| |
Monday, July 21, 2008
A convention of critics
There are hundreds of science fiction (and fantasy) conventions held around the country every year, involving thousands of volunteer hours, countless airlines tickets and hotel bills, and booksellers, writers, editors, and readers coming together to talk about the field. There are conventions that include, besides books, media and gaming. There are some that are "furry"--a designation I can't speak about with authority! And there are a handful, not enough in my estimation, which are focused exclusively on books. Not writers so much, although writers are encouraged to attend and take part, but on the process of discovery, critique, analysis, and sometimes deconstruction of books.
Readercon, in Boston, is one of these latter conventions. (Others are Potlatch, in the Pacific Northwest, Armadillocon in Austin, Texas, and World Fantasy Convention, which is a movable feast.) Readercon, which is a long day's travel from my home, concluded yesterday. It was, as was my previous experience, a challenging and enlightening experience. And listening to esteemed science fiction and fantasy critics like John Clute and Paul di Filippo hold forth on the underpinnings of the genre, I came away more convinced than ever that the creator--the writer--has to tune the bulk of this information out, at least during the creative process.
I think my colleague Kay Kenyon (Bright of the Sky, A World Too Near) put it perfectly when she called the disconnect between the critic and the writer "the sacred divide". Readercon featured brilliant academics like Farah Mendelssohn, who presented a fascinating thesis on the four types of fantasy. Equally brilliant writers attended: Jonathan Lethem, James Patrick Kelly, Geoff Ryman, Elizabeth Hand, Ellen Kushner, Delia Sherman, et al--I hate leaving anyone out, but I've left out a number of them. Besides doing my own panels, I scooted around trying to sample what these genre leaders had to say. A good bit of the academic talk I simply can't understand; it's not my language.
Years ago, when I was a novice, I subscribed to an excellent review publication, The New York Review of Science Fiction. My intent was to learn all I could about the way critics and academics view speculative fiction, novels in particular. But after reading a deconstruction of one of my novels, Sing the Warmth, I found myself thinking about critics as I wrote. Such a bad idea! I was forced to let my subscription lapse, and to pick and choose carefully what critical essays I read.
I worked with many musicians, in my first career, who assiduously avoided reading their own reviews. There's something to that! The creative process needs to use its own vocabulary, and stretch its own muscles. Maybe certain courageous writers can look at their own work with a constructionist eye, but I suspect they're rare. Nothing will knock me out of the "flow", I've learned, than to worry what critics (or even editors) are going to say.
I'll still go to Readercon, naturally. It's the one convention that gathers the best of the best, and it's valuable to simply breathe the same air they breathe for a time. But I'm going to respect that "sacred divide"!
lmarley at 11:03:01 AM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
|  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
Monday, July 14, 2008
A novel's midlife crisis
July 14, 2008
The writer W. Somerset Maugham said, "There are three rules for writing a novel. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are." I ponder these words as I struggle with the middle of the current work-in-progress, a work in crisis.
All novels have these moments, I think, like all lives. My esteemed colleague Kay Kenyon (Bright of the Sky, A World Too Near) calls the middle of a novel "the piece of shit stage". Another writer may prefer another word, but when her novel reaches that stage, she recognizes it.
Bestselling author William Gibson said once that "Writing a novel is mostly walking around and wondering if it will work out." That's the POS stage, for me. The beginning is laid down, the ending is planned, the characters are all in plenty of trouble and more or less in the right place--but making it all come together seems impossible. To quote another great author, Connie Willis, middles are the place for reversals. Of course, we know that, and we can think of all kinds of them, but we're already at 350 pages, and if it gets any longer we'll have to cut it, and besides, there have been plenty of reversals already, and the problem is solving the ones already on the page . . . hence the crisis.
I will never understand those of my colleagues who say first drafts are the best part of writing. I must be of some alien species. First drafts, to me, feel like pulling my brain out through my ears. And at this midpoint of the novel, the hardest part has yet to be achieved: weaving all the of the threads of plot together into a believable whole. Once I know I have that whole, I could rewrite forever, polishing prose, cutting adverbs, checking facts, brushing up dialogue. I can hardly wait for that part.
