Molly O'Keefe's Blog, page 59
May 12, 2011
Bookstuff 101
Last week Maureen mentioned possibly giving out information for some of our more newbie followers. Don't even know if we have newbie followers, but I figured a refresh in the abc's of how to get published might be helpful.
Also I can reuse this post the next time anyone says… "Oh you're a writer. My (hairdresser's daughter's third cousin once removed fill in any other blank here___) is a writer. How should she go about getting published?"
1. Have a finished book. The last page needs to say The End. The word count (if you're writing for something besides category romance) should be at least 65,000 words. That's probably too short for most books too – but I figure if you can string together 65,000 words you've got a good start.
2. Put that book away in a drawer because it's probably not any good and start writing a new one…. Just kidding (I'm so not.) But that is not what newbies want to hear. They want the part about fame and fortune. So I'll just leave it at if you think this book is good enough - which means you've read it back to yourself and you still think it's the cat's meow – then on to step 3.
3. What does the agent do? The agent makes contacts within the publishing industry and establishes a reputation for having a good taste. So when they say to editor So and So at Publishers What and What – "Hey I've got this really talented author who has written a great book. Do you want to be the lucky lucky publisher to pay me for it so in return you can make lots of money too?" Publisher pays an advance, agent takes a cut, writer gets the rest. Then anything beyond the advance of earned royalties gets split. Publishers bulk, writer a little bit. Agent gets 15% of your little bit.
4. Do you need an agent? Yes. If you want to publish with a mainstream NY publisher that is not Harlequin – then yes. Why? Because let's say 100,000 people think they can write a book other people will pay money to read. The reality is that of those 100,000 probably only 10,000 can. Of the 10,000 only maybe 5,000 are the "right" book for the "right" time. Publishers don't want to deal with 90,000 bad books. Agents find the 10,000 good books. The publishers scoop up the 5,000 they "think" will make money. And of those only maybe 500 will go on to be books that will make big money. These numbers are of course made up –hope they give you a scope of things.
5. Do you need an agent? No. Nothing but easy answers here folks. If want to try an indie publisher/electronic only publisher/ or you want to self publish – or you specifically write category romance - which really only Harlequin publishes – then you don't necessarily have to have an agent.
6. Why are these publishers different? Because they will pay out less or no advance so they take less risk, and can open themselves up to more than just "agented" writers. If you are self-publishing – you obviously take all the risk and get no money until people buy your book.
7. What is Electronic Publishing vs Self Publishing. A "self" published book is a book you would put online to allow people to purchase and read. Putting it on line – cheap. Printing it, Cover Art, distribution – not cheap. So today most selfpublished books are offered electronically. You wrote it, we assume you edited, you plan to market it and you used a service that allows for the purchase of said books i.e. Amazon. You get 70% of all profits. (At least through Amazon.) An electronic book can by any book by a publisher or self-publisher that is offered in an electronic format. Big NY publishers today publish hardback, paperback and electronic books. Some publishers will only publish books in an electronic format. Why? See the bit about cheap above. Got it?
8. Why have a publisher? Because they work on the book with you. They edit it, they give it a cover, they market it to buyers and readers. Here is how it translates. You make a widget – you can sell it yourself at a stand in front of your house. You keep all the profits. Or you give it to Walmart and let them sell it all over the country. They take the bulk of the profits – but give you some. Now what's changing here is the internet is making that stand outside your home a little bigger. But think about it folks – readers still need to find your little corner of the world.
Okay, those were the things I needed to understand first. Because writing is creative but publishing is a business. Unless you have a grasp of the business you shouldn't be swimming in the pool.
Also I can reuse this post the next time anyone says… "Oh you're a writer. My (hairdresser's daughter's third cousin once removed fill in any other blank here___) is a writer. How should she go about getting published?"
1. Have a finished book. The last page needs to say The End. The word count (if you're writing for something besides category romance) should be at least 65,000 words. That's probably too short for most books too – but I figure if you can string together 65,000 words you've got a good start.
2. Put that book away in a drawer because it's probably not any good and start writing a new one…. Just kidding (I'm so not.) But that is not what newbies want to hear. They want the part about fame and fortune. So I'll just leave it at if you think this book is good enough - which means you've read it back to yourself and you still think it's the cat's meow – then on to step 3.
3. What does the agent do? The agent makes contacts within the publishing industry and establishes a reputation for having a good taste. So when they say to editor So and So at Publishers What and What – "Hey I've got this really talented author who has written a great book. Do you want to be the lucky lucky publisher to pay me for it so in return you can make lots of money too?" Publisher pays an advance, agent takes a cut, writer gets the rest. Then anything beyond the advance of earned royalties gets split. Publishers bulk, writer a little bit. Agent gets 15% of your little bit.
