Everyone's a critic

Me included. When the drunk writers get together, we talk about books we've read, what we liked about them and what we didn't. We are critical, but I like to think we mostly focus on what we loved, rather than what didn't work. I read several review sites on a regular basis and most of the time the reviews are well thought out and lacking in personal bias.

And as writers, I think we all understand, that the decision to publish is partly putting your work into the world and getting that feedback, good and bad, and hopefully finding a way to mine the useful from the bad. I do honestly think it's part of the process of writing to publish.

But then sometimes I want to whine, why does no one understand how hard it is? I read a review today that basically said, book was OK, but not great. And my first thought was how does a writer absorb that? And I know it's not a reviewers job to tell us how to fix our books, but seriously, where do you go with that?

Writing is hard work, coupled with a ridiculous self-awareness of the words we put on the page, and throw in a little magic for good measure. It takes equal measure working everyday and being absorbed into the work, and finding other outlets to inspire creativity. As a critic I can easily see the great when I'm reading, but as a writer what takes the good to great feels magical.

And that's my whine for today. Great is really freakin' difficult and so for today, I'm celebrating the good books, because those authors are one little measure of magic away from great, and who knows, maybe it will happen in the next book.

Would you rather...

I was struggling for a topic today and we played this game at lunch yesterday so I thought I would bring it to the people.

The trick is you have to pick one or the other for the REST OF YOUR LIFE... So choose carefully.

Would you rather...

Be able to eat chocolate or cheese... for the rest of your life!

Ice cream or Cake - (this includes cupcakes as determined by the lunch table ruling)

Hot dogs or Hamburgers

Potatoes (any form) or Pasta

And since this is a writing blog...

Your favorite genre or all other books!

Classic novels or current bestsellers

Would you rather...

Write or read... (I'm still thinking about my answer to this one!)

Page Turner -- Compliment or Insult?

Before I started writing, I was a bit of a literary snob. Well, in truth, I think I was a wanna-be literary snob. (Maybe that's worse: a literary snob poser.)

While I was still in school (high school and university) I read mostly popular fiction for recreation--as opposed to the books I was required to read for class--many of which I enjoyed, too.

I read voraciously in high school but don't remember too many titles/authors, but I do remember Sidney Sheldon and Judith Krantz and Jackie Collins and Jaqueline Susanne... I think I read an article in which someone dubbed that genre/style of book from the 70s/80s as "glitz or glamor fiction". Precursors to romance, perhaps? Maybe. I think if there had been such a thing as single title romance when I was in high school, that's what I would have been reading, or would have been reading, too. I also remember reading multiple books by James Michener and Andrew Greeley...

So, while I was in school, my recreational reading tastes definitely skewed "popular" or "commercial" versus "literary". Then after I graduated, I read mostly what I considered to be more high-brow fiction than I'd read in my teens. This started when, on a beach vacation right after graduating, I was bored. Used to reading all day while I was studying I didn't know what to do with myself on a beach--one can only consume so many pina coladas, even at age 23--and I found Robertson Davies' Fifth Business in a used bookstore at the resort. I recognized the title, having seen it on shelves in my high school, and thought I'd give it a try. I was hooked and read through everything he ever wrote. Then I set out to read "more books like that" -- whatever "that" meant. I read a bunch of classics that I hadn't read (or barely read) at school... And also bought and read a lot of new at the time fiction...

But although I considered my reading tastes at the time to skew in the literary direction, looking back to the decade or so after school, I mostly bought and read books that got table placement in big chain bookstores -- so probably defacto the more commercial books in the literary genre.

As a Canadian living in the US at the time, I also made a point to read a lot of Canlit, and I suppose I also read books that other people were talking about -- award winners, great reviews in big magazines etc. And I have to say that the vast majority of those books were exceedingly readable. Some favorite authors from that period of my life include Anne Tyler, Robertson Davies, John Irving, Jane Urquart, Carol Shields, Tom Robbins, Margaret Atwood, Anne Rice... I sure I'm missing a lot; I'm doing this off the top of my head.

But because all these authors' books were incredibly readable and "page turners" for me, I get annoyed at some genre fiction writers/readers when they talk about literary fiction as if it's all boring, impenetrable and lacking in story. That was not my experience. I do agree that some literary writers could benefit from learning to plot... but not all literary books lack story. And some that lack story more than make up for it with voice and with tension/conflict. (Like Michael Chabon's first novel, Mysteries of Pittsburgh. Molly and I were talking about it on Sunday night...)

And so it never occurred to me that "page turner" might be ever levied as an insult. Even most of these so-called literary novels (at least the ones I finished--grin) kept me turning pages. I mean, isn't turning the pages what ANY author wants readers to do? Yes, some books are faster reads than others, but all great books, IMHO, are page turners by default. Even if each page takes slightly longer to read in some books... each page should still make you want to turn immediately to the next one.

Call me a slow learner, but only recently have I started to realize that some people consider the term page turner to be an insult (in the same ilk as "trash" or "bodice ripper" or "pulp".) It implies that if a book reads quickly it must also be bad or poorly written or not worthy of any kind of merit.

I do *not* like it when someone refers to my work as trash or fluff or pulp or formulaic... To me, words like that diminish all the hard work I put into writing a novel. But call it a beach read or a page turner or an airplane read and I'll kiss you. :) To me those terms reflect the hard work I put in, rather than negate it.

So why would anyone consider them insults? Color me confused.

Jonathan Franzen

I went to hear Jonathan Franzen speak on Saturday night. I went with some buddies from the best ever bookclub (word to the BDBC!!!). Not everyone wanted to go because several people still hate The Corrections with a passion. I hadn't read that one, but had really liked a lot of things about Freedom. Not the super bad sex scene(s). Not the bazillion pages about mountain top removal. I loved the characters, particularly Patti. I wanted to jump into the book and be her friend when she needed one.

Franzen was way more charming than I expected and significantly more handsome, too. He had this fantastic grin. He'd get lost in something or digress down some little rabbit hole, realize it and then look up and flash this fantastic smile and I found myself forgiving that whole ugly Oprah thing.

I so wish I had brought a notebook with me, though. He'd say things and I really felt like I needed to really look at them and decide what I thought about them, but then he was already talking about something else and I didn't have time. Of course, it appears I might have a chance since I saw a deal in Pub Lunch today for a book of essays from him one of which has the same title as the talk he gave.

Anyway he had this list of things he considered his enemies when writing a book and I'm pretty sure he did at least two of the things on the list in Freedom and I thought, well, well, well, people in glass houses shouldn't introduce pots to kettles. Just as I was about to start to feel somewhat smug, though, I started to wonder how many things I hate in other people's books I might do in my own and opted to cancel the self-righteousness for the moment.

One thing I couldn't quite stop myself from laughing out loud about, though, was when he was talking about writing The Corrections. At one point, he said he'd been working on one character for about a year and at the end of the year had 30 pages written. THIRTY PAGES!!!!!!! Jumpin' Jehosophat! That's not even a page a week. Can you imagine an active romance writer producing 30 pages in a year! Thumb your nose at our mechanistic plotting (yes, he said that, but not just about romance writers. He said it about all genre fiction writers.), at least we get the words on the page.

Has there been an author you've heard speak that defied your expectations? Or met them? Who?

I'm HOME!!!!

After six weeks in a camper, six thousand miles up and down and back and forth across New Zealand, five days in Fiji, a lost book, and what had to be one of the worst ten hour flights of all time -- we are home.

It took us about a year to plan this trip, and it seemed to go by so fast every day was quite literally full of adventure and fun and melt downs and pinot noir and rain and gorgeous vistas, hikes and runs and octopus and amazing food and and now, home since tuesday, it feels like it happened a year ago. Maybe to another person. That's the nature of vacations, I guess, they don't linger.

I also love how different this vacation was from what I expected. I actually expected to WORK. Like I was going to sit in a camper and write a few thousand words. Hilarious. I also thought I was going to do a lot of reading. That was pretty much a no, too. Too tired to read, perhaps a bit too drunk. I made up for that in Fiji - The Autumn of Jacob De Zoet - AMAZING BOOK!

So, what I'm saying is that I didn't read and I didn't write for six weeks. This vacation was a like a vacation from who I usually am. I listened to sports radio - with interest. I watched a lot of Rugby. This is not me. After the initial excitement of the New Zealand RWA conference - wonderful conference. Wonderful group of woman, so warm and welcoming - there wasn't even any writing talk. Or movie talk. Or book talk.

But now, I am looking at Thursday (my first day back at the office with Maureen) with serious trepidation. I'm going to be rusty. it's going to be ugly. But I am so glad to be home, so glad to get back to work. I know it's going to be ugly and I can't wait.

My ideal vacation

Ever since I've read Stephanie's post, I've been fantasizing about a vacation of my own. And as it's all I've been able to think about, it's what I'm going to blog about.

So here it is, my ideal vacation.

1) Somewhere hot, a gorgeous hotel, a pool and a lounge chair for during the day.

2) the drunk writers, because we have books to plot and by the pool is the ideal location for plotting new books.

3) time to write, quiet computer time to actually put into words what we've been working on during plot group.

4) books. The perfect mix, two great YA reads, a historical romance, a great contemp and perhaps a mainstream fiction.

