At the recent Malice Domestic convention, I participated in the Malice Go Round, aka Speed Dating With Authors. It’s quite an experience, whether you’re presenting or listening.
Imagine 20 tables of 10. Eight of the chairs at each table are filled with listeners. The other two are for authors who are pitching their latest book(s). All of the listeners stay put while the pairs of authors move around from table to table. At each table, each author has 2 minutes to pass out postcards, bookmarks, etc. and talk about their book(s). Every 4 minutes the authors move on to the next table. There’s a 21st table where the authors get a four-minute break. Approximately an hour and 45 minutes later all the pitches have been done and everyone is exhausted.
For those listening, it’s a great way to learn about books and authors you haven’t heard of before. On the pitching side, it’s a great way to make others aware of your work.
I teamed up with fellow Henery Press author, Christina Freeburn, who writes the Faith Hunter Scrap This mystery series. Here we are looking chipper as we wait to begin pitching.
Christina’s giveaway was a stamped frame with a postcard of her latest book while my giveaway was a set of postcards of the two books in my Aurora Anderson Mystery series.
We put both our items in Ziploc bags so they’d be faster to give out. Here are our packets of giveaways.
Here’s the ballroom as the authors gather and get ready. Tip: If you’re pitching get there early and snag a table as close to #10 as you can get. That way your break will be halfway through your round.
And here’s the ballroom when the Go Round is in full swing.
Type Mer Vicki Delany and Cathy Ace were right behind me so I kept on hearing “We’re the Criminous Canucks...” every time we moved to a new table. I have to admit I wanted to hear the rest of their pitch. I learned later it continued “We kill people, but we do it politely.” My pitch wasn’t quite as interesting, but I think I did okay for the first time. It was definitely an experience I’m glad I had. So that’s my experience at Malice Go Round.
Oh, and by the way, I sent my third book to my publisher on Monday. Yay!
Frankie Bailey, John Corrigan, Barbara Fradkin, Donis Casey, Charlotte Hinger, Mario Acevedo, Shelley Burbank, Sybil Johnson, Thomas Kies, Catherine Dilts, and Steve Pease — always ready to Type M for MURDER. “One of 100 Best Creative Writing Blogs.” — Colleges Online. “Typing” since 2006!
Wednesday, May 11, 2016
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
If strangers talked to everybody like they talk to writers
by Rick Blechta
My post topic this week (well, last week, actually, but as you know that never happened) was not going to be on this topic, but an upcoming post by Vicki that’s also gotten rescheduled made me decide to break this one out because it does dovetail nicely with what you’ll be reading from her in a couple of weeks. This post today is primarily directed at writers, but it should prove amusing to anyone who enjoys observing the foibles of human beings.
First, you need to read this: If Strangers Talked to Everybody Like They Talk to Writers. I think Elizabeth McCracken and Lincoln Michel hit the nail squarely on the head, don’t you?
Everything said about the sorts of questions and comments we writers receive from the public is true and accurate. For some reason, when the general public meets a writer, even in the most casual of circumstances, all their social filters seem to shut down. Those of us who are ink-stained wretches have experienced the comments contained in the article I invited you to read. It really is a very odd, disconcerting occurrence, even after many years in the game. I’m always left wondering what I should say. Usually my social filters stay up and I don’t shoot back with a cutting comment or walk away in a huff – but I’m always tempted to do so.
My personal favourite is “Oh! So you're a writer. Would I have read anything of yours?”
How the hell should I know? Unless you suspect me of breaking into your house in the dead of night for the purpose of giving your library a once-over, or being an accomplished mind reader, there is no way of answering such a stupid question. And it’s not as if I’ve gotten this question from unintelligent people. On the contrary, many of them are people who are well-educated and otherwise pretty smart and accomplished. Think lawyers and doctors here, folks.
Regardless, everyone seems ready to dispense helpful hints to those of us who write. From plot ideas (“I'll share my plot idea with you for a 50/50 split of the profits!”) to financial pointers (“You really can’t expect to make your living from something like this, can you? You’ll definitely need to keep a day job going.”), we hear it all at some point or another.
Being a musician as well, I have a lot of friends in the arts. While they do occasionally get asked similar sorts of questions, it’s not a constant thing. Every time I’m invited to a party, for instance, I ask myself how many slightly embarrassing, more than frank, questions I’ll be subjected to.
Why is that? Is there some sort of open season on writers about which I’m not aware?
My post topic this week (well, last week, actually, but as you know that never happened) was not going to be on this topic, but an upcoming post by Vicki that’s also gotten rescheduled made me decide to break this one out because it does dovetail nicely with what you’ll be reading from her in a couple of weeks. This post today is primarily directed at writers, but it should prove amusing to anyone who enjoys observing the foibles of human beings.
First, you need to read this: If Strangers Talked to Everybody Like They Talk to Writers. I think Elizabeth McCracken and Lincoln Michel hit the nail squarely on the head, don’t you?
Everything said about the sorts of questions and comments we writers receive from the public is true and accurate. For some reason, when the general public meets a writer, even in the most casual of circumstances, all their social filters seem to shut down. Those of us who are ink-stained wretches have experienced the comments contained in the article I invited you to read. It really is a very odd, disconcerting occurrence, even after many years in the game. I’m always left wondering what I should say. Usually my social filters stay up and I don’t shoot back with a cutting comment or walk away in a huff – but I’m always tempted to do so.
My personal favourite is “Oh! So you're a writer. Would I have read anything of yours?”
How the hell should I know? Unless you suspect me of breaking into your house in the dead of night for the purpose of giving your library a once-over, or being an accomplished mind reader, there is no way of answering such a stupid question. And it’s not as if I’ve gotten this question from unintelligent people. On the contrary, many of them are people who are well-educated and otherwise pretty smart and accomplished. Think lawyers and doctors here, folks.
Regardless, everyone seems ready to dispense helpful hints to those of us who write. From plot ideas (“I'll share my plot idea with you for a 50/50 split of the profits!”) to financial pointers (“You really can’t expect to make your living from something like this, can you? You’ll definitely need to keep a day job going.”), we hear it all at some point or another.
Being a musician as well, I have a lot of friends in the arts. While they do occasionally get asked similar sorts of questions, it’s not a constant thing. Every time I’m invited to a party, for instance, I ask myself how many slightly embarrassing, more than frank, questions I’ll be subjected to.
Why is that? Is there some sort of open season on writers about which I’m not aware?
Monday, May 09, 2016
Keep Calm and Carry On. And They Did.
By Vicki Delany
What prompted this little bit of insightful wisdom from me
was this video.
Watch it until the end.
What struck me so much about this was the lack of panic. People are driving though a fire storm like
they’re heading to the office or the mall.
Police are directing traffic as fire rains down around them, and everyone
waits their turn.
And no one (so far, except for a young woman killed in a car
accident) has been hurt. An entire city
of 80,000 evacuated in a fire storm and no one is dead or injured.
I can only think that it’s because no one panicked, and if
they did there were people around to calm them down.
When people panic, then people die. Keep
calm and carry on might be a trite saying for coffee mugs and T-shirts, but in
this instance it worked.
Easy for me to say of course, because I am not in the thick
of things, and who knows how any of us would react until the time comes.
Good job, Fort McMurrayites.
For an insiders-view of the evacuation, my friend and
fellow-writer Kevin Thornton has a good piece in the New York Times:
Saturday, May 07, 2016
Guest Blogger: Charles Benoit
This week’s guest blogger is one of the founding members of Type M for Murder, Charles Benoit. He is a man of many talents: novelist, copywriter, producer, tenor saxophonist, bon vivant and brilliant conversationalist. An evening in a bar is always well-spent when in Charles’ company. Originally a straight-up crime novelist, he now inhabits (very successfully) the world of the young adult novel – but as always, crime is involved. Find out more about the man and his works at charlesbenoit.com. (And be sure to visit his website. It’s hilarious.)
Author as Character
by Charles Benoit
When I do talks at schools, students always ask me if the protagonists in my novels are thinly veiled autobiographical representations of my younger self. Actually, what they say is “Are you that guy in the book?”
In my latest novel, Snow Job, a D- high school senior ends up running large amounts of cocaine for a drug-crazed dealer, all while plotting with the dealer’s possibly prostitute girlfriend to rip off said dealer and ignore the murder they’re pretty sure happened. So my answer to those students is “No. And you can’t prove otherwise.”
There’s a bit of the author in everything we write, whether it’s the dashing good looks and Magic Mike physique or, as in my case, the confused expression and the ability to consistently make the wrong decision. I don’t set out to put myself in the books I write, but somehow I always end up in there anyway. It’s never a singular trait that’s unique to me—is there even such a thing?—but rather a characteristic or two that those who know me well would easily identify. At least that’s what I assume when I spot them in the revision process, glaring off the page at me like an angry tip-of-the-nose zit.
But the funny thing is no one else seems to see them. Friends whom I assume would notice the that’s-so-Charles traits in characters seem to think that I was referencing someone else—and that someone else is usually them. They like to claim that a character’s clueless nature or dim-witted dorkiness was inspired by their own lives. When I point out that no, that character was truly an autobiographical extension, they smile and shake their heads, chuckling at how wrong I am.
And that’s a good thing.
It means that somehow I managed to create characters that seem so real and relatable that people I wasn’t thinking about at all assume I was writing specifically about them. Or it could mean that my friends are empathetic readers who lose themselves in the story, becoming the characters they encounter. Or it means they didn’t read the book and are just playing it off to be polite.
So in the end, yeah, I am the guy in the book. But if I did it right, so are you.
Labels:
Author as Character,
Charles Benoit,
Snow Job
Friday, May 06, 2016
Real People and Fiction
I can't resist joining this week's discussion about the use of real people's stories in fiction. I have done it, too. Because my character, Lizzie Stuart, is a crime historian, she is often concerned with cases from the past. I draw on real life cases, most of them involving ordinary people who would have passed their lives in obscurity if not for their involvement in a crime.
I use the stories of these real people as inspiration and starting point, spinning form fact (or what is believed to be fact) into fiction. For example, in A Dead Man's Honor, the book began with a real-life lynching. I changed the victim and the crime that served as the catalyst for the lynching. I made the man who was lynched innocent of the crime. I inserted Lizzie's grandmother into the story as a child who had witnessed what happened.
