Two Books on Writing for Writers

A post on two books I checked out this afternoon at the bookstore: (1) How Not to Write a Novelby Howard Mittlemark and Sandra Newman and (2) Bird by Birdby Anne Lamott.  While both were on writing, they could not be more different in terms of styles and approach.

Note that I have NOT read either book from cover to cover - the following simply contains some of my views on them from flicking through the book, skimming the majority of it (using my slightly faulty speed reading capabilities) and reading in detail only the specific sections that appealed to me.

How Not to Write a Novel: 200 Classic Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

I first caught a glimpse of this book in the hands of some dude standing outside a bank in Dublin of all places.  It sounded like an interesting concept for a writer’s book (if anything, it was catchy), and I was keen to know whether I was committing any of the 200 classic mistakes in the fantasy novel I was working on.

So I found the book rather easily today and had a good look through it.  The book is broken down into various parts, each dealing with a specific problem area, such as plot, pacing, character, dialogue, voice - and goes as far as telling writers how not to write sex scenes!  Each of the 200 classic mistakes were accompanied by a tailor-made example provided by the authors that allow the reader to identify the mistake with ease.  Much of the writing is infused with quite a bit of humour, and the tone is light-hearted, though it can be somewhat condescending at times.  The authors call it ‘tough love’.  They say if you can learn to avoid all the mistakes they listed, you would have transformed yourself from unpublishable to publishable writer.

To be honest, I’m not sure how helpful the book would be to serious writers.  Don’t get me wrong, it was a fascinating read, but the significant proportion of the ’classic mistakes’ were so blatantly obvious that any writer with a little common sense would not make them (perhaps they just needed to get to 200).  And I say this as a first-time writer who is acutely aware of the fact that he has a long long long way to go before becoming even remotely publishable.

However, that is not to say all of the tips were useless - I did find a few to be beneficial.  Perhaps not in reading what the actual mistake is as such, but rather from seeing clearly why the mistake is bad for your writing.  As a consequence, it will make it easier for you to recognise the mistake in your own writing.  In particular, the bits I found most useful were the examples on sticking to just the relevant details in descriptions and dialogue, and avoiding stock-standard character descriptions and  indistinguishable or faceless secondary characters.  These may have been things I knew were bad before, but now I will aim to target these problems even more in my next draft.

The biggest problem with the book might also be its selling point - most of the time, the book tells you what NOT to do rather than teaches what you SHOULD do.  You might say it’s the same thing, but it’s much easier to point out another’s mistakes than doing it right yourself.  Not making a common mistake does not necessarily make the writing any good.  Furthermore, some of these so-called mistakes may be found in many of the published novels you see on shelves today.

The verdict: A good book to pick up and flick through, especially for novices (like myself), but the truth is it won’t instantly transform you into a publishable author if you weren’t one before.  Many of the classic mistakes are obvious and reading too many in a row can get tedious, so it’s probably better to pick and choose your problem areas rather than go from cover to cover.

Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life

Now this is a completely different book to the one above.  I first came across Anne Lamott’s gem of a book the first day of a creative writing course I did a year ago.  Since then, I have picked up the book in book stores on several occasions (which killed the need to buy it) and I’ve enjoyed it immensely every time.

This book is less about gimmicks and more about the essence of writing.  It’s written like a memoir, with lots of personal stories, experiences and anecdotes, usually told in Lamott’s trade mark, self-deprecating humour which I find very funny.  You won’t find any meticulously structured tips on writing techniques (though it is split into chapters, each dealing with a different aspect of writing), but what you will get are brutally honest and sometimes profound observations about the craft of writing and the struggles in the life of a writer.

Much of it is philosophical, so how much the reader takes out of it may vary significantly, but personally, I found it more useful than How Not to Write a Novel.  Instead of learning about the types of mistakes that publishers avoid, Lamott tells you to be honest with yourself and write from the heart.  You can tell she believes what she preaches through her writing.  That is not to say there are not any broad lessons to be learnt.  Ones I found especially helpful include:

• allowing yourself to write shitty first drafts (no one gets it right on the first attempt);
• knowing its okay to learn about and define your characters as you progress, rather than worry about shaping them completely before you begin writing;
• ensuring each character has a different voice and distinguishing characteristics, such that they can be distinguished through their dialogue;
• reading your dialogue out loud (where possible) to improve it;
• dealing with jealousy (in relation to successful friends and colleagues!);
• getting help from others, such as finding someone to read your drafts, join groups and networking;
• how to deal with writer’s block; and
• the cold hard truth about getting published.

Lamott paints a pretty grim picture about the publishing world.  Frankly, she says, it’s not all it’s cracked up to be, and in particular, the financial rewards for most are minimal.  However, she continues to remind writers of the beauty and pleasure of the act of writing itself.  For people that tend to get too caught up in getting published, it’s a good book to read to bring you back down to earth.

