Occasionally I drop in and read a blog by a guy called Scott Young. Can't remember how I found him, but he often says things that strike a chord, even if they're nothing to do with writing. Recently, he posted on feel-good tasks - the ones you do that make you feel like you're achieving something, when you're not - you're just finding a happier way to procrastinate. As he says, if you want to get fit, don't buy new running shoes, get out there and do some running! He also gives examples like people who want to lose weight that spend ages comparing calories and fat content and additives for brands of cream cheese instead of just buying salad.
You might think this sounds obvious and boring, and what's wrong with some fun in our daily choices? But when we continually go for the "light" option, we end up doing very little writing. Some of the light options might be:
* doing more research to get those few extra facts
* arranging to meet a writer friend for coffee to re-inspire each other
* reading another how-to writing book
* going for a walk to stretch your body from the computer
* going on the internet to find out some vital information for your story that could actually wait
* writing a blog because you think it gets you in the mood for writing
What all of these things (and I'm sure you can add your own) do is take you away from what you should be doing - writing. That means turning off the TV, sitting down and typing or writing for a good length of time. A good enough length that you end up with 1000 or 2000 words or more. When was the last time you thought about your writing goals for this year? February? Or last week? If you reviewed your goals, would you find that you had produced the amount of words you aimed for? Or have you achieved a lot of little feel-good things that haven't advanced your novel more than a chapter or two - in eight months!
Young says: "The problem with feel-good tasks is that they often appear productive. It’s only when you really examine them that you realize they aren’t either necessary or directly helpful to your goal." Too often, we have big lists of things to do (I'm guilty of this!) that are nothing to do with writing. We think they have to be done, and probably they do, but when they encroach onto or take over your writing time, then maybe you need to honestly evaluate how vital and necessary they really are. I've started making two lists. One is totally about writing, and it comes first. Then when I have time (like those dead gaps in the late afternoon before dinner, perhaps) I get stuck into the other list - the one full of small stuff that isn't really so important.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
Distractions From Writing
Today, a blog, a newsletter and my own life all collided in one place - and it made me think yet again about why, when we call ourselves writers, have projects on the go, deadlines looming, still we faff about and don't write. First was the blog - Kristi Holl has written two insightful posts about what fuels your writing, what motivates you to sit down and put words on the page. Deadlines are great, but if you've been writing for a while and had some stuff published, then that particular carrot (seeing your work in print) is not so important anymore.
So what do you replace it with? Then I read Randy Ingermanson's newsletter that turns up in my InBox every month. He talks about advanced fiction writing techniques, and something he said today struck a chord: "I've heard from a lot of writers on this, and the strong impression I've gotten is that most writers, most days, don't feel like writing. That's as true of professional novelists as it is of the newest novices." (You can sign up for his free newsletter here.)
That made me feel better. In fact, it almost gave me a really good excuse for not writing. I had a dozen distractions today, things I considered important to accomplish. One was part of my third job these days (building a house - I've long given up considering it a small extra!). Light fittings. I drove all over my area looking yet again at light fittings. Nobody has what I want for a reasonable price, and when they do, it's not in stock. By 1pm today, I was grinding my teeth and trying really hard not to thump a salesman. All the while, that last chapter in my novel revision hovered somewhere over my right shoulder, mumbling at me.
There were other distractions. That's part of the problem Kristi and Randy talk about - unless you are going through a period of hot, intense motivation, sitting down to write can be the hardest thing in the world to do. It's not even that you give in to distractions - you go looking for them! Anything except writing. But this last chapter ... it was waiting. It had been patient for a few days, but it knew I was avoiding it, and it was starting to scowl.
After I read the rest of Randy's article, I knew he was right. The only way to write is to sit on that chair and begin. No matter how long it takes the computer to boot up (there are so many things you can squeeze in while you're waiting, and then they stretch out to an hour or more...), when it's ready, you have to sit down and start. No more distractions, no more excuses. Are you a writer? So get on with it and write!
So what do you replace it with? Then I read Randy Ingermanson's newsletter that turns up in my InBox every month. He talks about advanced fiction writing techniques, and something he said today struck a chord: "I've heard from a lot of writers on this, and the strong impression I've gotten is that most writers, most days, don't feel like writing. That's as true of professional novelists as it is of the newest novices." (You can sign up for his free newsletter here.)
That made me feel better. In fact, it almost gave me a really good excuse for not writing. I had a dozen distractions today, things I considered important to accomplish. One was part of my third job these days (building a house - I've long given up considering it a small extra!). Light fittings. I drove all over my area looking yet again at light fittings. Nobody has what I want for a reasonable price, and when they do, it's not in stock. By 1pm today, I was grinding my teeth and trying really hard not to thump a salesman. All the while, that last chapter in my novel revision hovered somewhere over my right shoulder, mumbling at me.
There were other distractions. That's part of the problem Kristi and Randy talk about - unless you are going through a period of hot, intense motivation, sitting down to write can be the hardest thing in the world to do. It's not even that you give in to distractions - you go looking for them! Anything except writing. But this last chapter ... it was waiting. It had been patient for a few days, but it knew I was avoiding it, and it was starting to scowl.
After I read the rest of Randy's article, I knew he was right. The only way to write is to sit on that chair and begin. No matter how long it takes the computer to boot up (there are so many things you can squeeze in while you're waiting, and then they stretch out to an hour or more...), when it's ready, you have to sit down and start. No more distractions, no more excuses. Are you a writer? So get on with it and write!
Friday, July 31, 2009
Learning From Others
In our course, we do a lot of workshopping of students' writing in class, whether it be fiction, nonfiction, poems or picture books. At the beginning, we talk about what everyone can learn from workshopping properly. By properly, we mean taking the time and effort to read carefully, work out what isn't working for the reader, and then make constructive comments and suggestions. All it really does take is time and effort, even for those who have never workshopped before and feel they have little to offer.
We are all critical readers (or should try to be if we are developing our writing) - we know if a beginning is too slow, if an ending doesn't work, if a character seems shallow or if a story just doesn't engage us strongly. The key to learning is to try to work out why, and then how to fix it. The "fixing" suggestions might take a while. You might not feel confident enough to make suggestions, thinking "what would I know?" You might begin by going too far in the other direction, wanting the author to revise the story the way you would if it were yours. Finding the middle ground comes with experience.
It also comes, as I said, with time and effort. Too often, I see students whose idea of workshopping is to correct some punctuation (usually wrongly!), say "I liked this" and leave it at that. Then when it comes around to the teacher's turn to comment, they sit with mouths gaping open. Or sit with arms folded, resisting. It's a good bet that when we get to workshopping the arm-folder's writing, they will either argue or stay silent and refuse to change a thing. I've even had students who declare if no one understands what they're writing, then that's the reader's problem, not theirs.
Workshopping (or critiquing, as it's called too) can be very confronting. People shake in their shoes at the prospect, thinking they will be ripped apart. Sometimes it can feel like that! Sometimes people are not tactful and encouraging, choosing to go on a little superiority trip instead and be rude and discouraging. We try not to let that happen. But way beyond any great feedback you may receive on your own work comes a far greater benefit. Through reading and critiquing other writers' work, you learn how to critique your own.
The hardest thing in the world is to be able to get enough distance from your writing to effectively edit it, to see what's not working, to realise what it needs in order to be fixed. This comes from experience, and the fastest way to gain that experience is in a workshop. But this is what counts - you need to approach workshopping with time, effort and thought. You get back what you put in, in all senses. If others in the workshop realise (and they will, very quickly) that you can't be bothered with their stuff, you only want comments for your own work, they'll pull back and you'll get very little in return. Think of it as an investment for your future writing, and put in 100%.
We are all critical readers (or should try to be if we are developing our writing) - we know if a beginning is too slow, if an ending doesn't work, if a character seems shallow or if a story just doesn't engage us strongly. The key to learning is to try to work out why, and then how to fix it. The "fixing" suggestions might take a while. You might not feel confident enough to make suggestions, thinking "what would I know?" You might begin by going too far in the other direction, wanting the author to revise the story the way you would if it were yours. Finding the middle ground comes with experience.
It also comes, as I said, with time and effort. Too often, I see students whose idea of workshopping is to correct some punctuation (usually wrongly!), say "I liked this" and leave it at that. Then when it comes around to the teacher's turn to comment, they sit with mouths gaping open. Or sit with arms folded, resisting. It's a good bet that when we get to workshopping the arm-folder's writing, they will either argue or stay silent and refuse to change a thing. I've even had students who declare if no one understands what they're writing, then that's the reader's problem, not theirs.
Workshopping (or critiquing, as it's called too) can be very confronting. People shake in their shoes at the prospect, thinking they will be ripped apart. Sometimes it can feel like that! Sometimes people are not tactful and encouraging, choosing to go on a little superiority trip instead and be rude and discouraging. We try not to let that happen. But way beyond any great feedback you may receive on your own work comes a far greater benefit. Through reading and critiquing other writers' work, you learn how to critique your own.