5) the first season of Friday Night Lights, because I've wanted to re-watch it for a year now.

6) drinks... goes without saying, I guess.

7) A great movie in there. I would love to see Moneyball, or 50/50.

8) Sleep... lots and lots of sleep

9) more drinks.

there you go, my perfect vacation in a nutshell. Anyone else want to escape, maybe to Vegas?

Best Vacation Ever!

I have been on vacation now for what will be four days today. I didn’t go anywhere. I didn’t have to catch a flight. I didn’t have to pack. I didn’t have to set up care for the kitties.

Instead, I planned to have a back room carpeted. I needed to add an electrical socket to a wall. I wanted to organize my shoes. I wanted to get rid of all my old T-shirts which no longer fit and have stains on them. And of course I found time for a pedicure.

I also wanted to write. I had a new book to start and this was the perfect week to just sit down and start cranking out pages. So far forty pages in four days. Right on track.

Every time I think I couldn’t do this full time I have one of these amazingly productive and relaxing weeks and wonder. Now my career being what it is, I have no choice but to work and write. But I used to think even if someday I hit it big I would still want to work in my office.

As a single person with no kids I always imagined the solitary lifestyle would get to me. But after four days, six if you count the weekend, with only the workers who’ve come to the house to chat with and my cats naturally, I am in bliss.

Maybe I’m part hermit. All I know that having the day to write and think about writing and organize things – which I compulsively love to do – it’s been heaven.

Now if the Phillies could win the World Series… well that’s just icing on the top.

Did you like it?

While I was at TIFF this year, I got asked this question a lot by people in lines (one tends to spend as much time in lines for movies as in actual movies at the festival) and I realized it's not an easy question to answer about some books and movies. For me, movies (perhaps more than books) can be really great, and I can even say that I loved them, but not really be able to say that I liked them...

There are certainly lots of movies I've been riveted by and/or felt like I really got something out of, but that I can't say I "liked". Some stories are simply too difficult to like depending on the subject matter or style or whatever.

Here are some examples of movies I've seen in the past year or two that I would recommend to others, or that really affected me in some way, but that I can't possibly apply the "like" word to:

Shame (talked about that one here)

Meek's Crossing (a very bleak and quiet film I saw at the 2010 festival, staring Michelle Williams about a group of pioneers in a wagon train totally lost in the desert on the way to California and running out of food and water fast)

Rabbit Hole (a really great film with Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckart playing parents mourning the loss of their four year old son)

Thirteen (not a film I saw at the festival, but one that will scare the crap out of any parent of a young girl, or basically anyone who knows or ever was a young girl.)

Hard Candy (just jumped to mind. First time I ever saw Ellen Page and she is no Juno in this movie...)

Beautiful Boy (a movie Molly and I saw together at the 2010 TIFF -- poor Molly, I picked her some tough films -- that was about an almost divorced couple coping with their son having done something horrific. Similar plot to this year's TIFF film We Need to Talk About Kevin, which I didn't see, but I'm sure I will when it comes out.)

Elles (A French film I saw this year, starring Juliette Binoche, about a journalist interviewing young student prostitutes for Elle magazine and then having a sexual awakening of sorts of her own)

Drive (The Ryan Gosling film about a stunt car driver who drives getaway cars for crimes on the side and gets caught up in some bad (and very violent) business because of a (married) girl. A lot to "like" about this film--Ryan Gosling for one--but ultimately too violent and bleak to apply the term "like" to, I think. But I was enthralled and would acutally see this one again.)

Irreversable (This one's not so recent, from 2002, but it immediately sprang to mind as I was thinking about "difficult" films I'm glad I saw but couldn't say I "liked".)

I'm sure I'll think of more movies from this year's TIFF tomorrow. Or moments after I press Publish on this post.

Interestingly, I can't think of any books to add to the list right now. Perhaps because I typically don't finish books I'm not "liking". Oh, maybe I could put Lolita on the list. Admired certain things about that book, but most definitely did not like it. Oh, and Sons and Lovers (I'm going back to high school English class now. Detested that book -- I'm convinced that D.H. Lawrence hated women), but kind of loved it, too.)

How about you? Any books or movies you kind of loved but really can't like?

Done!

I turned it in on Friday. I am done. Yep. The book that has had me tearing my hair out, gnashing my teeth and chewing my tongue in my sleep is done. I feel like an enormous weight has been lifted off my shoulders. I've already cleaned my closet, signed my child up for SAT subject tests and gone for 40 mile bike ride. Tomorrow I'm paying bills and straightening up the laundry room. Wednesday it's sweeping the patio and coffee with friends.

This will be my tenth novel, which I realize is pretty small potatoes in the romance industry, but feels like a big deal to me. I'm trying to come up with a way to reward myself. One of my friends has a necklace with ISBN number of her novel engraved on it. Another has a necklace made of beads that were formed from her book cover (don't know quite how that works, but it seemed interesting). I can't figure out how to do something with 10 ISBns, though and I don't think I have cover flats from all the books so I'd have to strip some to make beads from each one and that feels painful.

Any suggestions?

THE PASSAGE Update.

Sinead, I'm on 218 (out of 844). I'm still a little confused about what's happening and who's in charge and who's actually a good guy and who's actually a bad guy, but I can not put it down. I'm carrying my Nook around with me at all times just in case there's a minute of down time when I might be reading. I'm afraid my sudoku skills are going straight down the toilet.

There are no rules

I'm on an interesting reading binge right now, which started with the second book in Game of Thrones series and then moved to The Passage.

I'm loving the Passage, to the point where there have been evenings when I should have been sleeping and instead, I've been reading compulsively. What the book does really, really well is create sympathy for the main characters, you really, really care about them and how they survive the catastrophic happenings in the horrific world the author has created. It's a book that reminds me a lot of Stephen King's earlier works, and the comparison has been made in almost every review I've read of the book.

But largely I find the book works almost in spite of itself. It's huge, and a little disjointed. We get backstories on a lot of the characters. Even characters that have only minimal pov's, and POV's of characters that are minor elements and more backstories that add very, very little to the plot, but because the central storyline is so tense and because we care so much about the two central characters in the first section and a few more in the second section (it's hard to describe this book without giving away spoilers, so apologies for the vague sentences) I'm drawn through.

As a genre writer, I'm careful to ensure that backstory is crucial to both plot and character and that POV is for important characters, but when you have a storyline as compulsively readable as the Passage and a little girl in danger, and it's as tense as this book, I'll read past the flaws and just enjoy, perhaps skipping a few paragraphs here and there.

And I guess we come back to a rule my critique group decided upon, which is, when a scene/chapter is engaging and tense and readable, there are no rules.

The Thing about Self-published Ebooks...

I was on a business trip this past week to the west coast and as everyone knows I’ve been struggling for something to read as I wait for a lot of my favorite authors to release their books in the next few months. It came down to crunch time as I was going to have a five hour flight back and forth to the west coast. (I won’t go into the part about how my boss convinced me to check my carry-on and then they lost it and I was stuck at a Walmart at 12:00am at night struggling to find something business appropriate. Business travel sucks!)

But to my delight as I went on Amazon I found an author whose historicals I really enjoy. I was surprised because I know when her next release date is and this wasn’t it. In this case this was a self-published eBook.

I was like – okay. Let’s give this a shot. I want to self-publish some of my titles why not start reading other’s self-published work and see how it goes. Other than short stories this was my first foray into this world. The price point was less than one of her normal books, but not .99. For a little more than six dollars I got what I felt was a full sized book. One that would suffice for my trip out and back.

It was good. But… every other sentence started with And… First this made me smile – I don’t know if you remember my rant on cleaning up my own work and realizing I start all my sentences with “And” too. Then it got a little in the way of the reading experience.

Overall I couldn’t see why publishers would have passed on this book but they must have. I could feel this was an older work but the author’s voice still came shouting through and really that was enough for me.

But it is a reminder of why it’s going to be worth it to pay a little extra for an “agency” priced book. There is no doubt about it – a professionally published book may not be “better” – but it sure as heck is going to be more polished unless a whole lot of effort is put into the copy-editing. Which let’s face it - costs money - which can result in a decrease in profits. After all the whole point of this is to make money.

So my message to the big “Six” is you all have nothing to fear. While I may seek out new self-published works, I know concretely what professional editors and copy-editors bring to the table and will always continue to want that level of professionalism in the books I read.

Fall Funk

Just a few weeks ago we were blogging about all the reasons we were looking forward to fall... and for some reason this new season's just not working for me yet. It might be because, with the exception of a few cold days at the end of TIFF, we haven't had fall-like weather here, yet. Still wearing cropped pants and sandals and it's almost Thanksgiving! It might be because I've been anxiously awaiting the green light to make an announcement that keeps taking longer and longer (and consequently seeming less real and less exciting). It might be because so far I'm not turned on any of the new fall TV.. Or it might just be because I'm in that always horrible for me half to two thirds of the way through my book--the stage where it always seems like crap. (Every time, after I push through this part, I remind myself not to listen to the doubt demons at this stage--to just plow ahead as fast as I can and finish, trusting I can fix whatever's wrong in revisions--yet with each new book, the demons get louder, or my ability to ignore them gets worse instead of better because my personal stakes keep getting higher...)

All those reasons seem like valid contributors. But I think I've hit on the real reason I'm in a fall funk. I miss Molly. Come home, Miss Molly!!! We miss you!

