Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts

Thursday, October 17, 2024

Love and Russian Literature and Somerset Maugham

The story "Love and Russian Literature" by Somerset Maugham is based on Maugham's own experience as a secret agent for Britain, as indeed are all the stories in his novel Ashenden: Or the Secret Agent, published in 1929.

Maugham's dry, satirical style is appropriate for a book about spies who range from incompetent to completely clueless. (This was indeed the state of affairs for British military intelligence during WWI.)

The character of Anastasia Alexandrovna Leonidov was based on Alexandra Kropotkin, daughter of the famous Russian anarchist, Pyotr Kropotkin. Maugham knew her in London, and even had a brief affair with her. And, in line with the story, Maugham did indeed travel to Petrograd just prior to the Russian Revolution. 

Other than changing the names, I have to wonder how much in this story is actually fiction. Or is it simply a memoir, recorded through the eyes of someone whose self-mockery extends to all human endeavors? 

(This story contains a line that makes me laugh out loud every time I read it. See if you can spot it.)

Photo: Afisha, London/Midjourney

_______________________________________

"Love and Russian Literature" from Ashenden: Or the Secret Agent, by Somerset Maugham

* * *

When Ashenden found himself in his bedroom at the hotel and, for the first time for it seemed an age, alone, he sat down and looked about him. He had not the energy to start immediately to unpack. How many of these hotel bedrooms had he known since the beginning of the war, grand or shabby, in one place and one land after another! It seemed to him that he had been living in his luggage for as long as he could remember. He was weary. He asked himself how he was going to set about the work that he had been sent to do. He felt lost in the immensity of Russia and very solitary. He had protested when he was chosen for this mission, it looked too large an order, but his protests were ignored. He was chosen not because those in authority thought him particularly suited for the job, but because there was no one to be found who was more suited. There was a knock at the door and Ashenden, pleased to make use of the few words of the language he knew, called out in Russian. The door was opened. He sprang to his feet.

"Come in, come in," he cried. "I'm awfully glad to see you."

Three men entered. He knew them by sight, since they had travelled on the same boat with him from San Francisco to Yokohama, but following their instructions no communications had passed between them and Ashenden. They were Czechs, exiled from their country for their revolutionary activity and long settled in America, who had been sent over to Russia to help Ashenden in his mission and put him in touch with Professor Z., whose authority over the Czechs in Russia was absolute. Their chief was a certain Dr. Egon Orth, a tall thin man, with a little grey head; he was minister to some church in the Middle West and a doctor of divinity; but he had abandoned his cure to work for the liberation of his country. Ashenden had the impression that he was an intelligent fellow who would not put too fine a point on matters of conscience. A parson with a fixed idea has this advantage over common men that he can persuade himself of the Almighty's approval for almost any goings on. Dr. Orth had a merry twinkle in his eye and a dry humour.

Ashenden had had two secret interviews with him in Yokohama and had learnt that Professor Z., though eager to free his country from the Austrian rule and since he knew that this could only come about by the downfall of the Central Powers with the allies body and soul, yet had scruples; he would not do things that outraged his conscience, all must be straightforward and aboveboard, and so some things that it was necessary to do had to be done without his knowledge. His influence was so great that his wishes could not be disregarded, but on occasion it was felt better not to let him know too much of what was going on.

Dr. Orth had arrived in Petrograd a week before Ashenden and now put before him what he had learned of the situation. It seemed to Ashenden that it was critical and if anything was to be done it must be done quickly. The army was dissatisfied and mutinous, the Government under the weak Kerensky was tottering and held power only because no one else had the courage to seize it, famine was staring the country in the face and already the possibility had to be considered that the Germans would march on Petrograd. The ambassadors of Great Britain and the United States had been apprised of Ashenden's coming, but his mission was secret even from them, and there were particular reasons why he could demand no assistance from them. He arranged with Dr. Orth to make an appointment with Professor Z. so that he could learn his views and explain to him that he had the financial means to support any scheme that seemed likely to prevent the catastrophe that the Allied governments foresaw of Russia's making a separate peace. But he had to get in touch with influential persons in all classes. Mr. Harrington, with his business proposition and his letters to Ministers of State, would be thrown in contact with members of the Government and Mr. Harrington wanted an interpreter. Dr. Orth spoke Russian almost as well as his own language and it struck Ashenden that he would be admirably suited to the post. He explained the circumstances to him and it was arranged that while Ashenden and Mr. Harrington were at luncheon Dr. Orth should come in, greeting Ashenden as though he had not seen him before, and be introduced to Mr. Harrington; then Ashenden, guiding the conversation, would suggest to Mr. Harrington that the heavens had sent in Dr. Orth the ideal man for his purpose.

But there was another person on whom Ashenden had fixed as possibly useful to him and now he said:

"Have you ever heard of a woman called Anastasia Alexandrovna Leonidov? She's the daughter of Alexander Denisiev."

"I know all about him of course."

"I have reason to believe she's in Petrograd. Will you find out where she lives and what she's doing?"

"Certainly."

Dr. Orth spoke in Czech to one of the two men who accompanied him. They were sharp-looking fellows, both of them, one was tall and fair and the other was short and dark, but they were younger than Dr. Orth and Ashenden understood that they were there to do as he bade them. The man nodded, got up, shook hands with Ashenden and went out.

"You shall have all the information possible this afternoon."

"Well, I think there's nothing more we can do for the present," said Ashenden. "To tell you the truth I haven't had a bath for eleven days and I badly want one."

Ashenden had never quite made up his mind whether the pleasure of reflection was better pursued in a railway carriage or in a bath. So far as the act of invention was concerned he was inclined to prefer a train that went smoothly and not too fast, and many of his best ideas had come to him when he was thus traversing the plains of France; but for the delight of reminiscence or the entertainment of embroidery upon a theme already in his head he had no doubt that nothing could compare with a hot bath. He considered now, wallowing in soapy water like a water-buffalo in a muddy pond, the grim pleasantry of his relations with Anastasia Alexandrovna Leonidov.

In these stories no more than the barest suggestion has been made that Ashenden was capable on occasions of the passion ironically called tender. The specialists in this matter, those charming creatures who make a business of what philosophers know is but a diversion, assert that writers, painters and musicians, all in short who are connected with the arts, in the relation of love cut no very conspicuous figure. There is much cry but little wool. They rave or sigh, make phrases and strike many a romantic attitude, but in the end, loving art or themselves (which with them is one and the same thing) better than the object of their emotion offer a shadow when the said object, with the practical common sense of the sex, demands a substance. It may be so and this may be the reason (never before suggested) why women in their souls look upon art with such a virulent hatred. Be this as it may, Ashenden in the last twenty years had felt his heart go pit-a-pat because of one charming person after another. He had had a good deal of fun and had paid for it with a great deal of misery, but even when suffering most acutely from the pangs of unrequited love he had been able to say to himself, albeit with a wry face, after all, it's grist to the mill.

Anastasia Alexandrovna Leonidov was the daughter of a revolutionary who had escaped from Siberia after being sentenced to penal servitude for life and had settled in England. He was an able man and had supported himself for thirty years by the activity of a restless pen and had even made himself a distinguished position in English letters. When Anastasia Alexandrovna reached a suitable age she married Vladimir Semenovich Leonidov, also an exile from his native country, and it was after she had been married to him for some years that Ashenden made her acquaintance. It was at the time when Europe discovered Russia. Everyone was reading the Russian novelists, the Russian dancers captivated the civilized world, and the Russian composers set shivering the sensibility of persons who were beginning to want a change from Wagner. Russian art seized upon Europe with the virulence of an epidemic of influenza. New phrases became the fashion, new colours, new emotions, and the highbrows described themselves without a moment's hesitation as members of the intelligentsia. It was a difficult word to spell but an easy one to say. Ashenden fell like the rest, changed the cushions of his sitting-room, hung an eikon on the wall, read Chekhov and went to the ballet.

