Roberta Pearce's Blog, page 2

Exhausted just watching.

Last night, I was playing on Facebook at a release party. Running into familiar names and faces, meeting some new ones. Good times.

My attention was somewhat divided, feeling a bit under pressure with other things going on in – what's that thing called? Oh, yeah. Life. I got awfully proud of myself when I tossed out some tweets for participating authors, helping promote their work, and then got in a bit of a sweat thinking about my own three-day event, starting today on FB:



Don't get me wrong! I love the events. Love being invited, either as participant or guest. Love playing, commenting, tweeting, sharing – it's great fun. And the readers who come out to play! They're awesome! They're funny and smart and generally jazzed to participate. Love meeting them. So, I'm going to have a good time during the event, as I always do.

As I've told anyone who would [and even those who wouldn't] listen to my whining, June's been a hellish kind of month in my schedule, and I'm so glad it's almost over. I see wine, and friends, and barbecues, and a diminished TBR in that fantasised future called July. That's all I've thought about for weeks, going well back into April. And in the middle of last night's multitasking, I wondered if I would ever see the Magical Land of Outside ever again.

One of my sidebars of the evening was having a PM chat with Katerina Baker, who blogs every day, works on her novel[s] and WiPs every day, has a personal and professional existence, and is busy, busy, busy all the time. It exhausts me just thinking of what she accomplishes in a day.

At the same time I was having this chat, I was conversing with the person hosting the FB event, Angie Martin. Wife, mom, best-selling author, FB-event planner . . . I have no idea how she does it. It makes me dizzy just thinking of it. Sure, I can spend eighteen hours in front of my computer, but I don't accomplish a fraction of what Angie does.

So this is my shout out to women like these. You are phenomenal role models. Don't stop being your energetic selves. I want to be you when I grow up [though I doubt that's going to happen any time soon, since it hasn't happened yet]. Thank you for your support – and I'm not the only person who is in your collective debt.

But thank you, thank you, thank you, both. You are inspirational. And I promise to still be inspired by you while I'm catching up on my reading in July . . . and I'll toast you with my glass of wine.

Time Out to Play #LuckySeven

I’m taking time out of my currently insane schedule to have a bit of fun.The brilliant Katerina Baker, whose sample from her  romantic suspense WiP The Secret Wife is posted on her blog, tagged me in this game.

The rules:
Go to page 7 or 77 in your current WIP
Go to line 7
Post on your blog the next 7 sentences or 7 lines – as they are!
Tag 7 people, who'll do the same. Okay, must get back to work . . . but here’s my sample from page 77 of my contemporary romance WiP, Public Frenemy , due out in August.  

“Why did he call you the other night?”
“Speed-dial ass call, I gather.”
“He has you on speed dial?”
“That was my reaction, if you recall.”
“I was paying closer attention to other things,” he pointed out, and pointed out.
She laughed. For the first time, a conversation about those days lacked some sting. “I thought we weren’t going to talk about our miserable former lovers.”

###

I am tagging:
Martyn V. Halm
Rosanna Leo
Susanne Matthews
Carrigan Richards
Marisa Oldham
Malia Mallory
Elodie Parkes   
 

Shaking my complacency in Jane’s HEA.

Yesterday, I observed to a friend that there is nothing better than reading a book with which you form a love/hate relationship, where your reactions to it are so visceral, it stays with you forever. All Hallows at Eyre Hall by Luccia Gray is such a book.

In a recent blog-post mention of All Hallows [which was not then published], I observed that it promised to be a “dark and stormy one”. Released just at the beginning of May, it lives up to my prediction.

But a bit about Jane Eyre first. Not merely because of the obvious – that All Hallows is a sequel to that classic – but because Jane Eyre is one of my favourite novels. As in, top five. Easily. So that makes it somewhat sacrosanct. That must be noted, in order that my comments on this new novel are put into perspective.

Jane Eyre is one of the greatest love stories of all time. Of all the tropes it embodies, the best, IMHO, is that Jane is the veritable prototype of sassy h who tames the embittered H. Rochester is the epitome of the Byronic hero, a.k.a.: a villain. At the end of Jane Eyre, Rochester is punished and therefore redeemed, making him, er, a suitable suitor for the pious, passionate, and independent Jane. That “cord of communion” connecting their hearts, as Rochester described, is unbroken.

So. We’ve got a good girl. A dark hero. And a great love between them. HEA, right? Never doubted it.

Hm. And so, to my review:

I was honoured to be one of the beta readers on this novel several months ago, thrilled to be pulled into Jane Eyre’s world again. I observed at the time to Ms. Gray that fans of Jane and Rochester's love – hoping to see the ongoing romance between this strong waif and the man whose desire for her reached out across miles of moor – might not like her reinterpretation, but, damn it, we fans were really going to dissect it! All Hallows at Eyre Hall takes my beloved Jane and shakes the gloss from what I imagined her life with Rochester would be. Set twenty-odd years after the original, Rochester is stripped of his Byronic cloak, leaving the villain exposed. Spewing vitriol from his deathbed, he is a toothless tyrant – physical might lost to age and illness, but still able to wound. He actually trash-talks Jane. He is, however, an unreliable narrator, and I refuse to take this monster’s word on anything.

