CAGE MATCH: Prison Break vs. Friday Night Lights

Tonight I am admitting my love of Friday Night Lights. Yep. The Texas High School football show based on the non-fiction book of the same name which was made into a movie of the same name and now, thanks to Peter Berg I have something else to watch on Tuesday nights.

Now, admittedly, I am from a small town where on Friday nights the whole town rolled out to watch the high school football game...and my dad was a coach...and my brother a player. I am so so white bread.

Anyway -- all that aside -- this is a great show in the same way Prison Break WAS a great show and why both shows are helping my writing in a BIG BIG way. Here is what I've been spending way too much time thinking about...

The weight of both shows rest on two incredibly LIKEABLE MAIN CHARACTERS. Scofield and The Coach. It helps that Scofield is hot - though that whole Clint Eastwood tone of voice he uses, endlessly infuriates me and the Coach is always sweaty and sloppy looking (like a real coach). Both of them are fighting battles in which there is no gray area between winning and losing. Scofield if he fails will go back to jail or be killed and so far in Friday Night Lights if Coach loses I really think he might be killed or sent to jail too. Because of this stringent black and white both men are being morally tested and are PROVING THEY ARE WILLING TO BEND RULES and are NOT ALWAYS HEROIC. Scofield manipulated pretty nurse Sarah and Coach illegally influenced a high school athlete displaced by Katrina to come to his school to play. This shit comes back to haunt them all the time. As it should. Heroes can't always be heroes but they should feel bad about it. These kind of heroes are like romance gold mines.

Anyway, both men put forth Herculean efforts to get even the smallest amount of success which in GREAT story telling fashion, is only rewarded by increased stakes and MORE TROUBLE/BAD STUFF.

My editor constantly reminds me of the power of the +/- factor to scenes. If a scene begins with a positive event, or the character feels good something has to happen through the course of the scene - information has to introduced or events change that forces the scene to end on a negative note. Cliffhanger style. Both shows do an amazing job loading their scenes with the +/-.

Now, I totally understand this - but frankly it can be hard so I maybe get this 70% of the time. But, also I think doing that a hundred percent of the time gets predictable and you loose a chance to build into bigger climaxes. Prison Break is spinning off into completely unbelievable areas in terms of Scofield's boy scout preparedness for every single possibility. And the +/- reversals are coming so fast - that they are completely losing their effectiveness. Last week for instance -- Sarah and Scofield meet up Yeah!! Bad FBI guy finds them - oh no!! They get away - yeah!!! Scofield apologizes says he's glad she's with him - yeah!! He gets out of the shower and she's gone - oh no!!! She's in the car and decides not to leave him Yeah!!! She gets out of the car and there's the second scary FBI guy -- oh no!!!

Come on let us catch our breath -- let something build a little bit more before you chop it off at the knees.

Friday Night Lights has set up really excellent pacing and like the incredibly well written DEXTER - it allows us to feel good while the characters feel good (or as good as Dexter can) because the show, the concept and the momentum built up has it's own cliffhanger. We know what's at stake, we know what COULD happen - so let us enjoy the good stuff while it's happening. I think it gives us a chance to truly root for the characters, to get invested so the pluses are higher and the negatives lower.

I agree that ending a chapter with a character falling asleep is an invitation to the reader to put the book down and get some shut eye themselves but ending a chapter on a high note is not the same thing -- like going into commercial break on a high note can be just as much a cliffhanger as the manipulative stuff Prison Break does before a commercial break.

I think it's about pacing, characters and...in the case of my new favorite show...high school football. I know my fellow drunk writers will not let me live this one down.

Where I go for inspiration –

A really common question writers get asked is, where do you get your ideas. Many authors have developed witty, cute responses to this, but me, I actually sort of know, I can usually pin it down and God help the person who asks me, because they might get an answer that will bore them to sleep.

95% of the time, I get my ideas, from the movies, or my husband, who lately, has been throwing incredible concepts at me left right and center. I am a lucky girl. And he can cook too…

Some movies just make me think of a whole host of different ideas, characters, ways of playing with plot structure. And it’s not necessarily the best movies, or the most well written either, in fact, some Molly has ridiculed me for loving.

The most recent movie is Serenity, which is playing on and off on one of my movie channels. I LOVED this movie, but then again, I loved the TV show, and whenever I see even ten minutes of this, I’m reminded of how shaking up an old concept, giving it a different setting and a great cast of supporting characters can really revitalize a genre. Like the Western, which this movie is, just one set in space.

Or the Long Kiss Goodnight, not a great movie, but another movie I whole heartedly loved. The scene where Geena Davis comes out of the water while being tortured and tells the bad guy he’ll die screaming. Pure cheese, but I know I can attribute many of my ideas on both character and plot to that movie. (Whether that’s a good or a bad thing, I’m not sure)

Lots more movies have given me great ideas. Ideas that go in a completely different direction than the movie. Films like Le Femme Nikita, From Hell, Aliens, History of Violence, Whale Rider, these are movies that give me ideas for concepts and guide me in what tension should be. There are tons others of course, more than I could possibly mention here.

What movies have given you fodder for the next book?

Babel and Alternate Structure

I'm a sucker for alternate storytelling structures. If I continue wanting to write popular fiction, this may well prove my downfall... but I do love books and movies that use unconventional devices to tell a story.

Maybe I just like to be challenged a little while I'm reading/watching something? Maybe I need an extra something to keep my attention these days? Not all the time. I also enjoy a simply-but-well-told story. But some of my all time favorite books and movies have had some kind of alternative structure. (And alternate structures--particularly fractured timelines combined with heavy use of flashbacks--seem to have overtaken the TV writing these past couple of years. So far, I'm likin' it. Studio 60 had a reversed timeline last week...)

One of my favorite movie structures is interconnecting stories. (I've been working on a book like this, but it's in very early stages and I'm not sure how well it's working.) While struggling with that book I've been thinking movies have a bit of an advantage for this structure, because it's easier to show the reader which story they're in using visuals--such as the actors themselves, the setting etc. It's harder, in a book, to flip between stories when the reader is still getting all the characters straight. Not impossible... Just harder to suck a reader into a book that flips around a lot and still not bog down the pace with too much description and/or narrative.

But other alternate structures can work in popular fiction... I blogged a while ago about Journal of Mortifying Moments, by Robyn Harding which used a journal as a literary device. And Deidre Knight's Parallel series books use time travel to allow the reader to replay events in the book and/or see events out of order. Other books released as literary fiction but which crossed over to mainstream that used alternate structures by way of multiple or disjointed timelines include Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood and The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger. LOVE both of these books.

But I was going to talk about interconnecting story movies. There are plenty like this in the "art house" genre. (Robert Altman is a god. (Nashville, Gosford Park, Short Cuts) Paul Thomas Anderson has done some great ones, (notably Magnolia) and Babel filmmaker Alejandro González Iñárritu, (21 Grams, Amores Perros, Babel) is a master at this style as well.) Plus, he's cute. (Blogger wouldn't let me upload his photo. Maybe he's too hot?)

In addition to these less commercial films, a few movies using this structure have crossed into the mainstream. LOVE ACTUALLY comes to mind. In fact, I might argue that many episodes of Seinfeld used this structure. That is, seemingly unconnected story lines for each of the main characters end up connecting in an unexpected way. Love that kind of thing.

But back to BABEL.

I don't know if BABEL has opened everywhere yet, but it opened here in Toronto last weekend and I saw it in September at the film festival. I liked it enough that I may go again now it's been released. It is a long and challenging movie and the stories aren't as intricately connected as this filmmaker's earlier films... (like 21 Grams) but I was really impressed none the less. I found it a totally engrossing film.

And what a great theme for our times: Miscommunication.

Miscommunication because of language differences.
Miscommunication because of emotional baggage.
Miscommunication because of deafness (which I guess is just a special case of language differences)
Miscommunication because of cultural bias
Miscommunication because of prejudice.
Miscommunication because of politics.
Miscommunication because of fear.

If you haven't seen it, go. Brad Pitt actually made me cry. Something I really didn't think he, as an actor, could do. And the strange thing about my crying is, the way the story unfolds, it's not like the audience is finding out new information at the point he made me cry. (It was during the scene in this photo.) We'd see one side of this conversation early on in the film, so by the time we see this scene, we know what's going on, and still, as much as I've fallen out of love with Brad Pitt of late, it was hard not to admire how he evoked strong emotions in this scene. For me, anyway. Now I really want to see the film again.

And speaking of celebrity marriages... (Okay, Brad made me think of them.) Britney and K-Fed? Those two crazy kids.... Who saw that divorce coming? Shocker.

For the LAST TIME....it's NOT a @#!$*&! FORMULA!!!

I love my job. LOVE IT. I love romance. And right now, I really really love Harlequin. But I'm getting a twitchy feeling these days from reader expectations and the non-believers.

We'll begin with the non-believers...like my grandmother...and lot's of other people in the world who, I agree with Maureen, believe that because romance is read primarily by women, written primarily by women, about issues paramount to women (family, love, children, self-respect, finding one's strength and keeping one's humor in the face of the daily shit that can beat us down, clothes, hair, gossip, chocolate, world peace, education, politics, war, violence and of course -- sex) it must be of less value than other books. Add some crappy covers over the years (DAMN YOU FABIO!!!) and some even crappier books and we romance writers might as well walk around with targets on our backs.

