changes your work becomes stronger. (As opposed to having the feeling after every meeting that you're not good and you might as well give up.)

What are your feelings on critiques? Do you think you should only point out the positive about a writer’s work (in order to encourage them to continue writing)? Or do you believe that honesty (as brutal as it may be) will be more helpful to the writer in the long run? Should friends/family members be beta readers? Are peers or industry professionals too harsh/uptight in their critiques?

In Love with the Past: The Challenges of Historical Fiction

2011-09-11T14:41:00.000-06:00

Judging by the list of Emmy nominations, Americans appear to be in love with the past. 2011 has been a ripe season for popular shows exuding nostalgia for the not-so-perfect Twentieth Century. The recent past is also the favorite setting of present bestselling historical fiction. Why is historical fiction (and drama) still alive and well when is much more difficult to read and to create than other genres?

Historical fiction is an umbrella term that shelters several subgenres such as historical mysteries, historical romances (what in my day were known as bodice-rippers), inspirational period pieces, and nostalgia yarns. It even encompasses the fantastic, whether it´s alternative history, historical fantasy, steampunk, time travel stories a la Outlander or paranormal romances. The genre’s possibilities are eternal.

True historical fiction applies to novels dealing with actual historical facts and real people as dramatic personae. Examples of historical fiction are Philippa Gregory’s The Other Boleyn Girl, Robert Graves’ I Claudius, and, in terms of current television shows, Emmy winning nominee Boardwalk Empire that deals with a historical person, Enoch “Nucky” Thompson (Steve Buscemi) and his part in the politics and rise of organized crime in Atlantic City.

Then there are those novels set in specific epochs, but telling the adventures of fictional characters such as the New York Times Bestsellers Rules of Civility and Sarah Gruen´s Water for Elephants both set in the Depression Era. Another series in the Emmy list is Downton Abbey, which takes place in the years preceding World War I, and it could be described as a period piece, or as it is known in film’s lingo, a “customer.”

Finally there is nostalgia or vintage, evocations of a recent past, one that is familiar to the reader or to his parents’ generation. The Fifties, Sixties and Seventies are the fashionable vintage area to explore, attested by the success of series like Mad Men and novels like Kathryn Socket´s The Help that takes place in the South, at the onset of The Civil Rights Movement.

Since the past is a rich field for harvesting fiction, it surprised me that thrillers and fantasy have eclipsed historical novels at the New York Time Bestsellers lists. Taking into consideration that such lists are poor barometers to measure the genre´s popularity, I preferred to check Amazon and Barnes & Nobles’ category lists.

Going over the top twentieth most popular items in historical fiction, I expected to find historical romance galore and plenty of medieval sagas a la Ken Follet. Surprisingly, the only material of that sort was precisely Ken Follett’s The Pillars of the Earth, which still enjoys an enviable enduring popularity.

The Middle-Ages might not be the favorite time period for contemporary novelists, but Twentieth Century is. More than half of those top sellers took place in a recent past and some dealt with the Second World War. About six years, ago when I began my first novel, I was strongly advised not to tackle that era. Expert voices at sites dispensing advice to novice writers told me that writing about 30’s, 40’s, and particularly about the global conflict that took place in those days, was ill-advised and “unfashionable.”

Now, the three titles within the New York Times List are set in those despised decades. There is The Paris Wife (Paris in the 20’s), Civility Rules (1938 New York), and War and Honor which is an actual World War II novel. Other war novels doing well in category lists are Tatiana de Rosay’s Holocaust fable Sarah’s Key and Amazon Bestseller War Brides. I wonder what changed. Why is it trendy now to write about the first half of the Twentieth Century? Why is recent history much more fascinating than ancient eras?

As a history buff I would like to see more historical fiction in display, but I can understand why not many would care to tackle the genre. Writing historical fiction demands careful but time-consuming research. Not only do authors have to learn dates, statistics, and proper names, they also have to delve with the daily life their character might experience. What they ate? What did they wear? Most novelists in the field become amateur social historians, and so do their readers. One of the critiques befalling historical novels is that they end up being “disguised textbooks.”

Often, I meet people who shun period pieces with excuses such as “I know so little about that period, I can’t follow the plot” or “I get confused with all the historical details.” Others, like yours truly, thrive in learning historical facts through an entertainment medium. In fact, one of the few reasons why I would throw away a book might be its historical inaccuracy.

Much more difficult that the research process is trying to create characters living in a time alien to us. How did they think? What moved them? What were their values and concerns? And that is where historical fiction and drama tend to fail. Most serious historical fiction authors will run into two ominous characters: Mr. Political Correctness and Madame Modern Sensibility. On encountering them, the author is forced to make a choice on how to portray the past and its inhabitants.

There are three unofficial schools that guide the historical fiction novelist in this quandary. One advises to depict yesteryear as much worse than today, an emphasis on our ancestors’ barbaric ways and primitive mentalities as if to make the reader think he is fortunate to lie in such progressive times like the third Millennium. Then there is nostalgic fondness: to describe days gone by as in Don Quixote’s Golden Age monologue, a lost magical world when everything was better and nicer than today. Finally, is the easiest and most common approach: show the past as a mirror of the present. People have always thought and acted as we do, they just dressed differently and were much more backwards (technologically speaking) than us.

As only a witness could testify of how a historical period really was, all three approaches are legitimate. That doesn’t stop us purists from clenching our teeth when reading hidden current agendas behind a harmless historical tale or glancing through stories that are so anachronistic in language and mentality that characters appear to be attending a costume party.

I have to say that I love research and find tremendous pleasure in reconstructing lost worlds, but is that reason enough to write a historical novel? So I ask those who dare to evoke the past in writing. Why do you do it? What made you select a particular period for your tale’s setting? What is the biggest challenge in writing historical fiction?

We have received the Liebster Award!

2011-09-10T18:48:00.002-06:00

I am honored to be the recipient of the Liebster Award, but I feel I should share it with my Sisters since this is a "choral" blog. composed by four musketeers.
http://belledamesansmerci.wordpress.com/2011/09/10/leibster-award/

I am very grateful to Elizabeth Anne Mitchell for selecting me and for having such a magical blog that I encourage everyone to visit.
http://lapidaryprose.wordpress.com/

The Woes of Word Counts

2011-09-04T16:17:00.002-06:00

A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all his sentences short, or that he avoid all detail and treat his subjects only in outline, but that every word tell.

~William Strunk, Jr.

The dreaded red pen

Being concise is difficult; so difficult many writers won’t do it unless forced. Most of us regard the red pen with fear and loathing. We don’t want to edit, we don’t want to cut. So why do we have to? We love words. Why can’t we write as many of them as we want?

The simplest reason is that the publishing industry clearly demands it. The magic number is 100,000. You can’t go over that word count for a novel without severely hampering your chances of getting published. (In some genres, it’s even less.) To be honest, I don’t really understand why this is. Maybe one of our readers in the publishing industry can explain it. In a recent informal, completely nonscientific survey, the majority of my friends said they prefer long books: the longer, the better. They like getting lost in another world. We can all think of a dozen bestselling exceptions to the 100,000 rule: War & Peace. Pillars of the Earth. Gone with the Wind. Harry Potter. According to this guy, all modern books (all!) are too long. So we may be forgiven for feeling sniffy when agents tell us to keep our submissions short.

Doubles as a doorstop

One thing to keep in mind is that the demand for succinctness seems to apply primarily to unpublished writers. The Deathly Hallows is 759 pages, but The Sorcerer’s Stone is only 309. Rowling was probably forced to be more terse than she wanted with that first novel: once she established herself as a bestselling author, she was allowed to indulge. It is also true that some debut novels are massive: Special Topics in Calamity Physics, Marisha Pessl’s first novel, is 514 pages long — which translates to about 200,000 words. We look at her, cross our envious arms over our chests, and think, well if she can do it …

But the most salient truth here is this: many literary agents really do reject on word-count alone, and it’s never a good idea for a novice to assume she’s the next Marisha Pessl. Getting published is hard enough. To ignore the word-count guideline is to run a marathon with one leg hobbled.

Not an ideal way to enter a marathon

Another reason to write shorter is that it will force you to write better. “The only art is to omit,” said Robert Louis Stevenson. “If there is anywhere a thing said in two sentences that could have been as clearly and engagingly said in one, then it’s amateur work.” When I write freelance articles, I’m usually required to write no more than 800 words. My notes and interview transcripts run thousands of words, and it all seems important.

