Ever have the phone ring right when you're in the middle of writing an inspired passage? Me, too. The benefits of caller ID helps decide if you're going to pick up the phone or let it go to voicemail. Telemarketers usually hang up when the voicemail starts up. (I really do not like telemarketing and in spite of registering with the "NationalDoNotCall List", they still call - usually during the dinner and national news hours.)
So yesterday, when in the middle of the current novel (editing and polishing and wondering "What was I thinking!) the phone on the desk rings. "Caller Unknown. Location Unknown." Forget it, would be my normal reaction, but for some reason, I picked up the receiver and said, "Hello."
Good news sometimes arrives from "Caller Unknown" I have decided. Because that one caller was the new President of the Maine Writers and Publishers Alliance. He was calling to let me know I have been named the recipient of the 2010 Writers Retreat Scholarship - and there is only one. YabaDabaDo!
Needless to say, no more work on the novel. I just wasn't in a "killer mode."
Maybe I should answer "Caller Unknown" calls more often. No, I think yesterday was just an exceptional day. We all need them every once in a while.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
MWA UNIVERSITY IN BETHESDA, MD
The pilot program for MWA University (otherwise known as MWAU) was held at The Writers' Center on Walsh Street Saturday, August 14. Co-sponsored by MWA's national Board of Directors and the Mid-Atlantic MWA Chapter, I'm so pleased I was at the First MWAU. THIS was a learning experience unlike typical writers' conferences.
The presenters (and teachers) were Jess Lourey (author of Murder-by-the Month mysteries and a tenured professor of English and sociology at a two-year Minnesota college) who spoke on After The Idea. Great handouts, too.
Next was Hallie Ephron (author of psychologoical suspense Never Tell a Lie, crime fiction book reviewer for the Boston Globe, and author of the Edgar-nominated Writing and Selling Your Mystery Novel), spoke on Dramatic Structure & Plot.
The final morning presenter was Daniel Stashower who is a two-time Edgar award winner, and a recipient of the Raymond Chandler Fulbright Fellowship in Detective and Crime Fiction Writing. Dan's presentation on Setting & Description was not only beneficial, but his humor and comparative examples kept everyone involved.
After a one-hour lunch break, the afternoon session began with Donna Andrews talking about Character & Dialogue. Donna is the award-winning NYT bestselling author of sixteen novels and founding member of the Mid-Atlantic chapter of MWA.
Reed Farrel Coleman got everyone involved with his topic of Writing as Re-Writing. It was nice to hear Reed discuss his person process of dealing with writing and editing as a continuing process. Reed has been twice nominated for the Edgar (MWA's top annual honor) and three-time winner of the Shamus Award. Reed is an adjunct professor of English at Hofstra University.
The last presenter was Hank Phillippi Ryan, a Boston TV reporter who has won 26 Emmys for her investigative jurnalism. She has also been the winner of two Agatha Awards in addition to being nominated for the Anthony, Agatha and Macavity. Hank (a woman for those unfamiliar with her work) spoke on The Writing Life - a perfect closing for the day's program. One might think it difficult to be the last speaker at such an event, but Hank got everyone's attention from the "get-go" by passing out miniature chocolate candies. Her presentation was just as encouraging and energizing.
Anyone who hears of a MWAU being held in their area should plan to attend. At $50. for MWA members and non-members alike, it was a bargain.
The presenters (and teachers) were Jess Lourey (author of Murder-by-the Month mysteries and a tenured professor of English and sociology at a two-year Minnesota college) who spoke on After The Idea. Great handouts, too.
Next was Hallie Ephron (author of psychologoical suspense Never Tell a Lie, crime fiction book reviewer for the Boston Globe, and author of the Edgar-nominated Writing and Selling Your Mystery Novel), spoke on Dramatic Structure & Plot.
The final morning presenter was Daniel Stashower who is a two-time Edgar award winner, and a recipient of the Raymond Chandler Fulbright Fellowship in Detective and Crime Fiction Writing. Dan's presentation on Setting & Description was not only beneficial, but his humor and comparative examples kept everyone involved.
After a one-hour lunch break, the afternoon session began with Donna Andrews talking about Character & Dialogue. Donna is the award-winning NYT bestselling author of sixteen novels and founding member of the Mid-Atlantic chapter of MWA.