The hardest thing in the world is to be able to get enough distance from your writing to effectively edit it, to see what's not working, to realise what it needs in order to be fixed. This comes from experience, and the fastest way to gain that experience is in a workshop. But this is what counts - you need to approach workshopping with time, effort and thought. You get back what you put in, in all senses. If others in the workshop realise (and they will, very quickly) that you can't be bothered with their stuff, you only want comments for your own work, they'll pull back and you'll get very little in return. Think of it as an investment for your future writing, and put in 100%.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
How Many Words?
At the moment, I'm teaching a subject that is all about writing chapter books. In Australia, that is. Chapter book is a tricky term. In the USA, it can mean any book for children that has chapters. However, in Australia it generally means those books published for kids who are emerging or newly independent readers. In other words, they're what you read when you've had enough of school readers (the John and Betty ones, although they're vastly improved these days), but you're not quite ready for novels.
Novels generally start at around 15,000 words. My students are struggling still with exactly what makes a chapter book, so I've set the parameters to make it easier (even though I know there are plenty of chapter books outside this boundary). We're looking at anything from 1,000 words to 8,000 words, with illustrations. For those of you who like to write whatever you want, it might seem a tad restrictive to say a book must have 1500 words, but this is the recommended number for an Aussie Nibble. Other series, particularly those put out by educational publishers, are even more restrictive. They will set a word count, a range of topics, a target readership and the number of pages this all works out to be.
Like it or not, the word count issue applies to nearly all books. Sometimes it depends on what you're writing and who you are. If you're a new fantasy writer, you'll be told that more than 120,000 words is frowned upon, and around 100,000 is your best bet. Too bad if you've written a 300,000 word epic. (However, if you're well-published, the word count doesn't really apply any longer.) If you write for young adults, you're looking at around 40-50,000 words. Category romances have word limits. Even literary novels are unlikely to be much outside the 70,000-80,000 word count. Of course, you can write whatever you want. But these days you'd do well to have a fair idea of what the average word count is in your genre/form, and have a darned good reason for going outside it.
The pesky problem arises in your query letter. You can't lie (well, you can, but when you get caught out you're going to look unprofessional). So an editor or agent to whom you're pitching, say, a middle grade fantasy is going to feel a fair bit of dread when you say your novel is 90,000 words. (Never mind Harry Potter - I've tried that arguement and it doesn't work!) And if you're pitching a literary novel of 38,000 words, the same suspicion will arise, regardless of The Bridges of Madison County.
I'm pondering all of this word count stuff because I'm currently trying to write texts for very new readers. Texts that have a maximum of 50 words but must still tell a story. Other texts that have a word count of 350-400 words but must still tell a darned good story, with a beginning, middle and end. It's practise that helps, I find. You write one, and keep it as tight as you can, then you are 100 words short so you have to fill it out with more exciting bits. Or you are 100 words over, and you have to cut out every single fluffy extra phrase you can find.
It's actually really good for your writing to do this. I remember one year I only had one suitable story for the Age Short Story competition, but it was 480 words over the 3000 word limit. It took me two days, but I finally got it down to 2998 words. I learned a lot during that exercise, and I've never gone back and added the words back in again (after I didn't win). When I read the story a few weeks later, I realised that the cutting had improved the story immensely. An even better lesson.
Novels generally start at around 15,000 words. My students are struggling still with exactly what makes a chapter book, so I've set the parameters to make it easier (even though I know there are plenty of chapter books outside this boundary). We're looking at anything from 1,000 words to 8,000 words, with illustrations. For those of you who like to write whatever you want, it might seem a tad restrictive to say a book must have 1500 words, but this is the recommended number for an Aussie Nibble. Other series, particularly those put out by educational publishers, are even more restrictive. They will set a word count, a range of topics, a target readership and the number of pages this all works out to be.
Like it or not, the word count issue applies to nearly all books. Sometimes it depends on what you're writing and who you are. If you're a new fantasy writer, you'll be told that more than 120,000 words is frowned upon, and around 100,000 is your best bet. Too bad if you've written a 300,000 word epic. (However, if you're well-published, the word count doesn't really apply any longer.) If you write for young adults, you're looking at around 40-50,000 words. Category romances have word limits. Even literary novels are unlikely to be much outside the 70,000-80,000 word count. Of course, you can write whatever you want. But these days you'd do well to have a fair idea of what the average word count is in your genre/form, and have a darned good reason for going outside it.
The pesky problem arises in your query letter. You can't lie (well, you can, but when you get caught out you're going to look unprofessional). So an editor or agent to whom you're pitching, say, a middle grade fantasy is going to feel a fair bit of dread when you say your novel is 90,000 words. (Never mind Harry Potter - I've tried that arguement and it doesn't work!) And if you're pitching a literary novel of 38,000 words, the same suspicion will arise, regardless of The Bridges of Madison County.
I'm pondering all of this word count stuff because I'm currently trying to write texts for very new readers. Texts that have a maximum of 50 words but must still tell a story. Other texts that have a word count of 350-400 words but must still tell a darned good story, with a beginning, middle and end. It's practise that helps, I find. You write one, and keep it as tight as you can, then you are 100 words short so you have to fill it out with more exciting bits. Or you are 100 words over, and you have to cut out every single fluffy extra phrase you can find.
It's actually really good for your writing to do this. I remember one year I only had one suitable story for the Age Short Story competition, but it was 480 words over the 3000 word limit. It took me two days, but I finally got it down to 2998 words. I learned a lot during that exercise, and I've never gone back and added the words back in again (after I didn't win). When I read the story a few weeks later, I realised that the cutting had improved the story immensely. An even better lesson.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Crime Writing Festival
This is a relatively new festival on Melbourne's calendar, and for many of us, a very welcome one. I'd booked my tickets and was looking forward to it when the program for the main Melbourne Writers' Festival was released. The theme for the MWF is 'Where Stories Meet' but for me, the program is sadly lacking in a focus on fiction writing. Maybe there were only so many sessions they could run on the difficulties of the short story (it was starting to sound like the same old stuff, apart from Cate Kennedy's insightful comments), but one of my favourites was always the Writer in Conversation. This year, MWF is running with the 'deep and meaningful ideas' again. Great for avid nonfiction readers who want to hear people talk about politics and social issues, not so great for me.
So the crime writing festival was going to be my thing! I booked three sessions, had a keen crime-reading friend to go with, and away we went. The Convent is a great place for the festival, all stone and slate and big windows - and extremely cold in July. But the rooms were warm. Pity the poor writers whose book signing table was outside the bookshop in the freezing wind! First up was Stuart MacBride, here from Scotland - and he was very easy to understand (sometimes I thought Scottish crime on TV needed subtitles). He was determined to have a good time, despite a series of disjointed questions from the interviewer, and had lots of funny stories to tell. When I asked him how he'd feel about his characters by Book No. 12, he almost blanched! But he is planning a couple of stand-alones for variety. Some of his books can be quite gory (Flesh Market in particular) but Stuart himself was very cheery and had lots of funny stories. (Stuart even managed to smile and be cheery while freezing to death at the signing table - above.)
The second session was Barry Maitland and Garry Disher, and the interviewer was Mary Dalmau from Reader's Feast. Mary was so obviously a fan and had a great depth of knowledge about crime fiction. She got both writers talking at length about their ideas, why they wrote what they did. Maitland was an architect, which explained to me where his book Silvermeadow came from - it's a fascinating insight into those huge enclosed shopping malls. Garry began writing about the Mornington Peninsula when he moved there and began to realise how much more you notice surroundings/weather/seasons change outside the city. Both of them agreed that writing several books in a series can get to be a strain. Maitland has just released a stand-alone - he said the Brock/Kolla series was never intended to be more than one book. Disher has been working on a new Wyatt novel, his first in seven years, but his stand-alone book has stalled at the moment.
The final session I attended was on forensic psychiatry. It was packed out (gee, I wonder why?) and fascinating. The panel consisted of two women and a man, all of whom have written books about real crime - gangs, murderous doctors and murderers in general. I've heard Rochelle Jackson speak before, and she is very straightforward and clear. Her stories of interviewing people like Ivan Milat's brother were amazing - she's pretty brave! There was a bit of a digression into where teenagers today might be heading which unsettled a few people. Are our boys and young men really headed down a road of violence? Or is it just that the media reports it all and makes it sound worse than it is? That question wasn't answered - I'm not sure it could be, and certainly not in a session like that. Mostly the discussion was about serial killers!
Sunday, July 19, 2009
What I Don't Want to Read
In his book, "No Plot, No Problem", Chris Baty (Mr NaNoWriMo) starts by asking you to think about what you like to read, and what you don't like to read. Or should I say, read about. Not genres, but topics or subjects or plots or ideas. This is an interesting exercise, and I like to do it with a whole class. There are so many different opinions! I spent some time at the Crime writing festival in the bookshop, cruising along the shelves, and I've done the same in my public library. Reading blurbs, scanning the first page. We all do it. What turns you off a book? This is some of my list.