Because the books have a man and a woman and must end with some kind of commitment (A+B=C) the non-believers think it must be easy because after all...A+B=C...the formula it's right there! Well, let me tell you -- it's not easy to get two emotionally damaged, fragile, commit-phobes - believably at HEA in around 300 pages. Beliveable being the key word. That 'formula" is more like a dark, overgrown path in a jungle with lots of possible wrong turns. And poison ivy. And a bad flashlight that keeps shorting out. Oh, and there's a bear. A bear that is actully my critique group and a cliff that is my deadline and a cheerful woman with a gun that is my editor.

So - nope. Not easy. No formula. Bear. Gun. Woods. Bad flashlight.

Add to that scenario -- the incredibly avid romance reading audience. Who open every romance with expectations about what a hero should be and what a heroine can and can't do. Reviews are coming in for my latest book - His Best Friend's Baby and they are strangely lopsided. What I belived would be my problem - my hero and his brooding self-indulgence - is getting eaten up. People love my battered dark, suicidal hero. They HATE my misguided, earnest, heart of gold heroine who is ready to do anything for a little love and approval. We talk about rules and loving the books and tv shows that break those rules - but man, don't mess with the romance readers heroine. That's been my lesson this week.

On a far more fun note -- I spend WAY too much time thinking about Laura Kinsale's novels. If you haven't read these brilliant brilliant romances -- you need to. I love the Shadow and the Star and all this Daniel Craig talk (and the poster I saw today outside the movie theater - we saw The Queen) has made me decide that he would be a perfect Samuel. Him or Christian Bale.

Dexter and Characters who break all the rules …. And why I love Daniel Craig

Molly got me started on my new love, Dexter. Great recommendation, Molly. I love, love this show, and especially him.
Well, he is the show really. That they had the balls to create a show around a serial killer, without any real emotions, or much a conscience is amazing. They’ve pulled it off, and I’ve been thinking about how, lately.

First off, they gave him moral guidelines. They’re not his, but his father’s but the character, in a way, that is really true to character, has made them his own. So he’s a serial killer who doesn’t really kill good people, but he really enjoys killing bad people.

Secondly, they’ve surrounded him with vulnerable supporting characters, who are great foils to his character. The sister especially. He loves her as much as he’s capable (which isn’t a lot) but he gives her leads on cases because he has no ego unrelated to killing, and therefore no need for glory in his job. These are small touches, but go a long way towards humanizing his character.

They’ve made him really good at his job, which is, not surprisingly, blood related.

They even gave him a girlfriend and a nice way with her children, which we know is an act, but still manages to make him more sympathetic.

Then there’s the subplot with the serial killer. Spoiler Alert: His admiration for the other serial killer, their little game, and his absolute lack of empathy for the victims of the other serial killer, nicely shown in a scene with his sister, who has nothing but empathy for the victims. It’s brilliant. I love this subplot.

So the writers and actor, took what should be a standard villain, and made him fascinating, and funny and completely watchable.

This is a perfect instance where the rules would say this character would be the nemesis of the hero. Screw the rules.

It’s also why I’ve loved great TV shows more than the movies I’ve seen this year. I find the writing sharper and the characters better defined and more interesting. Shows like Firefly, Buffy, Dexter, 24, have all gripped me more than all the movies I’ve seen on the big screen this year. (There are a few others that should be on the list, but we’re still playing catch up. Right now, I have DVD seasons of Battlestar Galactica, Six Feet Under and Band of Brothers still to watch)

Why I love Daniel Craig. Well, I’ve seen him in a few movies, but a movie called Layercake, (Molly has already blogged on this) will explain why he’s going to be a great Bond. He has this undercurrent of dark, something in his screen presence says he’s capable of being bad if required, and I believe the character of Bond desperately needs it. Or else we’re back to the Roger Moore days… shudder.

Plus, like some other actors, Clive Owen jumps to mind, Edward Norton has the same thing, minus the British accent, they come across like men, not boys playing at being men. No offense to Jude Law, or Tom Cruise.

Rule Breaking and Little Children

Okay, that title sounds like I'm going to do a post offering parenting advice. Ha!

Actually, I saw the film Little Children last night (instead of handing out candy to real little children) and was blown away. In spite of feeling absorbed in the story/characters, I knew I had to blog today and so the movie made me think of something writer related -- rules and rule breaking.

In the romance world new writers are faced with a lot of "rules" some of which I started to think had been made up by the writers themselves. Amazing what rumors can do. But in all genres of writing there are lots of rules of good writing we learn. Don't dump backstory. Stay in one character's POV at a time. Don't include too many POV's. Don't include too much exposition. Don't do prologues. Don't do flashbacks. Start with action. Each scene should move the plot forward. etc. etc. etc.

At the Surrey Writers Conference last week I went to a workshop by agent Donald Maass on breaking the rules and getting away with it. He read some examples of good writing from published books (one example was from a new Anne Perry manuscript to be published next spring) and each of them broke some golden rule, yet worked. One of my favourite things about this presentation was that two of the examples he used were from romance novels. You should have heard the collective gasp in the room when he casually dropped in that one of them was a Harlequin. Everyone had been praising the prologue, saying how tight and tense and ominous it was... Then "gasp" It's one of those novels. Gotta love Donald Maass. But I digress...

I was thinking of rule-breaking during Little Children tonight. It did some things that not only broke "writers" rules but also broke "film making" rules -- at least as I know them. Big sections of the film were narrated with the narrator telling us very omnisciently what each of the main characters was thinking. Robert McKee would not approve. But it really worked. At one point, I noticed there was no more narration and I thought, "Oh, he only did that at the beginning to set up the characters. Now we know them, we don't need it anymore." But later I realized the narrator was back and then gone and then back.

I'm making the narration sound distracting... but my point is that it wasn't distracting at all. If I hadn't been trying to keep track, I don't think I would have noticed and even trying to keep track I blew it, not noticing until well after each switch, because I was so caught up in the characters.

Todd Field, the filmmaker, who I don't remember as being a very memorable actor when he was an actor, is certainly a talented filmmaker. His previous films include In the Bedroom which also blew me away. Such a talent for exploring the darker side of human nature that resides even inside the most normal/sympathetic people. Master of quiet tension, too. Very good.

Highly recommend this movie. Two beer mugs up.

Let the race begin...with The Departed

Sorry for the delay - Monday is my day and I was in Pittsburgh with my 92 year old grandmother. I had not anticipated the little love affair that would bloom between Oma and my 9 month old son whose name she never remembers - but it happened and that combined with a wind storm convinced me to stay an extra day. Mick was a delirious flirt for two days and lit up like a sparkler every time he caught sight of her - how could I break them up?

Anyway - it gave me some extra time to think about this...my favorite time of year. Recognizable not so much by the turning of the leaves or the cool nights. But by the appearance of Kate Winslet, Sean Penn and Clint Eastwood films at the movie theater. Yep - it's Oscar race time.

Pretentious and overreaching and exciting all at the same time. Now - Maureen is really the reigning film fan - and my standards have taken a serious blow (Sinead's standards have taken a hit since admitting she owns the Chronicles of Riddick - still can't get over that) with lack of sleep. (We rented Benchwarmers the other night and I howled until I cried at the various ways Jon Heder could hit himself in the balls with a baseball bat) but I adore the Oscar race. All that earnest over-acting (sorry Sean Penn) gets me pretty revved up.

Last week we went to go see The Departed - the new Martin Scorsese film. While not a huge fan of Scorsese I can appreciate what he's done for modern movie-making (the man deserves an Oscar alone for bringing us DeNiro) and there's a pretty good chance that he'll get an Oscar for this movie. Most people will say it's sort of an honorary Oscar -- like Denzel Washington's for Training Day (when he deserved it for The Hurricane) but I gotta say -- The Departed deserves it on it's own merits. It is a hell of a movie.

I think leaving behind New York and his usual cast revitalized him. And the cast he assembled for this film is brilliant. He found the right guys - and it's not just about getting the right South Boston accent -- it's about finding the actors that can portray men that live on that line between good and bad and have no qualms about going one way or another whatever the situation dictates. Mark Whalberg might very well have been playing some kind of version of himself but I have never seen such authentic non-acting. And Jack -- just when you thought the guy was going to keep phoning in performances he pulls this monster out. He's terrifying and electric. DiCaprio should finally get that nomination he's been so pissed about. And he looks really good in jeans. Really good.

Scorsese knows how to put together a cast and a soundtrack -- both are amazing.

What I really love is how the characters are what they are. The motivations are simple and they permeate every single action -- as they should be. He doesn't spend a lot of time showing us why or how (although he does a bit with Matt Damon) these men just explode on the screen - same as the one female role -- all of her motivation summed up by DiCaprio saying "you're the kid of an alcoholic." And the action just unfolds -- nice and slow no manipulation, no flashbacks - every character reveals himself, further creates the tone and mood and then pushes the action ever forward which starts slow and then beings a horrible gut wrenching wind up that is unrelenting. My heart rate was elevated to an uncomfortable level for the last half of the film.

There's a lot of violence -- poetic and raw in the Scorsese style. Some amazing camera tricks (Mark Whalberg in the briefing with Alec Baldwin in front of the task force -- WOW!) And Scorsese will be nominated and so far -- I think he should win. Sorry, Clint.

Confessions of a conference slut

I’ve been to a lot of writing conferences this year. So many, I’m embarrassed to admit the number (6).

In my defense, I started 2006 determined this would be the year I’d sign with an agent. To that end, my motivation for registering for 3 winter conferences (in Florida, San Diego and Arizona) was to meet and pitch as many agents as I could (and to get a little winter warmth at the same time). I carefully picked conferences which had agents I wanted to meet in attendance (and writer friends I wanted to connect or reconnect with). But since I actually got the offer-to-rep-call from one of my dream agents, Pamela Harty, a day before the first of these three “meet agents” conferences, I guess that excuse for conference promiscuity doesn’t hold water. (I actually picked up the message at the conference. Story here. Scroll to February 8.)