4. Do you need an agent? Yes. If you want to publish with a mainstream NY publisher that is not Harlequin – then yes. Why? Because let's say 100,000 people think they can write a book other people will pay money to read. The reality is that of those 100,000 probably only 10,000 can. Of the 10,000 only maybe 5,000 are the "right" book for the "right" time. Publishers don't want to deal with 90,000 bad books. Agents find the 10,000 good books. The publishers scoop up the 5,000 they "think" will make money. And of those only maybe 500 will go on to be books that will make big money. These numbers are of course made up –hope they give you a scope of things.
5. Do you need an agent? No. Nothing but easy answers here folks. If want to try an indie publisher/electronic only publisher/ or you want to self publish – or you specifically write category romance - which really only Harlequin publishes – then you don't necessarily have to have an agent.
6. Why are these publishers different? Because they will pay out less or no advance so they take less risk, and can open themselves up to more than just "agented" writers. If you are self-publishing – you obviously take all the risk and get no money until people buy your book.
7. What is Electronic Publishing vs Self Publishing. A "self" published book is a book you would put online to allow people to purchase and read. Putting it on line – cheap. Printing it, Cover Art, distribution – not cheap. So today most selfpublished books are offered electronically. You wrote it, we assume you edited, you plan to market it and you used a service that allows for the purchase of said books i.e. Amazon. You get 70% of all profits. (At least through Amazon.) An electronic book can by any book by a publisher or self-publisher that is offered in an electronic format. Big NY publishers today publish hardback, paperback and electronic books. Some publishers will only publish books in an electronic format. Why? See the bit about cheap above. Got it?
8. Why have a publisher? Because they work on the book with you. They edit it, they give it a cover, they market it to buyers and readers. Here is how it translates. You make a widget – you can sell it yourself at a stand in front of your house. You keep all the profits. Or you give it to Walmart and let them sell it all over the country. They take the bulk of the profits – but give you some. Now what's changing here is the internet is making that stand outside your home a little bigger. But think about it folks – readers still need to find your little corner of the world.
Okay, those were the things I needed to understand first. Because writing is creative but publishing is a business. Unless you have a grasp of the business you shouldn't be swimming in the pool.
May 11, 2011
Storytelling Rules
I went to a screening of The English Patient on Monday evening that had a talk with author Michael Ondaatje following.
I still love that movie and it stands, for me, as one of the most amazing adaptations of a book ever. Not because it adapted the novel directly, but because it didn't. Because it found the compelling story hidden inside the poetic and difficult to penetrate novel. Because it took beautiful images from the novel that didn't have any tension or forward plot momentum and managed to create scenes, relevant to the story, to show those beautiful images. I mean, they changed a flashback about a University lecture on wind into a life-or-death scene that was also pivotal to the romance they chose to tell. (In the book, I much preferred the Kip/Hanna romance and barely noticed the Katherine/Amalsy one...)
The late, amazingly talented, Anthony Minghella wrote the screenplay (and directed) but Ondaatje was involved in early discussions about how to make the novel into a film and gave extensive notes and thoughts on not only the first 4 or 5 drafts of the screenplay, but was also involved in the film's editing. He said that he, Minghella and the producer spent 3 full days of meetings going over notes on each of the first four drafts. Pretty unusual for an novelist to be involved to that extent in a movie and goes to the mutual respect that Ondaatje and Minghella had for each other.
One great example of Ondaatje's lack of ego over having his novel changed was this paraphrased quote: I love the book Beloved, so I don't think I could bear to see the movie made of it, but I was happy to let someone do a movie of The English Patient. He also said something like: They didn't do anything to my novel. My novel is still the same.
But while all that was fascinating to hear about, what really struck me were the few examples Ondaatje gave as things he learned from the filmmaking process, both from Minghella and from the editor, Murch, about storytelling. Things that seemed very basic to me. Things I learned within the first year of novel writing.
For example, Kip, in the novel, doesn't appear until about halfway through. Minghella insisted that if he was a main character, he needed to appear near the beginning of the movie, hence they added a scene at the start, where Hanna runs into a mine field and Kip is there.
The Caravaggio character's role in the movie was also very different in the book vs the movie. (Beyond the fact that they made the Canadian characters from Montreal, not Toronto. Annoying to me!) In the book, he shows up because he knows Hanna from Toronto, and while he adds some flavor and probably a little tension (it's been a long time since I read the book) he's actually part of the plot in the movie and he's key to tying the plots of Hanna in the present to the plot of Almasy in the past. In the movie, Caravaggio doesn't know Hanna. He goes to the church looking for Almasy (The English Patient) to exact revenge. Same/similar character, some of the same scenes, but TOTALLY different use of that character. Minghella knit all of Ondaatje's disparate pieces together.