* Crime fiction that tries to be funny. Apart from Janet Evanovich (who is being very un-original these days), I simply don't like funny crime. Black humour or witty dry lines from characters is a whole different ball game. But quite a bit of the humorous crime or mystery books I've looked at are laboured and tacky.
* Anything that involves plane hijacking, terrorists, or spy stuff. Too much like reading the news at the moment, no matter how well researched it is.
* Any novel about serial murder that goes way overboard with the blood and guts and gore stuff, just for effect. I'm actually not that interested in the gore - I want to know how the person gets caught, and why.
* Most novels that change point of view and give the villain or serial murderer a voice in the book. Most times it doesn't add anything for me. If I cared at all, I'd want the detective to find it out for me, not be "told". I see this as a sneaky way of telling.
* Whiny YA novels where the main character seems to think her life sucks, and wants to tell me about it. Nup.
* Chick lit novels that are similarly whiny but for an older age group. Everyone raved about "I Don't Know How She Does It". I tried to read it and wondered why she bothered.
* Novels where the main character has a mental illness. They never seem credible to me. If the narrator really was mentally ill, how could they write something so cohesive? It somehow offends my sense of logic, and I lose empathy. No doubt others will say I am insensitive...
* Anything with vampires in it. This is entirely a personal response, created by having a series of students a few years ago who wrote the worst vampire novels in existence, and then I had to read them and give constructive feedback. It has scarred me for life.
* Literary novels about middle-class men whose lives have suddenly gone awry, often because they have been laid off or their wives have left them. So what? Suck it up. Don't write about it.
* Misery memoirs. Sorry, I know lots of people love them, and love the "winning through despite terrible ordeals" bit, but I can't bear them. They make me incredibly depressed. I couldn't even read "Angela's Ashes".
I'm sure there are lots more, but honestly, I usually give most things a go. Up to Page 50 or so. Before I chuck them back at the library. What do you hate?
* Crime fiction that tries to be funny. Apart from Janet Evanovich (who is being very un-original these days), I simply don't like funny crime. Black humour or witty dry lines from characters is a whole different ball game. But quite a bit of the humorous crime or mystery books I've looked at are laboured and tacky.
* Anything that involves plane hijacking, terrorists, or spy stuff. Too much like reading the news at the moment, no matter how well researched it is.
* Any novel about serial murder that goes way overboard with the blood and guts and gore stuff, just for effect. I'm actually not that interested in the gore - I want to know how the person gets caught, and why.
* Most novels that change point of view and give the villain or serial murderer a voice in the book. Most times it doesn't add anything for me. If I cared at all, I'd want the detective to find it out for me, not be "told". I see this as a sneaky way of telling.
* Whiny YA novels where the main character seems to think her life sucks, and wants to tell me about it. Nup.
* Chick lit novels that are similarly whiny but for an older age group. Everyone raved about "I Don't Know How She Does It". I tried to read it and wondered why she bothered.
* Novels where the main character has a mental illness. They never seem credible to me. If the narrator really was mentally ill, how could they write something so cohesive? It somehow offends my sense of logic, and I lose empathy. No doubt others will say I am insensitive...
* Anything with vampires in it. This is entirely a personal response, created by having a series of students a few years ago who wrote the worst vampire novels in existence, and then I had to read them and give constructive feedback. It has scarred me for life.
* Literary novels about middle-class men whose lives have suddenly gone awry, often because they have been laid off or their wives have left them. So what? Suck it up. Don't write about it.
* Misery memoirs. Sorry, I know lots of people love them, and love the "winning through despite terrible ordeals" bit, but I can't bear them. They make me incredibly depressed. I couldn't even read "Angela's Ashes".
I'm sure there are lots more, but honestly, I usually give most things a go. Up to Page 50 or so. Before I chuck them back at the library. What do you hate?
Friday, July 17, 2009
When You've Had Enough
On Saturday I'm off to the Crime and Justice Festival, a good excuse to go and indulge in my passion for crime fiction. Among others, I'll be listening to Stuart MacBride and Barry Maitland talk about their books and characters, and drinking coffee and trying not to buy too many books. My friend G and I swap books sometimes, and swap recommendations constantly. It's great to find a new author whose work you love, and then read their backlist as well. But now and then I wonder about those writers who have been going a long time, whose main character is being trotted out for the 15th time, and whether they feel tired.
I've blogged before about the pressure of a series, especially one where you are expected to produce several books in a short period of time. I read a comment in the review pages the other day about Michael Connelly - the writer said Connelly's publisher must love him because he writes a new book every nine months without fail. That said, the new one is not about Harry Bosch (who's had many outings) but Jack McEvoy, who first appeared in The Poet. This was the first of Connelly's books I read, and it captured me immediately. I went on to read Trunk Music and Concrete Blonde in quick succession.
But nowadays, is a Harry Bosch novel capturing me in the same way? Is Connelly putting the same passion and hard work into his writing? Would it show on the page if he wasn't? Could I tell? I think readers can tell - take Patricia Cornwell. I don't know what happened to her writing, but I know that for me, as soon as she started writing in present tense, she lost me. I have to confess I have now stopped buying Janet Evanovich (although I might borrow from the library). For me, it's too much of the same old, same old.
But how do the writers feel? Do they groan when the publisher says, "I want another one of those, and we need it by 1 May"? Or are they still keen on their characters and have a secret pile of story ideas they can't wait to get to? Maybe that's a question I can ask at the festival... But one thing I have to say about Connelly's new book The Scarecrow - the background of print journalism and the way in which the internet is superseding hardcopy newspapers was fascinating, and what is even better is that Series 5 of The Wire uses the same context as one of its main plot threads.
I've blogged before about the pressure of a series, especially one where you are expected to produce several books in a short period of time. I read a comment in the review pages the other day about Michael Connelly - the writer said Connelly's publisher must love him because he writes a new book every nine months without fail. That said, the new one is not about Harry Bosch (who's had many outings) but Jack McEvoy, who first appeared in The Poet. This was the first of Connelly's books I read, and it captured me immediately. I went on to read Trunk Music and Concrete Blonde in quick succession.
But nowadays, is a Harry Bosch novel capturing me in the same way? Is Connelly putting the same passion and hard work into his writing? Would it show on the page if he wasn't? Could I tell? I think readers can tell - take Patricia Cornwell. I don't know what happened to her writing, but I know that for me, as soon as she started writing in present tense, she lost me. I have to confess I have now stopped buying Janet Evanovich (although I might borrow from the library). For me, it's too much of the same old, same old.But how do the writers feel? Do they groan when the publisher says, "I want another one of those, and we need it by 1 May"? Or are they still keen on their characters and have a secret pile of story ideas they can't wait to get to? Maybe that's a question I can ask at the festival... But one thing I have to say about Connelly's new book The Scarecrow - the background of print journalism and the way in which the internet is superseding hardcopy newspapers was fascinating, and what is even better is that Series 5 of The Wire uses the same context as one of its main plot threads.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Reading Poetry
The week began with 63 poems - the ones in my new verse novel (out in March 2010). Having received notes from the editor, it was time to sit down and read the whole manuscript a few times before responding. It's been a while - publishers have schedules and there are often months between signing a contract and working on revision and editing (not always though). It was like reading it with a fresh eye, almost as if I hadn't written it. That's an excellent way to be more critical of your own work.
Then I went through the editor's notes, and scribbled responses for myself, plus I also had another look at a few things that had leapt out at me as not working very well. Revision now will be refining and tweaking. Sometimes it might take a week to find the solution for a line that doesn't quite work. After that, I read poems as I looked for suitable examples for my symbols class on Monday. This is not a class that has studied poetry as a separate subject, but I'm not about to "baby" them either! I paused to re-read two Billy Collins' poems that feature the moon, and filed them for study in class.
Today, I did a poetry reading at Bacchus Marsh. It's the first reading like this I've done in quite a while. As I told the audience, I'm more used to school visits these days, and the challenge of engaging 40 8-year-olds. Or perhaps those 15 or so tiny pirates at the bookshop the other day. You tend to forget what it's like to have a room full of listeners who are there because they want to be, because they enjoy poetry and they are keen to engage. From me, they heard the whole range, from the verse novel for kids to a recent poem about Hong Kong. It was funny that I realised, as I neared the end of the second reading session, how much (to me) I sounded like I do when reading to a school group. I think reading pirate stories out loud, with voices and actions, has given my poetry reading more energy!
The other reader was my long-time friend, Kristin Henry, and over lunch we got onto the subject of bad poetry and obscure poetry (by obscure, we meant poems that are written to be deliberately almost impossible to understand, usually in order to look clever). I've had poetry students who wrote like this and declared that if anyone couldn't understand their poems, it was their problem! There is a difference between being difficult or challenging, and obscure. I still read poems in the Age newspaper Saturday books pages and think, What on earth is that meant to be? So they get the four-time test. If I read the poem four times, slowly and with concentration, and it is still meaningless to me, I give up. I want a poem to communicate with me, show me something new, give me something to think about. Not give me a needless headache! What do you think?
