Dashiell Hammett

Today is the birthday of Samuel Dashiell Hammett, who was born in 1894 and died on Jan. 10, 1961.

Hammett is one of my favorite fiction authors. His hard-boiled detective novels are full of interesting, three-dimensional characters who are both cynical and romantic. My favorites are Nick and Nora Charles from THE THIN MAN. The novel was published in 1934 and there were six movies based on Nick and Nora, starting with "The Thin Man", also in 1934.

He only wrote five novels -- all in five years with THE THIN MAN being the last -- but also wrote a host of short stories. The other novel for which he is well known today is THE MALTESE FALCON, which was his third novel and which introduced the detective character Sam Spade. However, his first novel, RED HARVEST, published in 1929, was listed by Time magazine several years ago as one of the top 100, English-language novels in the 20th Century.

In many ways, Hammett's character Sam Spade inspired David Blaise, the protagonist in my 2009 novel, AN UNTIDY AFFAIR. I read THE MALTESE FALCON for the umpteenth time in 2008 and while the timing and settings of Hammett's novel and my novel are different, as I wrote I often thought of what Spade's office would look like and of the characters on the street he would meet.

Blaise is a struggling detective and a bit of a loner. Solitude is probably his greatest vice.

Blaise is not hard-drinking and heavy smoking like what you find in Hammett's work -- or in his life. But I think those vices are more a product of Hammett's time. Given the traits of his characters, it is hard believe they would have as strong a cultural impact or have the lasting appeal if they were written that way today.

Hammett was a veteran of two world wars. And though jailed in the 1950s for failing to name names during the Red Scare, he is buried in Arlington National Cemetery. The cemetery is large and I generally just go to the Kennedy gravesite because it is the easiest to find. But this summer when we are vacationing in the area, I plan to visit Hammett's grave.

Thanks for reading and, like me, keep writing.

Writing . . . and quitting

Just last week, I was talking to a friend from high school who is a lawyer by training. Several years ago, he tried his hand at writing fiction. In fact, he tells me he wrote eight -- yes, I said eight -- novels. He even joined Mystery Writers of America after getting a short story published.

He said he tried unsuccessfully for a while to get an agent but then just quit.

And I asked myself, how in the world could you just quit?

Writing is hard. Getting published is even harder. Neither is for the faint-hearted. But why quit, not just trying to get published but writing as well?

I can imagine a time when I might stop trying to get published, whether I ever publish a book or not. But I can't imagine not writing. I daydream all the time and, to me at least, writing is just an extension of daydreaming. A short story or a novel is a daydream written down.

I encouraged my friend to take up the pen again, and even to come sit in on my Wednesday critique group. Perhaps it will inspire him to write. (Then again, the frank honesty of my group may turn him off from writing forever.)

It just seems to me that if you have written eight novels, you had something to say. I can't see how you could give that up.

Thanks for reading and get back to work.

Nathan Bransford, Author: Self-Publishing vs. Traditional Publishing: Which ...

I like this. Author Nathan Bransford really breaks down the financial question as whether to self-publish or go the traditional route.

Very informative.

Thanks for reading and keep writing.


Nathan Bransford, Author: Self-Publishing vs. Traditional Publishing: Which ...: "It's author monetization week! Monday through Thursday this week I'm going to have a series of posts on a crucial topic for the modern write..."

Trying to set a new personal best

Yesterday, I embarked on a quest to set a new personal best. Personal best, you say! Of what?

Rejections.

I sent out a batch of query letters yesterday for AN UNTIDY AFFAIR and will now see if I can top my personal best set on Sept. 13, of last year when I got four (4, IV) rejections on the same day. That topped the previous best of three set one week earlier.

While this is probably a worthy goal, I, sadly, will probably not top it anytime soon because my querying strategy has changed since last fall. I am sending out fewer queries at a time and if all the responses are negative, then I re-write the query in hopes of drawing more interest.

I send four queries yesterday throughout the day as time permitted, and will ship off three today. And that is it. Seven. Then, I will wait to see what happens. If nothing good happens, then I know that letter doesn't work and I will to try again with another letter. And then I will ship off another batch of seven.

For this letter, I used my novel's background as outlined in my Publishers Weekly review. It was good and generally well-written. I adapted parts, of course, but the overall structure was the same. Now I will see if that helps. Plus I made a brief mention of being a quarterfinalist in this year's Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award. Time to see if that horse has any legs.

Well, that's it for today. I have a couple of other topics I want to discuss next week. But for now, have a great day and keep writing.

Thanks for reading.

Solid, but not particularly noteworthy

I know I have started this and should finish but today has been particularly busy and I will have to come back to this tomorrow. But for just a moment, I did want to return today to the Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award and, more specifically, my Publishers Week review.

It was a mixed bag but in the end concluded with, "Solid, but not particularly noteworthy."