Anastasia Alexandrovna was by birth, circumstances and education very much a member of the intelligentsia. She lived with her husband in a tiny house near Regent's Park and here all the literary folk in London might gaze with humble reverence at pale-faced bearded giants who leaned against the wall like caryatids taking a day off; they were revolutionaries to a man and it was a miracle that they were not in the mines of Siberia. Women of letters tremulously put their lips to a glass of vodka. If you were lucky and greatly favoured you might shake hands there with Diaghileff and now and again, like a peach-blossom wafted by the breeze, Pavlova herself hovered in and out. At this time Ashenden's success had not been so great as to affront the highbrows; he had very distinctly been one of them in his youth, and though some already looked askance, others (optimistic creatures with a faith in human nature) still had hopes of him. Anastasia Alexandrovna told him to his face that he was a member of the intelligentsia. Ashenden was quite ready to believe it. He was in a state when he was ready to believe anything. He was thrilled and excited. It seemed to him that at last he was about to capture that illusive spirit of romance that he had so long been chasing. Anastasia Alexandrovna had fine eyes, and a good, though for these days, too voluptuous figure, high cheek bones and a snub nose (this was very Tartar), a wide mouth full of large square teeth, and a pale skin. She dressed somewhat flamboyantly. In her dark melancholy eyes Ashenden saw the boundless steppes of Russia, and the Kremlin with its pealing bells, and the solemn ceremonies of Easter at St. Isaac's, and forests of silver beeches and the Nevsky Prospekt; it was astonishing how much he saw in her eyes. They were round and shining and slightly protuberant like those of a Pekinese. They talked together of Alyosha in the Brothers Karamazov, of Natasha in War and Peace, of Anna Karenina and of Fathers and Sons.

Ashenden soon discovered that her husband was quite unworthy of her and presently learned that she shared his opinion. Vladimir Semenovich was a little man with a large, long head that looked as though it had been pulled like a piece of liquorice, and he had a great shock of unruly Russian hair. He was a gentle, unobtrusive creature and it was hard to believe that the Czarist government had really feared his revolutionary activities. He taught Russian and wrote for papers in Moscow. He was amiable and obliging. He needed these qualities, for Anastasia Alexandrovna was a woman of character; when she had a toothache Vladimir Semenovich suffered the agonies of the damned and when her heart was wrung by the suffering of her unhappy country Vladimir Semenovich might well have wished he had never been born. Ashenden could not help admitting that he was a poor thing, but he was so harmless that he conceived quite a liking for him, and when in due course he had disclosed his passion to Anastasia Alexandrovna and to his joy found it was returned he was puzzled to know what to do about Vladimir Semenovich. Neither Anastasia Alexandrovna nor he felt that they could live another minute out of one another's pockets, and Ashenden feared that, with her revolutionary views and all that, she would never consent to marry him; but somewhat to his surprise, and very much to his relief, she accepted the suggestion with alacrity.

"Would Vladimir Semenovich let himself be divorced, do you think?" he asked, as he sat on the sofa, leaning against cushions the colour of which reminded him of raw meat just gone bad, and held her hand.

"Vladimir adores me," she answered. "It'll break his heart."

"He's a nice fellow, I shouldn't like him to be very unhappy. I hope he'll get over it."

"He'll never get over it. That is the Russian spirit. I know that when I leave him he'll feel that he has lost everything that made life worth living for him. I've never known anyone so wrapped up in a woman as he is in me. But of course he wouldn't want to stand in the way of my happiness. He's far too great for that. He'll see that when it's a question of my own self-development I haven't the right to hesitate. Vladimir will give me my freedom without question."

At that time the divorce law in England was even more complicated and absurd than it is now and in case she was not acquainted with its peculiarities Ashenden explained to Anastasia Alexandrovna the difficulties of the case. She put her hand gently on his.

"Vladimir would never expose me to the vulgar notoriety of the divorce court. When I tell him that I have decided to marry you he will commit suicide."

"That would be terrible," said Ashenden.

He was startled, but thrilled. It was really very much like a Russian novel and he saw the moving and terrible pages, pages and pages, in which Dostoievsky would have described the situation. He knew the lacerations his characters would have suffered, the broken bottles of champagne, the visits to the gypsies, the vodka, the swoonings, the catalepsy and the long, long speeches everyone would have made. It was all very dreadful and wonderful and shattering.

"It would make us horribly unhappy," said Anastasia Alexandrovna, "but I don't know what else he could do. I couldn't ask him to live without me. He would be like a ship without a rudder or a car without a carburettor. I know Vladimir so well. He will commit suicide."

"How?" asked Ashenden, who had the realist's passion for the exact detail.

"He will blow his brains out."

Ashenden remembered Rosmerholm. In his day he had been an ardent Ibsenite and had even flirted with the notion of learning Norwegian so that he might, by reading the master in the original, get at the secret essence of his thought. He had once seen Ibsen in the flesh drink a glass of Munich beer.

"But do you think we could ever pass another easy hour if we had the death of that man on our conscience?" he asked. "I have a feeling that he would always be between us."

"I know we shall suffer, we shall suffer dreadfully," said Anastasia Alexandrovna, "but how can we help it? Life is like that. We must think of Vladimir. There is his happiness to be considered too. He will prefer to commit suicide."

She turned her face away and Ashenden saw that the heavy tears were coming down her cheeks. He was much moved. For he had a soft heart and it was dreadful to think of poor Vladimir lying there with a bullet in his brain.

These Russians, what fun they have!

But when Anastasia Alexandrovna had mastered her emotion she turned to him gravely. She looked at him with her humid, round and slightly protuberant eyes.

"We must be quite sure that we're doing the right thing," she said. "I should never forgive myself if I'd allowed Vladimir to commit suicide and then found I'd made a mistake. I think we ought to make sure that we really love one another."

"But don't you know?" exclaimed Ashenden in a low, tense voice. "I know."

"Let's go over to Paris for a week and see how we get on. Then we shall know."

Ashenden was a trifle conventional and the suggestion took him by surprise. But only for a moment. Anastasia was wonderful. She was very quick and she saw the hesitation that for an instant troubled him.

"Surely you have no bourgeois prejudices?" she said.

"Of course not," he assured her hurriedly, for he would much sooner have been thought knavish than bourgeois, "I think it's a splendid idea."

"Why should a woman hazard her whole life on a throw? It's impossible to know what a man is really like till you've lived with him. It's only fair to give her the opportunity to change her mind before it's too late."

"Quite so," said Ashenden.

Anastasia Alexandrovna was not a woman to let the grass grow under her feet and so, having made their arrangements forthwith, on the following Saturday they started for Paris.

"I shall not tell Vladimir that I am going with you," she said. "It would only distress him."

"It would be a pity to do that," said Ashenden.

"And if at the end of the week I come to the conclusion that we've made a mistake he need never know anything about it."

"Quite so," said Ashenden.

They met at Victoria station.

"What class have you got?" she asked him.

"First."

"I'm glad of that. Father and Vladimir travel third on account of their principles, but I always feel sick on a train and I like to be able to lean my head on somebody's shoulder. It's easier in a first-class carriage."

When the train started Anastasia Alexandrovna said she felt dizzy, so she took off her hat and leaned her head on Ashenden's shoulder. He put his arm round her waist.

"Keep quite still, won't you?" she said.

When they got on the boat she went down to the ladies' cabin, and at Calais was able to eat a very hearty meal, but when they got into the train she took off her hat again and rested her head on Ashenden's shoulder. He thought he would like to read and took up a book.

"Do you mind not reading?" she said. "I have to be held and when you turn the pages it makes me feel all funny."