And Jane . . . I recognise her, and yet do not. Living with Rochester has robbed her of something – her piousness, I suppose. I don’t mean that in an “organised religion” sort of way, because Jane – despising both Brocklehurst and St. John Rivers’ approaches to religion – always sought to balance tenets of faith with her human passions, to ensure that one not overrun the other. And here, she has slid somewhat [in my view], losing some of that balance as she pursues passions. Jane is human – but I can’t write about it anymore. I have to think about it more. Maybe cry a little bit.

I will not forget this novel anytime soon.

The novel is written in rotating first-person POV in the tradition of the epistolary novel without benefit of the epistles [a monumental task], with many characters giving their view of both past and present. Richard Mason reappears, nefarious extortion plan in tow. John Rochester, Jane and Rochester’s son, is introduced. A new character in the form of Annette Mason, the secret daughter of Rochester and Bertha, appears, too, providing fodder both for Mason’s plans and Jane’s final revelations of her husband.

In my opinion, the strongest theme of the original was the search for love, home, and independence, all of which Jane had gained. Now her love for and from Rochester is gone, and her independence and home are under threat from Mason. It is a bittersweet reminder that, for all the fantasy of an HEA, in the real world we’re never done until we’re dead. There is always work to do: on relationships, stability, and, yes, love.

All Hallows is graced with postmodern, postcolonial views that remove the naivety that whitewashed even the darkest moments of Brontë’s original. Ms. Gray does not pull any literary punches in portraying the truth of the world these characters inhabit, filled with bigotry, classism, superstition, and ignorance – and as an educator in Postcolonial English lit, she's got the chops for it. There is a direct nod to Rebecca through Annette’s voice; allusions to Wuthering Heights. . . and dozens of reminders that Ms. Gray has not abandoned her source material in her deconstruction of it. All Hallows has all the gems of the Gothic novel, with secret births, deathbed confessions, morganatic affairs, and hidden letters. The sin-eater scene is delicious.

The novel is the first of a planned trilogy, but there is no nail-biting cliff hanger that will annoy. Jane stands on the brink of adventure, and I hope that Ms. Gray will – if not restore my Jane to me – reform her into something new that I can embrace with equal fervour.

Four stars for being awesome; bumped to five for ruining my life complacency.
_________________
All Hallows at Eyre Hall is available at Amazon.

For Mom's special day, get her a serial killer.

Happy Mother's Day!

So, if the title of this blog post raises eyebrows, I’m not going to make excuses. I finished reading Angie Martin’s Conduit in the last couple of days, and finally finished my review. Go buy the book for your mom. Or yourself.


Conduit cover
But before I get to the review, I want to write a little about author voice. Mine tends to be dry and sarcastic [and some things I thought terribly witty are taken as "Are you serious?" – to which I'm going to state universally: "Probably not."]

Everybody's got a voice, and every voice is different – even when we're writing it down. I'm not going to make a clever allusion to regional accents [oops, maybe I just did], but certainly, authors from similar genre backgrounds have a similar tone. This is a good thing, as readers have an expectation when they pick up a book in “their” genre, even when it's a new or unknown author.

But no matter the genre, every once in a while, someone takes a fresh voice, and sometimes, it works.

With that in mind, we come to my review of Conduit. Which starts with me:  I can’t write sweet. Or sweetly. When I try, the words pour out like thick treacle that would choke a dead cat. Many writers who attempt it suffer the same problem as I. True sweetness, on the other hand, is never heavy or cloying. It’s a dusting of sentiment with a . . . a nugget of goodness, wholesomeness . . . argh. See? I can’t even define it. Yet, I know it when I read it. It is an elusive ability, and few have it.
Ms. Martin’s got it. She’s got it going on.
“Um,” you say hesitantly, “are you sure you’re reviewing the right book? Isn’t Conduit about a serial killer?”
Yep. Sure is. And it’s a good one.
Ms. Martin’s enviable ability to write with that elusive and delicate sweet air leant to Conduit a sick twist of horror that a dryer, darker voice could never have accomplished. For the voice is virtually unaltered in the killer’s scenes, and it plays foil to the maliciousness, the callousness, the sheer evil of him.
The sweetness frosted his scenes with delicious inappropriateness.
Brilliant.
There will be some readers who love the subplot of the romance. Did I? Sure, why not? And readers who will linger over the police-y stuff, intrigued with the details. Did I? Yep, they were pretty good – love that stuff. The psychic bits, the unravelling, all the intricate detail Ms. Martin put into this novel? Good, good, and good. These offhand statements should not be taken as indifference or dislike, because it was all great. But—