Banned Books Week!

Hey, kids! Welcome to Banned Books Week! No. They're not celebrating the banning of books, they are trying to raise awareness about censorship, though. I figured I'd lend a hand.

If you check out the list of most challenged books of 2010, you'll notice (if you're a follower of this blog) that there's a book on the list that I detest. Yep. Twilight. I hate that book. I think it has some terrible messages laced through it about female submissiveness and sexuality and what love should be.

Do I want it banned? Absolutely not.

I don't care for Meyer's world view one bit. I think it's a terrible example for young girls. I also think they should totally have a right to read it. In fact, I might just encourage it. If we don't read it, how can we discuss it? If we don't discuss it, how can we show the young women in our lives that romance doesn't mean being physically subdued whenever she disagrees or being isolated from her friends and family by an overly possessive boyfriend or that sexual desire is dangerous.

So, in celebration, go read Twilight. Or And Tango Makes Three. Or The Hunger Games. In fact, just read. We have the right to do that.

I still say contemporary romance is the hardest genre to write

I just finished a contemporary romance, which after all the dark YA and urban fantasy I've been reading lately, felt a but like a palate cleanser, light and frothy and fun. At least for the first half, and then for the second half, I lost interest.

The characters were still engaging, it's just the scenes could only progress so far, with the way the author had set it up, and the conflicts could only be hashed out so much before they felt repetitive. I know my own limitations, this is the point where I would have thrown a murder mystery at the wall, simply to add wordcount and I commend the author for not doing so. But it's why I still feel like this particular genre is so hard to write.

How do you come up with compelling internal conflicts and external conflicts that aren't life and death, keep each scene moving forward and keep the reader invested through 90,000 words?

Paranormal, fantasy, suspense, all have life and death, a strong external plot to pick up the slack when the internal starts to feel repetitive. But not contemporary.

And this is where I write my ode to Susan Elizabeth Phillips, who never seems to have this problem. She keeps me engaged and voraciously reading all the way through, without ever throwing a dead body into the mix.

Molly does this as well, which is why we drunk writers are so in awe of her contemps and so excited for them to be released on the world.

And it's why I could never write one. The urge to kill someone on paper would overcome me.

Ode to Old Elizabeth Lowell...

Now I really hope Elizabeth Lowell doesn’t have a Google Alert which will pop up because she might not like the title of this blog! But of course I don’t mean the “actual” Elizabeth Lowell. I’m talking about her older category novels.

My collection consists of tons of the old school Silhouette and Harlequin category novels of the 80s and 90s when I first discovered romance. This was back in the day when S&H were discovering authors like Nora Roberts, Jayne Ann Krentz, Sandra Brown… I could go on forever. But some of the most delicious stories came from the amazing Elizabeth Lowell.

Usually what happens when I hit a reading dearth which is where I seem to be now, I’ll go back and just pick up a random book from my shelf and relive the glory days. They are a short investment of time. I know where all the good parts are. And they leave me feeling nostalgic.

What astounds me every time I read her, is why I love her heroes so much. I mean truly a woman in 2011 should probably look at these near Neanderthals and balk. They are crass, rude, usually sexists and sometimes actually sexually threatening… but there is always that lingering reason why. That soft gooey middle which gives him humanity.

These men will abuse their women (not physically of course) but emotionally to the point where you are screaming at the heroine… “Walk away! You don’t need this. You don’t need him!”

In most cases this is accurate. She doesn’t need him. But in an Elizabeth Lowell book he always needs her. It’s his desperation which is so compelling. The reader knows he’s hurting this woman because he hurts so much inside. Elizabeth Lowell plays on this theme so perfectly and in the end somehow redeems these hard men.

As a thief who is about to start my next book (Naturally suffering from startabookaphobia… but I’m hoping to overcome that this weekend) I plan to steal from Elizabeth Lowell. Just that one element.

In this story my hero is strong, he’s ruthless and he’s cold. He’s also lost and desperate. He NEEDS someone. Cue blank page… in walks my heroine. Boy is she in for a ride.

Thank you Elizabeth for so many amazing heroes!

Pirates are Funny, Copyright Infringement is Not

Somali pirates aside, piracy of old isn't something people have had to deal with over the past, say, hundred or more years, and at some point during those hundred years pirates have become less something to dread and more something associated with Halloween costumes and children's games. And then along came Johnny Depp and suddenly pirates were not only funny, but also cool and sexy.

So it has occurred to me that the entertainment industry (or whoever started it -- software industry?) made a huge tactical error in calling people who infringe on copyrights pirates. Huge.

Pirates are funny. Pirates are cool. Pirates defy the big bad authorities to claim spoils and get the girls. The general public does not think "criminal" or "thief" or "immoral" when they hear the word pirate.

This has never been more evident to me as it has been during the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF) these past few years. TIFF has become arguably the most important festival in the world in terms of launching award winning and commercially successful films. And while most of the movies screened at TIFF are made outside of the studio systems, many come to the festival already sold to big distributors who have a huge stake in not having the films leaked before their releases. Hence, it's probably also a great festival for a criminal to attend who wants to record the films and sell the bootleg copies.

I'd say that about 5-6 years ago, TIFF started taking this very seriously. Also because that was around the time that cameras started getting smaller and better quality. And now most of the "bigger" films have burly men in uniforms with night vision glasses standing around the audience watching us watch the film...

The first year the burly men showed up, they were super aggressive at some screenings and didn't even let people take out their cameras during the introductions before the films. (Which led to my tragically blurry photo of Heath Ledger, in spite of only being less than 15 feet away from him, because a big burly man was diving at me as I took it.)

But back on topic, about five years ago they started making announcements before the films to the effect of, "as part of our anti-piracy program, night vision technology may be in use during this screening."

And what happened? Some joker one night made a pirate "Arrr" sound during this announcement. And, as so often happens, it became a tradition. (Kind of like the audience used to clap wildly and cheer for the guy who took away the podium before screenings at the Uptown. I miss the Uptown.)

This year, clearly trying to stop this tradition and probably to make the filmmakers believe that TIFF festival goers do take copyright infringement seriously, the TIFF staff stopped using the word piracy during these announcements. Instead, they started their announcement with something like, "recording the movie is a criminal offense."

But did this stop jokers from saying "Arrrr!" No, it did not. And it still got laughs from the audience. Not from me. As someone trying to earn a living from royalties, I don't think copyright infringement is funny. But after being annoyed for the first few days, I realized I just needed to have a sense of humor about the "Arrr".

Pirates are funny. Copyright infringement is not.

Apparently point of view does matter to me

I have met a few people who have told me flat out that they dislike any book written in first person. I've also met a few who only like first person. This has always seemed strange to me. Both first and third person POV have their uses, their pluses and minuses. I like writing in both (but always in different projects) and I like reading both.

But apparently I really dislike omniscient point of view.

I'm reading two books right now. Sister by Rosamund Lupton and The Little Book by Selden Edwards.I am loving Sister. It's the of a woman figuring out what happened to her sister. It moves from the present as the heroine prepares for the murderer's trial and deal with her grief to the past as she unravels the mystery and solves the case. We are always in Beatrice's point of view, but we always know when we are because she cleverly uses present tense for the present narrative and past for the past. I know that sounds really elementary, but it's a great reading experience and feels very subtle as you read. I am so deeply into this character's POV (although she's very different from me in temperament) that the scenes where she recounts finding out that her sister was dead made me weep. And we already knew she was dead in the book! We'd known for pages and pages and pages!

I wish I could say that I hated The Little Book, but it's too boring to even incite that much emotion. It's an incredibly intricate story with time travel and cultural references and historical figures and it's all told from the point of view of the hero's dead father. I guess he might not really be dead, but he's supposed to be dead.

Because it's always him telling the story, we're never deeply in anyone's POV. We're floating above it all and watching. To me, this has about as much life as the flattened snake I saw in the road last week. Everyone's voice is the same. Everything's a little removed. I hit a "love" scene and it was so clinical and detached and weird that it actually kind of grossed me out.

I keep wondering what that book would be like if Edwards had gone ahead and written it deep third person POV. Would those scenes in nineteenth century Vienna have come alive? What about the tension of the baseball game at the prep school? Would the love scene have seemed tender and sweet instead of icky?

So . . . third person omniscient is a deal breaker for me. Do any of you have POV deal breakers?

Irrevocable Decisions...

As authors we make a ton of decision every time we tell a story. Everybody knows that. Our readers have to put up with those decisions. Some are going to like them and some are not. Let’s face it.

I recently ran up against a book where an author made one of these big irrevocable decisions. This is an ongoing series and the author did something to fundamentally change the main character’s life.

As an author I thought it was brave and daring because there is no walking back from this decision. It’s not like in the old days of daytime soaps where you could kill a guy by having him drive off a cliff and then suddenly bring him back to life ten years later.
When it’s done – it’s done.

I thought about the courage it took to go that direction not knowing how readers were going to react to it. But the truth is as a reader I hated it.

It made me think about how important the really big decisions are. This writer removed an entire element of the series that might not be an issue for a couple of books, but could impact the series down the road when you start to worry about how you can continually show character growth.

This writer took a chance a lot of readers (including me) were going to be disappointed. The author had to hope the disappointment wouldn’t be so great these readers don’t come back for more.