I think what most struck me (beyond how brilliant all these changes were, because I already thought that) but how none of these things had occurred to Ondaatje. He said that he actually added a small scene with a previously late arriving character in his next novel, Anil's Ghost, as a result of learning that "tip" from the movie makers.
Now don't get me wrong. Ondaatje still thinks he wrote the novel the way it should have been written. He still thinks that practically every character having multiple, out of order flashbacks was the best way to write The English Patient. He still thinks that long, beautiful passages in the POV of characters who just walk on screen, but have nothing to do with the story was the right choice for the novel. But he could see that they weren't the right choices for the medium of movie storytelling and he seemed to loved that. To have enjoyed learning about more structured storytelling.
It's such an interesting hypothetical question to me... If he'd written The English Patient using a more conventional storytelling structure, he might not have won the Booker (and all the other awards) but I think the book still would have been an amazing bestseller, maybe even a bigger bestseller, and more people who bought it would have actually read it. :) (I remember seeing it on a list of the top 10 books people have bought but couldn't get through reading.)
At the end, Ondaatje told us a story about a man who came up to him at the movie premiere, and thinking he was the screenwriter, told him how he thought it was fabulous how he wrote such an amazing screenplay based on such a terrible book. That got a big laugh and I love that Ondaatje thought it was funny, too.
Molly and Sinead know that early on this writing thing I had ambitions of writing more literary novels, but listening to Ondaatje on Monday night, while I completely admire what he does, I realized yet again that I prefer story over art in books. Sure, you can pull a conventional storytelling structure apart and make it creative and cool (The Time Traveler's Wife, anyone?) but I do like to be able to find that through line and I thought it was hilarious that Ondaatje, such a famous and acclaimed novelist, acted as if he didn't previously understand some of those basic storytelling conventions.
Other pleasant surprise of the night? I totally forgot that Naveen Andrews played Kip. Such a beautiful man. Who couldn't love a movie with Ralph Fiennes, Colin Firth and Naveen Andrews. Yum.
Photo from http://fanzone50.com
I still love that movie and it stands, for me, as one of the most amazing adaptations of a book ever. Not because it adapted the novel directly, but because it didn't. Because it found the compelling story hidden inside the poetic and difficult to penetrate novel. Because it took beautiful images from the novel that didn't have any tension or forward plot momentum and managed to create scenes, relevant to the story, to show those beautiful images. I mean, they changed a flashback about a University lecture on wind into a life-or-death scene that was also pivotal to the romance they chose to tell. (In the book, I much preferred the Kip/Hanna romance and barely noticed the Katherine/Amalsy one...)
The late, amazingly talented, Anthony Minghella wrote the screenplay (and directed) but Ondaatje was involved in early discussions about how to make the novel into a film and gave extensive notes and thoughts on not only the first 4 or 5 drafts of the screenplay, but was also involved in the film's editing. He said that he, Minghella and the producer spent 3 full days of meetings going over notes on each of the first four drafts. Pretty unusual for an novelist to be involved to that extent in a movie and goes to the mutual respect that Ondaatje and Minghella had for each other.
One great example of Ondaatje's lack of ego over having his novel changed was this paraphrased quote: I love the book Beloved, so I don't think I could bear to see the movie made of it, but I was happy to let someone do a movie of The English Patient. He also said something like: They didn't do anything to my novel. My novel is still the same.
But while all that was fascinating to hear about, what really struck me were the few examples Ondaatje gave as things he learned from the filmmaking process, both from Minghella and from the editor, Murch, about storytelling. Things that seemed very basic to me. Things I learned within the first year of novel writing.
For example, Kip, in the novel, doesn't appear until about halfway through. Minghella insisted that if he was a main character, he needed to appear near the beginning of the movie, hence they added a scene at the start, where Hanna runs into a mine field and Kip is there.
The Caravaggio character's role in the movie was also very different in the book vs the movie. (Beyond the fact that they made the Canadian characters from Montreal, not Toronto. Annoying to me!) In the book, he shows up because he knows Hanna from Toronto, and while he adds some flavor and probably a little tension (it's been a long time since I read the book) he's actually part of the plot in the movie and he's key to tying the plots of Hanna in the present to the plot of Almasy in the past. In the movie, Caravaggio doesn't know Hanna. He goes to the church looking for Almasy (The English Patient) to exact revenge. Same/similar character, some of the same scenes, but TOTALLY different use of that character. Minghella knit all of Ondaatje's disparate pieces together.