When I decided to do the winter conferences, it was supposed to be in lieu of going to RWA Nationals in 2006. But that plan fell apart too, because the agency I signed with is The Knight Agency who were throwing a 10th anniversary party at that conference. Couldn’t miss that, or the opportunity to bond with my agent, could I?

For attending the NJRWA conference in early October, I have few reputable excuses. Basically, I wanted to go to have fun with my fellow drunk writers. Nuff said.

The Surrey International Writers Conference in mid October? I wanted to go to a conference outside the RWA world (which is great, but a tad insular) and also wanted the opportunity to do the “Blue Pencil Café” sessions, during which best-selling authors (including Jennifer Crusie, Diana Gabaldon and Bob Mayer) read 3 pages of your work and then discuss it with you for 15 minutes. I really wanted to get Jennifer Crusie for this session, but who knew Bob Mayer would help me solve the biggest problem I was having with my book! Yippee! Thanks Bob.

Not conferenced out yet, I’m still cooking up new reasons for going to more, so I thought I’d put together a list for others searching for reasons.

Reasons for the newbie writer:

Learn the basics about the craft of writing. If you’ve never been to a conference or taken a (recent) writing class, you probably don’t know as much about writing as you think you do. (Your high school English teacher thinking you were talented doesn’t count. Sad, but true. Chances are he/she didn’t know as much as he/she thought either.)

Learn the basics about the industry. (If you’ve done your publishing industry research by watching movies with author protagonists, you’ve got a few rude awakenings ahead. Publishing is like no other business (and it’s certainly nothing like it’s depicted in movies). If you want to be part of it, learn as much as you can.)

Reasons for the intermediate writer:

Explore craft topics in greater detail. Are you using POV to greatest advantage? Will using the hero’s journey help to deepen your character’s arc? Will 3 (or 4) act plotting improve your pacing, make your stories more compelling? Are your characters’ motivations rooted deeply in human psychology?

Engage in drunk (or sober) writer talk. This recent conference has reminded me how much I enjoy talking about writing with other smart writers. Fun, fun, fun. (This reason stands for all stages.)

Meet other writers for support, for critique partners, for connections, for friends. (This reasons stands for all stages.)

Reasons for the advanced writer:

Share your wealth of knowledge with others

Argue with the instructors to spark interesting discussion

Get strokes if your work is praised (we all need strokes)

Think critically about your work

Perhaps be humbled…(okay, what is an advanced writer? IMHO anyone who claims to be one may just not have realized what else they have to learn yet. Or worse, may have stopped learning too soon.)

Reasons if you’re submitting:

Conference pitches can help you avoid the dreaded query letter stage of the submission process. (Skip query, go straight to submission. Sadly no $200.) While many agents I’ve spoken to say they’ve found more clients from their slush than from pitches, there’s a lot to be said for skipping over the query stage.

Seeing agents in “real life”. I think this is often overlooked, because when you’re looking for an agent, it’s hard to remember that writers have any control in this whole process. At conferences, you get to meet agents to help determine whether you’d want them to represent you. NB. Only submit to agents you’d love to have as your representative.

Reasons if you’re “close” to selling

Madeline Hunter does a great workshop on “Surviving Almost There” and I’d suggest that simply attending conferences and meeting other writers in a similar position can help survive almost there. Acutally, I could have simply listed Madeline Hunter as a reason to attend conferences. And Jennifer Crusie. And Bob Mayer. And Eloisa James… and lots of other good writers and editors willing to share their expertise and experience.

Making your own luck. There’s a lot to be said about luck and timing in this business, but if you’re not putting yourself and your writing out there, you aren’t creating opportunities for luck. Diana Peterfreund sold off contacts her critique partner made at a conference, co-drunk-writer Molly O’Keefe became involved in a Valentines anthology WHO NEEDS CUPID? based on contacts she made at a conference. Eileen Cook got a great blurb (Jennifer Crusie) for her January 2007 release IN THE STARS based on a contact at a conference.

Reasons if you’ve just sold

Writers are voracious readers. If you meet lots of writers at conferences, you’ve created a pool of people more likely than the general public to purchase your book when it comes out. At least they’ll know the book exists!

Writers (for the most part) support other writers—especially those they’ve met and who’ve made a good impression. Therefore contacts made at conferences can lead to future help via buying books, recommending books, reviewing books, giving cover-blurbs, blogging about books, cross-promotional ideas. All these types of things can happen via contacts made at conferences.

Reasons if you’re getting stale

Writing never gets easy. Markets change, readers get bored, writers develop blocks, editors leave, agents disappoint us—they also retire. There are lots of reasons to keep learning and keep making contacts throughout your career. (So I assume. I’ve been hypothesizing for some of these stages.)

Wow! There are plenty of reasons to attend a good writers conference. I’d better think about going to some more. If you’ve been looking for a good excuse and I've provided you one?—you’re welcome. Always happy to help rationalize an expensive (but smart) decision.

Why I used to care about hair color and now don’t.

To start with, this post is not my own hair color, which is pretty boring. I used to open a book and look for the scene where the writer described the heroine.
Actively hunt it down, because I must have cared.
Why? Sad thing is, I can’t remember.
This is a while ago, before I started writing myself, but I remember it being really important. I needed a visual of her, more than I needed to know what she was like, character flaws, any of that stuff. And to be frank, and I’m not proud of this, I wanted her to be beautiful.
Perhaps it connects back to the whole reading as escapism, which I know is particularly true with romance. It was easier to get swept up into another world if I could place myself in the shoes of someone who was gorgeous and virtuous and in hindsight, pretty uninteresting.
Now, a few years later, I don’t really care what she looks like, unless it enhances her character in some way. I really dislike virtuous heroines, I find them boring and for a book to really sweep me up, it has to be different, unique and have characters who are deeply flawed and conflicted.
What’s the difference between now and ten years ago. I’m pretty sure it’s the writing, although I’m also sure a lot of readers out there would make a good case for non-writers also not caring about the heroine’s hair color.

But sometimes I worry that puts me out of touch with some potential readers. By trying to create books I want to read, am I creating books that don’t have enough escapism, characters who have too many flaws, am I skipping over that all important description scene(which I know I do now)

The answer won’t change anything. I write the books I want to read, or what’s the point.
But perhaps I should try for a balance between escapism and character, which is what I’m trying to do now.

The numbers that make me feel better...

Numbers in any context usually scare the bejesus out of me - make my eyes glaze over and I instantly turn back into a freshman in Mr. Kerestes Algebra 1C class (math for idiots and, as it would turn out for the kid next to me all semester -- drug dealers). But as I go to conferences and get overwhelmed by the number of people making serious efforts to write romantic fiction -- any one of whom could be far more brilliant than me - I remember what someone told me....

Say every second person in North America wants to write a book - so you take 100% of those people. 1% will actually do it. Of that 1% only 1% will actually finish the book. Most get stuck around page 100 and they spend years talking about thier novel but never work on it (because writing is really hard). 1% of that 1% who finish will submit to a publisher -- now .00000001% will sell that first book - they don't add into the math here (because they are rare and they sold thier soul to the devil.) Now the 100% of people who submitted - almost all of them will get rejected in some fashion - some will get a great rejection letter with an invitation to resubmit but most will get a form rejection letter. And because it takes a seriously thick skin, the kind of which can only be built up by years of "good" rejection letters - most will only see the "no thanks" which will read in thier minds like "you suck." 100% will have wine or chocolate. Perhaps Margaritas. Perhaps pizza.

Only 1% of those who submitted will either make the revisions needed, or do the smart thing and hide that first manuscript, join RWA and start a second book. So, I don't know what our percentage is now -- but there aren't that many of us still standing and we've only really just started.

So, we've got 100% of people working on a second book, they're learning some craft things and realizing how much more fun it was to write when they didn't know anything - some will stop right now because it's not as easy as they thought. They thought people just sat down and wrote books - no one said anything about POV and character motivation. And frankly, it's been two years now and they only gave themselves a year to be a NYT Bestseller. Time to move on.

So 1% of people who finish a second book, working so hard on craft and query letters and that @#$% synopsis actually submit. And now, thier chances start to improve -- they might sell. They've put in some real time and sacrifice (and we all know that nothing good comes with out sacrificing something - TV, social life, time with family and friends, that olympic swimming career...) and now the publishing Gods smile upon them. Well, on .5% of them.

Of the other .5% only .1% (is this math even making sense anymore?) will be able to keep going. And some will have to keep going for fifteen years - through 10 manuscripts - each one better than the last and each one getting them closer and closer to the validation we writers NEED after spending so many years dedicated to this cause. It's no longer about the money at this point -- that's simply ludicrous. More and more people will lose heart as those rare stories surface about the lucky (devil worshiping) writers who sell thier first mms.

But the point of all this faulty math is -- if you stay in this business long enough AND if you work hard on improving your craft constantly (writing the same problematic stuff over and over again won't help your cause) and you get wise to industry stuff (stop sending out that western idea to editors who HATE westerns) -- the odds are actually in your favor.

See...totally heartening information. Right?

On an unrelated side note -- the TV show Dexter? Anyone watching this? I'm blown away. Seriously blown away by this show.

The Beginning…. And the End

Molly blogged about finishing a book, which is a huge event. And deserves huge congratulations.