For the record – I probably will go back.

But it really brought home the concept that when we make the big decision, when we take the road less traveled or bring about a major change which will dictate the character’s actions going forward - we really really need to think about what it means. Not just to us the author – who is telling the story – but to the people we tell the story too.

I’m not saying give the fans what they want all the time. We have to own our work. But when we know we’re probably going to upset them, then we need to consider the whole picture before we do.

Shame (and Michael Fassbender's penis)

I'll now disappoint all the people who stumbled onto this post from google because of the penis reference. (And another warning: This will be a short post... I'm bagged. I'm basically out of the house 14-15 hours each day during TIFF. Love it. But it's tiring.)

One of the best films I've seen so far at this year's Toronto International Film Festival was Steve McQueen's Shame.

It's not an easy film and goodness knows whether it will ever be released in the US (because of all of the nudity and sex and full frontal penis) but wow, it's a powerful film.

And, more relevant to this blog, a lesson in "show, don't tell" -- particularly where it comes to revealing character without revealing much backstory... Also it made a great use of foreshadowing to create tension.

The film is about a man with a sexual obsession. A man who uses sex to block out feeling any emotions. To the point where the one time he tries to have sex with someone he knows and likes, he can't. (Sorry, that was kind of spoilerish.)

The man's world, one in which all he does is work, watch porn, and f8ck strangers, is disrupted when his sister (also clearly damaged) lands on his doorstep to live with him for a while. She's clearly also messed up and we see this both through their interactions and through a heart wrenching rendition of New York, New York she sings in a night club (sister is played by Carey Mulligan). We never learn why these two siblings are so damaged. The only clue is her telling him via a voice mail late in the movie, "We aren't bad people, we just come from a bad place." That line tells us what we've already figured out at that point... that something happened to these two in their childhoods that messed them up. And I suppose it doesn't matter exactly what happened in the past, but most writers would tell us or add a flashback or something. And I admired that Abi Morgan and Steve McQueen did not.

Each of the two siblings has chosen a different but very destructive way to dull his or her pain and the movie builds to a moving climax where we finally see the hero emote.

I liked the slight ambiguous ending, too... Actually, would like to see the movie again to decide for sure what I think he'll do the second the movie stops. I think he changed during the movie. I hope so.

My final comment: Fassbender naked. Wow. Just wow.

Best. Book Club. Ever.

My book club just left and I know I'm a little biased and a little drunk, but they are the best book club ever. We call ourselves the BDBC which stands for Big Dumb Book Club. We came up with the name after we read One Hundred Years of Solitude and all looked at each other and said, "WTF? I don't get it." We know it's a classic. We just don't get it. It was like a bunch of random stuff all strung together. What I love best about this group is that they're completely unafraid to say that they don't get it. Tonight was the All Eileen All the Time Night. They read both the books I published this year. They always read them and they always show up at booksignings and they always want to hear about the writing and publishing and all of it. They're fabulous. They're also unafraid to try something new which is how we ended up drinking Chocovine tonight which we decided tasted like a chocolatey Bailey's. We have some lawyers, a couple of therapist-types, some scientists, a nurse, some stay at home moms. Some of our kids are toddlers. Some have graduated from college. So I'm a little high on all the love and the Chocovine and I wanted everyone to know it. Oh! I almost forgot! Romantic Times reviewed Vanished in the Night and it was kind of awesome! They compared me to Tami Hoag! I love Tami Hoag!!! Good night, everyone! I'm sending you all a big chocolatey kiss and a overly friendly wine-soaked hug!!! May you all find awesome book groups with whom to talk and drink. I came really close to ending that last sentence with a preposition, but I'm not that drunk!!!!

Do the pictures of naked men really work?

Well, maybe not completely naked, but mostly, and I'm referring to a lot of romance writer blogs and websites where they post pics of half naked men, as inspiration for heroes and as well, inspiration for the day.

And hey, I am not against seeing a fit half-naked men, but sometimes I worry that those pics aren't doing anything to dispel the myths about romance.

I still know a ton of people who dismiss romance novels as porn for women, who think of them as nothing but silly and poorly written. Which, as anyone who reads this blog, knows is completely untrue. Like any genre, there are great and not so great books, but the ambassadors of romance have to be the authors and if we spend more time discussing a hot bod, rather than craft and story on our blogs and websites, how can we expect to be taken seriously?

I want to mention JR Ward, and Courtney Milan and Sherry Thomas to strangers and not have them look at me as if I'm an addle brained twit for reading romance. Because these books are great examples of craft, and character and a lot of "serious" authors could learn a lot from romance writers. Which is why I sometimes worry, do romance authors treat their own work with the respect it deserves?

What we put on the internet is basically out there for the world, and I don't want it to be serious all the time, but it cannot be taken back and when I look at those pics, I wince, because I think of a reader that has never read a romance and is investigating an author thinking whether the might pick up their book and would they after seeing that?

I'm not sure, but I do hope they pick up the romance, because if they do, they'll probably be a romance reader for life.

My post to explain why I have no post...

With being off Monday for Labor Day it sort of messed up my days of the week.

What I thought was Tuesday was really Wednesday and today is really Thursday and my normally well thought out post (not really... I just like to pretend I think them out) is not available.

This is me, live and unedited.

So I'm going to take the most completely lame approach and ask (or beg) our readers to help me out.

I'm out of books to read. I know that's crazy talk, but truly I've gone through all my favorite authors and I haven't seen any amazing new reviews of new authors to tempt me. I'm counting the days until Meljean Brook's new Steampunk novel is out. Other than that I'm a little lost.

I don't want serious, sad or depressing. I want a great romance novel. Any genre. So for all you out there thinking, seriously? I clicked on the blog for this? I apologize but can you help a sister out and at least tell me what you are reading and loving.

Falling into Autumn

Inspired by Eileen's list yesterday I thought I'd do my own It's Fall! list.

Fittingly, temperatures here dropped dramatically on Monday, so I definitely had fall on my mind already.

Things I'm Looking Forward To:

1. Sleeping with my windows open. Toronto is hot and sticky in the summer and the only thing I hate more than sleeping with the air conditioning on, is sleeping when I'm hot and sticky... I love a nice cold room for sleeping and so fall is one of my favorite times of the year, for that alone. 
2. TIFF. The Toronto International Film Festival opens on Thursday and runs to the following Sunday (8th-18th) During that time, I will be seeing a minimum of 32 films. At least that's how many I have tickets for at this point. And I'm excited about them all.
3. Oscar season. TIFF usually gives me a head start on the fall movies, but I'm looking forward to all the great films that typically open between now and the Oscar deadline at the end of the year.
4. Fall colors. This part of the world has some pretty spectacular autumn colors and I love the show. Who knows how it will really be, but at this point the weather people are predicting a long and mild autumn. Here's hoping it doesn't turn into full-on winter until January. 
5. I've been sitting on some exciting news and fall is when I'm supposed to be able to finally announce it... I hope. Soon.
6. Fall TV. I'm most excited about premieres for The Good Wife and Boardwalk Empire. And Sons of Anarchy Season 4.  (Sinead, you really should watch Season 3.) Also pining for Mad Men and Game of Thrones, but those won't be until winter or later, right?
7. Finishing my WIP. I cannot wait to be over the first draft stage and on to revising. I told Molly I'd be done my first draft by the time she gets back from New Zealand and barring a miracle, that's not likely to happen, but definitely before the end of October. (TIFF is eating up way too much of my September.)

Things I'm Not Looking Forward To:

1. Winter. As much as I love me some fall, I hates me some winter. It's a tough call between which season I hate more, the 35 C degree and humid days of summer, or icy, windy cold days in winter.  (I actually don't mind the freakishly cold weather we sometimes get here in the winter, as long as it's sunny. You can dress for cold.)
2. Shorter days. As much as I jested yesterday, I dread the shorter days too. And they start to get shorter so dang quickly. It's no secret I'm not an early riser, and the consequence of that bad habit is that my days get VERY short...
3. Deadlines. I'm going to be facing at least two over the fall/winter and I'm already a bit stressed out.
4. Sandals. I will miss my open toed shoes and going sans socks. I actually wore closed toe shoes for the first time yesterday since some time in May, possibly April. On the other hand, I bought an AWESOME new pair of Fluevogs this summer I can't wait to wear. (See below.)

It's over.

Yesterday was Labor Day so as far as I'm concerned summer is over. I know it has a few more weeks according to the calendar, but in my mind, summer goes from Memorial Day to Labor Day. In our listy spirit at Drunk Writer Talk, allow me to tell you about things I'm looking forward to this fall and things I'll miss from the summer.

THINGS TO WHICH I AM LOOKING FORWARD

1) Finishing the book I'm working on now. I've got less than two weeks to go. I think it might be good. I can't wait to find out.

2) Fall TV Premieres. I can't wait for The Good Wife and Castle. I'm also curious about a lot of new shows. There are TWO fairytale based urban fantasy sounding series. Two! Plus Ringers and something with Claire Danes and Damion Lewis that sounds interesting and a bunch of others.

3) Starting a new book. I've got a third Messenger novel and a novella that I'm itching to get started on.

4) My kid's soccer season. This is the last one. He's a senior this year. I've made so many wonderful friends on those sidelines and have had such fun watching him play.