I think what most struck me (beyond how brilliant all these changes were, because I already thought that) but how none of these things had occurred to Ondaatje. He said that he actually added a small scene with a previously late arriving character in his next novel, Anil's Ghost, as a result of learning that "tip" from the movie makers.
Now don't get me wrong. Ondaatje still thinks he wrote the novel the way it should have been written. He still thinks that practically every character having multiple, out of order flashbacks was the best way to write The English Patient. He still thinks that long, beautiful passages in the POV of characters who just walk on screen, but have nothing to do with the story was the right choice for the novel. But he could see that they weren't the right choices for the medium of movie storytelling and he seemed to loved that. To have enjoyed learning about more structured storytelling.
It's such an interesting hypothetical question to me... If he'd written The English Patient using a more conventional storytelling structure, he might not have won the Booker (and all the other awards) but I think the book still would have been an amazing bestseller, maybe even a bigger bestseller, and more people who bought it would have actually read it. :) (I remember seeing it on a list of the top 10 books people have bought but couldn't get through reading.)
At the end, Ondaatje told us a story about a man who came up to him at the movie premiere, and thinking he was the screenwriter, told him how he thought it was fabulous how he wrote such an amazing screenplay based on such a terrible book. That got a big laugh and I love that Ondaatje thought it was funny, too.
Molly and Sinead know that early on this writing thing I had ambitions of writing more literary novels, but listening to Ondaatje on Monday night, while I completely admire what he does, I realized yet again that I prefer story over art in books. Sure, you can pull a conventional storytelling structure apart and make it creative and cool (The Time Traveler's Wife, anyone?) but I do like to be able to find that through line and I thought it was hilarious that Ondaatje, such a famous and acclaimed novelist, acted as if he didn't previously understand some of those basic storytelling conventions.
Other pleasant surprise of the night? I totally forgot that Naveen Andrews played Kip. Such a beautiful man. Who couldn't love a movie with Ralph Fiennes, Colin Firth and Naveen Andrews. Yum.
Photo from http://fanzone50.com
May 9, 2011
My process
It's not like I don't know that I have an easier time getting to the heart of things when I talk things out. My husband used to tell people that I was an "external processor." Actually he threatened someone with it. Just a local vendor that was screwing with us, but he basically said that we lived in a small community, that I had a lot of friends and that I tended to talk. It was apparently all HE needed to say. Whatever.
Anyway, I was trying to decide what the first scene of the new proposal I was working on would be. I had two good candidates. I'd been turning them over in my head and I'd half decided that I would write both of them and then see which one felt right. Then I started talking to my son about it. After just a few minutes, I realized he was totally right. I needed to start with Melina's search for her werewolf friend, Paul, and not in spin class with her mother. I congratulated Alex on being ever so perspicacious and thanked him for helping me.
He laughed, pointed out that he hadn't actually said anything and then reminisced about several other items that I'd done exactly the same thing. He then returned to his usual state of ignoring me and watching the basketball finals.
So apparently that's my process. What I don't get is, if I don't need the other person to say anything, why can't I get the same clarity by just saying it out loud to myself? And if there's no one there to hear it, why can't I just think it through? Why do I have to subject the people I love the most to my meandering half-formed thoughts? And what is it about it that makes me thing that they've give me the answers?
Anyway, I was trying to decide what the first scene of the new proposal I was working on would be. I had two good candidates. I'd been turning them over in my head and I'd half decided that I would write both of them and then see which one felt right. Then I started talking to my son about it. After just a few minutes, I realized he was totally right. I needed to start with Melina's search for her werewolf friend, Paul, and not in spin class with her mother. I congratulated Alex on being ever so perspicacious and thanked him for helping me.
He laughed, pointed out that he hadn't actually said anything and then reminisced about several other items that I'd done exactly the same thing. He then returned to his usual state of ignoring me and watching the basketball finals.
So apparently that's my process. What I don't get is, if I don't need the other person to say anything, why can't I get the same clarity by just saying it out loud to myself? And if there's no one there to hear it, why can't I just think it through? Why do I have to subject the people I love the most to my meandering half-formed thoughts? And what is it about it that makes me thing that they've give me the answers?
What the F$*# does "finesse" mean?
I got my edits email from my editor the other day and then, a few days later, my edit phone call. The notes are straight forward and a few days ago, I thought the work was straight forward too. But know that I'm knee deep in the manuscript, covered in story guts and severed plot lines, I have no effing clue what "finesse" means. Because I'm supposed to finesse a lot of things right now, and I can't see for the carnage of editing.
Right now, where I'm at in my head and in this book, the only editorial that makes sense, is cut it. If it doesn't work, just cut the whole thing right out. Because I probably didn't need it anyway. Maureen told me this over beer the other day and I frowned at her and griped and said "I don't want to talk about this anymore." Clearly, I am a fully grown adult writer.
