The Reluctant "I"

I've learned TONS from my Nashville SCBWI Mid-South Conference this September past. Three big things stood out for me, though. Well, and you know, if I listed everything here, you'd be bored to tears and find the next Westbound Ocela train as fast as it's permitted to speed the rails.

But first:

Big, heartfelt thank yous to The InGenuity Depot Followers! Kudos and props to you all for patiently waiting when this blog would get out from "the dark," and following my writing triumphs and tribulations through my WIPs gestations. You guys rock--and you always will.

On with the show!

Caroline B. Cooney, author of THE FACE ON THE MILK CARTON and some seven dozen other reads, mentioned during the conference and JERSEY DOG's first ten pages crit, "I'm not a fan of first person narrative because it takes the writer FOREVER to let the reader know who this person is! With third person," Cooney stated, "the reader gets to know who this person is right away, puts a name to a character and gets right in the character's life and story. First person takes far too much time--pretentiously expecting the reader to, too--to let us get to know their troubles, their name, their concerns."

Paraphrasing mine, but that aside, other than her personal preference--which Cooney said was third person in leisure reads and her works--she holds a rock-solid point. Melville gets right to Captain Ishmael's name in the first line of MOBY DICK, but apart from that, I can't think of many first person reads that do what Melville did. S.E. Hinton's classic first novel THE OUTSIDERS takes some four pages until we know who Ponyboy Curtis is; some five pages until we know who Texas McCormick is in TEX--but that's not totally fair, since, well, the book's the kid's name, so technically, this one gets a pass, as does Twain's HUCK FINN and Dickens' DAVID COPPERFIELD. Older boileroom private eye reads get right to who their "I"s are, too. For the most part, now with Cooney's scrutiny in mind, yesterday's and today's first person reads take pages long to let the reader in on who they are. And we writers don't have that kind of time or luxury anymore for pages of nameless first person narratives.

Why the reluctance? I'm not really sure. The point logically valid, we're in the age of instantaneous gratification and having a satisfied bottom line to that gratification. We should get to the point of naming the "I"s in the stories (and in plot, too), because, as rotten as this is the case, we'll hold a bookstore browser's attention all of 30 seconds or less no matter which book they pick up. You can have a whale of a story, but if someone finds something wrong with the book--be it you said the person's name too early or too late in that 30 second span--it won't get bought. Period.

*******

I found myself real hesitant in seeing Cooney about JERSEY DOG's first ten pages. Although I knew going in they were an initial mess and the solution eluded me for some reason--it's a tighter open that'll make the revision process more fun, thanks to her ideas--after Cooney's badass boot camp of rapid-fire style writing, and her having over eighty books in print, AND the fame in MILK CARTON (also a Lifetime TV movie), AND getting my tuckus handed to me in my day's prior crit to BREATHE the person could've found something else nice to say about it aside from "I liked the setting," AND learning her stance on first person, I had a good grip on what a spent dishrag went through in cleaning a 300 person service. I was scared green, kids, and I don't scare easy. Instead, I got the tear up crit AND a confidence boost: Loving the writing aside, she also loved the risk of unsafe writing I did for my McGuinness guys, and their finding a corpse how they did, and loved that I usually wrote that way. I told her--in a stunned voice, mind you--it's what I grew up on when I read books; my sister fared better with dollhouses and tea parties during childhood than I did. I wanted to live those boys' adventures, get dirty, play rough, and yeah, okay, I admit it, kiss the cute guy grungy from the Dumpsters and day's sweat and grime.

How long did it take me to get to my nameless "I?" Seven pages.

But someone like Cooney, even through the grungepit of a first draft, saw what I did, imperfections and all--and buoyed me in spite of the imperfections. I'm still glowing from the crit--and after my move to Gettysburg, PA, I'm getting right back into JERSEY's and BREATHE's adventures.

No longer am I a "reluctant I."

*******

When you write first person, remember "I" is a pronoun, too. And with writing, you can still, even in first drafts and in third person, watch the overuse of this little word and its sibling variations. Me, my, we, us, ours can be minimalized; we're still going to know you're writing in first person, but this overemphasis of the "I" should be downplayed.