A teenager girl's life and death was the starting point for another book. She had killed a woman and she was executed by the state of Virginia. The true story was sad and frustrating. The girl, whose name was Virginia Christian, was a member of a sharecropping family. She worked in the home of the widow who owned the land. During an argument and a physical confrontation, she killed her employer. I went to the Library of Virginia to go through the documents related to the case. A page from the 1912 record of Christian's appearance in court and the discussion of the charges against her appears to the left. Christian's story and that of her victim became the starting point for Old Murders. In my version, Lizzie encounters Christian's lawyer decades after he had failed to save his client's life.
In the same way, real people have found their way into my Hannah McCabe books. In the McCabe books, these people have been better known. John Wilkes Booth (long dead, but not forgotten) plays a pivotal role in The Red Queen Dies. But there is another story involving ordinary people and an abandoned school that I would love to tell. In my mind that story has become interwoven with a newspaper article that I read about an investigation of a boys' school in another state. I have a victim and a case I would love to have McCabe investigate.
I am always interested in the ethics that we bring to bear in writing about real people. In my Author's Note, I acknowledge the inspiration/starting point of real cases and the people I include (if they might be recognized). I explain that I did research to learn more about what happened. But then I turned down another path, spiraled off into make-believe, and what was true was now blurred into fiction.
In my 1939 book, I do have real people appear in cameos. But I'm trying to stay close to what they might have said or done. I want to make sure that J. Edgar Hoover wasn't in Florida when I have him meeting with my FBI agent in Washington, D. C. I also want what he says to reflect his attitude about the looming likelihood of war and the real-life people being investigated.
This topic sometimes comes up when I'm doing an event. Someone from the audience will come up after it's over and tell me about someone they know who has been involved in a crime as victim or offender or an old family story about an uncle or a grandfather. This person often wants to write a book about what happened and is wondering whether to try a novel or true crime. I tell him or her that if there are gaps in the story and people still alive who were involved, I personally would write a novel and change the facts. But that's because I write mysteries.
Anyone else have these chats with people about stories they'd like to tell?
I use the stories of these real people as inspiration and starting point, spinning form fact (or what is believed to be fact) into fiction. For example, in A Dead Man's Honor, the book began with a real-life lynching. I changed the victim and the crime that served as the catalyst for the lynching. I made the man who was lynched innocent of the crime. I inserted Lizzie's grandmother into the story as a child who had witnessed what happened.
A teenager girl's life and death was the starting point for another book. She had killed a woman and she was executed by the state of Virginia. The true story was sad and frustrating. The girl, whose name was Virginia Christian, was a member of a sharecropping family. She worked in the home of the widow who owned the land. During an argument and a physical confrontation, she killed her employer. I went to the Library of Virginia to go through the documents related to the case. A page from the 1912 record of Christian's appearance in court and the discussion of the charges against her appears to the left. Christian's story and that of her victim became the starting point for Old Murders. In my version, Lizzie encounters Christian's lawyer decades after he had failed to save his client's life.
In the same way, real people have found their way into my Hannah McCabe books. In the McCabe books, these people have been better known. John Wilkes Booth (long dead, but not forgotten) plays a pivotal role in The Red Queen Dies. But there is another story involving ordinary people and an abandoned school that I would love to tell. In my mind that story has become interwoven with a newspaper article that I read about an investigation of a boys' school in another state. I have a victim and a case I would love to have McCabe investigate.
I am always interested in the ethics that we bring to bear in writing about real people. In my Author's Note, I acknowledge the inspiration/starting point of real cases and the people I include (if they might be recognized). I explain that I did research to learn more about what happened. But then I turned down another path, spiraled off into make-believe, and what was true was now blurred into fiction.
In my 1939 book, I do have real people appear in cameos. But I'm trying to stay close to what they might have said or done. I want to make sure that J. Edgar Hoover wasn't in Florida when I have him meeting with my FBI agent in Washington, D. C. I also want what he says to reflect his attitude about the looming likelihood of war and the real-life people being investigated.
This topic sometimes comes up when I'm doing an event. Someone from the audience will come up after it's over and tell me about someone they know who has been involved in a crime as victim or offender or an old family story about an uncle or a grandfather. This person often wants to write a book about what happened and is wondering whether to try a novel or true crime. I tell him or her that if there are gaps in the story and people still alive who were involved, I personally would write a novel and change the facts. But that's because I write mysteries.
Anyone else have these chats with people about stories they'd like to tell?
Thursday, May 05, 2016
Never Waste a Good Story
Aline’s entry from Monday concerning the ethics of using a third party’s actual life experience as a plot line, plus last weekend’s guest entry by Leslie Dana Kirby about how her debut novel was inspired by the O.J. Simpson case, brought to mind an entry I (Donis) did on a similar theme several years ago on this very site. I use real events, both historical and personal, all the time in my books. When I use personal events, I either disguise them or ask permission of the individual to whom it happened. I do have the writer’s mind, though, and when I hear an intriguing story, I do not forget it, and like Aline, I ponder long and hard on how I can use it in a book. Sometimes I ponder long and hard for decades, as I noted in this entry from 2011:
My third novel, The Drop Edge of Yonder, was thirty years in the making. There are at least two pivotal scenes in the book that owe their existence to newspaper articles that stayed with me all that time. I read the first story when I lived in Lubbock, Texas, back in the ’70′s. Two women, an elderly mother and her grown daughter, were out shopping together, walking down the street and minding their own business, when a crazy person ran up and attacked the daughter out of the blue. The old mother saved her daughter when she jumped on the crazy man’s back and pummeled him and bit on him and basically beat the heck out of him.
Somewhere around the same time, I read an interview with an old British soldier who had fought the Massoud in Palestine after WWII. He described a fighter who came at him tooth and claw and absolutely refused to be killed, even after he shot him and stabbed him and beat him with the butt of his rifle. The fighter finally sunk his teeth in the soldier’s foot and the soldier had to decapitate him to make him let go. The soldier said it was the scariest thing that had ever happened to him in his life. I took both these images and put them together to create one of the climatic scenes of the book.
The opening scene of Drop Edge isn’t quite as old an image in my head as the other two, but it is also a tale that took me a long time to tell. Seven or eight years before I began writing that particular book, I did a family genealogy for my sibs for Christmas, which as you regular Dear Readers may know, is one of the things that inspired me to write my Alafair Tucker series in the first place . One of the things I learned while doing research on my family was the story of one of my a great-great grandfathers and three of his companions who were returning from the Civil War Battle of Pea Ridge when they stopped a few miles from home to rob a bee hive in a tree. While they were smoking the hive, they were ambushed by bushwhackers and killed. They were found by their families a few hours later but lay dead in the field over night, guarded from wild animals by their wives until morning, when they were buried where they fell.
(p.s. the following was also included in the same 2011 blog entry—I repost it now because it is five years later and the high school reunion is about to recur, and now it is not just depressing, it’s unbelievably depressing) On another topic, I recently received an invitation to a depressingly high-numbered high school reunion coming up in October. I graduated from Nathan Hale High in Tulsa in a class of nearly 700 people. (Nathan Hale is the guy who, while about to be hanged by the British as a spy during the American Revolution, said, “I regret that I have but one life to give for my country,” which I always thought was one of history’s great instances of bravado in the face of death. If it had been me, I might have done my patriotic duty like Nathan did, but when it came time to die, my last words would have been along the lines of , “For the love of God, please don’t hang me.” Of course, nobody would have named a high school after me, either.)
My third novel, The Drop Edge of Yonder, was thirty years in the making. There are at least two pivotal scenes in the book that owe their existence to newspaper articles that stayed with me all that time. I read the first story when I lived in Lubbock, Texas, back in the ’70′s. Two women, an elderly mother and her grown daughter, were out shopping together, walking down the street and minding their own business, when a crazy person ran up and attacked the daughter out of the blue. The old mother saved her daughter when she jumped on the crazy man’s back and pummeled him and bit on him and basically beat the heck out of him.
Somewhere around the same time, I read an interview with an old British soldier who had fought the Massoud in Palestine after WWII. He described a fighter who came at him tooth and claw and absolutely refused to be killed, even after he shot him and stabbed him and beat him with the butt of his rifle. The fighter finally sunk his teeth in the soldier’s foot and the soldier had to decapitate him to make him let go. The soldier said it was the scariest thing that had ever happened to him in his life. I took both these images and put them together to create one of the climatic scenes of the book.
The opening scene of Drop Edge isn’t quite as old an image in my head as the other two, but it is also a tale that took me a long time to tell. Seven or eight years before I began writing that particular book, I did a family genealogy for my sibs for Christmas, which as you regular Dear Readers may know, is one of the things that inspired me to write my Alafair Tucker series in the first place . One of the things I learned while doing research on my family was the story of one of my a great-great grandfathers and three of his companions who were returning from the Civil War Battle of Pea Ridge when they stopped a few miles from home to rob a bee hive in a tree. While they were smoking the hive, they were ambushed by bushwhackers and killed. They were found by their families a few hours later but lay dead in the field over night, guarded from wild animals by their wives until morning, when they were buried where they fell.
(p.s. the following was also included in the same 2011 blog entry—I repost it now because it is five years later and the high school reunion is about to recur, and now it is not just depressing, it’s unbelievably depressing) On another topic, I recently received an invitation to a depressingly high-numbered high school reunion coming up in October. I graduated from Nathan Hale High in Tulsa in a class of nearly 700 people. (Nathan Hale is the guy who, while about to be hanged by the British as a spy during the American Revolution, said, “I regret that I have but one life to give for my country,” which I always thought was one of history’s great instances of bravado in the face of death. If it had been me, I might have done my patriotic duty like Nathan did, but when it came time to die, my last words would have been along the lines of , “For the love of God, please don’t hang me.” Of course, nobody would have named a high school after me, either.)
Wednesday, May 04, 2016
Politics, money, and the Arthur Ellis Awards
Barbara here. In my last blog, I talked about the Arthur Ellis Awards (and taxes, but let's not go there). They are Canada's premiere awards for crime fiction, which for some reason never seems to make it onto the other Canadian fiction awards lists like the Giller and the Governor General Awards. Not that we're complaining, really. With the bigger awards, there is the issue of politics and money, which are really two sides of the same coin. Money not only in terms of the size of the prize, which in the case of the Giller is $100,000, but in terms of the huge surge in sales, which allows both publisher and author to live to create another book. Perhaps even longer.
Because of this, politics rears its ugly head. Writers compete, publishers size up potential books in terms of their ability to win the big prizes, writers can be dumped if their books aren't nominated, rumours of influence and backroom deals abound, publishers lobby, and writers chafe with secret envy. Media scramble to do features on the latest literary stars, thus producing priceless additional publicity.