This is going to hurt

But I have to be economical: if I don’t slice those words, my editor will, and I’d rather be the one holding the scalpel. This forced concision means I have to think hard about word choice. Not only word by word, but paragraph by paragraph. Some passages, especially descriptive ones, add nothing substantive. They’re decorative, and when you’re on a word budget, decoration is the first thing to go.

Not everyone, of course, is inclined to write long. Last summer I took a writing class with a woman struggling to complete a middle-grade book. She’d been told she needed to add about 2,000 words to get it to the “right” word count for that genre, and she was devastated. “I don’t know if I can do that,” she said, mournfully regarding the pages in her hands. I was puzzled: for one thing, 2,000 words doesn’t seem like that much. For another thing: think of the chances she had to develop character! To wax eloquent with a scene description! To throw in some snappy dialogue! But for some writers, reaching the word-count minimum is the trick. (That magic number, if you’re wondering, is 50K for mainstream adult fiction; 30K for middle-grade.)

What about you? Do you feel hampered by industry’s word-count limits, or do you find the guidelines helpful? Do you wonder, especially with the growing popularity of e-readers, if this limitation is becoming irrelevant? Have you been told by an agent or editor you need to cut — and if so, how did it affect your story?

Too many notes, Herr Mozart

Where Have all the Recluses Gone?

2011-08-28T15:25:00.000-06:00

Are you a little shutter shy?
How reclusive are you?

Much like Paula Cole asked back in 1997 when it came to the cowboys, I too have a similar question. We live in a day and age where just about any pertinent (and some that isn't) piece of information one wants to know about a film star, a musician, a reality junkie, or heck, even an author, is out there for all to see. But there was a time when no one really cared about that black and white glossy on the back flap of a book or the quick bio indicating how many dogs the author lived with and what he/she enjoyed about living in (insert a state that doesn't come easily to mind). No. There was a time when the unknown author was, well, unknown.

Today, any aspiring author is told that in order for her work to sell, she must have a built-in audience already in place for that big day when her book hits the shelf. Anymore, there seems to be an endless list of what aspiring authors should be doing and not really focusing on what's most important to a writing career -- the writing. I've heard more than one agent or editor stress that those time-consuming things we do on the side (i.e. blogging, tweeting, etc.) are almost more important than what's written on the page. How have we gotten so off-track in the publishing world, to the point that the writing has been placed on the back burner?

I'd like to take a look at a few of the authors many of us have come to know and love and, yet, they shunned the public eye. They pretty much thumbed their noses at it and told everyone to leave them alone. But we love them to this day, and not because of their "platform" or how many "followers" they have tagging along behind them. No, we love them for . . . you guessed it, their writing.

J.D. Salinger -- 1950

J.D. Salinger, who is known for his one and only full-length novel, Catcher in the Rye, was probably one of the most reclusive writers in American literature. Catcher in the Rye took Salinger ten years to write and when it was published it became an instant hit. The book has never gone out of print, but according to nndb.com, "as the novel's popularity grew its author became more and more reclusive, refusing all interview requests and virtually never being seen in public." Even his neighbors in Cornish, New Hampshire fiercely protected his privacy. Up until the time he passed away on January 27, 2010, he reportedly spent his time writing, but for himself and not for the public. His last work to ever appear in print was a novella entitled "Hapworth 16, 1924," which was published in The New Yorker in 1965. Talk about longevity and basically off of one novel! I'm assuming he never opened a Facebook account, right?

Marcel Proust -- 1900

Marcel Proust was a French novelist who became a permanent fixture in Paris salon society up until the turn of the century. With his brother's marriage, his parents' death and health issues, including crippling asthma, he lived a reclusive lifestyle during the last seventeen years of his life. According to FlavorWire.com, "Proust, who soundproofed his studio with cork walls and installed layers of heavy curtains to keep the light out, would stay up for days on end working on his 3,200-page masterpiece, In Search of Lost Time. When greeting guests, he was often unsure of whether it was day or night." Before his death in 1922, there was a three year period where Proust rarely (if ever) left his apartment.

Cormac McCarthy

Cormac McCarthy isn't quite as reclusive as the aforementioned authors, since he showed up on Oprah not too many years ago. But it had been a while. Fifteen years to be exact, since his last interview. Although McCarthy's first novel, The Orchard Keeper, came out in 1965, it wasn't until the 1992 publication of All the Pretty Horses (Yeah, you remember that dud of a movie starring Matt Damon, right?) that he earned recognition for his writing (and most of his career he's spent without an agent). All the Pretty Horses would go on to win the National Book Award and National Book Critics Circle Award. The only newspaper interview McCarthy has ever done was for the New York Times and the only on-air interview he's ever done was for Oprah Winfrey in 2007, when he told Winfrey that he doesn't know any writers and much prefers the company of scientists (interestingly enough, he doesn't care for Marcel Proust's literature, either). His most recent bestsellers include No Country for Old Men (2005) and The Road (2006). He leads a quiet life in Tesuque, New Mexico.

Thomas Pynchon on The Simpsons

Thomas Pynchon has lived a similar reclusive lifestyle to that of Salinger, although with a little twist of humor along the way. His most celebrated appearances? The three that took place on The Simpsons, most notably with a bag over his head. Pynchon has a penchant for fooling the public and most wonder why he's chosen such a low-key lifestyle. He's been praised for his novel Gravity's Rainbow which was released in 1974 and won the National Book Award. He sent comedian Irwin Corey in his place to accept the award. It took four decades before New York magazine tracked him down in 1996. Although he's reportedly spent much of his career living in Mexico with brief stints in California, the magazine found him living a quiet life in New York. He shuns the public eye and has rarely been photographed or seen on camera (surprisingly enough, per his request).

Harper Lee -- 1960

Harper Lee's one and only novel, To Kill a Mockingbird, came out in 1960. She was a long-time friend of Truman Capote and based most of her novel off her life growing up in Alabama. Her novel won the Pulitzer Prize for fiction the following year, but that didn't mean Lee was doling out interviews. For years, Lee politely refused interviews and public appearances. It wasn't until 2006 that Lee broke her longtime silence. She finally agreed to do an interview for the New York Times but would only answer questions pertaining to the University of Alabama's annual awards banquet honoring essays written about To Kill a Mockingbird. To this day, at the age of 85, she politely refuses all interviews with a handwritten note.

After seeing how some notable authors have been able to retain their privacy to this day, my question is, why is the social network so important when it comes to selling fiction? I recently attended a writers' meeting where the guest speaker spoke about the imbalance between those who follow him on Facebook and Twitter and how many books he sells on average. Basically, what he said is that followers on those sites don't translate into sales, something he's worked long and hard to attain through social networking.

Perhaps you're a little like me and don't care for all the details when it comes to the author. Does a little ambiguity make us enjoy an author more, and does it lend a little mystery to the writing craft?

What do you think?

Do you believe the online community has helped or harmed your writing career? Do you waste time connecting to others, or do you use your time wisely and learn to balance your writing with your online social life? Do you believe a writing career today would be harmed by adopting such a reclusive lifestyle?

☞ Make sure to stop by The Random Book Review and see what Sister Stephanie has to say about this week's controversial novel! ☜

To Err is Human, To Learn Divine

2011-08-21T20:40:00.002-06:00

My 8 Biggest Mistakes in Writing

From the time we learn to form complete sentences, we notice and point out other people’s mistakes and flaws (for a sample, visit your nearest playground or listen to a pair of siblings arguing.) But it takes decades for us to acknowledge our own errors—if we ever do. It seems especially difficult to find mistakes in our creative endeavors, particularly in our writing. There is something about this art form that feels very personal. Many times we need someone else to tell us what's wrong with our manuscript. Other times—if we’re objective enough—we’re able to identify the problems ourselves. This is an important step for a writer; if we never acknowledge our mistakes, we are bound to repeat them. Equally important is to be able to learn from them, but this is not always easy. Sometimes we’re too immersed in our work to see clearly, or we’re too impatient to be published to take the time to rewrite—even if a little voice inside our heads keeps telling us the novel is not ready. This is why time and distance are key. If we come back to our novel weeks, months or years later, we’ll be able to read it like outsiders and identify what’s not working. But we won't be able to do this until we have grown in our craft. Thus, practice and reading are essential. Our favorite books, or even the ones we don’t like, can be great learning tools. As with any other skill, like playing the piano, cooking, or roller-skating, the more we do it, the better we’ll get at it.

Going back to the earliest drafts of my first novel, I can now see clearly the mistakes I made. Here are my eight worst mistakes and what I’ve learned from them:

1. Ms. Ghost or the Passive Protagonist

In my attempt to create a vulnerable and likable heroine, I made the mistake of making her too passive. She was agreeable and nice, but boring. (And she was always smiling!) Things just happened to her and she had no other option but to react. Somewhere in the creative process, I crafted secondary characters that “came to life” and became a lot more interesting than my protagonist. Ms. Ghost became a witness to the more active characters and I kept hearing how much my readers loved the other characters (buuh!)