In Brian Kiteley's amazing writing tool THE 3am BREAKTHROUGH, he's got Lesson One titled "The Reluctant I." Here, he challenges the writer to do this exercise in 600 words, using the "I" reference three times only, and once must be in the title of the piece. I was like, "Dude, you're nuts. No way!"

But it works! As often as you'll peeve readers in the overuse of pronouns--and this habit outright makes an editor or agent pass on you, regardless of story--you'll have a reader re-reading your story to catch what they thought they missed: the lack of the "I" landmarks there. Think of it as unnecessary and distracting word clutter. Don't you want your readers engrossed in the characters and story, as opposed to you, through your "I" reference, being pretentiously intrusive in your character's story?

On that, I reluctantly bid you all a lovely adieu. Next stop: Gettysburg and ghost hunting!

~Missye

Hello SCBWI Fans from Music City!

I'm learning so much great info here, gang, from perfecting my story's elevator pitch to the "No 1st person present for you!" exercise on the "Don't Think, Just Write!" exercises this morning. Sure, sometimes it was conflicting information--but this is where we as writers (in the Brian Kiteley skein/blogpost prior) need to discern that sometimes, not everyone's end-all, be-all is a fit for you. Tell your character's story from the gut, from the heart and from the soul. It'll be a good one. And don't you DARE let anyone edit that out.

I'm also getting my first-ever, first of two partial MS critiques from an agent. Tonight: Chris Richman will give me his what's hot (what's good and why)/what's not (what's going and why) vibe on BREATHE and my guy, Zak. I'll mos def let everyone know how that goes.

BTW--gots love for you, Caroline, and there's a lotta adventure in JERSEY and BREATHE, but I'm sticking with 1st person. . .past :). Two outta three ain't bad.

Gotta fly, gang! I'll post more soon.

~Missye

Brevity. Unconventional. Screwball. Threshhold.

This, my friends, means B. U. S. T. If ever you got stuck for writer's block, or faced a mocking blank page--or even stared at the wall--this post will recommend you, dear followers, what to read and how to CRUSH your writer's block to smithereens.

Brian Kiteley penned this unimposing THE 3a.m. EPIPHANY reference. What I found in its pages--and you may, too--opened a world of resonating colors, yummy sounds and in-depth tastes that pushed my writing to the outer edges of . . . organized pandemonium. Take, for example, the Ph. D's exercise #2: "The Reluctant I." You are permitted to use this 1st person POV just twice, in 600 words, and once MUST be in the title of your piece.

How's that for "screwball"? Or is it "twoball"? :)

Part of the reason we've got writer's block, yes, is laziness. Who wants to write something so out there it's too out there for consideration? Yet, it's that wackiness--the semantics of "Duck, Rabbit, Duck!"--that makes this reference so damn goosebumps thrilling. And a must in every serious writer's library.

The second reason? Get out your own way, stupid!

In Kiteley's sequel, the award-winning author expects each and every one of us reading this 4a. m. BREAKTHROUGH reference to train the writing instincts so you can write naturally, not put pen to paper--or pixel letter to screen--for the masses. You can't ever write by committee, and if you do, your work is goosecrap. This reference expects you to take your writing to places you knew instinctively, but was either critiqued out of it, edited out of it, or self-doubted out of it. Not anymore. As I select my writing tools, weapons and "irons" by sense of smell, I, like you, was sometimes told, "You're a great writer and keep your 'What If. . . ?' imagination sharp and voice, sharper. .Just fit it in this box. Do that, you'll be a helluva writer. Do it not. . .mediocre is all you'll be."

Being on the edge makes for mediocre writing? Since when? Brevity, unconventional, screwy, and on the threshold of something incredible that covers your soul in a rainbow is bad, how? If the literary, artsy-fartsy types don't get it, it's "too mainstream." If the mainstream types can't class it, it's too "avant-garde." And if it's neither, both will argue why it's the other one.

As the former mayor of NYC, Ed Koch, would always say to his nit-picky critics: "WRONG!" Stop!