A problem I had with the book are common with books of this type - you don’t always find the anecdotes and stories interesting and engaging.  Sometimes, you might feel like skipping to the next point, except you’re not sure where the next point is because the structure doesn’t allow it.  So it’s best not to see this book as a technical writing guide, but rather, as something you can enjoy as a piece of work in its own right, though you might be surprised to learn a few valuable lessons along the way.

Another issue one may find is that Lamott’s style is more suited to writers like her who write about characters and relationships.  Accordingly, for someone (like me) working on a fast-paced fantasy novel, the suggestions about letting your characters take complete charge and drive the plot wherever it may go might not always be the most suitable approach.

The verdict: An honest, often hilarious book that speaks to writers’ hearts.  It might not be the book you would choose if you want to learn about the technical aspects of being a better writer, and some people might simply not get her message (and there’s nothing wrong with that), but personally I found it enjoyable.

PS: for those that enjoyed the book, there is a documentary called Bird by Bird with Annie: A Film Portrait of Writer Anne Lamott that focuses on a year in the life of the titular writer.  I haven’t seen it but would be interested to know if it is any good.

Smiles to Go - Jerry Spinelli

When Will Tuppence was young his neighbour told him about protons. How everything is made from them and even if you die, your protons would still exist vibrating away. Will has built his life around knowing this idea, and knowing that has made him feel safe. The beginning of the book starts off with the news that scientists have recorded, for the first time ever, the death of a proton. Subsequent chapters are there after labeled in PD, or days after Proton Death.

Will seems to feel he has a good understanding on his life, he has his two friends Mi-Su, and BT aka Anthony Bontempo who play monopoly with him every week, with BT always showing late. Will’s life has been filled with these very expected moments, his little sister Tabby bent on tormenting him one black jelly bean at a time, but the death of the proton lingers over him like a sign that things are about to change.

As Will and Mi-Su attend a star party with an unexpected little sister, Will ends up being separated from everybody. While looking for Tabby, he discovers Mi-Su and BT kissing.  Immediately expecting this to change everything, Will starts wondering how it makes him feel about Mi-Su.

Will is in a constant struggle to control his world around him and the people in it. However, as the story unfold he realizes that living in the now is infinitely more important that worrying about the future. Although I do like Jerry Spinelli as an other I found Will hard to relate to. I spent most of the book wanting to smack him on the back of the head. So it’s a definite okay for me.

BOOK REVIEW: Death Perception by Victoria Laurie

About two years ago I started reading the Psychic Eye mysteries written by Victoria Laurie. They start as bright, breezy, light weight mysteries; entertaining, very readable and charming, pretty much what you want in this kind of cozy. Like many readers I don’t always want to be hip deep in blood, bodies, killers or clues and I enjoy good fun fluff with a decent story. The psychic angle was a clever hook. I’d put her early works as a C+ to B- grade. Death Perception is the 6th in the series and the first where Laurie tries to get into a meatier, more complex mystery plot.

Abby Cooper is a psychic. She does her readings in person and by phone (so does Laurie, by the way). Her ‘crew’ are those spirits on the ‘other side’ nudge her in her readings. Lately, her crew have been very quiet. So quiet that Abby is concerned that her gifts might be leaving her somehow.

Dutch is having a family crisis, his cousin Chase has been kidnapped and his family has asked for his help. Dutch, who has finally accepted that Abby has ‘special gifts’, he asks for her help. But Abby’s visions turn dark and deadly – for Dutch.  Things don’t improve when they arrive in Las Vegas and check in at the Wynn.

Then Dutch goes out and Abby’s visions turn ever darker and more frightening. She grabs a cab and follows the GPS signal of Dutch’s phone. She lands at the scene of a car accident. A bad one. Panic seizes her. A body is found in a ravine – but it isn’t Dutch, it’s a woman. Then Raymond Robillard, Dutch’s boss, ex-CIA guy and a man Abby saw commit murder in one of her visions is standing there at the accident scene. Her last vision is Dutch in a cemetery.

Robillard is out to silence Abby and make it look like Dutch is a dirty agent. He knows she’s made Dutch suspicious of him and he’s a man with a lot to hide. Compounding the problems is Delgado, the man Chase was guarding, is also missing and it’s starting to look like Dutch and his cousin were involved in it somehow – or so Robillard claims. Now Abby starts fighting the clock, the FBI, and the police, to find Dutch before her visions come true. Her friend Candice, a PI and insurance investigator, comes to Vegas to help. And since money is an issue, Abby has to call her rich, corporate exec, sister in Boston who, instead of sending the courier with cash, once again drops everything and runs to Abby’s side. (How can a top exec keep doing that?)

