The Most Nerve-Wracking Critique

I'm teaching a course in our three-week summer term called "The Story and the Script," which deals with the major elements of storytelling, applied to writing scripts for television and film. Today we talked about the importance of finding people to give critiques. One of the things we discussed was how awkward/difficult it is to have people who are family or close friends to do a critique of your work, because either a) they won't be completely honest in favor of sparing your feelings, or b) they will be completely honest, which might hurt your feelings. Regardless of who does the critique, we agreed it's important for a writer to separate the work from one's self - to remember the story is NOT you and says nothing about your ultimate value as a human being.

I hope I was listening today, ha ha. A couple of weeks ago, I had a copy of my manuscript printed by Lulu.com, not because I'm ready to publish it, but because I was tired of looking at it as a collection of pixels and wanted to see it in tangible form. The picture above is the cover I designed, which I am quite happy with. I'm actually quite happy with the whole project. The day it arrived, my husband commandeered it and started reading it.

This is a big deal, folks. I've been working on this book for eight (yes, eight) years, and while I've talked a lot about the story, I've never let him read any of it. I always told him it was probably not a book he would be interested in, since he's not the target market. But this time I decided I wouldn't stop him - it's time. But it has made me jittery to come in and find him reading it before bedtime. I guess I'm afraid he'll think it's stupid - and he wouldn't be shy about telling me so (he's used to judging band contests and saying exactly what he thinks about a performance). Who wants your life partner to think your favorite hobby is stupid? (Not that it would make any difference if he did....)

In the week and a half he's been reading it, he hasn't said a word about it. Not one. And though it has been REALLY difficult for me, I haven't asked what he thinks. As I told my sister (who has been ultimately patient in listening to me talk about this project for the whole eight years, bless her), I guess it's a good sign that he has kept reading.

Tonight he finished. And what was his comment? "Your chick story gets really sappy in the last chapter." That sounds kind of cold, I guess, but his nonverbals let me know he didn't mean it in a bad way. Actually, it's about what I expected. It's as I always told him - this wasn't his kind of story.

I'm going to let it stand at that for the moment, but believe me, he's not going to get off that easy! After I finish cleaning the kitchen, I'll pin him down and make him give me more details. And now I can ask him to read and give me feedback on the first draft of the sequel, which is told from the male protagonist's viewpoint and has more history in it - less of a chick story. I've been needing a male reader for that story - now he's trapped!

One of Many Pleasures

One of the things I like best about writing and reading historical fiction is looking back at how real people lived in the past. Of course, the big historical events are interesting, but my favorite thing is finding out some small detail about daily life.

I read once in Harriette Simpson Arnow's book Flowering of the Cumberland that people used to sing a lot, and that makes sense. We have others do our singing for us these days via our iPods, but in the early 19th century people would have been their own iPods. So I incorporated singing into a scene in my novel. I found the names of some old ballads I was sure would have been around at that time and worked them into the story.

But until yesterday, I had only looked at the lyrics - I hadn't heard the songs performed. I was stuck at the computer doing some updates yesterday, so I amused myself by looking up the songs from my book on YouTube. It was such an enjoyable experience I decided to share.

One long-lived and well-known ballad is the beautiful Annie Laurie, performed here by the Scottish duo The Corries:



The next song is one I learned long ago in elementary school music (thank you, Mrs. Pauline Stewart!), The Keeper Did a-Hunting Go (performed here by David Holness):



Finally, this was my first introduction to this beautiful song, which I chose only because its name fit what I wanted to do in the scene. What a piece of luck that it was also such a lovely song - Ae Fond Kiss by Robert Burns, performed here by Dougie MacLean:



Sampling these three old songs makes me interested in learning more of them. As much as I enjoy The Script, Journey, and James Taylor, there's something to be said for the days before iPods, when people sang for their entertainment. Go out today and sing something!

What to Do, What to Do....

Sorry for the long absence. It's been a rather brutal month on the day job, with both a draft of my chapter for the school's self-study and midterm grades due. Unfortunately, when I turned in my chapter draft, I was informed that it was too long and needs to be cut in half (and I wasn't even completely finished yet!). So I am still chained to that task.

