Off to a slow start for 2010, unlike the rest of the writing community who seem to have leaped from the starting gate as if their tails are on fire. So with so much good material around it wasn’t hard to dig up some interesting links.
This time I briefly disinterred my rusty knowledge of literary theory, and then quickly got practical. After some work on characters and scenes, an introduction to screenwriting and some editing advice it was time to daydream about submission. As you do. And after submission, promotion. Speaking of promotion, I admitted at last that I’m not really cut out for the corporate ladder, so I abandoned my cube-dwelling career.
Then I kicked back a little, took in some music, and ended with The Knave. Who abideth.
The Guardian is getting academic with an occasional series of articles by Andrew Gallix. He started off with an excellent tour around the death of the author.
John Robert Marlowe kicked off the year with a strong post on the Self Editing Blog in which he pointed out some bad habits. These include the tendency to make things seem to be what they actually are, and to have people start to do things that you could more economically have them simply do.
I’ve been reading a lot recently about scenes, characters and story structure, so two posts caught my eye. Scott G F Bailey at The Literary Lab wrote about giving your characters multiple personality traits. This dovetailed nicely with my thoughts about villainous characters. In About A Screenplay Laura Cross wrote about setups and payoffs.
My work in progress seems to be telescoping. I’ve just spent two weeks on a single scene. Time to introduce some targets I think. And to consider yet again my attitude towards time. Alegra Clarke, guest posting on Make A Scene, had some advice there. She suggested rolling with it, and co-operating with time. I like the idea, but in my experience time is a tricksy negotiating partner, and I’d like the option of bludgeoning it into submission if at all possible.
One way of spurring myself forward is to imagine having a finished draft in my hands. Of course the work doesn’t end there. Then the submissions begin in earnest. Luckily Query Shark is there for that. January has been an active month, with more willing victims skewered, and a rare personal interjection by Janet Reid, the shark herself.
On the subject of agent submissions, Roz Morris from Dirty White Candy provided a timely reminder that your manuscript should be good right from the start. If a novel takes a hundred pages before it gets good, chances are you need to fix it before submitting.
Once I’ve got myself an agent and a publishing deal, my worries will presumably be over. Not according to Charlie Jane Anders of io9. She described how to promote your SF book, including advice from book reviewers, who are just as particular as agents about protocol, it seems.
Must be something in the air. Literary agent Nathan Bransford posted some excellent looking advice on marketing your book
io9 also offered a great post by Mary Ratliff, a graduate student studying screenwriting, on the basics. Well worth reading, and don’t neglect the comments. As usual the io9 readers are a cut above the herd, and some professionals contribute to the discussion.
A writing partner of mine passed me this elderly link from therumpus.net on spotting a writer in your corporate midst. This piece was particularly apt for me as an unwilling corporate resource. Six years ago I was forced by a series of fincancial mishaps to abandon a life of unfettered freelancing. There is some relief to be felt in clipping on a namebadge.
- Writers are excessively grateful—for a while. Particularly in the first few weeks and months after being hired, a writer will be almost inordinately appreciative to have a job…. Primarily, however, this gratitude relates to having an income once again, at last—not to mention a dental plan, vision insurance, and the opportunity to buy orthotics.
Reality soon reaserts itself. After a couple of accidental promotions I soon found I still couldn’t quite get with the program. I think my manager would recognize me in this excerpt.
- Writers lack corporate ambition. All real writers prefer the less-responsible position to the corporate climb, the part-time position to the full-time job. Their inability to be persuaded or influenced by—or punished through the withholding of—the kinds of economic rewards that are highly effective with other employees, can help to identify a writer, and also presents additional administrative challenges.
So I’m demoting myself and abandoning the office, I’m sure to everyone’s relief.
This is a tenuous link, but what the hell. I did say I listen to Radio Head when I write so that will have to do. I found this rendition of Creep, by a homeless guy called Mustard, completely haunting.
Boing Boing reported (actually reposted from Eat Our Brains) that a bonkers religious person had bonkers opinions about the godless depravity of science fiction. The question is, how can SF be made to whip up more bonkers people into an entertaining froth?
Speaking of bonkers but brilliant, Boing Boing also reported that The Big Lebowski has been rewritten as a Shakespeare play. This is from the script:
THE KNAVE
‘Tis well; sometimes thou exits in pursuit
Of bear, and sometimes he doth pursue thee.
_[Enter CHORUS]
_ But here’s the man of whom I had these words!
I wonder’d if he’d cross my path again.
CHORUS
I dare not miss the semifinal games.
How fares my good and noble friend the Knave?
THE KNAVE
Thou knowest; strikes and gutters, ups and downs.
CHORUS
Marry, be of ease, O gentle Knave;
I know thou wilt.
THE KNAVE
Thou know’st. The Knave abideth.
The Knave abideth.