But. I couldn’t wait to turn pages to get to the killer’s scenes. Ah, David Noakes! How you entertained me!
His scenes are salaciously graphic; the violence is blunt without lingering over the gore. There’s detachment in the author’s voice here, describing the essence of the action in perfect frugality, allowing the reader to imagine and fill in the scene. And [after getting out of bed to double-check the locks on my door], I did.
Oh, how I loved David’s mind! He admires the clean-living, the self-disciplined – preferring to kill only the worthy. And then rationalises the killing of the unworthy. His psychic abilities allow him to empathise [after a fashion] with his victims – you know, right before he kills them. He is self-congratulatory on his self-diagnosed brilliance. He is a complete egotist. And Ms. Martin wrote him as such without – as many writers are inclined to do in a mistaken attempt to prove omniscience – specifically pointing that out.
Well done.
I know you want to hear a negative – after all, what sort of balanced review lacks comment on both sides of the line? So . . . Um. I can’t think of any. I mean, nothing serious - and by serious, I mean things that pulled me out of the story. That would be a bad thing. Okay, so Emily and Jake’s relationship came through as a bit of “Yar, me soul-matey!” and I’m not much of a subscriber to the soul-mate paradigm. However, I believe it was a conscious choice on Ms. Martin’s part in order to throw harsh light on David’s delusions of his style of HEA with Emily [if I can cross genre boundaries . . . ironically, of course]. It doesn’t matter whether I subscribe to the paradigm or not. It worked. So. Enough said.
The upshot? My utter fascination – and complete appreciation – for Ms. Martin’s revelation of the complex mind of a psychopath kept me endlessly entranced.

And I forgot to write: 5 sweeeeeet stars! [Aside: Conduit is available today for $0.99 at Amazon, as part of Indie World Publishing and Author Services' Mother's Day Reading Blitz. Go buy the book. Read the book. And come back and tell me what you think. I could talk about it all day.]

Blog Hop: Baton Relay

I love plugging my fellow authors – treating someone who wanders by this page to information about books I’ve enjoyed. So when I was invited to this Pass the Baton blog hop, I couldn’t resist.
I was twice tagged for this hop, and so introduce you to two authors:  
The first is Luccia Gray. Luccia blogs about Victorian literature and just published the first volume of her Eyre Hall Trilogy, All Hallows at Eyre Hall . It promises to be a dark and stormy one . . . [I was lucky enough to be a beta reader, so can’t wait to read the final version].       
Learn more about Luccia on her blog, find her on Facebook, and visit her Amazon author page.  

The second author to tag me is Martyn V. Halm. Martyn’s addiction to verisimilitude in fiction has produced the Amsterdam Assassin Series – about which I can’t say enough marvellous things – featuring my current-favourite heroine Katla Sietjes.         Visit Martyn's phenomenal blog here, and take a look-see at his Amazon author page for all of his works. And seriously, read the books.

So, my turn to answer questions! I feel I’ve been writing a lot recently about my writing [LOL], so this will be the last for a long time. [Whew.]

What am I working on?
I’m in the final edits for my next novel, The Value of Vulnerability. This book shouldn’t be taking so long to finish, but my H is a sociopath – or perhaps just borderline – so making him both sociopathic and likeable is a damnable trial. It’s the story of two people who have suffered damages and deal with those damages in different ways: the h, Erin, generally lets things wash over her and moves on with her life; H, Ford, hoards hurts and seeks revenge for slights whenever he can . . . and sees no problem with doing so!
I’m also participating in a very cool Facebook event, Clever Quickies Monday , wherein a writer must construct a unique passage in 140 characters or less. An exercise in economical writing, I’m determined to write an entire short work comprised of these passages, to be shared at some future date on this blog.
How does my work differ from others in this genre?
Well, there’s that sociopathic H. In most romances, the troubled H is rescued by his love for h. In VV, I want him to retain his character and rescue himself. I dislike when sober and/or cold h/Hs turn warm and fuzzy and full of buoyant humour through their HEA. Love does many things, but I don’t believe people at their baseline essence really change. Not often, at any rate. So when Ford “rescues” himself, he’s still going to be a sociopath – which is not inherently a bad thing.
Why do I write what I write?

I fell in love with romances at a young age and, always having wanted to write, chose that genre as my go-to. I love thrillers and suspense, but I don’t write plot-driven things well, and prefer character studies. I also like breaking clichés. [In my last novel, A Bird Without Wings, my h is smarter than her H. You almost never see that – at least, not obviously.] And I love to write escapism. While I enjoy reading books that deal with controversial subjects, I’m not fond of writing them . . .
How does your writing process work?
I’m a pantser – that is, I write without an outline. I imagine a scene and mull it over in my head for a [sometimes long] while, then eventually get it down; hopefully a plot evolves from there. I work in Word, drink copious amounts of coffee and sometimes wine [but cut off my wine consumption at one-point-five glasses . . . there’s a fine line between in vino veritas and blathering with typos].
I usually work on several projects at once; I find it helps keep me fresh, and working on one novel can inspire another that’s stalling. It’s also a handy procrastination tool. I’m a champion procrastinator . . . except no one’s handing out awards for that!
Research is done while I’m writing, for the most part. My characters start doing things I know nothing of, and so I have to stop and check, making sure the things they’re doing are really possible. I love knowing the correct name of things. I hate writing description. I love inverting axioms. I hate rewriting. I love editing. [Yes, these are two different things.]





Introducing . . .


Susanne Lee Matthews is a romance novelist and fellow Ontarian, and I’ve been following her brilliant blog for some time. Check out her Amazon author page and the story of her writing process in this post.          

