It's spring break this week, and yesterday our family took a little jaunt to Memphis, TN, to look at a college our son is interested in attending (if he can get enough scholarship money). While we were on the campus, he wanted to ditch us so he could look around on his own without parents and a younger sister tagging along (how uncool!). So my husband, my daughter, and I made a stop at the library, where I made a stop in the Special Collections department, thinking I might pick up some tidbit of research to help me in writing my novel. The attendant quickly produced two books in response to my vague request for "anything about the history of Nashville or Memphis in the early 1820s."

One of those books was quite useful in the brief time I had to spend looking. It had a chapter on the Tennessee frontier (although "frontier" was about 25 years earlier than my story). One of the pieces of information I found was that at house or barn raisings, the men would pile together all the scraps and branches from the trees used to make the building. Then they set it on fire, and the light was enough to illuminate the area for dancing.

Ooops....in the first chapter of my book, I have a barn raising and a dance, but I had always mentally pictured the dance as happening inside the new barn. After reading the book in Special Collections, though, it makes perfect sense to me that the dance would be outside the barn. For one thing, there would be more room, and for another, there really wouldn't be any good way to have light in the barn (I don't think the people in this story would have money enough to illuminate the barn with lanterns; I guess I was assuming they would use torches or something, which I now realize would be very dangerous inside a small space with lots of people, including a number who had been drinking....) Ok, so I move the dance outside, right?

The problem is, there is a key plot point that involves the main character leaving the barn to get away from someone, and a whole scene that happens outside where other people won't observe it. It's very important that it happen away from other people. If the dance is outside, how on earth could that scene happen without someone seeing it?

Since discovering that discrepancy, I've gone back and forth about what to do. I thought I was at the point where I didn't need to make any more edits (really, though, will that point EVER come?!!), so part of me says, "Just forget it--your readers will never notice." Another part of me says that's just sheer laziness, and I need to rewrite because someone will notice, and even if no one does, I will know it's wrong, and I'll never be happy with it again. I know which side will win...I'm going right now to wash some dishes and see if I can figure a plausible way to have both the dancing and the important scene outside......wish me luck (or better yet, give me advice, ha ha!).

A Sense of Intimidation

After finishing the final draft of Book One (which is called Dancing in the Checkered Shade, by the way), I was forced by the day job to take a couple of days off. Today I started reading the first draft of the followup, most of which was written while I was on sabbatical from the day job, from January-May 2010. I haven't allowed myself to look at that draft since that time, although I've thought about it quite a bit. As I remembered it, I had done a pretty darn good job, if I do say so myself.

Well....let's say there are some pretty darn good spots mixed in with some pretty mediocre spots. One thing I noticed immediately is the amount of "telling" -- yes! After all my grumping about that writing style on this blog! Fortunately, this is a first draft and I can fix that problem. But, wow, that will take some thinking and some real writing work.  I also never completely finished the story, so I have to write the first draft of the last few chapters.

Overall, I am pleased with it as a beginning. It's really sort of funny - there are so many differences to DitCS (see, I even have an acronym!). For one thing, it was a lengthy struggle to cut DitCS down to a reasonable length; so far, this second book has 15 chapters (of probably 18) and fewer than 50,000 words. That's too short, really. I hope the conversion from "telling" to "showing" will help. I know it's going to be some work, but as one friend put it, it's "lovely" work.

To be honest, there is something else that intimidates me. The same friend asked me, "So what's next for DitCS?" Well....I don't know...... This friend has self-published two books, and she has encouraged me to do the same. That route does have some appeal, although I know I don't have the time to do the promotion needed to give the book a decent chance in the world.  And a little part of me still would like to have an agent think it's good enough to request the full manuscript to read (although the mainstream publishing world has some disadvantages, like a short window of opportunity to "make it," that don't appeal to me at all). I don't know....I don't want to be famous, and I don't want to quit my day job (at least not today!). But...it would be kind of cool to have people reading about these characters and loving them as much as I love Will and Susanna, Kit and Nat, Laura and Almanzo, Hannah and Tice.....

A Sense of Accomplishment

I may have mentioned at some point that I've been writing a novel. : ) This past Saturday morning, my husband and daughter went spelunking with a friend, and my son was sleeping in after a hard week of high school. So I decided to forego the work I brought home from school to spoil myself by a day of working on the edits for my book instead. Well, I became consumed with the task and ended up spending the entire Labor Day weekend editing (I did go to church, do laundry, and keep the family fed!). Last night around 10:00, I finally typed "The End" and closed the file with a sense that the book was finally finished

It's been a long process. I first had the idea for these characters about 25 years ago, but it wasn't until about seven years ago that I actually started writing. My first draft was 169,000 words, which is down to about 92,000 in the final draft. For a while I was stuck in the middle of the story, unable to explain why some of the scenes were included. But after "killing a few babies" (as the agent blogs call it), I feel satisfied that everything finally ties together into a tight plot package. For the first time, there's nothing I think I need to change.