The solution is something of a surprise though, both the who and the why, but the whole ‘Where is Dutch?’ thing was obvious.

Death Perception is a pretty good book, less of a cozy and more of a mystery, but Abby got rather irritating in this outing. The whole ‘high anxiety’ routine got on my last nerve in a big way. How many scenes of her being a nervous wreck can be crammed into one book? Apparently, a LOT. Abby was definitely outside her comfort zone and it felt like Laurie was as well. The whole book needed Xanax™ or Valium™ or something.

Laurie is a practicing psychic and that experience helps give her lead, Abby Cooper, the sense of being a complete and very real person. Many of her other supporting characters, Candice, Cat, etc., are very good as well. She usually at least good with Dutch Rivers, but here he had the feel of a prop, kind of a two dimensional character. That’s OK for a minor character, but not so good in a key role. The whole relationship between Dutch and Abby has been shallower than one would expect so far into the series. After the huge and very trying buildup, (and all that damn angst) the closing scene between Abby and Dutch was flat as a pancake.

I’m a fan of cozies and amateur sleuths, especially authors who can give me a good laugh now and then. Denise Swanson, Joan Hess, Joanne Fluke, and new comers Kate Collins and Lori Avocato are all examples of mystery light. I like Abby Cooper well enough, but I seriously hope Death Perception was a one off diversion and the stories get back on more secure footing. I am no fan of over-wrought, crying lead characters. Ms. Laurie also writes a Ghost Hunter series that I’ve tried and do not care for but others do.

My Grade: C- (Disclaimer – I am not in agreement with the reviewers on Amazon or Barnes and Nobel on this one. It has a 4.5* rating both places. Then again, maybe negative reviews were never posted after what Victoria Laurie did to one poster on Amazon. If Ms. Laurie wants to get even with me, I hope she realizes my avatar is a groundhog, not a gopher.)

Who would enjoy this book: Fans of Shirley Damsgaard, Madelyn Alt, and the Haunted Bookshop mysteries by Alice Kimberly.

There is a rather bizarre backstory to this book. You can read about it in the reviews on Amazon and also on Dear Author. I was unaware of any of this at the time I read the books, so it isn’t a factor in my comments in the review, but it will be a factor in any future decision to buy – or NOT BUY - Laurie’s future books. (Honestly, any more tears and I will be running away screaming.)

http://dearauthor.com/wordpress/2008/08/19/victoria-laurie-sends-blogger-threats-from-a-lawyer/

http://www.amazon.com/Death-Perception-Psychic-Mysteries-Book/dp/0451224868/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1235189405&sr=8-1

Practical Prophetic Ecclesiology (Part 2)

In chapter two, Healy addresses what he calls “blueprint ecclesiologies.” His vision for ecclesiology is that it “can aid the church’s efforts by reflecting theologically upon its concrete identity” (25). Healy moves on to focus on what he considers the ecclesiological styles of the last century: 1) an attempt to encapsulate in a single word or phrase the most essential characteristic of the church; 2) construing the church as having a bipartite structure; 3) these last two elements are combined into a systematic and theoretical form of normative ecclesiology; 4) a tendency to relfect upon the church in abstraction from its concrete identity; and 5) a tendency to present idealized accounts of the church (26).

Healy spends significant time reflecting upon Avery Dulles’ Models of the Church, focusing on number 1 above. The single words or phrases modern theologians have suggested, as mapped by Dulles are: sacrement, herald, institution, mystical communion, servant, and Dulles’ own suggestion, community of disciples (27). One need not reflect long to realize the possible dangers of such approaches - relativizing ecclesiology around a category which certainly will reflect aspects of the church, but probably will certainly fail to encapsulate ecclessiology in its entirety. From here it becomes clear what some of Healy’s presuppositions are: First, he claims that, “The impression is given - no doubt in many cases a false one - that theologians believe that it is necessary to get our thinking about the church right first, after which we can go on to put our theory into practice” (36). In light of this remark, the “modern” ecclesiologies, in Healy’s view, tend towards a description of the eschatological form of the church. Therefore,

The church in via has characteristics of its own that are quite different from the church triumphant and which prevent it from being described predominantly in terms of perfection…As a consequence, blueprint ecclesiologies frequently display a curious inability to acknowledge the complexities of ecclesial life in its pilgrim state” (37).

