Rachael Eyre's Blog, page 18
July 31, 2013
Polari 2013
The Governess is on the long list for the Polari First Fiction Prize 2013, announced last night. I've yet to recover from the shock.
The short list will be announced in September this year. I don't expect to place, but I'm tickled to get this far.
The short list will be announced in September this year. I don't expect to place, but I'm tickled to get this far.
July 28, 2013
First Person Narrator
I'm really not very good at this keeping up to date lark, am I? In my defence, work's been hectic over the last few months- I've barely had time to spend on my third book, never mind anything else. I promise to be less tardy in future.
Lately I've been thinking a lot about first person narrators. People can be unduly snobbish; if done well, there's no better way of plonking somebody in the world of the story. It's probably my favourite viewpoint; I haven't done it with my third story, since the second main character is a robot, but certainly I'm likely to use it again in the future.
First person is great for a number of reasons. You have to accept that person's version of events, whether you like it or not, which makes for a particularly interesting experience if they're villainous or mad. It feels far more immediate and authentic; yes, the Ancient Mariner might trap the wedding guest at the beginning of his tale, but it works precisely because we're seeing Death and Life in Death from his perspective. We realise everybody's bound to have their biases and things they don't want us to know (Sarah Waters plays with this beautifully in Fingersmith and Affinity), but as long as they're telling the story, we're taken right along with them.
Many of the arguments against first person don't hold water when examined closely. "Childish and non literary"? Try telling that to Dickens, who loved first person. A spoiler because it means the character survives the story? Not necessarily; look at recent critical darling The Song of Achilles, where Patroclus is able to witness events long after his death. Authors not being able to write convincingly as a different sex or age from themselves- well, that is occasionally an issue, but if it's a well written book, it shouldn't be. I don't remember anyone claiming that Harper Lee doesn't write convincingly from the perspective of a young girl. Really it boils down to genre; the best perspective for a dystopia or horror story is first person.
All those people who dismiss first person: can you imagine Jane Eyre in third person, or Lolita? I doubt it.
Lately I've been thinking a lot about first person narrators. People can be unduly snobbish; if done well, there's no better way of plonking somebody in the world of the story. It's probably my favourite viewpoint; I haven't done it with my third story, since the second main character is a robot, but certainly I'm likely to use it again in the future.
First person is great for a number of reasons. You have to accept that person's version of events, whether you like it or not, which makes for a particularly interesting experience if they're villainous or mad. It feels far more immediate and authentic; yes, the Ancient Mariner might trap the wedding guest at the beginning of his tale, but it works precisely because we're seeing Death and Life in Death from his perspective. We realise everybody's bound to have their biases and things they don't want us to know (Sarah Waters plays with this beautifully in Fingersmith and Affinity), but as long as they're telling the story, we're taken right along with them.
Many of the arguments against first person don't hold water when examined closely. "Childish and non literary"? Try telling that to Dickens, who loved first person. A spoiler because it means the character survives the story? Not necessarily; look at recent critical darling The Song of Achilles, where Patroclus is able to witness events long after his death. Authors not being able to write convincingly as a different sex or age from themselves- well, that is occasionally an issue, but if it's a well written book, it shouldn't be. I don't remember anyone claiming that Harper Lee doesn't write convincingly from the perspective of a young girl. Really it boils down to genre; the best perspective for a dystopia or horror story is first person.
All those people who dismiss first person: can you imagine Jane Eyre in third person, or Lolita? I doubt it.
April 2, 2013
What makes a good short story?
Short stories are puzzling beasts. On one hand they're how many of us hone our craft- especially if we're prone to entering contests! On the other, many readers have a marked intolerance towards them; it's almost impossible to get short stories published unless you've already got a body of work under your belt. My gran's lofty declaration, "I never read short stories," seems to be a common opinion. They're associated with magazines- Take a Break, Women's Own and the like. One of my favourite exercises at my university writer's guild was to write a pastiche- I don't think my spin on it (zookeeper leaves his wife for a panda) was quite what they were looking for, but never mind!
This seems to be a case not only of snobbery but small mindedness. What is Death in Venice, if not a short story, or The Turn of the Screw? (Both favourites of mine, as you've probably guessed). The form's ripe for adaptation, yet- even more than a book- can result in a lacklustre film or show. When done well, the results can be dazzling. So many books are full of padding or needless bit characters who could be excised with no overall impact. In some ways it's the most perfect example of the form- you draw up a plot and some characters, then get on with it. Though it's true both my novels began as short pieces (The Governess as a poem, of all things).
At the moment I'm reading Daphne du Maurier's short story collection The Breaking Point. Probably my favourite all round writer, her short pieces are particularly good, even the 'less successful' ones. Everybody knows Don't Look Now and The Birds, but I've found others just as unsettling, whether The Blue Lenses (which I've just finished reading- eek!) or The Doll, where the hero's love interest seems to have a mannequin with ... ahem ... moving parts.
Favourite short stories generally? Olivia by Olivia Strachey (though it's possibly a novella), Lady Into Fox (ditto), The Canterville Ghost (I firmly believe Oscar was at his best in his short fiction) and, oh, Angela Carter! I love The Bloody Chamber. We can't forget Sylvia Plath either; I love Superman and Paula Brown's New Snowsuit and Johnny Panic and the Bible of Dreams. Finally: Roald Dahl's Tales of the Unexpected. There are lots of dull ones about gambling, but I really like (in no particular order): Taste, Nunc Dimittus, Galloping Foxley, Lamb to the Slaughter, Royal Jelly and William and Mary.