Jason P. Crawford’s latest novel is the urban fantasy Chains of Prophecy . Read about his writing process next week on his site.

















Henry Martin – ah, what does one write about Henry? I recently read a review where he was dubbed “Minstrel Martin”. No argument here. I’ve read nearly all of his work, including the dark and brilliant Mad Days of Me trilogy. Discover more about Henry at his Amazon author page, and check out his blog, where he’ll be posting about his writing process soon.

Live Q&A with Roberta Pearce – Summary of Posts

First of all, thank you to everyone who came by to ask questions and chat. And especially thanks to Indie Author Central Group moderators Heather Dowell [author of  Summers & Winters ] and A.S. Oren [author of the Spearwood Academy  series] for hosting the event. Cheers, women!

Secondly, I was excited that several authors dropped by, including Martyn V. Halm and Angie Martin!

The following is a distillation of the Q&A about my novel A Bird Without Wings  and bits about writing in general. I’ve left my answers largely verbatim, but some questions are melded together as they touch on similar subjects.
A Bird Without Wings cover

Q. Who is your favorite character in the book? Why?
A. For me personally, my favourite is Callie herself, naturally. She’s complex, endlessly showing new facets of her odd personality. And ultimately, comes to her own "rescue" emotionally. Q. Who was the hardest to write or annoyed you the most?
A. Mmmm . . . in many ways, it was Callie again, as she is so annoying at times! LOL. Making her sympathetic and likeable was not always an easy task, but readers love her, so I guess I did okay.

Secondary characters are usually the toughest, making them whole people instead of cardboard cut outs. In this regard, Lucius’ family posed many problems, but in the end, I ended up with a charming group of oddballs.
Q. The plot is carefully woven, so I wondered if you planned the plot/novel before you started writing or if you created the characters and let them drive the plot? Or something else?
A. Thank you for that lovely compliment! I had the idea for the Birds when I was just a kid. Independently of that, I imagined a scene of a young woman waiting to go into the big-boss’s office while trying to control her crush on him. As I imagined who that woman would be – she had to be someone very special for the boss I was conceiving behind that closed door – I remembered my long-ago idea of the Birds . . . and Callie and that mystery evolved from there.

So essentially, she drove the plot, for the Birds were just a vague concept. The mystery had to be complicated enough for her to: A. Show her skills and B. Not be solved too easily, despite those skills.

FYI, I’m a pantser, not a plotter, so I’m usually just tying random images together . . . then kill myself editing them into one fluid piece!
Q. What was your inspiration for the plot?
A. That scene of the young woman outside the boss’s office had been hanging out in my head for a couple of years. I imagined it while killing time waiting on a client who was late for a meeting – though the circumstances were different, I tend to write in my head during downtime [as I’m sure most authors do!], taking random situations one finds oneself in and twisting them around to make the everyday interesting. Presto! A scene.

The character of Callie was also inspired by a bit of weariness on my part after reading novels with heroines who weren’t as smart as the hero. I wanted to create the reverse. Lucius is brilliant, but as he notes himself, he’s got nothing on Callie.
Q. Like Callie, did you move around a lot as a child or worried about money?
A. My childhood was quite stable. But not too long ago, I was struggling. Callie’s attic bachelor? I lived in an almost identical space! Actually, I’m a little nostalgic about it.

The problem was that Callie had to know what love was, but be confused about what it meant. And considering the age-old argument about whether it’s love or money that makes the world go ’round . . . LOL. So I imagined the circumstances of how an essential war of attrition by her parents [loving her without actually producing any evidence of it – sheer lip-service] married with extreme [and unnecessary poverty] would mould Callie’s character.

So, not direct experience . . . but touches of it in my own life.
Q. It’s funny how sometimes readers get annoyed with the main character and the writer does too. But hey, the characters are who they are and we can’t make them all perfect or their story would be a lie.
A. ’Zactly! No one wants to read perfect Mary Sues! So long as they are annoying in a realistic way, and not to the point of dislike . . . I regard it as a friendship. Is this someone I’d like in my life, even when he/she annoys the crap outta me from time to time?
Q. I love smart characters, it’s so hard not to make them too condescending, because when someone is smart and they know it, it’s difficult not to show it, and people tend to be uncomfortable around or dislike those who are smarter than them.
A.That really was a challenge! And that inspired Callie’s quiet reticence about being a centre shot. As the character Rachel notes: "As far as brains go, she’s smarter than anyone thinks she is—and we all think she’s brilliant."
Q. Love that line!! Would definitely want her as a friend.
A. :) Me, too!
Q. Did you use baby books/sites to come up with the character names? P.S. I love the name Lucius, Harry Potter nerd.
A. Haha! I never made that connexion! But of course . . .