Finally they reached Paris and went to a little hotel on the Left Bank that Anastasia Alexandrovna knew of. She said it had atmosphere. She could not bear those great big grand hotels on the other side; they were hopelessly vulgar and bourgeois.

"I'll go anywhere you like," said Ashenden, "as long as there's a bathroom."

She smiled and pinched his cheek.

"How adorably English you are. Can't you do without a bathroom for a week? My dear, my dear, you have so much to learn."

They talked far into the night about Maxim Gorki and Karl Marx, human destiny, love and the brotherhood of man; and drank innumerable cups of Russian tea, so that in the morning Ashenden would willingly have breakfasted in bed and got up for luncheon; but Anastasia Alexandrovna was an early riser. When life was so short and there was so much to do it was a sinful thing to have breakfast a minute after half-past eight. They sat down in a dingy little dining-room the windows of which showed no signs of having been opened for a month. It was full of atmosphere. Ashenden asked Anastasia Alexandrovna what she would have for breakfast.

"Scrambled eggs," she said.

She ate heartily. Ashenden had already noticed that she had a healthy appetite. He supposed it was a Russian trait: you could not picture Anna Karenina making her midday meal off a bath-bun and a cup of coffee, could you?

After breakfast they went to the Louvre and in the afternoon they went to the Luxembourg. They dined early in order to go to the Comédie Française; then they went to a Russian cabaret where they danced. When next morning at eight-thirty they took their places in the dining-room and Ashenden asked Anastasia Alexandrovna what she fancied, her reply was:

"Scrambled eggs."

"But we had scrambled eggs yesterday," he expostulated.

"Let's have them again to-day," she smiled.

"All right."

They spent the day in the same manner except that they went to the Carnavalet instead of the Louvre and the Musée Guimet instead of the Luxembourg. But when the morning after in answer to Ashenden's enquiry Anastasia Alexandrovna again asked for scrambled eggs, his heart sank.

"But we had scrambled eggs yesterday and the day before," he said.

"Don't you think that's a very good reason to have them again to-day?"

"No, I don't."

"Is it possible that your sense of humour is a little deficient this morning?" she asked. "I eat scrambled eggs every day. It's the only way I like them."

"Oh, very well. In that case of course we'll have scrambled eggs."

But the following morning he could not face them.

"Will you have scrambled eggs as usual?" he asked her.

"Of course," she smiled affectionately, showing him two rows of large square teeth.

"All right, I'll order them for you, I shall have mine fried."

The smile vanished from her lips.

"Oh?" She paused a moment. "Don't you think that's rather inconsiderate? Do you think it's fair to give the cook unnecessary work? You English, you're all the same, you look upon servants as machines. Does it occur to you that they have hearts like yours, the same feelings and the same emotions? How can you be surprised that the proletariat are seething with discontent when the bourgeoisie like you are so monstrously selfish?"

"Do you really think that there'll be a revolution in England if I have my eggs in Paris fried rather than scrambled?"

She tossed her pretty head in indignation.

"You don't understand. It's the principle of the thing. You think it's a jest, of course I know you're being funny, I can laugh at a joke as well as anyone, Chekhov was well-known in Russia as a humourist; but don't you see what is involved? Your whole attitude is wrong. It's a lack of feeling. You wouldn't talk like that if you had been through the events of 1905 in Petersburg. When I think of the crowds in front of the Winter Palace kneeling in the snow while the Cossacks charged them, women and children! No, no, no."

Her eyes filled with tears and her face was all twisted with pain. She took Ashenden's hand.

"I know you have a good heart. It was just thoughtless on your part and we won't say anything more about it. You have imagination. You're very sensitive. I know. You'll have your eggs done in the same way as mine, won't you?"

"Of course," said Ashenden.

He ate scrambled eggs for breakfast every morning after that. The waiter said: "Monsieur aime les œufs brouillés." At the end of the week they returned to London. He held Anastasia Alexandrovna in his arms, her head resting on his shoulder, from Paris to Calais and again from Dover to London. He reflected that the journey from New York to San Francisco took five days. When they arrived at Victoria and stood on the platform waiting for a cab she looked at him with her round, shining and slightly protuberant eyes.

"We've had a wonderful time, haven't we?" she said.

"Wonderful."

"I've quite made up my mind. The experiment has justified itself. I'm willing to marry you whenever you like."

But Ashenden saw himself eating scrambled eggs every morning for the rest of his life. When he had put her in a cab, he called another for himself, went to the Cunard office and took a berth on the first ship that was going to America. No immigrant, eager for freedom and a new life, ever looked upon the Statue of Liberty with more heartfelt thankfulness than did Ashenden, when on that bright and sunny morning his ship steamed into the harbour of New York. 

END

Copyright © MyMaughamCollection. All Rights Reserved

Creative Commons License

My Maugham Collection Concordance Library by MyMaughamCollection is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Wednesday, February 28, 2024

Weather: What Agents Say They Want And What They Really Want

When my daughter recommended that I read Weather, a novel by Jenny Offill, I dutifully got it from my local library. (While I always read books that my children recommend, I know better than to buy them. We have wildly divergent tastes.) As promised, it was engaging. And because it was composed entirely of short, one-paragraph, diary-like snippets thrown somewhat randomly together, it was perfect for doctors' waiting rooms, airports, and all the other venues of modern life that require casual time-killing.
 
In short, I liked it. But I would never consider putting this book on my shelf. Why? Because I could easily have written it. Stream-of-consciousness is the simplest, and laziest, form of writing. It requires no training, no "crafting," and certainly no thesaurus.

I frown upon that.

Predictably, the critics loved Weather.

"Offill takes subjects that could easily become pedantic — the tensions between self-involvement and social engagement — and makes them thrilling and hilarious and terrifying and alive," gushed New York Times reviewer Leslie Jamison. "Offill’s fragmentary structure evokes an unbearable emotional intensity: something at the core of the story that cannot be narrated directly, by straight chronology, because to do so would be like looking at the sun."

Thrilling, terrifying, hilarious, unbearably intense and like looking into the face of a gigantic ball of inconceivable energy produced by an endless stream of nuclear fusion, no less. All of these descriptions would lead you to believe that this novel has the potential to take you on a wild, unforgettable emotional ride, the likes of which you have never experienced before.

Absolutely not.

The reason I liked Weather was because it required no effort on my part to read it. I didn't have to recall who the characters were, because Offill didn't actually give us enough description to be able to identify them. (It was sort of like my meandering, elderly neighbor who constantly gossiped about Chet and Naomi, whoever they might be.) (I never did find out.) There was no descriptive prose, so I didn't have to tax my mind by imagining where these people were, or when events happened. Oh, now that I think of it, nothing actually did happen, so remembering the order of events was rendered moot. There was no plot. It was like being lost in space, enjoyable in a way that brings to mind an anesthetic haze. Or the pleasures of an opium den.

Apparently, this kind of fiction is appealing to readers. (2,300 ratings on Amazon 39,925 ratings on Goodreads - we'll get to some of those later).  

As a reader, I'm okay with Weather. But, from the point of view of someone who regularly deals with the publishing world, this book is an anomaly. It is precisely the type of a novel that agents say they don't want.

WHAT AGENTS SAY THEY WANT

This is how agents describe their perfect novel:
  • strong storytelling, unputdownable stories with characters that transcend the page
  • plot-driven work with strong world-building, character development,
  • compelling emotional stakes
  • beautiful writing, unforgettable characters, family stories, socially engaged writing,
  • compelling plots
  • unputdownable stories with bold, courageous characters who take you down an emotional journey of perseverance
  • character-driven literary explorations with efficient, stunning prose and commercially appealing plots
(In case you are wondering, all of those descriptions were lifted verbatim from agents' wish lists.)

Agents say they are looking for plot-driven, immersive, page-turners. Yet, Weather is none of those things. It is, however, a novelty. Readers like novelty. Publishers, and hence agents, don't - which is why they avoid taking a chance on new ideas.

