Pat Bertram's Blog, page 283

Perplexed by the Anything-Goes Publishing World (Part II)

Yesterday I wrote about how this new wild frontier, this stampede to publish and be damned (or not) of the new publishing world and how it could be lowering literacy standards because of the almost blythe acceptance of errors in books. The prevailing attitude is that as long as the writer is satisfied with the book, that's all that matters. Neither they nor their readers seem to care if their story is derivative, if the editing is slipshod, if typos litter the pages.

To add to the confusion of this anything-goes publishing world, books that do well are seldom the best. Often, these successful books are the result of a very aggressive promotion campaign or the result of luck — by being chosen by Amazon for an aggressive promotion campaign or by hitting the right market at the right time.

It seems as if the world is a poorer place if good books are destined to remain undiscovered simply because the author is a wonderful writer and a mediocre promoter. Since we reward wonderful promoters who are mediocre writers with huge numbers of sales, the whole book business becomes even more skewed than it already is. People think that good books will rise to the top, that such books will automatically find a readership, but that is not always the case. And shrugging off the conundrum as "survival of the fittest" doesn't help matters.

Some people think readers are screaming for quality, that readers are lost in the stampede, but when you consider the vast number of sales made by a few mediocre but bestselling traditionally published authors, most people are not screaming for quality. They are screaming for . . . comfort, perhaps. Predictability. A community of like-minded readers.

To make the situation even more complicated, publishers are not taking responsibility for marketing the books they publish. They want their authors to do that.

I recently read an article by a publisher who said that a publisher's role was simply to prepare a book for market and to make it available. That's it. Learning how to promote, navigating the insanely competitive book market, marketing one's book, paying for book tours and conferences — all of that is the responsibility of the author. So then why does an author need a publisher at all? With Create Space, Lulu, Smashwords, and now Goodreads getting into the epublishing business, authors can prepare their own books for market. And what they can't do, they can hire done, and keep all the profits. And authors by the millions are doing that very thing.

Maybe the problem I'm having coming to terms with this new wild frontier stems from a life-long respect for books, a sense that books are somehow sacred. Maybe it's time for me to give up that old-fashioned attitude and treat books like any other temporary reading commodity, such as a blog post or a cereal box.

Tagged: blogs, cereal boxes, publisher's role, publishing standards, reading commodity, self-publishing

Perplexed by the Anything-Goes Publishing World (Part I)

In a recent discussion on Facebook, someone mentioned the case of a self-published story that was being offered for sale on Amazon. A woman posted a review, stating her opinion that the work was far from ready for publishing, and she gave the writer several examples of how to improve, but the writer took these comments as insults. What ensued was a protracted argument between the writer and the reviewer.

The Facebooker who brought this exchange to our attention asked who was right and who was wrong. I thought the reviewer brought up some excellent points, gave wonderful suggestions for redoing the story without getting disrespectful about it. (And the reviewer could have gotten nasty. The story really was atrocious.)

I can't imagine arguing with a reviewer as the author did, though. A couple of times I have privately asked a reviewer to remove a spoiler that gave away the ending (and the reviewers graciously complied) but the writer in this case had a terribly unprofessional and arrogant attitude. She more or less said she could publish whatever she wanted, it didn't have to be perfect, and too bad if people didn't like it. Unfortunately, there are millions like her, which leaves me continually perplexed by the entire book business today.

The major publishers have had control of publishing standards for way too long. I certainly have no love for conglomerates or corporate thinking, so I don't object to a lessening of their control. On the other hand, many writers now think they don't need any standards at all. They say they can write whatever they wish, however they wish. The prevailing attitude is that as long as the writer is satisfied with the book, that's all that matters. They don't care if their story is derivative, if the editing is slipshod, if typos litter the pages.

Some of these writers even manage to sell a significant number of copies of their books.