I do use baby-name sites a lot, especially for minor characters. For me, I have to be careful naming characters, because they become real, and I can’t just arbitrarily change their names later without great anguish! ;)

If I recall correctly, I was watching Gladiator when I came up with "Lucius" – inspired by Commodus’ nephew; and Lucius is half-Italian, so . . . But the funniest thing about the name is that I kept keying it in wrong – over and over: Luscious! That’s how he got his nickname . . . pure accident.
Q. Are you on Wattpad? If so, what do you think of it and how do you utilize it?
A. I’m on Wattpad, but I use it very little for my own work. I have three chapters of my 2013 NaNoWriMo novel posted there – Famous Penultimate Words – but simply don’t have the time to dedicate to Wattpad. I am hoping to finish and publish that novel, though, for fall, before NaNoWriMo starts again in November . . . but I have two others to finish in the meantime.

I think Wattpad is great, and I’ve found a couple of gems there. It’s an awesome venue to hash out your work and get feedback on it before publication, but I choose to go a strict beta-reader route instead. Just a personal decision.
Q. I really admire Callie, she’s determined to live the life she wants, purposefully, not the life she could have drifted into, as her parents and brother seemed to do. I’ve known a lot of young people who just follow their parents’/family’s footsteps without even realising they aren’t putting any effort into their futures. Callie’s message to the reader seems to be: "you can break away and live your own life, it’s up to you." Were you doing that purposefully yourself in writing her character? [This question – and the  two following – were posed by Lucy Gray, soon-to-be published author of All Hallows at Eyre Hall.]
A. Absolutely! I mean, not consciously, but since that is a baseline belief of mine, it’s going to creep in [or splash over!] my writing. I don’t always like characters who “fall into” their dull lives and need an external force to shake them up and out of it.

Q. Do you think reading a novel can/does influence reader’s views of the word in any way?"
A. Yes, all the time. First of all, I’ve never read anything that didn’t teach me something new. And I’ve read all kinds of novels that either changed my world view of a thing, or at least tempered it. I’m pretty open minded, and like to have outside influences that force me to re-evaluate my opinions . . . even if I don’t change my mind, I come to better understanding of myself, and the views I hold. I just read an ARC of The Day I Became a $py , which led me to rethink a lot of my assumptions about the financial collapse a few years back - all couched in a fun and sexy thriller.

Q. Do you think as a writer you have the responsibility of helping/guiding/instructing (not only entertaining) your readers?
A. Hmm . . . that’s tough. My responsibility is not to lie - that is, not to represent as good/factual that which I personally regard as bad/untruthful. In complex [or morally ambiguous] matters, I like to have characters with varied points of view to inspire the reader to consider other sides. Since I’m on the fence about many things, I have difficulty making categorical statements about the right and wrong of things. Sometimes, both sides have valid argument. I’d like readers to consider the other side of their own.
Q. When you create characters, do you start with a name – like Lucius – then work out who and what he is, or do you start with the character and think up a name later?
[This question was posed by Martyn V. Halm, author of a brilliant series that I’m totally in love with, Amsterdam Assassin Series, featuring the amazing heroine Katla Sieltjes. In case you couldn’t figure out from the name of the series, it is not romance . . . though it has romantic elements!]
A. I only once started a story [as yet unfinished] with naming a character before even having an idea of a plot. All other times, the scene comes first, with Character X and Y; or, since I write romance, I frequently use "h" and "H" - as I noted earlier, I think, I find it hard to rename characters once done.

Q. Is your working method different for protagonist/antagonist vs. minor characters?
A. I’d say so, yes. Minor characters are to drive plot, or to reveal pertinent information, or give the protagonist/antagonist someone to bounce off of, revealing their own character. Sometimes I write scenes with these minor players and lose control of it, ultimately coming to the decision that these characters aren’t suited to this conversation/action . . . which is a good thing, as it demonstrates to me that they are more than my tools – if they’re behaving independently of me, they’ve become real. Q.There are cultures where children aren’t named until they reach their second or third year, because the name has to be part of their character and you might inadvertently give a child the ‘wrong’ name if you decide too early. Do you think it works that way with characters too? If you name them before you have fleshed them out, that they might have the ‘wrong’ name?
A. Sure! That’s why I hesitate before I commit . . . decisions are frequently made with wine . . .

But the "wrong name" could work ironically. I’d like to do that sometime, name a character "Rockford Steel" or something, and make him a soft-bellied, short, balding accountant with Coke-bottle-bottom glasses. I have a habit of naming secondary characters "Dave", "Steve", etc. Nothing against those names – there’s a reason they’re popular in the real world: they’re strong and identifiable.

A good site for picking appropriate names is the Social Security site, which lists most popular registered baby names by year – so, you’ll know if your h is a 30ish North American, naming her "Jennifer" is demographically reasonable, while naming her "Beyoncé" is less so!
Q.I wanted ask about your book covers. They are very unique and fun... did you make those yourself or do you have a designer? What is the inspiration for them? [This question was posed by Angie Martin, whose new novel  Conduit  has a gorgeous cover . . . and is on my TBR!]

A. Thanks for liking my covers. People either like or hate them . . . And yes, they’re all mine, and all my responsibility! LOL.

Theoretically, as I write romance, I should have gone with the naked-torso look [which admittedly is really frickin’ hot]! But when I thought about it, I realized that I can’t personally tell one cover from another in the genre: “Did I read this one? I remember those abs . . . Oh, same abs as the others.” I wanted something to stand out.