Of course, I've heard authors say there is always something to change, even after the book is published. But at this moment, I feel pretty happy. And excited, because now I'm going to dive right back in to the first draft of the sequel to this book. That will be fun!

A quick update on "Try It Out Tuesday": We didn't try anything new for the main dish tonight because the kids had a practice meet for their cross country teams and weren't going to be home to eat. But I did try a new cookie recipe. It's called Orange Chocolate Drops. The story of how I got this recipe is kind of funny. You may remember I said I was going to let my daughter pick the new dish for this week since she didn't like the dishes the other two weeks. So Thursday evening of last week I mentioned to her that she needed to pick something out so I could get the ingredients needed. On Friday, she went to the school library and checked out a big, old cookbook. Then she and one of her friends looked through the book and picked out four recipes, including Five-Cheese Pasta (FIVE cheeses!!!????) made from scratch, not from a jar. This is a cookbook for REAL cooks. Yikes....

One of the four recipes was this cookie recipe. I'm not sure I like it much. I haven't eaten one of them yet (don't want to eat too close to bedtime), but they are sort of small and there weren't really very many (only 2 1/2 dozen) and they seem like they may be sort of dry. My son did try one, and he announced they are "not poisoned" (family joke - someone always has to try the cookies fresh out of the oven to be sure they are safe for everyone else). I'm not sure if that was an endorsement, ha ha.

A Question of Case

I'm reading The Witch of Blackbird Pond right now (which is as fresh and enjoyable to me now as it was when I read it as a teen), and last night I came across something that raised a question in my mind. Kit (the main character) met Hannah Tupper, an old Quaker woman who lives in the meadow isolated from the rest of the community. Here are a couple of examples of Hannah's dialogue:

"Thee must be hungry," she said, more briskly. "Come, and I'll give thee a bit to eat."

"The answer is in thy heart," she said softly. "Thee can always hear it if thee listens for it."

What I wondered is whether the pronouns have been used properly in this dialogue. (Forgive me some grammar geekiness here...) I always thought "thee" was the objective case for the pronoun, "thou" was the subjective case, and "thy" was the possessive. If that's true, then a sentence might read something like this:

"Thou must be hungry...I'll give thee a bit to put in thy stomach."

In an earlier draft of my novel, I had the protagonist's sister-in-law be Quaker because I thought it would contribute to a subplot about slavery that was in the story at that time (Quakers were leaders in the abolition movement). I tried to be very careful to get the dialogue right, because I thought that would be the type of mistake that would take the reader out of the story. But I never felt entirely confident that it was done correctly, and I also had the problem of trying to figure out what verb should go with "thou." ("Thou have"? "Thou has?" "Thou do"? "Thou does"? ARRRGGGH!!!)

Eventually, I decided it wasn't urgent to the plot that the character be a Quaker. That was an easy way to solve my problem, but I still wonder about it. Just what is the right way to have a Quaker character use pronouns? Just in case it is urgent to have a character be Quaker in some future story!

Writing and Golf (or, What to Do, What to Do)

(This should be read in a matter-of-fact, non-whiny voice. It is not a pity party.)

I am about this close to calling it quits with trying to get published. And probably not for the reasons you would anticipate. I've been reading some agent blogs lately, and yeah, the numbers are staggeringly discouraging. One agent said he gets about 15,000 queries per year and takes on 3-5 new clients. But that's not what has discouraged me.  One agent answered my question about the future of historical fiction honestly by saying, "I won't lie. It's tough." I appreciate her straight answer, and although it's a discouraging answer for me, both as a writer and as a reader, that's not what has discouraged me.

Here's the discouraging part: I've been reading the comments left on those blogs, too, most of which are left by aspiring writers. And there are three attitudes that I'm picking up on that, if they are representative of "the game," just turn me off.  First, some people are just rude. It makes me think of what I learned about life in elementary school - some people try to make themselves look good (or in the case of these comments, clever or "with it" or saavy about the world of publishing) by belittling others in replies to those others' comments. I don't know why I'm surprised by that; aspiring writers are a microcosm of the rest of society, and there's a percentage of people in any field who are that way.