Self-published writers seem to be a militant lot, demanding the same respect as authors whose books are published by a traditional or an independent press, yet self-published authors adhere to no one's standards but their own, while a book that was accepted by and released by a publishing company has had to live up to at least the publisher's standards. But some self-published writers do adhere to a high standard of literacy while some bestsellers released by the major publishers have an appallingly low standard of literacy.

Does any of this matter? With texting and twittering, leaving out letters of words to shorten them or using number for letters is standard. (AFAIK, u cn rd this. Me 2. LOL) Eek. Whole novels have been written in such shorthand.

Do kids today learn grammar in school? Do they need to know grammar? With spell check and grammar check on their computers, probably not. So, if books today have grammar mistakes, punctuation mistakes, typos, do most people even notice? Those of us who have spent a lifetime reading do notice, but do we count? We value language, but is language important? Language is an evolving organism, so perhaps those of us who quail at poorly written and poorly copy written books are running a race that has already been lost. A new generation grows into adulthood every year along with a new generation of electronic toys and tools and together they spawn a new generation of idioms. A new language.

I don't know why this new anything-goes publishing world perplexes me. Most writers seem thrilled with the new order of doing book business. They don't have to take the time to research the business, finding out which agents will accept their genre and which publishers they can submit to without an agent. They don't have to learn how to write query letters or learn how to write a description and a hook. They don't need to learn to deal with rejection. And especially, they don't need to learn how to improve their work to make it as near perfect as possible. They simply decide to publish. That's all it takes.

And most readers seem thrilled to find myriad books to download to their new ereaders.

So perhaps it's just me who worries about a lessening of standards. Perhaps this new frontier, this stampede to publish and be damned (or not) is what everyone else wants. It's certainly not the first time in my life the world didn't act in accord with what I thought was the right direction for it to take, and it certainly won't be the last.

Tagged: Facebook, language, publishing standards, reviewer, self-publishing, texting, twittering

Perplexed by the Anything-Goes Publishing World

In a recent discussion on Facebook, someone mentioned the case of a self-published story that was being offered for sale on Amazon. A woman posted a review, stating her opinion that the work was far from ready for publishing, and she gave the writer several examples of how to improve, but the writer took these comments as insults. What ensued was a protracted argument between the writer and the reviewer.

The Facebooker who brought this exchange to our attention asked who was right and who was wrong. I thought the reviewer brought up some excellent points, gave wonderful suggestions for redoing the story without getting disrespectful about it. (And the reviewer could have gotten nasty. The story really was atrocious.)

I can't imagine arguing with a reviewer as the author did, though. A couple of times I have privately asked a reviewer to remove a spoiler that gave away the ending (and the reviewers graciously complied) but the writer in this case had a terribly unprofessional and arrogant attitude. She more or less said she could publish whatever she wanted, it didn't have to be perfect, and too bad if people didn't like it. Unfortunately, there are millions like her, which leaves me continually perplexed by the entire book business today.

The major publishers have had control of publishing standards for way too long. I certainly have no love for conglomerates or corporate thinking, so I don't object to a lessening of their control. On the other hand, many writers now think they don't need any standards at all. They say they can write whatever they wish, however they wish. The prevailing attitude is that as long as the writer is satisfied with the book, that's all that matters. They don't care if their story is derivative, if the editing is slipshod, if typos litter the pages.

Some of these writers even manage to sell a significant number of copies of their books.

Self-published writers seem to be a militant lot, demanding the same respect as authors whose books are published by a traditional or an independent press, yet self-published authors adhere to no one's standards but their own, while a book that was accepted by and released by a publishing company has had to live up to at least the publisher's standards. But some self-published writers do adhere to a high standard of literacy while some bestsellers released by the major publishers have an appallingly low standard of literacy.

Does any of this matter? With texting and twittering, leaving out letters of words to shorten them or using number for letters is standard. (AFAIK, u cn rd this. Me 2. LOL) Eek. Whole novels have been written in such shorthand.