I should say at this point that since my last blog, the Arthur Ellis shortlists have been announced, and my Rapid Reads book, THE NIGHT THIEF, was shortlisted in the best novella category. Three other Ottawa authors were also shortlisted in other categories; Peggy Blair for HUNGRY CHOSTS in Best Novel, Jeff Ross for SET YOU FREE in Juvenile/ Young Adult, and Pam Isfeld for BRAVE GIRLS in the unpublished manuscript category. We are all thrilled. Our local paper, the Ottawa Citizen, ran a story on us which was picked up by many major dailies across the country because its owner, Postmedia, happens to own most of the newspapers in the country.
This publicity, along with a well-timed phone call, led to three of us appearing on the local CBC radio afternoon show, during which the host asked what impact such an honour would have on our lives. After suppressing a laugh, I was tempted to say “huge!”, but the truth is, the impact is subtle. In fact, you have to be a serious optimistic to see it at first. Politics and money play very little part in winning these awards, once again because the two go hand in hand. There is little or no prize money attached to these awards, and an author's future does not hinge on winning or losing one. Most crime writers can count on a modest income that may never lift them above the poverty line but that will grow slowly as they prove themselves and continue to write consistently good books. Crime writers build readership good book by good book, often in a series, rather than by one spectacularly brilliant book.
Because there are no politics and money, crime writers rarely compete with each other (and we suffer only occasional tweaks of envy), but instead we find there is solidarity and fun in cooperation. Readers who read one crime writer usually read others, so it's not a matter of competing for readers but rather sharing them. Crime writers are generally the friendliest and most supportive of colleagues, and because there's little money or fame at stake, we know the friendship is without strings or self-interest. There are benefits to being frozen out of that $100,000 prize money!
So besides avoiding the jealousies, anxieties, and financial windstorms of literary prizes, what are these subtle benefits of the Arthur Ellis Awards? Most importantly, they are an affirmation of one's achievement as an author. Independently judged by a jury of experienced book people, they are an acknowledgement that your work stands out among its peers as excellent. This in itself is a huge boost to one's confidence and self-worth. Authors labour for months, often years, in the privacy of our little rooms, trying to produce a work of substance, but we really have little idea whether we've succeeded until the verdict comes back from readers. These awards are that verdict. Believe in yourself. Believe in your writing. It's good.
Secondly, the awards give a writer gravitas. Beyond bragging rights, winning the award brings respect from the book world in general, in the form of libraries, bookstores, reviewers, and media, and from fellow writers as well. No one can ever take that award away from you, and everyone takes a little more notice of you once you have that funny little hangman statue on your mantle. You may not have the media hounding you for feature articles, but when your next book comes out, reviewers may pick it up from the huge pile accumulating on their office floor.
Along with the increased respect comes a related, third, benefit; more name recognition and thus, more invitations to book events. Canada is full of literary festivals, readings, celebrations, and events. A lot of factors influence literary festival invitations, including the author's popularity, the size of the publisher's purse and publicity machine, the tastes of the organizers and their past experiences with authors. But one thing is certain; it's difficult to get invited if no one has heard of you. Organizers look for fresh faces and new talents. They look for authors whose works have been vetted. The Arthur Ellis Award, like other respected juried awards, provides that vetting.
Awards are subjective, and many good books do not get nominated. While being nominated is good for the ego, it does not follow that not being nominated is a mark of failure. Certain styles of book seem to get nominated over and over, while other equally excellent books do not. I believe this is partly due to the judging experience itself. Juries read dozens of books in rapid succession, so a book with a unique style or a compelling opening will catch their flagging attention more than subtler stories. In my experience, the majority of readers enjoy a good book and are not much influenced by the Arthur Ellis Awards, mainly because they've never heard of them.
On May 26, Crime Writers of Canada will celebrate all Canadian crime writing at its annual awards gala. I will be there, looking forward to raising a glass with my friends and colleagues, whether they are competing for a funny little hangman or not. Good luck to all!
Because of this, politics rears its ugly head. Writers compete, publishers size up potential books in terms of their ability to win the big prizes, writers can be dumped if their books aren't nominated, rumours of influence and backroom deals abound, publishers lobby, and writers chafe with secret envy. Media scramble to do features on the latest literary stars, thus producing priceless additional publicity.
I should say at this point that since my last blog, the Arthur Ellis shortlists have been announced, and my Rapid Reads book, THE NIGHT THIEF, was shortlisted in the best novella category. Three other Ottawa authors were also shortlisted in other categories; Peggy Blair for HUNGRY CHOSTS in Best Novel, Jeff Ross for SET YOU FREE in Juvenile/ Young Adult, and Pam Isfeld for BRAVE GIRLS in the unpublished manuscript category. We are all thrilled. Our local paper, the Ottawa Citizen, ran a story on us which was picked up by many major dailies across the country because its owner, Postmedia, happens to own most of the newspapers in the country.
This publicity, along with a well-timed phone call, led to three of us appearing on the local CBC radio afternoon show, during which the host asked what impact such an honour would have on our lives. After suppressing a laugh, I was tempted to say “huge!”, but the truth is, the impact is subtle. In fact, you have to be a serious optimistic to see it at first. Politics and money play very little part in winning these awards, once again because the two go hand in hand. There is little or no prize money attached to these awards, and an author's future does not hinge on winning or losing one. Most crime writers can count on a modest income that may never lift them above the poverty line but that will grow slowly as they prove themselves and continue to write consistently good books. Crime writers build readership good book by good book, often in a series, rather than by one spectacularly brilliant book.
Because there are no politics and money, crime writers rarely compete with each other (and we suffer only occasional tweaks of envy), but instead we find there is solidarity and fun in cooperation. Readers who read one crime writer usually read others, so it's not a matter of competing for readers but rather sharing them. Crime writers are generally the friendliest and most supportive of colleagues, and because there's little money or fame at stake, we know the friendship is without strings or self-interest. There are benefits to being frozen out of that $100,000 prize money!
Arthur and I |
Secondly, the awards give a writer gravitas. Beyond bragging rights, winning the award brings respect from the book world in general, in the form of libraries, bookstores, reviewers, and media, and from fellow writers as well. No one can ever take that award away from you, and everyone takes a little more notice of you once you have that funny little hangman statue on your mantle. You may not have the media hounding you for feature articles, but when your next book comes out, reviewers may pick it up from the huge pile accumulating on their office floor.
Along with the increased respect comes a related, third, benefit; more name recognition and thus, more invitations to book events. Canada is full of literary festivals, readings, celebrations, and events. A lot of factors influence literary festival invitations, including the author's popularity, the size of the publisher's purse and publicity machine, the tastes of the organizers and their past experiences with authors. But one thing is certain; it's difficult to get invited if no one has heard of you. Organizers look for fresh faces and new talents. They look for authors whose works have been vetted. The Arthur Ellis Award, like other respected juried awards, provides that vetting.
Awards are subjective, and many good books do not get nominated. While being nominated is good for the ego, it does not follow that not being nominated is a mark of failure. Certain styles of book seem to get nominated over and over, while other equally excellent books do not. I believe this is partly due to the judging experience itself. Juries read dozens of books in rapid succession, so a book with a unique style or a compelling opening will catch their flagging attention more than subtler stories. In my experience, the majority of readers enjoy a good book and are not much influenced by the Arthur Ellis Awards, mainly because they've never heard of them.
On May 26, Crime Writers of Canada will celebrate all Canadian crime writing at its annual awards gala. I will be there, looking forward to raising a glass with my friends and colleagues, whether they are competing for a funny little hangman or not. Good luck to all!
Monday, May 02, 2016
The Ethics of Real Life and Fiction
Supposing you had a friend or a family member who found themselves in a difficult position, one that was unpleasant or perhaps even dangerous, but viewed with a writer’s eye it was very, very intriguing.
It presented to you the idea for a book on a plate. The plot would have a wrinkle that you could never have thought of yourself, but that would give the book absolutely the sort of USP that publishers are always looking for.
But whatever you did in the way of changes to setting, names, personnel, the story is so unique that when he or she read it, they would know it was about them. Could you use it?
I’d never really thought about this, until a situation like that did come my way. Tempting though it was, I couldn’t bring myself to do it: I wouldn’t have had the courage to face them afterwards. It was eating me up totally, but it would feel a betrayal, like reducing their experience to being nothing more than a useful theme and I’d be capitalising on their problems for my own success.
Sounds very nice and moral, doesn’t it? But now, thinking about it, I have used real life stories to inspire some of mine. Someone has talked about someone they knew in an interesting situation, something has been reported in the newspaper: I have used those without considering that if they happened to read the book, they would know it was based on them.
The central figure in my book, Bad Blood, is the daughter of a woman who killed a child when she was only a child herself and who after serving her sentence was given a new identity. There was a celebrated case in Britain many years ago – the conviction of Mary Bell, who did just that.
I can’t deny that this situation was in my mind when I wrote the book. Mary’s adult identity was never disclosed but it was known that she had had a child. The action in my book doesn’t in any way mirror the case, but it was what prompted me to wonder what it would feel like to be the daughter of someone like that and the story followed. I rather hope now that Mary’s daughter, whoever she is, never reads it.
So, not so moral after all. Graham Greene talked about the chip of ice in the heart of every writer; we probably all have it. It’s just a question of degree.
It presented to you the idea for a book on a plate. The plot would have a wrinkle that you could never have thought of yourself, but that would give the book absolutely the sort of USP that publishers are always looking for.
But whatever you did in the way of changes to setting, names, personnel, the story is so unique that when he or she read it, they would know it was about them. Could you use it?
I’d never really thought about this, until a situation like that did come my way. Tempting though it was, I couldn’t bring myself to do it: I wouldn’t have had the courage to face them afterwards. It was eating me up totally, but it would feel a betrayal, like reducing their experience to being nothing more than a useful theme and I’d be capitalising on their problems for my own success.
Sounds very nice and moral, doesn’t it? But now, thinking about it, I have used real life stories to inspire some of mine. Someone has talked about someone they knew in an interesting situation, something has been reported in the newspaper: I have used those without considering that if they happened to read the book, they would know it was based on them.
The central figure in my book, Bad Blood, is the daughter of a woman who killed a child when she was only a child herself and who after serving her sentence was given a new identity. There was a celebrated case in Britain many years ago – the conviction of Mary Bell, who did just that.