Possible solutions: If another character becomes more engaging to you, consider making her the protagonist. If this is impossible, then find ways to make your main character more active and interesting. Instead of letting the circumstance and/or other characters dictate her actions, make her take the initiative. Give her a backstory (but don’t share the entire thing with the reader, please.) One of the problems I had with my heroine was that she was “born at 19.” I never gave her a past, therefore I didn’t know who she really was; only what was going to happen to her in the future.

2. Ms. Magnet or the Inexplicably-Attractive Character

Not only was my heroine passive, but men were falling for her like flies on a quarter sheet of chocolate cake. (Maybe because of her smile?) She was an irresistible magnet and at least three men in the novel were fighting for her affection. The leading man, for example, practically fell in love with her “at first sight.” Although it’s not unusual for people to be immediately attracted to each other, it’s not enough to build a convincing/touching tale. Neither is it realistic that with so many women in the world, everyone falls in love with the same one.

Possible solutions: Dissolve her fan club and focus on the relationships that are relevant to the plot. More importantly, give the hero and heroine things in common: likes, dislikes, backgrounds, ideals, goals, etc. You know, things that make couples in real life fall in love.

3. The "We are the World" Syndrome

If you ask me how many characters and subplots I had in my first draft, I couldn’t tell you. There were just too many to remember! My innocent goal was to tell the story of a town, not just a family, a la Peyton Place/Macondo. The problem with this is that it’s extremely difficult for a novice writer to keep track of all the developing storylines and character arcs, and be able to time them just right with the main plot. Not only that, but the manuscript becomes as thick as an encyclopedia, and you find yourself cutting down on scenes that contribute to the main plot or the characterization of important characters. (I should mention, too, that I was jumping from head to head at whim!)

Possible solutions: Press “delete."

4. The Anything-Goes Novel

In my conversations with other writers, we all agree that there is an innocence and bliss to that first draft that never comes back. When you first start, you feel unrestrained, powerful, enthusiastic with your creations and developments. A free spirit. You are overflowing with ideas and you must fit them all in your magnum opus. You are the “owner of your world.” But then you bump into that first door (aka: reality) be it through an editor, agent, teacher or critique partner and you realize you’re not as free as you thought. Your world has to have a direction, they tell you. You can’t have errant scenes just because they’re fun to write if they don’t lead anywhere. You can’t ramble about until you find a solution to the protagonist’s dilemma and your manuscript reaches 153,000 words. (True story.)

Possible solutions: Plan your novel before you start writing it. By planning, I don’t mean “think about it.” I mean write an outline or a summary of scenes. If you cringe just reading the word “outline," then at least figure out how you’ll get from opening dilemma to climactic scene to resolution. I know this is not a popular answer. Many writers feel their creativity will be shut down if they use any kind of structure or guideline. But in my own experience, complete freedom can be more paralyzing than setting limits for yourself. (If you can go any direction, how do you know which one is the best one to take?)

5. “Do what I tell you, Dammit!”

So you have an idea of how your plot should go. You figure out every twist and turn until you reach a satisfactory conclusion. Then you create your characters. But for some reason, they’re not doing what you want them to do. Or if they are, IT’S NOT MAKING SENSE. You’ve fallen into the trap of forcing your characters to follow the plot. They’re little puppets acting in ways that seem unnatural to who they are or to real life reactions.

Possible solutions: Be honest with yourself. How would you really act under the circumstances you’ve orchestrated in your novel? Don’t try to make your character act a certain way just because you want to use a particular setting, line of dialogue, or because you want to include that funny scene you love. It’s more important to craft believable characters and situations that your readers will buy. (A noteworthy comment: if you don’t think something you wrote is funny, neither will your audience.)

6. The Unsolvable Puzzle

When I first started writing it was difficult for me to determine how much information I should give away and how much I should withhold. Since I was writing a mystery, I was very careful not to give away too much. But the problem is I didn’t give enough and some conversations and scenes were so cryptic my readers had a hard time understanding what was going on. (I apologize for the frustration I imparted on my early readers.)

Possible solutions: Make the reader an accomplice of the protagonist’s discoveries. Give away information throughout the novel so that the reader doesn’t have the feeling he skipped three pages and doesn’t want to waste any more mental energy interpreting what your characters are saying/doing. In the end, you may lose your reader to a bottle of Aleve.

7. Telegraph Scenes

In my first draft, scenes were very short and lacked enough setting and inner thought. They were like characters in a school play coming in and out of the stage to recite their lines. My average chapter had ten or more scenes!

Possible solutions: Figure out what purpose each scene is serving and find a way to meet these needs by either joining scenes or rewriting them. Balance the dialogue with inner thought, action, setting, etc.

8. Rushed Ending

Somewhere in the middle of the first draft I read that 150,000 was a high word count (imagine that!) When I came to this realization, I started rushing my novel so that I wouldn’t add too many words to my already Bible-size manuscript (actually I did this with the second draft, too). What a mistake this was! There is nothing more unforgivable than an unsatisfactory ending! Many readers will swear off a writer if they don’t like how he or she wrapped up a book. Some writers also make this mistake because they’re eager to finish their books.

Possible solutions: If you realize late that you have a high word count, don’t sacrifice the quality of your book in order to cut down your words. When you revise the text from the beginning, cut any extraneous scenes/characters/subplots/words.

Your turn to own up to your mistakes. Which ones did you make when you first started to write and what have you learned from them?

From Book to Screen. Film Adaptation or Plain Distortion?

2011-08-14T20:20:00.013-06:00

Most published authors share an ambition: getting Hollywood to take an interest in her/his novel. It’s a terrific way to raise sales, find more readers and climb to immortality. However, as many disappointed readers (and some authors) have found out, film adaptations might end up butchering the book.

In days pre-TMC and DVD or video versions of GWTW, I had to wait for my local movie house to bring a revival of Gone with the Wind. While waiting in line to buy my ticket, I could feel butterflies fluttering in my gut. I was ten years old, and Peggy Mitchell´s opus magnum was my favorite book in the world. I still remember the thrill of those four hours in the dark, sitting on the edge of my seat, absolutely spellbound.

The fact that the movie was not entirely true to the book did not bother me a bit. I didn’t miss Scarlett´s other children, although the absence of a formidable character like Grandma Fontaine saddened me, but there was so much to compensate for those little flaws. Alas! It is a rare occasion when we can be contented with both the print and the film version of a beloved novel.

I always look forward to the translation of my preferred novels to movies, but I seldom feel happy with the results. There are films that I like better than the book that inspired them (Arthur Haley´s Airport comes to mind) . Others have become odious precisely because the producers massacred an entertaining yarn (Leon Uris’ Exodus, and all the unfortunate adaptations of Jacqueline Susann’s novels).

Dean Martin and Jacqueline Bisset's romance was warmer in the film version of Airport than in the book

I have noticed that classics fare better in the hands of producers than commercial bestsellers. Valley of the Dolls, Peyton Place and anything by Harold Robbins that ever went to Hollywood only kept the title from the original text. The stories were rewritten, characters changed completely, and the final product bore no resemblance to the book.

Classics are treated with much more respect. Since new film or television adaptations tend to appear every decade, chances are that one of them will remain faithful to the original. As it is, in my mind Jane Eyre will forever look like Joan Fontaine, Jo March will always be Winona Ryder, and Heathclieff can only be the incomparable Ralph Fiennes. Yet, I am sorry to say, despite its many versions, made all over the world, no screen adaptation of Henryk Sienkiewicz’Quo Vadis has pleased me.
Joan Fontaine as Jane Eyre

Several reasons account for the failure to adapt a book properly. Length limits, audience’s sensibilities, fads, and censorship are some of the culprits. The Hays Office that controlled Hollywood production for almost four decades, besides barring explicit sex from moving pictures, also demanded moral endings. In 1947, Mildred Pierce, based in the James Cain's novel, had wicked Veda (Ann Blyth) going to jail. This ending that was not in the book, but upheld the belief that all evil should go punished, at least in Hollywood fables.

Recently, I watched the HBO adaptation of Mildred Pierce. It is excellently made—Kate Winslet might get an Emmy for her performance—and is as true to the book as it gets. Despite its graphic sex galore (with plenty of shots of Guy Pearce´s bare rump) it left me with a bad taste in the mouth. I missed Joan Crawford’s tearful execution of the protagonist. This Mildred was mean, vulgar and hard-as-nails.Her obsession with her eldest daughter came across as a girlish crush instead of motherly devotion.