Do kids today learn grammar in school? Do they need to know grammar? With spell check and grammar check on their computers, probably not. So, if books today have grammar mistakes, punctuation mistakes, typos, do most people even notice? Those of us who have spent a lifetime reading do notice, but do we count? We value language, but is language important? Language is an evolving organism, so perhaps those of us who quail at poorly written and poorly copy written books are running a race that has already been lost. A new generation grows into adulthood every year along with a new generation of electronic toys and tools and together they spawn a new generation of idioms. A new language.

I don't know why this new anything-goes publishing world perplexes me. Most writers seem thrilled with the new order of doing book business. They don't have to take the time to research the business, finding out which agents will accept their genre and which publishers they can submit to without an agent. They don't have to learn how to write query letters or learn how to write a description and a hook. They don't need to learn to deal with rejection. And especially, they don't need to learn how to improve their work to make it as near perfect as possible. They simply decide to publish. That's all it takes.

And most readers seem thrilled to find myriad books to download to their new ereaders.

So perhaps it's just me who worries about a lessening of standards. Perhaps this new frontier, this stampede to publish and be damned (or not) is what everyone else wants. It's certainly not the first time in my life the world didn't act in accord with what I thought was the right direction for it to take, and it certainly won't be the last.

Tagged: Facebook, language, publishing standards, reviewer, self-publishing, texting, twittering

Top Five Things I've Learned About Twitter

Twitter is a microblogging site where you post 140 characters at a time. I've written 100-word stories, 100,000-word novels, blog posts of various word counts, but anything that can be said in 140 characters or less almost doesn't seem to be worth saying, so I'm having a hard time finding a home in the Twitosphere (or do I mean the Twitterverse?). Still, I am learning a few things about this twitterish world. Here are the top five things I've learned:

1. Tagging your tweets. You add tags to your tweets by using hash marks. For example, when I tweet this post, if I add #twitter to my tweet, people who are interested in finding out who is tweeting Twitter can search for #twitter, and discover all recent posts with that hash mark. (Okay, so you already knew that. But this is a post about things I've learned, and for some reason, that basic bit of twitia passed me by.)

2. Twit chats. #writechat is a group of writers who meet every Sunday on Twitter from 12:00 pm to 3:00 pm PT. You don't need an invitation to join the discussion. (Well, maybe you do, but I crashed the party and no one complained.) All you have to do is go to your Twitter account and search for #writechat. Or you can start your own discussion group. Pick a name, add a hash mark, tell a few friends, and there you are, master of your own twit chat.

3. Trending topics. On the right sidebar of your Twitter home page, there is a list of trends. These trends are topics that are currently popular (as in right-this-very-minute popular) and are compiled from the most retweeted tweets, mostly news items. Twitterers think that they are retweeting non-mainstream news, that they are in the vanguard of a rebellion against traditional news sources, but as it turns out, the most retweeted twits and tweets come from the major media via their followers.

4. Friend or follow. Some twits like to follow everyone to get a huge following, and after you have followed them because you really don't know what you're doing and so you follow everyone who follows you, these twits unfollow you. Don't you feel used? Well, no. Because you didn't know they unfollowed you. Twitter sends you a message when someone follows you, but they don't care if anyone unfollows you. So, here's where you even the score: go to Friend or Follow, fill in your Twitter user name, and wait for the results. They might surprise you. You can easily unfollow your unfollowers from the site.

5. Clean your twits. Sometimes you end up with spammers or people you thought were your friends but who tweet a hundred times a day. Or you end up with a whole stream of multi-level marketers. Here's an easy way of telling who is who. Go to: Twit Cleaner, fill in the information requested, and you get a whole list of unsweet tweeters with dodgy behavior such as those who tweet only links, those who only retweet other's tweets, those who tweet the same links over and over again. Click on the tweeters you want to remove, and soon they will gone.