I can’t deny that this situation was in my mind when I wrote the book. Mary’s adult identity was never disclosed but it was known that she had had a child. The action in my book doesn’t in any way mirror the case, but it was what prompted me to wonder what it would feel like to be the daughter of someone like that and the story followed. I rather hope now that Mary’s daughter, whoever she is, never reads it.
So, not so moral after all. Graham Greene talked about the chip of ice in the heart of every writer; we probably all have it. It’s just a question of degree.
Saturday, April 30, 2016
Guest Blogger Leslie Dana Kirby
Type M is thrilled to welcome Leslie Dana Kirby, whose debut novel The Perfect Game has recently been issued by Poisoned Pen Press. Leslie is a practicing clinical psychologist with a keen interest in human behavior. Dr. Kirby’s writing is inspired by headline-grabbing stories involving ordinary people caught up by extraordinary circumstances. Luckily for her, and for us, there appears to be no end to the shocking ways in which human behavior can surprise and intrigue us.
When Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were brutally murdered on June 12, 1994, I was in graduate school working toward my doctorate degree in clinical psychology. I spent my days attending classes, teaching undergraduates, and treating patients under supervision. I was spending my evenings reading journal articles and writing literature reviews. Although I have always loved reading, I didn’t have a spare moment to read for pleasure. I was completely absorbed in my studies and looking forward to my upcoming residency and career in psychology. However, my laser-like focus was derailed by this brutal crime, the ensuing investigation, and the resulting “Trial of the Century.” Although I had never been much of a professional football fan, even I recognized O.J. “the Juice” Simpson, although admittedly more for his roles in movies and commercials.
To say that I became enthralled by the trial would be a gross understatement. As I left for school each morning, I would carefully set an eight-hour VHS tape to record the daily trial coverage. In the evenings, I would rush through my homework and settle in to watch the trial. I abandoned all of my other regular television viewing, including ER, Seinfeld, and N.Y.P.D. Blue. It was entirely worth it to me because I found the trial provided better characters, conflict, and suspense than any other show on television. Important eyewitnesses were discredited for selling their stories to the tabloids, important timelines were established by a barking dog, a prosecution witness (Kato Kaelin) had to be declared a hostile witness by the the prosecutor who called him to testify, a glove demonstration went terribly awry, and a police detective asserted his own fifth amendment privilege on the witness stand. At the time, I remember saying that if the trial was written as a novel, it would be quickly dismissed as being ridiculous and fantastic. This real life trial provided more plot twists than any legal thriller that I had ever read. My graduate school mentor, who was an expert in psychology and the law, frequently tried to dissuade my interest by reminding me that this trial was not representative of the typical jury trial. I continued my obsession undeterred.
Although I had always been a diligent student, I admit to ditching class in order to hear the verdict read when the trial finally came to a close after more than eight months. Like many in the nation, I was shocked and dismayed when Simpson was acquitted in the face of a “mountain of evidence.” I clearly remember feeling particular empathy toward the family members of the victims, particularly Fred Goldman who had advocated so passionately for his son throughout the trial. What would I have done if one of the victims had been my loved one? What if Nicole had been my sister? And so the idea for my first novel was born.
But, alas, life interfered with my goal to write a book. When the trial ended, I resumed my studies in earnest and finished my graduate program in the spring of 1996. I went on to my clinical residency, joined the military, got married, and had two children. All of which explains why my first novel, The Perfect Game, wasn’t published until March 2015, more than 20 years after the murders of Brown-Simpson and Goldman.
In The Perfect Game, Lauren Rose is a medical intern who is devastated when her only sister, Liz, is murdered. Complicating matters is the fact that Liz was married to baseball pitching superstar, Jake Wakefield. As the sole beneficiary to Liz’s large life insurance policy, Lauren is quickly identified as a prime suspect. Given Jake’s fame, the media coverage during the police investigation and eventual trial is relentless. While the story is loosely based upon the Simpson case, the twists and turns take a very different course. Remember my impression that the developments of the Simpson case were too outlandish to incorporate into a novel? And in my opinion, The Perfect Game offers a much more satisfying conclusion than the real trial . . . although the fact that Simpson later landed himself in prison for a crime resulting from his attempt to hide his assets from the Goldman family also offered a very poetic justice.
I was surprised when the Simpson case landed back in the news this year as a result of the television miniseries, but I shouldn’t have been. As I have been watching American Crime Story: The People vs. O.J. Simpson miniseries, I have become fixated once again. I have been thoroughly enjoying the peek behind the curtains that the series offers. As a result of my husband’s work, I have met Fred Goldman and as a result of my book, I have also met Marcia Clark. I have been watching the series with my own daughter, who frequently reacts with this question, “That didn’t really happen, did it?”
Believe it or not, that is exactly what happened!
_______________
Leslie lives in Arizona with her husband and two children. The Perfect Game is available from Poisoned Pen Press, and wherever books are sold.
O.J. Simpson; Art Imitates Life
When Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were brutally murdered on June 12, 1994, I was in graduate school working toward my doctorate degree in clinical psychology. I spent my days attending classes, teaching undergraduates, and treating patients under supervision. I was spending my evenings reading journal articles and writing literature reviews. Although I have always loved reading, I didn’t have a spare moment to read for pleasure. I was completely absorbed in my studies and looking forward to my upcoming residency and career in psychology. However, my laser-like focus was derailed by this brutal crime, the ensuing investigation, and the resulting “Trial of the Century.” Although I had never been much of a professional football fan, even I recognized O.J. “the Juice” Simpson, although admittedly more for his roles in movies and commercials.
To say that I became enthralled by the trial would be a gross understatement. As I left for school each morning, I would carefully set an eight-hour VHS tape to record the daily trial coverage. In the evenings, I would rush through my homework and settle in to watch the trial. I abandoned all of my other regular television viewing, including ER, Seinfeld, and N.Y.P.D. Blue. It was entirely worth it to me because I found the trial provided better characters, conflict, and suspense than any other show on television. Important eyewitnesses were discredited for selling their stories to the tabloids, important timelines were established by a barking dog, a prosecution witness (Kato Kaelin) had to be declared a hostile witness by the the prosecutor who called him to testify, a glove demonstration went terribly awry, and a police detective asserted his own fifth amendment privilege on the witness stand. At the time, I remember saying that if the trial was written as a novel, it would be quickly dismissed as being ridiculous and fantastic. This real life trial provided more plot twists than any legal thriller that I had ever read. My graduate school mentor, who was an expert in psychology and the law, frequently tried to dissuade my interest by reminding me that this trial was not representative of the typical jury trial. I continued my obsession undeterred.
Although I had always been a diligent student, I admit to ditching class in order to hear the verdict read when the trial finally came to a close after more than eight months. Like many in the nation, I was shocked and dismayed when Simpson was acquitted in the face of a “mountain of evidence.” I clearly remember feeling particular empathy toward the family members of the victims, particularly Fred Goldman who had advocated so passionately for his son throughout the trial. What would I have done if one of the victims had been my loved one? What if Nicole had been my sister? And so the idea for my first novel was born.
But, alas, life interfered with my goal to write a book. When the trial ended, I resumed my studies in earnest and finished my graduate program in the spring of 1996. I went on to my clinical residency, joined the military, got married, and had two children. All of which explains why my first novel, The Perfect Game, wasn’t published until March 2015, more than 20 years after the murders of Brown-Simpson and Goldman.
In The Perfect Game, Lauren Rose is a medical intern who is devastated when her only sister, Liz, is murdered. Complicating matters is the fact that Liz was married to baseball pitching superstar, Jake Wakefield. As the sole beneficiary to Liz’s large life insurance policy, Lauren is quickly identified as a prime suspect. Given Jake’s fame, the media coverage during the police investigation and eventual trial is relentless. While the story is loosely based upon the Simpson case, the twists and turns take a very different course. Remember my impression that the developments of the Simpson case were too outlandish to incorporate into a novel? And in my opinion, The Perfect Game offers a much more satisfying conclusion than the real trial . . . although the fact that Simpson later landed himself in prison for a crime resulting from his attempt to hide his assets from the Goldman family also offered a very poetic justice.
I was surprised when the Simpson case landed back in the news this year as a result of the television miniseries, but I shouldn’t have been. As I have been watching American Crime Story: The People vs. O.J. Simpson miniseries, I have become fixated once again. I have been thoroughly enjoying the peek behind the curtains that the series offers. As a result of my husband’s work, I have met Fred Goldman and as a result of my book, I have also met Marcia Clark. I have been watching the series with my own daughter, who frequently reacts with this question, “That didn’t really happen, did it?”
Believe it or not, that is exactly what happened!
_______________
Leslie lives in Arizona with her husband and two children. The Perfect Game is available from Poisoned Pen Press, and wherever books are sold.
Friday, April 29, 2016
Country mouse/City mouse
I grew up in the very tiny town of Lone Elm Kansas. In a real sense, Anderson County will always be "home" to me. All of my family and my husband's family lived there and are now buried there.
In the Lottie Albright series, published by Poisoned Pen Press, the protagonists are twin sisters. Lottie is an historian who moved to Western Kansas when she married. Her sister Josie stayed in Eastern Kansas where they both were born. Writing about the two halves of the state has been a great way to play up the tension between the twins. Josie thinks Lottie is crazy for ever moving there. Lottie despairs of Josie's insensitivity to the grandeur of the prairie.
In fact the two halves of Kansas are like two different planets. The historic animosity of these two entities affects plotting in the series. I have lived in both places long enough to be acutely aware of the differences. Someone asked me once how this came about.
Militarily, Eastern Kansas is associated with the Civil War and Western Kansas with the Indian Wars. Eastern Kansas was settled much earlier. Western Kansas was labeled part of the Great American Desert and said to be virtually uninhabitable. It seemed to Eastern Kansans (the city cousins) that Western Kansans (the country bumpkins) were always looking for a hand-out.
In Western Kansas crops failed. Grasshoppers ate everything in sight. There were prairie fires and tornadoes and blizzards and Indian raids. Then by some miracle fortunes shifted. Western Kansas became the breadbasket of the world. Settlers struck oil. They discovered vast fields of natural gas.
Mining developed in Southeast Kansas and there was lively trade and shipping along the Missouri River. Population centers grew and suddenly the city cousins wanted part of their country cousins' tax revenue to finance their schools.
It's fun to watch the Albright twins argue about "their" place in the state as well as their roles in murder investigations. When a book stalls, try researching the history of your state or region. The information might jump-start your plot.