WHAT AGENTS REALLY WANT

Agents want to make money. (Sometimes, they also want to champion writers. But that's actually quite rare.) Agents are engaged in a career that involves acting as middlemen between people who produce ideas (writers) and people who sell them (publishers). The agent is simply a go-between. It's nice when they love your work, but their purpose is to make dollar signs happen. 

Weather made dollar signs for its author, and for Alfred A. Knopf, and presumably for Offill's agent. All of that is nice. But it flies in the face of what writers want, which is to be loved and admired.



HOW WEATHER WORKS

Note: If you are anticipating a discussion of pressure fronts and how they interact with moisture, you will be disappointed.

One of the things people who study the mechanics of language - phonemics, syntax, semantics - soon realize is that the relationship between sounds and parts of speech, etc., is what confers meaning, not the sounds and words, in and of themselves. This also holds true at the macro level. If you take two unconnected sentences and place them one after the other, your mind will automatically work to link them together in order to force them to make sense. (You can try that with any two sentences that I have ever written.)

To demonstrate my point, here is a page from Weather, chosen at random:
After the election, Ben makes many small wooden things. One to organize our utensils, one to keep the trash can from wobbling. He spends hours on them. "There, I fixed it," he says.

A turtle was mugged by a gang of snails. The police came to take a report, but he couldn't help them. "It all happened so fast," he said.

And in the ether, people asking the same question again and again. To the yours-to-losers, to the both-the-samers, to the wreck-it-allers.

Happy now?

The path is getting ...  narrower. That is how Ben told me. He was doing the math in his head. 

But it could still...?
It's not possible.

And so we stayed up and watched to the end.
See what I mean? I guarantee you will find a way to make this page make sense. In fact, you will read many more pages, attempting to find a context to place this page into. You will do that because that is the function of language.

SOME ENTERTAINING THOUGHTS BY REVIEWERS

I enjoyed reading this book, mostly because it only took a couple of hours of my time. (I am compelled to read every word of books I take out of the library. It's a diagnosable condition, I'm told.)

Other people were not so generously inclined. Here are a few one-star reviews I found on Amazon.

"Boring and pointless" -  Anything that resembles a plot could be written in 10 pages- good marriage, normal child, sick brother.

Why, oh why...this book did I buy! - I am REALLY struggling to finish this book. Rarely do I buy a hardcover book when it just comes out, but I did with this one and I am disappointed. It consists mainly of random, nonsensical paragraphs page by page.

Weather: NOT a novel - "Weather " is yet another fragmented, MFA-chic, tedious narration of boring events in the life of a contemporary jaded writer.

Noun verb noun - No plot after 25%. Maybe there'll be a point later, but I don't feel much need to slog through poorly crafted prose, with no plot, a boring heroine, no deep understanding of human nature. Of course I haven't finished it and I probably won't. This may appeal to some, but it seems to be the worst thing I've read in a decade.

Impressionistic, not a novel - Impressionistic observations, thoughts, anecdotes over a period of probably a few years — a writer’s notes strung together and called a novel. Many were interesting and many were not; I finished the book, relieved to get away from the chaos.

Terribly written - I had no idea who was who and what was happening. I get stream of consciousness but this was just terrible. Check Alice Walker for ways to do that well.


IN SUM

This post had a point when I started writing it. But I find it hard to maintain a coherent train of thought after reading Weather. (When you read, you unconsciously adopt the author's writing style to your thought patterns.)

Oh yes, now I remember. 

Just write whatever you damn well want to write. Despite all protestations to the contrary, agents (and publishers, as well) want something that will make them money. That is why they almost invariably include on their wish lists a number of successful books that they want your book to emulate. They want another... (just fill in the blank with a book that has sold millions of copies). Rarely do agents (or publishers) go for novelty.

Where does that leave you, the writer? My advice is to ignore the market. Ignore what agents say they want, and sell your idea to them as if you are the best thing since sliced bread.

Because you are.

--------------------

Here are some eye-opening stats that  will boost your self-confidence:







Thursday, April 27, 2023

Writing Fiction Like Nonfiction

I abhor writing rules. If you follow them, you will produce cookie-cutter prose that sounds as if it has been written by a machine. (Although, this may be what publishers are actually looking for.) 

One of the most egregious of these rules is: "Write nonfiction like fiction." I have read the work of writers who took this advice entirely too literally. They invariably produce personal essays and memoirs laden with self-conscious turns of phrase, excessively lyrical prose, and literary devices that transform what should have been an honest account into a parody. 

Verisimilitude is the bedrock of fiction. The appearance of reality in fiction is absolutely necessary, because without it readers won't be able to identify with the characters in the story. Even for genres in which readers are required to suspend disbelief, such as fantasy and science fiction, the thoughts and emotions of the characters need to conform to what readers already know about how people operate in the real world.   

"But ... but ... but..." (I can hear the objections now) "Write nonfiction like fiction" simply means that there should be an engrossing story line, well-developed characters, and that it should fully engage the reader! That is, in fact, a description of fiction. No, let me amend that. It's a description of good fiction. There is plenty of bad fiction out there that does none of those things. Conversely, there is plenty of nonfiction that does all of those things. The main difference is that unlike fiction, readers don't have to suspend disbelief. From the moment they open the book, they are ready and willing to believe that they are reading something that is actually true not merely like ("simil") the truth.

Good narrative nonfiction, because it is firmly grounded in real life, sticks with you. It expands your knowledge and brings people you have heard of (or perhaps not) to life, with all their quirks. (I will never forget that Winston Churchill wore pale pink silk underwear - a tantalizing detail I learned from Erik Larson's book, The Splendid and the Vile.) A well-written piece of narrative fiction not only expands your knowledge, it is immersive. You will feel as if you have personally experienced the London Blitz, or that you have visited the Black Sea. That quality of immersiveness is what makes good nonfiction unforgettable.

Of course, it also helps if the writer is skilled at storytelling, which is perhaps why so many narrative nonfiction writers have had early training as journalists. In journalism, writers must answer the basic questions: Who? What? When? Where? How? and (sometimes) Why? If those questions are answered in the right order, they combine to make a story. It's no accident that so many of our great novelists - Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Hemingway, and Mark Twain, to name a few - started as journalists. 

But at the root of good storytelling is mystery. Wanting to know what happens next is what makes you turn the page. Whether it's fiction or nonfiction, any book you can't put down contains that vital element of mystery.

By reading good narrative nonfiction, fiction writers can learn a great deal about their craft. So, which nonfiction books contain all of the features essential to fiction: immersiveness, great story-telling, mystery, "characters" who come to life, believability, and, of course, beautiful writing? 

Here are four books that fulfill those criteria. 

1) The Poet and the Murderer: A True Story of Literary Crime and the Art of Forgery by Simon Worrall. If you don't think the forgery of an Emily Dickinson poem makes for a thrilling read, think again. (I have devoured this book twice, and the second time was just as luscious as the first.) Worrall (a British journalist) takes a deep dive into a forgery that turned the literary world upside down. Step by step, he follows the path of a forged poem until it ends with psychosis and murder. (Two things you would never think of associating with Emily Dickinson.) I learned a great deal about forgery from this book. But most important, I learned how to bring a dry topic to life. 

This is how Worrall starts his book: "He thought he had gone under deep enough, but as he followed the curve of the letter m, he felt a momentary tremor like the distant rumbling of an earthquake." Now that is how to begin a book about a forger. (By the way, always read prologues. Don't skip them.)