Second, I don't like the constant self-promotion (or promotion of one's work, I guess). I know in this competitive environment it's really important to get the word out. And I know that if you don't toot your own horn, no one else is going to do it. But some commentors manage to work in a discussion of their plot or characters no matter what the original topic of the post is.

Finally, and this one bothers me most, no one seems to be listening to anyone else. There may be 100+ comments, but most of them are discrete responses to the original post. Only occasionally does something like a conversation get going. Maybe I misunderstand the purpose of comments and am thinking of something that is more like a forum or discussion board. But I sometimes think the internet has made it all too easy for each of us to have our say without paying any attention to what someone else is saying. 

So....back to my original contention, that I think I might quit. I'm not a competitive person. I don't want to have to engage in those sorts of behaviors to "succeed."  I don't want to be famous. The only reason I started writing was because I wanted to tell the story. Somewhere along the way, I began to think writing was only worthwhile if it "paid off." I felt too guilty about spending time at the computer instead of playing with my kids or washing dishes if there wasn't going to be a product that could bring in something as return on investment. But you know something? I bet there are millions of golfers who spend lots of time on the golf course but never expect to play professionally. They do it because it is relaxing and enjoyable. Why can't I feel the same way about my writing?

Maybe I should put my story on the Kindle store for 99 cents and be done with it!

(The thing that makes me reluctant to do that, though, is that I might lose the drive to improve the story. If I had put my book out there when I first finished it two/three years ago, it would have been flabby compared to what it is today, when I'm trying to edit it into a form strong enough to attract an agent's attention. But then again, maybe I'm editing the thing to death. I just know that when I go back after a couple of weeks and read the chapters I've trimmed 500 words out of, I realize those chapters are MUCH better than before. It's pretty amazing how virile the language can be when every word is forced to carry a major load!)

The Trouble with Taglines

(February 25, 2010)

I've been reading some blogs lately that have been talking about marketing your novel. The most recent one I read was about having a "tagline", which as I understand it, is sort of like an advertising slogan. I decided I really ought to get cracking and come up with something for my tagline.

The problem is, I am terrible at coming up with pithy sayings that express the heart of what I've written!

First of all, I'm really reluctant to use the word "romance" in a tagline, because in relation to novels, I think that word has become associated with things that simply aren't in my books, although there is definitely romance in them. So how do I tip people off that this is a love story without setting up expectations that won't be met?

Here are some of the ideas I've had and have shot down:

• "Old-Fashioned Love Stories Never Go Out of Style" - well, there's a quick way to kill interest in the story! Yeah, label it as "old-fashioned".....
• You know, it's good to use an "antithesis" approach, but "Regular people, unusual love" just brings up some pretty bad connotations, ha ha....
• "Romance and History on the American Frontier" - ok, that works for the current projects (except I used that "romance" word), but the next project I have in mind is not a love story and isn't set on the frontier. I don't want to have to be coming up with a new tagline to "brand" myself with every new book (ugh)!
• "Character-driven historical fiction" - yawn...
• "Books you'll like, I promise!" - Ok, I think I'm getting desperate....

Finding Edward DuVal

(June 25, 2009)

Last week, I made the "sacrifice" to chauffeur my son to a camp for students who play brass instruments. That meant I was "stuck" from 9-3:30 everyday in the genealogy room of the city's library with nothing to do but work on my writing. It was a productive week - I finished two chapters. But I might have done more if I hadn't become obsessed with a new project - finding Edward DuVal.

If you've read this blog at all, you've learned two things about me: first, that my WiP is about the struggle between the Cherokee and the white settlers for the land that became the state of Arkansas, and second, that I am rather a stickler for accuracy ("done but for the toe," not "done but for the cuff.") Edward DuVal was the U.S. government's agent to the western Cherokee during the time my book takes place. In order to work in some of the important events that were part of the Cherokee/white struggle, I'm going to have my protagonist (John David) luck into a job as a transcriptionist for DuVal. That will put John David in a position to observe the inner workings of those events.