Go BUST things up a little when creating. Keep it short. You'll be amazed how surgical and clean you are, you genius wordsmith you :).

~Missye

Tense Present, Tense Past. . .Is That The Question (Or Was That WAS. . .?)

This site will go dark this Monday and will resume with a fresh post on Tuesday.

A member of my Writing Well crit group posed a very good question regarding his novel. He asked if it's best served to write his story in present tense or past tense.

Being the (usual) dissenting voice, I offered my perspective that might be a good fit for his puzzle (barring other writers who shared their great, though limited IMO, views one the topic):

"Daniel",

I can understand how writing in present tense in first--or even third--is daunting. But it's not limiting in any scheme of things. You're so used to saying "said" or "did", "moved," or "ran" b/c that's how you're acting in life. When you speak to someone and mention what you'd done, you're speaking in the recent past, but it's still present past. Technically, as we write, it's present past, b/c in the now, timewise, it's not/past/present/future at the same time. And, it'd be really weird to speak of your actions in the present-present--I run, I sleep, I drink--b/c it isn't what you do. So, yes, it's limiting in timeframe, but not limiting in story--unless you keep the story shorter than you'd intended.

I know you don't write kid-lit like I do, but quite a few YA/MG authors wrote in present tense and did so beautifully. One comes to mind: Paula Danziger and her stories were told in the immediacy factor. If your story has to hold an urgency to it that may NOT work in past present, go for present tense. Granted, many here have already said it's hard to write that way, and it is. But your story dictates in which tense it should be told, and which tense would it serve better in. If it's better served in past, leave it in past. If it's better served in present, leave it in present. And, Danziger's known not just for her books but for her amazing footwork in first person present. I've read her books for years; you forget she's writing that way and get into the story.

Another one who tells a great story in first person present: Joan Bauer. She wrote a kid lit book--that has plenty of adults in it with adult situations going on--called STICKS, and again, it's the immediacy factor this story holds that drove the use for first person present in the first place. Same for K.L. Going's SAINT IGGY, and James Patterson's MAXIMUM RIDE reads too. It can be done. It's hard as hell to do. But it's the story you're telling that'll dictate how it best feels to tell it in.

Good luck. We're always here to help. :) I say go for it, first person present. If anything, I think it'll force you to make sure your plot's airtight and your characters are spot-on and deep enough to care about.

I've never been too irked over people writing in first present, really, because a good story gets told however it needs telling to make it a fine, memorable read. But, as the proverbial expression goes "too many cooks spoil the soup," so do too many hands passing through your story kills its intimacy, urgency, luster and heart. I'll never disagree with getting your story read by a set of trusting eyes to find holes you're too close to see. But I heartily stand on the premise of too many people tweaking the tweaked, the perfection is tweaked from it. Someone getting what you meant, your voice, your rhythm, versus someone else calling your perfection "sh*t" is the antithesis of you growing and shaping as a writer. That's exactly what you don't want with your work, or mine with mine.

I've got more to say on this topic with a conference call link I'll post here next week: The "new" new math in writing. What's that? Gotta tune in to find out :).

So, what say you on present tense verses past tense? Does it work, does it not work--and most important: why?

Happy Labor Day weekend!
~Missye

"Breathing" In "Orange Juice"

It's a given: to be a fine writer, you've got to be a voracious reader. It's also no secret I'm a big fan of audible downloads to read too. But two books jarred me from my writing complacency: one I read in my teens and the other, completed just last week. Both resonate with me, still.

They are BREATHING UNDERWATER by Alex Flinn and a 1960s cult classic and the full version (the 21st chapter included) by Anthony Burgess, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE. Although these reads aren't in my mystery/spec genre, they did tap for me the intimacy of knowing your characters well, turns of phrasing, brevity and to make sure scenes move forward to the chief character's end goal.

Like CLOCKWORK--okay, you get the idea--BREATHING UNDERWATER is going to be a favorite of mine, even through the subject Flinn tackled was a difficult one to sit through: dating violence. However, Flinn told this story superbly through the eyes of the abuser, Nic Andreas, through writing exercises in a journal. The book starts slow and hasn't chapters, but a third of the way into it, it snowballs and you wonder does Nic ever show remorse for what he'd done. I won't be a spoiler, but I did find myself feeling sorry for more than just Nic--and garnering a clearer understanding of the phrase "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree."

