Revealing and obscuring plot points

I’ve seen three movies recently that got me thinking about this topic and how there's kind of a sliding scale in terms of how much a writer decides to reveal and when.

Great storytelling constantly strikes a balance between revealing and obscuring plot, posing and answering questions, and this keeps pages turning, (or people from checking their cell phones and annoying me in the movie theatre.)

And these three films differed strikingly in this regard: what they showed the audience, what they held back.

Black Swan – As I watched this film, I was constantly figuring things out (I thought) and thinking of alternate explanations, but as many times as I changed my mind or went "aha!" I didn’t really know what was going on until the end. And reaching the end just made me want to see it all over again from the start. Every time you think you have it figured out, the filmmaker takes you in another direction.

127 Hours – The polar opposite of Black Swan in some ways, because you know how it’s going to end before it starts. At least I did, because it’s based on a widely known true story. But I liked this film too. A lot.

Certified Copy – With this film, as many things as I guessed, by the time I got to the end, all of those possibilities (and likely more) were still possible, and I never got a hint as to what the frak was really going on. Not even when I was part of a discussion of the movie with the audience and two prominent Toronto film critics.

A bit more about each:

Black Swan

I loved this movie. I saw it back during the tiff and can’t wait to see it again. And other than what I’ve already said, I don’t want to say more, because I fear it would be spoilerish. The trailer is very good. If you’ve seen that, you know as much as you should before going in. This is a film where the filmmaker figured out just how much to show and how much to hide and which ways to misdirect, to end up with near perfect storytelling. Of course this shouldn’t have been such a great surprise to me since I’ve admired all Darren Aronofsky’s previous films,  Pi, Requiem for a Dream, The Wrestler, (even The Fountain, although I’m not sure I’ve figured that one out, yet).

127 Hours

Even though I knew the basic true story and therefore the ending before the film started, it was one of the most tense and emotionally draining movies I’ve seen in a long time. And James Franco... That really should be enough.

Even if you haven’t heard of this movie, you might remember this guy’s story. It’s about the hiker who, back in 2003, got his arm suck under a boulder at the bottom of a narrow canyon in the Arizona desert, and the way he finally survived – by cutting off his lower arm after five days.

The moral of this story (other than being a major testament to one man’s enormous will to survive) is never go hiking alone without telling people where you’re going, and never leave home without a Swiss Army knife. (And filmmaker, Danny Boyle, manages to foreshadow both of those so cleverly...)

How this man finally manages to sever his lower arm without even, um, his Swiss army knife... well, let’s just say it was miles past horrific, and made you wish he'd remembered that knife, and if it hadn't been a true story, I’d never have believed it. Let’s just say he certainly didn’t have it as easy as Merle in The Walking Dead -- no handy saw lying on the roof :). If any of the news stories back in 2003 had the graphic details of what this guy did to get free, I forgot them.

But what impressed me about the film, and increased my awe of the fabulous Danny Boyle (Shallow Grave, Trainspotting, 28 Days Later, Slumdog Millionaire among others...) is how tense the story was.

Even though, right from the beginning, you know that at some point he’s going to fall and trap his arm, you don’t know when this will happen, and so the part of the movie that passes before the event is gripping. I tensed up every time he jumped over anything, or did something dangerous—both of which he does, a lot.

Then after he’s trapped, you know from the film’s title (and doing some math in your head) that he’s not going to get himself out for five and a half days... and yet even though he tries some new method at, say, 14 hours in, you’re rooting for him and thinking his plan might actually work. (Or, I guess, trying to figure out why it won’t work...)

I can’t remember when I’ve felt so physically wrecked after a movie. I cried during a lot of films at the tiff this year, and felt emotionally spent after several, but 127 Hours left me physically drained too, as if, for at least 90 minutes, I’d been part of his 127 hour ordeal.

Certified Copy

Now this is a film that purposefully misdirects you, confuses you... and then not only doesn’t give you an answer, it gives so many contradictory clues, it’s pretty much impossible to puzzle through what happened. The whole time, I kept guessing and second guessing what was going on, and trying to relate it to the title and philisophical discussion about the value of copies vs originals in the art world... And I do admit that kept me (mostly) interested. But I felt somewhat frustrated when it ended without answering any of my questions, instead left me asking more.

Certified Copy is definitely an art film, (although, for some bizarre reason, CBC film critic, Jesse Wente, referred to it as a romantic comedy when he introduced it... wha-at?). It won Juliette Binoche the best actress prize at Cannes, and opens in North America in a few months. At least that’s what Jesse told at the sneak peek screening I saw. I can’t decide whether or not Binoche deserved that award. I found it nearly impossible to get a clear read on her character, but based on the fact that by the end I also could not come out with a clear read on the entire film, maybe her somewhat flighty performance was the point?

Now, I do worry that if any of you want to see this movie I’m ruining the experience by telling you that you'll never figure it out. At least not in the same way the person sitting next to you will... but the two critics at the sneak peek screening claimed it was richer and more interesting on a second viewing. (They both first saw it in Cannes last spring.) But I’m not interested enough to find out if they’re right. And they also said they watched it the second time looking for clues to support their favored theories... but ended up seeing so many contradictions that picking one through-line that explained it all was possible.

While I know I'm making this movie sound aggravating, I also think I'm making it sound more interesting than it was, and maybe that's why Wente went (pun, ha!) with Romantic Comedy as a genre. It's reminiscent of Before Sunrise... Most of it is one couple talking. And the main questions you have are how, or if, these two know each other and whether or not they have a history and whether or not at certain parts they're role playing to make points, or whether it's the truth, or whether the screenwriter is really just screwing with us. Which was my conclusion. Someone at the end said they thought the pair were meant to be like a copy of every couple... not one specific couple. But yeah... while I didn't hate this movie, I'm not recommending it either.

So, how do you take your stories? With cream and sugar? Revealed or obscured? A little of both?

Can you think of other cool movies or books that used misdirection well? Hmm... I’m already thinking of a few, but will stop talking now. ;)

Cover love!

Yep. The cover gods have smiled upon me. Here it is, the proposed cover for my next Eileen Carr release!

Ain't she a beaut? I just love it. It's gotten me all excited about the book again. I can't wait to get my revision letter and dive back into it!

The Seventh Circle of Hell

Thanks Sinead, for that title, until you said that I didn't know what to call the last few days of my life. I've been a bad drunk writer the last week - no drinking, no writing, very little internet access. For some reason when I go to my folk's place over Thansgiving, I drop off the face of the earth, which is great in some respects and then terrible in others. But always, without fail, getting back to my regular life involves an epic struggle. This year so far has been the worst.

My son was sick in the night two nights before we left, a stomach bug that had him up every two hours to throw up in the bowl he slept with. I, of course, didn't sleep. The next night Lucy woke up WANTING to throw up because Mick had been doing it. She's a copy cat, as my son said all night, which was so helpful at four am.

I had a fabulous booksigning at Cypress House in Rochelle, Il. A gorgeous coffee shop/flower shop/gift shop. And then I packed up the kids and hit the road. I was tired, but a gigantic Panera coffee fixed that. The kid's fell asleep, I had NPR on the radio - it looked good. Until Lucy threw up all over herself. I cleaned her up as best I could and she fell right back to sleep. The car reeked of vomit. But, with that huge coffee in my system and the kids asleep, I thought I'd press on a little more. Lucy woke up a half hour later and put the kibosh on that idea.

So, hotel room. Mick, the trooper, passes right out and stays out. Lucy however, paces the room pushing aside every ice bucket and hotel towel I put under her nose, only to vomit four times all over herself. She finally passes out at 4:30. Mick is up at 6:30. The hotel coffee is terrible. Lucy throws a fit for forty five minutes about wearing Mick's pajamas - she simply doesn't understand she's thrown up over everything I had for her. I cried at this point. Just a little.

White out snow storm. Traffic jam twenty minutes from home. Backyardigan's on repeat on the DVD player - I will never hear that opening song again without wanting to cry and/or scream at my kids.

Now, what you may think, could possibly keep a woman like myself from losing her mind and I'll tell you. While home, I had a long conversation with my editor about some changes that needed to be made to my book. Big changes. Lots of thinking. And while my life was literally covered in vomit - I had my secret world to escape to. Once again, I say with great appreciation - Thank God I'm a Writer.

Genre blending. Again.

I know its a topic that's been talked about to death, but I figure it's Friday, so let's pound that subject into the ground.
I'm reading (thanks, Molly) The Iron Duke, and it's really something. It's steampunk romance, and it is sexy and fast paced and original and deserves to be read by a lot of people.
And it's a great example of genre blending. It's a steampunk mystery/adventure wrapped in a really hot romance. I don't think it's for people who need the romance to be the central focus of the book, but as direction for romance novels, I think it's a really good example of where they can go.
I want to read more romance that is also plot heavy. I want adventure novels with hot sex.
A lot of reviewers have issues if they feel the romance is underdeveloped, but for me, as long as I believe the two people belong together, and you keep me entertained through the course of the book, I'm buying in.
I love regular romance, but a lot of the books I'm reading lately feel padded to me, as though the author is struggling to meet page count with introspection and unrealistic drama.
Nothing about the Iron Duke feels padded.
Anyone out there a romance purist? Is anyone feeling genre blending fatigue?

How do you write a book?

It’s such an odd thing. My brother just sent his last kid off to college this year. He’s no longer coaching soccer, no longer driving and picking up kids. He’s not a TV fan and while he reads he’s not an insane reader like me (Who thought it would be a good idea for me to get a Kindle? I’m walking around with unlimited books in my purse. Not good!).