Then I went through the editor's notes, and scribbled responses for myself, plus I also had another look at a few things that had leapt out at me as not working very well. Revision now will be refining and tweaking. Sometimes it might take a week to find the solution for a line that doesn't quite work. After that, I read poems as I looked for suitable examples for my symbols class on Monday. This is not a class that has studied poetry as a separate subject, but I'm not about to "baby" them either! I paused to re-read two Billy Collins' poems that feature the moon, and filed them for study in class.
Today, I did a poetry reading at Bacchus Marsh. It's the first reading like this I've done in quite a while. As I told the audience, I'm more used to school visits these days, and the challenge of engaging 40 8-year-olds. Or perhaps those 15 or so tiny pirates at the bookshop the other day. You tend to forget what it's like to have a room full of listeners who are there because they want to be, because they enjoy poetry and they are keen to engage. From me, they heard the whole range, from the verse novel for kids to a recent poem about Hong Kong. It was funny that I realised, as I neared the end of the second reading session, how much (to me) I sounded like I do when reading to a school group. I think reading pirate stories out loud, with voices and actions, has given my poetry reading more energy!
The other reader was my long-time friend, Kristin Henry, and over lunch we got onto the subject of bad poetry and obscure poetry (by obscure, we meant poems that are written to be deliberately almost impossible to understand, usually in order to look clever). I've had poetry students who wrote like this and declared that if anyone couldn't understand their poems, it was their problem! There is a difference between being difficult or challenging, and obscure. I still read poems in the Age newspaper Saturday books pages and think, What on earth is that meant to be? So they get the four-time test. If I read the poem four times, slowly and with concentration, and it is still meaningless to me, I give up. I want a poem to communicate with me, show me something new, give me something to think about. Not give me a needless headache! What do you think?
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Goals vs Dreams
I've been goal setting for years. My very first taste of this tantalising exercise was way back in the days when my daughter was at primary school. Goodness knows why I went along to a parents' session that involved goal setting - all I remember was the part of the course on developing your own photos in a lab! But many years later, I found the notes I'd made at the time and was astounded to find that a few of the things I'd put down back then (such as "attend a writing conference in the US") had been achieved. If you'd asked me what I'd written down, I would have had no idea.
Later, I worked in a community arts centre and there I ventured into my second round of goal setting. The session was new to me, but familiar to nearly everyone now. 1. What would you like to achieve one day. 2. What do you want to achieve in 3 years. 3. What would you put at the top of the list if you had six months to live! I kept the handouts from that session, but not the goals I set. However, the two experiences stayed with me, and I have done a range of goal setting exercises ever since. Usually around February or March each year, after the initial New Year's resolutions have worn off and I can be practical about it.
Except, a few years down the track now, I have been finding the whole goal setting thing a total yawn. A list of jobs. An obvious list of stuff I already know I have to do (including deadlines) so why bother going through the motions? I've been giving this a bit of thought over the past few months, in the face of what looked like just another list of THINGS TO DO, and have come to some conclusions.
1. Deadlines and things contracted (with future due dates) don't belong on a Goals list.
2. Jobs such as cleaning out your office don't belong on a Goals list either - if only because this will be an ongoing job that will keep me busy until Infinity.
3. Jobs and commitments that involve other people don't belong on a Goals list.
4. What might help to re-inspire you about Goals is to change the word to Dreams, and then have a good think about the difference.
5. Dreams involve inspiration, excitement, anticipation and happy planning. They involve little steps, each one of which makes you feel good. Trips to France are included in Dreams. Completing a revision by 30 June, or fixing up your tax records, are absolutely not!
6. Dreams should include a couple of things that are wonderful to contemplate, but probably unreachable in practical terms. The exciting bit is when you start to see them become reachable.
So I've thrown away any of my Goals that sound like Jobs. I've put plenty of Dreams back on the list, things that I want to do just for me and no one else. Things that make me happy just to think about them. Things that don't rely on or respond to anyone else except me. I've been to France (and that was a dream come true!) - maybe now I'll start thinking about South America ... or Alaska ... or Canada ... or ...
Later, I worked in a community arts centre and there I ventured into my second round of goal setting. The session was new to me, but familiar to nearly everyone now. 1. What would you like to achieve one day. 2. What do you want to achieve in 3 years. 3. What would you put at the top of the list if you had six months to live! I kept the handouts from that session, but not the goals I set. However, the two experiences stayed with me, and I have done a range of goal setting exercises ever since. Usually around February or March each year, after the initial New Year's resolutions have worn off and I can be practical about it.
Except, a few years down the track now, I have been finding the whole goal setting thing a total yawn. A list of jobs. An obvious list of stuff I already know I have to do (including deadlines) so why bother going through the motions? I've been giving this a bit of thought over the past few months, in the face of what looked like just another list of THINGS TO DO, and have come to some conclusions.
1. Deadlines and things contracted (with future due dates) don't belong on a Goals list.
2. Jobs such as cleaning out your office don't belong on a Goals list either - if only because this will be an ongoing job that will keep me busy until Infinity.
3. Jobs and commitments that involve other people don't belong on a Goals list.
4. What might help to re-inspire you about Goals is to change the word to Dreams, and then have a good think about the difference.
5. Dreams involve inspiration, excitement, anticipation and happy planning. They involve little steps, each one of which makes you feel good. Trips to France are included in Dreams. Completing a revision by 30 June, or fixing up your tax records, are absolutely not!
6. Dreams should include a couple of things that are wonderful to contemplate, but probably unreachable in practical terms. The exciting bit is when you start to see them become reachable.
So I've thrown away any of my Goals that sound like Jobs. I've put plenty of Dreams back on the list, things that I want to do just for me and no one else. Things that make me happy just to think about them. Things that don't rely on or respond to anyone else except me. I've been to France (and that was a dream come true!) - maybe now I'll start thinking about South America ... or Alaska ... or Canada ... or ...
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Writers' Celebrations!
It's been a great four weeks, celebrating new books with writer friends. And the topics are so wide-ranging that I marvel at their passions and knowledge! In early June, Bronwen Scott (who is working on a crime novel with lots of scientific stuff in it) celebrated the release of her first title, a non-fiction book called Spineless: Dealing with Pests and Pals in Your Home and Backyard. This fascinated me - I have as many pests as the next person, from spiders to wasps, and never mind the ants and millipedes. This is the book you need when you're not sure whether to attack with a broom, or be kind and trap and release. I listened in to an interview she did on Radio National, where listeners phoned in with questions about their own pests and what to do with them. A bit like the gardening show on steroids!
And finally I am allowed to announce that my friend, Gina Perry, has won a Silver World Medal in the 2009 New York Festivals Radio Programming Awards for her radio documentary, Beyond the Shock Machine. If you heard this broadcast earlier this year on Radio Eye on the ABC, you will know what an amazing story it is. Stanley Millgram ran a series of controversial experiments more than 40 years ago, designed to test how far people would go when instructed to give electric shocks to others in a test situation. While someone in another room answered questions, a wrong answer required the "tester" to give a shock via a machine in front of them. Compliance? Obedience? Lack of moral judgement? Who would go all the way on the voltage meter? And why did it take Millgram so long to reveal to the testers that the person in the other room was faking it? It is a fascinating story. Congratulations, Gina, and also to the ABC producer and team that worked with you.
Time for champagne!
Saturday, July 04, 2009
Turning Points in a Scene
I have a fairly extensive library of writing how-to books, and some of them are ones I recommend, some are not (one or two I actively de-recommend!). I always say to students that they should have a good look at a writing book before they buy it. Each book speaks differently to us. One that is perfect for me may leave you cold. Sometimes it's the style, but often it happens that I come across a book that tells me what I want to know at just the right time.Last semester I co-taught a great subject we call Story Structure. I teach it with a scriptwriter who has a huge amount of experience in both scriptwriting and script editing (and as a dramaturg). We'll each talk about something to do with structure, such as scenes, and I approach it from a fiction writer's perspective, and she does the same from a scriptwriter's perspective. No matter how many times we tell students to listen to everything, that the principles apply to both, there are still those that declare themselves confused. "What does that script stuff have to do with my novel?"
So it was with a cry of "Aha!" that I read a chapter last night in The Fire in Fiction: Passion, Purpose and Techniques to Make Your Novel Great by Donald Maass. This is the guy who wrote Writing the Breakout Novel and the workbook that goes with it. In the bit I was reading, he talks about turning points in scenes, something that we covered in class. We'd talked about the two turning points in Syd Field's classic movie structure, and then later we'd moved on to the beats and turning points in a scene.
Still, there were those in the class who couldn't make the connection. A scene is just a scene, isn't it? Stuff happens? Er no, not unless that stuff is interesting and involving and moves the story forward. Maass is talking about scenes in the middle of the novel - the sagging point - and how the turning points should be both external and internal for the viewpoint character. I wish I'd had his book in class - but there's plenty more in there for me to read and think about.