5) Figs, persimmons and mandarin oranges. I adore the summer fruit, but some of the fall and winter fruit is pretty darn special, too!



THINGS I'M GOING TO MISS

1) The light and the heat. I love the long hot summer days. I like it being light at 6 a.m. and still light at 9 p.m. I groove on it. I'm already losing the morning light and it's totally bumming me out.

2) Summer TV (In Plain Sight, Suits, Wilfred, Burn Notice, plus some more I can't come up with off the top of my head). Summer TV seems a little quirky and weird and I love it.

3) White clothes. I don't have any white shoes, but I love me my white capri pants.

4) My big boy when he goes back to school. I think we laugh more when he's in the house. I am not, however, going to miss the chaos he tends to spread through the house.

5) More relaxed schedules. School's started. We're all busy. Our house runs on a schedule year round, but in the summer it feels like it has a little more grease to it.

What I've learned this summer

More lists, in honour of Molly, who is having the vacation of a lifetime.

1) summer is the hardest time of the year to write. I'm unfocused, reluctant to sit and work and lacking in focus. And judging by how much work my critique group sends out, we all feel this way. When the Fall hits, it seems all of us get to work and scenes get sent out, and we meet much more frequently.

2) Without an actual deadline, it's hard to muster up the enthusiasm to put the last, finishing edits on a book, the detail work that I generally don't enjoy as much. I should have finished this book three months ago and I'm still editing it... Creating my own deadline doesn't work for me any longer.

3) Every writer needs a break. I've watched critique partners and friends push to three, even four books a year and there is inevitably the book that teaches them they need to take a break, the one that needs a complete edit, or where each sentence is painful and they lose the joy.

4) Too much bachelor pad can turn your brain to mush, but two hours a week is just perfect.

5) Wear white after labour day. That rule that says not to is outdated.

time to get back to work. Have a great labour day.

Things I've learned after writing this book...

Once again in honor of Molly and her love of lists I thought I would put together a list of everything I learned from writing this last book. Which if I prevail will be turned in after this weekend. (I always ask my editor for that extra weekend – this time I was super sneaky because it included a holiday.)

1. A book is easier to write when you are writing consistently every day or every other. When I take breaks between writing chunks… it’s disjointed and sucky.

2. Writing for an hour consistently every day allows for more pages than trying to do major chunks of time only on the weekend. I will commit my mornings to writing. I will. (Damn you double alarm clock which always gives me an out…)

3. I can’t start a sentence without And or So. I must also include the word “that” and “just” in every sentence. It simply is what it is. Thank goodness for Find and Replace.

4. I believe 20 percent of my sentences are fragments and I have a passion for the “…”.

5. My favorite parts of writing are the spontaneous things which come out. Not brainstorming, not executing a chapter the way it appeared in my head, not editing it certainly. It’s the things which go where I didn’t know they were going, which surprise me, which make me ask - Where in the hell did that come from? - which excites me the most. I never realized that until this book.

6. I’m too linear. I can’t get far enough away from the book to pick out the big things I got wrong. I can’t move chapter 11 to chapter 2 or insert chapter 2 ½ between chapters 2 and 3. Thank goodness for my editor.

7. Thinking about GMC actually helps. Funny story… I had no idea what that acronym stood for. Molly sent it to me in an email regarding a book I had asked her to read. I was like what the heck… oh no – I bet it’s one of those writer terms everyone should know. It was. Thank goodness for Google.

8. I need a little pressure when writing. Not a lot of pressure. I could never do a twenty four hour writing marathon. But sometimes I like to wait for the last moments because it lends a sense of urgency to the writing. I’m still putting my book together, still waiting for the word count to add up and I still have the final scene I need to write. I have to give it another read, then more editing. All of that in a handful of days. I think it makes me more focused.

9. I did not think I could write a book without killing someone. I was right. Someone in the book always has to die.

10. … I’ve run out but I wanted to have a 10 things listed.

And that’s it. So just what are the things that you learn too….

(See what I did there.)

Be Norman Jewison = My New Goal

I'm joking, of course. Not about to go into film making. But the past few weeks I've seen a handful of Normal Jewison films as part of a retrospective put on by the TIFF and it's been kind of inspiring.

He was there to introduce a couple of them and I understand he'll be at the screening of Jesus Christ Superstar that I'm going to tomorrow evening. I bought the ticket after I learned he'd be there... (I know, crazy person going to all these films right before the festival starts. I call it stretching.)

Anyway, on the weekend I saw a rarely seen film of his called Gaily, Gaily. It was filmed in the 1960's, set in the 1910's and starred a very young Beau Bridges (playing a teenager) and an even younger Margot Kidder. In fact, the credits read: Introducing Margot Kidder.

I have a feeling the reason this film is so rare is that many Americans would consider its message to be "communist", but like so many of his films, it's critical of American society -- in this film: greed and corruption.

The film was fun, but that's not really what I wanted to talk about. Before the film, a big-wig from, um, Sony-Pictures Classics? (or one of the really big studios) introduced Jewison and then talked to him on stage for an hour. And he showed clips of 3 of Jewison's films (2 of which I'd just seen in the past few weeks--In the Heat of the Night, and In Justice for All. The third was In Country. At which I cried. At a 5 minute clip. Now I need to rent that movie. Bruce Willis. Who knew?) Anyway, the studio guy kept repeating that Norman Jewison was one of 3 or 4 filmmakers of all time whose work was a) universally appealing (he meant to a global audience) b) highly commercial, and c) art -- about something.

I don't know if "art" is the right word, but I get what the guy meant. The reason that so many of Jewison's films have become classics or are considered iconic is because he hit that sweet spot where commercial met the stories he wanted to tell. He turned Gaily, Gaily, a cutting look at politics and corruption (with definite socialist leanings... the book it was based on was written in 1910 after all), into a silly sex farce set at the turn of the century. He turns a film about civil rights into a murder mystery. He turns a cutting look at the growing power of big corporations (Rollerball) into a violent, action-paced sci-fi sports film. No matter what's at the core, his films are commercial.

At both the screening of In the Heat of the Night, and in this discussion before Gaily, Gaily Jewison told a story about meeting Robert Kennedy the winter before he started shooting and giving Kennedy a synopsis. (The two men were both in a hospital waiting room in Sundance, Idaho where both of their sons, by coincidence, had broken their legs skiing on the same day.) Anyway, the way Jewison tells it now, Kennedy told him that In the Heat of the Night was going to be an important film and Jewison claims he'd never even thought about the film in that way before that point. He just loved the story and was fascinated by the interaction and human dynamic between the two main characters. Yes, Jewison is someone who cared deeply about the civil rights movement and I'm sure that's why he chose that project (based on a book), but mostly, he claims, he was just hoping that people would turn up to see the film.

And really, isn't that what it's about? Because if no one shows up to see your film, or if no one buys your book, then who cares what fabulous ideas you included, or what beautiful sentences you crafted... Isn't it about sharing those ideas? And they aren't shared if no one wants to see the film or read the book.

If a book gets printed and nobody reads it, does it exist?

Clearly feeling existential this evening. I blame The Bachelor Pad. ;) That's what I should have posted about. :) So much more highbrow.

Fav line of this week? (and there were many, I was clapping and bouncing on my sofa a few times...)

Blake (with electric toothbrush in mouth): Give me four minutes and then we can talk.

Only a dentist could get away with using that excuse to postpone talking to the crazy chick.

Full of Hope

Okay. The rough is done. It's a huge relief. All the scenes are there (I think). All the major turning points. All the character arcs.

This rough, however, takes rough to a whole new level of rough. Nothing is in order. Stuff came out of me sometimes according to character arc, sometimes according to philosophical underpinnings, sometimes (apparently very rare times) according to plot. There's going to be some crazy wild revising going on here.

I will get frustrated. I will get mad at myself. I will get crazy. But at the moment, I am a little bit thrilled. This book means so much to me and I really think some of the things in it are really important. It's been a challenge. I've been terrified of it. Right now, it's thrilling me. Andy keeps nodding and saying, "Phase Four."

I love this part of writing. I love when all the pieces are there, but they're rough and ugly and now I can use those more refined skills to massage things into place, to turn phrases, to create great scene endings. In another week, I'll probably again be convinced that it's a terrible book and the end of my career, but for now I'm hopeful and I'm sticking with that.

What's your favorite part of writing? Which phase? Does your family know which one you're in just by how you talk about your project?

Fringe and how to build a believable heroine

I watched the first season of Fringe when it hit TV, got frustrated half way through and stopped, but since then, Maureen and Entertainment Weekly have convinced me to give it another shot.

What frustrated me about season 1 was that I didn't buy the heroine. I didn't believe her when she fired her gun, didn't believe her when she stripped to her underwear to climb into a sensory deprivation tank for the benefit of science, (and not for the hordes of teenage boys they were trying to attract to the show,) and didn't buy that this woman would be a successful FBI agent.

But when I picked up season 2 and started watching it, that all changed. I totally buy into the main heroine. First the show has stopped trying to create a sex symbol and instead they created a character. And this FBI agent wears flat, black shoes, loose black suits and a button up shirt that is untucked and not skin tight. She ties her hair into a ponytail when she works, she gets injured and takes several episodes to heal and when she fires her gun, I believe it now. I believe that woman, the one who dresses seriously, seems to wear no makeup and when she wakes in the morning, her hair is messy and even frizzy.