Anyway, he says, to put it quite bluntly, he’s going insane. He’s turned his hand to cooking, training his new puppy in Frisbee toss and ... he wants to write a book.
My brother is famous for “having an idea”. Over the years he’s always told me … Hey Steph… I have this idea. I smile and nod and let him go on. He actually inspired one of my books. Not his idea at all, but one kernel of what he said later became one of my Bombshells.

When he talks about his ideas, he does talk like a writer. I mean it’s there. He sees the characters, he sees their actions. He sees how they interact with one another. I think you have to have that bit of creativity in order to be a fiction writer. I don’t know how else you do it unless you see or hear the characters in your mind. Kind of like the Michelangelo approach to sculpture.

I don’t sit down and think about what I make. I take the image that’s in my head already and just pull it out and put it on paper.

So for me a writer has to have those images, that picture, those characters already in there and then figure out what all those people in your head are doing so you can effectively tell their story. Would you all agree? Or do you think you can build a character from the ground up? I don’t know.

But then there is the work of writing. He asked me, so how do I start? What do I do? And I drew a blank. The obvious answer is to start with page one, but I think he was looking for more of a guideline as to how it all works. How does one sit down and write a book.

I did say – because I learned this only when I met other writers - everyone has their own process. You have to find out what works for you. But it felt a little bit like if I asked someone how to cook - they might answer you need to try different things and see what taste combinations make sense.

Huh? I couldn’t do much with that. As a result – I’m not much of a cook.

I ask you - do you have books you would recommend on getting started? Would have some advice for a person who literally has never attempted such a thing before? Tell him to try plotting? Try pantsing? I mean I just don’t know.

For me one day I sat down and started to write stuff. Seems like pretty weak advice.

Writing has taught me how to fail

I read a post the other day on agent Jenny Bent's blog that spoke to me and, (forgive the psychobabble),  led to a lightbulb moment of self-realization.

Writing has taught me how to fail.

That sounds negative. But really, I don't mean it that way. Honest.

Jenny's post was at least partially about bravery and how much she admires writers who eagerly pitch to her at conferences, when chances are they are going to fail. (Not necessarily fail at the pitch, but fail at getting her to offer representation, or fail at landing a good publishing contract for the book.)

My moment of insight was that before I started writing seriously, (and the seriously part is important), I was not good at failing. I think this is because, frankly, I hadn't had all that much practice. Sure, I'd had tons of disappointments in sports and school and work and love, but basically I was used to success.  As a result, my one or two major failures before writing (BW) were, in a word, devastating. I sucked at dealing with failure.

In my BW years, the five stages of grief in reaction to a setback, took forever to go through. In fact, I think I still might be working through my grief for a couple of big BW failures from more than a decade ago...

But the good news is that after learning how to accept negative critiques (my CPs might claim I'm still on the upside of that learning curve), learning how to accept rejections, learning how to recognize that a book on which I've spent a year (or more) of my life isn't working, or just isn't good enough to stand out, or maybe simply just had bad luck... After all the things it takes to become a writer, I am learning to fail. Yay me!!!

I'm not claiming that I'm great at failing yet, but I am learning and getting better with each failure. :)

Seriously. I feel really good about this. Personal growth that doesn't involve needing new clothes. ;)

In other news... I'm part of a new blog for readers and anyone who loves a good story that launches today. I'll be blogging there about once a week.  Get Lost in a Story

Galleys Off!

I sent off galleys of my second Messenger book, Dead on Delivery, last week. So that's it. That was my last chance to change anything. Next time I see it, it will be bound. It will be a book. It's done. My work is through. My brain child will be born for all the world to see.

It is my least favorite moment of publishing. I hate it. I always feel like I'm not doing enough at this stage, although in all truth, no one wants you to be making any big changes at this point. There are rules. Percentages. Consequences. Still . . . to just go through and fix typos and continuity errors (and that is seriously all I do at this point) seems like not enough. I should be polishing and honing more.

I can't stand to even think about it at this point, though. At this point in the process, I have read the damn thing so many times I can not stand it anymore. The idea is stupid. The execution is clumsy. The dialogue is wooden and the setting is bland. There is no fixing it. It should simply be thrown out and forgotten about.

In all fairness, in a year (maybe less), I'll pick it up for some reason or another, flip it open and something in it will make me chuckle. Or get misty-eyed. Or pat myself on the back for some reason or another.

Not now, though. Right now I hate it. At least it's off my desk.

National Day of Listening

Oh Thanksgiving. How I love thee. With your cranberry sauce and cornbread stuffing. The pie selection. The leftovers. The total disregard to calories consumed. It is any wonder this is my favorite holiday?

Truth be told it's my favorite holiday for a lot of reasons. Pie, not the least of them. But we share this holiday with my four cousins and thier families. Inevitably, the catching up with each other turns into looking back. And the stories come out. There are amazing stories - all of my cousins have spent most of thier lives in Africa building schools and wells and bridges and communities. But the stories everyone want to hear are the stories of when my Dad and my Uncle were kids. There was a lot of adventure, mishaps, a loving border collie mutt who fought to the death to protect them from various animals. And my Dad is a master storyteller. But why everyone loves these stories is the fact that my grandparents are absent - it's just Dad and Uncle Tim against the world. And the fact that my grandparents perhaps weren't the most loving or involved parents - sets the stories against a backdrop fraught with conflict.

It's compelling stuff.

My mother on the other hand, had a warm and supportive upbringing. Very attentive and involved parents. Her stories are a little boring. So are mine.

My cousins - with thier African childhoods and thier parents who were attentive and involved but often seemed to have NO IDEA where thier boys were - totally intriguing.And I've heard the stories a hundred times, but every year, my belly too full, I listen like they are brand new because I love them so much.

How about you? What family stories are your favorites?

Welcome Caridad Ferrer!

Today Rita-award winning author Caridad Ferrer's long-awaited new novel, When the Stars Go Blue, is being released and we are lucky enough to have her stop by for a little chat.

Here's a description of the book:

Dance is Soledad Reyes’s life. About to graduate from Miami’s Biscayne High School for the Performing Arts, she plans on spending her last summer at home teaching in a dance studio, saving money, and eventually auditioning for dance companies. That is, until fate intervenes in the form of fellow student Jonathan Crandall who has what sounds like an outrageous proposition: Forget teaching. Why not spend the summer performing in the intense environment of the competitive drum and bugle corps? The corps is going to be performing Carmen, and the opportunity to portray the character of the sultry gypsy proves too tempting for Soledad to pass up, as well as the opportunity to spend more time with Jonathan, who intrigues her in a way no boy ever has before.

But in an uncanny echo of the story they perform every evening, an unexpected competitor for Soledad's affections appears: Taz, a member of an all-star Spanish soccer team. One explosive encounter later Soledad finds not only her relationship with Jonathan threatened, but her entire future as a professional dancer.

Sounds good, doesn't it? Well, Allyson Noel says that Caridad "delivers a dreamy romance with all the necessary ingredients: a feisty heroine, an irresistible hero, and an ending that will make you swoon." If you want to read it for yourself, stop by Amazon or leave a comment here. One lucky commenter will win a copy of Caridad's book! Don't be shy!

Welcome, Caridad! I'm so thrilled to have you here! What's your drink of choice?

Um... Let's see: For morning, coffee, brewed very strong (I love Sumatra, if that tells you anything), during the day, it's Diet Coke w/ Splenda, in the evenings or if it's really cold outside, I switch to tea (Earl Grey, please), and if I'm in the south, sweet tea, because that's the only thing you can have barbeque with.

As far as alcoholic drinks, I love mojitos and Cosmos. What can I say, I'm fairly straightforward that way. :)

Excellent. Let me just muddle the mint and the lime. Ah, there we go. Perhaps you'd like some croquetas to go with it? No? Perhaps some pan fritos? Ah, very good. Now, down to business. Tell us about your show biz background (I know you have one. Don't be shy.). Did it help you in writing When the Stars Go Blue? Or did you have to do a lot of research on the whole drum and bugle corps thing?

Oh heavens, I'm not sure you could legitimately call it a "show-biz background," but I do have a very longstanding background in the arts, to the point where once upon a time I wanted nothing more than to be Barbra Streisand, just without the diva 'tude. I have at various times, played piano, trumpet, French horn, and various percussion instruments. These days I limit myself to singing (mostly in the car, but I can occasionally be persuaded, with the help of a mojito, to karaoke), and I absolutely adore musical theatre, with the pinnacle of my "career" coming when I played Rizzo in GREASE. I actually, when I'm being fairly honest, think I could have been a half-decent actor, if not for the massive audition anxiety that robs me of coherent thought.

As far as drum and bugle corps, that was one of the musical activities that consumed my adolescence-- from ages 15 to 18, I was a member of the Florida Wave Drum & Bugle corps, so yeah, I did live the life I write about in STARS, except I gave those kids a few more amenities (like decent buses) that I never got to experience as a member of a small, perpetually broke corps.

You speak a lot of languages and I'm not just talking about Spanish and English. You clearly speak YA very well. Kirkus Reviews mentions how authentic Soledad's first person narration feels in STARS. Tell us about writing for the teen market. Are there things you do differently than when you're writing for adults?

Why thank you! And yes, the Kirkus review was a nice surprise-- it's always comes as something of a shock when people compliment me on my young adult voice and its authenticity, because I never felt as if I was truly a "young adult." I was a latchkey kid by the age of twelve, with a lot of adult responsibilities in the wake of my parents' divorce and then, as a musician, immersed in that world, which encompasses people across a broad age spectrum, it wasn't as if I did a lot of hanging out with my peers, in terms of age. However, that said, I think that what makes my voice resonate and why people tend to compliment it, is because I write from the perspective of the teenager I was. I think it was Melissa Marr who was recently quoted as saying "write YA for the teenager you were," and without ever consciously realizing it, I think that's exactly what I've been doing all along. I'm not sure I would ever be drawn to writing a high-school set YA, for example, because for me, high school remains a blur. It was just somewhere to pass time until I could get to a rehearsal or practice piano or write in my journal. (Okay, so I DID do some of the journal writing in class, which is another reason high school is such a blur-- the worlds I was creating were far more interesting than the day-to-day minutiae of high school drama.)