Having said so, I still prefer books-into-miniseries. That format allows for more time and space to develop story and characters, so the end result is much closer to the novel than a hurried film version. With miniseries, every so often, the author might get involved in the adaptation improving the plot while controlling the amount of damaging changes. George R.R. Martin’s Game of Thrones, Herman Wouk’s The Winds of War and Stephen King’s The Stand illustrate my point. Authors worked hand by hand with the scriptwriters, advancing and sometimes rewriting the content so it could appeal to massive audiences.

The best example of how a book does better on a miniseries format than a film is Evelyn Waugh’s Brideshead Revisited. In 1981, Granada Television adapted Waugh’s saga of an aristocratic British family caught between sin and religion. In its day, Brideshead broke television taboos, implanted fads and turned Jeremy Irons into a star. Today, this miniseries is considered a classic piece of television.
Anthony Andrews and Jeremy Irons in Brideshead Revisited (1981)

Most importantly, the script managed to convey the inner layers of a story that combined nostalgia for an Oxford of yesteryear with an iconic view of homoerotic friendships and the disturbing pressures of faith in modern life. I loved it from the start. I still cry buckets when I watch it, and it brought me to read and love Evelyn Waugh’s sarcastic and yet graceful prose.

In 2008, some misguided demon convinced British producers to make a film adaptation of Brideshead Revisited. It simply reeked! The casting was preposterous and the script made shameful use of Waugh’s milieu and characters to create some ridiculous mishmash of tortuous love affairs among the rich and the eccentric. My only comfort is that those who love Brideshead Revisited can still enjoy the marvelous and true-to-the book miniseries in DVD format.

Have you gone through a similar experience? Is there an adaptation that turned your stomach and a film version that did justice to the print version? Would you like to see your novel turned into a Hollywood blockbuster or a cozy miniseries?

Too Dark for Teens?

2011-08-08T13:08:00.020-06:00

How dark is too dark for Young Adult fiction? When I began writing a YA novel a few years ago, I struggled with this question. I wasn’t sure how to handle my protagonist’s burgeoning sexuality, or how graphic the fight scenes in the book should be. I’m not the only one worrying about this: parents and teachers are chewing their nails too. When we have teens reading stories about racism, rape, murder, drug abuse, suicide, and genocide, have we gone too far? Do we want our young people reading about an isolated group of children who turn savage and fight to the death? What happened to the days when the most daring book a teen might read was “Are You There God, It’s Me Margaret?”

A few weeks ago, this national conversation — which has been going on at least since the middle of last century — got a bit more heated when the Wall Street Journal published a piece by Meghan Cox Gurdon excoriating the horrible, awful, no-good, very-bad state of YA lit. Gurdon writes, “How dark is contemporary fiction for teens? Darker than when you were a child, my dear: So dark that kidnapping and pederasty and incest and brutal beatings are now just part of the run of things in novels directed, broadly speaking, at children from the ages of 12 to 18.”

Before I get into my take on this debate, it bears repeating that “Young Adult” is a broad genre, and that a 12-year-old is quite a different reader than an 18-year-old. The last few Harry Potter books may be too dark for the former; The Hunger Games trilogy ditto. But most high-school seniors will consider those books kid stuff. They’ve been assigned books like “Heart of Darkness,” (it's right in the title!) and “To Kill A Mockingbird.” They’ve been reading about holocausts, racism, and rape. Parents, kids, and authors all have to recognize that in spite of the one-size-fits-all title, YA encompasses an enormous range. Just because a book is not appropriate for a 12-year-old doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be written.

Back to teenagers browsing through books about rape, genocide, drugs, and children fighting to the death. Am I referring to “The Hunger Games?” Or to Sherman Alexie’s gritty novel, “The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian,” about life on the rez? (Both of these books are on Gurdon’s “too dark” list.) No. I’m recounting books assigned to most high school students over the past fifty years or so: “The Catcher in the Rye,” “The Diary of Anne Frank,” “The Outsiders,” “Go Ask Alice,” “Lord of the Flies,” “Oedipus Rex,” and most of Shakespeare.

“Pathologies that went undescribed in print 40 years ago, that were still only sparingly outlined a generation ago, are now spelled out in stomach-clenching detail,” writes Gurdon. Really? Take Hamlet: you’ve got suicide, incest, parricide, and everyone dies in the end. In “Lord of the Flies,” two sweet boys are brutally murdered by other children, and the vivid description of a pig slaughter will put you off your tea for days. In “A Clockwork Orange,” a 15-year-old and his friends go off on a murder-and-rape spree. These are all classics, all read by teens forty years ago (or more).

Another WSJ article takes up Gurdon’s cause: “Until recently, the young-adult fiction section at your local bookstore was a sea of nubile midriffs set against pink and turquoise backgrounds,” writes Katie Roiphe. “Today’s landscape features haunted girls staring out from dark or washed-out covers. Current young-adult best sellers include one suicide, one deadly car wreck, one life-threatening case of anorexia and one dystopian universe in which children fight to the death. Somewhere along the line our teenagers have become connoisseurs of disaster.”

Roiphe must have forgotten Deborah Hautzig’s “Second Star to the Right,” published in 1981, about a 14-year-old’s near-fatal bout with anorexia. (Amazon lists it for “ages 12 to 15.”) We’ve already covered suicide and children fighting to the death with Shakespeare and Golding. These themes are not new, and young people’s exposure to them is not new. In fact, required reading for high school is inevitably going to include books with grim, dark, difficult themes.

The current kerfuffle over the state of YA is, I suspect, the result of Good Old Dayism: these people are remembering a past that never existed. Gurdon might have read Judy Blume when she was a teenager, but I was done with those books by the time I was 11. As teenagers, my friends and I read Pet Sematary and Clan of the Cave Bear. We read VC Andrews and HP Lovecraft. As teens still do today, we actively sought out dark books, books about people with problems bigger than ours, books about sexuality we hadn’t experienced. It was a way to experience things without actually having to live through them, a way to learn lessons without having to get hurt. While Gurdon seems convinced that reading about bad things will convince kids to go out and do bad things, I suspect it more often goes the other way — especially if the story explores the negative consequences of poor choices.

As a writer who has dabbled in YA, and as the parent of a teenager, I’m constantly aware of story content and context. They’re both important, but when it comes to writing and reading YA stories, context trumps content. A violent scene, or an early sexual experience, is completely different to read about when couched in different ways. Sex can be presented as meaningless or as part of a loving, consensual relationship. Violence can be gratuitous or illustrative. It’s all in the presentation. The point is not whether things are too dark, the point is whether the story reflects my value system — as the parent, and as a writer.

Interview with Western Author Melody Groves

2011-08-01T10:02:00.000-06:00

The Divine Secrets of the Writing Sisterhood would like to welcome Western author and SouthWest Writers' president Melody Groves!

New Mexico native Melody Groves has a deep love for anything cowboy and Old West. As a member of New Mexico Gunfighters, she “shoots” sheriffs and outlaws every other Sunday in Albuquerque’s Old Town.

Winner of two first-place writing awards, Groves is President of SouthWest Writers and publicity chairman for Western Writers of America. She writes for American Cowboy, True West and New Mexico magazines. Her non-fiction book, Ropes, Reins, and Rawhide: All About Rodeo, is a guide to understanding the sport. Additionally, Hoist a Cold One! Historic Bars of the Southwest, a look at the history and beauty of 26 front and back bars, launched in mid-July.

She is also author of the Colton Family Saga series, Border Ambush, Sonoran Rage, and Arizona War. Recently, her essay about living in New Mexico was published in Voices of New Mexico.

As an author, what drew you to not only become a writer, but specifically the genre of Westerns?

I’ve always been a writer—I think it’s a passion that comes from within. And specifically the genre of Westerns, it also comes from within. I wrote them kind of in a closet for years until realizing that they’re a valuable, viable part of literature. Since I grew up in southern New Mexico and spent time on horseback and visiting old ghost towns, Westerns are sort of in my blood, so to speak. I feel a definite connection with the past.

Border Ambush
by Melody Groves

When people think of Western novels, they tend to think of writers such as Louis L’Amour and Zane Grey. Do you think their work still properly represents the types of Westerns being published today? Are Western novels as popular today as when authors such as L’Amour and Grey were being published?
L’Amour and Grey’s Westerns are similar and yet different from today’s. All of the Westerns speak to redefining oneself and also the landscape is usually a character. Westerns today aren’t quite as popular as say, in the 1950s, but we’re seeing an increase in readership and sales. I think it’s because people want a good story and are looking for something with moral characters. People would buy them if bookstores would promote them. There’s definitely a need and a market for Westerns.