What am I to make of that?

Yes, I know it is only one person's opinion and they implied that the writing was good, which was nice to know. But the 'note particularly noteworthy' line puzzles me.

In the next couple of days I am going to try to figure that out, and then polish my novel yet again. I don't know what else to do.

When I have time, I will post all my reviews for you, dear reader, to consider. Until then, thanks again for supporting me, thanks for reading and sally forth.

ABNA -- I'm out

I haven't blogged but once since I entered the Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award contest this year, and I made it a point not to post about the contest. I didn't want to become consumed with ABNA or have people asking me how it was going.

I first entered in 2009 with DEATH AT THE JUNGLE-BUNNY JOURNAL, though I went with a name that was more PC. I was eliminated in the first round. I just missed entering AN UNTIDY AFFAIR in the contest in 2010, missing the cutoff deadline by mere minutes.

This year I entered Affair under the title A NASTY AFFAIR by M. Stewart Dunn.

To enter the contest, you submit a 300-word pitch, which is judged in the first round, a 5,000-word excerpt from the beginning of the novel, which is judged in the second round, and the entire manuscript, which is used to determine the semi-finalists, finalists and the two eventual winners.

Since I didn't do well in 2009 and I spent hardly any time writing the pitch this year, I was surprised (and pleased) to make it through the first round. Plus, I got two wonderful Amazon Vine reviews of the excerpt -- with one reviewer saying, "The author's talent is there in spades" -- as I advanced to the quarter-finalist round. (Wasn't sure how I felt about the 'spades' comment but decided to take it on face value.) And I got five customer reviews. Four of the five were very positive.

I felt quite hopeful of being named a semi-finalist but, alas, it is not to be. Ths list of semi-finalists was announced less than an hour ago and my name isn't on it.

I was well-aware of the possibility, of course. The competition was very strong this year. But I had confidence in my writing, and in the story. Where I lacked confidence, however, was in my self-editing.

I read through the novel line by line before I entered the contest but, since the submission period was already open, I didn't think I had time to have someone else proof it for me before I entered. Afterwards, I was surprised and embarrassed at the spelling and other errors in the ms. But there was nothing I could do about it but hope. In the end, I'm sure the errors hurt my chances of advancing, perhaps fatally hurting them.

I feel about as bad as I thought I'd feel but life goes on. I plan to go over the manuscript completely again and have someone else do a final read. Then I plan to let the query letters fly again and see where it all leads.

And I am on the third draft of the novel I wrote last November during National Novel Writing Month. It is stronger that Affair and I plan to enter it in next year's ABNA competition.

So that's it for me at the moment. Sad but resolute.

Thanks for reading and keep writing.

Sorry I have been away

I am sorry, dear readers in Russia, China and Brazil (I get people from all over), that I have been away. It's been a busy time for me and I just haven't had a lot to say. Plus, once I got out of the habit of posting, even on a semi-regular basis, it was easy to allow work and everyday life to intrude further into this part of my writing life.

So, I am back again.

Probably won't have much more to say this week, but next week I will probably have a lot of my mind and will fill you in on things then.

Until then, have a good week. Thanks for reading and keep writing.

ABNA -- brief update

I finally did it this evening. I entered ABNA.

I also did something I said I wouldn't do. I commented under my real name on one of the threads. I'm sorry but I couldn't help it. The threads are addictive and sometimes destructive. So, from now on, I plan to avoid the whole thing and let my writing stand on its own.

I entered under a pen name, and used the name of a male child that my wife and I never had. (We have daughters.) She smiled when I mentioned to her the name I used.

I haven't been very productive this month with my blog. Lots going on. But I should be back on the horse next month.

Have a good weekend and thanks for reading.

Cancer II

This is only the fourth time in the last 15 months I have written about cancer. But this blog is suppose to be about my journey as a writer and the things that affect me as a writer. (Which, by the way, brings up the point whether it should be affect or effect. I always have a hard time remembering which is which. So if I just got it wrong, well, at this moment I don't give a flying .... .)

I have some work to do on my current WIP but this evening I'm having a hard time with it. Writing fiction is like dreaming, and then writing it down. And tonight I'm having a hard time dreaming.

The reason is that I went to a prostate cancer support group meeting today, something I rarely do and I am now reminded why. It depresses me. Yes, I feel fine. Actually, I always have. The times when I haven't felt good have always been because of the treatment of the disease, not from the disease itself. I have never noticed a symptom of prostate cancer.

I went through eight-and-a-half weeks of external radiation treatment last winter. It was my "winter project," if you recall. But today I was reminded yet again that I don't know yet whether I am cured. I was told it could take 18 months to two years before we'd know for sure. I normally put such thoughts out of my mind because at the moment there isn't anything I can do about it, cured or not. But it is still like the Sword of Damocles over my head.