I loved the excerpt from STARS on your website. Soledad talks about the "dancer" almost as if she was another person. Can you tell us more about that?

I'm not sure how good a job I can do explaining it, but I'll do my best, because I absolutely love this question and I love the quote that I'm assuming prompted the question.

"Breathing deep, I waited for the strum of the guitar, the dark insistent rhythms of the percussion to sink into my skin and work their magic, transforming me into an enchantress, a siren. With each note, the minutiae of dress rehearsal, of intense boys with pretty eyes, of the petty annoyances of life, of school, of everything.

It all faded into insignificance as once again, the dancer took over."

Yes! That's the one! It gave me shivers!

I think, when you're in the arts, regardless of what medium, you sink into the pursuit so thoroughly, it's almost as if you divorce yourself from your everyday being. You're transformed into someone or something else altogether and it's a being that even those who are closest to you might not recognize. I know, when I played piano competitively, it was as if someone else took over. That part of me that was confident and accomplished at this thing at which I worked so hard, something that very few people were privy to, until I chose to allow them to see. I wasn't the geek with the zits and glasses-- I held command over this instrument and by extension, anyone who was listening. And it always, always came as a surprise to outsiders. It was the same with acting and it's what I've always loved best about writing. That sensation of sinking into the work so deeply that the wife and mother and daughter and sister and friend simply ceases to exist. Nothing else matters. I'm only that part of me that is the writer.

Well, that gave me shivers, too! Thank you so much for stopping by, Caridad. Don't forget, everyone, leave a comment and you'll have a chance to win a copy of WHEN THE STARS GO BLUE!

The magic of the perfect character

I don't know if it's prep, or luck, or a combination of the both, but sometimes other people(ie. not me) find the perfect character.
An example of this, for me, is Sheldon, on the Big Bang theory, a sitcom I'm only now just discovering. sigh! Always late to any party.

The character is perfection, and luckily, for the show's producers, played to perfection by Jim Parsons. The character is a combintation of Asberger's and obsessive complusive disorder with a complete lack of understanding of human nature added to a ridiculously high IQ and a complete lack of humility. And several seasons in, the character, while not fundamentally changing, is still funny and fresh and I think part of this is in the writer's choice not to overwhelm the show with too much Sheldon, but also not to try and change him.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, would be Don Draper. Totally imperfect, and a man consistently hampered by his own terrible personal decisions. But completely fascinating, always. I know this character was more prep than luck, but it doesn't stop me from being absurdly jealous.

In print, the closest to perfection for me is Zadist. The mostly riculously tortured, sexy hero ever. I could have read another 400 pages about him and that book is still a big comfort read for me.

I know I've missed a ton. Any other characters that could sustain many books, or seasons of TV?

The End

I’m about six pages and a few more read throughs from being done with my book. Really, I can’t believe it. When I decided to go ahead and write the book on spec I was jazzed with energy. Yes, I was taking a risk. Four months out of my writing life spent on a book - that let’s face it has a very minor chance of getting published - is a big deal for me. Oh and that’s not negativity about my chances – that’s publishing fact.

But when my agent said - I really think you need to finish the book if we’re going to have a chance at selling it – I thought this is great. I’ll get to do it. I’ll get to see the finished product. Sometimes it can be frustrating when you have this great idea, you write the synopsis and first three chapters, you just start to get involved with the characters and then… nothing. No one likes the idea, or can sell the idea or whatever. You never really get to know how it might have turned out. Would it have matched the vision in you had in your head when you started?

So in looking at the bright side of things – I thought lucky me. I will get to find out what happens to these characters. I will test myself and see if I can execute this somewhat complicated story. I will push myself and try to grow as a writer…

And then about sixty-percent of the way through, I thought… this sucks! I’m never going to finish. I have no idea if this is any good. I am spending months working on this when it probably won’t sell (again fact – most books don’t sell). I could be doing proposals for my editor who I stand a much better chance of selling to, but OH NO I had to write historicals!

What was I thinking?

I forgot it really does take about four to five months to write a book. I think I can always do it in three. I forgot when I’m getting up early to work on the book, and then I spend the day at my computer at work that I get this horrible pinched nervey thing going on in my neck which requires PT therapy to work it out. I forgot that when I am in full blown book mode, I tend not to exercise which I need.
But I just kept putting out the pages. Telling the story. And finally it’s here. The end. I know it’s not over. I’m hoping for feedback to fix and correct the things I got wrong. I’m hoping too for some time away from it so I can go back to it with a fresh eye. But the labor, the real hard work, is done.

People ask me how many books I’ve written. I say thirteen – because that’s how many I’ve published and that’s all they really care about. I just sat down and counted them out. I’ve written (complete books beginning to end) twenty-four books.
It never gets easier, but it always feels the same when I type those words at the bottom of the page… The End.

So freaking good.

Forgettable TV

I watch a lot of TV. Too much TV. And yet, when I hear people recommend shows I've given a pass, I'm curious. And not wanting to miss out on something potentially great, I sometimes try to catch up.

I've done that with two series, lately. The Good Wife and Castle.

While I wasn't drawn into The Good Wife immediately, it really grew on me with the complexity of the characters and situations, and the truly outstanding actors and performances. And I love that there aren't any fully "good" or "bad" characters.  Love all the moral ambiguity in this show. This is one I wish I'd watched from the start and need to hunt down the episodes from this season that I missed, so I can get fully caught up. (When did the Lily Taylor character first appear? Love her...)

Castle, on the other hand, I really wanted to like from the start. And I do remember watching the pilot and thought I'd stopped watching soon after that. But, hearing that the show has lots of fans among other writers, I thought I needed to give it another chance and so I rented the first season. Watched them  this weekend in record time. Why record time? Because I quickly realized I'd seen them all before. I'd forgotten I'd watched the entire first season. I clearly found it so forgettable, I, well, forgot I'd seen it.

I'm trying to figure out why I found it so forgettable...

Nathan Fillion is infinitely likable and adorable and so is his Richard Castle character. And I really think they do capture the "writer thing" very well. Not that I know what it's like to be a mega-bestseller, but so many of the writer details ring true. Some of the dialogue and banter is great and the one liners can be clever. I do find myself believing that Nathan Fillion is a writer and not Captain Mal from Firefly. And that's no small feat.

I also like the mother and daughter characters, even if they feel slightly stereotypical to me. But as of the end of the first season, nothing very interesting has happened with either of these characters. Unlike TGW where the family and other secondary characters have depth and layers, these two just seem to be there so that Castle has someone to tell the details of the case-of-the-week to. And all the other bits of business (mother exploiting his fame and throwing parties, daughter being ridiculously responsible and cute) had no arc or nuance. (To be fair, the first season was only 10 episodes long, but even given the short season, not much happened... Really... do we know much more at the end of the first season that we didn't already know or see coming in the pilot? Or even the trailer for the series? Perhaps this is why my memory tricked me into thinking I'd only seen the pilot.)

The detective I find slightly less appealing. Beckett. That's her name, right? See, I forgot. I haven't found her character all that interesting or even consistent. She seems to go from no-nonsense-obsessed-with-difficult-case girl to drop-a-sexual-innuendo-into-every-second-sentence girl at the drop of a hat.  But again... Something happened in the very last episode of the first season that hinted that more interesting things ahead for her... And I can maybe buy that she's supposed to be a bit of a mystery for the Castle character to work out... But still, I remain underwhelmed.

Perhaps it's a pacing thing for me. I'm not into murder-of-the-week style shows that much, so for a show in this genre to work for me, (like Dexter, for example), there has to be an overarching story that's also paced well and juicy enough to draw me from week to week. For me, only *hinting* at the major character arcs and internal conflicts (other than the obvious: they want to sleep with each other) by the end of the tenth episode isn't quick enough.

What I want to know now is... Should I watch season 2? I have to admit that when I rented Season 1, I thought the current season was 2... I didn't realize how far behind I was... But who knows, maybe I blocked out Season 2, too? (I don't think so... with hindsight, I think I gave up part way into 2, not part way into 1 as I'd first thought.)

Castle fans... Is it worth getting caught up?

If season 1 was just a tease and it gets better... let me know. I still mostly want to like this show, even though I forgot I'd seen an entire season.

I love me an epistolary novel

I do. It's true. They amaze me. I'm reading one now (Ella Minnow Pea by Mark Dunn) and while I'm wondering if it's a little too clever, I'm still really enjoying it.

How about A.S. Byatt's Possession? It wasn't totally epistolary, but I loved the old letters they found and how all the romances and relationships and everything intertwined. And how about Roxanne St. Claire's Hit Reply? My mother didn't even know what an IM was and she still loved it. It was that good.

So what is it about these novels I love? I think it's that they're all about words. There's no stage direction. You can't experience any of the action first-hand. It all has to be told to you at some remove. It's all words, words, words and I do love words.

I slid a little of my love for them into Un-Bridaled. My heroine found a box of old letters from World War II. The letters were based off a box of old World War II letters that we found in my garage. My late husband's father had written them to his sister. I have no idea how we ended up with them and anyone who might possible know was already dead. My kids and I pored over them. They're fascinating.