DuVal will, therefore, be a rather important character in this book. So over the past months, I've been trying to find out as much as I can about him, so as to be as accurate as possible in my protrayal of him. I know that probably doesn't matter to anyone but me, but it does matter to me. I had learned quite a bit about DuVal by reading the correspondence between him and his bosses at the War department in Washington in the Arkansas Territorial papers. The impression I got was that of a man who was ambitious, but eager to do his job well and to be fair to the Cherokee, even if it meant bypassing the territorial government (which I think DuVal saw as inept and biased). I read in Josiah Shinn's Pioneers and Makers of Arkansas that DuVal was a "young" man when he came to Arkansas Territory, and that he was eage to "magnify" the office of Indian agent, and therefore made some mistakes, like not respecting the territorial governor.

A couple of months ago, I hit a little vein of rich information by asking "The Google" (as my sister calls it, ha ha). I found in the footnote of an old book that DuVal had served as a clerk in the Department of the Navy, and although he was only a lowly clerk, sort of became the "go-to" guy for anyone who wanted access to William Jones, the Secretary of the Navy. However, when Jones was replaced as secretary, DuVal lost his position of favor and ended up as a storekeeper at the Navy Yard in Baltimore. I discovered by perusing a list of President Monroe's papers that DuVal had tried after that point to get a number of political appointments, including several out West. He tried, unsuccessfully, to be named Secretary of Mississippi Territory and, later, Secretary of Arkansas Territory. Finally, in 1823, he got his wish: in what was probably one of the last acts of President Monroe, DuVal became the Cherokee agent.

An interesting little side note: I found testimony from William Jones regarding the burning of the Naval Yard when the British were invading Washington, DC, during the War of 1812. Apparently DuVal was with him when Jones gave the order to burn the Yard. DuVal may have even been part of the crew that carried out that order. Quite exciting, I thought!

That brings me back to my week in the Fort Smith library. I had a set of questions about DuVal that I hadn't been able to answer with The Google alone. Most relevant to my story was the question of DuVal's age. But I also needed to know something about his family, and I wanted to know something about his military background. I haven't done much genealogical research; that is my sister's specialty (and she has certainly pulled some magnificant rabbits out of the hat for me from time to time!). Looking up family trees and at lists of men who were mustered during the War of 1812 and at historical lists of officers in the U.S. Army and Navy was a new experience -- and I sort of became addicted. I found out from old newspaper accounts when and vaguely how DuVal died (in 1830 of a "violent illness that lasted two or three days"), and (I think) how old he was (one account said he was 40 at the time of his death, so I'm taking their word for it). I found out from census records that DuVal probably had at least three young sons when he moved to Arkansas, and from an old letter that his wife had a "fine daughter" shortly before he died. I thought I had found a marriage record which turned out to be the wrong Edward DuVal, but I did eventually find out his wife's name (Ellen Jones).

That's all I need for my book, right? What is important is NOT Edward DuVal, it is the history that he was part of making. However, as I got involved in this research, Edward became sort of a friend, and I found myself wanting to know more and more about him. Was this Ellen Jones he married the daughter of his boss at the Navy Department, William Jones? Just what WAS Edward's military record? I couldn't find him in any of the lists of the War of 1812. Was he a political appointee who gave himself airs by referring to himself as "Major" DuVal, or was he really a major? How many children did Edward and Ellen have? What happened to Ellen and those children after Edward died from that "violent illness"?

Last night, I finally decided (at nearly midnight) that this obsession with DuVal had gone far enough and that I must quit (or at least suspend) the research on him because it's getting in the way of other pursuits (like sleeping!). So I'm not allowing myself to search for those answers any more right now. Maybe later I will do that. Maybe sometime I will put it all together and write an article about DuVal to submit to the state historical journal. (hmmmm.....on second thought, I wonder if there is any kind of state prize for historical articles? I seem to recall something about that....hmmmmmm.........)

A Motivation Problem

(May 24, 2009)

No, it's not my motivation that's the problem this time...I'm trying to understand what would make one of my characters act the way he does, and I would welcome any help.

This is from my second book, in which the protagonist was illegally squatting on Indian land and was evicted by the U.S. Army. He's currently living in a town on the side of the river the government gave to whites. The standard of living he and his family are experiencing is considerably higher than the one he had on his illegal farm. Yet he's pining for that piece of land.

What would make someone be so fixated on something like the land? I'm having some trouble understanding the character because I am much more practical than that, living by a sort of "get over it" mantra. Some of the possible motivations I've offered to myself include 1) he likes the landscape better than that south of the river (but it's not THAT different!), or 2) it reminds him of home (but again, it's not THAT different). So why can't he just get over it and say, "It's not that different, I'll just find a spot south of the river?" It's important to the plot of my story that he be fixated on living north of the river, because that's where the main conflict comes in. White people coveted this land the government had given to the Cherokees, and they put pressure on the politicians to move the Cherokees out--something that didn't take a tremendous amount of pressure, I might add.