This seems to be a case not only of snobbery but small mindedness. What is Death in Venice, if not a short story, or The Turn of the Screw? (Both favourites of mine, as you've probably guessed). The form's ripe for adaptation, yet- even more than a book- can result in a lacklustre film or show. When done well, the results can be dazzling. So many books are full of padding or needless bit characters who could be excised with no overall impact. In some ways it's the most perfect example of the form- you draw up a plot and some characters, then get on with it. Though it's true both my novels began as short pieces (The Governess as a poem, of all things).
At the moment I'm reading Daphne du Maurier's short story collection The Breaking Point. Probably my favourite all round writer, her short pieces are particularly good, even the 'less successful' ones. Everybody knows Don't Look Now and The Birds, but I've found others just as unsettling, whether The Blue Lenses (which I've just finished reading- eek!) or The Doll, where the hero's love interest seems to have a mannequin with ... ahem ... moving parts.
Favourite short stories generally? Olivia by Olivia Strachey (though it's possibly a novella), Lady Into Fox (ditto), The Canterville Ghost (I firmly believe Oscar was at his best in his short fiction) and, oh, Angela Carter! I love The Bloody Chamber. We can't forget Sylvia Plath either; I love Superman and Paula Brown's New Snowsuit and Johnny Panic and the Bible of Dreams. Finally: Roald Dahl's Tales of the Unexpected. There are lots of dull ones about gambling, but I really like (in no particular order): Taste, Nunc Dimittus, Galloping Foxley, Lamb to the Slaughter, Royal Jelly and William and Mary.
March 24, 2013
Testing, testing ...
Yep, still alive. Just showing my usual lack of flair with modern technology. It comes from doing everything on your phone- the boxes are too small (and I was too sozzled yesterday) to see properly.
Thoroughly enjoying the radio adaptation of Neverwhere. Sex and Punishment is a good read; I'll see how much of it I can use. Today I'll try and enter The Governess in a competition.
Catch up properly soon!
Thoroughly enjoying the radio adaptation of Neverwhere. Sex and Punishment is a good read; I'll see how much of it I can use. Today I'll try and enter The Governess in a competition.
Catch up properly soon!
February 23, 2013
Let's start at the very beginning ...
How weird- I have to write daily as part of my job but clam up the instant I'm required to write anything about myself.
First blogs by their very nature require some exposition. Since that's really not too interesting, I'll move onto the pudding: I'm a marketing assistant by day, writer (I don't like the word 'author') by night. In between life and spasms of writers' block I've finished two books, The Governess and The Revenge of Rose Grubb, and put them on Kindle. I've been writing a third- working title Love and Robotics- for a year and 3 months. It seems to take longer with each successive novel!
I have 3 aims with my stories. First and foremost is to give the reader a good time; if I'm not enjoying writing a book, I scrap it. Secondly, I try to have to have more lesbian, gay or gender queer characters in my stories- while a book may not be necessarily "gay", it's always there as an element. I hate the stock gay character who's a bit part, always a best friend or relative, who never actually engages in any romance. They seem solely there to prove the author's "liberal" credentials- a sandwich board rather than a convincing character.
Thirdly- and I feel about this so strongly it's a wonder it isn't first- I like writing well fleshed out female characters. It irks me even more than the chronic underuse of gay characters; while I can just about accept a writer may never have been close to anyone gay, there's women all around. I'm sick of female characters being girlfriends, mothers, assistants. Some of the most glaring pedlars of this nonsense are women! I'm sick of women sitting on their tuffets waiting for Prince Charming to rescue them.
Whew! There endeth the rant. That's why I write the sorts of stories I do. I hope to get to know some of you a bit better as this blog progresses.
First blogs by their very nature require some exposition. Since that's really not too interesting, I'll move onto the pudding: I'm a marketing assistant by day, writer (I don't like the word 'author') by night. In between life and spasms of writers' block I've finished two books, The Governess and The Revenge of Rose Grubb, and put them on Kindle. I've been writing a third- working title Love and Robotics- for a year and 3 months. It seems to take longer with each successive novel!
I have 3 aims with my stories. First and foremost is to give the reader a good time; if I'm not enjoying writing a book, I scrap it. Secondly, I try to have to have more lesbian, gay or gender queer characters in my stories- while a book may not be necessarily "gay", it's always there as an element. I hate the stock gay character who's a bit part, always a best friend or relative, who never actually engages in any romance. They seem solely there to prove the author's "liberal" credentials- a sandwich board rather than a convincing character.
Thirdly- and I feel about this so strongly it's a wonder it isn't first- I like writing well fleshed out female characters. It irks me even more than the chronic underuse of gay characters; while I can just about accept a writer may never have been close to anyone gay, there's women all around. I'm sick of female characters being girlfriends, mothers, assistants. Some of the most glaring pedlars of this nonsense are women! I'm sick of women sitting on their tuffets waiting for Prince Charming to rescue them.
Whew! There endeth the rant. That's why I write the sorts of stories I do. I hope to get to know some of you a bit better as this blog progresses.