How about you? Do you love all things epistolary? Do you have a favorite? Do you hate them?

Totally Blunt Conversation About Royalties: Internet Sales

Royalty Statement time again and with the exception of some suprising popularity in Nordic countries - there's very little of interest. Except internet numbers. And I'm waffling between how interesting they are or not. But here goes.

My least popular book, the first that was made available on the internet all the way back in 07 has sold 74 copies. That's right. 74. On my first royalty statement for that book it had sold 11.

The first book in my Mitchell series - Baby Makes Three - has sold 373. The second in that series, about a hundred less. And the third book sold 290 - but that book was on sale at Amazon for like...a buck. That series got some buzz on Dear Author, which I think bumped those numbers a bit.

The first of the O'Neill books which was out in August and these statements end in June had sold 7 e-books and they are only available on the eHarlequin website.

So...what does all of this mean to me? Well, remember I am a middle of the road author in a not best selling line. So, my numbers are way way different than say Presents or Desire. There is no doubt in my mind but that Harlequin is ahead of the curve on the internet sales of thier standard print books - in terms of pricing and availabity - they've bypassed the agency model drama. They offer GREAT promotions on thier website and I believe that most internet sales come from the eHarlequin website. I think for as confusing and misleading the Amazon sales rank numbers are the kindle sales are the numbers to watch - and not because you get a better idea of what's what - but because Amazon is becoming an e-book seller. I imagine most authors ebooks far out sell thier print books from that seller. I believe mine do. I think my best selling book probably sold 20 print books through Amazon.

I believe that sites like Dear Author and All About Romance can give you some sales - I believe more and more fans of those sites are buying thier books on an ereader. That said - for me, 98% my sales are still paper and a large portion are still subscribers. (I made up that 98% - I'm not doing that math on a monday morning).

So, it's interesting. Sort of. Frankly, having gone to conferences I expected to be blown away by the ebook sales - but maybe it just doesn't effect Harlequin the same way it effects single title books. OR maybe it's Superromance. Once again - a lot of theory - not much proof. But there you have it.

building the monster

Vampire diaries is doing something really interesting right now. They are building the myth of a super vamp, and creating a monster, all without showing us the actual monster.
The first thing they did was have other vamps talk about the super vamp with fear and awe. A super vamp that even the big bad from the previous season is terrified of.
They introduced the concept that the super vamp is the original vampire and therefore older than anyone else.
Because they did this, we believe that he could have extra powers, without them having to explain why.
Then they introduced the super vamps foot soldier, a vamp that could easily beat any other vamp.
So now, without ever seeing this character, there is no doubt that the heroes of the show are in serious trouble.
They've done a pretty good job of building the monster, but now they have to follow through and when they do present the super vamp, he has to live up to expectations. He has to be the scariest creature they've ever presented on this show.

The opposite of this is what Stephen King did with IT. An amazing book, right up to the end. Because seriously, what's scarier than a monster clown? He created the question and then answered it with a giant spider. To me it felt like a huge let down. Sure, giant spiders are terrifying, but he needed to come up with something that could trump the homocidal clown and a spider didn't.

It's a tricky balance, building the monster in a way that satisfies the audience and also allows the hero to vanquish them.

Connections...

Did anyone see Glee this week? I thought it was a really good episode – maybe only one unnecessary song – but I loved the Kurt storyline. Bullying has been very much in the news and not surprising the writers would broach this particular subject with Kurt.

What I loved most about the episode was when Kurt goes to the other school and meets these guys who sing and dance and are cool because of it. He asks the three guys who take him for coffee… “Are you all gay?” Only one is, but still there is that moment of connection. Here in front of Kurt is someone who will understand what he’s going through. Will know how hard it can be sometimes.

I couldn’t help but think it’s like that for me when I’m with other writers. I remember the first time I went to RWA. I was so new and had never had any exposure to other writers. Ever. My editor took me to dinner with a few of her other authors and I was like Kurt…

“Are you all writers?” I thought in that same awed tone.

For the first time here were people who understood what I was talking about. I don’t know if I realized how isolated I was until that happened. Writing is a big part of my life. Always has been. As a kid my parents bought me a Commodore 64 and all I used it for was as a keyboard to write. I had a card table and card chair set up in the basement, my C64, an old TV for a monitor and a printer that after three years of asking for my parents finally bought me for Christmas. And I knew they had no idea why it was so important to me.

“What’s she doing down in that basement?” My dad would forever ask and my mother would just shrug.

They had no idea what I did down there. We didn’t talk about my stories. We didn’t discuss plot points or characters, or strategize a plan to get published. In my family we were athletes, not writers. I was most definitely an outcast in that regard. Now certainly I’m not comparing being a writer to being gay. Writers as far as I know are not socially discriminated against. But for me it was definitely a part of my life that I didn’t get to share with anyone. Meeting other writers at conferences and even in part on the internet through blogs has really been life changing in that regard.

I can tell you all I’m struggling with the final death throes of my WIP and you’ll understand what that means. My assistant at my day job will come in and ask me about a plan of attack for our next electronic claim implementation and my answer will be… “I think there needs to be a little more emotional connection between these characters in Chapter 8.”

Now most of my non-writer friends have come to know me well enough that when I have book on the brain you’re only getting about 45% of the rest of me. But they really don’t “get” it. They don’t know what it’s like to fight this fight with a book. To wonder if you’ve got enough depth, if the plot is both logical and surprising, to worry about language and word choice. They don’t know the fear of sending it out and waiting to see how people will respond.

So while it’s very different as I’ve never faced bullying for being a writer either ... I still take something away from the message in Glee. Connection. We – or at least I - really need it.

“Are you all writers?”

How do you like your monsters?

Okay, so I had some other things to post about, but they were going to involve way too much thinking, and my brain is in the shop, so here's a question I've been pondering for some time now...

I don't think there's AN ANSWER, but I'd love to hear what people think.

In the world of fantasy or paranormal or dare I say horror.... do you like a monster you know or something different and unusual?

I look at a lot of the successful books out there and while they did do their own twist on vampires or werewolves or zombies or angels or demons... The monsters were variations of known mythologies.

What if the monster is something entirely new?

How close does a monster (or even a heroic creature) have to be to an already recognizable creature for readers to get attached?

Thoughts? Anyone? Bueller?

Mmmm. Brains.

So my sweetie-pie and I just watched the premiere of The Walking Dead, a new zombie/apocalypse show on AMC. We'd both give it a thumbs up if we weren't afraid of getting them bitten off. Whether we watch more of the season or not depends pretty much on whether or not I have nightmares. Generally, I prefer my zombies funny. Think Zombieland and Shaun of the Dead. These zombies? Not so funny.

I'm also really drawn to the apocalypse, or near apocalypse, story, though as people struggle with how to get along with each other and rebuild a world at the same time. My kids and I really enjoyed the first season of Jericho (and interestingly enough, Lennie James appears in both) where the people were figuring out how to survive. It sort of lost us in the second season when it turned into a big conspiracy theory thing.

We also liked Battlestar Galactica, another post-apocalypse type show where people were figuring out how to put a society back together.

Now, I'm pretty sure I'd be one of the first to die in any kind of apocalyptic event. I base this one my stunning deer-in-the-headlights reactions to most situations. By the time I thought to get the shovel out of the garage and take off a zombie's head, he'd be munching on my intestines. So I wouldn't be one of the people rebuilding society. I still sort of like to imagine that I'd manage to be one of them, though, and that I'd be one of the Good Guys.

So. . . how do you feel about these kinds of stories? Which ones do you like? Which ones fell short of the mark for you?

Confidence, Ego and Optimism

I spend a lot of time thinking about ego and confidence and the differences between the two and until recently confidence was the better of the two because, in my opinion, confidence is something you earn. Trying to make yourself better, seeing improvement in your work, being open to criticism and understanding how to cherry pick opinions to match your voice and idea - those are all skills that lead to confidence.

I'm pretty confident in my work. Not confident about my place in the industry, but the work I do - yep, I feel good about it.

Now, optimism is just something we all must share as a whole. Maureen and I get together and bitch a blue streak about the industry, but we're optimistic about our work and it's place in the industry. Not confident, but optimistic. I don't know how to make myself optimistic or how to tell other people how to optimistic - I think optimism is key ingredient to the writer's make up. Otherwise how would we face the blank page every day?

Ego, I thought was kind of bad. Because it was unearned. Or perhaps a false by-product of confidence. But here's the truth - I think it's the most important ingredient to success. We have to believe that the project we are working on is IMPORTANT. Not just to use but other readers. We have to believe, with absolutely no proof that what we're doing is not only good enough - it's great. And while I used to think that ego was something I had to get over and push away - perhaps we have to protect it. We have to quietly with great discipline, nurture it. Because no matter what people say about our work, our faith has to come from some secret place inside ourselves that we can't put a finger on and we don't like to talk about.

I think ego, confidence and optimism are the most important things a writer can have going for them, and they are the first to be crushed and taken away by this industry.

So - where do you stand on those three things? Are you lacking in one area with a surplus in another? Do you agree? Disagree? Want me to shut my egotistical mouth?

We all need a little honesty

We've talked a little on Drunk writer talk about genre hopping and choosing the right genre. The challenge is, picking the genre, and ensuring we, as writers, have the skills to write in that area.

There are authors out there that can write sucessfully across different genres (Maureen can, and we should hate her for it) and right now, I'm trying to contain my jealousy towards those people, but for most of us mere mortals, we really can't switch from suspense driven to character driven.

That's why so many authors say don't chase trends, because that trend may not fit your voice. And it's why we need other writers, or readers, in our lives that can help us figure this stuff out. Or at least confirm if we've made the right decision.