Following upon his reflection on the church in via, Healy claims, “Ecclesiology is not about the business of finding the single right way to think about the church, of developing a blueprint suitable for all times and places. Rather, I propose that its function is to aid the concrete church in performing its tasks of witness and pastoral care within what I will call its ‘ecclesiological context’ (38). Therefore,

An image or concept is not the starting point for ecclesiological inquiry so much as the reflection of a decision as to how best to explicate that inquiry’s conclusions…The primary concern of ecclesiology should not be to explicate a particular model but to make sound judgments upon the ‘everything else.’ Putting it boldly, ecclesiologists have something rather like a prophetic function in the church. They reflect theologically and therefore critically upon the church’s concrete identity in order to help boast in its Lord, and boast only in its Lord…Contextual ecclesial praxis informs ecclesiology, and ecclesiology informs contextual ecclesial praxis, in a practical hermeneutical circle” (46).

So what is the upshot for a project like this? Do you think he has a valid concern? My initial inclination is that he may be sharpening the contrasts a bit between a “theological” analysis and what he calls the “practical prophetic,” but it will be hard to know until I get to the rest of the book. Also (again, this could be addressed later in the volume), I find it hard to know what it means that ecclesiology is not about finding a “single right way to think about the church,” when Healy assumes from the outset that ecclesiology aids the church in “performing its tasks of witness and pastoral care.” These concerns seem to stem from a theoretical concept of what church has to be, that one could say is a “model,” albeit lacking an image. I’m fine with this, but it does seem to push against the sharp contrast he has drawn. Any thoughts?

What Do YOU Want?

Since I’ve done everything but disappear completely lately, I figured it’s time to make some changes to my blog when I get back completely (which will be within the next week or so), I want to know what suggestions you guys had. What do you like? What would you change? What do you want to see more of? Less of? Did you enjoy the Author of the Month feature? Blogger interviews?

Let me know either by commenting on this post or emailing me at harmonybookreviews[at]yahoo[dot]com.

I like this Girl

A Happy Meal (March 10, 2009)

 

This girl, I love.  I like to give her pleasure.  I feel like inviting her for lunch. I love to sit by her and look at her profile. “All right” she said “but we go to MacDonald. It has been so long…”  She craves nuggets dipped in ketchup.  If our relationship last then I will teach her many other things, many other kinds of fine meals. I won’t argue now: I know how girls are; they are just promising.

 

Along the way, I compliment her shoes. “Don’t tell me that’s the first time you noticed them. I got them in Christmas” she replied. I then compliment her socks.  She berates me my stupidity.  She is the most beautiful girl on the street.

 

I feel a surge of disgust as I enter MacDonald. The women are ugly and fat people stays in line. She is holding my hand gently and her little finger caresses the inside of my palm. My heart is in turmoil.  She changes her mind several times before settling for nuggets and a caramel sundae. I pick up the trays and she precedes me and selects a quiet corner. 

 

“You prefer a smoking section, don’t you? Yes, you do. I know” she said.  Faces turn on her passage; she does not even notice them. She sits and slowly unties her scarf.  She nods her head trice before I can see her slim neck. I am standing and waiting for her to invite me to sit down.  “Why don’t you sit down?” she said.  I say: “I was looking at you”  “You will look at me later. The food is getting cold” I said “You are right”  “I am always right” she said.  She is right almost always.

 

She elegantly opens her magic box of nuggets. I contemplate her hands and fingers.  She has a fresh coat of paints on her nails. She arranged her blonde hair with tiny barrettes. I cannot help but thinking that she has gone into so much trouble just for me. She dips her nuggets methodically in the ketchup.  I said “You really like that?” “Yes, I love them a lot.  They taste good” she said

 

She does not talk much but I am accustomed to her habits.  All sorts of people fascinate her.  As she is engaged at looking around I take advantage studying the details of her beauty.  I love the shape of her eye lashes, her tiny nose, and the lobes of her ears and then she noticed that I was scrutinizing her face.

 

She eats the tiny crunches of peanuts on her sundae and the caramel but does not touch the ice cream. I tell her to get a refill of caramel but she refuses saying “I know they won’t” I am thinking what we are to do next?  Where shall I take her?  Will she give me her hand? She wants to know where we might spend summer vacation.  The best I can do is figuring out where to take her next after lunch.

 

She folds her napkin before cleaning her mouth. She smoothes her skirt and readjust the collar of her shirt.  She takes her bags and nudged her head to me in the direction where I should dump the plates. I open the door for her. She reties her scarf and takes her hair out of her jacket.  She decided to take my arms.  This girl, I love.  She is mine.  She is seven of age.

 

Note:  An abridged and slightly edited translation from French by the author Anna Gavalda.  This story could have applied in its mechanics to the behavior of one of my nieces with minor modifications.

In the Mail

I was quite surprised to walk out to the mailbox today and discover that the fine folks at IVP Academic sent along a review copy of Robin Routledge’s Old Testament Theology: A Thematic Approach.  I hadn’t requested or even heard about this book but it’s a beautifully bound volume and the table of contents has me anxious to dive into it.  Also, for those interested you can read the preface or part of the first chapter online.

B”H