Interestingly, in the fourth chapter of the book (aptly titled, Auction Artifice), Worrall quotes the forger as saying that deceiving people gave him "a sense of power." But the power of deception can only be achieved when people are willing to suspend disbelief. The reason forgeries find willing buyers is because the forgeries themselves are imbued with the stories people want to hear - an old woman who finds a letter written by Lincoln tucked in a picture frame in her attic, a man who comes across a signed first edition of Pride and Prejudice in a rummage sale. The possession of the object therefore comes fully endowed with a desirable story, which the owner now possesses as well. Perhaps, deceiving people through giving them a story they want to hear, and allowing them to "own" it, is the ultimate power wielded by fiction writers.

2) Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible: The Surreal Heart of the New Russia by Peter Pomerantsev. I've read everything written by Pomerantsev and all I can say is that I wish he would write more. Pomerantsev is a consummate storyteller. This book explores the world of Russian reality TV in a way you will never forget. Pomerantsev, whose parents emigrated to England to avoid being sent to the gulag (ironically, for distributing Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago), returned to Moscow to spend ten years working in Russian television, specifically reality TV. And what a ride it was! Professional hit men, Kremlin propagandists, the suspicious death of a supermodel, remote Siberian towns run by  crime bosses...damn! This book took my breath away. 

His second book, This Is Not Propaganda: Adventures in the War Against Reality, is also breathtaking. He begins each chapter with a gripping biographical section on his parents, told in third person. This is a literary device which was all the more effective because it was a true story.

What I learned from these books is not just how Russian TV propaganda works, but their applicability to our own television, which suffers no less from the war against reality.

3) The Devil in the White City: Murder, Magic, and Madness at the Fair That Changed America by Erik Larson. Any book by Erik Larson (who is, predictably, a journalist) is well worth reading. Each of Larson's books contains the magical alchemy of great storytelling, people you come to know intimately, and immersiveness. And I can guarantee you won't forget what you have learned from reading any of his books. 

Among Larson's works, The Devil in the White City stands out as exemplary. The story is captivating. In addition, the writing is superb. Larson is no stranger to lyrical prose, which he uses only where it is essential. (I will never forget his description of the first skyscrapers: "the inaudible cry of overstressed steel.") And most important of all, this book has mystery. Weaving in and out of building the monumental Chicago world's fair in the face of natural disasters and catastrophe, there is the nail-biting story of hunting down a gruesome serial killer. And all of it is true

4) I can also recommend The Black Sea by Neal Ascherson, another British journalist. This book is more than a history. Ascherson also includes his own experiences, including the time he just happened to be in Crimea during the coup against Gorbachev, who had been placed under house arrest in Crimea. (That was exciting!) I found the entire book to be captivating, not least because Ascherson is a superb writer. The history of this region is fascinating, and in the hands of a wonderful writer, it is unforgettable.  

But let's not stop with nonfiction writers who are worthy of emulation. Here are two works of fiction that embody what is best about narrative nonfiction.

The Giant, O'brien by Hilary Mantel. Mantel, who sadly passed away recently, wrote several noteworthy works of historical fiction. But this book is unique. It is a marvelous combination of science (I learned a lot about surgery), fairy tales, Irish history, and the harsh realities of 18th century squalor. While fiction, this book incorporates the true story of John Hunter, England's most famous surgeon, anatomist, and advocate of the scientific method in medicine. Mantel did a careful job of researching this novel, and it shows. It's not only engrossing, it's perfectly credible.

Anthony Doerr is another writer whose prose is so transparent, so (seemingly) effortless, you are hardly aware that you are reading. Like good narrative nonfiction, his prose is natural, yet precise, and it never draws attention to itself. I've read, and loved, all of Doerr's work. But The Shell Collector is fiction that embodies what is best about good narrative nonfiction. It is instantly believable and as lovingly detailed as the shells which provide the story's anchor. Like Ascherson, Doerr has the ability to take you to another place so convincingly, you will think you've been there.

(Image: Inside/Outside: Illusion Meets Reality: Uwe Schroder, Flickr)


Wednesday, March 15, 2023

Transplants: What Is Creativity?

The act of artistic creation has puzzled artists and philosophers for centuries. The Ancient Greeks even invented an entire branch of deities to explain it: the Muses. Where does creativity come from?  Is creativity a mental process, or does it spring from the unfathomable well of inspiration? Or does it come from something else entirely? To misquote Shakespeare, “Where is creativity bred, or in the heart or in the head? How begot? How nourished?”

Jungians ascribe creativity to the “collective unconscious” – that vast sea of socio-psychological quasi-consciousness shared by all of humanity. According to Jung, this is the place where all thought originates. Anthropologists would call this “culture” −− a largely unquestioned set of shared values, beliefs, and norms formed by variety of social factors. Mystics of various stripes would call the act of creation “divine,” inspired by otherworldly forces −− gods, deities or, perhaps, demons.

The first short story I ever wrote was probably the result of  brain damage.  

Normally, when I am writing fiction, I “see” a scene. I play it in my head like a movie until it reaches a stopping point. Then it’s merely a matter of describing what I “saw.” When the next scene appears, sometimes in a dream, sometimes while I am driving or in the shower (water is wonderful for getting the creative juices to flow), I repeat the process. Fiction, which relies on imagining, is bred in my heart. 

Nonfiction requires an entirely different process. It relies on thinking. As I ponder what I want to say, phrases pop into my head. When they begin to form sentences, I start to write them down, and as I am writing, a logical sequence of thought presents itself. Nonfiction, which is a product of structured thought, is bred in my head.

But once – and only once – those two processes merged. Instead of envisioning a scene, I saw the words, literally. I woke up one morning, and in my head I saw words on a page, as if I were reading. And I didn’t just see a few words, there were whole pages. I felt a sudden compulsion to write the words down, so I got up, went to the computer, and started typing. Seventeen pages later I had “transcribed” a complete short story. It was my first work of fiction, and it left me utterly drained. It was as if I had been possessed by a demon.

At the time, I was suffering from a severe case of myalgic encephalomyelitis (also known by the absurdly inappropriate misnomer, “chronic fatigue syndrome”). ME is a neurological disease that in its severe form can be life-threatening. My case was nearly fatal. For six weeks, I had been in a hospital, where the doctors could do nothing to stop the dramatic weight loss that was killing me. Nor could they relieve the constant burning pain that made every moment unbearable. The doctors informed my mother that I was dying. She took me home, an emaciated remnant of my former self, to die in my own bed. (Spoiler alert: I didn’t die. But that’s another story.)

In this state of extremis, it is perfectly plausible that my brain’s language centers, which separately process written and verbal language, “shorted out.” (This is a gross over-simplification of how the brain processes language, but "crossed circuitry" will do nicely as a metaphor.) Instead of using my visual circuits to imagine scenes, which could then be translated into language, my brain simply transformed the act of visual imagining directly into words.

I have never repeated that creative experience, for which I am grateful. (Being possessed is not as much fun as it’s cracked up to be.) And once I had recovered from it, I was a little embarrassed by what I had written−−after all, I hadn’t composed it, some brain glitch had. So, I put the story away and didn’t make an effort to get it published. Then, a few weeks ago, a writing contest held by Backchannels caught my attention. And because I had recently won first place in the Tell Your Story writing contest for my South American memoir excerpt, “They Will Try to Kill You", I was feeling cocky. So, I entered “Transplants,” my first story, now considerably shorter than its original seventeen pages. "Transplants" didn’t win, but the editors decided to publish it anyway in their contest edition.

Why am I telling you this long story about a short story? My point is that regardless of how we create− whether the source is mystical, cultural, or the product of a neurological glitch, the origins of creativity will probably always remain a mystery. Even when we dissect the process of writing, and try to expose the inner mechanisms of creation (or its pathogenesis), we will never truly grasp the driving force that compels us to assign words to our thoughts, feelings, and experiences. No matter how we approach the process of writing, it is the compulsion to write that makes us writers.

We can't resist it.

You can read Transplants HERE.

You can read They Will Try to Kill You HERE.