Any writer that finishes a book, published or not, deserves a serious pat on the back. Well done, you’ve accomplished what so many people talk about, but never actually do.

I’m in the process of finishing a book as well. Another 50 or so pages, some serious editing, and I’ll be done. This book suffers from some serious mistakes as well. Starting it, I thought it might be a little lighthearted. I don’t do lighthearted well, so a third of the way in, the tone changed, probably for the better, but the beginning all needed to change.

The relationship between the hero and heroine also changed significantly. Halfway through I gave them a past history, so more re-writes and a lot more of me wishing I’d figured all this stuff out before I’d written the book.

But, at the same time I’m finishing this book, I’m also starting another.

Why?

I can’t resist. One of the joys of writing for me is starting a book. I love it. I love writing that first chapter. I love thinking through the upcoming plot twists and the character reveals. The idea of an unwritten 400 pages invigorates me. I know this makes me weird, but hey… I’m weird.

I also usually know writing that first chapter how the book is going to go. Whether the book is going to be easy to write, or hard. This next book, the first three chapters have come together really well. My first draft is solid, which is really unusual for me. Why this book and not the one I’m finishing?

Why is it, some books flow so well, are joyful to write and everything comes together easily, and others are like slogging through quicksand.

I’d love to hear whether other writers have the same issue. Are some books easier to write than others? And why? Because right now, it’s a mystery to me.

The End...sort of

Big week here. Honorary drunk writers - which, frankly I think we should have more of - and I finished the latest mms today. Done. The End. Epilogue too. Exactly a month and a half before deadline - which isn't to say I'm actually done. Oh no.

My critique group used to celebrate these sorts of events with champagne and then we got wise to the fact that actually finishing the book is just the beginning. Oh! Those sweet days of ignorance and champagne.

I've sent versions to the critique group and now, I just await the real work. Revisions.

I know what my BIG problem with the mms is -- I really have no clue of what's going on. Scenes aren't clear in my head, GMC is all over the board - if it's there at all and the whole character arc is pretty muddied - if I remember correctly my heroine has her major life changing epiphany while eating eggs. Now, that happens to real life people all the time but I'm pretty sure the readers of Superromance are expecting MORE. (His epiphany happens at gun point, well, knife point, but I think that's an improvement.) As Sinead so wisely said while critiquing one of my earlier books -- "basically the guy goes for a walk and changes his mind." I inferred from her tone that that wasn't good enough. Anyway - that's only one of the major things I have to change.

The second major thing is that I have her loving her job in the first 30 pages but after that I decided she hated it. I also could never remember her hair color and was too lazy to go back and change it so she covers the spectrum. I also couldn't remember the official name for the hats police officers wear with their dress uniforms so I just have BLAH BLAH HAT - reminding me that I have to do a little research - which I could do now - but I won't.

I also, I'm sure you've noticed from reading this blog, have no clue what to do with a comma. It's embarrassing and every once in a while I figure I should just learn the rule - but then I don't. Too busy writing, maybe. I also need to change just about every character's name. There's a heavy Hispanic influence in this book and because I never think about these things all the character's last names end in EZ. (thanks, Maureen for pointing that out) OH! And I have my hero hiding behind a couch in a very un-heroic way during a big shoot out- which was funny to me while writing it- but I don't think that's going to fly. I also think maybe he does too many drugs. And there are too many scenes with food.

So - yep. Book done. Except for those few things.

Regardless - I'm celebrating tonight with leftover meatloaf, Hershey kisses and two hours of watching exactly what I want on TV. Husband is gone and I'm watching Food Channel and Entertainment Tonight...That's so sad.

Introducing... ATIII Finalist Kimberley Howe!

Today, we have a special treat. Honorary drunk writer, Kimberley Howe, who is a finalist in the American Title III contest. Kim is an amazing writer, “on the verge” and her romantic suspense manuscripts have finalled in multiple contests, including last year’s Golden Heart.

We’re all rooting for Kim in ATIII and hope you’ll vote for her too!

She’s done some serious research for her romantic suspense novels—how many writers do you know who’ve done a course in Advanced Tactical Training!—so we thought she might share some of her research tips with us today.

Welcome, Kim!

Thanks to Molly, Maureen, and Sinead for asking me to stop by Drunk Writers. I appreciate the opportunity to talk about the fascinating world of research. Perhaps the invitation stemmed from the fact that the words, “drunken oblivion,” can be found in the first sentence of my novel, ONE SHOT, TWO KILLS. :-)

Ed note: Use of the word “drunken” in the first line of the book certainly helped! But we’d have asked her to blog, even if her characters always remained sober.

When I decided to set my romantic suspense about a former Army sniper in St. Lucia, I had never been to St. Lucia, and I had never shot a gun. That’s what is so exciting about writing—the process of discovery, the opportunity to learn. I figure that if you’re willing to commit several months of your life to a project, you had better grow as a person during that time.

A writer’s life is disciplined, not unlike a sniper’s. Heck, we both get shot up when we falter in our work. Precision is crucial and we need to get our facts right. That’s why I’ll let Kenya—the heroine of ONE SHOT, TWO KILLS—take point on our mission of discovery, allowing us to delve into research and low-crawl in the trenches.

Reconnoiter. Scout out your target. Learn everything you can about your subject before you speak to any experts. Use the internet—an invaluable tool. The library also offers excellent resources if you have a sniper’s patience. Be creative. Out-of-print books about a variety of subjects can be found at www.abebooks.com or www.bookfinder.com I purchased videos and books from Palladin Press, a company that specializes in material about sniping and guns. The History Channel had a series on snipers. I ordered the DVDs and learned that in Stalingrad, 2,000 women snipers participated in the battle and only 500 of those women survived. One of these heroines became Kenya’s grandmother, the person who first taught her how to shoot.

Infiltrate. The best way to get the facts about a subject is to spend time in the middle of the action. Now, to clarify, by no means did I join a mercenary group and travel to Sierra Leone, but I did visit a gun range where I had the opportunity to fire the exact rifle Kenya uses in the novel. I also took a course in Advanced Tactical Training and participated in simulated combat with a bunch of guys. FYI, Prada has nothing on Camo Wear.

Ambush. Okay, maybe ambushing is more Kenya’s style, but you can go for the subtler approach and ask questions without a full frontal attack. Experts are usually quite willing to share their knowledge if you do your homework first. For example, Kenya runs a dive charter in St. Lucia and the hero approaches her about assisting in the recovery of a sunken Russian satellite. Although I’m an avid scuba diver, I’ve never had the chance to use trimix, the mixture of gases that allows you to dive deep with fewer side effects. My eye doctor travels the world on diving vacations, so I dropped by his office to ask if he knew much about trimix. He introduced me to an instructor who specializes in it. The man called me from a deep diving expedition off the coast of Ireland. I had more details than I had dreamed about. And discovering the waters of St. Lucia was definitely the highlight of the research.

The lesson in all of this is to immerse yourself in research. Be fearless like Kenya when pursuing the facts. Also be open to double-checking. My mentor at Seton Hill University was a former New York homicide detective and a Vietnam sniper. When he read the book, I was proud that he didn’t find any technical errors. No matter what subject you’re tackling in your novels, zero in on your target.

If you have two minutes to spare, please log onto www.romantictimes.com and vote for ONE SHOT, TWO KILLS in the American Title III Contest. Kenya would be most grateful, and a sniper is always a good friend to have.

Thanks Kim! We'd love to have you back, anytime.

I think we should all vote for Kim. She’s right. It’s better to have snipers as friends than enemies! To vote, simply send an e-mail to webmaster@romantictimes.com with the words, ONE SHOT, TWO KILLS in the subject line. Vote from every e-mail address you have. Tell your friends to, too!

To see all the contestants and their opening lines, check out this link.

Good luck to Kimberley Howe!

Secret Guest Blogger!

Stay tuned...

The Drunk Writers have a guest blogger today! The post should be up around noon.

Very exciting!

What I learned at NJRW – Editors and Agents

First off, this is a great, really well run conference that I’d really recommend. Small enough that you can meet people and large enough that it gets a good turnout from editors and agents.

I attended the agent/editor panels, so I’m going to cover them. Not that I ever find them that informative.

The editors present were from St. Martins, Avon, Kensington, Harlequin(Luna, SIM, HI) and a new publishing house, Samhain.

The usual questions got asked, what are you looking for? What trends do you see in the marketplace, yada, yada..

First and foremost, all of them said, they’re looking for a well written story. I really got the sense that they’re open to a lot of different genre’s, as long as the story is compelling. Not one said they’re looking for any particular genre specifically.

But here are the specifics
1) Westerns. No one there other than Samhain was willing to consider Westerns. They haven’t sold well in the past. Personally, I think someone is going to write an incredible Western romance and change all this. Maybe, I'm just really hoping that’s the case.
2) Paranormals, still selling well, but if you’re going to do a Vampire or Werewolf story, you have to put a really unique spin on it, as they already have established authors writing the more standard Vampires and Werewolves.
3) Hot… sexy sells better. In almost all genres. Up the saleability of your book by adding great sexual tension and smoking sex scenes.
4) Check the Barnes and Noble best seller lists and see what’s selling, and that will give you a strong indication of what’s selling. That’s what the editors do.

The agent panel, had six agents. Sorry, but I either won’t get the names right, or I’ll misspell them. Not much came out of this, except they are looking for really well written saleable stories across all genres.

My impression coming out of these panels are that they are open to almost all types of stories(westerns aside) and are looking for something different.