Labels:
city,
country,
Eastern Kansas,
Lottie Albright,
Poisoned Pen,
taxes,
tornado,
twins,
Western Kansas
Thursday, April 28, 2016
Fresh Ideas
I have an idea.
Really, you say. A writer with an idea. Is that newsworthy?
Probably not. But it feels like a big deal to me. You see, I've spent ten years with the same protagonist, written perhaps 3,000 pages to get three published novels. And for the past three years, I've had . . . not exactly a conceptualized idea, but a voice kicking around in my head. And a voice is a character knocking on the front door, waiting to be let in. Last week, I opened the door, and he walked in, bringing a whole cast of characters and problems with him.
So I sat down and wrote a description of the setting, the cast, and a synopsis (something you might find on the dust jacket). The synopsis concludes with these three sentences: Money, power, and political swag go a long way in explaining a hidden truth. And some secrets are never meant to be told. Unbeknownst to Bo and Ellie, this one threatens not only them but their daughters as well.
And that's where I began. I sat down and started writing. What's the secret Ellie and Bo will learn? I have no idea. Not yet. Looking forward to finding out. I'm not working from an outline, just a 730-word, wide-open description. And something fun has happened: I having a blast writing this book. The voice keeps talking, the story is unfolding, and the book is taking off.
It's a rush. And that rush is why I do it. It's why I get up at 4 and write until 6 a.m. most days. Not for a contract. Not for a royalty check. And never for reviews.
Where will the novel go? No idea. But I'm looking forward to finding out.
Really, you say. A writer with an idea. Is that newsworthy?
So I sat down and wrote a description of the setting, the cast, and a synopsis (something you might find on the dust jacket). The synopsis concludes with these three sentences: Money, power, and political swag go a long way in explaining a hidden truth. And some secrets are never meant to be told. Unbeknownst to Bo and Ellie, this one threatens not only them but their daughters as well.
It's a rush. And that rush is why I do it. It's why I get up at 4 and write until 6 a.m. most days. Not for a contract. Not for a royalty check. And never for reviews.
Where will the novel go? No idea. But I'm looking forward to finding out.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
Musings on American English
Sybil here. As you read this, I’m on my way to the Malice Domestic conference in Bethesda, MD. I’m also finishing up Book 3 in my Aurora Anderson Mystery series. To say I’m stressed would be an understatement.
When I’m stressed out, I get annoyed at little things and get a bit nit picky about how people speak or write English. Don’t worry, I don’t actually correct people. Okay, I might talk to the TV screen, but they can’t hear me so...
I’ve taken enough linguistic classes to know a language is a living thing, in a constant take of flux. Words get added, deleted, change meanings all the time. I get that. I also get that grammar changes over time. What was once considered unacceptable and bad grammar becomes the norm.
I’m not a grammar snob. My own isn’t ‘correct’ all the time, but some things annoy me or, at least, bring me up short. Here’s my current list:
How do you pronounce ‘primer’?
Pronunciation of this word is one of my hot buttons. In American English it's pronounced two different ways, depending on its meaning. Go ahead, consult your American English dictionary if you don’t believe me. You back? If we’re talking about a book, it’s pronounced with a short ‘i’ like “primmer”. If we’re talking paint, it’s pronounced with a long ‘i’. I don’t know how many times I’ve been literally laughed at for pronouncing this word correctly. My gut response is: “Read the dictionary, people!”, but I usually just say that’s what the dictionary says. One of my AE dictionaries did note that in British English, the book is pronounced the same as the paint. I'd be interested to know if this is true. So, you speakers of British English, let me know.
Waiting/standing on line v. in line
This preposition difference between coasts only came to my attention in the last few years. I’ve lived on the West coast my entire life. We stand or wait ‘in line’ here. On the East coast, though, ‘on line’ seems to be preferred. You East Coasters can stand or wait on line all you want. I’ll stick with ‘in line.’ But when a character in a book that we’re told has lived on the West coast their entire life stands “on line”, I sit up and take notice. It bothers me, okay. Brings me right out of the story. I read a book once where that happened and it bothered me for pages. Okay, it’s still bothering me years later. Stupid, I know, but that’s the way it is.
pled v. pleaded
Okay, this one I know is not incorrect. I was just taught that the proper past tense of ‘to plead’ is pled. Both are listed in my American English dictionaries, though pled seems to have pretty much gone out of every day use. All of the news articles on crime that I read use the form ‘pleaded’. Still jars me, though. Yep, I’m old.
‘she’ used as a generic pronoun
English needs a generic 3rd person pronoun. It really does. Neither ‘he’ nor ‘she’ seems to work well. I was taught ‘he’ is the proper generic to use in English so that’s what I use. Now, I grew up in the 60s and 70s. I remember when single women couldn’t get mortgages without a man to cosign a loan. I understand the issue. I didn’t change my name when I got married, my own little womens’ rights protest, something quite unusual at the time. Years and years ago, I started seeing ‘she’ used in this context all over the place. Makes me pause every time. I know this is my problem. I’m okay with that. Just don’t tell me I’m wrong when I use ‘he’ as my generic.
than + preposition
This one I think I’m going to have to let go. It’s become too ingrained in current American English. Still, it grates on my nerves to hear someone say “he’s taller than me.” I was taught the correct preposition in this case is ‘I’ and here’s how you know: extend the sentence to use the proper form of the verb ‘to be’, e.g. He’s taller than I am. You can cut off the verb or leave it in. I tend to leave it in, because I admit it sounds a little odd otherwise. I did catch myself saying ‘taller than me’ the other day, though. Guess it really is time to ignore this one.
I’ve shown you my list of nitpicks. What things annoy you or at least cause you to pause?
When I’m stressed out, I get annoyed at little things and get a bit nit picky about how people speak or write English. Don’t worry, I don’t actually correct people. Okay, I might talk to the TV screen, but they can’t hear me so...
I’ve taken enough linguistic classes to know a language is a living thing, in a constant take of flux. Words get added, deleted, change meanings all the time. I get that. I also get that grammar changes over time. What was once considered unacceptable and bad grammar becomes the norm.
I’m not a grammar snob. My own isn’t ‘correct’ all the time, but some things annoy me or, at least, bring me up short. Here’s my current list:
How do you pronounce ‘primer’?
Pronunciation of this word is one of my hot buttons. In American English it's pronounced two different ways, depending on its meaning. Go ahead, consult your American English dictionary if you don’t believe me. You back? If we’re talking about a book, it’s pronounced with a short ‘i’ like “primmer”. If we’re talking paint, it’s pronounced with a long ‘i’. I don’t know how many times I’ve been literally laughed at for pronouncing this word correctly. My gut response is: “Read the dictionary, people!”, but I usually just say that’s what the dictionary says. One of my AE dictionaries did note that in British English, the book is pronounced the same as the paint. I'd be interested to know if this is true. So, you speakers of British English, let me know.
Waiting/standing on line v. in line
This preposition difference between coasts only came to my attention in the last few years. I’ve lived on the West coast my entire life. We stand or wait ‘in line’ here. On the East coast, though, ‘on line’ seems to be preferred. You East Coasters can stand or wait on line all you want. I’ll stick with ‘in line.’ But when a character in a book that we’re told has lived on the West coast their entire life stands “on line”, I sit up and take notice. It bothers me, okay. Brings me right out of the story. I read a book once where that happened and it bothered me for pages. Okay, it’s still bothering me years later. Stupid, I know, but that’s the way it is.
pled v. pleaded
Okay, this one I know is not incorrect. I was just taught that the proper past tense of ‘to plead’ is pled. Both are listed in my American English dictionaries, though pled seems to have pretty much gone out of every day use. All of the news articles on crime that I read use the form ‘pleaded’. Still jars me, though. Yep, I’m old.
‘she’ used as a generic pronoun
English needs a generic 3rd person pronoun. It really does. Neither ‘he’ nor ‘she’ seems to work well. I was taught ‘he’ is the proper generic to use in English so that’s what I use. Now, I grew up in the 60s and 70s. I remember when single women couldn’t get mortgages without a man to cosign a loan. I understand the issue. I didn’t change my name when I got married, my own little womens’ rights protest, something quite unusual at the time. Years and years ago, I started seeing ‘she’ used in this context all over the place. Makes me pause every time. I know this is my problem. I’m okay with that. Just don’t tell me I’m wrong when I use ‘he’ as my generic.
than + preposition
This one I think I’m going to have to let go. It’s become too ingrained in current American English. Still, it grates on my nerves to hear someone say “he’s taller than me.” I was taught the correct preposition in this case is ‘I’ and here’s how you know: extend the sentence to use the proper form of the verb ‘to be’, e.g. He’s taller than I am. You can cut off the verb or leave it in. I tend to leave it in, because I admit it sounds a little odd otherwise. I did catch myself saying ‘taller than me’ the other day, though. Guess it really is time to ignore this one.
I’ve shown you my list of nitpicks. What things annoy you or at least cause you to pause?
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
More rumours & a shout out to the Bony Blithe!
by Rick Blechta
Vicki Delany’s post yesterday made some very good points that need to be heard by those just starting out in the writing game or those contemplating a writing career.
Like any of the creative arts, publishing has more than it’s fair share of sharks and fast operators. It’s always best to look first, then ask a ton of questions, and if something doesn’t seem right or it appears to be too good to be true, rest assured that you are at risk of being taken.
Vicki’s post dealt with rumours about self-publishing, and I believe she correctly surmises that the rumours were started by those who have money to make out of this: vanity presses.
There is nothing inherently wrong with a vanity press. If you desire to publish (and print) your own works, more power to you. It’s just that the vanity press business model is all about selling dreams, and they know darn well that the likelihood of all those dreams of wild author success coming true happen in the neighbourhood of once every ten or fifteen years.
Then there are agents. Take it from me, if an agent asks you for a reading fee, he or she is not a real agent. If after reading your magnum opus, they recommend a great editor they work with, then be very suspicious.
And if anyone asks you to do something for free (especially if they’ll be making money on your efforts) because doing so “will be terrific exposure”, just tell them this: “People can die from exposure, you know.”
Sorry. Gotta run. Bills have to be paid, and well, I’m doing this blog because it’s, um, good exposure...
(Toronto, ON) April 14, 2016 – The Bloody Words Light Mystery Award (aka the Bony Blithe Award), an annual Canadian award that celebrates traditional, feel-good mysteries is pleased to announce this year’s finalists. Now in its fifth year, the award is for a “mystery book that makes us smile” and includes everything from laugh-out-loud to gentle humour to good old-fashioned stories with little violence or gore.