As the new TV season starts, and we get into a host of female dominated shows, where women will run wearing six inch stilletos, fight hand to hand wearing tight jeans and work a twelve hour day without a hint of a mascara smudge, I love that Fringe has committed to creating a realistic, intelligent female character while no longer caring what the teenage boy wants.

Because let's face it, he'll be watching the new Charlie's Angels tv show, and I'll still be watching fringe.

An Earthquake in New Jersey... Seriously?

I don’t know if you all watch the news, but the east coast… that’s right Eileen the “east coast” - suffered a 5.9 earthquake yesterday.

I was heading back to my office after lunch wondering if the window washers were at it again when I saw the windows shake slightly. It took about five seconds to register what was happening. (I experienced an earthquake once when living in Seattle many many years ago so eventually I got a clue.)

I urged everyone under the doorways. I think I saw that in a movie or television show once – so it's good that I was using TV as some kind of survival guide.
Then I rode it out for a couple of more seconds with my co-workers. I might have giggled nervously. I might have.

When something like this happens you naturally take stock. What might have been if…? What was the worst that could have happened? More importantly… how did you react?

I’m a big believer in people finding out the most about themselves in crisis. As writers - isn't that what we are always doing with our characters? Natural disaster is one of those ‘BIG’ moments. What are your instincts? How does the adrenaline rush feel? What do you really want to do when crash hits? Have sex (like in so many romance novels) or lie down and take a Tylenol?

This was a minor event. A small tremor where for maybe 10 seconds total the earth shook and it freaked me the hell out. I didn’t cry. My first instinct was to tell people what to do (not shocking) and I tried to laugh as if it was okay but really I was wondering like everyone else if the building was suddenly going to collapse.

I want to point out… bring me a hurricane any day of the week. This we understand in New Jersey. Earthquake, mudslides, fires and tornados… not so much.

This will be good for my writing. We take so much of what we extrapolate from real life “as seen on the news” into how we think our characters will behave in certain situations. This is a good reminder the real thing – no matter how scary – is good research.

What about you? Did any of you shake a little?

Fright Night—Three Thumbs Up

So, I’ve never really been one to like horror films—and it’s not only because I’m not a fan of being scared (although I am a bit of a ‘fraidy cat)—it’s more about the fact that they mostly seem dumb to me. Gore for gore’s sake, weak plots, stupid characters (if one can even call them characters), and teenaged girls running around in their underwear (or less) and screaming. But I was lured into the lair of Fright Night by two factors, or should I say two cute boys—Colin Farrell and Anton Yelchin.

I’ve admired Yelchin as a young actor since the fabulous but underrated TV show Huff and I figured if he was in this, chances were it wasn’t that dumb. And Farrell? Well, even if the movie was dumb, watching him for 90 minutes would be a redeeming quality. ☺

So, I suppose I went in with relatively low but hopeful expectations, and boy was I pleasantly surprised. Because Molly loves lists, here are the top 10 reasons I liked it.

1. The vampires are scary monsters. Seriously scary monsters. No sparkling. 
2. The plot holds together and—there actually is a plot. Sure, the main plot is pretty much: kill the evil vampire and live, but it was a really well structured story. 
3. There were real characters. Well developed characters. Even characters who could have been throw-away stereotypes had some interesting quirks and inconsistencies that made them three dimensional. 
4. The supernatural world holds together. Sure, to pull off a teenaged boy defeats an ancient evil vampire story the writer needs to put some tools and knowledge in the kid’s path to help, but the way those elements were introduced—it made sense and all hung together. 
5. The girls weren’t stupid. The main character’s girlfriend was not only not stupid, she was brave and fought too. She wasn’t just a pretty victim for the hero to save. And we believed why she was with the main character beyond: the geeky guy in a horror movie needs a hot girl to save for no apparent reason reason. Even the neighbour who was basically a walk-on female character, who had maybe two lines, wasn’t a total dumb blonde stereotype. 
6. There were lots of places that made me jump – but there were also lots of seriously funny parts. And not just making fun of the movie, funny. Actually funny. Smart funny. 
7. Minimal TSTL moments. Yes, twice early on in the film characters run up stairs in a house when clearly they should be running out the back door... and I did roll my eyes at the time. But it turned out they actually had reasons to go upstairs, even if they weren’t instantly apparent as they started up the stairs. 
8. Toni Collete is always awesome. (And did I mention Colin Farrell?)
9. A small suburb outside of Las Vegas made a smart setting for a vampire movie—lots of people work at night and sleep during the day, so even blacked out windows aren’t that odd. 
10. It was just plain good fun and how can you not like a teen horror movie where there’s actually character development? 

Phew, I made it to ten. ☺

Basically, throughout the entire movie all I could think of was how well it was done. Then the credits rolled. Written by Marti Noxon. I know that name. She used to write for Buffy. And then it all made sense.

Smart writer = smart screenplay = smart horror movie.

Yes, there was lots of blood and gore (and I saw it in 3D) but I really liked the way it all hung together. Has anyone else seen it?

Justified! No need for spoiler alerts!

Finally! I have science on my side! I have long been one of those people who must read the end of a book before I get there. It's too stressful to me to not know and I like seeing the way an author twists and turns things. Now, according to a study by UC San Diego, I was right all along.

Yep. Spoilers enhance our enjoyment of stories. In fact, spoilers may help us reach a deeper understanding of the story.

So . . . all you people who have looked at me with horror on their faces, all you people who have said that it's "cheating" to read the end of the story, to you I say HA! It's not just that I'm neurotic. It's science.

So are you an end reader? Or no?

Hair and bachelor Pad

Because at this point in my life, I have absolutely nothing to offer on craft, and there seems to be a drastic absence of anything good on TV and me getting out to see a movie seems like a laughable concept, I have only Bachelor Pad to talk about.

Which is a tremendously sad statement on my life, and the glee with which I approach this show is bordering on pitiful.

That said, this week was the same soul sucking absence of anything worthwhile about the human condition, it did show some really interesting hair. Not just hair, but some pretty obvious extensions, so basically fake hair. Obviously there are no hairdressers in the pad, and the camera men are trying gamely not to show them completely from behind, unless they are in bikinis, and so the detail I noticed this week are that hair extensions are pretty obvious if your hair is stick straight.

And continually dying hair bright blond is pretty bad for hair as well, so in the bad lighting split ends and frizzies were everywhere.

So what does this have to do with writing. Well, truthfully almost nothing. Except reality television still gives me some of the most unique details about characters, like the hair thing, while showing the most broad characteristics out there. Kasey as a villain is so obvious because he practically cackles after every statement he makes. And even when you feel bad for a person, they still find a way to be awful, like the vapid blond chick who is humiliated when every guy in the house picks her as the least attractive and so she says horrible things about another girl to make herself feel better. That was a character detail that actually rang true to me.

And there, I just managed to justify the two hours that show will suck from my life this coming Monday.

The Final Stretch

This blog will be super short today. All my energies are being poured into my WIP which is due in two weeks. Every word I type here is like one I’m taking away from my book.

Word count requirements….ughhhh. Darn publishers wanting things the way they want them.

But it is nice to take a break from the stress of the end. You know how it is, you can see the end in sight and you’re just typing and typing as fast as you can to get there. Pushing and pushing to make sure you hit that right word count number at the end of the chapter.

I love the end. I hate the end. I love deadlines because they push me to work harder. I hate deadlines because they stress me the heck out.

And people wonder why writers drink!

Okay that’s it. It’s all I can spare. This blog cost me 182 words and now I’m going to have to come up with a way to make that up. Here we go – the final stretch – DEEP BREATH.

Google What?

Has anyone else played around with Google +?

I have to say, I really like it and if everyone I'm in contact with on Facebook and Twitter would move over to Google +, that would be awesome. *I"m waiting*

Alas, there is the rub with all these social networking things. You don't use the one that works best or has the best features, you use the one where everyone else is hanging out. Five or so years ago, that was MySpace and I hated MySpace. I did set up a page because all the workshops on how to promote yourself as a writer said I had to (it's probably still there) and made a very feeble attempt to get "friends" but found it mostly annoying. Then FB in the early days was so awesome. But lately I mostly find it annoying, too. It's like they're making it more commercial (ads, letting corporations set up pages) and at the same time making it WAY more difficult to use it, if one of your main aims in using it is commercial.... Or especially if you have dual aims... to use it to interact with actual friends and with, well, virtual friends and people you hope might read your books.

And Google + takes the best stuff from Facebook but sets it up the way you wish Facebook worked.

First, you can follow someone in a one-sided way and vice versa... That is, you don't need to accept me as a "friend" in order for me to follow your public updates and vice versa. In this, it's more like Twitter.

And... it's super easy to group everyone you choose to follow into groups -- called circles on google plus. So you can filter what you look at. "Only show me updates from people in this particular circle." That's possible on FB, too, but they've now buried their friend lists so deeply it makes me crazy. And it's very hard to manage your friend lists on FB. (Does anyone know how to delete an empty friend list???) Whereas it's easy to manage circles on Google +.