The main problem with cleaning your twits is that you end up with a huge discrepancy between the number of those who follow you and those you follow, and Twitter frowns on that. But whose Twitter is this? The way I figure, it's better to follow fewer followers and get to know them, than to follow all who follow you and be inundated with the same twiddly stuff over and over again.

I'd planned to end this blog with a refutation of my bad report — Twit Cleaner told me I was guilty of dodgy behavior, that my tweets were mostly links. I was going to say that if people wanted to unfollow me because I tweeted too many links, then that is fine with me since if they're not interested in what I tweet, they are of no use to me. Unfortunately, I just got a new report from The Twit Cleaner. They said "You're awesome! Not very much to improve here. You're basically already pretty great. Keep being your wonderful self."

Thank you. I will.

@patbertram

Tagged: 140 characters, microblogging, tagging tweets, trending topics, twit chats, Twit Cleaner, Twitter

Book Bits #114 – Kudos to Beauty & the Book, Roald Dahl stamps, William Gibson, Queen Elizabeth

Three reasons to read Malcolm R. Campbell's Book Bits #114

1. It's the best compendium of book information orbiting the blogosphere

2. It has a link to my Pat Bertram Introduces blog where I interview Benjamin Cheah, an author from Singapore

3. It has a link to the incomparable Beth Hill's latest article for her The Editor's Blog.

Book Bits #114 – Kudos to Beauty & the Book, Roald Dahl stamps, William Gibson, Queen Elizabeth.

(If you would like to do an interview for my Pat Bertram Introduces blog, you can find the questions and instructions by clicking here: Pat Bertram Introduces . . . )

Tagged: Beth Hill, Book Bits, Malcolm R. Campbell

Rubicon Ranch: A Collaborative Novel

I am involved in a wonderful project with eight other Second Wind authors. Rubicon Ranch is an ongoing collaborative novel that we are writing online. It is the story of people whose lives have been changed when a little girl's body was found in the wilderness near the desert community of Rubicon Ranch. Was her death an accident? Or . . . murder! But who would want to kill a child? Everyone in this upscale housing development is hiding something. Everyone has an agenda. Everyone's life will be different after they have encountered the Rubicon. Rubicon Ranch, that is.

Each of us writers is responsible for the development of our own characters. My character is Melanie Gray. She has traveled the world with her husband, a world-renowned photographer. Together they authored many coffee-table books (she did the writing, he the photographs). One of the books told about mountains of the world, one about rivers, one about oceans, one about forests, and now they have a contract to do deserts. After they rented a house in Rubicon Ranch to begin their in-depth study of the southwestern deserts, he died in a car accident.

Now, not only does Melanie have to deal with the pain of losing her husband and figuring out what she's going to do for the rest of her life, she needs to fulfill the publishing contract or she'll have to reimburse the publishers, which she cannot do because the advance is all but spent. Since she is not a photographer, she roams the desert bordering on Rubicon Ranch, taking hundreds of photos, hoping that a few of them will accidentally end up being as brilliant as her husband's photos always were. She finds the child's body and takes photos of the scene after calling 911. At first she is a suspect but once the Sheriff has ruled her out, he requests her help in reading the desert and desert-related clues. Still, the sheriff does not trust her completely, thinking she is hiding something.

Chapter 26: Melanie Gray — by Pat Bertram

Fury, like wildfire flashed through Melanie. Fury at the sheriff for paying his silly games when people were dead, fury at herself for playing his fool.

She'd been flattered that he thought she could help with his investigation, but apparently the only thing he'd been investigating was her and how to get in her panties. And she'd fallen for it. Cripes, what an idiot! All her resolve not to let him get to her had been for nothing.

And that whole seduction scene—"So maybe, when I need you to help me, I won't have to bully you. You'll cooperate with me because you understand that getting my job done honestly is the most important thing to me." Did he believe his own drivel? And anyway, how could she help when he wasn't doing anything? It had been two days since Riley died. Didn't they say that if they didn't catch a killer within the first forty-eight hours that chances are he or she would never be caught? And the sheriff had wasted those precious hours trying to seduce her.