Congratulations to the five finalists for the 2016 award:
Victoria Abbott, The Marsh Madness (Berkley Prime Crime)
Elizabeth J. Duncan, Untimely Death (Crooked Lane Books)
Eva Gates, Booked for Trouble (NAL)
Victoria Hamilton, White Colander Crime (Berkley Prime Crime)
Alexis Koetting, Encore (Five Star)
Help us celebrate Bony Blithe’s fifth birthday at the 2016 Bony Blithe Gala, an afternoon and evening of mirthful mayhem!
The award will be presented at the Bony Blithe Gala on Friday, May 27, at the High Park Club, 100 Indian Road, Toronto. The festivities start at 2:00 p.m. with panels and afternoon nibblies, culminating with the award banquet where the monarch of merry murder will be crowned. For more information or to buy a ticket for the gala, contact us at bw-award@bloodywords.com or visit www.bonyblithe.com.
The winner will receive a cheque for $1,000 plus a colourful plaque.
Thank you to all the publishers and authors who submitted their books for this year’s contest. May there be many smiles in your future.
Website: www.bonyblithe.com
Facebook: Bony Blithe Light Mystery Award
Twitter: @bonyblithe
Vicki Delany’s post yesterday made some very good points that need to be heard by those just starting out in the writing game or those contemplating a writing career.
Like any of the creative arts, publishing has more than it’s fair share of sharks and fast operators. It’s always best to look first, then ask a ton of questions, and if something doesn’t seem right or it appears to be too good to be true, rest assured that you are at risk of being taken.
Vicki’s post dealt with rumours about self-publishing, and I believe she correctly surmises that the rumours were started by those who have money to make out of this: vanity presses.
There is nothing inherently wrong with a vanity press. If you desire to publish (and print) your own works, more power to you. It’s just that the vanity press business model is all about selling dreams, and they know darn well that the likelihood of all those dreams of wild author success coming true happen in the neighbourhood of once every ten or fifteen years.
Then there are agents. Take it from me, if an agent asks you for a reading fee, he or she is not a real agent. If after reading your magnum opus, they recommend a great editor they work with, then be very suspicious.
And if anyone asks you to do something for free (especially if they’ll be making money on your efforts) because doing so “will be terrific exposure”, just tell them this: “People can die from exposure, you know.”
Sorry. Gotta run. Bills have to be paid, and well, I’m doing this blog because it’s, um, good exposure...
As for the shout out:
The Bloody Words Light Mystery Award (aka the Bony Blithe Award) Shortlist was announced on April 14th – and our very own Eva Gates (aka Vicki Delany) is on the list! So are four other people, but I’ll give you the press release for the rest of the information!
Murder Is Nothing to Have Fun With...Or Is It?
Bloody Words Light Mystery Award Announces Finalists
Bloody Words Light Mystery Award Announces Finalists
(Toronto, ON) April 14, 2016 – The Bloody Words Light Mystery Award (aka the Bony Blithe Award), an annual Canadian award that celebrates traditional, feel-good mysteries is pleased to announce this year’s finalists. Now in its fifth year, the award is for a “mystery book that makes us smile” and includes everything from laugh-out-loud to gentle humour to good old-fashioned stories with little violence or gore.
Congratulations to the five finalists for the 2016 award:
Victoria Abbott, The Marsh Madness (Berkley Prime Crime)
Elizabeth J. Duncan, Untimely Death (Crooked Lane Books)
Eva Gates, Booked for Trouble (NAL)
Victoria Hamilton, White Colander Crime (Berkley Prime Crime)
Alexis Koetting, Encore (Five Star)
Help us celebrate Bony Blithe’s fifth birthday at the 2016 Bony Blithe Gala, an afternoon and evening of mirthful mayhem!
The award will be presented at the Bony Blithe Gala on Friday, May 27, at the High Park Club, 100 Indian Road, Toronto. The festivities start at 2:00 p.m. with panels and afternoon nibblies, culminating with the award banquet where the monarch of merry murder will be crowned. For more information or to buy a ticket for the gala, contact us at bw-award@bloodywords.com or visit www.bonyblithe.com.
The winner will receive a cheque for $1,000 plus a colourful plaque.
Thank you to all the publishers and authors who submitted their books for this year’s contest. May there be many smiles in your future.
Website: www.bonyblithe.com
Facebook: Bony Blithe Light Mystery Award
Twitter: @bonyblithe
Monday, April 25, 2016
Rumour Has It
by Vicki Delany
I’ve started hearing this a lot. I heard it again just
yesterday.
Beginning writers are being told that major, traditional
publishers are now only interested in publishing authors who have self-published their first
book. Something like, “to prove they can write a book” or “to show that they’re
serious about writing.”
I suspect this rumor is being circulated by the sort of vanity
presses or self-publishing companies that are, shall we say, less than honest
about their business dealings.
Because it simply isn’t true.
I was at a book signing about a year ago, and a woman came
up to me and started telling me all about this article she’d read in the paper
about some self-published author who’d gotten a major book contract. What did I think about that? I said that the
reason it was in the newspaper was because it was so unusual.
They’ve all heard about Fifty
Shades of Gray, or similar books that were self-published and only then did
the author get a big contract. Fair enough.
Nothing wrong with having something to attempt to emulate.
But these cases are extremely rare.
Unless the book really does break through big-time, a traditional
publisher isn’t the least bit interested. For one thing, the author has destroyed their marketability as
a first time author. First books get reviewed more often, and they are eligible
for major awards in the first novel category. The competition is a heck of a lot
more intense for second and later books.
Most of all, publishing is a numbers game. Publishers look
at an author’s sales numbers when wondering whether or not to take on an author with
at least one book published. Good sales = chance of a contract. Anything less = pretty much out of luck. The publisher you were with, the distribution
they had means nothing. They are only
looking at the number.
Without excellent bookstore distribution (for print
books) or a big promotional effort for e-books, an astronomical amount of luck,
or tens of thousands of dollars to promote the book, most self-published
books, particularly a first novel, can’t make the grade.
Agents and publishers have enormous slush-piles: stacks of manuscripts
that are sent to them in the hopes of being picked up. The last thing they are going to do is wade through
all the self-published books out there looking for next big thing.
There's nothing wrong with self-publishing, and I knew some
people who are happy with their decision to take that path. But please, do your
homework first. You wouldn’t embark on a
career in medicine without knowing the pitfalls and the down side. So don’t do
it with your writing career either.
Oh, and one more thing. Perhaps the LAST THING you want to do with your first book is “just get
it out there”. I’ve heard that too. You
have exactly one chance in your life to publish a first book. Are you prepared to do the work
it takes to make the book the best it can be and to give it the best chance it
has of being read?
Or do you want to just “get it out there”?
Friday, April 22, 2016
Writing in the Present and the Past
Rick's post on Tuesday about the digital age and new technology struck a chord with me. I agree that as writers of crime fiction, we end up looking fairly stupid -- or making our characters look that way -- if we don't know about and make use of current technology in our books. I have tried a twist in my two Hannah McCabe books. They are set in the near-future, but in an Albany, New York that exists in an alternate universe. The characters communicate with an all-purpose device called an ORB. I've incorporated some other real-life technology already available but not yet widely used.
On the other hand, my Lizzie Stuart series is set in the recent past. The challenge there is to remind readers that Lizzie is in 2004 right now. Only problem, my memory of early 2000 is becoming a bit blurry. I haven't written a book in the series in several years. When I return to it with the next book, I'm going to have to do some research -- read some newspapers, look at some ads, get back into the technology of 12 years ago.
I thought it would be easier to write a historical thriller set in 1939. Even with the future looming and on display at the World's Fair, no one was able to pick up a smartphone and find information. But I do need to know what technology was available. That's a fairly easy question to answer regarding the FBI and large city police departments. But I must dig deeper to know how readily a small town police chief in Georgia would have been able to obtain information about a suspect or verify someone's identity.
And there are other questions I need to answer about 1939. Recently, I came across a collection of letters online. Letters to a young woman who was in her first year of college. Most are from her mother, with an occasional letter from her father, a minister. The letters are fascinating because the parents are keeping their daughter informed about what is happening at home. What has struck me is how often someone is ill that winter. The mother has a toe that has become infected and she is at home with her foot up in the early letters, waiting for the toe to drain and the hole to close over. She later comes down with a horrible cold, as do several other people she mentions. One of those people is a radio personality. A family in the town suffers a double tragedy when a young man attending the funeral of his sister, fails to dress properly for the wet, chilly weather, catches pneumonia, and dies soon after. All of this illness has reminded me that I need to know more about the state of medicine in the 1930s. I had this on my radar as a concern for the people struggling to survive the Great Depression, but even in this middle-class, well-educated family and among their neighbors, the danger of an early demise seems to loom over their heads. So research on the state of medicine in the 1930s is in order.
But right now, I am waiting to receive my new computer. I have turned over my old equipment to my computer guy and he is transferring everything over. I'm going to keep my outdated desk top to use for writing when I don't want to be distracted. The new laptop will have all of the most recent bells and whistles, including touch screen. It should be interesting to see how long it takes me to adapt
On the other hand, my Lizzie Stuart series is set in the recent past. The challenge there is to remind readers that Lizzie is in 2004 right now. Only problem, my memory of early 2000 is becoming a bit blurry. I haven't written a book in the series in several years. When I return to it with the next book, I'm going to have to do some research -- read some newspapers, look at some ads, get back into the technology of 12 years ago.
I thought it would be easier to write a historical thriller set in 1939. Even with the future looming and on display at the World's Fair, no one was able to pick up a smartphone and find information. But I do need to know what technology was available. That's a fairly easy question to answer regarding the FBI and large city police departments. But I must dig deeper to know how readily a small town police chief in Georgia would have been able to obtain information about a suspect or verify someone's identity.
And there are other questions I need to answer about 1939. Recently, I came across a collection of letters online. Letters to a young woman who was in her first year of college. Most are from her mother, with an occasional letter from her father, a minister. The letters are fascinating because the parents are keeping their daughter informed about what is happening at home. What has struck me is how often someone is ill that winter. The mother has a toe that has become infected and she is at home with her foot up in the early letters, waiting for the toe to drain and the hole to close over. She later comes down with a horrible cold, as do several other people she mentions. One of those people is a radio personality. A family in the town suffers a double tragedy when a young man attending the funeral of his sister, fails to dress properly for the wet, chilly weather, catches pneumonia, and dies soon after. All of this illness has reminded me that I need to know more about the state of medicine in the 1930s. I had this on my radar as a concern for the people struggling to survive the Great Depression, but even in this middle-class, well-educated family and among their neighbors, the danger of an early demise seems to loom over their heads. So research on the state of medicine in the 1930s is in order.