But she was right, so I cut out a bunch of stuff that I was supposed to finesse, but finessing it just made it more confusing. Because, probably, I don't know how to finesse. I think I'm more of a blunt instrument writer - finesse is for better writers. Better writers who know more words? I know about 50.
My other very sophisticated editorial tool at this moment is something I like to call "do the opposite." If it's not working, don't bother finessing, just do the opposite. I'm amazed at how often this works. If it doesn't work with her in the room, take her out of the room. It's like I don't just get it a little wrong the first time, I get it all the way wrong.
I'm about to open my laptop and step back into the story gore, and my manuscript is shaking with terror, beacuse it probably wants to be finessed. It wants to be nuanced and massaged and I keep showing up with a hammer and a hacksaw, because I have no idea what those other words mean in relationship to my book. So....anyone know?
Right now, where I'm at in my head and in this book, the only editorial that makes sense, is cut it. If it doesn't work, just cut the whole thing right out. Because I probably didn't need it anyway. Maureen told me this over beer the other day and I frowned at her and griped and said "I don't want to talk about this anymore." Clearly, I am a fully grown adult writer.
But she was right, so I cut out a bunch of stuff that I was supposed to finesse, but finessing it just made it more confusing. Because, probably, I don't know how to finesse. I think I'm more of a blunt instrument writer - finesse is for better writers. Better writers who know more words? I know about 50.
My other very sophisticated editorial tool at this moment is something I like to call "do the opposite." If it's not working, don't bother finessing, just do the opposite. I'm amazed at how often this works. If it doesn't work with her in the room, take her out of the room. It's like I don't just get it a little wrong the first time, I get it all the way wrong.
I'm about to open my laptop and step back into the story gore, and my manuscript is shaking with terror, beacuse it probably wants to be finessed. It wants to be nuanced and massaged and I keep showing up with a hammer and a hacksaw, because I have no idea what those other words mean in relationship to my book. So....anyone know?
May 6, 2011
Cliches
There is a commercial on TV right now that is driving me crazy. It's for a detergent, and it's one of those, "real person test' travesty commercials with the testers being a blond woman with long hair and a brunnette with hair that can only be called a bowl cut "joyce dewitt" style, and bad glasses.
And of course the brunette with the bad hair is the smart one and the blond the flighty idiot. I take exception on behalf of both blondes and brunettes, but also, seriously. A national commercial, and these lazy, ridiculous cliches are the best the advertising company could come up with?
Every genre is a breeding ground for cliches, but the books I enjoy the most find a way to turn cliches on their head. Sherry Thomas does this over and over again. I no longer want to read about the uptight governess who secretly desires the rake. But if you give me the uptight laywer who falls for the wrong woman, than I'm in.
One of the storylines I love the most right now is on The Vampire Diaries(I know, I won't give up talking about this show, but it's great) They had the spoiled blond teenager, who was as annoying as she sounds, but then she's turned into a vampire. This transformation makes her more powerful, but also more caring. She's more human now that she's a vamp. It's great, and something Joss Whedom used to do with his characters. Take the annoying, shallow girl and make her someone the audience truly cares about.
Any other good cliche turn arounds out there? Cliches people hate?
And of course the brunette with the bad hair is the smart one and the blond the flighty idiot. I take exception on behalf of both blondes and brunettes, but also, seriously. A national commercial, and these lazy, ridiculous cliches are the best the advertising company could come up with?
Every genre is a breeding ground for cliches, but the books I enjoy the most find a way to turn cliches on their head. Sherry Thomas does this over and over again. I no longer want to read about the uptight governess who secretly desires the rake. But if you give me the uptight laywer who falls for the wrong woman, than I'm in.
One of the storylines I love the most right now is on The Vampire Diaries(I know, I won't give up talking about this show, but it's great) They had the spoiled blond teenager, who was as annoying as she sounds, but then she's turned into a vampire. This transformation makes her more powerful, but also more caring. She's more human now that she's a vamp. It's great, and something Joss Whedom used to do with his characters. Take the annoying, shallow girl and make her someone the audience truly cares about.
Any other good cliche turn arounds out there? Cliches people hate?
May 5, 2011
"I live my life between reality and fantasy..."
This was an awesome quote I heard from Lady Gaga on Ellen that I've decided to adopt as my own personal mantra. I'm not going to lie – I took a lot of flack (all good natured of course) for taking a day off to watch the Royal Wedding.
Words like… "pathetic" and "no life" were used with great frequency. Again no one was intending to be mean spirited but it did make me think a little. I mean I really really loved watching that wedding.