Anyone have any thoughts? I greatly appreciate any help!

People Probably Think I'm Odd (and maybe they're right....)

(April 24, 2009)

Just about every writer has a spot where he/she prefers to work, where ideas seem to flow easily and inspiration seems to abound. For me, that spot is the local Wendy's restaurant. When I am sitting alone at the table at the very back of the eating area, under the sunroom roof, I can work through even the stickiest plot problems or brainstorm character motivations. I don't know why that particular spot is so productive for me -- well, maybe I do. I get my food and then for 30, 45, or 60 glorious minutes, I am anonymous. No one knows me as "Mama" or "Dr. Marlow" and wants the activities that come with that role. I don't even have to worry about doing the dishes when I'm finished eating. For the time I am at Wendy's, I can fully concentrate all my mental effort on my writing.

I always assumed I was anonymous. But today as I was trying to work out how John David would react to being evicted from the land where he and Maggie are illegal squatters, one of the women who works at Wendy's was cleaning the lobby (I usually go after the initial lunch rush is well over). From the corner of my eye, I could tell she was watching me as she wiped the tables. She came closer, and then in her cheeriest voice, she asked if I needed anything else, a refill, maybe? I said no, but I'd made eye contact, and this was her opportunity. She asked, "What are you doing? Everytime you come in here, you are working on something so hard."

Why not? I told her the truth, that I am writing a book and her restaurant is a great place for me to work. I reminded her that J.K. Rowling wrote much of the first Harry Potter book at a coffee shop in her hometown, and I assured her if I ever become famous for this book, I will be sure to put in a plug for Wendy's. I think she thought I was a little crazy, but she accepted my story with an "Oh, cool," and moved on to the next table.

Anyway, at least they won't have to wonder any more!

Maggots in the Cornmeal

(March 13, 2009)

How does an author handle it when the protagonist of his work has to do things that are less than honorable? In other words, what do we do about the "maggots in the cornmeal" of history? (I'm borrowing this phrase from a discussion once with Jack Shakely, author of The Confederate Warbonnet.)

Tonight I was procrastinating in my actual writing by doing some research into the history of the treaty with the Arkansas Cherokees that will figure prominently toward the end of my second book. To summarize, white settlers and the Cherokees were both claiming a section of land in what is now northwest Arkansas and northeast Oklahoma. The territorial legislature in Arkansas had launched a "pre-emptive strike" in the battle by designating the area "Lovely County," making it part of their jurisdiction and effectively claiming it for the whites. A delegation of Cherokees from Arkansas went to Washington, DC, in 1828 to try to get government officials to enforce the provisions of previous treaties that would keep whites out of the region. However, the delegation found that the US government wasn't interested in talking about the old treaties; all they would talk about was a new treaty in which the Cherokee would agree to give up their lands in Arkansas in exchange for land farther west. After 6 weeks of futile negotiations, the Cherokees, "frustrated and worn out," according to one source, agreed to the proposal, on the condition that nothing was final until the full Council back in Arkansas Territory had approved the agreement. They signed the treaty on May 6, but on May 12 - less than a week after the signing - President John Quincy Adams took the treaty to the Senate for ratification proceedings, obviously without any effort to get approval from the other Cherokees in Arkansas.

Unpleasant happenings, agreed? And yet the protagonist of my story (John David) is a white man who wants to settle on land that, by rights, belongs to the Cherokees. If he is going to achieve his goals and his dreams, he has to participate in these actions that defraud an entire group of people and deprive them of their own dreams.

How do I manage the necessary balance between having my protagonist act in a way that rings true to historical fact and yet having him remain a sympathetic character that readers will still like? Actually, the reason I am procrastinating is because I've reached the point where I have to write the first scene in which John David has to harbor some politically-incorrect feelings toward the Cherokees. It's not that he's a "perfect" person who's never displayed any negative feelings or behavior; it's just that this time, he's really not justified in what he's going to do. It's a little scary to put those "maggots" into the "cornmeal" of my story.

I Need a Character Name - Quick!

