Having trouble with this format

I'm having a little trouble figuring out the new format on Blogger. As the person doing the blog -- not just writing it online -- I'm not sure where things are on my blog, and not how i go about finding them. It's somewhat easier today but it's still strange and new, not two words I am always comfortable with.

On other news, a friend from my critique group who made the quarterfinals in this year's Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award contest unfortunately failed to make the semifinals this week. I saw her yesterday at our critique group meeting and she seems to be taking it as well as can be expected. By the time you reach the quarterfinals, you begin to seriously think of making it to the end. But then, when you dreams are dashed (as mind were at this point last year in ABNA), it still stings a little. I feel sorry for her but I tried to be supporter. After all, I know what you is going through.

Also in other news, I started a blog draft last week about Amazon and the publishing industry. I should post it soon. It should be interesting, so be on the look out.

Lastly, not only did I break my single month record for pageviews, I doubled the previous record -- and the month isn't finished yet. We have another four days to go. And more and more pageviews are of recent posts. So I must be getting more readers. I hope so.

That's it for now. I gave my critique group a new short story yesterday. Will hear their comments in two weeks. Sending out query letters for The Last Tontine Survivor. Haven't heard anything yet. My short story for the next Sisters in Crime anthology isn't panning out, so I will try something else.

Thanks for reading and don't stop 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.

Critique groups

I am in two critique groups at the moment -- one that meets monthly and one that meets every other weeks. But I think I will drop one in the new year because I'm increasingly having trouble remembering what to submit to each group and when. Then, after we meet, it's become difficult to juggle the comments and gain the greatest value from them. Both groups are looking at the same work, though at different points.

This is a difficult decision, however, because I have grown quite fond of the members of both groups and will miss their insights. But it is a decision that has to be made.

I encourage every new writer I meet to join a critique group. The insights of fellow writers is often invaluable. When I read someone's work, I consider it as a whole and piece by piece, line by line. In that way, the writer can see where I am providing a more objective view and where I am being subjective and nit-picky.

Plus it always amazes me when another wirter sees the same exact problems I do.

Any critique group is only as good as its weakest member, which I fear in both cases is me. Both groups have their strengths and weaknesses, but the one I will drop is obvious to me.

I won't inform the group until in January but the one I will drop is the monthly group. We only meet 11 times a year, whereas with the bi-weekly group we will meet at least 24 times in a year. Thus, by sheer numbers, it is a more productive group. But it is also a group with strong members.

In the end, I will know fairly soon if I made the correct decision, which also won't be set in stone. If this group doesn't work out, I will just find another one.

So there you have it.

My goals will be coming next week. Until then, thanks for reading and keep writing.

POV

Until the last handful of years when I seriously took up writing fiction, I never gave much thought to point of view. As a journalist, most of my writing has been in third-person. Whether at a news conference or witnessing events as they unfolded, I was like a fly on the wall. I observed and wrote what I heard or observed but not as a participant.

There have been exceptions, of course.

Besides the editorials I wrote for The Philadelphia Tribune (for which I won a couple of awards, thank you very much), my writing career includes a handful of first-person articles about experiences I had, including two I had at racing school. But my favorite first-person article was while I worked for United Press International. It was about an experiment at the Franklin Institute science museum in Philadelphia.

Using only paper, Popsicle sticks, string, glue and other materials found around the kitchen, a group of us, including an 11-year-old boy named Noah, had 15 minutes to construct something that would hold an egg and protect it from breaking when dropped from 12 feet onto some bricks. I felt particularly competitive toward Noah, though he was only one-third my age, and when I wrote the article I proudly announced to the world that I succeeded where most failed (though Noah wasn't one of them).

I have always felt most comfortable as a writer using a third-person POV. But as a reader, I generally don't care. In fact, I don't think most readers care. Or at least I don't think most readers who aren't writers actually care or even notice. So when other writers in my critique group say I sometimes switch POV when in third-person, I don't see it. I don't understand. It seems consistent throughout to me.

Then yesterday, I bell went off in my head and for the first time I got what other writers were talking about. I was reading James King's BILL WARRINGTON'S LAST CHANCE, which I have praised in the past and suggest you read. I was aware of whose head the writer in mind from chapter to chapter, and I noticed its consistency and when and why it changed.

James' writing is wonderful, descriptive and, it turns out, instructive.

I think I am going to stick with first-person narrative in my fiction for a while. It is challenging for me but also easier to keep consistent. So the next time I change POV, it will be with knowledge of forethought.

I've learned something. Thanks James.

And thanks to all of you for reading. Now go write something and don't give up.

Critique group

One of the best ways for a beginning writer to improve their writing is by joining a critique group. I have joined a couple of online groups but they never seem to suit me. You can get criticism from other writers but often they are more harsh than supportive or encouraging, and often you don't hear from the same people. Thus the value is greatly diminished.

I prefer a group in which you face others directly.