Why do bookstores shy away from promoting Westerns? Is there something specific about the genre that keeps them from doing so?
It's a nasty spiral. Bookstores don't carry a wide range of Westerns because people don't request them. People don't request them because they don't know about them. I've attended many Western events where we sell a wide range of Westerns, and people are always so very grateful. They say they can't get them anywhere else. And I don't think it's necessarily the genre itself, it's the sales that guide the book sellers. WWA is doing what we can to change people's reading habits. It's frustrating, to say the least.

What was your experience like on the road to getting published?
My experience to getting published was up and down, pretty much like everybody else’s. Once I decided that I really, truly wanted to get published, then I attended workshops, conferences, classes and talked to everybody I could. A ton of rejections later, I got an article published in a magazine, and the rest as they say…is history.

Your novels are published through La Frontera Publishing, a smaller press. Can you give some insight as to what it’s like to work with a smaller press as opposed to having your work published through one of the “Big Six”?
A small press has tons of advantages and disadvantages. The publisher knows you and you know him/her. It’s usually easier to get him on the phone than a larger publisher. They’ll also keep your book in print longer than the Big Six. The down side is: they’re small, which means even more of the marketing burden is on you and if they have a personal crisis (I know one small publisher who had pneumonia and then hip surgery, so was out for almost a year), the work pretty much stops.

A larger press has a staff to handle everything that needs to be done to get a book published. It’s a bit more impersonal, but their books could have a wider distribution range. The down side: if your book doesn’t perform well, it’s taken off the shelf in a matter of months.

Would you recommend a smaller publishing house, or does it depend on the genre and what a writer hopes to accomplish with his/her work?
My recommendation as to whether to go large or small—just go. There’s nothing wrong with small publishers, I like them a lot. The important thing is that if your book is on the shelf, somebody will pick it up and buy it. If your small publisher isn’t doing his job, then try to find another who will. Genre really doesn’t matter.

Ropes, Reins and Rawhide
by Melody Groves

You’ve also written a non-fiction book entitled Ropes, Reins, and Rawhide: All About Rodeo, plus you have another non-fiction book that was recently published about historic bars of the Southwest. Is it more challenging to write non-fiction as opposed to fiction or vice versa?
Non-fiction or fiction—which is more challenging? Both. Writing is hard work, whether it’s made up or real. In both areas, you’ve got to be accurate with your facts, whether it’s the date of a certain battle or what kind of matches they use.

What type of advice would you give to an aspiring writer of a non-fiction work?
Write about something you love. You’re going to spend thousands of hours with the topic and if you don’t have passion about it, you’re going to end up hating it and probably not doing your best work. Also, pick a topic that will appeal to a wide audience. That’s your best chance of getting published.

What I mean by that is instead of writing about say, hummingbird nests of Albuquerque, make the topic something like “Small birds of the Southwest.” That way, people in Phoenix may buy it, too. After my rodeo book came out, I decided to write a book on Ranch Rodeo. What I discovered was that very few people knew the difference and even fewer knew what one was. I didn’t want to spend my time promoting a book to people who needed to be educated first. So, I abandoned the idea, even though I had a publisher for it!

I’m seeing a wide audience for my bar book, Hoist a Cold One! Historic Bars of the Southwest, which just came out in June. Everyone knows what a bar is and they’re even more interested when I tell them that it’s not about the building, but about the wooden bar itself.

Melody Groves' newest release!

If you could pick out one scene in your writing that proved to be the most challenging, what would it be and what made it so difficult to write?
One of the first scenes I ever wrote in a Western was the most challenging.--a cattle stampede! Why did I think it would be easy? Not only did I have a thousand steers running in various directions, thunder, lightning, rain, dust and cowboys yelling all had to be described. Needing to bring in all the senses: smell, sight, sound, taste, seeing…it was organized chaos. I got through it and then realized I’d forgotten wind. Any time I have a barroom fight or some such, those are tough because there are so many moving parts.

You are the current president of SouthWest Writers, an all-genres writing group in Albuquerque, New Mexico. As the president, what kinds of challenges do you face when it comes to managing a fairly large writing group?

As president of SouthWest Writers, the biggest challenge is providing speakers, classes, workshops and conferences that address the various levels of writing skills our members have. Unlike Western Writers of America where in order to join you must be published in the Western genre, SouthWest Writers accepts anyone who is even vaguely interested in writing. Our members range from those who just like to be around writers, to those who’ve won national awards. Trying to please everybody is tough.

Conferences are a large part of any aspiring writers journey to getting published. In the last year, SWW has not held a writers conference. Can you give a little insight as to what goes into organizing a conference and what happens if for some reason the conference has to be cancelled? Do you have any alternate suggestions if an aspiring writer is unable to attend a conference due to any number of reasons (i.e. financially unable, time conflict, conference doesn’t offer what writer is looking for, etc.)?

Conferences are extremely important, so in developing one, we look for wide appeal but a specialized topic that many genres can learn something from. To organize one, we need about five dedicated people to select topic, place, date, speakers, etc. The best is to start at least a year out. We’re organizing a February 2012 conference on screen and script writing, which at first blush sounds like it’s a limiting topic. But from my own personal experience, I know that two classes on screenwriting I took drastically improved my dialogue and understanding of structure in my fiction. This conference will offer something for everyone.

This year we had a perfect storm for not being able to put together a conference or two for SouthWest Writers. In a span of five months, I had two conference coordinators quit, even though the conferences were in the works. The executive board and I sat down and did some hard, cold number crunching. We decided that no matter what, we’d lose money and we didn’t have enough time to put on the quality of conference we wanted. Canceling it was one of the hardest decisions I’ve had to make.

There is no good substitute for conferences, but the next best thing would be to read on line about the various writing topics. With today’s online blogs and websites, writers can pick up a lot of helpful tips. But my recommendation: save your pennies and locate a conference that you’re interested in and go!

According to your website, http://www.melodygroves.com, you make several appearances throughout the year for book signings and conventions such as Western Writers of America. When it comes to publicity and marketing your work, how important are these scheduled events to your career?

Publicity and marketing—hugely important. Scheduled events such as signings and presentations have several benefits. First, you meet people who are unfamiliar with your work. Now, they know your name. Second, you become more and more comfortable speaking about your work and talking to strangers. Third, you get to meet some amazing people.

When I attend Western Writers of America conventions, not only do I get to renew my friendship with writers across the US, but meet editors and agents who become not only friends but critical elements in my career. I look at it this way: I can write all I want to, but if I want someone to read it, I need to get out in public. Thankfully, I’m no longer shy.

On your website you also list that you are a gunfighter re-enactor. You play “Mad Mel” and you “know what it feels like to shoot a sheriff.” This sounds like it would be so much fun. Does doing something like this allow for you to feel, in some small way, what the characters in your book would be going through? How important is re-enacting when it comes to your writing?

Believe it or not, my Old West gunfighting re-enacting is vital to my writing. While it’s a ton of fun, and we do use blanks, I learn something new every show that I can put in my writing. I’ve stood toe to toe with sheriffs and outlaws, shooting at them, they shooting at me. And while the bullets aren’t real, the adrenaline is. It’s scary to stand facing someone with a gun.

And I know what it feels like to hit the ground after being “shot.” It hurts, unless it’s on grass.

A couple of years ago, my group was in Tombstone playing at the OK Corral. I was Morgan Earp, so I was lined up on one side with my “brothers” and Doc. On the other side stood the McLowry’s and Clanton boys. Two things happened that I’ve used in my writing. Doc’s shotgun had a hair trigger—it went off before the cue was given. We all started shooting, ducking, dying earlier than we’d rehearsed. Secondly, there was so much dust from our boots and smoke from our guns that I couldn’t see across the corral. I knew they were there, but I couldn’t see my target. That was the way it really happened. Spontaneous and smokey.

If you could give two words of advice to any writer out there trying to break into the publishing world, what would those two words be?

Keep Writing. Pure and simple. You won’t get any better or published by not writing.

My mantra, especially when I’m discouraged: “Never Give Up. Never surrender.” Thank you “Galaxy Quest” movie.

And thank you, Melody Groves, for your wonderful insight into the world of Western writing!

Feel free to visit her website at http://www.melodygroves.com.

Interview with Agent Elizabeth Kracht

2011-07-25T09:00:00.007-06:00

Today I have a special treat for all the friends of the Writing Sisterhood: an interview with agent Elizabeth Kracht of Kimberley Cameron & Associates ! In addition, she will to stop by for a Q&A session on Friday, July 29th from 1 pm to 4 pm (Pacific Time). This means you can leave your questions throughout the week and/or during her visit on Friday. Please join us then!