I'm definitely pro critique group, because I honestly don't have the skills to look at my work and see the major failings, not the plot failings, but the tone, or voice failings, because plot I can usually figure out, but the rest is really difficult for me.

And every once in a while, if I try something new, I don't know if it's working until they look at it. I envy the authors that can work independantly and determine this for themselves, but I am not that person.
And when I read a book by an author who has been sucessful in one genre, trying a new genre and the book is falling flat, I wonder, did she had anyone in her life saying, this was not her best work.

And as a side note, and I'm really starting to get repetitive. The Vampire Diaries. Anyone watching? It's so good and it really has this amazing ability to change somewhat annoying characters into amazing characters over the course of a season. Every week it's a lesson in writing genre.

Expectations...

Molly said something truly profound when we saw each other at NJRW last week. (I don’t know if she remembers – she’d had a few beers, I had a few wines). But it really stuck with me despite the wine. I was moaning and groaning about my WIP, not really sure what it is –romance, mystery, historical fiction, blah, blah. I’m afraid I’m not focused enough. I’m afraid of just about everything right now. And in talking about she said, “What are you expectations? Who do you want to be?”

When I read this book… whose work should this be as good as?

Okay. My first thought was Deanna Raybourn. Her Julia Grey novels are part of what inspired me to want to write this story. I thought… I want to be as good as she is.
I just finished her latest - The Road to Darjeeling. It was, in a word, perfection.

Absolute perfection. The voice, the mystery, the setting, the feel of these people in the late Victorian era, the familial relationships, the surprises and most importantly the romantic elements between Julia and Brisbane. Now that they are married, this might have slipped. It did not. There was just as much conflict, just as much emotion. Which goes to show you can “get a couple together” and still make them interesting.

I read this book and thought F***. I cannot live up to these expectations. I can’t be this good. My writing isn’t as crisp. She does all these small things that are soooo Victorian but of course I can’t use any of it because it’s hers.

Hookay… plan B.

I can’t be Deanna Raybourn… so who can I be? Robyn Carr who was the keynote speaker at NJRW also said another profound thing during her speech. “Write the book you want to read.”

Simple, but important.

So as I was near despair after finishing the perfect book and thinking about what I was going to do I had to stop myself and say what would I change? How do I want to be different? What are the things that are going to make my story standout?
For one Deanna Raybourn gives us this hot, sexy, muscled, hairy-chested hero. I want to take this guy home and make him my sex slave. But any time he and the wife get busy we find the line “he acted on his marital affections” or some crazy euphemism like that. It was perfectly done and to great effect. Always a little tongue in cheek, it told the reader everything you needed to know without the couple actually “getting busy” on page.

And I thought – okay. That’s something that I want to do differently. I want to read a story that gives me everything that hers did and hot sex! (I know I can’t help myself) I also want more POVs. I also want things to be a little dirtier and grittier as I take my characters a little bit out of the world of the gentry.

The moral of the story is – I can’t be her. I can’t be as good as she is. She’d hardly be one of my idol’s if she was a chump though – right? Sure, I can aspire to be better. Who doesn’t do that? But most importantly – I have to be me. (That is so freaking cheesy – I can’t believe I just wrote that.)

You – out there – who do you want to be as good as?

Publishing Survivor

I've been thinking about what Eileen's agent told her to put Eileen's fears of seeming unfocused as a writer to rest. Jumping genres is what publishing survivors do. I really like that. I've been looking at all the romantic suspence, historical and contemporary authors jump from the genre that made them famous into YA and paranormal - and admitedly I've been thinking that they did it either for the cash grab, or because thier numbers were down. And perhaps all of that is true - but in reality, I imagine those authors looked at the chance to try something new with a giant sigh of relief. Or they had an idea that just wouldn't go away and didn't fit into what had given them legions of fans.

How many crime scenes can one person have in them? How many ballroom scenes? After so many years of writing serial killer books I imagine anyone would look to clear their brains and write zombie books for kids or something similar.

We often talk about writing book and then should it sell having to write a bunch more - the same but different. And perhaps we can think down the road for a series and perhaps another series, but I have no idea of what it's like to sit down to book 30 and try to think of a new way for two people to have a conversation about how terrible thier mother's are. That just made me sick to my stomach.

So, maybe people are jumping to YA and Paranormal to make some money or because thier numbers were slipping or maybe they just wanted to do something different. Something all of us take for granted - not that I ever do anything different. But I'm going to. Someday.

So what about you? Have you jumped around? Stayed in the same genre you started? Where do you see yourself jumping?

Old dog. New Tricks.

I recently started working on a new project. It's going to be yet another departure for me. I worry that after forays into chick lit, romantic suspense and urban fantasy, adding yet another sub-genre will make me look like I have Author ADD in the worst way. My editor says it's the mark of a publishing survivor, but she's incredibly nice to me. 

Anyway, while it's true that my process for each sub-genre has been a little bit different, this time it feels REALLY different. I've always written character-driven books, but usually a scene or two will pop in my head as I figure out my characters. I like to think that the scenes have moments that show, rather than tell, what my characters are like. 

Not so much, this time. I've got a sketchbook that I'm toting around with me to jot notes in about characters and places and important ideas. I'm reading a lot and going to some lectures. There have been a few stray lines of dialogue, but no actual scenes. Instead I'm going seriously deep into these people's heads (even though they have no names) and their relationships and their backgrounds. 

I had thought that, by this point, my process was pretty much my process. I thought I was pretty set in my ways. Apparently I was wrong. It's exciting and a bit frightening, but it's nice to know I can twist myself into a new pretzel still.

How about you? Is your process always the same? Or does it change as you change projects?

It's Halloween

I love Halloween. What's not to love, candy and costumes, without the stress of cooking a turkey, or buying a pile of presents.

It helps that I love scary movies, love them. I've seen an embarassing amount, and I hold them to a high standard. They have to try and scare me, not gross me out, or make me squirm in discomfort, but make me jump and get sweaty and nervous from the tension of waiting to see what will happen next.

So in the spirit of Halloween, here is a list of my favourite scary movies.

1) Aliens. No secret, my favourite movie hands down. A war movie in space with the most chilling villains and the strongest movie heroine in a scary movie. Love it.

2) 28 days later. I find Zombie movies pretty boring normally, and I've gone on record with my belied that they are more a disaster movie than horror movie, but this movie I loved. Amazing tension, characters I got totally invested in, and the turn around in the end, which I know some people did not buy, but I completely did. For me the difference between disaster and horror movies are the control the characters have over what is happening to them. In a horror movie, the characters have some semblance of control, and they can eventually turn the tables around on their attackers. In a disaster movie, they are just trying to get out of the way. When the main character goes on the attack in this movie, that's when it became a horror movie to me.

3) The descent - A group of women go spelunking, get lost and things go awry. Loved this for the tension and the atmosphere and how they still managed to differentiate the different characters and none of them were just victims.

4) High Tension - A french movie, and starting from almost the first scene, it's crazy tense and has a really cool ending I did not see coming.

5) Blade 2 - not sure if this technically belongs in hororr, but it's direected by Guillermo del Toro and has some of the most interesting and scary vampire villains ever created.

6) Halloween - the original, watched it again the other day and it still stands up.

7) The Thing - trapped scientists, an alien that can take on any form, and it still scares me.

8) Hellraiser - because what's scarier than a trip to hell and pinhead it all his logical, reasoned calmness is truly scary.

These are mine, and I didn't include jaws, although I love it, because I'm not sure it's horror, and same for Seven and The Silence of the Lambs, but they are scary, and amazing movies.

Did I miss any important ones. I never really loved the Exorcist, and didn't find The Shining to be all that scary. Does that make me a bad person?

Finally a TV romance worth watching!

Have you all been watching Boardwalk Empire? It’s yet another HBO show that now dominates Sunday nights. It’s a period piece set during prohibition times in Atlantic City. Steve Buscemi plays Nucky Thompson – the “Boss” of the city.

Nucky – was a real person who did indeed run the illegal alcohol trade in AC. He was known for big parties, big gestures and show girls. Steve is staying fairly true to this on screen. He’s got a showgirl girlfriend who doesn’t appear to have too many brain cells, but of course there is this other woman… An Irish widow with two children. (Nucky made her a widow when he learned her husband was abusive.)

Through the first few episodes, you can see she admires him and goes to him seeking help for her struggling family. Inexplicably he takes interest in her. He kills her husband, then finds her a job. We can see she is grateful to him but there also seems to be something else there. She’s excited when he comes to see her. She fusses with her appearance.

On his birthday he dances with her at an extravagant party while she dazzles him with her intelligence and wit. Meanwhile his girlfriend is hiding naked in the cake. At the end of this episode the Widow Schroeder steals some lingerie from the dress shop where she works.

The subsequent episode will go down as one of my favorite TV eps ever. The episode is really a mind game between these two characters. The Widow Schroeder wants Nucky’s attention. Nucky has decided he’s got enough complications in his life and the last thing he needs is a temperance supporting suffragette widow with two kids. After all she’s a good woman. And he’s a bad man.

He ignores her at every turn. So she reports a “beer” storage facility to the IRS and names the man running the operation as someone working with Nucky. Of course she’s only doing this because she cares about the temperance movement…. Right!!!!!
Nucky’s man gets arrested in dramatic fashion and we see the Widow Schroeder singing along with her temperance sisters as she and Nucky exchange a glance that is pure genius.

I refer to this as a “I’m not going to be ignored!“ look. Which he returns with an “I believe I underestimated you” gaze. When the knock on her door came late at night I didn’t know if she was going to be fired from the job, beaten up by a gangster or kissed senseless. Nucky went with kissing her senseless. LOVED IT!