Reed Farrel Coleman got everyone involved with his topic of Writing as Re-Writing. It was nice to hear Reed discuss his person process of dealing with writing and editing as a continuing process. Reed has been twice nominated for the Edgar (MWA's top annual honor) and three-time winner of the Shamus Award. Reed is an adjunct professor of English at Hofstra University.
The last presenter was Hank Phillippi Ryan, a Boston TV reporter who has won 26 Emmys for her investigative jurnalism. She has also been the winner of two Agatha Awards in addition to being nominated for the Anthony, Agatha and Macavity. Hank (a woman for those unfamiliar with her work) spoke on The Writing Life - a perfect closing for the day's program. One might think it difficult to be the last speaker at such an event, but Hank got everyone's attention from the "get-go" by passing out miniature chocolate candies. Her presentation was just as encouraging and energizing.
Anyone who hears of a MWAU being held in their area should plan to attend. At $50. for MWA members and non-members alike, it was a bargain.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
OFF TO THE MWA UNIVERSITY
Today will be one of travel to Portland, Maine in preparation of flying tomorrow. This coming Saturday will be the MWA University in Bethesda, MD. Looking forward to the sessions, even if not the projected thunderstorms.
Tonight, in Portland, in the grand 35 years celebration of the Maine Writers and Publishers Alliance. Dinner with published authors in various restaurants followed by a Champagne and desert at the Portland Public Library and a dance. Congrats to MAPA and the many people who have made the organization (and tomorrow night's events) possible.
Tonight, in Portland, in the grand 35 years celebration of the Maine Writers and Publishers Alliance. Dinner with published authors in various restaurants followed by a Champagne and desert at the Portland Public Library and a dance. Congrats to MAPA and the many people who have made the organization (and tomorrow night's events) possible.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
A NETWORK FOR MYSTERY WRITERS AND READERS
Check out www.Crimespace.com for a network of mystery, crime, thriller and suspense writers, readers and just fans. You can make "friends", ask questions, and read/comment of blogs. It's free - and a good source.
I'll be at a Mystery Writers of America (MWA) learning experience this coming weekend. Blogs resume here next week.
I'll be at a Mystery Writers of America (MWA) learning experience this coming weekend. Blogs resume here next week.
Monday, August 2, 2010
NOVELS CAN BE BASED ON THE IRONIES OF LABELS, IDEAS & PHRASES
This writer has often wondered at the irony of the conflict inherent in certain pat phrases we become accustomed to over time. Phrases like "Law and Order", "Peace Officers/Keeping the Peace and Law Enforcement", "Corrections and Rehabilitation" just for a few. Think about it.
The LAW is constant changing. ORDER is rather static. Maintaining Law and Order is not always compatible. It is somewhat like the age-old story of "the haves and the have-nots". Those who "have" will certainly want their version of order preserved. Those who considered themselves dis-enfranchised will be more inclined to want their version of order changed. The process of maintaining or changing is through both the evolution of the law and whatever other factors will generate more (goods, money, power, etc.) to the "have-nots", which by its very nature means less will be in the hands of the "haves." Sometimes that change is achieved peacefully through negotiation and compromise. Other times it is through rebellion and revolution. Somewhere, in the midst of that change (by whichever means) is that group of people charged with enforcing the law (and which law is often the question), - maintaining order (and whose order is the often question), - keeping the peace (among all of the people or only some is the question) without any question as to where they, as individuals, stand on the issue(s). And what if they, as individuals, feel conflict with their assigned duty?
As to the phrase "Corrections and Rehabilitation" - now there is an interesting idea. I did not say reality because there is little rehabilitation in the idea of corrections. As expensive as "corrections" is ($40,000+/annually per inmate in many state institutions), rehabilitation in the short-term is more. Inmates who would be eligible for rehabilitation programs are usually working in the institution, thereby reducing the cost of running the institution. If these same inmates were in rehab programs, that work might well have to be done by paid labor. On the other hand, rehabilitation is less expensive in the long-term because these individuals stand a better chance of not re-offending, of not coming back to prison.
Unfortunately, rehabilitation is not considered punishment in the minds of most voters. So while the title and label and department names may include the idea of changing behavior through rehabilitation, budgets are not paid with ideas. They are paid with voters' tax dollars. And campaigns are often waged on Law and Order promises. From such irony are interesting (and sometimes great) novels written.