What else I learned from the New Jersey conference.
I agree with Molly. Eloisa James is a very smart lady and I really wish I’d attended her workshop.
Most bestselling authors are bestsellers because they write great books, but also, because they are really knowledgeable about the publishing industry and what it takes to progress in their careers. I aspire to be half as smart as Eloisa James, Ann Stuart and Jennifer Crusie.
I’m trying to be half as nice as Virginia Kantra, Roxanne St. Claire and CJ Carmichael. Class acts, and really lovely ladies.
And even though we only see them once a year, it was so fun hanging out with Anna and Brenda Harlen.

Great conference, catch it next year if you can.

What I learned in NJ – about career objectives

In my opinion, the most important business, i.e. non-writing, thing a writer can do is to:

• Learn as much about the industry as humanly possible


• Decide what kind of career he/she wants


• Make all career decisions based on the above—without compromise (or as little compromise as possible.)

This is something I’ve “known” for a while, but somehow I really started to believe it at the NJRW conference after listening to best selling authors like Jennifer Crusie, Bob Mayer, Anne Stuart and Eloisa James talk about their careers and how they got there.

Career planning is important to me right now, because in spite of thinking I was close to publication a couple of years ago when my romantic comedy (now abandoned) was doing well in contests, I’m pretty sure I’m now at a point where I can fairly say, “I’m close”.

Problem is, in this business one can be “close” for a very, very long time. And these days, with so many options available for publication, (e-pubs, small pubs, self-pubs) it’s easy to get confused or to just leap one direction without giving much thought as to why.

Debbie Macomber asserts that it’s a good thing to write down your goals, so I’m going to say, right here and now: I want a long-term publishing career writing mainstream fiction. (Of course, Debbie suggested writing your goal on a file card and sticking it in a drawer, and I’ve gone and announced it publicly… Doh!)

But that’s what I want. (Right now, anyway.) And while I know there isn’t only one way to get there, I do know that I don’t want to make any decisions that aren’t directly in support of that goal.

Last winter, I was floored to hear Jennifer Crusie say that when she was breaking out of category romance into single title, she turned down mediocre contracts for her first book to hold out for the possibility of a great contract for her next book. Floored. What a brave thing to do, I thought. But it was just smart. She knew what kind of career she wanted, and she knew that taking a mediocre contract wasn’t going to help her get it.

Another writer I met in NJ bought out the last two books of her first three-book contract, so that she could write books in a “hotter” genre for a smaller house. She figured she was better served getting on the wave of a rising new genre and having the chance to be a lead author for a smaller house, than she would have been delivering on her contracts for books in a down-trending genre at a big house where she’d likely be a bottom-of-the-ladder author the sales team wouldn’t push.

Very brave. Very smart. And all about knowing what you want and making sure your decisions support it.

Still, I do second-guess myself in weaker moments. Some days I just want to be published. I want to join PAN. I want to see my name in the First Sales column in the RWR. I want to tell people I have a book. I want to have a few dollars in my pocket to show for all my hard work. I just want to see and hold a book with my name on the cover. Show it to strangers on the subway. Maybe sleep with it under my pillow…

But in these moments, I realize the primary reason I want to be published by any means possible, is so I’ll have better answers to questions like: “How’s the writing going?” or “Still writing?” or (a personal favorite) “When is your book coming out?”, which I inevitably get every time I’m around anyone I know who isn’t a writer. (and who hasn’t previously had their head bitten off after asking me these questions when I’m in a bad mood.)

So, this post was a long-winded way to say that the most important thing I learned in NJ was know what you want and: “Never give up! Never surrender!”

Oh, and I also learned that when I’m sleep deprived, I start to slur after 2 gin & tonics.

What I Learned at the NJRW Put Your Heart In A Book Conference...

My reasons for originally signing up to speak at NJRW's conference were pretty basic. I have a bunch of books coming out and attending conferences (speaking and hiding in my room - or worse with the people I already know) is the kind of promotion I am comfortable with. AND it was at a Sheraton -- and they have such dark rooms and nice beds. AND it was my first time away from my new baby. So - in a nutshell I was going to New Jersey to get some sleep.

Well - best laid plans... Maureen wanted to drink gin, Sinead wanted to dance (I know trust me no one was more surprised than her) and I ended up having some serious light bulb moments about writing and more importantly what I want from my writing career.

Let me first say this -- Eloisa James. Wow. Smart lady. Virginia Kantra. Smart lady. Molly O'Keefe - big dummy.

First let's talk about the craft stuff - because as a writer terrified of promotion - this is the most fun. I know that we internalize a lot of what we do - we know in our gut what we love about romances and why we want to write them but we often don't get those reasons, spoken to us wrapped up in a bow by another writer - but when we do it's electrifying and clears all the crap off the table and reminds us what we're supposed to be doing.

Eloisa James gave me this one -- halfway through the book, you have to turn things inside out. Expectations must be upended, love must be thwarted and a happily ever after must seem like an impossibility. I am so wrapped up in chapter hooks and likeable heroines and contracts and nap time and FBI research that I have completely forgotten what the point is. The reader knows HEA is coming - it's my job to make them wonder if maybe...this time... it won't. It's not just a black moment - it's something intrinsic in the character, not always the conflict, that keeps them apart. And I have to make it REAL!

I know lots of you are probably going...well, duh?! And I think other times, in the process of writing other books I would have said the same thing. But this was exactly what I needed to hear as I get ready to do a big rewrite of the current WIP.

Now - in terms of the career. This gem I think came from Jenny Cruise but it was something I heard echoed lots in the bar and hallway. I need to gather myself a good posse. A team. People who have my back and I have theirs - and sure Maureen, Sinead and the rest of the talented women in my critique group are core members of that - we bitch, we moan, we theorize and most importantly we make sure that each person is putting out the best book they are capable of.
But each of us have people we need to meet at different parts of our career, to inspire and help us to the next level. And I have to be smart about it. It's not just about making contact with a writer I admire, or is a NYT bestseller, or a writer who writes the same thing I do - it's about making contact with writers who are a few steps ahead of me in terms of their career - whose careers are enviable and exciting and have gone from point A to point B. or C.

And what I really learned -- it's about meeting the nice writers. The kind ones. Ones who engage in conversations rather than monologues -- because these relationships will hopefully last a long time and they should be equal and friendly. Not mercenary and shallow.

Maybe that's a no duh thing too - but it feels huge right now.

Molly

I did speak at this conference about Writing a Partial That Sells and the notes to the workshop will be on my website by the end of the week. Feel free to use them if they help.

Stages of Rejection

Sorry for the downer subject, but having received a particularly disappointing rejection almost a month ago and just realizing I’m not totally over it yet, I’ve been reflecting on how we, as writers, deal with this inevitable and frequent event called rejection.

I wondered if the five stages of grief might offer some clues. The most well known stages of grief as defined by Elisabeth Kubler-Ross are:

Denial (this isn't happening to me!)
Anger (why is this happening to me?)
Bargaining (I promise I'll be a better person if...)
Depression (I don't care anymore)
Acceptance (I'm ready for whatever comes)

Somehow, this list doesn’t adequately describe my personal rejection coping process, at least at this point. I admit, my rejection coping strategies have evolved as I've progressed as a writer.

Anger? In the early days, I probably did go through some anger, (what an idiot that agent/editor is), and along with that anger, I read lots of personal meaning into phrases I later recognized as part of that particular agent’s form letter. Really, though, I can’t remember the last time a rejection made me angry. Two years ago? Three? All-in-all, I’ve gotten pretty good at shrugging off rejections. Even bad contest scores don’t really make me angry any more. I mean, what’s the point? I’m not even (that) bitter about the fact the Stiletto contest imploded this year and I’ll never know how my finalling manuscript, THE MISEDUCATION OF APRIL HILLSON, placed. Okay, I’m a little bitter. But what difference would it make to know whether I was first, second or third? I’ve already got a great agent.

Bargaining? I’m not sure I ever did that—unless you can count the days when I kept putting time limits on how long I’d keep trying to get published. (I’ll give myself one year to get published. Okay, two. Okay, three. I’ve since seen the folly in that!)

I’d say my stages of rejection are:

Ambivalence (It doesn’t matter.)
Depression (I’m never, ever, going to sell. I suck.)
Rationalization (I wasn’t expecting that one anyway. It was bad timing, bad luck.)
Acceptance (It was just one chance. I'll have others as long as I keep trying.)
Optimism (I’ll get ‘em next time. It took many great writers a long time to get published. Maybe I’ll sell that book after the one I’m working on now hits bestseller lists.)

Thing is, the “bigger” and more disappointing a rejection is for me, the more these stages seem to cycle. I think sometimes I need to run through them all a few times, before I truly graduate from faux optimism to the real thing.

The bigger my hopes the farther I fall and the more times I need to rinse and repeat*. Know what I mean?

At least that’s how I’m rationalizing the funk I’ve been this past week. The “really disappointing” rejection came right after labor day. You’d think I’d be over it by now…

Onward and upward. (she said optimistically)

What are your stages of rejection?

*(Ha! I'm blogging about hair on my other blog today. The rinse and repeat metaphor was an unconscious coincidence.)

Post script: Not sure if there will be any fresh posts until next week. The drunk writers are heading to New Jersey for a conference and to catch up on their drinking.

Where have all the good books gone?

Before I get too in to this I should let you know -- I've been a bit hungover for two days. My son got up three times last night. I had Sunday all set aside to do some work -- which I didn't do. And because of the hangover I've eaten everything that has crossed my path and not gone for a run.

So - I'm in a bit of a funk.

