Reading ABOUT Writing

Yes, if you want to write, you need to read. A lot. I usually have two or three books I'm reading at any given time.

But what about reading ABOUT writing.

I think this is an important part of any beginning writer's training. There are a ton of books out there, as well as The Writer, Writer's Digest and other magazines.

The simple fact is like novels, these books and articles are very uneven. Actually, most are way too generalized and superficial to be much use. Afterall, how can you discuss character development for a 100,000 word novel in an 800 word article?

That said, do read the magazines, but do so critically. There is useful information in those pages. Likewise with books.

I highly recommend On Writing by Stephen King. It is a tour de force and offers significant insight into this writer's beliefs, techniques, and development...the kind of things often missing from other books on writing.

Lately, I find myself scouring interviews with writers. Mostly, it is the same stuff rehashed over and over...but every once in a while, you come across a gem.

So get looking for those gems. They are out there and they are worth wading through the crap.

Doubts

Doubt is a writing killer.

Over the last couple of weeks, a few doubts began to slip into my brain in regards to my writing.

Is it really good enough? Can my novels find a home? Have I just rehashed the same old, same old, and really written nothing that is unique and creative and at least somewhat original?

Or, have the words dried up? Is there nothing left to give?

I don't remember who said it, but I once heard someone say "extraordinary people are just ordinary people with an extraordinary sense of determination."

I like that. Determination is the key.

Doubt is the creative buzz kill.

Determination kills doubt.

Conventions of genre

Recently, an interesting debate took place on a mystery writer's forum I belong to. It concerned the sub-genre known as hardboiled mysteries.

Hardboiled is somewhat difficult to describe, but it definitely has a "dark" feel to it. John D. McDonald was hardboiled, as was early master Raymond Chandler.

Their characters are to mystery fiction what Robert E. Howard's Conan is to fantasy fiction.

The thing about it is, Conan was truly an original. Yet over the years, there have been a million Conan clones come down the pike to the point that the sword and sorcery sub-genre is sometimes looked down upon. Same with hardboiled -- I definitely saw it in the conversation we had in the forum.

Let us look at Raymond Chandler's creation Phillip Marlowe. When you think of him, you immediately think "private eye." Here's a description of Marlowe: The private eye is a pessimistic and cynical observer of a corrupt society, yet the enduring appeal of Marlowe and other hardboiled detectives lies in their tarnished idealism. Underneath the wisecracking, hard drinking, tough private eye, Marlowe is quietly contemplative and philosophical. He enjoys chess and poetry. While he is not afraid to risk physical harm, he does not dish out violence merely to settle scores.

The thing is...in the 1920s, that was quite an original character and what Chandler did was simply amazing. Today, there have been thousands of books filled with cheap Marlowe clones written.

I have read some of these and they are a let down.

Yet, there are those out there who've taken the hardboiled themes (crime, violence and sex) in general, and the private eye story (which is not necessarily hardboiled) to a whole new level.

Sue Grafton's Kinsey Milhone, Harlan Coben's Myron Bolitar and Robert Crais' Elvis Cole all are private eyes. Their books certainly touch upon the hardboiled subjects of crime, violence and sex in an unflinching and sometimes graphic manner, yet the characters bring such originality to the table they are a pleasure to read.

The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkein put epic fantasy on the map, and a slew of cheap knock-offs ensued. But then in the 1980s, amid the trash, a man named Terry Brooks came along with a series of "Shanara" books. Wow. They were original, amazing and definitely epic fantasy.

My point is there is still plenty of room for originality and creativity, even in the sub-sub-genres of fiction that deal with the most basist of emotions and ideas.

I believe my crime fiction is largely hardboiled, but that is where my stories need to be. I deal in themes of violence, of moral ambiguity and moral "gray areas." It seems this style of fiction best serves me and my stories at the moment.

Court TV

Yea, I'm back.

A new series premiers on Court TV on Monday, Nov. 13, titled "Murder by the Book."

Here's a description from the web site.

James Ellroy, Faye Kellerman, Jonathan Kellerman, Michael Connelly and Lisa Scottoline: These masters of the American crime novel are well known for their captivating page turners dealing with mystery, murder and the most shocking twists and turns in the history of popular fiction. But did you ever wonder what real-life crimes inspired them to write? Court TV has invited America’s top mystery fiction writers to recount their memories, speculations and personal connections to the true-life mysteries and headline-making crimes that haunt their dreams at night.

Using documentary footage, first-person accounts and the author's own insights, each one-hour episode sheds new light on a particularly intriguing crime. With alarming new facts combined with suspenseful storytelling, riveting developments are the rule in each dramatic opening and every shocking conclusion.

I'm very much looking forward to it, especially the James Ellroy episode, which is first in line. He's an interesting person, to say the least.

It airs on Court TV at 9 p.m. Central on Mondays.