The LAW is constant changing. ORDER is rather static. Maintaining Law and Order is not always compatible. It is somewhat like the age-old story of "the haves and the have-nots". Those who "have" will certainly want their version of order preserved. Those who considered themselves dis-enfranchised will be more inclined to want their version of order changed. The process of maintaining or changing is through both the evolution of the law and whatever other factors will generate more (goods, money, power, etc.) to the "have-nots", which by its very nature means less will be in the hands of the "haves." Sometimes that change is achieved peacefully through negotiation and compromise. Other times it is through rebellion and revolution. Somewhere, in the midst of that change (by whichever means) is that group of people charged with enforcing the law (and which law is often the question), - maintaining order (and whose order is the often question), - keeping the peace (among all of the people or only some is the question) without any question as to where they, as individuals, stand on the issue(s). And what if they, as individuals, feel conflict with their assigned duty?
As to the phrase "Corrections and Rehabilitation" - now there is an interesting idea. I did not say reality because there is little rehabilitation in the idea of corrections. As expensive as "corrections" is ($40,000+/annually per inmate in many state institutions), rehabilitation in the short-term is more. Inmates who would be eligible for rehabilitation programs are usually working in the institution, thereby reducing the cost of running the institution. If these same inmates were in rehab programs, that work might well have to be done by paid labor. On the other hand, rehabilitation is less expensive in the long-term because these individuals stand a better chance of not re-offending, of not coming back to prison.
Unfortunately, rehabilitation is not considered punishment in the minds of most voters. So while the title and label and department names may include the idea of changing behavior through rehabilitation, budgets are not paid with ideas. They are paid with voters' tax dollars. And campaigns are often waged on Law and Order promises. From such irony are interesting (and sometimes great) novels written.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
WRITING FOR ENTERTAINMENT & EDUCATING THE READER
I'm a member of several national writers organizations that specialize in the mystery genre. Of course many of the members write related genres - thrillers, suspense and sometimes even romance - because every life needs a little romance. These organizations regularly put out newsletters which is wonderful because they contain valuable information in articles containing information that often helps us write better or overcome obstacles in this business.
Several years ago, one of these organizations - I think it was Sisters in Crime (primarily women writers of crime-related books) - had an article in one of their newsletters regarding the responsibility writers have in writing stories that solve the crime in a factually correct manner - meaning the writer doesn't use some kind of hocus pocus that couldn't really work. Now if the book is some kind of science fiction set in the year 2100, who knows - maybe hocus pocus will work. But if the setting is 1980, the writer has to use a method that would have been available at that time and since DNA wasn't.... Another example is to understand that not all law enforcement departments have all the whiz-bang, high-tech equipment. Sometimes a microscope and a scapel are the basic forensic tools. Understand what I'm saying here?
An example was offered of a real life trial where the case involved a man being tried for homicide - the killing of another. The prosecutor had extensive evidence to prove the case against the defendant - the gun, the bullet from the body matched the gun owned by the defendant, the gun was found at the murder scene, the defendant's fingerprints were on the gun and at the murder scene, the victim's blood was found on some of the defendant's clothing, the defendant had both a motive and an opportunity.
But the jury's verdict came back 11-1 with 11 voting Guilty and one lone hold-out for Not Guilty. When the lone hold-out was finally asked Why she refused to vote Guilty, her answer was - "They didn't find the defendant's fingerprint on the bullet" meaning the bullet inside the victim. When she was pressed as to why she expected a fingerprint to have been found on that particular bullet, she is reported to have said she had seen it on the television program, CSI. Unreal. And I do mean - Un-Real.
Television is NOT real life. Television is "entertainment." Where else is a crime committed, discovered, investigated and solved and sometimes ("Law and Order") prosecuted and a verdict received in 40 minutes or less - because we do have to allow plenty of time for the never-ending commercials. The answer is NoWhere.
Writers have a far more responsible job to the public. We write to entertain, of course. Otherwise we would never get published. Heck, sometimes we entertain and still don't get published. But nonetheless, we have the responsibility to try to educate our readers to what the "reality" of the "system" is. Otherwise there won't be any system and far less chance of justice if one of our readers ever has the privilege of becoming a Juror some day. (And I have.) For the sake of what we call the Justice System, we have to try to ensure those who do sit on juries in this country are at least not expecting to be "entertained.