So tonight I can't write. Or at least it's a struggle.

I did everything I was suppose to do, everything my doctor and my pastor asked me to do. Now I just have to wait.

I hate this. I want the dreams to come easily like before. This really sucks.

But thanks for reading. And now I will try to take my oft-repeated advice and keep writing.

Endings . . . and redemptions

I am struck by the fact that I like happy endings, particularly in stories. Sentimental, yes, I know that. But it's not like I can't find satisfaction in a sad ending because I can. That is as long as the ending makes sense and there is some degree of redemption in the story.

So that brings me to my critique group. I won't mention names here, of course, but they all know I enjoy their stories and value them comments on my writing.

There is one woman in the group -- I will call her Kia -- who loves dark, creepy stories. I don't care for them much but I truly love her writing. She is a brilliant storyteller, has vivid descriptions and snappy dialogue. But she loves the dark side.

This week, we read a short story by another woman -- I will call her Angie -- that was full of mystical elements, which I could accept, and a surprising and shocking ending, where the protag is murdered. Now the protag wasn't a particularly likable person, certainly wasn't in the beginning. She was full of anger and pain. But Angie was wonderfully able paint a fuller picture of her as the story developed and there was a level of redemption in her life.

Then she is killed off.

Ninety to 95 percent of the story was great but Angie destroyed it in the last 300 words. I hated it and didn't pick it up again until my critique group meeting, though it was on my mind a lot. And I wondered how Kia, who loves the dark side, felt about Angie's story.

She disliked it, too.

The problem was nothing in the story up until that point -- not in its details or in its tone -- suggested the type of ending. It cheated the reader because there was little redemption and no justice in the outcome. It was like having a story about puppy dogs, and kitty cats, and unicorns, and daisies, and sunshine. Then suddenly at the end, having Freddie Kruger show up and stuff the kitties into a wood chipper. Despite the mere horror of it all, the ending would make no sense.

In my stories, I strive for them to make sense. I end them where I do because that's where the end is. I always want the ending to leave the reader satisfied, even if it's not totally happy.

Angie's story is a case study in what I will avoid.

Thanks for reading, and keep writing.

SinC survey

The Sisters in Crime Mystery Book Consumer Study is done and is online. I will look for the link and give it to you later. Analyzing the results should help in planning marketing strategies. So I will be looking at the study closely in the days and weeks ahead. I haven't read the study yet -- and I look forward to seeing some of the racial demographics -- but here are some of the results. (I am quoting below directly from the e-mail I got today.)

The majority of mystery/crime fiction buyers tend to be women over the age of 45. Overall, 68 percent of mysteries are purchased by women; more than half of mystery buyers are more than 45 years of age. Buyers 18 to 44 years of age purchase 31 percent of the mysteries sold.

Most of the mystery buyers – 48 percent – live in suburban areas, 27 percent reside in rural areas and 25 percent live in urban areas.

The majority of mysteries – 35 percent – are purchased by individuals who live in the South, 26 percent are purchased by people in the West, 20 percent by those in the Midwest and 19 percent by individuals in the Northeast.

Mysteries are obtained mostly through purchases from brick-and-mortar stores, followed by library borrowing and online purchasing. A total of 39 percent are obtained through in-store purchases, 19 percent are borrowed from libraries and 17 percent are purchased online. Online purchases in the mystery genre top those for other types of fiction.


More later.

Thanks for reading and keep writing.

ABNA -- again!

I must be an idiot (or a glutton for punishment at the very least) but I decided to enter the Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award contest again this year. But I also decided to follow some advice by online friend and published author James King, the 2009 ABNA winner.

I entered ABNA that year and found the expereince less than pleasant, though not because Jim ultimately -- and quite deservedly -- won. Some of the people I encountered in the online chat threads were not just competitive, which was to be expected -- we all were competitive -- but also downright nasty about it. I networked a lot on the threads and, despite the nasties, I thankfully met plenty of wonderful people and many of them I now consider friends.

At the time, Jim wasn't one of them. And that was probably because his approach to the contest was smart.

I met Jim face-to-face for the first time last fall during at one of his book tour events in Ohio. And I asked him whether he read or commented in the ABNA threads during the contest. He said no. He just entered and let it rip.

So I decided to do the same this year. I'm going to enter and just let my writing speak for me. I won't hang out talking and waiting. I don't plan to get all caught up in the contest as I have before. I will know something when they contact me.

I won't say which novel I will enter and I will use a pseudonym, though I haven't decided which name to use. I am reading over my entry now, nipping and tucking where I think it may need it. And I'm going to have my wife, who is great at marketing, write the first draft of my novel pitch, though I won't blame her if I don't make it past stage one because I will write the last draft of the pitch.

So there you have it. This is probably my last mention of this year's contest unless I make the semi-final round later in the spring. And I may not mention it then, either.