So I thought about minimalism and branding and strong colours —
Q. As an esthetic, I think your covers have a lot with older movie posters.
A. I looked at a lot of noir movie posters [I’m a fan of film noir] –
Q. I really love noir... maybe that’s why they speak to me so much! :)

A. In a future work, I actually draw comparisons between the h and Gilda - the epitome [to me] of American noir!] In specific research on minimalism, I found a site where an artist had taken big-name contemporary movies and made simple vector-graphic posters depicting the essence of the central plot. I ran some ideas past some designer friends [who are still split evenly on love/hate of my ultimate design decision], and ended up with my current brand.
Q. I think you really have the branding down! It makes your books very recognizable as your books and that’s a great thing in the current Indie marketplace. As you said, all abs start looking alike after a while . . and sometimes they really are the same abs! I don’t know why people would hate [your covers], except that they are outside the box. But that’s what makes me love them . . . they are unique, quirky, and fun. I think that’s so smart of you to do the covers this way.
A.I think once I have a couple more books out, they’ll stand apart as a definite statement, easily recognisable.
Q. I must admit, I had mixed feelings about your covers at first, but they sort of “grow on you”. They’re certainly very distinctive.
A. From your keyboard to someone’s ears . . . or eyes!

Q.I’ve read two of your novels and I love your writing. I found the voices of your characters very unique and fresh. How do you make them so authentic? Are any of your characters based on actual people? [This question was posed by Katerina Baker, soon-to-be published author of  The Day I Became a $py , that I cited in an earlier answer.]
A. Oh, thank you! No character is really based on anyone specific, but [confession time] I had a stint as a bartender once, and found endless inspiration for, um, quirkiness in that world. Mostly, though, my characters embody some part of me, of attitudes I have or have once held. Or of situations in which I’ve found myself - or narrowly avoided, or wished I hadn’t! The writing process is like stripping down what I think to the molecular structure . . . and then rethinking it. So if that lends it freshness, I’m most glad of it!
Q.I think it’s cool how authors pay so much mind to a character’s name and sometimes fall for them in a sense.
A. I agree. We do fall for them. In a way, we have to fall for them, in order to care enough to nurture them and draw them out. And if we don’t love them, how can our reader be expected to? Not that readers haveto feel anything at all for our brilliance [!], but at least an author has a shot at it if he/she loves his/her creation.

I’ve read many books where I didn’t like the MC[s], but other readers did, and obviously the author did, too. I respect that every time, even if I’m not coming along for the ride. And just because I don’t like thischaracter the author created, doesn’t mean I won’t like the next . . . and the author’s love will bring me back to check out the next creation.
Q. Do you name all your characters, Roberta? Or will you leave some orphaned without a name?
A. Most everyone who gets a line gets a name, for the most part, but I rarely deal with a cast of thousands as some writers do [mostly through sheer laziness], so it’s not difficult to come up with a handful of names. My next novel, The Value of Vulnerability, has a couple of mooks who don’t merit a name, and in the final analysis, I’ll end up identifying them with simple monikers.

I reserve cool names for my MCs. Giving too cool a name to secondary or tertiary characters flags them as important, running the risk of confusing the reader with a red herring. [End Q&A] There were also some asides in conversation, about Tycho Brahe and Thelonious Monk and PBS . . . It was an awesome time, and again, thank you, everyone, who made it such a success! Please check out visiting authors’ works on Goodreads, look for them on social media, and don’t forget – please write reviews! They are much appreciated, whether short, long, neutral, or ecstatic!

Formal Style – Let’s eat Grandma

I recently opened and closed a book without coming anywhere near the The End because of several issues, but mostly it was this error that stopped me: In dialogue, the missing comma before the name of the addressed.

I see it all the time. You likely see it all the time, and probably don’t get your knickers in such a twist as I do. And it doesn’t annoy me in the day-to-day, when some friend or business acquaintance shoots off an email to me: Hi Roberta. I always write back though: Hi, X. I’m not correcting the sender at all – merely writing it the way it should be written so I [hopefully] don’t make the error in my novels.

I tripped across the phrase “Let’s eat Grandma” a couple years back [though it might have been “Grandpa” in that instance] in an Internet meme about how commas can save lives. I thought it hilarious . . . but since, I’ve seen it all too often in published works.

The comma must always be there. No matter if it’s clear who the addressed is. No matter if it saves a life or not. Must have comma.

Maybe the trend away from the comma in this case is because of a misinterpretation that commas are only used as “pauses”; that you stick them in a sentence where you would naturally take a breath. That’s not a bad guideline for general comma use, but it isn’t the sole purpose. As the title of this blog entry alludes, direct address commas ensure there is no ambiguity.There are three types of direct address: Beginning, middle, and end. Samples of each, respectively:

“Bob, thank you for . . .”
“I think, Bob, we should . . .”
“See you soon, Bob.”