Elizabeth, welcome to the Divine Secrets of the Writing Sisterhood!

Q: How did you start your career in publishing?

A: I have been writing in one form or another for most of my life. Somehow I never thought about a career in publishing until I took a job as a copyeditor/proofreader for an English newspaper in Puerto Rico. It was an epiphany to realize I was equally as happy, if not more, working with others' words. When I relocated back to the mainland I took an internship at a small, nonfiction publisher in California (Hunter House Publishers) and later became its acquisitions editor. I brought to that job years of administrative, legal and technical writing/editing experience. Once working with books, I knew I'd found my "vein of gold." To further broaden my perspective on the industry, I began reading for Kimberley Cameron & Associates in my free time. When a position opened at the Agency and was offered to me, I did not hesitate to accept it. The Agency has a long legacy, and Kimberley is an amazing mentor.

Q: As an editor for Hunter House Publishers you acquired non-fiction books. Are you planning to focus more on fiction now, or both?

A: I will focus on both fiction and nonfiction. At Kimberley Cameron & Associates we receive more fiction manuscripts than nonfiction, but I have a strong, personal interest in nonfiction books, so if interesting proposals cross my desk, of course I will consider them. I also have a real soft spot for memoir and hope to represent many of them.

Q: What type of fiction do you represent? What are you looking for in a manuscript?

A: I represent both literary and commercial fiction. I also represent YA and genre fiction. In genre fiction I’m attracted to mysteries and thrillers and some science fiction. Right now I'd be interested in looking at anything with a Japanese theme, and rumor has it mermaids are supposed to be the next coming rage. Just to give an idea of some of my current projects: dystopian/science fiction YA, two nonfiction humor, literary historical fiction, commercial women's fiction, and a mystery. In a manuscript I look for great writing first and foremost, and am attracted to writing with a strong voice and compelling story that moves.

Q: What genres/themes you do NOT represent?

A: I don’t represent fantasy, but will consider magical realism. I don't represent horror, although Kimberley does. The science fiction that I am interested in is limited; I like grounded science fiction. I also do not represent romance and inspirational fiction.

Q: What are your top three authors of all time? What about your top three novels?

A: Tough question. Top three authors that come to mind: Edith Wharton, Ernest Hemingway, and Jon Krakauer. My current favorite novels: The House of Mirth by Edith Wharton, The Poe Shadow by Matthew Pearl, and The Killer Angels by Michael Shaara.

Q: Since you lived in Puerto Rico for some time, have you thought about representing books in Spanish or Latin American/Spanish authors? Is there a particular Latin author you like?

A: Although I am not able to represent works in Spanish, I would gladly represent a Hispanic author and/or a novel set in a Latin American country. I think my favorite Hispanic author is Esmeralda Santiago (http://www.esmeraldasantiago.com/), author of When I Was Puerto Rican. Esmeralda has a new novel out, which I plan to buy soon, titled Conquistadora.

Q: Do you think American Publishers are acquiring more or less multicultural novels than before?

A: I think American publishers are acquiring more novels with multicultural themes, and sometimes the trend is set by world events. In the last couple weeks in the deal pages of Publishers Marketplace I have seen at least three works set in Japan sold to publishers. I also believe we read to learn and be transported. What better way to learn and be transported than by entering a setting where we've never been through a voice that is culturally different from our own?

Q: Young Adult and Paranormal/Fantasy novels are extremely popular among agents and writers nowadays. How do you see the market for Historical and Women’s Fiction?

A: There is still a strong market for both historical and women's fiction, but the projects need to be unique. Agents and editors are attracted to a work by a combination of market trends, whether a work has a place in the market, and personal interest and passion for a project.

Q: Approximately how many submissions do you receive per week? What do you look for in a query letter and what is the best way to submit to you?

A: At the Agency we receive more than two hundred submissions per week. I appreciate brief and concise query letters--no gimmicks. I'm fairly forgiving of poorly written query letters. I have come to understand that the query letter is a technical piece of writing, a type of writing fiction writers rarely engage in. I often don't get through an entire query before moving straight to the writing. I've often been shocked by how well an author can write after choosing to ignore a poorly written, egocentric or gimmicky query. I would strongly urge writers to invest time and money in writing a good query since many literary agencies have intern readers that are much less forgiving of gimmicks and typos. As a writer you never know the conditions under which your query letter will be read, and you've already invested so much time in your manuscript. It's worth the effort to have a polished query so your submission isn't one that can be discarded on a technicality. There is always an issue of volume when it comes to queries at a literary agency. If you are brief, professional and concise in your query, and if you have done your homework on the agent you are submitting to, your work will likely be reviewed.

If a writer feels we are a good fit for their manuscript, we ask them to submit the first 50 pages and a one-page synopsis along with their query letter attached as Word documents or as PDFs. We prefer electronic submissions. Submissions can be sent to info@kimberleycameron.com and directed to whichever agent seems most appropriate for the work.

Q: What are the most common problems you see in the manuscripts you receive?

A: The most common problems I see in manuscripts are high word counts, excessive description slowing the pace of the novel, stories that don't get moving soon enough, and characters that are underdeveloped.

Writers should know what acceptable word counts are in their genre. Generally, for debut fiction we like to see works between 65,000-85,000 words (historical fiction can sometimes be an exception). Agents will reject you based on word count alone.

Be careful spending time in description of characters and things that aren't absolutely necessary to the forward movement of the story. Description can really slow the pace of a story, especially since the reader's own mind acts to fill in those details many times. If your character is in the elevator with a bike messenger, don't waste story pace telling me what he is wearing if I'm never going to see him again; I can already picture him perfectly. Watch excessive use of adverbs and don't use brand placement to try and give me a sense of the type of person your character is. Should the fact that your character drinks Amstel beer or carries a Kate Spade purse mean something to me? Only use brands if you feel it is important to your character's psychology, if it's an obsession that moves the story forward. If you drop too many brand names, they stand out in the manuscript, and those are not what you want your reader to notice.

To catch the attention of an agent, your manuscript has to move right from the start. Keep your story active and moving. Don't let it get bogged down by excessive description or dialogue that isn't crisp. And give your characters an inner landscape.

Q: Do you consider yourself an “editorial” agent or are you aiming to find manuscripts that are almost ready for submission to publishers? Would you take on a client based on his/her potential even if the manuscript is not ready to be sold?

A: I am definitely an editorial agent in spirit. I love to work on manuscripts with authors. However, because of the number of submissions we receive, I take on these kinds of projects based on both market considerations (is there strong market potential for it) and whether I have the time and strong personal interest. I'm working on developing a nonfiction humor book right now, but it's only a 60-page manuscript and the writer I'm working with is a professional and quick at revisions. In addition, there are hundreds of emails in my inbox that need attention. So, it's a little bit of a juggling act, but if the right thing crossed my desk at the right time, I would take it on and develop it.

Q: Writers are often times frustrated with how difficult it is to get the attention of industry professionals. What do you think is the most effective method for a writer to get noticed: conferences, blogs, query letters, contests?

A: There are many ways for writers to get noticed. If a manuscript is where it needs to be, a writer can easily get published by pitching an agent at a conference or by submitting to an agent online. In some cases it may take longer to find someone to champion your work. If you've gotten rejected by dozens of agents, try and get feedback on why and be open to the notion that your work might not be quite where it needs to be.

Personally, I think every writer should get a freelance editor known in the industry who will give them professional feedback on the market potential of their work, story structure, writing... It's an investment, but one that will speed up the process significantly. Otherwise, a writer may get rejections from agents and not understand from a publishing perspective what the problem is since rejections are usually template. In this publishing climate, the competition is stiff. I think writers spend a lot of time in the dark about their work, and a freelance editor is an unbiased source with a background that can give a writer the perspective that family, friends and writing groups can't give.

Agents usually attend conferences and listen to pitches. I just did eight consultations at the Book Passage Mystery Writers Conference in California. If a writer's manuscript is where it needs to be when I consult with them, I would ask to see more on the spot. A writer can also send query letters to agents listed in literary guides, but should make sure the agent is the right fit for the manuscript, that their query letter is meticulously crafted, and that their work is in the best possible shape. Also, be sure to include any information about yourself and your author platform. Author platform is more important than ever. Invest in an author website and get yourself on Facebook, Twitter, and Blogspot. If you have published clips, let us know about them. An author platform can tip the scale on an agent's decision to represent you.