The sad truth is if I could - I would live my life reading books, watching movies and television. Now I'm not a total recluse. I have a fairly active life. I've traveled a lot and enjoyed everyplace I've visited. But if someone said to me you can never leave your home again – as long as I had access to books I would be okay with that. If someone said you can travel the world extensively but you can never read or write again – I would be devastated beyond anything I could imagine.
This is probably not great. I would love maybe a little more balance in my life. My mother would REALLY love for me to have more balance. (Interpret balance as husband, children, white picket fence etc). But I realize that part of my content with my single-no-kids life is the fact that it gives me more time to read.
And truly any real relationship I've had has always fallen flat in comparison to a really good romance novel. Real relationships are complicated and messy and tricky and up and down. Blind dates are typically boring and awkward and 99% are total busts.
A good book has romantic tension and instant chemistry and great sex. It gives me all of the complications of a relationship but ties it up in a nice ribbon at the end to my total satisfaction.
Now some might think I need therapy and please know that much of what I'm saying is tongue in cheek. Of course I know that a real relationship is better than a good book. (Except let me remind everyone you never have to pick up dirty socks from a good book. A good book doesn't NOT unload the dishwasher… just saying.)
However, I can own up to the idea that I do live my life between reality and fantasy. I need both sides. In fact since my writing has been next to nil these last few months I find myself agitated like never before. Like I'm being pulled too far into reality and it's chafing me. I need to go back to fantasyland.
So am I crazy or could this be the truth for all writers? That to truly produce a story (in any format) they have to spend at least part of their life in fantasyland.
Words like… "pathetic" and "no life" were used with great frequency. Again no one was intending to be mean spirited but it did make me think a little. I mean I really really loved watching that wedding.
The sad truth is if I could - I would live my life reading books, watching movies and television. Now I'm not a total recluse. I have a fairly active life. I've traveled a lot and enjoyed everyplace I've visited. But if someone said to me you can never leave your home again – as long as I had access to books I would be okay with that. If someone said you can travel the world extensively but you can never read or write again – I would be devastated beyond anything I could imagine.
This is probably not great. I would love maybe a little more balance in my life. My mother would REALLY love for me to have more balance. (Interpret balance as husband, children, white picket fence etc). But I realize that part of my content with my single-no-kids life is the fact that it gives me more time to read.
And truly any real relationship I've had has always fallen flat in comparison to a really good romance novel. Real relationships are complicated and messy and tricky and up and down. Blind dates are typically boring and awkward and 99% are total busts.
A good book has romantic tension and instant chemistry and great sex. It gives me all of the complications of a relationship but ties it up in a nice ribbon at the end to my total satisfaction.
Now some might think I need therapy and please know that much of what I'm saying is tongue in cheek. Of course I know that a real relationship is better than a good book. (Except let me remind everyone you never have to pick up dirty socks from a good book. A good book doesn't NOT unload the dishwasher… just saying.)
However, I can own up to the idea that I do live my life between reality and fantasy. I need both sides. In fact since my writing has been next to nil these last few months I find myself agitated like never before. Like I'm being pulled too far into reality and it's chafing me. I need to go back to fantasyland.
So am I crazy or could this be the truth for all writers? That to truly produce a story (in any format) they have to spend at least part of their life in fantasyland.
May 4, 2011
We've Come a Long Way, Baby
I met with a friend of a friend yesterday who's written a novel and wanted to talk to me about how to get published. I was super happy to do this and honestly just hoped I wouldn't sound too jaded or too negative. (And to be 100% honest, I didn't want to tell her how hard it is, and then feel like an idiot when she sells her first book for a million dollars next week. Because that does happen. Sometimes. Just not to me.)
But in the end, the conversation went much differently than I'd been expecting, and it struck me how much I've learned over the past (um) nearly nine years since I started to learn about writing and publishing. Molly and I did a workshop called Romance 101 in January and I was worried that some of the material we covered was too basic and boring some of the participants, but based on the questions that came up after, we might have made the opposite mistake.
And the same thing happened when I met with this woman. We didn't even touch on the craft side of things (where I know I've done the majority of my learning) and talking with her I remembered that I honestly had no idea about the basics of the business of publishing when I first started. Terms like agents and queries and editors and royalties and how they all work, all seem so common knowledge to me now, but talking to a newbie I realized just how far I've come, how much I've learned.
And because it's my birthday, I'm posting a photo of me at about 13. No, I'm not going to tell you how many years ago that was, but the octagon wire-framed glasses might be a clue. Thanks to Barrie Summy for encouraging me to dig out a photo for her blog. She wanted a snap of me when I was the age that my readers are now.