But through all of this I have just wanted to be entertained. I have just wanted to hang out in my bed and read something really really good. A page-turner. A character driven romance of moderate epic proportions. I would skip the epic. Alas -- I can't find them. Where have all the good books gone? Three four years ago when the romance world was turned upside down by chick-lit and dark erotic paranormals -- amazing things seemed to be happening. Heros were dark and tortured again. Heroines were flawed and real. Plots didn't rely on a mis-understanding (though I like a good misunderstanding ala Judith McNaught who I've been re-reading during the dry spell). But most of all there was TENSION. Not just sexual though that abounded -- there was tension between me as the reader and the book. I couldn't turn pages fast enough.

I felt- as a reader - totally energized. As a writer I was totally freaking out! But those were some good days as readers. Fun authors came out of those years - Eileen Rendahl, Susan Squires, Susan Donovan (She was around earlier but I found her then and gobbled up everything) Mary Kay Andrews and dozens more.

Maybe I just need to be reminded of the good books I've read. The ones I really remember are The Dark Queen and even more so The Courtesan by Susan Carroll. So - someone remind me or inform me of the great books I'm missing. Because I need some romance. The best romance I've come across in months is The Office season finale from last year and the premiere this year. Now, that's tension.

So - let me have it. Best romances you've read this year....

Industry News

I spent last weekend at the Ottawa RWA Chapter - Are You Sweet or Spicy? Conference. The whole weekend was targeted to those writers working to write series romance. It was a fantastic weekend. Well-run conference - the specific nature of the event made it I think even more helpful to those attending. There was a lot of relevant and clear information (which isn't always the kind of information you get when dealing with Harlequin - thier guidelines are VERY vauge) And this is what I learned in no particular order.

1. If you are trying to break in target one of the new lines (EVERLASTING, ROMANTIC SUSPENSE, NOCTURNE) they are always looking for inventory.

2. If you are trying to break in and those lines don't appeal to you try to target one of the lines that puts out six books a month - SUPERROMANCE, INTRIGUE, BLAZE. They are always looking for inventory.

3. Nocturne is dark. They aren't looking for Vampire hi-jinks.

4. Everlasting is looking for historical material mixed with contemporary. Think Suzanne Brockman's WWII stuff. This is a VERY romantic line.

5. The difference between Romantic Suspense and Intrigue is - Intrigue is very hero focused. Women or Child in Jeopardy stuff but the hero does the saving. Romantic Suspense if for some of those kick-ass heroines.

6. AS A WHOLE - HARLEQUIN IS RETURNING TO ROMANCE. EVERY LINE IS GETTING MORE ROMANCE CENTERED.

7. Brenda Chin gave an interesting analysis of how hooks are used in the lines. For instance if you have a secret baby in a Blaze it means - the hero and heroine have done it once - you know they'll do it again. In an Intrigue you know that baby is going to be in jeopardy. There were more that I can't remember.

8. The editors find out what is said about them on the loops and they track it down. Brenda Chin said directly to the whole room - if you are an idiot on the loops or are difficult to work with and she knows about it - she won't buy your book.

9. Small conferences are the way to go. Intimate. Informative. Not over-whelming. Everytime I go to a small conference I am reminded of how great they are.

10. Gayle Wilson, President of RWA is a class act and a lovely lady.

That's it for the most part - hopefully others who attended might chime in with mroe info.

The whole chick lit debate

Okay, this topic is way too big (not to mention political) for me to delve into deeply here, but a fabulously funny cartoon done by Patricia Storms, (check it out), and a “roundtable discussion” by some of the contributors to the mean-spirited anthology THIS IS NOT CHICK LIT inspired me to say a few words.

First, I love many kinds of fiction. I know lots of people who only like reading in one genre. I'm not one of those people. I like the sort of books Oprah picks. I don’t mind if books are depressing. I don't mind if they're joyous. I don’t mind the main character’s not someone I’d like to know. I’m okay with happy or sad endings. I love endings that surprise me, but I also like ones I see coming from the first page, but are satisfying nonetheless. I like to read for lots and lots of reasons and sometimes just to be entertained.

The assertion that humourous, fast-paced books aren’t well written or aren’t to be taken seriously, or are less worthy simply because they don’t choose to tackle tricky topics, has always been a major irritant of mine. Some entertaining fast-paced books do tackle tricky subjects and I would claim that authors who can tackle meaty subjects and still make their books entertaining are far more talented than ones who create weighty tomes difficult to slog through. But that sounds too judgmental and that was not my intent.

Related to this irritant is the lack of attention given to women’s books by the publishing industry, reviewers, etc. Yes, there are some very well respected female authors in the literary world, yes we’ve come a long way baby, but still a HUGE percentage of all books reviewed by the major papers and trade publications are written by men.

This makes no sense. More books are written by women. More books are read by women. But most books written by women for women get no respect. What gives?

This is obviously not something I’m going to solve here today, nor am I going to try to. Others have already written eloquent essays on the topic—Lauren Baratz-Logsted, Jennifer Weiner and Shanna Swendson to name a few—but one thing said by one of the THIS IS NOT authors really ticked me off. (Lots of things did, but this one is small and easy to tackle.) She said that to call Jane Austen’s books chick lit was ridiculous because the term hadn’t even been invented yet then.

HUH??? She couldn’t have missed the point any further if she’d closed her eyes and spun before shooting off her mouth.

The point being made by suggesting Jane Austen was a chick lit author, is to assert that if she’d written those same books today, tackling the same socio-political and moral subjects, with the same plots, they would’ve been given hot pink covers and marketed as chick lit. (Or possibly romance. I’m not going to quibble on that one, but the heroine-centric nature of her books make them more chick lit than romance, to me.) The point is, PRIDE AND PREJUDICE would NOT be marketed as literary fiction today (if it even was then, I doubt it). It’s straightforward (very good) storytelling style is too simplistic. It’s too light, too funny—not heavy enough. No one gets raped. No one’s in rehab. No one was molested as a child. IT HAS A HAPPY ENDING! (Horrors)

I’ve never been a fan of the term chick-lit, but it’s not the authors’ fault that the industry coined this term and started to paint most non-romance fiction written by women for women with a bright-pink, chick-lit brush. Chick lit authors are just trying to write books women enjoy reading, that they enjoy reading, that they enjoy writing. The THIS IS NOT anthology contributors aimed their vitriol in the wrong direction, in my opinion. They should have criticized the industry for coining the phrase and further ghettoizing women’s fiction, rather than trying to claim they were superior to the authors whose books happen to be labeled as chick lit.
If you want to try one of the anthologies, try this one instead.

Pre-Writing…

Like Molly, I love to hear about each writer’s process. Especially the pre-writing stage, because I think here is where you can see the most variations.

Personally, I’ve played around with stage lately. The one thing that does not vary is what I call the percolation stage… where I mull the idea around in my head, play with the characters, and figure out some key scenes. All without writing a word down.

I create images in my head, conversations, some of which will make it into the book, some won’t. I usually do this while I’m finishing the previous book. This makes me a little schizophrenic, but I can’t help myself.

Once this is done, I’ll sketch out a rough outline of the characters, the plot, the major turning points, and the ending. I have to know the ending.

I’ve even tried detailing the book out scene by scene, with mixed results. A lot of the scenes changed during the first draft, so I’m not sure this helped me at all.

As I figure out my overall process, I know pre-planning is one of my favourite parts of the writing process. I also know it’s something I need to get better at. I keep thinking if I prefect this part, I can soften the pain of editing, or at least cut back on a draft or two.

I’d love to hear about other people’s pre-writing process and what they use that helps them write a better, cleaner first draft of a book.

How everything is subjective…and timing

The one thing I keep forgetting is how crazy subjective this whole thing is. I’m talking right now from a reader’s perspective. I’ll read a book, get three pages in and wonder how the hell did this ever get published? (not naming any titles here)

Some of these books I picked up myself, others were given to me with hearty recommendations. So other people obviously loved them.

It’s all a reminder of how weirdly subjective this business is. I’ve seen it in the rejections of my critique partners. Books I’ve loved, (am I do try and be subjective myself) and can’t understand how an editor wouldn’t.. (maureen’s rejections come to mind on this one)

But we’re dealing with personal taste or whether or not someone is having a bad day or they hate women under size 2, or they don’t like feisty heroines, or blonde heroes, you catch my drift.

It reminds me of that old saying, you can’t please all the people all the time… we just need to please the right person on the right day… which is partly talent, and partly luck.

Initially a hard concept for me to wrap my head around. Now it really helps take the sting out of rejections and lets me keep moving forward…

But the timing thing…. Well that’s a little easier. If something is trending well, when then editors are actively looking for that type of book. And if you’re lucky enough to write that type of book, chances are you’ll get read faster, and possibly with a more favourable bent…. But, say if you’re trying to sell a straight regency right now… the book would have to be nothing short of phenomenal…

Timing can sometimes be a sucky, sucky thing

Suspension of Disbelief

Every time we sit down to write, we ask readers to come on a ride with us, to suspend their disbelief and get sucked into our world and our characters and to believe for 300 plus pages that the characters we’ve created are real people taking real actions and feeling real emotions.

One could argue the further one strays from “reality” the more we ask the reader to suspend his/her disbelief, but I think this is debatable and not really what I wanted to talk about. :-) (Maybe a discussion for another time?) That said, I have been thinking about suspended disbelief a lot lately, primarily because I’m working on a book that does require more than average amount of “suspension”.

What I did want to talk about is how fragile suspension can be and to hypothesize that when a writer makes a misstep in this area, they risk losing the reader/viewer completely. Scary.