But right now, I am waiting to receive my new computer. I have turned over my old equipment to my computer guy and he is transferring everything over. I'm going to keep my outdated desk top to use for writing when I don't want to be distracted. The new laptop will have all of the most recent bells and whistles, including touch screen. It should be interesting to see how long it takes me to adapt
Labels:
1939,
digital age,
near-future,
technology,
writers
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Cover Stories
Here's what the cover artist revealed: "I acquired the actual photo (not a scan or reproduction) from a collector. It is an original 1900s mug shot one of about a dozen that I purchased. The collection is quite intriguing; each mug shot has a frontal face photo, a profile photo and on the back is the name of the arrested and a hand-written description of their crime! Although there were some murderers in the collection of mug shots, this man was arrested for being a 'disorderly person'. His alias was 'Jack the Hugger' and he was arrested in Jersey City, NJ in 1903."
Now there's a story. I imagine old Jack was just a bubble off plumb, and was arrested for walking around Jersey City giving random hugs to people whether they liked it or not. The saga of the man in the photo has caused me to ponder the history of the covers on my novels. When my first book came out in 2005, Amazon and the ebook were not the juggernauts they are today. Just in the past few years, cover artists have to take into consideration that most people will first see the book cover as a thumbnail online.
I was told that a book cover is like a movie poster. The whole point is to intrigue the potential reader. For my early novels in the Alafair Tucker series, the production supervisor asked me to send family photos for the cover artist to work with. So I provided the photo on novels one through four, which have rather busy covers and look a bit cut-and-paste to me.
By 2011, when the fifth novel, Crying Blood, came out, the internet was the thing, and nobody asked me to provide anything. The only input I had was when they sent me the mock-up and said, "here it is. Hope you like it." The cover artist had created a simple, colorful cover that looks good online or on a physical book. When All Men came out late last year, the cover was down to its bare essentials. The book is looking right at you. "Buy me," it says, "or you'll be sorry."
One of my favorites, the tornado book, 2014 |
_______________
*Here is what the curious reader said to the publisher: "he must have been a murderer! His face was so creepy that I had to turn the book face down on the coffee table when I wasn't reading it!" She then called back a little while later to clarify that she did not mean to insult the cover--in fact, quite the opposite; she thought it caught the spirit of the villain and the book perfectly!
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
It's party time!
Barbara here. This is tax month, which for a self-employed artist means days spent scouring the house for all those gas, meal, and conference receipts scattered in various piles, purses, bags, and drawers throughout the house. Unfolding them, squinting to read them, and sorting them into categories, etc. The dining room table, sofa, end tables, and even floor are forced into service, and the house is unfit for visitors for the duration.
Every year I swear an oath that next year I will be more organized and keep better records, but once that huge pile of papers is handed in to the accountant, I pour a drink, do a little dance, and forget the whole damn thing for another year.
This is not a blog about my failings as a records keeper, however, but rather an explanation for the brevity of today's post. I was so busy catching up on the things I'd put on hold to do my taxes– like raking my yard and cleaning up the debris from the winter– that I forgot it was blog day until just before bedtime.
So I want to take these few minutes to talk about the Arthur Ellis Awards, which are administered by Crime Writers of Canada and which honour excellence in Canadian crime writing. The awards are given annually in seven categories of published work– novel, first novel, short story, novella, French, non-fiction, and juvenile– as well as one category for unpublished manuscripts. To be eligible, the author must be a Canadian citizen or permanent resident, but the works need not be set in Canada. Both publishers and authors can submit works. At the end of each calendar year, all eligible works are sent out to the independent three-person jury for that category. Each jury chooses both a shortlist of (usually five) finalists and the eventual winner.
The shortlists are announced with great fanfare in media releases as well as shortlist parties across the country in late April, and the winners are announced at the Arthur Ellis Awards Banquet in June. The reason for this week's post is that the shortlists will be announced simultaneously across Canada tomorrow, April 21, at 8 pm. There will be shortlist parties held in Ottawa, Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver. Each party is organized by the local CWC members and usually features author readings, panels, and discussions.
The parties are free, open to the public, and everyone is welcome! So if you want to learn the latest and hottest in cool Canadian crime, as well as cheer on the authors nervously waiting to hear their name called, check out the party nearest you and come on down! If you can't make it, the results will be posted on the Crime Writers of Canada website shortly after the announcements.
Sandwiched between the huge markets of the US and UK, Canadian crime writers struggle to be heard and noticed. We compete with the international blockbusters for shelf space in the stores and for air time and review space in the media, so it takes a little more determination and ingenuity to find us. But we have a vibrant and active crime writing community in Canada, with books for every taste from nail-biting thrillers to historicals to gentle cozies, and once you find us, you won't be sorry. Crime Writers of Canada puts out a free monthly newsletter which contains all the new releases by members as well as the list of author events for that month. Check out the website to subscribe!
Good luck to all the authors on Thursday night!
Every year I swear an oath that next year I will be more organized and keep better records, but once that huge pile of papers is handed in to the accountant, I pour a drink, do a little dance, and forget the whole damn thing for another year.
This is not a blog about my failings as a records keeper, however, but rather an explanation for the brevity of today's post. I was so busy catching up on the things I'd put on hold to do my taxes– like raking my yard and cleaning up the debris from the winter– that I forgot it was blog day until just before bedtime.
So I want to take these few minutes to talk about the Arthur Ellis Awards, which are administered by Crime Writers of Canada and which honour excellence in Canadian crime writing. The awards are given annually in seven categories of published work– novel, first novel, short story, novella, French, non-fiction, and juvenile– as well as one category for unpublished manuscripts. To be eligible, the author must be a Canadian citizen or permanent resident, but the works need not be set in Canada. Both publishers and authors can submit works. At the end of each calendar year, all eligible works are sent out to the independent three-person jury for that category. Each jury chooses both a shortlist of (usually five) finalists and the eventual winner.
The shortlists are announced with great fanfare in media releases as well as shortlist parties across the country in late April, and the winners are announced at the Arthur Ellis Awards Banquet in June. The reason for this week's post is that the shortlists will be announced simultaneously across Canada tomorrow, April 21, at 8 pm. There will be shortlist parties held in Ottawa, Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver. Each party is organized by the local CWC members and usually features author readings, panels, and discussions.
The parties are free, open to the public, and everyone is welcome! So if you want to learn the latest and hottest in cool Canadian crime, as well as cheer on the authors nervously waiting to hear their name called, check out the party nearest you and come on down! If you can't make it, the results will be posted on the Crime Writers of Canada website shortly after the announcements.
Sandwiched between the huge markets of the US and UK, Canadian crime writers struggle to be heard and noticed. We compete with the international blockbusters for shelf space in the stores and for air time and review space in the media, so it takes a little more determination and ingenuity to find us. But we have a vibrant and active crime writing community in Canada, with books for every taste from nail-biting thrillers to historicals to gentle cozies, and once you find us, you won't be sorry. Crime Writers of Canada puts out a free monthly newsletter which contains all the new releases by members as well as the list of author events for that month. Check out the website to subscribe!
Good luck to all the authors on Thursday night!
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
Embracing the digital age and other new technology
by Rick Blechta
No, this isn't an email about how everyone should learn to love their smartphone. Heck! That sort of advice shouldn’t be coming from me. I don’t even own one.
What I’m writing about today is getting up to date when new technology hits crime fiction. The world has changed profoundly in the 21st Century and a crime writer's plots have to reflect that or risk having your stories lose credibility with an audience that is quite at home with smart phones, computers and all the other new toys we've been given to play with.
This post comes because of an article I just read in the current issue of The Walrus, Canada's intellectual magazine. Since I have a subscription, I also have access to The Walrus online, so here is a link to the article in case you want to read it: “Narrative Devices: Rewiring the mystery novel for the digital age”. Hopefully, the link will open for you.
Even though there are some points I would quibble with (like giving way too much information from the plots of novels we might like to read!), I think the author makes some good points.
It's something I'm sure many of us have wrestled with. With the ubiquity of smart phones and computers, modern plots have to be much more savvy if they're to maintain credibility with readers. Sure, you can use dodges like, “She took out her cell phone and felt like screaming. Her battery was completely out of gas. Now there was no way to call for help.” But after awhile, these really won't wash. Even now, this sort of passage would certainly earn an eye roll or two from young hipsters.
Part of the issue certainly does come from “writers of a certain age” who are unwilling to use or unknowledgeable about new technology, but also pointed out in the article are younger writers who work out some sort of dodge — such as the example I gave above — to negate the influence of new technology might have on their plots. For each, this sort of smacks of laziness or taking the easy way out.
I believe it is possible to use new technology to help move a plot forward. Let's face it: it ain't going away. Don't use it and your story line will become anachronistic even quicker than it usually does anyway. Unless you're writing historical crime fiction, I see really no way out of incorporating new technology in your plots.
That does mean learning about it and the possibilities that new technology opens, but we all do a lot of research anyway, don't we? No big deal. Using plots that embrace new technology can also make your plot cleverer. For instance, how would your hero defeat bad guys who can use a smart phone to track every move the hero makes? Something clever could be done here (short of turning off the tracking feature in the phone).
Regardless of how you feel on the subject or what you do in your plots, new tech is here to stay. Don’t get caught in a Luddite trap! If you're setting a book in the present, you have to at least have a working knowledge of what is possible — simply to avoid driving into plot “potholes”. The last thing you want is a reader to think (or worse, say out loud), “Why the hell doesn’t he just take out his #$$%%@ cell phone?!”
No, this isn't an email about how everyone should learn to love their smartphone. Heck! That sort of advice shouldn’t be coming from me. I don’t even own one.
What I’m writing about today is getting up to date when new technology hits crime fiction. The world has changed profoundly in the 21st Century and a crime writer's plots have to reflect that or risk having your stories lose credibility with an audience that is quite at home with smart phones, computers and all the other new toys we've been given to play with.
This post comes because of an article I just read in the current issue of The Walrus, Canada's intellectual magazine. Since I have a subscription, I also have access to The Walrus online, so here is a link to the article in case you want to read it: “Narrative Devices: Rewiring the mystery novel for the digital age”. Hopefully, the link will open for you.
Even though there are some points I would quibble with (like giving way too much information from the plots of novels we might like to read!), I think the author makes some good points.