She'd fallen for Alexander's crap and apparently she hadn't learned anything, because here she was again, playing straight-woman for another unprincipled clown. Alexander, at least, had offered her adventure and marriage, and for a while he had even been faithful. But Seth? What did he have to offer? Nothing. He was married, and he was a taker. He'd take everything she had, which wasn't much, just her integrity, and she'd be damned before she let him tarnish that with a tawdry affair. She'd seen the look in his eyes when he'd said "And I know you'd rather claw out my eyes and slash my throat than let me touch you." And that look had belied his words. He seemed to think all he had to do was pretend to know her and she'd fall into his oh, so understanding arms.

"What?" he said, sounding as if he didn't know exactly what was going through her mind. How could he not? He, Sheriff Seth Bryan, the great detective.

"As if you don't know." Melanie spit the words from between clenched teeth.

Seth's brows drew together in an almost believable though comic look of confusion. "That's such a typical womanish remark. I thought you were different."

"You thought I was gullible and naïve. You thought since I put up with Alexander's philandering, I'd put up with yours, too, but that is not going to happen. Only a fool gets involved with a married man, and whatever you think, I am no fool."

Seth held up his hands, palms toward her. "Whoa."

"Being a widow does not make me ripe for the plucking. I don't need to be serviced like a bitch in heat. Believe me, the last thing I need in my life is a man, especially a married man. Calling it separate maintenance does not make you any less married."

He flashed his teeth. "So you do like me. You're protesting too much."

"Not protesting enough, apparently, or else you wouldn't have that silly grin on your face."

He lost the grin. "What's going on here? I thought we were having a nice meal while we went over the case."

"You should be going over the case with your deputies. They, at least, seem to understand how inappropriate it is for you to include me in your investigation. Unless I'm still a suspect and you're trying to get me to let down my guard and confess?"

"I told you, you were never a suspect."

"As if playing with me, gigging me as you called it, is any better. So let's discuss the case. What were the results of the autopsy? Was Riley murdered or was it an accident? If she was murdered, how was it done and who did it? Were there drugs in her system? Have you interrogated her parents yet to find out what they're hiding? Have you found out who the dead man is and what, if anything, he has to do with Riley's murder? You pretty much ignored me when I said he looked liked Riley, but then, that's understandable. I never got a good look at the girl. All I saw was her jaw line, her nose, and her eyebrows, so whatever I blurted out after seeing the man's corpse has to be discounted. Did the same person kill both of them? Or were there two different killers? Or . . ." Melanie paused to grab the thought that flitted through her mind. "Did he kill Riley and someone else kill him?"

Seth picked up his sandwich, dipped an end in the au jus, bit off a piece, and chewed slowly.

Melanie nodded. "That's what I thought. You're all talk." She deepened her voice and mimicked him. "'We have to solve these murders.' Yeah, like there really is a we. Well, there was a we, but that was Alexander and me. You and I will never be a we." A cough shuddered through her torso. She took a long drink of water, hoping she wasn't coming down with a cold but was merely dehydrated from the strong air-conditioning and her rare monologue.

Seth gave her a searching look, opened his mouth and then closed it again with what sounded like a resigned sigh. She wondered what he'd been going to say and why he thought better of it, then she let out a sigh of her own. It didn't matter. She had enough to do with grieving and fulfilling her book contract. She had nothing left for the sheriff and his investigation. Whatever he might think, she really didn't know anything. Well, that wasn't strictly true. She did know one thing.

She threw her napkin on the table and stood, ready to flee.

Seth gaped at her. "What's going on?"