But I haven't even got to the best part yet. Every time you "share" or "post" you can choose who you want to share it with. No. It's not one main setting for the entire system buried under pages of security options. EVERY TIME you post, you can choose to share it with the public (everyone) or just certain circles, or just certain people. Awesomely flexible.

For authors and other people who have multiple reasons to use social networking sites, this verges on nirvana. I can share family photos with only my family. I can share a book review with everyone on the planet. I can share an article on writing or publishing with only other writers. Awesome.

And whereas it's possible to see who's added you to their circles, you can't see to what circles... so someone might be following my updates in a circle labelled "Idiots I laugh at" and I'll never know. :)

My friend Debbie Ohi (also known as @Inkygirl and @Ipadgirl has done some great posts about Google +  if you're not yet convinced. Join. Please?

The Kids are All Right

I know. Everyone else saw this movie last year. I just saw it Sunday night. I figured it wasn't one of those movies that you needed to see on the big screen. I was right about that, but now I want to talk about it and everyone else is like, "Eileen, that is so 2010."

BTW, this post will be positively BURSTING with SPOILERS. Alert. Alert. Alert.

Can I talk first about Annette Benning's face? OMG. She's beautiful. She appears to have resisted pressure to have plastic surgery. She looks so real and her emotions are so real on her beautiful real face. The scene at the dinner table when she realizes that her partner has been unfaithful to her and yet she has to endure the rest of the meal with her partner, her children and the man her partner is sleeping with? OMG. Amazing. Everything is on that face. She doesn't need to say a word. In fact, she doesn't.

I love that this family is essentially exactly where I am now. Two teenagers. Two adults trying to keep everything together. To be there for each other and for the kids and still find some level of self-actualization. The movie totally captured what that's like, right down to the fact that any house with teenagers in it can explode at any second. It just can. It's the way it is. They're crazy volatile and have a complete scorched earth policy. I have great sweet kids, but hand to God, it could go south any second. I've seen it. BTW, loved the way they handled the daughter leaving for college. She had to get that little snippet of rebellion in there before she left. Because they do need to. They have to separate from us. But she's still the same smart sweet loving kid she was.

It also captured how easy it is for two smart caring adults to lose their connection despite how much they love each other. I feel like I'm constantly fighting to keep from taking that step to where they are in this movie. I don't want to be Julianne Moore trying to control my partner's almost drinking problem or be the one with the problem who can't listen to what my partner's saying because I want that glass of wine that bad. The sex? That cracked me up, too. Who hasn't phoned it in here and there? Do that too often, though, and someone could end up doing Mark Ruffalo doggie-style in the middle of the afternoon.

Oh, and those moments when one or the other mom was totally tone deaf to what she was saying to her kid? I've heard that crap coming out of my own mouth. I know I'm screwing it up, but I can't help it. The thank you note thing? The one mom trying to be honest with the kid about sexuality and going oh, maybe a little too far, but maybe not and the other mom shutting her down. Okay. I guess it was always Annette Benning who was tone deaf.

So I loved loved loved this movie. I loved the people and the problems and the resolution at the end. It was a little like Molly's post about great reading experiences. I saw this movie at the exact right moment in my life.

Thanks. You may now all resume your previously scheduled 2011.

The core of your character

There is this really amazing article in Rolling Stone about Breaking Bad. In it they have this really insightful analysis of Walter from Breaking Bad, where they sum up his need to continue making meth, in the current season, even after he has made enough money to assure his family's comfort after his death.

Walter, before his cancer diagnosis considered himself a failure, a mediocre teacher, his history a series of lost opportunities when his friends had gone on to make millions. But he is the best maker of meth in the criminal world and that has given him purpose and there has been a point in the show where it became not about his family, but about the work itself, and how he is the best at it, for the first time in his life and that's why he'll never stop.

What I like about it is that it's so specific. Mine has always been too vague for my characters, ie, she looking to gain more power to make up for having her freedom removed from her. It's fine, but the more specific that character core need gets, the better we can keep them true to their core needs, even as plot, or even the world changes.

Here's another one. Vienna from Bachelor Pad wants to be on television so she never has to go back to her minimum wage job again.

Living in their reality....

I’m going to say it in public. I think the Bachelor Pad is the greatest reality TV show ever. Okay maybe All-Star Survivor when Rob fell in love with Amber and they won all the money was better, but other than that – this is right up there for me. The comedic value (I mock – I mock a lot) is just endless.

This show is awful, mindless, pointless and probably does suck up IQ points. I know.

But it’s beautiful people running around living in this very tense environment made tense by their own shallow awfulness to each other and I just can’t get enough.

They put ex-fiances together. They put women who didn’t like each other together. They put ex-fiances with a new love interest together. Take 18 beautiful men and women who believe love or money can be found easiest on television – they know this because they have already been on the Bachelor and Bachelorette – and you’ve got a hit.

As I watched it and was completely absorbed for the three hour premier… (That’s right! I watched for three hours and loved every second of it)… I thought what are these people doing? Thank you for doing it… but really… who are you?

Why are they having sex when they know there is a camera there but thinking large pillows will hide their actions? Why are they saying these ridiculous things… like “I’m here to protect you. You’re here to protect me. We’re here to protect each other.”

I’m not lying. This is real dialogue from real people who I believe are genuine when they say these things. They believe this fictional reality is real. They believe in what they are doing on the show. They think they really a) might find love or b) will somehow make money as a result of this.

And I think it’s because of that, because they’ve so bought into their reality that as a viewer I get sucked in.

It’s kind of like a J.R. Ward book. If you take some of her heroes out of context, some of her dialogue out of context… if you read aloud some scenes from those books… you might think cheesy. But when you get sucked in to what’s she’s doing. When you buys these characters at face value… it’s wonderful awfulness that you can’t get enough of.

That’s what this show is for me. It reminds me that sometimes characters can bring the cheese. As long as I believe it for them when I’m writing the lines or conveying the thoughts then I can make readers believe it too.

As writers we have to believe in the reality we built for our characters and if we do everything said and done there will be okay. I think.

I guess my point is…. It’s okay to say. “I will guard and protect your heart.” You believe your character really means it.

Internal Conflict at the Movies

I used to love romantic comedies at the movies. In fact one question Molly asked me not long after we met and I confessed I didn't love reading romance was, "Why the contradiction? Why do you love romantic comedies at the movies, but not in books?" I didn't really have an answer at the time, and all I could come up with is a book is a bigger time commitment than a movie.

But I actually think that discovering and reading romance ruined my enjoyment of rom com movies. After reading some great romance novels and learning how to analyze them, I expect too much. I can spot the silly coincidences and weak internal conflicts and contrived external conflicts. Not to mention the "big misunderstandings".

Last week I mentioned that the only thing I've heard come out of Michael Hauge's mouth during presentations that I didn't agree with, or didn't want to agree with, is that he claims that all romantic comedies (American ones, anyway) NEED a big misunderstanding. He believes that's the main plot point they all hang on.

And maybe that started to ruin rom coms for me, too... because he was kind of right. Not in that they NEEDED to have them, IMO. Just that almost all of them did rely on one.

No internal conflict, just a big lie or misunderstanding keeping the couple apart.

But my faith in my love of romance at the movies was re-awoken this week by two movies. Friends with Benefits and Crazy, Stupid Love.

Friends with Benefits wasn't the best movie I've ever seen or anything, but I did believe the internal conflict and actually thought it was a strong internal conflict. And there isn't a "big misunderstanding". Sure, we hit a point where if the couple actually had a honest conversation, all would be right, but the reasons for each of them not wanting to have the conversation were completely believable given their internal conflicts. Each was believably terrified of admitting what they really felt and opening themselves up to hurt. And the one who caves and grovels is the one who should and it's really kind of perfect. (If contrived... but still so cute.)

Justin Timberlake is turning into a half decent actor and Mila Kunis is WAY better than I ever thought she'd be based on the one season of That Seventies Show that I watched. So, ya, I definitely give that movie a "worth a rental for sure" rating.

Then tonight I saw Crazy, Stupid Love. And it's a better film. Really well written. If you've seen the trailer, you've seen most of the funny parts and normally that makes me crazy, but it really isn't a comedy, or doesn't rely on being a comedy, so it doesn't matter that they blew some of the jokes with the advertising. Sure, there are tons of smiles in the movie, but really it's more of a heart warming film.

It has two romances. Actually three, I guess... One between a married couple who are divorcing and one between a womanizer and a smart, witty girl who doesn't buy his line. The third, well, I think it's spoilerish, so I won't say. The second romance (between Gosling and Stone) sounds like it's cliche but it really doesn't come off that way.

I think there are a few reasons for this. First, it's a subplot -- it's not carrying the movie. Second, the acting is stellar -- Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone. Third, the writing is stellar -- Dan Fogelman. Fourth, and I think this is the main reason, and it's highly dependent on both #2 and #3, and that is -- we actually see the couple falling in love. That is, we're shown a scene in which we believe this couple is falling in love. And it's not just a montage of running on the beach. In fact, not at all. It's a planned one night stand where nothing goes the way you (or either character) assumes it will go and ends up so perfectly coming full circle that I don't want to say how and ruin it.

The movie also has a major plot twist that for a change, I did not see coming -- at all.