But first, the middle. I might need to buy a red convertible.
lmarley at 1:14:55 PM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
Sunday, July 6, 2008
The myth of the solitary writer
 It's been axiomatic that writing is a solitary profession. Before I became one, I pictured writers laboring away in garrets, madly typing and piling up pages of text, only coming out after hours alone with their muse. Now, I admit, that image has a lot of appeal! Today's writer is no longer solitary. it's not only that we have retreats (which I love) and writers' groups (which I consider an essential part of the creative process) but we have this internet thing. It is delight, distraction, opportunity, and danger, all in one. It's getting harder and harder to get away from, and I suspect many a writer having difficulty producing regularly is retreating to the internet every time she finds herself struggling with a plot point or a word choice or a character decision. I speak, of course, from experience. My motto is "There is no art without discipline," but I never thought "discipline" would mean "disconnecting"! One of my most productive hours of the week is Sunday morning, locked in the car with no internet access, and nothing to do while I wait for the hour Mass begins. The upside of all this is the delight factor. A writer no longer has to wait forever--if ever--to hear from fans. When I began publishing in 1995, the only fans who thought of emailing me were the very young ones. I had the great pleasure of watching a couple of them grow up through their emails, beginning with no punctuation or capitals and progressing to properly formatted, courteous, adult letters. The relationship of a writer with her fans can grow into something beyond that of just writer and reader. It can be a connection created by a shared world, a mutual passion, a common concern. Case in point: That rascal Toby Bishop, having recently received a photograph of a Horsemistress Saga fan with her horse, started a page of such pictures. Toby hopes there will be dozens of them, but at the moment there are already some charming ones at http://www.tobybishop.net/tb-readers.htm This is hardly a writer working in solitude. This is a writer getting nearly immediate feedback and response, and being inspired by it. Pretty cool. But not solitary.
lmarley at 7:28:59 PM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
The best damn bookseller in America
Last night I attended the second in the Clarion West 2008 Reading Series, featuring instructor Mary Rosenblum ( Water Rites, Horizons, et al) at the University Bookstore in Seattle. The U Bookstore is one of the largest independent booksellers in Washington State, and their science fiction and fantasy offerings are so comprehensive, the department deserves recognition. The reading was well-attended, the supply of books was impressive, and Mary read a terrific story coming out soon in an anthology from Pyr ( Sideways in Crime)I'm sure I'm not the only writer in the Pacific Northwest to dub Duane Wilkens the best damn bookseller in America. He goes to conventions, he supplies books for readings outside his own bookstore, and he's a sweetheart besides. It's so gratifying to go to his section in this fine store and find that your backlist is there, your pseudonym is properly represented, that related books are shelved proportionately, and that he knows each and every sf/f writer working today . . . or yesterday. Duane is simply amazing, and not only because he's seven feet tall:
 Yes, Duane is the one on your left. I don't know who the writer is, but clearly he shares my sentiments.
If you can't get to Seattle, you can sample Duane's substantial wares online at http://www.bookstore.washington.edu/default.taf ? Duane is also an expert on children's literature.
lmarley at 12:35:59 PM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
Monday, June 30, 2008
Writing for expediency (also known as writing fast)
Jonathan Karp, formerly of Random House and now with the new house
called Twelve Publishers, wrote an article for the Sunday Washington
Post on the state of publishing. According to Publishers Lunch:
He
remarks on "the relentless, indiscriminate proliferation" of commercial
"ephemera" on the bookshelves" and freely admits "I too have sinned. In
weaker moments, I've been seduced by tales of celebrity, money, gossip
and scandal." He notes: "Most authors want their work to be accessible
to a typical educated reader, so the question really isn't whether the
work is highbrow or lowbrow or appeals to the masses or the elites; the
question is whether the book is expedient or built to last. Are we
going for the quick score or enduring value? Too often, we (publishers
and authors) are driven by the same concerns as any commercial
enterprise: We are manufacturing products for the moment."
Karp
also observes: "I can't prove it empirically, but when I talk to
literary agents and fellow publishers, they acknowledge an
unarticulated truth about our business: Fewer authors are devoting more
than two years to their projects. The system demands more, faster.