(Image: Antonio Mora "En Las Nubes")

 

Wednesday, November 2, 2022

Revolutionary Road: The Art of Dialogue

I seldom come across perfect novels. I've read good novels, even great ones, but there is something about perfection that is different from great novel writing. It's simply the quality of having reached the pinnacle of what a novel is all about: the human experience, unhampered by the conventions of literature.

Richard Yates' novel, Revolutionary Road, is a perfect novel. It doesn't have an action-packed plot, filled with twists and turns. Actually, nothing of note happens until nearly the end of the book. (And then it's a doozy!) The setting is mundane, a suburb in the 1950s. The characters are people who aren't particularly passionate, or driven, or even admirable. But Yates' goal in this book is not to develop characters of intellectual or emotional depth. In fact, it's quite the reverse; His aim is to excoriate post-war suburban life, in all its shallowness, it's "hopeless emptiness," and with all its failures.

According to writers of the era, Richard Yates exemplified the "Age of Anxiety"the 20th century morass of "world wars, hatred, and collective neurosis"which he somehow manages to capture without directly addressing any of the themes of the era. Yates was greatly admired by Styron and Vonnegut as the voice of their generation. And then Yates died and was forgotten. None of his books sold more than 12,000 copies during his lifetime.

I can't imagine why. 

Revolutionary Road is brilliant. The prose is so accessible you don't realize you're reading. The descriptions are evocative without descending into self-conscious lyricism. (A fallen stage curtain "that became a dull wall of green velvet, faded and streaked with dust" precisely conveys the dismal failure of a play's performance without using a single word that cries for attention.) And his characters are real; so believable that you'd swear you knew them.

As I was reading Revolutionary Road, I couldn't help asking myself: "How is he doing this?" How did Yates establish his characters so firmly, so realistically? The answer to that question lies in the fact that Yates is a master of, as one reviewer put it, "terrifyingly accurate" dialogue. Yates deftly establishes who his characters are through speech. 

What Yates successfully pulls off in his dialogue is natural-sounding speech, with all its stress patterns, rhythms, and repetitions, but without the tediousness of actual speech. Yates has a finely tuned ear, He individualizes the speech patterns of each of his characters, so you know who they are by how they sound. You hear them so clearly, it feels as if you are eavesdropping. Then he takes it one step further, letting us in on the thought processes of these charactershow they sound to themselves as they weigh what they want to say, or what they don't want to say, and their reflections on how they speak.

Does that sound boring? It isn't. It's tense, and it is frighteningly realistic, because we already know who these characters are. Not only have we met them, we may even have been some of them. 

How many couples have arguments that devolve into "You always do that..." "There you go again..." "You know how you get..."? How many couples descend into deception to cover transgression? How many weave a web of words around what they should be saying to one another, but can't? Speech is everything in this book. (When you get to the last line, that will be made crystal clear. I was left breathless.)

We don't necessarily like Yates' characters in Revolutionary Road, but I think that may have been the point. The way he delves into their inner and outer liveswith such finesse, and such detailwe can't help but identify with them. We can sympathize with them without expending the emotional effort of needing to see them in a positive light, because they are undeniably human.

As writers, it would do us good to read Revolutionary Road. This book is not only an example of how to artfully, yet without any seeming effort, establish characters through dialogue, it serves as an example of how to create transparency through using language that cuts to the heart of description without drawing attention to itself. Despite its unpretentious delivery, or, more likely, because of it, that kind of language packs a wallop. 

Read this book, writers, and then read it again. It contains a lesson worth learning: Don't let your writing get in the way of what you want to say. 

Thursday, November 1, 2018

It's November! And That Means NaNoWriMo!


It's November, and we all know what that means! (No, not turkey and mashed potatoes.) It's time to sit down and write your novel.

(Go ahead and panic. There are thousands of other writers who feel like tearing their hair out right now, same as you. But given the excellent distraught company you will be keeping, why not?)

If you have participated in National November Writing Month (NaNoWriMo) before, you will know it is an exciting, grueling, rewarding, excruciating, and __________ (insert other contradictory adjectives here) event. Writers have exactly one month to compose a 50,000-word novel. Easy-peasy!

To participate in NaNoWriMo, writers first have to sign up. (Don't worry, it's free.) There are steps to follow: 1) Fill out your profile, 2) Give your novel a title, 3) Select your region, 4) Earn badges for completing milestones, and 5) Get inspired! The NaNoWriMo site has plenty of pep talks.

There are also forums where writers can talk about outlining, character development, plot, and share their progress. NaNoWriMo acknowledges that writing is a solitary pursuit, that writing a novel, in particular, is daunting, and that having company along the way can be both inspiring and provide the necessary motivation to get that novel you've wanted to write out of your head and into the light of day.

If you want to find out more about NaNoWriMo, go to their website HERE.

And if you decide that this is it! You will write your novel in November! Don't be dismayed if you don't finish it in one month. You've gotten off to a roaring start, and that's what you needed all along.


Monday, March 12, 2018

How to Edit Your Own Manuscript

Writer's Block/Drew Coffman/CC license
You've written the last line of your book, and you have that expansive euphoria that comes with a job well done. An almost uncontrollable urge to share your accomplishment with the world washes over you. You want to show your new book to your friends, agents, publishers - or, God forbid, immediately self-publish.

Don't do it.

The first draft of anything you write needs to be your little secret. Hug it to your breast, murmur sweet nothings to its pages, but don't let anybody read it.

Why? Because it is filled with mistakes. There are errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, word choice, internal logic, voice, awkward constructions, typos. There are whole scenes you have left out, dramatic high points you have missed. There is a relationship between your characters that you have not fully developed. You may even have used impact as a verb! (AGH!)

If you think none of those things appear in your book, you are wrong. If you think nobody will pay attention to any of those minor blips, you are wrong. If you think your glorious prose will shine through, like the sun breaking through clouds of dangling participles, you are dead wrong. Left uncorrected, those errors will forever mar your work.

At this point, I may have sufficiently scared you into hiring an editor. Don't do it yet. First, give your book a once over. Maybe a twice over. Or a three times over. Take a jolly good crack at it before you send it off to be edited. (You will save yourself some money if the editor doesn't have to fix a multitude of mistakes you could have caught yourself.) Follow these steps:

1) Put your manuscript away for a few months. It will grate on you to simply park your project awhile, but I can guarantee you need a break from it in order to see it with fresh eyes. You can use the break to write something else. Or you can read a book. (Reading a good book can stimulate ideas about how to make your manuscript better. Either take notes, or make some changes on the spot.)

2) When you pick up your manuscript again, read it aloud. Reading aloud slows processing speed, allowing you to spot errors more easily. If you stumble while you are reading, revise that sentence or phrase. Stumbling means you've composed an awkward or ambiguous construction that readers will find difficult to parse.

3) Open your book to a random page to edit. Writers get "manuscript blindness" when they read their work from first to last page. It's a natural consequence of looking at something too many times combined with the inner knowledge of what comes next. To find errors you need to surprise yourself.

4) Read your first page. Pretend that your book will be judged on that page, and that page alone. (Often, readers don't even make it past the first paragraph. I know agents don't.) Polish that page until you can see your face in it.

5) Repeat step 4 for every page in your book.

Now you can show your manuscript to trusted friends or beta readers. After you have gotten enough feedback to hone your book even further, you can begin searching for an editor. At this point, you will have a much better idea of what kind of editor you need (line editor, proofreader, or, if you are still stuck on structural components, a developmental editor). This article will help you find the editor who is right for you: Editing a Self-Published Book

When, at long last, you send your book to an editor, she, or he, will find errors, because there are always errors. But you will have had the chance to take care of plot holes, character motivation, missing scenes, and all those things that only you, the author, can fix.

Thursday, October 12, 2017

Becoming a Better Writer: Getting Critiqued

Updated 6/11/25

Like any other art form, writing is essentially a solitary pursuit. However, the end product can be greatly enhanced by feedback. For a writer, getting critiques is an essential part of the writing process.