A couple of things I’ve seen (not read) recently have made me ponder this more: The new season of Prison Break and a film that premiered at the Toronto Film Festival called Penelope. (tried to post a picture, but blogger not being nice to me tonight)

I’ll start with Penelope. Now, lots (most) people I talked to in festival lines who’d seen this movie LOVED it. Me? After loving the first half, I ended up decidedly lukewarm in the end. Because my opinion differed from so many others I chatted with, I tried to figure out why. (Exception was Zach Braff's dad, who I met in a line for another movie. He didn't like the movie either and for the exact same reason.)

Some background: Penelope is a fairy tale. It’s not meant to be taken literally. I get that. It’s about a girl who’s cursed. A girl with a pig snout for a nose. A pig snout which can’t be fixed via plastic surgery, because by some strange medical mystery, her carotid artery runs through it.

But are any of these elements what caused me to roll my eyes? No. It was a scene where the hero asks the heroine to guess which musical instrument he plays. Instead of the heroine simply guessing, there’s a cut and suddenly the hero has recruited a five piece jazz ensemble and tries each instrument in turn, while singing “Yes, sir, she’s my baby” wildly off key.

I get that this scene was supposed to show them starting to know and to like each other. I get that it was supposed to be comic relief. For me, it was just annoying (not to mention painful to listen to) and ridiculous – particularly since she could have just asked, “Flute? Guitar? Sax? Piano?” and have been done with it.

Why stage a silly contrived scene when a conversation will do?

This scene was the moment the filmmaker lost me. Every subsequent moment where any degree of suspended disbelief was required, I rolled my eyes. I was no longer sucked into the magical half-NY-half-London fairytale setting and instead was bemoaning the predictability of the outcome and comparing the movie’s theme to Shrek, a movie with a similar theme, but for which I had no problem suspending my disbelief.

Sigh. I don’t know when this film hits the theatres. I’ll be really interested to see what other people think.

On to the second season of Prison Break. I LOVED this show last year. LOVED it. But this season, particularly during the first couple of episodes, I had a lot of trouble believing in Michael’s plans. “Why?” I wondered. He’s still the same guy. Still as smart. Still as obsessive. His plans were wildly implausible last year, too. But I didn't care.

I decided it’s because there are too many variables outside the prison. When they were in the relatively contained environment, I could believe he had contingency plans worked out in case the main plan hit snags -- but that bridge, with that car, with those radio stations, with that handy-dandy pig blood? And how did he know the bridge wouldn't have been repaired since he took out the bolts ages ago. Give me a break. (No pun intended.)

I think this season might have been more interesting if, when things went wrong on the outside, Michael became useless and Lincoln had to solve all the problems.
I’m still willing to give it a few more episodes, but I think they may have already lost me.

Speaking of LOST. Still along for that ride even with all it’s implausible turns and dropped threads. I hope they don’t do anything this season to sink my suspended disbelief. There’s nothing I love more than getting sucked into some other writer’s world. (Except maybe creating my own.)

How Do We Do What We Do?

I love talking about 'process.' Plotter, Pantser, Synopsis, Outline, Character Interviews, Music, No Music, Candles, Goat sacrifice...that one might just be me? How writers get words on paper and day by day get the work done - fascinates me.

And mine has undergone two major changes since I started writing.

I used to be a total write by the seat of my pants kind of writer. No outline, no synopsis, no real idea past happily ever after how things were going to end. I would just write all week and then on Sunday I would head down to whatever bagel shop was close to where ever I was living at the time and I'd edit. With, like most beginning writers, no clue how I was doing everything wrong.

Ah...to be so ignorant and happy with my writing. Those were the days.

During this time I also had a serious Free Cell addiction so I would allow myself one game before getting to work. I'd write most of the day on those days that I could - liberal amounts of Free Cell mixed in - my story blown this way and that by whatever whim took me that day.

Then I sold a book and everything changed. The first book that sold was the first in a series of three books. I had written most of the second by the time the first sold so I finished it and sent that in. Unbelievably my editor called and asked me for a synopsis of the third book so she could put together a two book contract.

A syn-what??
I overhauled my process and turned from a pantser to a devote plotter.
After that my process included a long synopsis - usually 10 -15 pages and then I'd write three chapters and revise the synopsis and then, of course, revise the first three chapters.

I edited as I went - getting to the point that I would have been through a second rewrite before I'd send scenes on to my critique group. I would begin each day of writing going over what I'd written the day before and doing some fairly extensive changes and then I'd do the same thing at the end of the day. I had a lot of time to write in those days.

Then I had a baby. And that changed EVERYTHING.
Now, I can't sit down to the computer without knowing exactly what I'm going to write. I can't go back and reread anything because it takes too much time. I work on a computer not hooked up to the internet and I've stopped listening to music.

So every day I sit down to the computer and vomit onto the screen and never every look back. I have no clue what I'm writing - if any of it is holding together or making sense. I'm told this is how a first draft usually goes by those that write this way (Sinead).

Am I liking this? Not yet. I certainly see the pluses - things are going FAST and the story feels incredibly immediate. But I feel so unplugged from my work and I look forward to reading it for myself.

So - tell me how you guys do what you do? Keep the goat's a secret if you want to.

Movie Orgies

I love movies. A lot. In fact, I’ve seen 33 movies in since 2:00 pm last Thursday and plan to see 9 more before I got to bed on Saturday... (And no Peter Saarsgard this year, Molly... Did sit across the aisle from Christian Bale a few nights ago, though... Actually, he was down the row a bit, but Jeremy Davies was right across the aisle from me. What a strange and interesting little man...)

Because of my movie obsession, picking one favourite movie is beyond difficult...

But I'm going to have to go with Robert Altman's SHORT CUTS. I'm a serious sucker for the interconnected storyline movie. I also loved Crash, Magnolia, Grand Canyon, Gosford Park, Nashville and even Love, Actually.

Sometimes loving a movie is about when you saw it, or who you saw it with, or what was going on in your life when you saw it... But I think my infatuation with SHORT CUTS is about the characters. No cookie-cutter stereotypes in that movie. Just fascinating, layered people with serious flaws, making interesting, unexpected and questionable choices.

Like Madeline Stowe's character's reaction to her philandering husband. Instead of lashing out, she makes a joking game out of hearing what ridiculous lie he comes up with next. Still she actually seems to love him. I loved the relationship between her and her sister, played by Julianne Moore, too, and the way they laughed at the Matthew Modine character, Julianne's husband, when he tried to be blasé about finding his sister-in-law nude in his living room. And the contrast between that scene and Modine’s actual blasé reaction to his wife being naked from the waist down in another scene. Her nudity had nothing to do with the scene, so some people might argue it was gratuitous, but the choice to have her be naked and not have it matter to the scene, said so much about their characters and the marriage.

I could go on and on about this movie, and I haven’t seen it in years… Must see it again. (Actually, I’m seeing a film tomorrow, JINDABYNE, that is taken from one of the Carver short stories adapted in SHORT CUTS – the one where they find a dead body.)

Has it affected my writing? Not 100% sure. I wish I could write all my characters with so many layers. Must try harder. I am attempting an interconnected storyline manuscript (it's had had a few false starts), and the manuscript that got me my agent has two interconnected timelines… so I guess I am carrying some of the love of this type of film into my writing.

I think filmmakers have a slight advantage over novelists with this structure, though. With the visuals, they can show you the characters and get you interested in a lot of different characters without resorting to tons of description and reminders. Not that it’s impossible in a novel, just harder, I think.

While I’m on the interconnecting soapbox, I saw BABEL this week. Very good. Believe it or not, Brad Pitt made me cry. The film’s not quite as powerful as 21 GRAMS, but great nonetheless.

My brain is too full of movies to think any more…

Some other festival highlights you should see when/if they open.

The Last King of Scotland
Fido
2:37
Rescue Dawn
Pan’s Labyrinth
For Your Consideration
Breaking and Entering

Favorite Movie I totally forgot about and why I am angry with Maureen. Really angry.

Sinead has a good plan here -- open up a conversation that Maureen would really spend a long time thinking about and talking about as punishment for living the Toronto Film Festival. I was going to talk about my new love of the series Fire Fly -- but how our favorite movies reflect our writing is better.

My anger towards Maureen right now is due in large part to Peter Saarsgard. If Pete were going to leave his pregnant lover for one of us - Maureen has a distinct advantage because she's actually been in the same room as him. Sure five fantastic movies a day is great --but for me it all comes down to Peter Saarsgard.

Now. Movies.

My favorite dramas are Good Will Hunting and Field of Dreams (it's funny that Sinead and I are critique partners isn't it... I'm on the warm and fuzzy side of the spectrum - though when she dragged me to Aliens at the I-Max - it was pretty amazing anyway...) I think what I love about these films and how I try incorporate it into my writing is

1. I try not to get in the way of the storytelling. Those movies are great because there is not an inch of fat - there is not a scene that doesn't serve the might trinty of purpose - character development, forwarding the plot, revealing backstory or forshadowing the future.

2. I try to let the characters tell thier story. This really comes down to showing rather than telling. We know nothing of Will Hunting except what is shown to us -- he's a bad ass. Loyal. Smart. So when the big reveal of his past happens -- it's a gut churner because it's not something we've already had referenced -we've just seen hints and so by the time it shows up we're dying to know. As for Field of Dreams - we get that he's unorthodox in large part becuse of the behavior of his wife the fantastic Amy Madigan -- a man married to a woman who stands up at a PTA meeting and calls someone a Nazi Cow -- is likely to plow under his corn to build a baseball field because a voice told him to. At least I believed it.