I have the talent, I believe, but success is often a matter of luck. So wish me luck.

And, as always, thanks for reading.

Gender bias

I joined Sisters in Crime several years ago for a variety of reasons and have totally embraced the concept of equality for female writers in the industry, in general, and in the mystery genre, in particular. To me, it isn't a question of limiting men or of limiting men's access in the industry. It is about elevating the access of women.

Put it like this. It isn't just about women getting a bigger piece of the literary pie. It's about caking a bigger pie. Then, everyone benefits. (Not the perfect analogy, I know. It has flaws. But I think you get the point and I want to move on.)

There is an issue I was unaware of before I joined SinC and something the organization has been crusading about for years. It's the issue of gender bias in book reviews. Who is reviewed and why?

SinC's Monitoring Project has for more than two decades tracked mystery book reviews in key publications. And the bottomline is that even in the 21st Century -- yes, the enlightened 21st Century -- male authors tend to get more reviews than women. The Project recently reported that in 22 publications through the third quarter of 2010, only four reviewed more female authors than men.

An article in SinC's December newsletter mentioned a monitoring project conducted by Slate, the online magazine, in which it counted the adult fiction reviews in The New York Times over a two-year period. Its results showed 67 percent of the reviews went to men. And of those getting a double shot, with a review in the daily paper and in the Sunday Book Review, the number shot to 71 percent in favor of men.

(The newsletter also pointed out that only men made Publishers Weekly's Best of 2009 list.)

All of this makes me wonder -- Are there that many more male authors than female authors? I don't know the demographics but I doubt that is the case. Then -- and I can barely believe I'm about to say this -- are men inherently better writers than women? I doubt that, too.

So the only reasonable conclusion is there is a gender bias. But why?

I have worked for a national business news magazine (BusinessWeek), an international wire service (United Press International) and a newspaper (the African-American daily, The Philadelphia Tribune), and have written book reviews for each. And I know that if a publication wanted to review more books by women it is a simple decision to do so. Publications get tons of manuscripts. And it is up to the editors which books are reviewed.

It's obvious, it seems to me, something is wrong here. The question is, will anything be done about it. Since SinC has been fighting this battle for decades, it doesn't seem promising.

But what is promising is that three years ago I was totally unaware this problem existed. I wasn't enlightened. (I don't remember every book I have reviewed but I must sadly admit that probably only a few were by women.) So maybe education is part of the answer. Bringing this issue to light should help in its solution. I can't imagine that in the 21st Century it wouldn't be. And that, as the newsletter pointed out, is "precisely why Sisters in Crime started the Monitoring Project."

Thanks for reading and keep writing.

Query rejections

I got into a heated discussion with my wife a couple of nights ago. We were in the car and she was talking about her work, and I could feel the anger rising up in me as she talked. I couldn't believe she was being so stupid and short-sighted. Or, to be accurate, I thought her position was stupid and short-sighted.

She is a senior vice president for her employer and two positions reporting directly to her are vacant. This is a serious problem for her because the positions are critical and until they are filled and the people are fully functioning, doing her job will be much harder for my wife.

It's an employers market and she says they have more than 300 applications, and most are qualified for one of the positions. But no more than half the applications will ever land on her desk at any point and fewer than 20 applicants will get any sort of interview.

She says she has dozens of cover letters to review and she makes up her mind in seconds whether consider or reject the applicant. And one of the deciding factors is whether there is a mistake -- ANY SORT OF MISTAKE -- in the cover letter. Spelling, grammar, a typo -- doesn't matter. The person is rejected. They could be perfect in every other way, could be perfect for the job, but she rejects them.

"Why would you do that?" I asked. "You have made small mistakes before."

She said there has to be a method for quickly getting through the applications and cover letters, and that is one method she uses.

The reason I got so hot under the collar was because just the day before I was reading some agent who said a tiny mistake in a query letter isn't a good thing, of course, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're going to get a rejection.

After listening to my wife, whom, by the way, is a beautiful woman I'm most proud of, I wasn't so sure the agent was telling the truth. In fact, I thought they were lying.

Agents get dozens of query letters a day, hundreds a week, much like the hundreds of applications my wife has. And agents must weed through them. And I suspect a small error will get you bounced. Agents can't possibly have the time to seriously read all those queries. They have to find ways to get to the bottom of the pile.

Knowing I could be rejected for as minor a problem as one misplaced comma is a scary thought. All prospective writers pour over their letters looking for something to give them a slight edge. But I hate to think that an otherwise wonderfully written query letter could sink the chances for a brilliantly executed novel because the writer had a little typo. It puts even more pressure on you to have the perfect query. (As if you don't have enough pressure.) But anyone can make a mistake.

Life just doesn't seem fair.

Thanks for reading and don't give up. See ya next time.