The payoff from this episode wasn’t as good as I expected, but I’m still fascinated. The Widow Schroeder is not pure and sweet. She is smart and feisty and very practical. She also strikes me as a woman who will do whatever she needs to survive. Nucky will sleep with anything that moves, has no intention of marrying anyone and making them honest, yet we see this particular woman does something to him. I really hope they continue to make this relationship interesting. They won me over with that one episode.

Well, that and the hats. I love hats!

The point - to me there is NOTHING sexier than two smart people pitting their brains against each other. It takes the physical chemistry to a whole new level.

Interesting Times and Chinese Curses

The times they are a-changing.

My  favorite quote from the NJRW conference last weekend was from Alicia Condon, Editorial Director of the Brava imprint at Kensington.  She pointed out that the line, "May you live in interesting times" comes from a Chinese curse. Yes, a curse.

Given all the conflicting predictions, dire and hopeful, floating around right now about the future of publishing, while the "experts" might not agree on much, there's no denying that the industry is going through some pretty intense changes and will continue to over the near future.

And the curse might lie mostly in the uncertainty. Publishing is stressful enough without all this dang extra uncertainty!

I'm not one to buy into all the dire, sky-is-falling predictions about publishing. I do, however, think that the publishing industry (and authors) need to educate the public--as the music industry did back in the Napster days--that downloading creative media for free, when it hasn't been offered for free by the creator or rights holder, is STEALING.

Yes, some people will always steal, but most people who'd never consider stealing a book from a bookstore might now download a book they find on the internet without batting an eyelash. And I think the generation currently hitting adulthood have been conditioned to think that any content on the internet is free for the taking and should be. So that's an issue... And a big one. But if handled, it shouldn't spell the end of getting paid to write books.

Another negative prediction I've heard that rang true for me, is that publishers might stop printing ANY copies of books that aren't expected to be bestsellers... (They are already cutting back on print runs, big time, and expecting much higher overall sell-throughs.) And this means that many (most) authors might see a day, fairly soon, when we can't actually hold our books... Sad, but...

I also think that, especially for genre fiction which has a huge established fan-base, e-books and e-readers could actually be a boon.

The reason I jump to this conclusion (instead of thinking the sky is falling) is because e-readers make impulse buys so much easier. I recently bought a kindle and I've bought a few books already that I was curious about, and/or wanted to buy to support the author, but that I might not have bought in print because, well, in print then I'd have to deal with storing the physical book and anyone who's been to my house knows I already have a serious book storage problem and it's becoming hard to spot my bed behind the huge mountain of books that surrounds it.

So, as much as I know I can't predict the future, I do expect that e-readers will lead avid readers to buy and read more books, not fewer. On the other hand, readers who tend to pick up one or two books a year, might not buy an e-reader, and if the publishers stop printing mid-list authors, this reader will only ever see the few books that retailers put in stores... But then again, the reader who only buys one or two books a year, was probably only ever picking up those bestselling books, anyway.

Who the heck knows...

But one thing is certain. Those of us trying to survive in the publishing world do live in interesting times.

Consider yourself cursed. :)

Has anyone else bought an e-reader? Which one? How do you like it?

Empathy

I watched my son get his nose cauterized this morning. He did great. Barely winced. I managed to stay in my chair and not pass out, but just barely. Watching someone you care about feel pain is excruciating. 

I was thinking about this in terms of writing (of course, because I think about everything  in terms of writing). I'm reading a book right now where the author is doing a great job of throwing her characters in the Dumpster. There's one main character and three secondary ones and every one of them is being forced to face her own personal nightmare. 

Unfortunately, I don't care. I should care. They're women about my age with problems I might have or that my friends or sisters might have. They're trying to balance love and family and work. I still don't care. Somehow, they're not likable. There are no "Save the Cat" moments. They're unrelentingly selfish and mean. I don't like them. 

It's not enough to torture characters. You have to make me care about the characters you're torturing. Otherwise, I have no empathy for them and you can stick hot pokers up their nose and I won't even flinch. 

What's your take? Can you still enjoy a book when you don't like the characters? Or do you have to like them to have empathy for them and to care what happens to them? 

So That's What a Real Break Feels Like?

I don't know about you guys, but in between books I like to take a little break. Usually this means I read a bunch of books and still think and obsess about either my last project or my project to come. The only difference is I don't touch the laptop. So, after that week "break" I come back to the laptop all wound up with no real sense of excitement or anticipation.

Not this time. Oh no. This time, my break happened to coincide with a trip to New York City with my husband. We went to a Broadway Show (Promises, Promises - I think in all honesty, Sean Hayes if the funniest physical actor of our time - please, someone try to come up with someone better - you can't.) We walked ourselves into exhaustion. We went to a Bruce Springsteen photo exhibit at The Morrison Hotel. We saw some really funny comedy (and in a total New York moment Judah Friedlander came into the club to do an impromptu set - my husband was over the moon). We drank some beer, ate some pizza. I had lunch with Shauna Summers and that included something called Porter Ice Cream which is no freaking joke. And then from that blissful break from not only my children, my life and my books I went to the New Jersey conference. And Maureen and Stephanie were there! And Kathleen O'Reilly! And Jessica Andersen! And Kwana! I sat next to Sherry Thomas and tried to subtly rub her magic onto my sweater to take home and study.

And then I took a few hours to sit down and work on a synopsis - my least favorite part of the whole business - and what do you know...it just fell down from the sky onto the screen. It wasn't perfect but it wasn't torturous. And I'll take that trade off any day of the week.

So, here's the lesson I learned. If we're going to take breaks, which we need, we need to really take a break. Get out of, not only our books, but our heads and our routines and our lives. I know we can't all get to New York - but there's got to be middle ground between amazing break and no break at all - and we've got to find that middle ground. Our writing needs it!

Not letting self-consciousness kill the magic

I recently got my hands on the latest JR Ward, Crave(thanks, Molly). The book is great, so far, at least. And as usual, she builds her world really convincingly. A large part of that world building is in the character's voices, their word choices. And she has a different voice for each character, and their convincing, and real, and she commits to it completely.

There is always a point in a book where I wonder, am I going too far with this? Is this realistic, and when I think about it too hard, I can pull back, not commit completely and some of the magic dissipates.

It's why at a certain part of the process, primarily the rough draft, I have to shut down the outside world, forget about what everyone else is saying, selling, where certain books failed, really, what anyone else will think. Because it screws with my head, kills my productivity and can kill the magic.

Basically at this point, I'm just trying to stay out of my own way. I can fix something that isn't working, and my critique group will tell me what needs to be fixed, but it's really hard to add magic after the fact. The best magic, for me, always comes from the first draft, and as Molly pointed out earlier this week, we have to protect the magic.

I'm completely not jealous that three of the drunk writers are at a conference together. Not jealous at all.

Buzz and Business vs. Writing and Crackers

Molly posted this week about the business of publishing. How we struggle to determine if you’re successful, growing, moving up and catching some industry buzz. How sometimes this can thrill you or drive you crazy.

And I was thinking… yeah, yeah… I know what that’s like. Such a smart post. Because when your book comes out you look for reviews. You do a bunch of crazy Google searches to see if anyone is talking about the book. Sometimes even the negative stuff gives you a jolt. If they really hate it, at least you know they are passionate about hating it.

I remember all those feelings… but I feel so far away from it now. When my agent told me to write the book that I had proposed I was excited and nervous because I knew the scope of the job I was taking on. Now months behind my own personal schedule (I wanted it done by 10/1 – we’re looking more like 12/1 at this point) I feel removed from the publishing world.

I realize it’s like a completely different occupation. There’s writing. There’s publishing. They are sooo different.

I’m totally out of the loop. I’m not checking my email for news from my agent or editor because there is no news. I’ve got nothing out on submission. No proposal that I’m waiting for someone to decide on… nothing. Just a book that’s 100 pages away from being done and a couple of weeks from being anywhere close to the point that I can show it to people.

I have to say… I’m not crazy about this feeling. I would much rather being moaning that I haven’t heard back from someone, waiting on that horrible precipice of acceptance or rejection. Or scanning the Internet wondering if anyone out there even knows who Stephanie Doyle is.

Instead I’m just writing and writing and nervously eating Triskets because I can’t think of what this character should do or what this character should say. Wondering the whole time if I’ve wasted five months writing a book that’s never going to see the light of day. And of course what that set back will mean to my career.

Writing and Publishing… yeah. The same, but different.

Which one is harder?

Structure -- My best friend, my worst enemy

I've been pondering this post for about 3 weeks, ever since I attended a full day workshop by Michael Hauge, in Ottawa. He's a screenwriting/storytelling guru and I really like his approach to describing three act plotting and especially how he integrates outer journey (plot) with the hero's inner journey (character arc). He also has the best theory of what makes great romances great that I've ever heard. (And I've heard a lot of romance authors speak on the topic.)

I'm pretty analytical and like "systems" and so I'm bit of a junky when it comes to storytelling craft topics. When I read my first few books and attended my first few workshops on structure, it all seemed like the keys to the kingdom to me. Magic. Now I understood how it all works, I thought. It was just a matter of execution.

But of course, it's never that easy (which is why every writer rankles at the word "formula") and no two books for me have been the same, and now I feel like thinking about structure can either work for or against me, depending on that particular WIP and what stage I'm at when I try to analyze what I've been pouring into my computer.

And that workshop 3 weeks ago was all the right stuff at EXACTLY THE WRONG time.

Maybe.

Or maybe it will all turn out fine.

I was feeling a little lost about how the third act of my story should play out, and I thought that sitting through this workshop would help me figure it out, but instead it made me question every step I'd taken so far. Was my "opportunity" too soon? Was my Act 1 turning point too late? And what exactly was my character's goal after all. I'd been positive I knew that...