Talking to this new writer last night also reminded me that we used to talk about more craft and publishing business topics on this blog... I wonder if any of readers miss that or would like more "content" on occasion.
Thoughts anyone? Anything you'd like us to talk about? I'm an open book. (No pun intended.)
But in the end, the conversation went much differently than I'd been expecting, and it struck me how much I've learned over the past (um) nearly nine years since I started to learn about writing and publishing. Molly and I did a workshop called Romance 101 in January and I was worried that some of the material we covered was too basic and boring some of the participants, but based on the questions that came up after, we might have made the opposite mistake.
And the same thing happened when I met with this woman. We didn't even touch on the craft side of things (where I know I've done the majority of my learning) and talking with her I remembered that I honestly had no idea about the basics of the business of publishing when I first started. Terms like agents and queries and editors and royalties and how they all work, all seem so common knowledge to me now, but talking to a newbie I realized just how far I've come, how much I've learned.And because it's my birthday, I'm posting a photo of me at about 13. No, I'm not going to tell you how many years ago that was, but the octagon wire-framed glasses might be a clue. Thanks to Barrie Summy for encouraging me to dig out a photo for her blog. She wanted a snap of me when I was the age that my readers are now.
Talking to this new writer last night also reminded me that we used to talk about more craft and publishing business topics on this blog... I wonder if any of readers miss that or would like more "content" on occasion.
Thoughts anyone? Anything you'd like us to talk about? I'm an open book. (No pun intended.)
May 3, 2011
Time Management
A couple of months ago, my niece (the fabulous and talented Sophie Leininger) complimented me on how well I was keeping my life balanced. I'll admit, I was feeling pretty in control at the time and it felt good to have it be recognized. I was writing every day, exercising, working my day job, remembering a friend's birthday and visiting my mother on a regular basis.
Oh, how I miss those halcyon days. Someone asked what I was working on this weekend and when I heard my own explanation (I'm taking a break from the proposal I was working on to do page proofs on a different project, but I need to get the proposal done so I can get back to the rough draft that's due in September) I felt like I'd lost my mind.
Now mind you, I'm happy to have this problem. They're all projects I'm happy and excited to be writing. I'm also thrilled to go to my son's soccer tournaments (Go Chaos United!) and attend my cousin's wedding and go with my sweetheart to his father's memorial services (well, I'm not HAPPY about that, but you get my drift). Still it's all time and I'm starting to freak out a little bit.
I need to remove some of the distractions and settle down to get some work done, but the distractions don't seem to want to be removed. I keep thinking that the next week will be the one where I have some blocks of time to really work and then my mother has a dental emergency or my son gets sick or, well, you know. It's making me incredibly anxious and since my baseline is already a fairly high level of anxiety, it's not good.
Soccer season ends in a few short weeks. My mother's jaw has been successfully recontoured (don't ask). The wedding is coming up and will soon be past and I can settle down and get some work done. Right?
Oh, how I miss those halcyon days. Someone asked what I was working on this weekend and when I heard my own explanation (I'm taking a break from the proposal I was working on to do page proofs on a different project, but I need to get the proposal done so I can get back to the rough draft that's due in September) I felt like I'd lost my mind.
Now mind you, I'm happy to have this problem. They're all projects I'm happy and excited to be writing. I'm also thrilled to go to my son's soccer tournaments (Go Chaos United!) and attend my cousin's wedding and go with my sweetheart to his father's memorial services (well, I'm not HAPPY about that, but you get my drift). Still it's all time and I'm starting to freak out a little bit.
I need to remove some of the distractions and settle down to get some work done, but the distractions don't seem to want to be removed. I keep thinking that the next week will be the one where I have some blocks of time to really work and then my mother has a dental emergency or my son gets sick or, well, you know. It's making me incredibly anxious and since my baseline is already a fairly high level of anxiety, it's not good.
Soccer season ends in a few short weeks. My mother's jaw has been successfully recontoured (don't ask). The wedding is coming up and will soon be past and I can settle down and get some work done. Right?
May 2, 2011
Real Life Inspiration
Wow - what a weekend for world events. A Royal Wedding and the bloody end of a ten year hunt for the deadliest terrorist of our time. The twenty-four hour news shows FINALLY have some news to fill all those hours.
Most of the world is breathing a sigh of relief over the end of Bin Laden (none more so than Kate and William who can slink back to regular royal life)and I hope the widows, widowers and children of the innocent victims of 9/11 have some closure.
It's hard to stop watching TV to get more information on the last moments of Bin Laden's life. Waiting for them to rerun the clips of the blood-splattered bedroom, the mansion on fire. Which is weird and morbid, but I'm still doing it.