Conventional wisdom holds that popular novelists should deliver one or
two books per year. Nonfiction authors often aren't paid enough to work
full-time on a book for more than a year or two." One result:
"Journalism has long been regarded as the first rough draft of history;
lately, however, books have too easily been thought of as the second
rough draft, rather than the final word."
So, greater
minds than I are all over this topic. Beloved son once asked me, when
I was lamenting my inability to churn out two or three books a year,
"Do you want to write a lot of books, Mom, or books that will be
remembered?" 'Nuff said. Smart boy.
lmarley at 11:39:28 AM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
A conversation about horses
 Writer Patrice Sarath ( Gordath Wood) and my alter ego have been chatting about that mystical connection between girls and horses. Here's the gist, from Patrice's excellent blog at http://www.patricesarath.com/horses/a-conversation-with-toby-bishop/ :
Everyone always goes on about “girls and horses,” blah blah blah. I had another writer tell me seriously about how it was all psychosexual transference and stuff (she didn’t like horses). But I think there’s a more important question: What about boys and horses? That is, why aren’t there more horse crazy boys out there?
Toby Bishop:
A lot of work has been done in this area, trying to puzzle out the connection between adolescent girls and horses. The “psychosexual” stuff has pretty much been discounted by every psychological study I could find. In preparing to write The Horsemistress Saga, I read everything I could find on the bond between women and horses (beware of Googling this topic! Lots of porn sites come up!) My own conclusion, after all the reading, and knowing many girls who love horses and riding and all that goes with it, is that girls are attracted to the beauty and the power of their horses. When a woman sits on a horse, she is tall, she is lovely, she is strong, and she is mobile.
We shouldn’tforget, either, the very nature of horses. These big, beautiful creatures are essentially sensitive, easily frightened, and responsive to human beings who understand them. It would be hard not to love horses if you get to know them. And adolescent girls–with all the confusion and turmoil of that age–are drawn, I think, to these affectionate animals who don’t care if you have pimples or a small bust or whatever else a girl might be worried about.
Patrice Sarath: I remember being seven years old and falling flat out in love with horses. When kids are seven, they are so little, so it’s kind of comical looking back, at how there’s this attraction to a creature so big. So here you are with this big animal and you can control it. Plus, they are soft, they smell good, and they respond to you. So I think the power of horses and the power you have over a horse is very attractive.
But the power comes with a twist. In order to achieve power and control over horses, you have to give it up too. Like you say, horses are sensitive, easily frightened, and can hurt you. We think of achieving power as making another creature submit to you, but with horses, it’s a partnership.
I think that in western cultures we don’t teach our boys enough about partnership, but it’s more acceptable for girls. So it’s more difficult for boys nowadays to find that they can have a partnership with an animal, be it horse or dog, that doesn’t involve domination. Which is a shame. I look at my son and think he’d be great as a horseman, but he’s been socialized against it. Well, and he’s thirteen, so it’s a hard age anyway to step outside cultural expectations.
Toby Bishop: My father was the first horse lover in our family. I loved watching him work with his horses, not against them. And they adored him!
Dad’s favorite horse was an enormous sorrel stallion named Red Feather, a real gentle giant. All of us kids treated him like a pet, and he responded by being careful where he put his feet whenever we were around. My mother found my younger brother, at about four, playing underneath this lovely horse’s feet one day, out in the pasture. I mean, right underneath!
My father had not grown up with horses, and so, when he started to acquire them, he found a book to teach him what to do. That book was always lying around in the house, and I suppose Dad was lucky it was such a good one, with an approach that even the gentle horse trainers of today could admire.
For The Horsemistress Saga I studied the videos of a “natural horse trainer” which led to the development of the relationships between the winged horses of the story and the women and girls who fly them. I went to a show where a horse trainer showed his horses “at liberty”–with no tack of any kind–and that was helpful, too. And I shudder at the old western movies (and some recent, ridiculous films) in which they wrench their horses’ heads this way and that, and gallop everywhere. But maybe that’s another discussion!