Friday, July 03, 2009
Daily Writing Goals
This week I have finally had time off to write. When I say "time off", I mean whole days for writing and nothing else. At least, nothing else that required me to show up from 9-5. The days stretched out ahead of me. Eight hours for writing. Think of all those words I could write. Except ... I knew from experience how easy it was for each day, and all those hours, to dribble away on stuff. Household chores, house building things, attacking the endless mess in my office (and going to the stationery shop), reading, etc. How to organise my precious days so they were spent on writing?
It's partly about discipline. Nobody was making me do the other stuff. They were merely procrastination tools, ones I tend to do while thinking "I'll write better in the afternoon", and then finding it was after 5pm and I hadn't written a thing. I thought about what would get my backside in the chair and keep it there. Should I set a number of words to write? Not relevant at the moment because my writing task this week is a major revision, which means some new writing and some rewriting. How about hours sitting at the computer, no matter what? In the end, I decided on pages of revised novel. I aimed for 15 per day. Ha! I thought. That's nailed it.
Not. Monday and Tuesday saw me finally sitting down at the computer around 2pm. Should have been plenty of time to work on 15 pages, but somehow it wasn't. Tuesday I accomplished THREE! Wednesday morning I had a fantastic Skype call with my friend K, who completed the Margie Lawson course on Self-Defeating Behaviours earlier this year. K told me that what works best for her is putting writing first, sitting down after breakfast and writing for 2-3 hours, no matter what. Then the rest of the day is free for all that other stuff, and you feel great because you have written.
Obvious, isn't it? Well, it is if you are a morning person. Which I am not. But related to this are other elements, such as getting a good night's sleep so you can be up and functioning by 8am. Eating breakfast and doing some exercise helps too. Mostly, it's about making a decision that writing needs to come before everything else, and sticking to it. I used to read about full-time authors who go to their desk at 9am and write until 5pm. That's a great day's writing, I thought. But I don't write like that. I'm not sure anyone does. Eight hours at the keyboard? At the speed I type, I'd be producing 8-10,000 words a day.
But it would be 10,000 words of babble. I need thinking and planning and pondering time. When I'm not writing, that's when I see plot holes, and develop exciting new ideas. But I still need at least 2 hours of typing to get it all into the story. When I have a normal writing week, there are two days where I cannot write at all. Not even if I got up at 5am (and Melbourne is so cold right now, there's no way I'm doing that!). But this week has shown me that I can structure those other days better, and get more done, simply by writing first.
It's partly about discipline. Nobody was making me do the other stuff. They were merely procrastination tools, ones I tend to do while thinking "I'll write better in the afternoon", and then finding it was after 5pm and I hadn't written a thing. I thought about what would get my backside in the chair and keep it there. Should I set a number of words to write? Not relevant at the moment because my writing task this week is a major revision, which means some new writing and some rewriting. How about hours sitting at the computer, no matter what? In the end, I decided on pages of revised novel. I aimed for 15 per day. Ha! I thought. That's nailed it.
Not. Monday and Tuesday saw me finally sitting down at the computer around 2pm. Should have been plenty of time to work on 15 pages, but somehow it wasn't. Tuesday I accomplished THREE! Wednesday morning I had a fantastic Skype call with my friend K, who completed the Margie Lawson course on Self-Defeating Behaviours earlier this year. K told me that what works best for her is putting writing first, sitting down after breakfast and writing for 2-3 hours, no matter what. Then the rest of the day is free for all that other stuff, and you feel great because you have written.
Obvious, isn't it? Well, it is if you are a morning person. Which I am not. But related to this are other elements, such as getting a good night's sleep so you can be up and functioning by 8am. Eating breakfast and doing some exercise helps too. Mostly, it's about making a decision that writing needs to come before everything else, and sticking to it. I used to read about full-time authors who go to their desk at 9am and write until 5pm. That's a great day's writing, I thought. But I don't write like that. I'm not sure anyone does. Eight hours at the keyboard? At the speed I type, I'd be producing 8-10,000 words a day.
But it would be 10,000 words of babble. I need thinking and planning and pondering time. When I'm not writing, that's when I see plot holes, and develop exciting new ideas. But I still need at least 2 hours of typing to get it all into the story. When I have a normal writing week, there are two days where I cannot write at all. Not even if I got up at 5am (and Melbourne is so cold right now, there's no way I'm doing that!). But this week has shown me that I can structure those other days better, and get more done, simply by writing first.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Ready or Not?
One of the things I like to do is read blogs by editors and agents. Apart from giving them a "human" face (because we all know agents and editors are either gods on pedastals or monsters), you can gain some useful insights into the process of acquiring manuscripts or taking on new clients. What they're looking for, what they aren't. We already know they're not looking for crazy people who pursue them into the bathroom at conferences. Or who call and berate them for not accepting a manuscript. But given that there are a lot of people writing novels or picture books or memoirs, etc., what are these agents and editors looking for?Apart from the usual (specialising in certain kinds of books), they'll happily tell you they don't really know - but they'll know it when they see it. "Hmph!" you snort. "Coulda told you that already." They'll talk about things like a story that leaps off the page, an intriguing voice, a plot with a difference, characters you really care about ... all things that sound vague to many writers. How do you get these things? Do they come by magic? Why won't anyone tell me something precise and exact that I can use?
Well, it's an inexact business. Even publishers can't predict a best-seller: the first novel that takes off and sells hundreds of thousands of copies; the break-out million-seller from well-known author that seems like all his others; the diary story that's been done before but somehow this one strikes a chord with its audience. There's a big difference between Janet Evanovich's twelfth novel and "Cold Mountain" by Charles Frazier. JE's publishers were always going to get behind it and put the big money into publicity. "Cold Mountain" did it kind of on its own, from what I know. Or should I say, readers did it.
OK, so if there's no recipe for success, is there a recipe for not succeeding? Of course there is, and the one thing that I see mentioned over and over again is - the writer sent it out before it was ready. I've heard two examples recently of this. A fabulous idea, a great voice, but the writer hadn't learned how to craft it onto the page successfully. That's the key word - CRAFT. Craft takes time. Craft is not banging out a first draft and getting so excited that you immediately print out ten copies and mail it out to the ten biggest publishers.
Craft is five, ten or twenty drafts. Craft is giving it to experienced readers you trust and truly listening to their critiques, even if it hurts. Craft is going to seminars or courses to learn what you need to. Craft is reading and then trying to better the best books that you admire. In the Weekend Australian Review yesterday, M.J. Hyland talks about her new novel This is How. She says, about the first two years of working on the book: "it simply didn't work. The voice was wrong, the rhythm was wrong ... ", it was "an awful, awful two years". She adds, "I'm talking about not a dozen drafts, 25-plus rewrites, over and over ... I had to go back to the drawing board three times."
I've been guilty of it myself. You work on something for ages, and you've done three drafts, so you're convinced it's ready to go. But all the while, a little voice inside is saying, "Let it sit, and give it one more go." That's the voice to take notice of, the one that's saying you might be ready, but the manuscript isn't. Not yet.
(The photo is of Taupo Bay, in New Zealand, by the way. I always feel inspired when I'm there, which is not often enough!)
Monday, June 22, 2009
Sleeping and Writing
Over the past few months, quite a number of articles have been published in various newspapers and magazines about the effects of not enough sleep. Some of these include tiredness (obviously!), stress, poor immune system, falling asleep without realising (e.g. when driving) and, strangely, inability to sleep. I guess that last one is what my mother used to call being "overtired". But the studies also show that lack of sleep can lead to obesity, mental impairment and depression, among other things. Not sure about the obesity, although it seems to be the effect on your metabolism that's the problem.
While I was away on holiday, I got an amazing amount of sleep. At home, I wake up several times each night. Sometimes it's to put the cats out (and they hardly ever go out at the same time!), often it's because of my husband tossing and turning. I have just had ten nights of sleeping on an excellent bed, and probably seven of those nights I slept through without waking. Each time it happened, I was surprised, not least because each time it reminded me of how poor my sleep at home must be.
What effect did this have on me? For a start, I had a lot more energy. Not "get up and go" energy but a deeper core of simply being able to cruise through each day without feeling slow and achey. It didn't take very long at all before I felt restored and ready to write, and my brain also felt like it had extra space in it, space I could use for creating, thinking and putting good words together. Of course, when you realise this, you can't help wondering how much poor-quality creating might be going on at other times!
Writers tend to think they don't need to be fit and healthy to write. After all, don't we just sit all day? In fact, we need to be as healthy as we can possibly be in order for our brains to function well and for us to put energy and enthusiasm into each day of wordsmithing. That means food (including snacks) that restore and feed us properly - keep the chocolate for a reward! Not too much coffee or alcohol. Exercise that helps to keep our bodies functioning, such as stretches and walking. Hours at the computer lead to some awful injuries to our arms, neck and shoulders.
But to all of that, I'd add good sleep, and put it at the top of the list. If we're rested, we're better able to cope with deadlines, blocks and that knotty bit in Chapter 4 that just won't work. If we're rested, we can cope with burnout, lack of ideas and deal with interruptions without losing our temper. We don't need coffee or anything else that might be a stimulant. We have headspace and are relaxed enough to use it well.