I'm sure all of us writers are watching the news and thinking of the angles - the stories. We're taking these real life events and finding the room for fiction. We did it with the Royal Wedding and now, this CIA kill mission. And what's been great about this weekend, as I'm feeling utterly devoid of inspiration or even will to write, my brain has found something to chew on.
So, what I'm thinking about:
Obviously, that Navy SEAL team. We'll probably never know the names of the men who stormed that mansion, but they know and that's exciting stuff. Imagining those men has made Brockman a super star and I have no intention of trying - but they're fun to think about.
That burial at sea seems really convenient to me, which has made me wonder - perhaps Bin Laden is not what we thought he was...did they bring him onto that ship only to find out he was...cyborg? Dragon? A woman?
I'm also wondering about that mansion outside of Islamabad. Was that his house? Did someone there betray Bin Laden? It seems like US forces knew where he was for a while, but I like to pretend right now that Bin Laden just came out of whatever rat hole he was living in in the mountains, to take a shower and spew his poison. And someone at that house betrayed him. In my mind it was a woman.
So, how about you - inspired by recent events? Still processing? Jubuliant over the end of a terrorist? Still wondering what the Royal Counsins were thinking with those hats and dresses at the wedding?
Most of the world is breathing a sigh of relief over the end of Bin Laden (none more so than Kate and William who can slink back to regular royal life)and I hope the widows, widowers and children of the innocent victims of 9/11 have some closure.
It's hard to stop watching TV to get more information on the last moments of Bin Laden's life. Waiting for them to rerun the clips of the blood-splattered bedroom, the mansion on fire. Which is weird and morbid, but I'm still doing it.
I'm sure all of us writers are watching the news and thinking of the angles - the stories. We're taking these real life events and finding the room for fiction. We did it with the Royal Wedding and now, this CIA kill mission. And what's been great about this weekend, as I'm feeling utterly devoid of inspiration or even will to write, my brain has found something to chew on.
So, what I'm thinking about:
Obviously, that Navy SEAL team. We'll probably never know the names of the men who stormed that mansion, but they know and that's exciting stuff. Imagining those men has made Brockman a super star and I have no intention of trying - but they're fun to think about.
That burial at sea seems really convenient to me, which has made me wonder - perhaps Bin Laden is not what we thought he was...did they bring him onto that ship only to find out he was...cyborg? Dragon? A woman?
I'm also wondering about that mansion outside of Islamabad. Was that his house? Did someone there betray Bin Laden? It seems like US forces knew where he was for a while, but I like to pretend right now that Bin Laden just came out of whatever rat hole he was living in in the mountains, to take a shower and spew his poison. And someone at that house betrayed him. In my mind it was a woman.
So, how about you - inspired by recent events? Still processing? Jubuliant over the end of a terrorist? Still wondering what the Royal Counsins were thinking with those hats and dresses at the wedding?
April 29, 2011
princess stories
Most little girls want to be one, me too if I can remember back that far and certainly today is a good day to daydream about gorgeous white dresses and tiaras and the pomp and attention that comes with marrying a prince.
Me, I'm too practical to get caught up in the romance of the situation, even today, but it has sparked my imagination. Princess stories can be fun to write, so here is where my imagaination has taken me.
A practical woman, raised to marry royalty, aware of the advantages it will give her, the way she can be an advocate for the undertrod and do real good in the world. Barely knows the prince, has never liked him, he seems too carefree, too much a playboy for my serious princess to be.
The prince doesn't want to marry, but he has no choice. He knows his duty, has never been allowed to forget his duty and so these two perfect strangers put on a wedding show for the world and once married begin the process of getting to know and love each other.
An updated marriage of convenience story.
I love when real world events spark fictional stories in my head and I'm sure right now, many, many writers have their own version of their princess story.
I'd love to hear what sort of princess story you would write? Would it be contemporary or historical? Paranormal even?
Me, I'm too practical to get caught up in the romance of the situation, even today, but it has sparked my imagination. Princess stories can be fun to write, so here is where my imagaination has taken me.
A practical woman, raised to marry royalty, aware of the advantages it will give her, the way she can be an advocate for the undertrod and do real good in the world. Barely knows the prince, has never liked him, he seems too carefree, too much a playboy for my serious princess to be.
The prince doesn't want to marry, but he has no choice. He knows his duty, has never been allowed to forget his duty and so these two perfect strangers put on a wedding show for the world and once married begin the process of getting to know and love each other.
An updated marriage of convenience story.
I love when real world events spark fictional stories in my head and I'm sure right now, many, many writers have their own version of their princess story.
I'd love to hear what sort of princess story you would write? Would it be contemporary or historical? Paranormal even?