I walked out of that workshop thinking that I needed to start the book over. That it was a total mess.

And then I sat down to read through the first 100 pages again and wow. It's not as bad as I thought. Yes, all that scary thinking helped me figure out a few places where I think things could be tweaked, and I'm sure once I finally let my critique partners see this book they'll have some other great suggestions (for which I'll hate them at first, and then love them...) But all in all, it's not as bad as I thought.

And in this particular case, thinking to much about story structure proved a bad thing. I should have just relied on my instincts. (I think.)

How about you? Do you think about structure? Do you have any one particular storytelling/plotting method you really like?

Stuffing Myself on Story

The City of Davis has been renovating our public library. For close to a year, the library has been housed in temporary quarters in what used to be an inline skating rink. It's time to move back. They are closing the library for two months to make the move.

Two months! Two months with no library! When I saw the sign posted on the library door, I almost couldn't breathe. How could I live without the library for two entire months? From October 4 to December 2. No library.

So people wouldn't have to drive all over the place to return books, due dates from books checked out at the end of September were going to be in early December. There were signs up around the library encouraging patrons to check out lots of and lots of stuff so the library wouldn't have to move it.

I panicked. I checked out armloads of books. Pretty much everything they would let me take. Fiction. Non-fiction. Books on CD.

Now I'm freaking out. My TBR pile towers next to my bed and I'm reading reading reading as fast as I can because they're so much of it! How will I ever get it all read? I've got a book in the car, a book by the bed, a book in the bathroom, a book in the living room. I've got an audio book on my iPod and a book on CD in my car. Everywhere I go, someone is telling me a story. My ever so helpful and logical boyfriend keeps pointing out that I checked all these books out so I'd have enough to tide me over until December, but somehow that isn't helping. I feel compelled to get it all read and listened to right now.

It's actually kind of fun, but there is no silence in my life right now. If I'm awake, there's a story happening and I'm beginning to realize how much of my own storytelling happens in those odd moments when there is silence. Not necessarily when I'm settled down with pen and paper or computer, but when I'm washing the dishes or driving or working out and letting my mind focus on something other than a story is when a lot of my big story realizations come.

So is story gluttony a problem? Do I need to join a support group?

When The Internet is Not Your Friend

Sometimes I think this writing profession is the equivalant of sitting in a dark cave. We're not sure what's around us, if we're steps from a cliff or a giant pile of delicious brown sugar snickerdoodles. Every once in a while a light goes on in the cave and we get ten seconds to look around. But we can only see part of the cave and we make a thousand guesses as to what the rest of the cave looks like.

Drunk Writers love to have theories, but the truth is, at least for me - I don't understand the business. I don't understand what happens in a publishing house when they're deciding what to buy or what not to buy. I make a lot of guesses because I've had that light turned on a couple of times, but for the most part - I got nothing.

The one real glimpse into publishing and my success in it is my royalty statement and trust me that's a light that shines down on me and me alone. I have no idea where my books sold best, what my print run was, how many books were shipped, what my publisher's expectations were - all I know is how many books I sold. Which, you would think would answer a lot of questions, but it's kind of like the smoke monster on Lost. One answer - lots more questions.

So, like most authors I obsess on the internet. I check my amazon ratings and troll various review sites checking to see if I have any buzz. And in my head buzz=success. But the reality is that MOST romance buyers and in particular most category romance buyers don't review, don't create buzz, they don't buy on amazon. So the internet is quite possibly the most misleading light ever. It's a spotlight on maybe...a couple thousand readers? Maybe hundreds. I've heard a bunch of authors say the book with the most buzz sold the least and the book they thought was failing miserably sold like gangbusters.

TRW had a panel discussion this weekened with a lot of authors at various stages in thier careers. Some people felt good about thier careers, others were feeling some stress. And across the board, the people with the LEAST amount of information, the ones that sat happily in that dark cave trying to get better, trying to write the best story they could, ignoring the light - they were the happiest.

It's totally in our nature to want to figure this puzzle out - but sometimes, I really think, ignorance is bliss.

A little part of me wants to be Dancing With The Stars

So week after week, Dancing with the stars brings in really high ratings, usually the highest. Critics hate it, for the most part. To be honest, I've never watched it. There's been nothing to really recommend it. But it beats the pants off of the ratings for Mad Men, or Friday Night Lights, or even The Vampire Diaries, so millions of people out there are passionate about it.

It strikes me as the tv equivalent of Dan Brown's books. Critics see nothing to recommend them, but they sell to millions. But is there anything wrong with appealing to a large group of people?

Ideally we'd all like to be both, critically adored, and get incredible sales. But I wonder if it is even possible. In book form there have been a few, The Lovely Bones, the Poisonwood Bible and anything written by Jonathon Frantzen come to mind, but on TV, I can't think of a huge critical and ratings success.
Maybe Grey's Anatomy for the first couple of seasons?

But if you had to choose, ratings, or critics, where would you go?

When the pressure is on....

Who are you? When the going gets tough… do you get going? When you find yourself in the “moment” do you own it like Eminem suggests we do because we only get one shot?

As many who follow the blog may know, I’m a sports fan. Football, golf and most recently baseball. I really got into the Phillies (which was pretty easy since they’re good right now) and went so far as to buy a season ticket plan. I spent the summer eating hot dogs, drinking beer, cheering and booing and singing about peanuts and cracker jacks.

It was a blast.

Philadelphia made it to the playoffs and as part of my package I got to go to the first playoff game. The pitcher in that game - Roy Halladay - has been pitching in the major league for years. He’s won the best pitcher award (Cy Young) multiple times but he has always played for a losing team. The Phillies picked him up this off-season in a trade.

This was his first trip to the post season.

Speculation was crazy leading into this game. How would he handle the pressure? Would he perform at the same level? Or would those nasty little choke cherries that can effect premier athletes come in to play?

This man is the best at what he does, has been for years, and for the first time he was going to have to prove it on a very large stage.

I sat and watched him throw a no-hitter. Not one batter hit the ball to get on base. Only one batter out of the 28 he faced, walked. This was only the second time in the post season that this had been done EVER in 100+ year history of the game.

So there he was, in “the moment” and he was nearly perfect.

I’m jealous as hell. I’m writing this “big” book. Slogging my way through chapters, focusing on so many different elements of it, and I’m wondering if I’m even coming close to it being good. This is my “moment”. The one shot. The chance to maybe branch out and hit it big. I’m feeling the pressure big time. Only I can’t tell if I’m a “man” or a “mouse.”

Anyway, just another day in the life of an insecure writer. But I did enjoy seeing Roy pitch that game. Because it reminded me what hard work, dedication and absolute focus on what you’re doing can - not will (there are so many other factors) - but can get you.

More Glee

I wish this was about my personal glee, but alas. The reason I'm so late posting is I'm a little swamped under and the story of why is too irritating to share, so I won't. :)

But I did have time at about 2:00 am last night to watch Glee (previously DVR'd) and have some thoughts. Not many. Don't get your hopes up.

First. Kurt's dad. Miraculously out of his coma. Can I call em or what?

Second. Should I just give up on there being a plot or any character arcs this season? Last year the story lines were outrageous, but they were fun and they were there. Teen pregnancy. Hot tub conception lies. Fake pregnancies. Marriages ending. Affairs. War between teachers... good stuff. ;)

Third. I was entertained last night. I laughed. I snickered. I smiled. I didn't want to fast forward through any of the songs.

Conclusion: Maybe I should just let this show be what it now appears to be... A farm factory for selling CDs. But an amusing one. I'd love to see a story line, too. But for now, it's as enjoyable a way to spend an hour (44 mins w/o commercials) as watching Survivor, or Top Chef or maybe more on point: ANTM... and I think that's what I should be measuring it against. When I want a story, I'll watch Mad Men (almost over!) or Grey's Anatomy or Parenthood or The Good Wife (which I'm just starting)... Can't really think of much else. Although Dexter held my attention this week, too, for the first time this season...

Now for a pause in our regularly scheduled programming

As romance writers, we tend to write about breasts. Big ones, small ones, soft ones and firm ones. Our heroes like to think about them. Our heroines have nice ones. I would consider us, as a group, to be pro-breast.

Cancer is probably the only thing that threatens our breasts more than gravity. The American Cancer Society estimates that a woman's chance of getting invasive breast cancer at some point in her life is a little less than 1 in 8. 1 in 8. Pretty stunning odds.

I've seen how those odds play out. My sister, my mother and my practically-sister-in-law are all breast cancer survivors. My aunt was not so lucky. 

October is National Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Cancer research has found ways to detect breast cancer earlier and found more focused and targeted way to treat it. More and more women survive diagnoses that were once death sentences. There are tons of places to donate money to cancer research. If you have a little extra jingle in your jeans, you might want to consider it.

But I'm not writing this to ask you to donate money. I'm writing this to ask you to take a few minutes to take care of yourself. Make sure you check yourself monthly. Nearly 70% of breast cancers are detected through self-exam. Don't put off that year mammogram if it's indicated either. I just scheduled a mother/daughter outing to the imaging center. 

This month, make the call. Feel yourself up in the shower. Do your part to keep your parts healthy. Yay, breasts!

Casting games

Hunger games is going to be turned into a movie, but no one yet has been cast. So I still have time to imagine who my ideal cast would be. Entertainment weekly is also playing the same game, but I don't agree with the majority of their picks.

1) Katniss - so tough, this casting. She has to be young, but tough, and intelligent and wise beyond her years. I'm thinking of Saoirse Ronan. I loved her in Atonement and I do think she has the wise beyond her years thing going.