Here are more examples, incorrect first; corrected following:Incorrect:

“Hello Bob.”
“Hello Sue honey.”
“Show me dear Carol.” [If it is a demand to be shown dear Carol, it’s right. Otherwise, uh uh.]
“Yes sir.”
“I called my sister Bob.” [You did? Is your sister’s name “Bob”?]
“I called my sister Carol.” [This may or may not be wrong, depending on if there was indeed a call placed to someone’s sister named Carol. But if Carol’s the one being addressed, it’s wrong.]
“I was thinking Sue that we should go shopping.” [See how it can get mangled without those commas!]
“Happy birthday Bob.” [Just . . . no.]

Correct: “Hello, Bob.”
“Hello, Sue honey.” [“Honey” is adjectival, and thus included with her name.]
“Show me, dear Carol.” [“Dear” is adjectival; a letter salutation would be “Dear Carol:”.]
“Yes, sir.”
“I called my sister, Bob.”
“I called my sister, Carol.” [If this is spoken to Carol; if there was a call placed to sister Carol, it would be: “I called my sister Carol.” I noted it above, but it's worth two mentions.]
“I was thinking, Sue, that we should go shopping.”
“Happy birthday, Bob.”

I wish I could say this error was limited to self-pubs. Actually, it has become such a pervasive error that it even pops up in professionally edited works from established publishing houses. Rest assured, I’m not one of those people who don’t like change. I love the way the English language constantly grows and evolves. I don’t mind that some words become obsolete. I don’t mind that the serial [or Oxford] comma is used less and less [though there are times it must be used . . . but that’s for a different post].But the direct address comma can’t go anywhere. It might not save lives, but it will save your writing from at least that form of ambiguity. And while the occasional neglect of the rule is forgivable [who doesn’t make errors?], I’ve pretty much decided that I won’t be reading any more books that neglect the rule wholesale.

So, let’s eat, Grandma.This post was originally published on my Goodreads blog.

Formal Style – Apostrophes

What is formal style? In an Internet search, it was “longer sentences” and “more complex vocabulary”. Well, it’s not. That’s style. Writing style, more specifically. Formal style could be described as the equivalent of etiquette. But rather than what fork to use, it’s the correct use of punctuation and word case: title/sentence/camel case, how footnotes/endnotes are constructed, how dialogue tags are attached, the sort of dash used, how ellipses are inserted, where italics are used rather than quotes . . . ad nauseam. I am a stickler for formal style. That doesn’t mean I don’t make formal style errors [though I pretend I make none. Uh uh, no way, no how]. Ahem. Or should that be Amen?

Maybe you’ll think: “Roberta, that is not about writing. That is not a writing tip.”

Ah, but it is.

In an earlier post, I wrote that there were no rules, and modified that with “of course, there are rules.” The goal of every author is to keep the reader turning pages. That’s how authors get loyal fans, get chatter about their books, get reviews written. So, based on that goal, here’s my:

Cardinal Rule #1 –Anything that pulls a reader out of the story is a bad thing.

Pulled out of a story is being distracted. And distracting your reader is something to be avoided at all costs. A distracted reader is missing your clever words. Notices other bad things that they otherwise would have ignored. Gets annoyed at you, doesn’t finish the book, doesn’t write a review, and says only negative things.
In this age of instant gratification and the quick scan of opening-chapter sampling to assess and reject/accept a book under consideration for purchase, an author can’t afford a single error that distracts. That’s it. No excuses about how the writing/story/characters are really fantastic and readers should be looking beyond sloppy formal style for the heart of your work.

That’s not going to fly.

Readers deserve better. They’re putting out their money for your work, taking the time and energy to read your work, and you want them to work harder? Don’t think so.

Today’s observation on formal style is about apostrophes. Not “its” vs. “it’s” or “they’re, their, there” – that’s grammar. I’m writing about a particular pet peeve that will have many who read this crossing/rolling their eyes, saying: “Really, Roberta? This is an issue for you? Pedantic idiot.”Maybe. But I’m a reader buying your books, so my opinion counts. And I hate to have to say it, but an open quote is not the same thing as an apostrophe, as much as a period is not the same thing as a comma, as italics are not the same thing as boldface, a cat is not a dog, a shoehorn is not a power drill, and the word “wrong” is in no way the word “right”.

So, my formal-style apostrophe issue: I often see abbreviated words [about vs. ’bout; them vs. ’em; nineteen-seventies vs. ’seventies] where the apostrophe is actually an open single quote: ‘bout; ‘em; ‘seventies.
 
Don’t see the difference? Hm. I do. And it drives me wild. Does it take effort while you’re keying your eternal novel into Word to make sure you have the right punctuation? A tiny bit; sure. Is it worth it? That’s up to you. And ultimately, your reader - a.k.a., your customer.

This post was originally published on my Goodreads blog.

Formal Style – Apostrophes

What is formal style? In an Internet search, it was “longer sentences” and “more complex vocabulary”. Well, it’s not. That’s style. Writing style, more specifically.

Formal style could be described as the equivalent of etiquette. But rather than what fork to use, it’s the correct use of punctuation and word case: title/sentence/camel case, how footnotes/endnotes are constructed, how dialogue tags are attached, the sort of dash used, how ellipses are inserted, where italics are used rather than quotes . . . ad nauseam. I am a stickler for formal style. That doesn’t mean I don’t make formal style errors [though I pretend I make none. Uh uh, no way, no how]. Ahem. Or should that be amen?