I give Crazy, Stupid Love a "worth going out and seeing in theatres" rating. :) Oh, and another nice little surprise in this movie was one of the main secondary characters was a former contestant from America's Next Top Model, Analeigh Tipton. I just looked her up and it says she placed third in "cycle 11). And... drumroll... she was good in this. I totally believed her. And she has an important pivotal part.

It was so nice to see movies with smart romances that were also entertaining.

What’s Up with all the Serial Killers?

The other night at a dinner party, one of my friends asked why it is we’re all so fascinated with serial killers. After all, they’re evil. They’re twisted. They’re not anyone we would or should admire. We clearly are fascinated, however.. If there were as many serial killers out there as there are in books, on TV and in the movies, I don’t there would be many of us left.

I really didn’t have a ready answer as to why we’re so fascinated. There are a lot of theories about our fascination with serial killers. A lot of people refer to them as the rock stars of the homicide world and I suppose they do get a lot of news and media coverage, but I don’t think that’s it. I think they’re the rock stars because they fascinate us, not the other way around.

I read a few articles that posited a case that we are jealous of serial killers, of the boldness of their actions, of their willingness to do what we only think about doing. This worried a whole more about the people writing those articles than it did even about serial killers. Jealous? I don’t think so. Revolted by? More likely.

I think what fascinates me about serial killers is how easily they seem to live among us. The idea that such incredible evil might be lurking underneath the too polite exterior of the guy in the house down the street is both terrifying and mesmerizing. We all know the cliché. He was so quiet. He kept to himself. I have neighbors like that. Are there bodies in their basements?

As an author, I always want to understand people’s hidden lives. I don’t think there’s too much more hidden than the inner life of a serial killer. What is it about serial killers that fascinates you?

Visualization and Terminology

I am in the process of taking an epic break from writing. Between the madness of summer and packing for a two month trip to New Zealand and Fiji, I've only had one day to write in the last two months. But man-oh-man what a day. A break through day. Not in word count but I finally got past this block I've had about my book.

When things are going well in a book scenes stack up in my head like building blocks. That's how I see it. Building blocks with these little threads hanging off and I tie the threads to different building blocks in my book. Those would be subplots and tangents and character quirks.

When things aren't going well it's like walking through a cave. Light is coming in behind me so I can see around myself, but up ahead - a big nothing. A big dark nothing. And I keep walking and walking hoping I'll find a light switch somewhere.

So, after writing roughly half a book in the dark, waiting for something to tie everything together, I finally got to a place where my scenes started stacking up and I got the threads out and started to make it work.

I was feeling really good about this and was telling my husband about it. I rarely get the "WTF" looks from him about writing. We've been together a long time and that whole time I've been a writer, so he knows the drill. But man explaining the building blocks and the threads I got the look.

So, how do you visualize your work? What's your insane terminology? Come on...make me feel less crazy!

Stuff

There is a character in Clueless, a really great movie and her response at one point is "stuff", but the way she drawls it, and the expression on her face as she says it has always stuck in my head and when I'm at a loss for something to say, my response is always "stuff".

how the hell do you follow up a post in identity and trilogy arcs that namechecks not one, but two amazing craft books with anything but "stuff"?

So here are my inane, random thoughts for the week.

first off, has anyone out there read the Karen Marie Moning fae series? Seriously, I'm glad I'm reading it now, because if I'd had to wait a year between books, I might have been genuinely annoyed. Love the books, hate the cliffhanger endings to each of them. (Molly, am on the last one, Thrones is next)

Am stupidly excited that Bachelor Pad is starting on Monday. Sad, I know. As a show it pretty much sums up the worst of humanity and I'm still going to watch, because while I gave up on the Bachelor stuff a long time ago, this show has no qualms about what it is, it knows, it's not afraid to investigate the worst of what fame whores will do to stay on Tv and because of that I'm in.

And then I'll cleanse my palate with a little So you think you can dance, because it's on the opposite end of the scale and I'm afraid that when it's over all I'll be left with is Bachelor pad to watch on TV.

Sad, I know. I should probably get out of the house more often. Anyone else stuck in a summer TV rut... especially now that True Blood is letting us down. Maybe this is just a sign that I should be watching less TV and exercising more...

Identity, Essence and Trilogy Story Arcs

So, my latest project is a trilogy and I'm just getting going on Book 2. Writing a trilogy is moderately terrifying to me, because I've read some great ones and others that I've given up on after book one or soon into Book 2. The trick is to keep escalating the stakes/tension while still having them as high as they possibly can be in each book (not holding back). So, I'm a little nervous heading into Book 2.

I already have a fairly detailed synopsis for Book 2 and a sketchy one for Book 3 (which both went out on submission with the manuscript for Book 1 -- and I hope to announce exciting news about that soon -- probably in September) but before I got too far into the second book, I wanted to stop and do a little brainstorming.

If you read this blog often you might know that I can hate brainstorming my own stories with other people. But this "hate" is really only true if I'm not ready for input yet. I like to have the basic world/plot/characters, and the overall kind of story I want to tell, firm in my mind before I let other people into my brain. Probably because the two people I brainstorm with most often are AWESOME at story ideas and I end up feeling as if their ideas are better than mine, or things head off in the direction of the books they'd write given the same idea, not the book I'd write... And then I start emitting "back off" vibes and they shut down... and little brainstorming happens... (And we drink instead, which is good, too...)

Anyway... Monday night we did a little brainstorming for my Book 2 and 3 and it was pretty awesome. I already had a 10 + page synopsis for one and a 5+ page one for the other... so really it wasn't about coming up with stories, it was about making them better. Adding some surprises. Taking out the weak/obvious choices and plot points, most of which were the first things that came to mind when I wrote the synopses (very quickly) (under pressure) before we sent the manuscript to I'm not allowed to say who...

Anyway, one of the coolest moments for me (because I'm a total craft nerd, okay: nerd nerd) was when I realized one of the ideas we came up with, or an epiphany I had during our discussion, fit so well with Michael Hauge's Identity to Essence character arc method.

Now, he teaches it in the context of a single story (screenplay or novel) but what I realized was that it was (hopefully) going to fit for me across the three book story arc with one particular bit of her character growth.

If you've never heard Michael Hauge speak, or read one of his books, or bought one of his DVD's => DO! Now!!   Here's a handy link. Writing Screenplays That Sell


But in a nutshell, the identity to essence concept is that over the course of a story, a character moves from who they think they are/how they see themselves (their identity), to their true selves (their essence). And the truly changed character emerges when the identity and essence meld. (At least I think that's what he says... This isn't sounding right to me now. If I'm wrong, I don't want to know right now, because I'm still high on my epiphany.)

Okay, I broke down and looked it up. I was merging Michael Hauge's Identity/Essence concept with the late Blake Snyder's Thesis/Antithesis/Synthesis concept. Or what he calls the thematic progression of the hero's journey. (Blake Snyder's Save The Cat!. Go buy it. Now!!!)  Actually, I think my epiphany fits even better with Snyder's verbiage, so I'll go with that. ;)

What I realized that while each of my books has an internal character arc itself (I hope), the overall trilogy will have one, too. Yay! In the first book, the protagonist, Glory,  completely defines herself by one particular trait (a power she has). Which could be defined as her "identity", but it's also the "Thesis" in terms of this overall trilogy character arc. It's who she believes she is and for that particular trait, she pretty much still believes that trait defines her throughout Book 1.

In the second book, she'll have rejected her identity, that is: she'll be doing all she can do deny that she's defined by that trait (power) and she'll be essentially rejecting/denying it. So, to use Snyder's terms, this will be her antithesis stage -- which I think will continue on into the early parts of Book 3.
Then, I hope, during the course of the third book, she'll find the balance and be in her "essence", to use Hauge's term, or she'll find Synthesis to use Snyder's. To quote him, "...the hero gains the knowledge to combine what was and its opposite to form a synthesis of everything he has learned." (See why I think Snyder's works better? Because it merges the two... And she can learn she can be both her identity and her essence... or that her identity doesn't completely define her...)

I don't know why this got me so excited. But sometimes it helps me to see my your story in an overall way that makes sense. Helps in those rare instances where one can glimpse the forest and not just all the trees.

Will this hold up as I write books 2 and 3? Who knows. Ask me again in a month when I'm neck deep in my first draft and whining about how hard it is to write a book. Because you know I will.  ;)

Too Much 'Magination

So yesterday morning when I was out running, I almost stepped on a dead rat. I was coming around the corner and there it was and I had to do a little leap to avoid landing right on it.

No biggie, right? Oh, yes. Biggie. I couldn't stop thinking about the stupid rat. I couldn't stop imagining what it would have been like if I hadn't noticed it (I'm often more than a little oblivious out there) and had stepped on it. I kept thinking about how it would have squished, how I would have slipped, how the hair and the guts would have been embedded in the tread of my shoe. I had to stop running and do some deep breathing because I was literally making myself sick.

I got home, showered and headed off to work, but my stomach would not stop rolling and I could not stop imagining the squish and the crunch and the guts and the hair and the slipping and the smell. I was so nauseous that I had to go home and curl up in bed with tea and toast.

It was totally a case of too much imagination. I rarely have this happen (although I'm realizing now that this is sort of related to last week's post about the abduction on the bike path). I always feel like life is so crazy that I don't have to make anything up. This time . . .definitely too much 'magination. Have you ever sabotaged yourself that way?