Q: How do you feel about writers posting excerpts of their unpublished novels and/or creating websites for them?

A: I think I'd prefer to have an author work on an author website rather than one for the novel, to start, since titles often change in the publishing process. I'd rather see an author build up their general online presence first. And rather than publishing or posting excerpts, it might be wiser to write some additional content about the characters in the form of a short story and publish it on a website such as Smashwords for free or $.99. I would love to be able to say to an editor I am pitching that an author I am working with has had thousands of downloads (and great reviews) of a short story of content related to the manuscript.

Q: As a former publicist, do you think every author should hire one? Or do you think most agents can (or are willing) to take on that role for their authors?

A: Agents do not take on the role of publicist for their clients. Because I have publicity experience, I tend to keep my eyes open for opportunities, but agents do not handle publicity at all. We may do some promotion on our website, but publicity is handled by the publisher, and now more than ever, publishers require that authors help promote their works.

I urge writers to hire outside publicists if they have a book in the publishing process. However, the author should be sure to avoid conflict with the publishing house publicist (assuming there is one).

It is in the best interest of the writer to help sell as many copies of their work as possible. If a writer has only sold one book to a publisher (no series deal or two/three book deal), that writer wants to make every effort to sell as many copies of their work as possible so when it comes time to pitch the next book the writer can show that there was demand for their work. Publishers look at Nielsen BookScan, which will tell them how many copies of an author's work have sold. If your first book did not sell well, it will influence a publisher's decision on whether to acquire your new work.

In addition, the more copies sold, the more royalties the author will receive! This is an author's paycheck. Work it.

Why not just rely on the publisher? Because some contracts I have seen are vague about the kind of publicity a publisher will do; meaning, they may not be legally bound to do any publicity for you. I've heard a publisher say that some books aren't important in the scheme of an entire list, which may be accurate from the viewpoint of their financial perspective, but that can be a real bummer for you as a professional writer. Even if your work is published by a big house with an in-house publicist, you will only have that publicist for a window of time unless your book really takes off. Help it take off!

Q: How much marketing/self promotion is expected from a writer aside from Internet interviews/blogs? What are other ways in which authors can promote their novels?

A: If not you, then who? Your book will have a window of publicity with your publisher, and maybe not even much of that depending on who your publisher is and what your contract agreement states. It is in all writers' best interest to research book publicity and marketing. Know your audience. Who will buy your book and where can you find them? Think of your work from as many angles as possible; what are the themes? Does your book have a theme that the National Organization for Women can get behind? Are you an African-American author? Dissect your work from multiple viewpoints and seek relevant publicity and marketing opportunities. Get authors or experts to give you a quote about your work. Get Amazon reviewers to review your book (or galley) or find other online reviewers and/or bloggers on the subject to review it (most people buy books based on reviews, Verso Study on book-buying trends). Review other authors' works and have the review link back to your author page, short story content, or book. Write articles related to some theme in your book and offer the article for free to magazine editors if they agree to include your bio at the end of the article, which will include an "author of..." sentence (you aren't pitching your book in the article, rather your expertise on a theme of your book). Magazines need to be pitched six or seven months prior to publication. Pitch them articles for holidays or another tie-in date with your book.

Write related content and publish it as an e-book for free. Do a book trailer. Get that author website up (check out www.LoisReed.com or Xuni.com) and do all available social media (get your kids or grandkids to manage it). Consider getting basic CisionPoint for a year, which is a database that has every media contact you could ever want (not cheap). Organize a book tour in your area and find creative ways to get local media involved. Let your alma mater know you've published a book and offer to write an article for the newsletter. Get all your friends, family and colleagues networking for you, and listen to their ideas on how you can generate interest in your book. Sign up for Amazon Author Central on the Amazon.com site as well as other websites. Pitch a radio show, rather than your book, to your local radio. Do an email blast (Constant Contact is great for this). Write a press release about the book and send it out to relevant media. Get friends and family to review your book on websites such as Amazon.com, Barnes & Noble and e-book retailers if you have an e-book out. Submit your work to book clubs and moms' groups! Google "How do I promote my book?" or "book publicity" and read as many articles as you can.

Be creative. There are so many ways to get your work out there and so many opportunities online. Create a media plan (examples can be found on the Internet) for your book, and begin promoting your work six to seven months before release.

Thank you, Elizabeth, for these very informative answers!

She Says, He Says: Gender and the Writing Craft

2011-07-17T11:12:00.020-06:00

We do know there is such a thing as “Women’s Literature” and it is known that romance fiction targets a feminine audience. Does the author’ sex influence its characters? Are male novelists guilty of stereotyping female characters? Are their feminine counterparts still hooked in idealized masculine protagonists?

In a near future, gender might become an obsolete term. Until then, we accept that men and women (regardless of their sexual preferences) react in different ways to situations and emotions. Just as religion, family life and past romantic history reflect on a particular writer´s work, gender does play a part in his/her craft.

Indeed, certain genres are associated with gender. As much as I try, I cannot remember a war novel written by a woman. Women can describe the effect conflicts have on civilians, but they don´t write battlefield scenes. Perhaps because until recently few women were on the battlefield and none was too eager to fictionalize her experiences. Think of how Margaret Mitchell describes soldiers in Gone with the Wind. They are either in hospital beds, on leave or marching away form Atlanta. She doesn´t show them actually engaged in war games as Stephen Crane does in The Red Badge of Courage.

Wounded Confederate soldiers in Gone with the Wind

There are hardly any women writers specializing in thrillers, adventure novels, epic fantasy or science fiction. I don´t know if there is a predisposition against them doing it or if those are not subjects women care for. This is why the few women who have achieved success in those genres (e.g. Ursula Le Guin) are twice as famous. Precisely why Nicholas Sparks is much lauded for being one of the small number of men who dare to write romance. In fact there are plenty of male romance authors but they hide under pseudonyms. Just as Nora Roberts signs her futuristic murder stories as “J.D. Robb.”

Beyond the question of prejudice in the publishing universe, I’m interested to know if readers notice a difference in voice when comparing genre written by novelists of either sex. Do women authors “feminize” their science fiction and mysteries? Do men authors rely on negative archetypes when it comes to feminine protagonists? Just think about those wonderful hardboiled detective classics and their femme fatales, as dangerous as tarantulas.

Barbara Stanwyck playing femme fatale in Double Idemnity based in a James Cain story

Nineteenth-century literature was full of novels with feminine names as titles, all written by men, all depicting nasty protagonists: unfaithful wives like Madame Bovary or Anna Karenina; prostitutes like Camille and Balzac´s Nana; fallen women like Tess of D’Urbervilles and ambitious schemers like Thackeray’s Becky Sharp. Thank you gentlemen, but you did us a disservice. Only Dickens stepped aside from the Scarlet Women-Makers Circle, but he used a worse stereotype: the victim, the damsel in distress that always needs a knight to fight for her virtue.

Women writers are also guilty of stereotyping. In The Time Traveler’s Wife, Audrey Niffenegger creates a leading man who is a metaphor for guys unable to commit and who drift in and out of their women’s lives. At least, Henry De Tamble has an excuse. He suffers a genetic disorder that forces him to time travel, but that’s little comfort to Clare, the wife he is constantly deserting. Although the novel should be about Henry, we are hooked on Clare and her plight. He is just a nuisance, an object, and although Niffnegger alternates Henry and Clare’s perspectives, sometime he feels like a cardboard character.

Rachel McAdams and Eric Bana in The Time Traveler's Wife

It might sound as a generalization, but biographical data shows us that most romance authors base their masculine characters in “The Man that Got Away” (a former lover), or some approximation to the ideal man they dream to find. Sometimes they combine both and give an impossible happy ending to their botched down affairs. Although it´s legitimate to draw on our own emotional experiences to create characters, sometimes we concentrate so much in developing a leading man or woman that their counterpart ends up being a one-dimensional shadow.

Afraid to fall into that trap, many men writers have qualms about delving too deep into the feminine universe, and some female novelists wouldn’t dream of writing from a man’s point of view. This is particularly true in romance.

When I first started to write “seriously”, my story had a supposedly dead protagonist who resurrected around chapter fourth. Therefore, the first three chapters were written from her bereaved husband’s POV. My Beta Reader wisely said that no woman reader would care for a romance written from a man´s perspective. I went over my collection of bodice-rippers and saw her point. And yet we now have romantic bestsellers like Water for Elephants with a powerful sensitive hero, and he comes from the imagination of a woman, Sara Gruen.