2) Peeta- Ok, bear with me on this, but I see Cory Monteith in here. I realize this is slightly crazy, but based on the story about Glee in rolling stone, I think this kid might be able to act and he has that slightly innocent, blank faced impression that makes Katniss underestimate Peeta.

3) Gale - Armie Hammer. From the Social network.

4) Prim - Elle Fanning.

5) Haymitch - here is where I really agree with EW - who suggested Robert Downey Jr.


And Eileen, while reading Don't kill the messenger, I had pictured Emily Blunt in the role, I'd be curious to know who you would cast.

Anyone else want to cast some books?

Why Tim Riggins is the greatest TV romantic hero...

Molly is a huge fan of lists so I thought I would do one for one of her favorite shows.

Tim is:

1. Handsome – this isn’t a must. In fact I’m a huge lover of the “beast” archetype. But Riggin’s looks to me are poetic. His face is beautiful. His expression is usually tortured. The combination is powerful.

2. Flawed – where oh where do I start counting the flaws. Having started watching him in season 6 and now able to go back and watch him from season 1, I don’t know that there has ever been a boy/man more lost in his own life. How he does this and remains sympathetic to the audience… amazing.

3. Heroic - for every negative action this character displays, there is an equal action that showcases his heroism. He doesn’t see his friend when he’s in the hospital, when he finally shows up he does more to lift the spirits then anyone. He sleeps with his friend’s girlfriend, he comes to her rescue when she’s being verbally abused. He hates the running back, but still comes to his defense when he’s threatened. He follows his brother into trouble, then takes the fall for everything when it goes wrong.

4. Unassuming - One of the reasons I have a hard time watching this show is because of Tim. When I saw him in season 6 as a has-been high school football star – I assumed he was a defensive player. A linebacker. Something flashy. When I realized he was a full back, I immediately saw all kinds of new facets to his character. The creators picked this position for him very carefully. For those who don’t know, the full back is one of the hardest working least appreciated members on a team. He takes the punishment, shoulders all the burdens and leads the way for the more talented and faster half back. He is not showy. He often gets no glory. But every once and a while when given the ball - he can take it all the way and score. My dad was a full back. When I watch the scenes of Tim playing and putting his body in front so that others can follow behind I always think of dad and I usually end up in tears. Being heroic is only cool if the person doesn’t show case his heroism. The full back is the definition of modest and humble. A quiet hero.

5. Sexual – the bedroom eyes, the slow drawl, the body. These are the easy reasons why Tim is a guy any girl would want to sleep with. Add on the bad boy quality – and there you go. But what I think makes him more sexual than anything else… his vulnerability. Everything about this character says, save me, help me, love me without any element of wining or pleading on his part.

6. Loving – finally, this character loves. He loves and commits deeply… if not always wisely. But what good is a romantic hero who will never love the heroine back.

Thank you DWT for giving me this show and making me realize how wonderful it was. In a year where I seem to be suffering TV malaise - FNL repeats offer me a little slice of something perfect.

Pacing and What's Wrong with Glee?

Sinead and I have been talking about pacing in great YA novels and I think we both agree that it's one of the main keys for success.

Of course, I love fast pacing in novels written for any age group, but I do think that teen readers, in general, have less patience for the slow build.

To segue to a moderately related topic, the other day, Molly raised, as a topic of Drunk Writer Talk discussion, "Why does Glee suck this season?" Or maybe it was Sinead who asked the question first. Whoever did, they were right.

And tonight, I decided that amongst other things, Glee sucks this season because of pacing. There's too much singing and not enough story. Not enough focus on the characters. And too many songs destroys the pacing.

Yes, last night's episode had its emotional moments (I do confess to tearing up a little when Kurt sang I Wanna Hold Your Hand -- that song is so great as a sad ballad, as first proved in movie, Across The Universe), but mostly this season has seemed like a series of songs strung together. It's like their main objective is making sure that they have enough material to put out a new CD every second episode. And I'm sorry, but the heart attack seemed less about let's-make-things-tough-on-Kurt and more about let's-find-an-excuse-to-talk-about-religion for an episode. Who wants to bet that Kurt's dad makes a full recovery next episode? I hope I'm wrong and they actually go somewhere with that story. Not that I want Kurt's dad to die... I'll just be pissed if he's in a coma one episode and miraculously recovered the next.

But back to too many songs.

Last season the songs were tied into the overall story arc. They were about the choir improving and the competition. Or they were about rehearsals, or distracting a football team, or doing a commercial for a mattress king. In a word, they were relevant.

Now, I like a good musical where people burst into song for no good reason as much as the next gal, but I'm getting bored of Glee. It's lost its edge. It's like the writers have stopped trying.

Am I the only one who feels this way?

Top Ten Moments from ECWC

I just came back from the Emerald City Writers' Conference in Seattle. Yes. The same conference where Molly and I first bonded over a potato. Good times. Good times. 

This was another set of good times. I came out feeling energized, excited, focused and ready to tackle dragons. So many wonderful, funny and inspiring things happened, I can't talk about them all in depth, but thought I'd put together a top ten list.

10. Having Ann Aguirre tell me I had pretty eyes. 

9. Attending the wonderfully insightful Laurie Schnebly Campbell's workshop on the Personality Ladder which I think will be a marvelous tool for keeping me focused during the plotting process.

8. Learning some of the many things that Lauren Dane doesn't support. 

7. Accidentally French kissing Christina Arbini before I even managed to register for the conference. Note to self: do not sneak up on people while they're eating lunch and kiss them on the cheek. When they're startled, they turn toward you and you can end up with part of their lunch in your mouth.

6. Barbara Vey's adorable and inspiring speech at the end of the conference. Talk about a great story-teller! She had the room in the palm of her hand. Get her to tell you how she ended up at an Obama rally with Caroline Kennedy as one of the speakers and everything it led to. You'll wish you wrote it.

5. Eileen Cook and Serena Robar's workshop on planning a year's worth of writing. First of all, they served wine at their workshop. It was from Target. Yes. That Target. The Pinot Noir was surprisingly good. Perhaps not as delightful as a Bud Light, but there you have it. Second of all, I came out with the tools I need to define my writing goals for the rest of 2010 and possibly into 2011.

4. Watching Alyssa Day use a bookmark as photo ID to check into the hotel. Somehow the room was booked under her pen name and not her real name and the desk clerk wasn't happy with the photo ID and credit card in Alyssa's real name (Alesia Holliday). It wasn't until she whipped out a bookmark with her picture on it that she managed to get a key.

3. Having Rosemary Clement-Moore tell me that the book that I'm afraid to write might be the book that's most important to write since I actually care about getting it right. I'm terrified that she might be right.

2. Caridad Ferrer's insightful commentary about the appeal of the Beta hero over lettuce wraps and fried green beans at PF Chang's that might have gotten me to realize what the real conflict should be in my next Messenger book.

And the Number One Moment for Eileen at ECWC? (Drum roll, please!)

1. Getting a personal shout-out in Alyssa Day's absolute barn-burner of a dinner speech. She had the room laughing, crying and cheering and did I mention that she said my name? 

Comfort Reads

Oh. Monday. I finished the rough draft of my manuscript last Wednesday and sent it off to the critique group knowing something was wrong, but the squirrel in my brain was tired of running on the wheel so I couldn't solve my own problems. Friday my big plan was to clean the top of my fridge. It's terrifying. But instead I surfed the web and got frustrated and confused and worried about how in the world I could write a book that would please everyone all of the time - which is sort of my raison d'etre.

So, I finally tore myself away from the Internet, a ball of crazy and the top of the fridge for all of it's charm - no longer had enough appeal. So, I crawled into bed (don't tell my husband) and searched through my keeper shelf for a comfort read.

A comfort read for me is about satisfaction - it's about every scene being not only exactly the best it could be - all pistons firing. But all scenes manage to move me and surprise me. It's romance at it's most compelling, characters at their most nuanced and no matter how many times I pick the book up - I get sucked in.

For this particular bout of anxiety I needed something edgy. Something sexy and dark that wouldn't make me feel bad about what I was writing and would be totally escape. I choose Lover Awakened - the Zadist story in the Black Dagger Brotherhood. Good stuff.

My other two top comfort reads: Dream a Little Dream by Susan Elizabeth Phillips - sympathetic heroine, unlikeable hero, everyone's backs are against the wall and there's a heart-breaking kid - it's perfect. And Finally The Star and The Shadow - Laura Kinsale. Because it's subtle and it's magic - it's the other side of the coin in terms of the Ward book.

So, what are your comfort reads?

My threesome is just not working

Before I start to write a book, I plan it out. Not intensively, but generally I know the basic direction, the ending, the main turning points and the relationships involved.
And inevitably, a lot of it changes during the writing, but having a dotted line to follow gives me confidence when I'm writing a rough draft.
In the current WIP, I'd planned a lovely little love triangle. Two boys and the girl torn between them, both representing differet facets of what she wants from the rest of her life.
And I cannot seem to make it work. Perhaps it's my background writing romance, or that the other elements of the book are so all encompassing, but this part is falling terribly, terribly flat.
I need the two boys, they each serve a purpose, but the idea that both love this girl and will fight for her, while battling my evil monsters, well, it's just not ringing true.
So I'm removing one of them from the ring. Now she only has one love interest.
I think it's the right move right now, but I'll really only know when I've finished the rough draft.
It's another example of no matter how much I plot a book, it always changes in the execution.

And for anyone out there writing, or thinking about writing, a YA, watch the Vampire Diaries, if for nothing but the pacing and plotting. And perhaps Ian Somerhalder, who's line readings are magic.