Maybe you’ll think: “Roberta, that is not about writing. That is not a writing tip.”

Ah, but it is.

In an earlier post, I wrote that there were no rules, and modified that with “of course, there are rules.” The goal of every author is to keep the reader turning pages. That’s how authors get loyal fans, get chatter about their books, get reviews written. So, based on that goal, here’s my:

Cardinal Rule #1 –

Anything that pulls a reader out of the story is a bad thing.

Pulled out of a story is being distracted. And distracting your reader is something to be avoided at all costs. A distracted reader is missing your clever words. Notices other bad things that they otherwise would have ignored. Gets annoyed at you, doesn’t finish the book, doesn’t write a review, and says only negative things.

In this age of instant gratification and the quick scan of opening-chapter sampling to assess and reject/accept a book under consideration for purchase, an author can’t afford a single error that distracts. That’s it. No excuses about how the writing/story/characters are really fantastic and readers should be looking beyond sloppy formal style for the heart of your work.

That’s not going to fly.

Readers deserve better. They’re putting out their money for your work, taking the time and energy to read your work, and you want them to work harder? Don’t think so.

Today’s observation on formal style is about apostrophes. Not “its” vs. “it’s” or “they’re, their, there” – that’s grammar. I’m writing about a particular pet peeve that will have many who read this crossing/rolling their eyes, saying: “Really, Roberta? This is an issue for you? Pedantic idiot.”

Maybe. But I’m a reader buying your books, so my opinion counts. And I hate to have to say it, but an open quote is not the same thing as an apostrophe, as much as a period is not the same thing as a comma, as italics are not the same thing as boldface, a cat is not a dog, a shoehorn is not a power drill, and the word “wrong” is in no way the word “right”.

So, my formal-style apostrophe issue: I often see abbreviated words [about vs. ’bout; them vs. ’em; nineteen-seventies vs. ’seventies] where the apostrophe is actually an open single quote: ‘bout; ‘em; ‘seventies.

Don’t see the difference? Hm. I do. And it drives me wild. Does it take effort while you’re keying your eternal novel into Word to make sure you have the right punctuation? A tiny bit; sure. Is it worth it? That’s up to you. And ultimately, your reader - a.k.a., your customer.

My Writing Process

Michaela Miles logo
courtesy www.michaelamiles.com

I’ve been invited to answer a few questions about my writing process by the inimitable author/blogger Michaela Miles! This particular blog hop is all about authors offering others a glimpse into their work, their work schedules, and perhaps their innermost thoughts.

Click hereto find out how she does it! And be sure to explore her blog for her many gems of observation, reviews, and more!  Q. What am I working on?

The Value of Vulnerability
cover
I’m still editing my latest novel The Value of Vulnerability, a purely character-driven work about how people deal with personal damage – and in the case of my H, rather harshly! So naturally he needs an h who shows him better ways to deal. I’m hoping to have this to beta readers in a couple of days.

Public Frenemy coverI’ll be following that novel with Public Frenemy, a story of two people trying to learn how to love again without fear, ultimately determining that it takes courage and self-confidence. Slated for April 2014 release, it’s probably going to be May instead. Q. How does my work differ from others of its genre?


For Those Who Wait
coverMy first novel, For Those Who Wait, is actually a nod to Harlequin Presents style – that genre that I love so well and inspired me to write romance in the first place. But within it, I broke some clichés, which was both hard and satisfying [That’s what she said!]. A Bird Without Wings
coverMy second novel, A Bird Without Wings is written around a h who is smarter than her H! Talk about breaking clichés! Considering the sophistication and education of the average romance reader, I thought it would be rewarding to read such a character. She’s complex and compelling. I love her. And so do the readers who’ve met her.

The upshot? I’m not out to reinvent the genre – it’s great as-is. But it’s fun for both me and the reader to invert tropes and dispense with stereotypes, so I do so as often as possible.Q. Why do I write what I do?

Hmm . . . I write contemporary romance because I find the entire question of what makes a relationship work [independent of the ultimate conclusion of an HEA!] endlessly intriguing. What makes two people want to permanently join forces through their lives? How can one person rely on another to that degree? Still single, you can see how that would fascinate me!Q. How does your writing process work?

I see a scene in my head. I write dialogue in my head. I create a new Word doc and get down as much of it as I can – frequently naming the characters “H” and “h”. Then I ignore it for weeks - sometimes months. Eventually, I drag it out and start poking at it, see what I can make of it, keying in little ideas that occur about backstory, characterisation, and conflict.I’m a pantser who thinks she’s a plotter. This time, I’m going to write an outline! Never happens. Sometimes to get things moving, I’ll write whole stream-of-consciousness passages to help me get where I want to go. The characters – if strong enough – will write their own story.

Oh, and I drink loads of coffee. Sometimes wine – but there’s a fine line in creativity with wine . . . one point five glasses is my cut off before I lose momentum and focus!Who will we meet next week?

Check out these authors and their processes:Renea Mason
Noelle Clark
Anne LangeAnd Lan LLP will be posting her processes on blog soon.

This post was originally published on my Goodreads blog.