My stepdad was an abuser, as was my father. Both these men learned this abuse from their fathers, and in turn, passed down what they knew. I know this first hand b/c my late uncle (who never talked about his family life growing up with his two brothers and sister, incidentally) wasn't a violent man as much as my dad was. Through his unspoken language and my dad's outspoken one--and through Flinn's and Burgess's books--I was able to piece together a past I wasn't told. Hearing things told from Nic's POV why he was on such a destructive path gave me a perspective seldom told in heavy issues like these. Flinn handled this with dignity, class and a masterful touch, voice and all. I'll refer to these reads time and again to get down my male characters' voices. Besides and sadly, there's more than one way to be abusive, since not all abuse is and will ever be, physical.

To me, this is a modern twist on Burgess's A CLOCKWORK ORANGE (and if you read the full version with the 21st chapter, you'll understand the impact). There's one parallel between Alex and Nic I've discovered: Can you be made to be good if you're left with no choice to do so? The rest, when and if you've read both books, are left for your conclusions.

I highly recommend CLOCKWORK and BREATHING UNDERWATER. This proves unquestionably how easy reading sure is damn hard writing. For more impactful reading, writing about very uncomfortable topics and teens who trevail that road in life, yet handled eloquently as Burgess and Flinn have done, is damned harder writing still.

Now. . .other than posting a comment, go buy the books!
~Missye

A Muse-Quotable Stew

“There are two kinds of [successful] writers: those that make you think, and those that make you wonder.” - Brian Aldiss

"There is such thing as mind over matter. Those who mind, don't matter and those who matter, don't mind."
--Theodore Geisel, a.k.a. "Dr. Seuss."

Elizabeth Berg wrote this about writing: "I crave it. When I don't have it, I suffer. I feel like a drug addict with an exceptionally wise drug of choice."

Want more writing inspiration? Here's one from Margare Laurence: “Amazingly, the gift was given to me once again,” she writes. “One morning, in the spring of 1971, I woke up with a thought in my mind. I took a notebook out to the lawn and began to write a novel that I knew even then would be called The Diviners. It felt as though I had been waiting for it, and it had been waiting for me. I couldn’t write it fast enough.”
- From DANCE ON THE EARTH.

“Don’t write down to your readers. The ones dumber than you can’t read.”
--Jack Bickham, The 38 Most Common Mistakes for Fiction Writers

Scottish author William Meikle says, “As a writer, it’s all too easy to concentrate on the mechanics of submitting work to editors and to forget that the writing itself is of primary importance. We should all be constantly seeking to improve. If we do that, editorial approval will become that much easier.”

"Too many people overvalue what they are not and undervalue what they are."
— Malcolm Forbes (1919-1990), American Publisher.

“It may be hard for an egg to turn into a bird: it would be a jolly sight harder for it to learn to fly while remaining an egg. We are like eggs at present. And you cannot go on indefinitely being just an ordinary, decent egg. We must be hatched or go bad.”
-- C.S. Lewis.

"Beyond talent lie all the usual words: discipline, love, luck, but most of all endurance." -- James Baldwin

"When something can be read without effort, great effort has gone into its writing."
--Enrique Jardiel Poncela

“Don’t keep working on a story or with a character you hate writing,” write Mlynowski and Jacobs in SEE JANE WRITE. “We’re not saying that every time you hit a rough patch you should give up. Au contraire - you need to write through that.”

"Whenever you are asked if you can do a job, tell 'em, 'certainly I can!'- and get busy and find out how to do it."-- Theodore Roosevelt

BIRD BY BIRD author Anne Lamott: “E. L. Doctorow once said that ‘writing a novel is like driving a car at night. You can see only as far as your headlights, but you can make the whole trip that way.’ You don’t have to see where you’re going, you don’t have to see your destination or everything you will pass along the way. You just have to see two or three feet ahead of you. That is right up there with the best advice about writing, or life, I have ever heard.”