(March 2, 2009)

Naming the characters in my stories has always been something of a struggle for me. Sometimes I'll hit on something that sounds right in my ear the first time, but often a character will go through several names before I settle on something. Maybe I overthink the issue, but it seems to me a name needs to fit the time period, and it needs to evoke something of the character's personality, and it needs to have a rhythm that reads easily. I always know this is going to be my least favorite part of writing something.

Well, I've hit that point in my current project. And I have an additional problem this time -- the characters who need names are the first of the Cherokee characters who will be in the story. I will be using several actual historical figures in Cherokee history, but these two characters (father and son) are completely fictional. The son, in particular, will play a key role in the story so he needs a good name.

From what I've been able to gather in my research, a number of the Cherokee at that time (1820s) had (or took on) anglicized names, perhaps in an effort to show themselves as acculturated. For example, Elias Boudinot (the editor of the first newspaper in the Cherokee language) started out life as Gallegina Watie (or Oowatie). That became "Buck" Watie since Gallegina meant "deer." But when Gallegina/Buck decided to attend a missionary school run by whites, he adopted the name of his financial benefactor, Elias Boudinot. It was a name he kept until he was murdered for his role in removal of the Cherokee to present-day Oklahoma.

However, I've also seen in my research Cherokee who kept names that aren't exactly familiar to ears accustomed to English names. Some are clearly Indian names, like Ta-ka-toka, while others seem to me to fall somewhere in the gap between cultures, like John Jolly or George Guess (who is better known as Sequoyah).

So....what do I choose as names for these characters? I could simply go with anglicized names and be historically accurate. However, that might imply an attitude toward white culture that I don't really want these characters to have. But I am very uncomfortable with trying to come up with Cherokee names for the characters. What I want are names that show these characters have adopted some elements of white culture (they are going to be farmers), but that still have something of a unique quality to them.

Hmmmmm....I think it's time to go do some dishes and some heavy thinking.

In Memory of Mr. Malvern

(February 22, 2009)

It's not kosher, I know, to admit that any of the characters in your writing are based on real people. Too much drama can arise as a result! Today, however, I'm going to make an exception to that rule, because one of the people who was the real-life model for a favorite character in Dancing in the Checkered Shade died Friday night.

His name was Malvern Gray, and he was the sweetest older man I've ever known. He was 88 years old and I guess he died of complications from pneumonia (not sure about that, though). His wife told me this morning they had celebrated their 59th wedding anniversary on Thursday. My family and I sat behind the two of them at church just about every Sunday, and I always found it so touching to see the little intimacies they still showed after so many years of marriage, like holding hands during the hymns. I guess that's why, when I needed a model of a loving, life-long marriage for newlyweds Maggie and John David to learn from, I thought of Mr. and Mrs. Gray.  I hope the portrayal in the book does them justice.

Kicking Them When They're Down

(February 7, 2009)

I recently read a couple of blog posts that were discussing whether readers prefer stories in which the main characters suffer or stories in which everything turns out well for the characters. Nixy Valentine contends readers want to go on a "ride" with the characters, through a range of emotions, good and bad. The Disorganised Author asks if writing (and by extension, reading) isn't an escape from the negative aspects of life. It's an interesting question, and I would submit that readers use the emotional ride of fictional characters to escape, at least temporarily, from the very real problems in their own lives.

When I was a journalism student, I learned that one of the key news values that make for a good news story is conflict. That conflict comes in various forms - man vs. man, man vs. nature, man vs. society - you probably know them as well as I do. You also know that conflict in life is inevitable. If a story is going to ring true, it must have conflict as well. So as much as a writer may hate putting his/her characters through the suffering, suffer they must. But...how much?

In Dancing in the Checkered Shade, I knew the main characters were going to have to suffer through heartbreak and rejection at one point in the plot. Their relationship had always been tenuous anyway, since they married on an impulse instead of making a reasoned decision. At this point near the end of the story, Maggie is tired of trying. When John David tells her he's going to leave her for a while so he can keep on with a job he's committed to, she tells him to not bother coming back.

In the original version, I wrote Maggie as being very matter-of-fact and cold during the whole scene. She gives "reasons" why he should leave, and she announces she's setting him free. John David doesn't really resist; when he tries to say something to her, she closes her eyes. At that point, he gives up and says goodbye to her, going off to join his boss (who has been calling through the door).