Patrice Sarath: Your father was a true “gentle” man. I love that story about Red Feather — what a great name, by the way. Perhaps one of your flying horses could wear it in his honor?
at 10:34:41 AM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
The E-Book Revolution
The E-Book Revolution
 I think we all know it's coming. And it will be no surprise--to most of us--that the older the reader, the more he or she will object to it! Here are some statistics, garnered from a report given at the Reading the Future Conference, organized by the U.K.'s The Bookseller: Delegates heard from William Higham of agency Next Big Thing, which conducted the research. Higham reported that 56% of 18-24s think people will still be using bookshops in 20 years' time. Looking deeper into 18-24 year olds' reading habits, he found that 28% were favourable towards the idea of e-readers, compared to 9% of 65+ year olds, and 40% liked the idea of downloadable chapters of books, compared to 7% of 65+ year olds.
Makes you want to run right out and buy an e-book reader, doesn't it? To prove that you're still young and in the swing? And more, from a panel on the topic: Speaking at a panel session after the research was presented, Transworld publisher Bill Scott-Kerr said the statistics about younger readers all pointed "to where we as publishers are going in the future". He added: "We all know the book is a great piece of technology - you can't drop e-books in the bath. But we as an industry are in a lot of trouble; we don't know where we are going."
The opposing point of view on the panel was this: The Book People c.e.o. Seni Glaister was more positive about the future of the book. "Content is king - always. As an industry I hope we don't spend too much time worrying about technology and let's protect our copyright, make sure downloads are available - but as content providers we shouldn't worry too much about technology."
Hmm. The statistics above didn't cover my demographic, but I must say, "shouldn't worry too much about technology" seems to me a bit like the naysayers who said the internet, like rock 'n roll, would never last. It's coming, my dears. I may not use it, and you may not use it, but it's coming. And I wish publishers wouldn't say "we don't know where we are going." All of this information is available from The Bookseller for a measly 195 pounds. That's right, pounds. Make that about $400 at today's exchange rate. Commenter Barbara made me laugh when she posted this: You have to worry a bit when you have to pay that much to read about the future of reading. Why is industry research so expensive? I guess reading such information is an unnecessary luxury; either that, or not of general interest so priced for a very tiny niche. No wonder the industry is in trouble.
lmarley at 9:46:46 AM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
The art of the blurb
 One of the confounding things that happens after a writer has published a few novels is being asked to write blurbs for new books. We have to decide, then and there, whether to blurb because we're asked or to blurb because we really like the manuscript. This can be tricky, as we want to maintain good relationships with friends and with editors, but we also--at least I do--want to maintain my integrity. I always recommend book buyers read blurbs with a slightly skeptical eye. Well, except this lovely one: When you read the first few pages . . . you think you're headed in familiar SF territory. you couldn't be more wrong. The place you're going, under Louise marley's gifted guidance, is one you've never been before: a world of troubling mysteries and even more troubling answers, of lost colonies and lost souls. It's a revelation. And a journey you won't want to miss. That's Connie Willis--the great Connie Willis--blurbing my novel, The Child Goddess. As I admire and try to emulate Connie, I have to believe she wouldn't have written it if she didn't mean it. On the other hand, when you read blurbs like this one: A welcome new voice in the fantasy field. Or this: If you loved Dune , this novel is for you. . . you would be wise to reserve judgment. The first time I was given a manuscript to blurb by an editor I like very much, I called my agent in a panic. "I hate it! It's awful! What do I do now?" He talked me down, and we came up with a polite way to beg off, and I learned not to be too quick to say yes--not until I've read the work in question. It takes a lot of work to read a manuscript and write a blurb. It's not something you toss off in an hour. So I wish that we could trust them more, that blurbs carry the weight that they should. For example, I hope the blurb on the front cover of this first novel by Patrice Sarath (blurb written by that rascal Toby Bishop) will be taken seriously by book buyers: A strong first novel, full of real people, some very real horsemanship, and utterly convincing warcraft.  It was fun reading that manuscript, and so it was easy to blurb it. And this one, too: Kay Kenyon has created a dark, colorful, richly imagined world that works as both science fiction and fantasy, a classic space opera that recalls the novels of Dan Simmons. --Louise Marley  It's all about marketing, of course. Sales departments try to get blurbs from authors who represent the readership they expect for the new books. And it's always nice to give a colleague a boost, and it's lovely, and much appreciated, to get aboost from another author. I'm not sure we know how much they help, but I can't imagine a book cover without one.