Some people hate routine. They think that being creative is all about burning the midnight oil, or the 3am oil, that going to bed earlier, at a regular time, and getting 8 hours is boring. If I was 20 or even 30, I'd probably think the same. But I'm not - and I love a great sleep!
P.s The winner of Tracey Binns is Lost was The Well-Read Rabbit! Please email me your postal address to kidsbooks at optusnet dot com dot au. Thanks, everyone, who posted a comment.
While I was away on holiday, I got an amazing amount of sleep. At home, I wake up several times each night. Sometimes it's to put the cats out (and they hardly ever go out at the same time!), often it's because of my husband tossing and turning. I have just had ten nights of sleeping on an excellent bed, and probably seven of those nights I slept through without waking. Each time it happened, I was surprised, not least because each time it reminded me of how poor my sleep at home must be.
What effect did this have on me? For a start, I had a lot more energy. Not "get up and go" energy but a deeper core of simply being able to cruise through each day without feeling slow and achey. It didn't take very long at all before I felt restored and ready to write, and my brain also felt like it had extra space in it, space I could use for creating, thinking and putting good words together. Of course, when you realise this, you can't help wondering how much poor-quality creating might be going on at other times!
Writers tend to think they don't need to be fit and healthy to write. After all, don't we just sit all day? In fact, we need to be as healthy as we can possibly be in order for our brains to function well and for us to put energy and enthusiasm into each day of wordsmithing. That means food (including snacks) that restore and feed us properly - keep the chocolate for a reward! Not too much coffee or alcohol. Exercise that helps to keep our bodies functioning, such as stretches and walking. Hours at the computer lead to some awful injuries to our arms, neck and shoulders.
But to all of that, I'd add good sleep, and put it at the top of the list. If we're rested, we're better able to cope with deadlines, blocks and that knotty bit in Chapter 4 that just won't work. If we're rested, we can cope with burnout, lack of ideas and deal with interruptions without losing our temper. We don't need coffee or anything else that might be a stimulant. We have headspace and are relaxed enough to use it well.
Some people hate routine. They think that being creative is all about burning the midnight oil, or the 3am oil, that going to bed earlier, at a regular time, and getting 8 hours is boring. If I was 20 or even 30, I'd probably think the same. But I'm not - and I love a great sleep!
P.s The winner of Tracey Binns is Lost was The Well-Read Rabbit! Please email me your postal address to kidsbooks at optusnet dot com dot au. Thanks, everyone, who posted a comment.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Writing Away
For many of us who have to work in "normal" jobs to pay the bills, time away to write is a treasured thing. No phone, minimal email contact, peace and quiet. Some writers go to residential retreats where everyone there is writing and the atmosphere is one of intensity and production and inspiration. Or possibly days and days of staring at a blank screen! Others take the opportunity to find a place far from the madding crowd - a motel or bed & breakfast or wood hut - and write alone.
But when you try to combine writing with other "away" things, like family and outings and social events, trouble can strike. Other people wonder why you're hiding from them, or being unsociable. Or else you go along with everything and everyone and writing doesn't happen. After a busy semester of teaching and hours of infuriating paperwork, I couldn't wait to get away from it all and find some sanity and headspace again. Yet here I am, five days in, and I haven't written a thing.
However, I have caught up with family news, spent wonderful hours with them all, and been for many inspiring walks. I'm sleeping better than I have for weeks, and hardly thinking about work at all. And I have been thinking about my novel (in its second major revision) and mulling over various changes and gaining character insights. I've read over most of the revised chapters and feel I am on the right track at last. Tomorrow will be a writing day, between walking, coffee and conversation. It's all good!
But when you try to combine writing with other "away" things, like family and outings and social events, trouble can strike. Other people wonder why you're hiding from them, or being unsociable. Or else you go along with everything and everyone and writing doesn't happen. After a busy semester of teaching and hours of infuriating paperwork, I couldn't wait to get away from it all and find some sanity and headspace again. Yet here I am, five days in, and I haven't written a thing.
However, I have caught up with family news, spent wonderful hours with them all, and been for many inspiring walks. I'm sleeping better than I have for weeks, and hardly thinking about work at all. And I have been thinking about my novel (in its second major revision) and mulling over various changes and gaining character insights. I've read over most of the revised chapters and feel I am on the right track at last. Tomorrow will be a writing day, between walking, coffee and conversation. It's all good!
Saturday, June 06, 2009
The Endurance Factor
“Beyond talent lie all the usual words: discipline, love, luck—but most of all, endurance.”—James Baldwin
I found this quote today while doing some reading on all sorts of different topics, and also in between grading a huge pile of student work. Grading creative writing is something that could be termed an oxymoron perhaps - how can you give originality and pizzazz a grade? Funnily enough, it's not so hard because before you get originality, you have to have strong ideas, structure, characterisation, dialogue that works well, a facility with language, and a good grasp of grammar and punctuation. I guess that's why we teach all that stuff - because from there comes great writing and then ... originality.
I digress. Sort of. Because when we talk about creative writing students, there's a perception that of course they're all talented - why would they be studying writing otherwise? It's true that our students have talent, that germ of something which means when they write, at least a little something happens on the page. But it's what they do with it that makes the difference. Endurance plays a huge part in it. I've seen quite a few very good writers in my classes whom I thought would one day, sooner maybe than later, see their work published. But although their talent might shine, without endurance it fades. I see them a few years on, and they've given up because it got too hard - either to fit it into a busy life, or the rejections were too much to take.
Writing is hard. Good writing is harder. Great writing can take years to develop, to grow, to learn how to do. The myth persists that a great writer is born with the talent, and no doubt for a very occasional person, that's true. But again, it's what happens after that. The road to publication can be long and rocky. Just ask the guy who wrote A Confederacy of Dunces. I saw that mentioned today as an "instant American classic". Yep, it was just a pity that he submitted it over and over and over for years, and finally killed himself. It was his mother who eventually found a publisher, and it became an instant classic. Hmmm.
What makes great writing? I think it is that ability to somehow put words on the page in a way that readers engage with. Just as well we have a wide range of readers, people who love Dan Brown, people who love Annie Proulx. Because words on the page have different effects on different readers. Nevertheless, along with the ability has to come a number of other things. As Baldwin says, discipline is a must. If you can't regularly commit to putting plenty of words on the page and then reworking those words until they sing, you won't get far. A book-length work is a huge, scary undertaking. There'll be plenty to tell you you're mad. Only self-discipline keeps your backside in that chair.
Luck? Yes, even though we hate to admit it. The story idea that somehow magically taps into the zietgist of the time. The editor who absolutely loves Shakespeare and receives an unsolicited manuscript that draws on Hamlet in a new way. The agent you meet just when she's heard of a publisher looking for a book just like yours. But it's not all luck. You make your own luck by being aware of the industry and researching your markets properly.
Love? I guess he means a love of writing. If you love writing for its own 'self', for what it gives you, for the thrill of having written, for how it gives you the licence to do almost anything in words that you dream of - then love helps a lot too. It especially helps when you're getting lots of rejections. But it's endurance that will get you there. Like building a house, you must believe that as along as you keep going, keep adding wood and nails and cement and pipes and a roof, then one day you may well have what you dream of - publication.
And then you must learn to endure all that comes with it - the pressure of each book after that, the reviews, the critics, the long hours at the desk (because you learn that each new book brings its own problems and you will never know it all)... Goodness, I'm starting to depress myself here! But it is endurance, and it is hard - never assume it will be easy because that way lies the road that holds those signs that say things like You're not good enough and I knew you'd fail and How come others can do it and not you?
You have to ignore them because, after all, as a writer you have chosen something that you may do for your whole life. Something that will have moments of ecstasy, moments of deep despair, and a whole lot of days of staring at a blank screen. Endurance doesn't have to be like carrying a heavy sack up a muddy hill in boots that are two sizes too large for you. But it does have to be something you cultivate inside yourself, like a solid warm extra organ that gives you the fortitude you need to keep going.
(And for those of you who know me, can you guess what the house is going to be called when it's finally finished? No, not Emoh Ruo. ENDURANCE.)
I found this quote today while doing some reading on all sorts of different topics, and also in between grading a huge pile of student work. Grading creative writing is something that could be termed an oxymoron perhaps - how can you give originality and pizzazz a grade? Funnily enough, it's not so hard because before you get originality, you have to have strong ideas, structure, characterisation, dialogue that works well, a facility with language, and a good grasp of grammar and punctuation. I guess that's why we teach all that stuff - because from there comes great writing and then ... originality.
I digress. Sort of. Because when we talk about creative writing students, there's a perception that of course they're all talented - why would they be studying writing otherwise? It's true that our students have talent, that germ of something which means when they write, at least a little something happens on the page. But it's what they do with it that makes the difference. Endurance plays a huge part in it. I've seen quite a few very good writers in my classes whom I thought would one day, sooner maybe than later, see their work published. But although their talent might shine, without endurance it fades. I see them a few years on, and they've given up because it got too hard - either to fit it into a busy life, or the rejections were too much to take.