Critiquing can be considered an art form unto itself. In order to write a good critique, you have to understand the elements of fiction: characterization, character development, plot, story structure, pacing, conflict, descriptive writing, scene structure.

There are also larger editorial considerations, such as whether the characters' motivations make sense, if plot points seem natural or contrived, and if the internal logic is consistent.

There are no hard and fast rules for any of these things (and it would be a mistake to utilize a checklist of "writing rules," because the best writing ignores them), but simply keep these points in mind when something makes your "eyes stop." If you are tempted to stop reading, it's usually because the author has hit a snag. It's up to the person writing the critique to figure out exactly what that snag is.

The object of the critique is not simply to point out flaws, but to suggest how those flaws can be addressed. The whole purpose of a critique is to make a work better, and to bring out the best in the writing, not drag it down.

Here are some critique groups that have been of benefit to both aspiring and professional authors. Several have been in existence for over twenty years, which means they have earned the trust of writers.

__________________

Critters

Critters is a member of the Critique.org family of on-line workshops/critique groups, and is for serious writers of Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror. You get your work critiqued in exchange for critiquing the work of others, both of which are invaluable ways to improve your writing. It's run by Andrew Burt, former vice-president of SFWA and his "army of software minions." Critters is free and is funded solely by donations.

In addition to chapter-by-chapter critiques, Critters also offers whole novel critiques. (Read about novel critiques HERE.) Novelists should make a "Request for Dedicated Readers." An RDR is like an ordinary entry in the queue (it's often added to a chapter group), but when that entry comes up for reading, it becomes a request for Critters to devote themselves to reading your entire novel. Your RDR generally consists of a description of the novel and any special constraints unique to you (e.g., a publisher's deadline).
__________________

Critique Circle

Critique Circle operates on a format common to many critique groups: you earn credits by critiquing works in order to get your own work critiqued. Members submit their stories to the story queue, and "pay" credits to do so. Only a certain number of stories will be displayed each week, so you may have to wait a week or two for yours to come up, depending on how much queue activity there is. When a story comes up for critique, other members can read it and submit their critiques to the author, thus earning credits. Stories stay in the queue for a week, which runs Wednesday to Wednesday.

To help with queue wait times, there is a Newbie Queue. Your first story must be submitted here and, if you wish, you can submit up to three in total before moving to the other queues. When you join the site, you get two free credits, and you can use these towards the "cost" of posting your first story. Additional credits are earned by critiquing the work of other writers.

Stories in the Newbie Queue can receive up to five full critiques, while stories in the other queues can receive an unlimited number of critiques. Once your story in the newbie queue has received 5 critiques of more than 150 words each it will be put into older submissions.

When posting a story, authors have some choice in who can view their story. For example, some authors will specify that only people who have been members of this site for a month can read their story. That’s why you may not be able to view all the stories in the queue.
__________________

Online Writing Workshop for Science Fiction, Fantasy and Horror

Charges a membership fee of $49 a year. The first month is free.

The Online Writing Workshop is open to all writers of science fiction, fantasy, or horror, both aspiring and professional. Writers improve here through the reviews and ratings given their works by other writers, and through reviewing the work of others.

After becoming a member, you may submit your work, review the work of others, and participate in workshop discussions. Other members will also be able to read, rate, and review the work you submit.

Since reviews and ratings are what improve people's writing, the workshop requires that you contribute reviews in order to be allowed to post your own work. And because all members should have a good chance of getting their work reviewed, there is a limit on how many pieces any member can submit at once.

You need four review points to post an active submission. You're given four review points when you join the workshop, so you can post your first submission before contributing any reviews. After that, you earn one review point for each substantive review you post, with a bonus point awarded if that submission has zero reviews.

[Note: Many speculative fiction writers swear by the Online Workshop.]

You can read their member agreement HERE.

__________________

Scribophile

Scribophile is one of the largest and most active writing groups online. Here you can:
  • Post your writing to get detailed, insightful feedback from other writers on how to improve it;
  • Chat and discuss with other writers from around the world in their writing forums;
  • Network with like-minded writers in special-purpose writing groups.

Scribophile also runs contests, maintains a blog, and offers writing advice.

The "currency" of Scribophile is karma. You earn karma points by writing critiques for the writing of others, and by having other members react positively to your critiques by marking them “constructive and enlightening." You earn more karma points for critiquing work in one of the spotlights versus critiquing work that’s not in one of the spotlights. The longer the critique, the more points you’ll earn.

You spend karma points on posting your writing for critique, giving virtual gifts to other members, and for a few other things around the site.

It costs 5 karma points to post a new work for critique. Each post should be no longer than about 3,000 words; longer work can be posted in parts and linked together during the posting process. Usually members post chapter by chapter, or a single short story or flash fiction per post.

You can read a guide that explains how to use Scribophile in detail HERE.
__________________

The Internet Writing Workshop


The Internet Writing Workshop is a set of mailing lists (groups) that communicate in English by email. The IWW is:
  • A community where writers can submit and critique written works.
  • A forum to discuss and get help on all aspects of writing.
  • A public service educational organization, staffed by volunteers and free of charge.

The Workshop is open to all styles and genres of writing: literary fiction, genre fiction, poetry, children's writing, essays, newspaper articles, scripts, you name it. Members do not need to be published writers, only to be serious about writing and about wanting to improve.

Because some of the posted material may be controversial or adult in nature, all members must be 18 years or older. The IWW has quite a few critiquing and discussion lists.
__________________

Writer's Infusion

This group takes critiquing to a whole new level. You can actually watch the group do their critique live, including a reading of the pages being critiqued. You also have the option of reading the original pages, as well as the edited pages.

I found this approach to critiquing to be utterly fascinating. Listening to the reading and to the discussion, and then reading the edits was an immersive experience. Interestingly, I completely disagreed with several aspects of the critique. (The critique was Of Men and Mice, a children's book by James Kabler. James, if you are reading this, don't change your first line!)

This is how it works: If you have written a short story, novel, novella, memoir, screenplay or essay, send up to five consecutive pages (no more than 1,500 words) using the submission form on the site. They randomly choose submissions to review before each episode. Poetry and explicit scenes are not allowed. You must be older than 17 to submit!

If your submission is chosen, you'll be given the opportunity to appear on the show. But if you are camera shy, they will critique your writing without your physical presence. They will only use your name with your permission.

(I thought this was such a neat idea, I went ahead and submitted five pages of my novel!)

__________________

Inked Voices

Inked Voices personally tailors your critique group depending on how often you would like to submit, experience level, and your reading and writing preferences. Not all groups accept new members, so I would suggest researching groups before you join. Most groups are small, which is an advantage if you are seeking a setting in which you can really get to know your critique partners. Membership is not free. (You have a choice between monthly and yearly fees.) 

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

How Long Does It Take to Write a Book?

If you have set out to write a novel, a memoir, or a non-fiction book, the question "How long will this take?" almost inevitably arises - especially if you have been at it for a few months.

That question is not easily answered, because it depends entirely on what you are writing. Some projects require months of research, others only need that special "Aha!" moment when a story somehow inserts itself in the mind of the unsuspecting writer.

Now that I've claimed the question can't be answered, I am going to answer it in a most unsatisfactory manner: Like childbirth, writing a book takes as long as it takes. If you are on a manic roll, it can take a couple of months. (One of my novels took only a few weeks to write. At 90,000 words, it was an exhilarating and exhausting experience.) If you are grappling with the text, writing your book can take decades. (It has taken me twenty years, so far, to finish another one of my novels. It is only 55,000 words, so I have no idea why this book is proving so stubborn.)