It's something I'm sure many of us have wrestled with. With the ubiquity of smart phones and computers, modern plots have to be much more savvy if they're to maintain credibility with readers. Sure, you can use dodges like, “She took out her cell phone and felt like screaming. Her battery was completely out of gas. Now there was no way to call for help.” But after awhile, these really won't wash. Even now, this sort of passage would certainly earn an eye roll or two from young hipsters.
Part of the issue certainly does come from “writers of a certain age” who are unwilling to use or unknowledgeable about new technology, but also pointed out in the article are younger writers who work out some sort of dodge — such as the example I gave above — to negate the influence of new technology might have on their plots. For each, this sort of smacks of laziness or taking the easy way out.
I believe it is possible to use new technology to help move a plot forward. Let's face it: it ain't going away. Don't use it and your story line will become anachronistic even quicker than it usually does anyway. Unless you're writing historical crime fiction, I see really no way out of incorporating new technology in your plots.
That does mean learning about it and the possibilities that new technology opens, but we all do a lot of research anyway, don't we? No big deal. Using plots that embrace new technology can also make your plot cleverer. For instance, how would your hero defeat bad guys who can use a smart phone to track every move the hero makes? Something clever could be done here (short of turning off the tracking feature in the phone).
Regardless of how you feel on the subject or what you do in your plots, new tech is here to stay. Don’t get caught in a Luddite trap! If you're setting a book in the present, you have to at least have a working knowledge of what is possible — simply to avoid driving into plot “potholes”. The last thing you want is a reader to think (or worse, say out loud), “Why the hell doesn’t he just take out his #$$%%@ cell phone?!”
Monday, April 18, 2016
Getting the Knowledge
I enjoyed Vicki's recent post on the subject of 'write what you know'. Like her, if I only wrote what I know it would make for a pretty dull book. I've always envied those people who before becoming writers have had a wonderfully chequered career – bouncer, roadie, explorer, stunt man – which must give them a huge advantage in terms of life experience.
I've had varied experiences, admittedly, from interviewing the then Archbishop of Canterbury to having dinner with a sheik and his entourage in Abu Dhabi, but that's not the sort of thing to qualify you for writing an ecclesiastical thriller or a wild Desert Song romance.
'Write what you want to know,' Vicki said, and though it hadn't struck me before in those terms, I think it's an excellent principle. One of the joys of writing is imagining yourself into a completely different situation.
The problem for many writers starting out is not knowing how to get that knowledge. When I'm doing a workshop, it's one of things I'm most often asked. I usually reply, 'Read up anything you can find. Go to the place. Talk to the people,' and what is interesting is how prepared they are to follow the first two suggestions while shrinking from the third.
Perhaps it's the fact that writers are at heart solitary creatures that makes them reluctant to impose on others. 'Oh, I couldn't!' is surprisingly often an instinctive, horrified response. I used to have it myself, at the beginning.
But now I understand that most people love to talk about themselves and their expertise. I wanted to have a character who was a silversmith; when I emailed a very well-known one who worked nearby to see if he might answer a few technical questions, he asked me to his studio and spent the afternoon showing me everything he did.
When I wanted details about police procedure, I managed to get an appointment with a DI in Marjory Fleming country and turned up at 11 am with a list of questions, hoping for half-an-hour. I emerged well after 2pm, during which time he hadn't stopped talking and we'd both missed our lunch. As research, both were pure gold.
I daresay you might have to develop a thick skin in case people do refuse, though I've never approached anyone who did. And of course, I'm happy to tell anyone who wants to know all about my life as a writer. Sometimes I even get paid for to do it!
I've had varied experiences, admittedly, from interviewing the then Archbishop of Canterbury to having dinner with a sheik and his entourage in Abu Dhabi, but that's not the sort of thing to qualify you for writing an ecclesiastical thriller or a wild Desert Song romance.
'Write what you want to know,' Vicki said, and though it hadn't struck me before in those terms, I think it's an excellent principle. One of the joys of writing is imagining yourself into a completely different situation.
The problem for many writers starting out is not knowing how to get that knowledge. When I'm doing a workshop, it's one of things I'm most often asked. I usually reply, 'Read up anything you can find. Go to the place. Talk to the people,' and what is interesting is how prepared they are to follow the first two suggestions while shrinking from the third.
Perhaps it's the fact that writers are at heart solitary creatures that makes them reluctant to impose on others. 'Oh, I couldn't!' is surprisingly often an instinctive, horrified response. I used to have it myself, at the beginning.
But now I understand that most people love to talk about themselves and their expertise. I wanted to have a character who was a silversmith; when I emailed a very well-known one who worked nearby to see if he might answer a few technical questions, he asked me to his studio and spent the afternoon showing me everything he did.
When I wanted details about police procedure, I managed to get an appointment with a DI in Marjory Fleming country and turned up at 11 am with a list of questions, hoping for half-an-hour. I emerged well after 2pm, during which time he hadn't stopped talking and we'd both missed our lunch. As research, both were pure gold.
I daresay you might have to develop a thick skin in case people do refuse, though I've never approached anyone who did. And of course, I'm happy to tell anyone who wants to know all about my life as a writer. Sometimes I even get paid for to do it!
Saturday, April 16, 2016
Guest slot: Ruth Dudley Edwards
Aline here. It's my privilege today to introduce you to Ruth Dudley Edwards, distinguished British/Irish journalist, broadcaster, biographer and crime writer. She's won the Crime Writers Association's Last Laugh Award twice for her brilliant satirical crime fiction as well as the CWA Gold Dagger for non-fiction – a unique achievement, I think. That isn't surprising, since Ruth herself is a one-off – original, big-hearted, clever and very, very funny. You'll enjoy meeting her here.
I had a card some time back that showed a couple tied to a railway track with a train coming towards them round the corner. “It’s your confounded optimism I can’t stand,” one was saying to the other. It was a not so subtle rebuke from a friend who had declared herself fed up with my resemblance to “Pollybloodyanna”.
Eleanor H Porter’s early 20th century heroine had been disappointed when the missionary barrel yielded a pair of crutches rather than the doll she had been hoping for, but quickly accepted her father’s recommendation that she should be glad she didn’t need them. Later, as an orphan, Pollyanna would cheer up the depressed inhabitants of a small Vermont town by teaching them “The Glad Game”.
I saw the film for the first time recently and wondered why they hadn’t strangled her, but I’d read the book as a small child and it had formed much my character, so, relentlessly, I keep on looking on the bright side while realising how annoying I can be.
In fact - though I’ve learned the hard way that when people are telling you a tale of misfortune they mostly want sympathy rather than an assurance that it’s all for the best - I don’t know how I’d get through life as a writer without a cheerful disposition.
When I’m being a journalist, I’m grateful that articles are short and deadlines therefore easy to meet. When I’m writing non-fiction, I stop myself cursing about the massive amount of reading I have to do by telling myself I’m glad I don’t have to think of a plot. And when I’m writing fiction and wondering what should happen next, I remind myself of the joy of having very little research.
The journalism often concerns terrorism and the non-fiction is often on very serious or even gloomy topics, but I get jokes in where I can and it cheers me up no end that my crime fiction is comic. My last novel, Killing the Emperors, was an all-out assault on what I regard as the massive confidence trick that is conceptual art.
Last month I published a book about the rebellion, insurrection or rising (all the words are contentious) that began in Dublin on Easter Monday 1916. The Seven: the lives and legacies of the founding fathers of the Irish Republic, looks at the unusual group of men, a clique within an oath-bound secret society, who planned a doomed revolution which afterwards turned them into nationalist icons.
A composite biography, it interweaves their stories. I realised as I was writing it, and many readers have commented, that its cliffhangers reflect crime fiction. I had to shoot them all in the end, which was rather melancholy because though I thought what they did was wrong and crazy, some of them were very likeable.
But I cheered myself up by reminding myself that I can play God in the crime book I’m about to begin. Mind you, it’s called A Fleece of Lawyers, so I’ll be tempted to go in for mass executions. Even Pollyanna will struggle to play The Glad Game in the law courts.
I had a card some time back that showed a couple tied to a railway track with a train coming towards them round the corner. “It’s your confounded optimism I can’t stand,” one was saying to the other. It was a not so subtle rebuke from a friend who had declared herself fed up with my resemblance to “Pollybloodyanna”.
Eleanor H Porter’s early 20th century heroine had been disappointed when the missionary barrel yielded a pair of crutches rather than the doll she had been hoping for, but quickly accepted her father’s recommendation that she should be glad she didn’t need them. Later, as an orphan, Pollyanna would cheer up the depressed inhabitants of a small Vermont town by teaching them “The Glad Game”.
I saw the film for the first time recently and wondered why they hadn’t strangled her, but I’d read the book as a small child and it had formed much my character, so, relentlessly, I keep on looking on the bright side while realising how annoying I can be.
In fact - though I’ve learned the hard way that when people are telling you a tale of misfortune they mostly want sympathy rather than an assurance that it’s all for the best - I don’t know how I’d get through life as a writer without a cheerful disposition.
When I’m being a journalist, I’m grateful that articles are short and deadlines therefore easy to meet. When I’m writing non-fiction, I stop myself cursing about the massive amount of reading I have to do by telling myself I’m glad I don’t have to think of a plot. And when I’m writing fiction and wondering what should happen next, I remind myself of the joy of having very little research.
The journalism often concerns terrorism and the non-fiction is often on very serious or even gloomy topics, but I get jokes in where I can and it cheers me up no end that my crime fiction is comic. My last novel, Killing the Emperors, was an all-out assault on what I regard as the massive confidence trick that is conceptual art.
Last month I published a book about the rebellion, insurrection or rising (all the words are contentious) that began in Dublin on Easter Monday 1916. The Seven: the lives and legacies of the founding fathers of the Irish Republic, looks at the unusual group of men, a clique within an oath-bound secret society, who planned a doomed revolution which afterwards turned them into nationalist icons.
A composite biography, it interweaves their stories. I realised as I was writing it, and many readers have commented, that its cliffhangers reflect crime fiction. I had to shoot them all in the end, which was rather melancholy because though I thought what they did was wrong and crazy, some of them were very likeable.
But I cheered myself up by reminding myself that I can play God in the crime book I’m about to begin. Mind you, it’s called A Fleece of Lawyers, so I’ll be tempted to go in for mass executions. Even Pollyanna will struggle to play The Glad Game in the law courts.
Labels:
Ruth Dudley Edwards
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)