"I'm going home, Sheriff Seth Bryan. I'm through with your games. You lied about investigating Alexander's accident. I saw the photos in the newspaper and I visited the scene of the accident. There was nothing there to indicate that the crash had been anything other than an accident. Perhaps someone had tampered with the car, but the only way to find that out was to investigate the vehicle itself. And you didn't care enough to check it out."

***

An additional chapter of the book will be posted every Monday. Please join in the adventure — it should be fun! We don't even know whodunit and won't know until the end. You can find the earlier chapters here: Rubicon Ranch

Tagged: collaborative novel, desert, Melanie Gray, murder, mystery, Pat Bertram, Rubicon Ranch, Second Wind Publishing

The Five Major Challenges We Face During the Second Year of Grief

The challenges we face during the first year after the death of a life mate/soul mate (or any other significant person), are too great to enumerate. It's all we can do to cope with the seemingly endless chores of laying our beloved to rest while dealing with the emotional shock, the physical pain, the psychological affront. Sometimes the first anniversary of his death is one of peace when we realize that we managed to survive the worst year of our life, but then we wake up to the second year and find a whole other set of challenges to meet.

These seem to be the five major challenges to face during the second year of grief:

1. Trying to understand where he went. We can understand that he is out of our lives (even though we don't like it), but we cannot understand his total goneness from this earth. No matter what we do, how we feel, or what we believe, it doesn't change the fact that he is dead. And there is nothing we can do about it.

2. Living without him — we can do it, we've proved that during the past months, but we still have a problem figuring out why we would want to.

3. Dealing with continued grief bursts. Though we do okay most of the time, and though we fulfill our daily responsibilities quite capably, upsurges of grief still hit us, sometimes right on schedule (such as my sadder Saturdays), and sometimes for no reason at all. Sometimes they last for days (such as the upsurge of grief most of us felt this New Year's Eve) and sometimes they last for mere minutes. But always, just when we think we can handle it, grief returns and we feel as if he just died.

4. Finding something to look forward to rather than simply existing. The second years seems to be a limbo, a time of waiting though we don't seem to be waiting for anything. We're just . . . waiting.

5. Handling the yearning. So many people who try to explain grief get it wrong. It's not about going through five or seven or ten stages of grief. It's about yearning for one more smile, one more word, one more hug from the person who was everything to us. The first year of yearning was hard, but somehow many of us had the strange idea that this was some sort of test and that after we passed the test, he'd pop back into our lives and we'd go on as before. Well, now we know this is no test. It's the real thing. And there is nothing protecting us from that great clawing yearning.

Making a list is easy. Meeting the challenges of the second year of grief is hard, but maybe we succeed simply by living, by dealing with each day as it comes.

Tagged: challenges of grief, death, grief, grief and yearining, grief upsurge, loss, second year of grief

A New Pattern of Grief

I've lived ninety-three Saturdays since the death of my life mate/soul mate. Of course, I've lived ninety-three of each of the other days, too, but Saturday is the day I cross the Rubicon. (Or do I mean it's the day I meet my Waterloo?) Either way, it continues to be my sadder day, the day he died, the day I always have an upswing of grief.

People think that by counting these sadder days I am steeping myself in grief, when the truth is, the sadness comes even before I know what day it is. Something deep inside of me is counting the weeks of this new life of mine. I'm sure there will come a time when first one Saturday passes without an extra burst of melancholy, and then another, and eventually my internal datekeeper will forget the day ever had a special meaning.

But not yet.

I truly thought I'd be done with grief by now. I've had several periods of relative stasis where I felt as if I'd moved beyond the sorrow, but so far, my grief has always returned, and it will probably continue to return for many months to come. It seems as if this process takes three to five years. Most people I've talked to who lost a mate say it took them four years to find the joy of living again. My twenty-one months, in comparison, falls way short of that.

Lately, a new pattern has been emerging. After a grief burst, there is a backwash of serenity, an acceptance of life as it now is, a determination to deal with my remaining years as best as I can. I even start thinking about the future, trying to imagine things I might try or places I might go. My mind drifts and I wonder how he will like those things or places. Then I realize . . . again . . . that he is dead, and grief washes over me.