“One of my first sales occurred when I read an article on horse training and thought, ‘I can do better than that!’ A writer isn’t going to get very far if she’s crushed by rejection slips or intimidated by everyone else out there who might be a better writer. You have to have a healthy coat of Teflon and faith that you can run with the big dogs, and that you deserve to!” - Barb Nefer.

"This manuscript of yours that has just come back from another editor is a precious package. Don't consider it rejected. Consider that you've addressed it 'to the editor that can appreciate my work' and it has simply come back stamped 'not at this address.' Just keep looking for the right address."
-- Barbara Kingsolver.

In closing, and to keep in mind much ego-shifting is in this game, I remember to thank my editors/crit group members for their changes and suggestions they make to my projects, no matter how bad the sting zings. The editors I’ve worked with--and writers I mentor as well as my harshest critics--only want the best, clearest, and most well-documented sentences published. They’re helping me become an even better writer tomorrow than I was yesterday. I’m grateful for their help/comments/suggestions/questions/clarifications/changes/notations/(it's madness!!) -- and I believe I’ll be an even more successful writer if I keep my attitude of humility and gratitude when yet another change or suggestion--or a dart thrown via a diatribe--sails, floats or thuds over the transom.

Dear Readers and Scribes, strive not to be perfect, not to be a bestselling author, and not to be a famous poet. As Eckhart Tolle says, "Live in this now." With that thought, just strive to be as good as YOU can, and want to, be.

~Missye

To Notify Or Not To Notify

in•ge•nu•i•ty: noun --
The quality of being clever, original and inventive. (New World Dictionary)

Depending on what it is, I get things with such alacrity I scare myself sometimes. On others I'm as dense as a bowling ball and don't much care about the issue. So that's one "clever" reason this blog's titled what it is. "Clever" can pertain to "snark" too. . .and if you're an Awesome Reader of this blog long enough, you got that about me :).

I'm always working on "originality" in my projects. Yes, staying abreast to what kids're reading and doing now is important (Halo, sexting, reading anything vampire or zombie-related, Final Fantasy, Guitar Hero and Garage Band, and copying silly moves from MTV's "Jackass" series). . .and what they could be doing later, but that's not always easy. So, I write what I want to read and hopefully, someone'll like it as I do. Leastwise my son does--and he's on the cusp of teenhood (God help us :)).

What a word "inventive" is. Tom Edison got laughed at for his light bulb he took almost ten thousand tries to get right. Inventive brought us the telephone and now mobiles (thanks Alexander Graham Bell), amazing uses for peanut butter (hooray George Washington Carver!) and penicillin (Madam Marie Curie, while you may be long gone, you still rock!). All three of these words, and history makers, make for things that get us well, brights the night and lets us talk to loved ones a full world away in an instant.

But isn't necessity always the mother of invention? Yep.

I'm attending a conference later this year where you're allowed to send in first pages of your WIPs. To see if you're on the right track or need to work on your WIP more. This is to gauge editorial reaction from an agent/editorial panel, and, to get in more reads from participants during time constraints, it's a reasonable less-than-200-words limit.

Here comes the "but." And you're wondering, "uh-oh, Missye's going to argue again." No, not really. Call me the "voice of dissent." Has a better ring than "argue" does, and besides, argue, in the Aristotlic philosophy, means to "persuade," anyhow. But, I digress.

I wondered, since we're living through a tight--and getting tighter--economy, would it be possible to let those know, since a second call for First Pages was issued, if those who made the cut the first time or can send in their initially disqualified FPs, in a bulk e-mail. I asked out of necessity, especially in these tight times.

Here's my idea: Everyone would be bulk e-mailed BCC'ed, and would be in two camps:

•Made the FP cuts (followed the guidelines to the letter):
"Thank you for your First Page submission. You will receive word at the conference of its acceptance." (Meaning: If yours gets read, sweet. If not, due to time constraints and in no particular order, hey, least they got the submission. And my sub is in this camp.)