Writing is hard. Good writing is harder. Great writing can take years to develop, to grow, to learn how to do. The myth persists that a great writer is born with the talent, and no doubt for a very occasional person, that's true. But again, it's what happens after that. The road to publication can be long and rocky. Just ask the guy who wrote A Confederacy of Dunces. I saw that mentioned today as an "instant American classic". Yep, it was just a pity that he submitted it over and over and over for years, and finally killed himself. It was his mother who eventually found a publisher, and it became an instant classic. Hmmm.
What makes great writing? I think it is that ability to somehow put words on the page in a way that readers engage with. Just as well we have a wide range of readers, people who love Dan Brown, people who love Annie Proulx. Because words on the page have different effects on different readers. Nevertheless, along with the ability has to come a number of other things. As Baldwin says, discipline is a must. If you can't regularly commit to putting plenty of words on the page and then reworking those words until they sing, you won't get far. A book-length work is a huge, scary undertaking. There'll be plenty to tell you you're mad. Only self-discipline keeps your backside in that chair.
Luck? Yes, even though we hate to admit it. The story idea that somehow magically taps into the zietgist of the time. The editor who absolutely loves Shakespeare and receives an unsolicited manuscript that draws on Hamlet in a new way. The agent you meet just when she's heard of a publisher looking for a book just like yours. But it's not all luck. You make your own luck by being aware of the industry and researching your markets properly.
Love? I guess he means a love of writing. If you love writing for its own 'self', for what it gives you, for the thrill of having written, for how it gives you the licence to do almost anything in words that you dream of - then love helps a lot too. It especially helps when you're getting lots of rejections. But it's endurance that will get you there. Like building a house, you must believe that as along as you keep going, keep adding wood and nails and cement and pipes and a roof, then one day you may well have what you dream of - publication.
And then you must learn to endure all that comes with it - the pressure of each book after that, the reviews, the critics, the long hours at the desk (because you learn that each new book brings its own problems and you will never know it all)... Goodness, I'm starting to depress myself here! But it is endurance, and it is hard - never assume it will be easy because that way lies the road that holds those signs that say things like You're not good enough and I knew you'd fail and How come others can do it and not you?
You have to ignore them because, after all, as a writer you have chosen something that you may do for your whole life. Something that will have moments of ecstasy, moments of deep despair, and a whole lot of days of staring at a blank screen. Endurance doesn't have to be like carrying a heavy sack up a muddy hill in boots that are two sizes too large for you. But it does have to be something you cultivate inside yourself, like a solid warm extra organ that gives you the fortitude you need to keep going.
(And for those of you who know me, can you guess what the house is going to be called when it's finally finished? No, not Emoh Ruo. ENDURANCE.)
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Creativity and Depression
What a great way to celebrate 500 blog posts - write about depression!! But I've been wanting to write about this book - The Van Gogh Blues: The Creative Person's Path Through Depression- for a week or more, even though I haven't finished reading it yet. So now's the time. I've also been thinking about the topic over the past two days while I've been attending the Reading Matters conference.
Why? Because several of the writers talked about problems with writing - getting stuck on a book that's not working (Bernard Beckett) or having to set a daily word target because of frittering away hours (James Roy) or realising that even when she was in a quiet room at Varuna, she still wrote at the same slow pace (Alison Goodman). We all struggle with our writing. In fact, James Roy quoted someone who said if you find writing easy, then you're not a writer! For me, attending the conference and listening to so many terrific writers talk about their craft is one of the ways I overcome creative slumps.
It would be easy, however, to sit and listen to them talk, see all their books on the bookshop tables, and think - Why am I bothering? Why don't I give up now? In "The Van Gogh Blues", Maisel talks a lot about this feeling, and why creative artists (writers, painters, sculptors, musicians, etc) experience it. Sometimes it can lead to a terrible depression, rather than fleeting feelings of despair, and he also talks about the necessity of getting to grips with reality - that you do have to pay the bills, you do often have to have a job which squeezes out time for creating. I know several people, excellent creators, who have indeed given up and gone off to do something completely different.
There is so much in this book that to try and summarise it in a couple of paragraphs is misleading. So I will pick out some of the things that, so far, have struck a chord with me. One is that you can opt to matter, that instead of buying into the whole notion that life itself is meaningless and we're just here until we die, you can choose to make your own life meaningful through creating. Think about how many people you know who either just exist, or who are waiting for whatever they think the afterlife might offer (and they say it's got to be better than here). Maisel says that for a creative person, neither of these attitudes will work. It is only by choosing to make your own life matter through your creations that you will find what you need.
He also discusses those artists for whom meaning is based in the marketplace. Becoming famous, making lots of money, receiving great reviews - none of these will feed into creating what matters for you. It has to reside inside you to endure, and you have to keep "opting to matter" rather than let it slide. It's also about being connected with the world - about caring for others as well as yourself, not letting your ego move you into ruthless behaviour or lording it over others.
Your decision to matter, to fuel your own creativity, comes from self-understanding. Maisel says, "Until you come to grips with your personality and your human nature and can say 'This is who I am and this is who I am choosing to become', not only will meaning elude you but so will a genuine enthusiasm for life." He goes on to talk about your personal power supply, how many people are "slowed down by the facts of existence" and lose their own energy and creative power.
As I said, I'm still only halfway through this book. There is so much in it - and I'm not suffering from depression, yet I do have periods of feeling totally uncreative and wondering how on earth I can get out of it. Maybe when I've finished it, I'll write more about the subject.
In the meantime, to celebrate Blog Post Number 500, I'm offering a prize!! Anyone who posts a comment about this whole thing of creativity and/or depression will go in the draw to win a copy of my latest book, Tracey Binns is Lost. If you post as Anon, please do put a name of some kind at the bottom!
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Post 499 - Creativity
Good gracious, I just realised that this is Post No. 499. I had better make sure No. 500 is a darned good one! Thank goodness it's 499 today, as my brain is struggling. We are in workshopping mode in class; consequently I have workshopped 17 picture book texts in the past week, marked 15 assignments on myths and am getting ready for the final onslaught. Another 50+ assignments to mark in about 9 days. No wonder I won't be writing for a while.
I've been pondering over the brain power question. And reading a great book on creativity, which I'll save for Post 500 perhaps. Is our creativity limited? Or is it actually boundless, living somewhere inside our head, and the problem is that we don't know how to manage it or release it properly? I make it sound like a caged creature, don't I?
But sometimes it feels like that. It feels like a tiger behind bars inside my head, growling and snarling because in front of the bars is a pile of "other work" so high that all I can hear is a faint whine. Or all I let myself hear is the whine, because to acknowledge the tiger is pacing the cage and getting extremely angry is a bit risky to my mental calm. So I toss a leg of lamb over the pile of work and hope that keeps the tiger quiet until I can let her out.
Yes, I probably need to leave this metaphor well alone, and get back to the "other work". The sooner it's conquered, the better. Then it's me and the tiger, off to the mountains, or the beach, or the wild blue yonder...
I've been pondering over the brain power question. And reading a great book on creativity, which I'll save for Post 500 perhaps. Is our creativity limited? Or is it actually boundless, living somewhere inside our head, and the problem is that we don't know how to manage it or release it properly? I make it sound like a caged creature, don't I?
But sometimes it feels like that. It feels like a tiger behind bars inside my head, growling and snarling because in front of the bars is a pile of "other work" so high that all I can hear is a faint whine. Or all I let myself hear is the whine, because to acknowledge the tiger is pacing the cage and getting extremely angry is a bit risky to my mental calm. So I toss a leg of lamb over the pile of work and hope that keeps the tiger quiet until I can let her out.
Yes, I probably need to leave this metaphor well alone, and get back to the "other work". The sooner it's conquered, the better. Then it's me and the tiger, off to the mountains, or the beach, or the wild blue yonder...
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Diving Into Poetry
This week, I've dived head-first into poetry. I'm not sure why this happens, but it kind of creeps up on me. First I read some poems (these were ones I wanted to use in my mythology class), then I wrote a couple, then I wrote more for my new verse novel, then my book order arrived, which included four books of poetry. Somehow, when my fingers did the ordering online, they clicked on books of poems and verse novels. Now I'm fully indulging! And remembering all the things I love about poetry, what each poem creates as I read it, and how often something in a poem will spark an idea and off I go to write.
Of course, the book I grabbed first was Ballistics. This is Billy Collins' new collection, and as the very first poem is about Paris, I had to stop and re-read it. Having heard recordings of him reading quite a few times, now whenever I read one of his poems, it's as if I can hear his voice. Weird, but good.
Next book in my pile was one I read about in a review magazine and actually misunderstood what it was. The book is The Cuckoo's Haiku: And Other Birding Poemsby Michael Rosen. I thought it was a book about writing haiku (despite the subtitle) but it's a great collection of haiku about birds. And not only that, the watercolour illustrations of birds by Stan Fellows are beautiful. If you're a haiku fan, I can recommend it.