I feel like a not very bright child who keeps running into a wall because she can't quite understand her inability to pass through to the other side. For me, his total goneness from this life is my wall. I don't understand death, don't think our brains are wired to understand it, yet I keep running into his goneness as if somehow I think the solidity of it will dissolve under my attack. Not very bright of me, is it?

I don't live in the past. I remember our shared life, of course, but mingled with the good memories are too many recollections of his suffering, which makes the past an unpleasant place to dwell. Or to dwell on. Nor can I bear to think of a future where he has no place, and so I live in the present. But I make note of my sadder Saturdays to prove to myself that yes, I can do this. I can live in a future without him. Ninety-three weeks ago, these Saturdays were all in the future and now they are all in the past. I lived them, and I'll continue to live and count my Saturdays.

My main problem is that even though I know I can do this — living without him — I still have a problem figuring out why I would want to. But the reason will come. It has to.

Tagged: death, grief, grief burst, how long does grief take, loss, pattern of grief, sadder days

North Rim of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison

Yesterday in my post, Looking at the World Through the Lens of a Camera, I mentioned a trip I took to the North Rim of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison. The south rim is the better known part of the canyon, but the north rim seems wilder to me. Here are a few photos of the canyon.

While I stood taking the previous photo, this is what lay behind me:

Tagged: Black Canyon, Black Canyon of the Gunnison, north rim, north rim of the Black Canyon

Grief: Looking at the World Through a Camera Lens

My publisher suggested adding photos to my soon-to-be-published book about grief, and I jumped at the chance. I'd recently read David Ebright's YA novel Reckless Endeavor, and was impressed by how much veracity just a couple of photos gave his story, so I was glad of the opportunity to do the same for my book. The only problem is, I have almost no photos of me and my life mate. We simply did not take photos — not of the places we lived, and not of each other. It's not that we weren't visually inclined, it's that we lived in the moment. If you take a photo of the moment, the shoot becomes the moment and you lose the moment itself.

A couple of years before he died, I was gifted with a digital camera, and I took hundreds of photos of trees, animal tracks, a cattle drive, some yaks in a nearby field, (well, weeds) along the lane where I walked. It helped me get through what I thought were the worst years of my life, the years of his dying. Oddly, during all that time, I only took one photo of him, and that was by accident. We always wanted to see the north rim of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison, but since the road leading to the canyon was gravel, it was too hard on our old cars. We promised each other that if we ever had the use of a rental car, we would take the trip. That August, I rented a car so I could visit my brother, and when I returned, I suggested we finally go see the north rim of the canyon. He didn't want to make the trip since he was so sick, but at the last moment, he agreed to come with me. It's a good memory. Just him and me and the ground that fell away just beyond our feet. I had my camera, and since I knew I'd never be back, I snapped a few photos, and he ended up being in one of those pictures. It still makes me cry, that photo. He's standing with his back to me, staring at  . . . eternity, perhaps. Did he know he had just a few more months to live? I sure didn't, or perhaps I was simply refusing to face the truth.

The year after he died (which actually was the worst year of my life), I took thousands of photos. The world had turned black and white, and it was only through the lens of a camera that I could see color and life. I roamed the neighborhood and the nearby desert, looking for visual treasures.

And then suddenly, a few months ago, I stopped carrying my camera around. Apparently, despite my continued sadness, I'm back in the moment, living life at full strength rather than diluted through the lens of the camera. I didn't even realize how far I'd come until I started hunting photos for my book and realized I'd stopped taking pictures.

(I did manage to scrounge a few photos for the book, though not as many as my publisher wanted. And we'll be using the only photo of the two of us for the back cover even if it is fifteen years old.)

Tagged: Black Canyon fo the Gunnison, camera, grief, life, photos, surviving grief