That scene bothered me for a long time. It didn't seem to have the "punch" it needed at this point in the book (near the end), and to be honest, it felt very flat and emotionally starved. So when I did my next edit, I got mean. I felt bad about it, because what I had planned was going to require Maggie, the narrator and the character I hope readers will identify with, to be a real jerk. In the rewrite, she starts out being "reasonable," but then she gets angry at John David. She slings unfair accusations at him and denies that they've ever felt anything for each other. Her anger builds up until she resorts to physical violence, slapping him (which ties back to an earlier scene quite neatly, ha ha). And when he makes a final attempt to reason with her, she's the one who cuts it off with goodbye.

It works much better, I think. Since Maggie made a jerk of herself, she has better opportunities later to regret and repent, which makes for a more satisfying resolution at the end of the book. And I think it's more realistic, too. Who among us hasn't done something we sorely regret, something which seems beyond our power to repair? So, while it might have been a risk to make the main character go evil (temporarily!), I'm hoping readers will still identify with her every step of the way.

For the good of the story, the characters have to suffer. I also believe that the greater their suffering, the deeper the potential emotional impact of the story will be. However, I'm no sadist! I also believe the best stories are those in which the characters find some way to deal with that suffering and ultimately come to peace in some form. I completely agree with Elizabeth George Speare, who said,

"I do not believe a historical novel should gloss over the pains and the ugliness. But I do believe that the hero...should on the last page...still be standing, with the strength to go to whatever the future may hold."

Setting the Stage

(January 26, 2009)

I decided it really didn't make much sense to start talking about an interview with my characters unless people know a little something about my project first.

Dancing in the Checkered Shade is a work of historical fiction and a love story that follows in the tradition of books I cherished when I was a teen reader, works like Hannah Fowler by Janice Holt Giles, The Edge of Time by Loula Grace Erdman, The Witch of Blackbird Pond by Elizabeth George Speare, and Judith of France by Margaret Leighton. I won't flatter myself by pretending my book is on an equal basis with those classics, but they were my role models. I hope Dancing in the Checkered Shade will appeal to readers of any age who enjoyed those books, as well as to young adults who are reading some of the fine historical fiction available now, like No Shame, No Fear by Ann Turnbull or Pirates! by Celia Rees.

The story is told in first-person by a young woman (Maggie Boon) who has impulsively married a stranger (John David McKellar) to escape from her abusive father. She gets more than she bargained for when John David decides to take her to Mexican Texas to try for one of the free land grants Stephen F. Austin has arranged. During their trip toward Texas, Maggie and John David face physical and emotional challenges that threaten to drive them apart. However, they find the faith and love to hold on to their dreams, even in the face of failure.

I first had the idea for these characters and the story 20+ years ago (I suspect a young man I was "chasing" at the time had a strong influence on my creative process, lol!). I never wrote anything more than character sketches, though, until five years ago. One night as I was bringing my kids home from a school function and listening to my favorite Irish music CD, I was struck with an urge to pick the project up again. For once, I didn't procrastinate! I worked on the manuscript in the spare time leftover from being a full-time teacher and mother and wife. At the end of three years, I had a manuscript with 269,000 words.

Fortunately, I was pragmatic enough to realize no one can get away with a book THAT long except Victor Hugo. I began the process of editing, a process that I finally wrapped up about two months ago. During those two years, I trimmed out more than half of what I'd written originally, ending up with a manuscript of 110,000 words. I don't regret anything that was left in the computer's recycle bin - the story now is much stronger.
One thing that happened as I was writing is that I realized there was too much story for one book (those 269,000 words didn't even cover part of what I'd originally plotted). So, as much as I fear falling into the cliche' of producing a sequel, I'm working on a second book about Maggie and John David, focusing on their experiences once they settled in Arkansas Territory. Actually, this portion of the story has more dramatic historical content, because it will deal with how the Cherokee were pushed out of Arkansas and into what later became Oklahoma. Because of the plot events needed to tell the second story, I will have to shift from having Maggie tell the story to having John David be the narrator. As a woman, and a married woman at that, Maggie wouldn't move in the same circles as those male officials. After all, it wasn't until the late 1820s that Frances Wright pioneered public speaking for women. I do have a plausible way, though, that John David can interact with the officials (I got the idea while reading through the historical documents).

Whether it was because I'm intimidated by the idea of writing from a man's perspective, or if I'm intimidated by writing about actually historical events, or simply because I'm procrastinating again, I'm having trouble writing John David's voice. Nan Hawthorne has suggested an interview with him. We'll see.