Several years ago, one of these organizations - I think it was Sisters in Crime (primarily women writers of crime-related books) - had an article in one of their newsletters regarding the responsibility writers have in writing stories that solve the crime in a factually correct manner - meaning the writer doesn't use some kind of hocus pocus that couldn't really work. Now if the book is some kind of science fiction set in the year 2100, who knows - maybe hocus pocus will work. But if the setting is 1980, the writer has to use a method that would have been available at that time and since DNA wasn't.... Another example is to understand that not all law enforcement departments have all the whiz-bang, high-tech equipment. Sometimes a microscope and a scapel are the basic forensic tools. Understand what I'm saying here?
An example was offered of a real life trial where the case involved a man being tried for homicide - the killing of another. The prosecutor had extensive evidence to prove the case against the defendant - the gun, the bullet from the body matched the gun owned by the defendant, the gun was found at the murder scene, the defendant's fingerprints were on the gun and at the murder scene, the victim's blood was found on some of the defendant's clothing, the defendant had both a motive and an opportunity.
But the jury's verdict came back 11-1 with 11 voting Guilty and one lone hold-out for Not Guilty. When the lone hold-out was finally asked Why she refused to vote Guilty, her answer was - "They didn't find the defendant's fingerprint on the bullet" meaning the bullet inside the victim. When she was pressed as to why she expected a fingerprint to have been found on that particular bullet, she is reported to have said she had seen it on the television program, CSI. Unreal. And I do mean - Un-Real.
Television is NOT real life. Television is "entertainment." Where else is a crime committed, discovered, investigated and solved and sometimes ("Law and Order") prosecuted and a verdict received in 40 minutes or less - because we do have to allow plenty of time for the never-ending commercials. The answer is NoWhere.
Writers have a far more responsible job to the public. We write to entertain, of course. Otherwise we would never get published. Heck, sometimes we entertain and still don't get published. But nonetheless, we have the responsibility to try to educate our readers to what the "reality" of the "system" is. Otherwise there won't be any system and far less chance of justice if one of our readers ever has the privilege of becoming a Juror some day. (And I have.) For the sake of what we call the Justice System, we have to try to ensure those who do sit on juries in this country are at least not expecting to be "entertained.
Monday, July 26, 2010
FIGHTING FOR YOUR STORY
As if writing your story weren't hard enough - finding a plot, developing your characters, making the story flow, building the tension, finding the hooks, developing the threads without giving away too much of the secrets, pulling it all together at the end with a sense of "of course" and satisfaction - it seems one must often be prepared to fight for it after the fact. A friend of mine, another writer, has written a marvelous novel. Seems a potential agent thinks its about 30,000 words too long. That may be, considering the concerns of the publishing business these days. Of course there are readers like me who actually look for the thicker books to read, and are willing to pay the extra dollars for them, but maybe we are too few or something.
Anyway, to get back to my friend, she is now in the throes of trying to cut out words and passages without losing the color and meat of her story. Because it's not enough to leave just the skeleton. There has to be the growth, and the passion and the tricky intrigue. For my friend's book, there are such marvelous details and color, the story wouldn't be the same without them. Sometimes a writer can make magic with words, transporting the reader to places and times they only thought they knew or previously imagined.
My friend is working on the task before her and I know she will succeed. But I loved her response at one suggestion where a cut could be made. "I will fight for that section. It's where she (her protagonist) becomes the winner in her own race."
Writers need to fight for their own races and the winning. Sometimes that's the real reason, maybe the only reason, for writing hours and hours into the dark of the night with only the moon and stars for company.
Anyway, to get back to my friend, she is now in the throes of trying to cut out words and passages without losing the color and meat of her story. Because it's not enough to leave just the skeleton. There has to be the growth, and the passion and the tricky intrigue. For my friend's book, there are such marvelous details and color, the story wouldn't be the same without them. Sometimes a writer can make magic with words, transporting the reader to places and times they only thought they knew or previously imagined.
My friend is working on the task before her and I know she will succeed. But I loved her response at one suggestion where a cut could be made. "I will fight for that section. It's where she (her protagonist) becomes the winner in her own race."
Writers need to fight for their own races and the winning. Sometimes that's the real reason, maybe the only reason, for writing hours and hours into the dark of the night with only the moon and stars for company.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