•Didn't made the FP cuts (didn't follow directions):
"We would like to invite you to re-submit your First Pages submission. Upon receipt, we will notify you and you will receive word of its acceptance at the conference. Please note these strict guidelines: 200 word limit, 12 pt TNR, white or cream-colored paper ONLY, and 1" margins. If these aren't met, your entry will be disqualified. Should you meet the FP standards, you will receive word of its receipt. Thank you for participating!"

Does this method embarrass the ones who didn't follow the rules? No. A BCC bulk e-mail could happen and no one would be the wiser. And, since they have everyone's e-mail address anyway, I say this would work. Give it a shot, what harm could it do?

But I got a fat, resounding NO and a few, "so-and-so is so sweet to take this time, we would've been none the wiser if she didn't put out the call, be grateful (in not so many words) that she didn't throw it away, yada, yada" from a few conference registrants. And, the subject was summarily dropped.

I'm outright insulted.

So in laymen's terms, I don't get word my sent-in-the-first-time-and-correct first page met the guidelines (I noted the word count, made a record and made sure mine would make the pile), so send it in again to get the same handball-wall silence? At today's postage prices, ink cartridge prices, and paper prices, and no guarantee I'd get reviewed aloud before an editorial panel, anyway? The hell gives? Why the big mystery? How would this give me an edge over someone else or someone else over me? In the age of e-mail and faxes, why the big deal over its FPs secrecy? If you had to disqualify people and read through--or count through--the word limit and volunteered your time for this undertaking, shoot, get more help. Ask if someone'll enter e-mail addresses for you to send the two BCC mass e-mails. It's an added step, sure, but what's an added step to make sure it's done right and saving writers on essentials like postage, paper and ink cartridges? I even offered to assist, since it was my idea to do away with this "you can't know if yours made the cut until the conference" draconian nonsense in the first place. This business is a lonely one enough without so many barriers in place as it is; to not take the time to offer a simple acknowledgment of its receipt via message board or e-mail--apart from a postcard returned--is rude. They could lose it in the paper shuffle. Coffee could get spilled on it, or it could get wet, maybe ripped. Their grandkid could chew on it. Hey, if editors and agents expect that level of professionalism from us, it ought to be copied in the conferences, too.

Still got a NO. And, the subject was dropped.

I'm red-hot. Am I being unreasonable?

I'll still write regardless of publication. But I'm getting more than a little sick and tired of these invisible landmines publications put up to get published. I realize standards are needed; you'll get every Tom, Dick and Nancy calling themselves a writer to get in over the transom with God knows what kind of material. However, the rules can be tweaked a little--and a fast courtesy note isn't going to hurt a soul. Except for the ones not willing to take the time to do it, that is.

And yet, everywhere you read in the industry, the fortress-sustainers are on the continuous prowl for the "next blockbuster novel." Damn, you practically have to be a mental form of an American Gladiator to get through these obstacles publishers heave at us to get them that blockbuster novel. Seems to me for all the castle, knights and fairy stories agents, editors and houses are sick of receiving, the industry's build like a 14th century near impenetrable fortress when it comes to getting yourself in. I don't handle fortresses well. I'm better at mazes. :)

In case you're wondering: I'm saving my postage, ink and paper and won't send another fresh first page just to get a stone silence the second time out. I checked my original once, twice, three times a lady. If they didn't get it and can't be courteous enough to let me know personally it wasn't received, the hell with it. Now it's on principle. When I get there I'll smile, be polite and play nice with the other kids, even if it kills me. But I will stick to my guns. And leave the one kid in a sandy and wet jumper in the corner of the sandbox well enough alone.

I got a backup, though: I'm attending another conference when I'll bring my first THREE pages there and get them surgically chiseled in a crit by either an editor or a published writer with a book deal. It's gonna sting like someone poured whiskey all over me, but it'll make it better.

Somebody say "neener!" "NEENER!" "Say 'neener'!" "NEENER!" Ho!! ;)

Thanks for the rant, guys.. Had to get that unstuck from my craw. I won't have another industry peeve for a few months yet. Next rant: My kids and the know-it-alls they turned out to be.

Joshin' :).

~Missye
(who's off to pump iron and find out what and where the "craw" is, exactly.)