Robert Pattinson and Reese Witherspoon in Water for Elephants

Ideas such as “real men don´t read romance” (so far I haven’t met any who dare come out of the closet and confess to enjoy that genre) and women readers shying away from “masculine” genres are hard to kill. That is why to attract female viewers, movie versions of Jules Verne classics or Conan Doyle’s The Lost World insert token ladies that never existed in those books.
What is Arlene Dahl doing in the Center of the Earth? Certainly Jules Verne didn't put her there

I must confess I am an odd duck that don´t need girls in a tale to appreciate it. I have watched the Band of Brothers miniseries about twenty times and never minded the absence of female characters. Moreover, although I concede that women are at their best in the creation of female characters, some men authors are masters in that same craft.
Band of Brothers. Wo needs girls with such gorgeous soldiers?

I enjoy the Sookie Stackhouse Novels (The Southern Vampire Mysteries) but I hate her! She is irksome, silly, and loud. Vampires, get her! On the other hand, I have fallen in love with the women in George R.R. Martin’s saga A Song of Ice and Fire since as characters they are vigorous, varied and they hold up their own in a world terribly biased against their sex.
Sookie and one of her vampire paramours

However, I constantly hear men complaining about the manner in which female writers portray their sex. They say that most male protagonists penned by women are feminine fantasies or nightmares. Even when it comes to “macho territory” such as detective stories they point out to me that Patricia Highsmith‘s Tom Ripley is homosexual and Agatha Christie´s Hercule Poirot is a fuzzy old bachelor, far from the manly private eye epitome created by men authors. I happen to think that P.D. James’ Inspector Adam Dalgliesh is a pretty strong masculine character, but then as a woman, my judgment could be clouded.

Could you give examples of authors who are experts in developing characters of the opposite sex? Do you find it hard to create them? As a reader, do you notice how the author imposed his/her voice to the text? Do you think gender dominates certain genres?

Freelance Writing

2011-07-10T20:37:00.005-06:00

Although fiction writing is my true love, professional non-fiction writing has probably honed my craft more than any story I’ve written. Being edited constantly, learning to withstand criticism, and writing on a deadline are all experiences any writer can benefit from.

When people learn I’m a freelancer, they usually want to know more about how that works — especially if they’re interested in trying it themselves. My path is not typical, but I’m not sure there is a “typical” path for freelancers.

My first paid writing job was as a reporter for a tiny newspaper, but after I became a mom I needed something more flexible, preferably something I could do from home. By the time my daughter was born I had moved to a new city so I cold-called the major newspaper there and asked whom I should speak to about freelance writing. Within a few minutes, I had my first assignment.

Thirteen years later I am still writing for that same newspaper, even though I have again moved cities. I’ve done some articles for other publications, which has taught me how good I have it with “my” newspaper. I’ve worked with two editors there now, both lovely people who edit me lightly and who let me write as often or as infrequently as I like. With my energies currently going toward completing at least one of my two novels-in-progress, I’m on a bit of hiatus at the paper, and my editor says that’s fine, just let her know when I’m ready and she’ll have work for me.

This publication also pays well … relatively speaking. Freelancing is not a money-making venture, and those who do it for a living have to be savvier than I am: for example, if you’re clever you ca re-sell the same article multiple times without breaking copyright. My more ambitious freelancer friends work their way up the chain, going from stringers at newspapers (which can pay as little as $15 per story) to writing regularly for magazines that buy their articles for a thousand bucks a pop.

Since I’m not relying on it for the money, and since fiction is my first love, some people (especially my husband) ask me why I freelance at all. The primary reason is exposure: I want to keep up my resume, to have my name out there. I hope that when I finish my novel and begin looking for an agent, it will be noted that I’m a regularly-published, reliable writer who is used to deadlines and to being edited.

For this reason, I’d encourage anyone who has considered freelancing to give it a try. It’s an excellent way to get your name in print, and the feedback you get from editors will only help your writing. Even if it doesn’t pay well at first, the experience is worth it: think of it as getting paid to be critiqued, to take a writing class. When you think of it that way, what writer wouldn’t jump at that chance?

What about you? If you freelance, what has your path been? If you’ve considered it but haven’t taken the plunge, is there anything you’re curious about?

Dipping My Foot in the Playwright's World

2011-07-03T15:32:00.003-06:00

Or how about just dipping my big toe in?

About a year ago, I was given the opportunity to go swimming in someone else's pool. Now, I didn't go with mischievous intentions (like leaving a cloud of colored water behind because I didn't want to be bothered by getting out and using the restroom, or throwing a Snicker's bar in so I could have the pool all to myself). No, I went willing to take the plunge and enjoy my stay as much as possible. And who knew, if all went well maybe I'd be invited back, or heck, maybe I'd get my own pool and enjoy every minute I spent in it. The name of this pool was "Playwright" and I entered the fluid world of writing my First. Play. Ever.

I'll be honest, I'm not the best at short stories because I think on a broader scale when it comes to my writing. I love great little subplots where each one takes its own path through the maze, but amazingly enough comes out the same side with every other subplot, right where it needs to be. I'd never written a play either. I thought perhaps I would crash and burn because at first glance a play seems similar to a short story. The writing had to be tight, we had only so many characters we could work with, the pacing had to stay even, and we had only a certain number of pages to get the whole thing out there in a timely manner. Needless to say, I believe my co-author and I wrote a pretty good play. If you're thinking of wading into the playwright's waters, then I want to share the highs and lows of what to expect.

I'd say that first, be sure of whether or not you want a co-author along for the ride. I had a lovely co-author who writes children's stories but, much like me, she had never written a play either. There was a lot of starting and stopping in the beginning because our ideas and our writing styles clashed (I had a much darker take on things that she didn't much care for at times). We had to figure out what would work best if we ever expected our play to see the light of day. In the end, we worked it out where we took two scenes per act (so I would have two and she would have two) and individually we exclusively wrote our two scenes. I should back up a bit and say that we had already brainstormed and had an outline for the direction of the play, so the task became doling out who would write what scenes. We managed to pull it off and the final product turned out much better than if we had continued to battle our way through with each of us writing over the other and then arguing about what worked best. The main thing we had to be careful with was that the characters' voices had to remain consistent no matter who wrote the character for a particular scene.

Next, I'd suggest getting a good guide on how to write a play. Plays are a different monster than novels, the main reason being there is no prose, therefore, no living in the characters' heads. My co-author and I chose The Playwright's Guidebook by Stuart Spencer. Why this book, you may ask? No reason other than out of the hundreds of guidebooks (very similar to all the how-to books on writing novels out there on the market) this one had good reviews and it was affordable ($11.56 on Amazon). The main chapters are divided into first an intro, entitled "How We Tell Stories," which gives some great background info on how the world of plays came about in the first place, and also into three useful parts based on structure, the creative process, and dealing with problems. Each chapter ends with exercises to use in your own writing and these exercises challenge the writer when it comes to things like how to build a scene, how can the story have forward momentum, and how to make the dialogue and action work for your story.

Dialogue is key! Especially in the first few pages. You must grab your audience right out of the gate. If you remember nothing else, remember this. Your dialogue in any given play you choose to write must move the action along, while at the same time revealing who your characters are. As I mentioned before, no prose, therefore no leaving it up to the audience to try and figure out what's going on inside everyone's heads. As a novelist, I must admit that working with pure dialogue was a hard nut to crack. I'm used to working with lengthy descriptions or getting lost in a character's thoughts. The lengthy descriptions aren't necessary because the audience can see what's going on up on the stage. And those thoughts? Toss them out the window when writing a play.

Lastly, editing is crucial. My co-author and I spent many nights at Starbucks sipping tea and hashing out scenes. When we went to put the whole thing together, it took a lot of effort to make sure everything was on the right track. Be patient with your co-author. Even in the end, ideas will clash, but that's where compromise comes into play. When working with another writer remember that their ideas count just as much as your own. Taking the time to edit out all the inconsistencies and making sure you have a smooth product is worth the blood, sweat, and tears. And enjoy the experience! I did, and who knows? Maybe I'll go for another dip in that pool!

5 Things to Remember When Writing Your First Play

If you write with a co-author, work side-by-side with him/her, not against or over him/her.
Have a good guidebook helping you along the way. Do the exercises!
The opening scene is what will draw in your audience.
Have conflict with high stakes and high hopes.
Your plot will always be related to your theme. Write something you care about, not what you believe is selling.

For the aspiring playwright:

Here is a sample exercise from The Playwright's Guidebook (Page 47). Give it a try and see if you've got what it takes!

Write a short five-to ten-page scene in which there are only two characters and the first character wants a book from the the second character. All the details of the scene are up to you. In other words, you have been given the action for the scene, but nothing else.

What did you come up with? Care to share?