I've also ordered three verse novels, again from reading about them in other people's reviews or blogs. I've read novels by Ron Koertge before, and was surprised to see a verse novel by him (hidden poet inside us all?) - Shakespeare Bats Cleanupis about a 14-year-old boy who gets mono (a disease) and is quarantined at home for a few weeks. He can't go to school, and he can't play baseball, his favourite sport. He's reduced to writing poems to entertain himself! What I like about this story is the way form poems sneak in - the narrator is under no illusion that his poems are world-class, but he still manages to use the forms and say what he wants. There are shades of "Love That Dog" in here - the idea of a kid who isn't keen on poetry and ends up writing it and drawing more from the experience than he thought possible.
After many years, Sharon Creech has written a follow-up to "Love That Dog". It's called, of course, Hate That Cat. I haven't read this one yet, but am looking forward to it. More poetry, please, more!
Of course, the book I grabbed first was Ballistics. This is Billy Collins' new collection, and as the very first poem is about Paris, I had to stop and re-read it. Having heard recordings of him reading quite a few times, now whenever I read one of his poems, it's as if I can hear his voice. Weird, but good.
Next book in my pile was one I read about in a review magazine and actually misunderstood what it was. The book is The Cuckoo's Haiku: And Other Birding Poemsby Michael Rosen. I thought it was a book about writing haiku (despite the subtitle) but it's a great collection of haiku about birds. And not only that, the watercolour illustrations of birds by Stan Fellows are beautiful. If you're a haiku fan, I can recommend it.I've also ordered three verse novels, again from reading about them in other people's reviews or blogs. I've read novels by Ron Koertge before, and was surprised to see a verse novel by him (hidden poet inside us all?) - Shakespeare Bats Cleanupis about a 14-year-old boy who gets mono (a disease) and is quarantined at home for a few weeks. He can't go to school, and he can't play baseball, his favourite sport. He's reduced to writing poems to entertain himself! What I like about this story is the way form poems sneak in - the narrator is under no illusion that his poems are world-class, but he still manages to use the forms and say what he wants. There are shades of "Love That Dog" in here - the idea of a kid who isn't keen on poetry and ends up writing it and drawing more from the experience than he thought possible.After many years, Sharon Creech has written a follow-up to "Love That Dog". It's called, of course, Hate That Cat. I haven't read this one yet, but am looking forward to it. More poetry, please, more!
Sunday, May 17, 2009
What Do Reviews Do?
When you have a new book out, you hold your breath. Will the reviews be good? Or awful? Will your book be reviewed at all? Do reviews make any difference? There have been studies done on the reasons why people buy a book. Reviews come way down on the list. Top reason is word of mouth. I think it's why so many authors have leapt into blogging and Facebooking and Twittering - trying to create their own word of mouth. The jury is still out on how well it works, but in the meantime, we try it anyway because the reviews were minimal, or they were in magazines with a low circulation, or we received one bad one and we're trying to bury it somehow.
With the growth of the internet, reviewing has become an unpaid hobby for many people. There are readers who have posted hundreds of reviews on Amazon, readers who have reviewing blogs, readers who submit reviews on spec to respected magazines, like Good Reading. How much notice do we take of any of them? And what is their agenda? With a review in a magazine or journal or newspaper, the assumption is that this person is reviewing because they are respected for their informed, professional opinion. None of us want to imagine this kind of reviewer throwing our book across the room, yet there are reviews published where this seems to be what happened.
On the other hand, there are one or two famous reviewers who are famous simply for their ability to be totally vitriolic about nearly every book. That just makes me wonder what they eat for breakfast. But at least their agenda is fairly obvious - they're being paid to do a job. Other kinds of reviews can be problematic. One example is the person who writes a critical review, simply in order to promote themselves as an "expert" who could have written that book better. If only they'd been asked. Another example is the person who is trying to make a name for themselves as an amateur reviewer and tries to be deliberately contentious.
Yet another problem arises when the reviewer seems to mis-read the book, and bases their comments on misconceptions. Often I wonder if the reviewer ran out of time and just skimmed the book. Sometimes reviewers have a personal agenda unknown to anyone else but the writer of the book and his/her close friends. I've had the "pleasure" of my book being reviewed by someone who disliked me personally, and wrote a dismissive review. It's so hard not to sling some harsh words back when that happens, but it's usually not worth the trouble. You just make things worse. Far better is to take the best phrase or sentence out of its context and use it in your publicity!
Mostly, I think reviewers try to do a good job. I know of some who refuse to review a book they don't like, which is a positive thing to do. If you receive a bad review, you just have to suck it up and move on. There are many strategies for overcoming any bad publicity that might come out of it - the afore-mentioned social networking, getting your friends on-board to help promote the good reviews, or simply getting out and about and talking to people about your book (school visits, if you write children's books, are a wonderful antidote - thirty excited Grade One kids who want you to sign their book, for example).
The one thing you can't do is brood about it. I know people who have stacks of good reviews, but can quote word-for-word their one bad review. What is the point? Do you really want to constantly remind yourself of it? Why? Instead, think of how many reviews you've read over the years, and ask yourself how many have influenced you NOT to buy a book. I can't think of one, and I do read lots.
Yes, a good review might tempt me to try a new author, but if I analysed my reasons for purchase, they usually come down to "read a book by that person before and liked it" or "my friend recommended it". Or, best of all, I was browsing in a bookshop and found it and read the first few pages and that made me buy it. So instead of reading your reviews, go back and read the first chapter of your current work-in-progress and ask yourself if it would influence your intended readership to buy it.
I do post short commentaries on this blog occasionally, but I don't consider them to be reviews. I always look at books here from the point of view of a writer - what worked, what didn't work (for me) and why. And I also talk about what I might have learned as a writer from this book, e.g. setting from James Lee Burke. If I influence anyone to buy a book, I'm usually not aware of it. It's interesting when readers agree or disagree with me. But it's still just one person's opinion.
With the growth of the internet, reviewing has become an unpaid hobby for many people. There are readers who have posted hundreds of reviews on Amazon, readers who have reviewing blogs, readers who submit reviews on spec to respected magazines, like Good Reading. How much notice do we take of any of them? And what is their agenda? With a review in a magazine or journal or newspaper, the assumption is that this person is reviewing because they are respected for their informed, professional opinion. None of us want to imagine this kind of reviewer throwing our book across the room, yet there are reviews published where this seems to be what happened.
On the other hand, there are one or two famous reviewers who are famous simply for their ability to be totally vitriolic about nearly every book. That just makes me wonder what they eat for breakfast. But at least their agenda is fairly obvious - they're being paid to do a job. Other kinds of reviews can be problematic. One example is the person who writes a critical review, simply in order to promote themselves as an "expert" who could have written that book better. If only they'd been asked. Another example is the person who is trying to make a name for themselves as an amateur reviewer and tries to be deliberately contentious.
Yet another problem arises when the reviewer seems to mis-read the book, and bases their comments on misconceptions. Often I wonder if the reviewer ran out of time and just skimmed the book. Sometimes reviewers have a personal agenda unknown to anyone else but the writer of the book and his/her close friends. I've had the "pleasure" of my book being reviewed by someone who disliked me personally, and wrote a dismissive review. It's so hard not to sling some harsh words back when that happens, but it's usually not worth the trouble. You just make things worse. Far better is to take the best phrase or sentence out of its context and use it in your publicity!
Mostly, I think reviewers try to do a good job. I know of some who refuse to review a book they don't like, which is a positive thing to do. If you receive a bad review, you just have to suck it up and move on. There are many strategies for overcoming any bad publicity that might come out of it - the afore-mentioned social networking, getting your friends on-board to help promote the good reviews, or simply getting out and about and talking to people about your book (school visits, if you write children's books, are a wonderful antidote - thirty excited Grade One kids who want you to sign their book, for example).
The one thing you can't do is brood about it. I know people who have stacks of good reviews, but can quote word-for-word their one bad review. What is the point? Do you really want to constantly remind yourself of it? Why? Instead, think of how many reviews you've read over the years, and ask yourself how many have influenced you NOT to buy a book. I can't think of one, and I do read lots.
Yes, a good review might tempt me to try a new author, but if I analysed my reasons for purchase, they usually come down to "read a book by that person before and liked it" or "my friend recommended it". Or, best of all, I was browsing in a bookshop and found it and read the first few pages and that made me buy it. So instead of reading your reviews, go back and read the first chapter of your current work-in-progress and ask yourself if it would influence your intended readership to buy it.
I do post short commentaries on this blog occasionally, but I don't consider them to be reviews. I always look at books here from the point of view of a writer - what worked, what didn't work (for me) and why. And I also talk about what I might have learned as a writer from this book, e.g. setting from James Lee Burke. If I influence anyone to buy a book, I'm usually not aware of it. It's interesting when readers agree or disagree with me. But it's still just one person's opinion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)