If you are stuck on a project, putting it down for a while can be enormously helpful. You may find that your unconscious continues to work on it, even when you are not writing. Working on other projects is also quite helpful. I usually write two books at once. That way, when I hit a snag with one, I can simply switch off to the other.

Writing in another genre is extremely liberating. If you are a novelist, write nonfiction. If you write long form, write a short story. Write a screenplay if you have never written one. By stretching yourself in different directions, whatever roadblock preventing you from finishing your book will be removed.

The important thing is to keep writing. Write anything. It is not important what you write, it is only important that you write.

Here are some famous books whose writers either took their time, or dashed them off in a rush. As you can see, how long it took to write these books has little to do with their quality.



At one end of the spectrum, John Boyne said that he wrote the entire first draft of The Boy in the Striped Pajamas in two and a half days, barely sleeping until he finished it. At 44,800 words, that amounts to 747 words an hour. It's quite possible to dash off 700 words for a few hours - that is how many of us write our short stories - but sustaining that kind of output for days is hard to imagine.

Other books on the short end of the scale include: The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (6 days), A Clockwork Orange (3 weeks), A Study in Scarlet (3 weeks), A Christmas Carol (6 weeks), and As I lay Dying (6 weeks).

At the far end of the spectrum is J. R. R. Tolkien, who took 16 years to complete the Lord of the Rings. At 455,000 words, that amounts to 28,000 words a year, roughly the length of a novella.

Les Miserables took Victor Hugo 12 years to write, Catcher in the Rye and Gone with the Wind each took ten years, and Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone took five.

Realistically, your book should fall somewhere between Boyne's and Tolkien's.

Monday, June 8, 2015

How to Write a Synopsis

Whether you are submitting your book to an agent or directly to a publisher, a synopsis is an essential part of your submission packet.

Nobody likes writing synopses, in part because there is a natural desire on the part of writers to resist stripping their works of art down to the bare bones of plot points.

Writing a synopsis is also not particularly fun. If your strong suit is snappy dialogue or lyrical descriptions, you will be forced to leave all your little darlings behind.

The truth is you don't have to sacrifice creativity to write a synopsis. You can include descriptive adjectives and power verbs (avoid all forms of the verb "to be" and "to have" whenever possible). You can also include short dialogue if it is relevant to the plot.

How long is a synopsis?

Back in the day, synopses used to be quite long, roughly one page per every 25 pages of manuscript. (A 200-page book would have a synopsis of  8 pages.) But agents and editors are increasingly pressed for time, which means synopses have shrunk. The length now depends entirely on what the agent/editor requires.

It is a good idea to have several synopses on hand: a 3-5 paragraph synopsis (one page, or roughly 300 words), a 2-page synopsis, and a one-paragraph synopsis. Chances are the agent or house you are querying will ask for one of these.

Remember: A synopsis is a summary. It is designed to give an agent or editor a clear, concise idea of your story, not show your dexterity as a wordsmith.

Here are the basics for writing a synopsis

1) A synopsis must include all of your plot, including the ending. You can't end a synopsis with a cliffhanger or a question. "John dies" may seem like a spoiler, but that is exactly what an editor wants to know.

2) Be explicit. Details are important in a synopsis. A character should not experience "something unexpected." Say what that something is. For example,"The unexpected arrival of her father leaves Clarissa confused and angry." (It's important to include how your character feels. That provides a basis for motivation.)

3) Make sure your synopsis is structured. It must have a clear beginning, middle, and end, corresponding to the beginning, middle, and end of your book. The beginning introduces your characters, identifies the main conflict, and describes the setting. The middle outlines the main plot points. And the end resolves the conflict and tells us what happens to the characters.

4) Don't include too many twists and turns. It is not essential to include absolutely everything. If there are too many extraneous characters and subplots, it will be impossible to follow the story. Simplify wherever you can.

5) Make your synopsis stand out. If there is something unique about your story, make sure to give it the attention it deserves.

6) Write in present tense.

Before you start ...

It's a good idea to write a couple of synopses for books you did not write before you tackle your own. Like every other aspect of writing, synopsis writing is a skill, and all skills benefit from practice.

For a great list of synopsis examples, check out Writers DigestSynopsis Writing

Thursday, April 2, 2015

Reddit for Writers

Updated 11/12/24

Reddit calls itself the "front page of the internet." They may be right, at least for one demographic.

Most Reddit users (Redditors) are young, well-educated white men. Twenty-two percent of U.S. adults aged 18 to 29 years use Reddit, with an average age of 23. According to Semrush, Reddit ranks as the 9th-most-visited website in the world and 6th most-visited website in the U.S.  

Aside from being one of the best places to get the latest news, Reddit is a great resource if you know how to navigate it.

At first it may seem like a manic hodge-podge of random questions, comments, and news items. There is that, but there is also a world of specialized knowledge. (The most popular reddits, however, have nothing to do with any consistent topic.)

There is a wide range of subreddits for those who are looking for specific topics and areas of interest, some of which are well-trafficked, and some that are voices crying in the wilderness - for example, those having to do with writing. But, as it happens, sometimes a small, intimate group can be more productive than 8 million subscribers who simply want a laugh. (Funny is one of reddit's most popular subreddit.)

The best way for writers to use reddit is not as a marketing tool. It's true there are subreddits that will allow you to post your freebies, but the best use you can make of Reddit is as a source of information and/or critique.  If you are looking for publishing or marketing advice, for example, you can ask a question and get useful - and accurate - answers from professionals and from people who are willing to share their personal experience.

There are also a number of active writing critique groups on Reddit. The critiques I've read have been right on the mark, and written by people who clearly understand the craft of writing. You may even find yourself willing to offer some suggestions of your own.

So, check out the subreddit list below. 

Not on this list, but deserving of mention is /r/books. This is where books get discovered.

General

Subreddits


SubredditReadersAbout
/r/writing2.1m
/r/write20.3K
/r/shutupandwrite9,416 (Private)About
/r/KeepWriting81KAbout
/r/writers131K

Genre

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/fantasywriters371K
/r/Erotica136K
/r/comedywriting13.9K
/r/scifiwriting50.1KAbout
/r/WritersOfHorror8.8KAbout
/r/EroticWriting9.7KAbout
/r/JournalingIsArt17.6K
/r/YAwriters14.2K

Medium

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/Screenwriting1.3m
/r/webfiction1.5K
/r/yourserial151
/r/fictionmagazines186About

Skillset-specific

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/freelanceWriters86.3K
/r/Newbwriters4.7K
/r/HighSchoolWriters1.9KAbout
/r/AmateurWriting2.9K

Length

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/sixwordstories62.2K
/r/OneParagraph8.5K
/r/ShortyStories2.1K

Publishing

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/selfpublish77K
/r/epublication964
/r/coverdesign801

Critique and Workshops

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/WritersGroup29.4K
/r/LitWorkshop2.8K
/r/ShortStoriesCritique4K
/r/PracticeWriting2.4K
/r/writingfeedback1.8KAbout
/r/WriteWithMe5.4KAbout
/r/writingclinic239About

About

Prewriting

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/worldbuilding828K
/r/IAmAFiction7.5KAbout
/r/streamwriting140

Story Sharing

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/readitnow6.3K
/r/shortstoryaday4.4K

Fanfiction

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/FanFiction225K
/r/Sherlock_Fanfiction3.6K
/r/SuperWhoLock1.2K
/r/masseffectfics2.7K

Contests and Events

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/nanowrimo36.1KAbout
/r/writingcontests7.5K
/r/CampNaNoWriMo2KAbout

Number Enthusiasts

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/wordcount3K

Writing Prompts

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/WritingPrompts15.6KAbout
/r/promptoftheday14.9K
/r/creativechallenge852
/r/Artprompt2K

Gender-specific

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/femalewriters1.9K
/r/malewriters60

Inactive

SubredditReadersAbout
/r/DarkWorkshop305
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...