BUT!
I forgot one of my favorite movies. I visited my oldest friend in the world this weekend and as a suprise she had Clue for us to watch. CLUE! Hilarious movie! Which made me think the whole way home that comedy is so tough to write because it rests largely on the characters acting it out. Movies it works because Madeline Khan is one of the funniest women ever - but how do you write it in such a way that everyone can see it the same way you do without what's-his-name Curry or Will Farrell or Steve Correll to help you out. Tough.

Great topic Sinead. Stay away from Peter Maureen.

My favourite movie.

Movies are top of mind right now, because Maureen is at the Toronto film festival and I am teeth gnashingly jealous.

I love movies, find something interesting in almost everything I see, even the bad ones. (except the Big Lebowski, but why would take up too much room here.)

My favourite movie is Aliens, has been since I first saw it well over fourteen years ago. Some movies make an initial impact and fade with time and experience. Some grow on me on the second viewing. Aliens I loved from the first frame.

I know, it’s not the usual fav. But to me it’s got everything I love about storytelling. A kick ass, conflicted, multi-dimensional heroine, tension in spades and great villains. More the actual Aliens, than the Paul Reiser character.

I think that movie has influenced more of my storytelling than any other movie I’ve ever seen. I love the rich character dramas, the gorgeous historical epics, but a tightly plotted, suspenseful, edge of your seat movie will always be my favorite.

And Sigourney Weaver is amazing.. What more can I say?

It’s always interesting to find out what other people’s fav movies are and how their writing reflects it.

I screwed up….

More than once, but this time I’m referring to how I spent my time after my book got agented and sent out to publishers.

Here’s the thing. I sort of expected an answer within a few weeks. Well imagine me still waiting eight months later and having heard nothing.. Why is a whole other blog.

So, what did I spend those eight months doing? Playing around with the sequel to the book that had been submitted to publishers. Taking twice as long as it should have to write the first draft.

Getting more and more discouraged with each day that went by without word. It was actually almost heartening to get a rejection. At least I know it had been read.. or hoped it had been.

Had a great bout of DWT on Wed night. And Molly said something that made complete sense to me. While a book is being shopped, write something completely different.

I know, it sounds a little defeatist, a belief the first book will be rejected, but it was only when I tried to write something not at all connected to the shopped book that I felt energized again. Ready to really get my head into a story.

And it got me writing again at my usual pace.

There are a few hard things about this business, the rejections, the self-doubt, but for me, the hardest is the waiting..

The only way I can combat is to write something new and different.

Not sure why this is, but it’s my new method, rather than sitting on my butt and watching Survivor re-runs..

Why do I judge contests?

Okay, there are plenty of reasons I judge contests and most of them good… But every time I sit down to actually judge contest entries, I end up grinding my teeth 99% of the time and regretting I volunteered to do it. WARNING: I just spent way too much of my long weekend judging contest entries, so I’m a little bitter.

I think what I find most difficult in judging is finding nice things to say. I do think (hope) I word my criticisms carefully and make lots of suggestions… but I do find it hard to say nice things about entries that just plain suck. Am I a mean bitch judge? Perhaps I am.

So, why do I do it?

• To give something back. I learned a lot from judges in the first few contests I entered and hope some of these writers are learning from me.


• To support my chapters. I judge for both of the RWA chapters I belong to… Doesn’t explain why I’ve volunteered for a few other contests run by other chapters, though.


• To see what’s out there. The unpublished part of me wants to know what else is floating around in submission land. Used to depress me. Now it makes me feel good about myself. Hope that means my writing has gotten better. Maybe it just means I’m more deluded now.


• To gain experience critiquing. Getting better at recognizing problems and getting to the core… Still have much to learn.


• To learn about writing. I’ve had a few true light bulb moments writing comments to contest entrants. Moments where, when I’m trying to articulate what I think they could improve on, I realize something really huge about my own writing or writing in general. Don’t know if the recipients of these pearls of wisdom consider them as such. (They probably want me burned in effigy.) But judging contests has helped me clarify some things.


• To make my own writing better. Even if I know something like, “don’t put back-story up front”. Sometimes, when I do it myself, I can come up with lots of excuses and rationalizations why it’s okay for me to break that “rule” in that particular case. But when I see something like that in six bad entries in a row… It helps me see how an objective reader would view my work and it pushes me to try harder.


• Oh, and because I've been reading my CPs' work tonight in preparation for our weekly meeting, I've realized another reason I judge contests. To appreciate what fantastic writers my critique partners are. Seriously. I don’t know why we aren’t all published yet. We will be. Soon.

And, the final reason I do it?

Because I’m a masochist at heart.

Hey, LIGHTBULB MOMENT! That must be why I write, too.

RAGE and the Labor Day long weekend

I was going to write about the nature of reading because I finally managed to get involved in Jonathon Strange and Mr. Norell - Fabulous book that has been collecting dust by my bed because I have the attention span of a may fly. BUT. THEN. FROM OUT OF THE BLUE....

Backstory first...

Labor Day long weekend - a friend of our's is the director of a camp and the camp closes on Labor Day so he invites a group of friends up for the weekend. There are TONS of kids and lots of people who don't know each other but are grateful to get out of the city and watch thier children fight with other children.

You have some friend's from mother's groups, college friends, wives of friends of friends - it's a real mixed bag.

Anyway second night - I am in the process of gulping down my three glasses of wine before I pass out at 10 at night when the kids are all finally gone and the adults can really settle into drinking and making sort of awkward small talk. Discussion of what we do as jobs roll around and I as I always do say "I write trashy romance novels." Because honest to God - I do. They are trashy -- at least what I consider trashy. I write guilty pleasures and I am SO okay with this it's not even funny. In fact -- when converstions like this come up I always feel really good beause 7 out of 10 people WISH they could do this. Two out of ten people could never do it but used to read and love Harlequins or thier mother's did or grandmothers or some other nice association. The 1 out of ten people -- the snobs and jerks who really do look down on this singularly FABULOUS job I have - I actually have never met. Until this weekend. When I think I met about four of them.

Blah blah blah - what do you do - marketing...advertising...trashy romance novels...

And then at the end of the table a man I have never met (but who directs television commercials -- so noble) says "OH! I thought you wrote real books..."

Swear to GOD the air in the room turned to cement. I said "ouch" or something like that and a few friends jumped to my defense and said they are wonderful romance novels and in the end I made some joke and we all laughed and the guy could not make eye contact with me again and his wife said that she'd suggesst my book for thier next book club and I could barely speak for all the anger. I am finally at a point where I make money from my writing. I don't have to go back to work. I have FUN every day doing what I do. But I didn't say any of that.

That was last night and I still am so mad. But I think what I am most mad about is how I couldn't or didn't defend myself and what I do. What I seriously LOVE. Granted I hate confrontation - but what should I have said? Honestly, what zinger could I have zapped him with that would make me feel better?

Romance authors always talk about running into this attitude and I certainly know it's out there - but I have always felt pretty vindicated by the huge chunk of book sales romance constitutes. I have always felt vindicated by the fact that I do not know a single woman who has not read at least one romance novel and truly loved it. And the fact that most people in the world hate thier jobs and wish they could stay at home and work in thier underware making shit up - and I actually get to do that -- that makes me feel pretty good too.

So, why am I still so bugged?
Am I not as in love with my genre as I thought? Am I secretly embarrassed? Or am I just mad that a television commercial director looks down his nose at what I do?

Hmmmm....

I don’t get why people are so bitchy on the loops.. and the Big Lebowski

Ha! I managed to get the word bitch into the first line.

I belong to a couple of writer’s loops, mostly as a lurker. If I have something useful to add I’ll pop in, but on my loops, there are other, smarter people there ready to answer the questions posed.

I find my loops informative, and for the most part, friendly..

For the most part… but then there are the touchy people. The ones who leap to offense at the smallest inference.

One big long discussion on one of my loops was about E-Publishing, a hot button topic for sure. People whined, moaned, verbally stomped their feet because their E-publishers weren’t RWA recognized. They threatened to leave RWA, they ranted on and on about how their publishers were twice as good as the snotty New York publishers.

A couple of people attempted to explain, or in some cases, disagreed. In my opinion, their statements were reasonable and very general.
The furor that erupted. The many, many posts(in all fairness, from the same five or six people) who leapt down those women’s throats. Attacks that were personal, nasty - in a word - bitchy.
So much for that discussion. No one else after that would have posted, why bother?

Or the loop where half the executive left because of one post, that from what I understand, was mis-read.

Or the loop where people have actually referred to each other as stupid. But then they’ve also called agents and editors stupid as well.

Sheesh… People’s names are at the bottom of these posts. Anyone can read this stuff. I know there are a few women who’ve posted on my loops that I’d make a point of avoiding if I saw them at a conference.
If I feel this way, what about the editors and agents who might be reading these loops?

The loops can be great, informative, helpful and a nice pick me up when we need reassurance or advice. If everyone on there is using them for that reason, and not to air grievances, or their frustrations.

But hey, I’m saving my energy for my family, and my writing, and my day job. There’s not a lot left of energy left over to take offense at what someone I’ve never met - or ever will - said.

As for the Big Lebowski. It’s up there as one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen. Why? Because it bored me to tears, went nowhere, didn’t even try and pretend there was a semblance of a plot. I didn’t get the charming quirkiness of the characters, I just found them annoying and pointless… and I know there are lots of people out there who disagree and I’m OK with that..