lmarley at 10:30:05 AM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
Monday, June 9, 2008
Writing fast
 There is an ongoing debate in the writing community about whether it's good or bad to push ourselves to write fast. One school says, "Write fast, send it out, never revise except on editorial request." The other--mine own--believes that a book takes as long as it takes. Those who know me, of course, know that I'm all about discipline, and though I don't write fast, I've still published eleven books in fourteen years. So when my friend and colleague Catherine Whitehead sent me the following, I rejoiced. It's from the Globe:
Top Authors on Annual Deadline Pressures
Publishers (and fans) increasingly expect and hope that top fiction authors will issue a new book on regular basis, but the Boston Globe says writers are complaining about the pressure. Patricia Cornwell says : "The Scarpetta [manuscript] that's due out Oct. 7 is due in a few weeks, because they have to reserve the storefront real estate and pay for it. If I don't get the book turned in on time, they'll be freaking out. If I miss my deadline, I miss the entire year. Sometimes there's an overwhelming feeling of panic. It's like a rock 'n' roll concert, and what if I don't show up?"
Thriller writer Brad Meltzer has turned down requests to have a book a year: "There's pressure to treat authors like Coca-Cola. Every time you get a bunch of writers together, this is all they complain about. The trend is, 'How many books can you put out?' From building your reputation to get on the best-seller list, it's gone to trying to get to the tippy-top of the list. It's not worth it to me."
And Dennis Lehane said he tried to write faster once: "I did it ["Prayers for Rain" in 1999], but the week it was published I realized what would have made it a really good book. The anger of that realization haunted me. I said I would never go back on that hamster wheel. It's what led me to write 'Mystic River.'"
David Baldacci does not object: "If you don't write a book a year, it might not be devastating, but it helps to keep your face out there,"
Yes, part of me thinks it would be cool to be in Patricia Cornwell's shoes and be that much in demand. And I do love the organizing effect deadlines has on my work. But Dennis Lehane's position is closest to mine. To quote another great author, K.W. Jeter: "Do you want a book that's on time, or do you want a good book?"
lmarley at 11:52:32 AM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
Saturday, June 7, 2008
Ethnic lit is hot
 I identify myself, in my heart, as Native American. My mother grew up with the Native American experience, and though I don't look Native American--Mom married a Scots-Irish man whose genes overpowered hers--I've always considered myself part of that ethnicity, and identified with that culture, for good and for ill. So this review by Hari Kunzru caught my eye. It begins: In the opening story of Nam Le’s first collection, we find a writer named Nam, who is on a tight deadline during his “last year at the Iowa Writers’ Workshop.” Le is struggling with writer’s block, an affliction his classmates find perplexing. “Just write a story about Vietnam,” one of them advises. Instructors and “visiting literary agents” reinforce this. “Ethnic literature’s hot."
Of course, those of us working in the field know that ethnic literature's hot. My problem, as a Native American, is that if I write about the real condition of Native Americans it's pretty bleak. But what I love about this review is this part, excerpted from the book: “I’m sick of ethnic lit,” says one of Le’s anonymous interlocutors. “It’s a license to bore.” This friend then congratulates the writer’s fictional alter ego: “You could totally exploit the Vietnamese thing. But instead, you choose to write about lesbian vampires and Colombian assassins and Hiroshima orphans — and New York painters with hemorrhoids.”
Kunzru gives Nam Le a very good reading. This is a thoughtful review, and worth having a look at for its analysis of an MFA (Master of Fine Arts) sort of writer: “The Boat” is transparently a product of the increasingly formalized milieu in which American writers train — a well-wrought collection that, in its acute self-consciousness, trails a telltale whiff of “the industry” that is its initial concern, of the “heap of fellowship and job applications” the fictional Le needs “to draft and submit” when he’s interrupted by his father. “Ethnic lit” is unhappily what emerges when identity politics head into the marketing meeting, and for any writer with a non-WASP name, it’s all too easy to feel one is being pimped for one’s “background and life experience” (real or imaginary), and somehow colluding in the production of a crude, essentialized version of oneself in return for an advantage over ethnically uninteresting peers.
Personally, I'd rather read about the lesbian vampires.
lmarley at 9:43:14 AM EDT
Permalink
| Blog about this entry
| Add to del.icio.us | digg this
This entry has comments: Add your own
|
|