I have been in a group associated with Sisters in Crime for two years. We meet monthly before the SinC meeting. It is a wonderful group of people and I have gained much from them and plan to continue. We actually are broken down into two groups which rotate about every six months. So, you see the same people for a number of months but also ultimately get the perspective of everyone over time.

I was asked this week if I wanted to join another group which meets every other Wednesday and I decided to give it a try. This group also has aspiring writers but they have been published more than my first group and there is slightly more diversity. I am the only man in my SinC-associated group. The new group has at least one man.

I am looking for more perspective in my writing and, by joining a second group, I think I will get it.

I am looking forward to it.

Thanks for reading and keep writing.

Gotta stop building a watch

Years ago, while I was working as a reporter at United Press International, a fellow reporter jokingly said whenever someone asks me the time, I tell them how to build a watch. I tell people more than they need to know.

I have always thought that was funny, though I have to admit he was right to some degree.

I got the same sort of comment last Saturday at my writing critique group. There are times when I just write too much. I take two paragraphs to say what I should say in one sentence. (A long sentence, I asked. No, was the reply.)

Sherita Campbell, a wonderful and funny little woman who would read Tarot cards for me if I'd let her, said I would increase the tension in my writing if sometimes I just got straight to the point by saying, "I walked in the room. There was a blond. I shot her."

I laughed -- it really is funny, don't you think? -- but I have also been trying to take it to heart. (Can't tell by this posting, though.)

Instead of telling someone how to build a watch, I will get to the point! -- and shoot someone.

Thanks, Steve Morgan (wherever you are) and Sherita Campbell.

I'm confused

I have been away and have been busy in the last week, which is why I haven't posted for a while. And in the last week I have also been doing some soul-searching regarding my career.

No, I don't doubt my decision regarding the pursuit of a fiction writing career. But I have been thinking about the execution.

I don't believe a person needs a fine arts undergrad or post-graduate degree to be a good writer. But I also don't approach my writing with the same technical understanding of the craft as someone with a BFA. I don't approach a story thinking about the technical aspects, such as how to raise the personal stakes for my protagonist or with how to create tension.

I don't contemplate how I create conflict and with whether there is enough conflict for the main character to overcome.

I just write. And when I finish, I look at it and re-write it and re-write it until it feels right to me. (Or I get totally tired of it.)

Writing is hard and involves a lot of effort. That effort is quite personal to me. But I don't feel that someone reading my fiction is somehow peering through a looking glass into the deepest reaches of my soul. I don't feel vested in my stories in that way. They are fiction. They are make-believe. I am real. And I am somewhat removed from my fiction as a result.

I love some of my characters. I hate some of my characters. Actually, some of my characters are me. But they are fictionalized accounts of me -- vested with my best traits or the best of characteristics that I wished I had. And again, they are not me.

Perhaps it is because of my lack in introspection and knowledge of the technical aspects of the craft that is standing in the way of my career advancing. Perhaps that is why I don't have an agent -- the partials display my imperfections for all to see.

I don't know. And because I don't know, I have no idea how to proceed. What do I do? What must I do to improve?

I am not so discouraged as I am at a loss. I am confused. I don't know what to do next. I just know I have to keep trying.

And so I will.

And so should you.

Is she white?

I got a funny and surprising question last Saturday from the members of my critique group, all of whom, it turns out, are middle-aged white women. Someone asked me if a particular character in my current novel, AN UNTIDY AFFAIR, is white. The character's name is Samantha and she is the secretary/clerical assistant to my protagonist David Blaise, and a former Ho (a.k.a. Baby Cakes). What was so surprising to me is that everyone in the group was wondering the same thing.

Writing fiction to me is like having a long, elaborate daydream and writing it all down. I see each character in my head as I write them in each scene. I describe who they are and how they look and try to demonstrate things about their character by the actions I also describe.

Samantha is a fun but minor character. I give her something to do in this novel but plan to show more of who she is in my next David Blaise novel, which will be a prequel. I know what Samantha looks like and I thought I described her well, including mentioning something about her race.

But looking back through the text I now realize that I don't clearly state her race. It is vague, which is what prompted the question. I also found another character, also a woman, about whom I don't provide a firm indication of race.

I like my critique group and I take their suggestions seriously and, in return, I make serious suggestions when it is my turn to discuss someone else's work. I don't always use the suggestions I get -- nor do I expect someone to always take my suggestions -- but I have learned to rely on their objective judgments.

I know what race Samantha is and can clarify the point with just one sentence in the text, and probably with even less than a sentence. But it is the collective judgment of the group that I do nothing. I should leave it as it is and allow the reader to decide, if they wish.

Samantha's race doesn't play a role in the story. It only provides some detail about her. So is it necessary to state which race she is. No, I don't think it is.

For now, I am leaving it the way it is. But what do you think?

You can leave comments here or on my Facebook page.

Thanks for reading and keep writing.