What Would You Take?

This weekend, my husband and I had the unsettling experience of coming home from a weekend in the Bay Area to find a huge grass fire in our brittle, dry foothill community and that an evacuation was in effect. We were grateful that our home was not affected and that the evacuation had been cancelled for our section of town, but I naturally began to take stock of what I would pile into the car in such an evacuation, if I had the time. Pets (need another cat carrier!), baby books & photos, important papers, heirlooms, computer, flashdrive, WIP...the list goes on.

If I had only a smidgen of room left in our vehicle, what three writing books would I take? What are the three books I couldn't do without (not including favorite fiction)? There were many that I would hate to lose, but I finally narrowed it down to these three:

1. 100,000 Baby Names by Bruce Lansky. Most useful to me is the listing of popular names by decade, but it has many other listings and, well, 100,000 names to chose from for my characters.

2. The Synonym Finder by J.I. Rodale. It is extemely comprehensive, written in a dictionary style, and the thesaurus that always delivers. When asked what stumped him in the rewrite of A Farewell to Arms, Hemingway answered, "Getting the words right." I wonder what thesaurus he used? Hm...

3. Walking on Water by Madeleine L'Engle. "And for each one of us there is a special gift, the way in which we may best serve and please the Lord whose love is so overflowing." (page 70). Her insights inspire and refresh me in times of discouragement by reminding me that my art is a gift from God and that He will equip me to use it.

So, now that the fire planes are just a hum in the distance, I think I will keep these three books stacked beside my desk within easy reach, just in case - at least until fire season is over.

What are the three most helpful books that you would stack by the door in the event of a quick getaway?

Movie Saturday

It's Movie Saturday. And we all know what you get during the summer -- you get reruns.

The video that was supposed to run today had... technical difficulties. We are all reminded that we cannot say bad words on this blog, even if they apply to technology. We'll return to our regularly-scheduled programming soon. And that's all I have to say about that.

So -- for those of you who are new followers, please enjoy the book trailer for Latter-day Cipher. If you're interested in some of the reviews of this book, click here.

Don't forget to leave a comment to be entered in our Saturday Night at the Movies monthly giveaway. We'll announce a winner on Monday!

A Too Social Media

The winner of a copy of Latayne C. Scott's The Mormon Mirage is Edna! Hey Edna, we have your e-mail address and Latayne will be in touch with you to collect your mailing address.

We'll announce the next book give-away Wednesday, September 2.

And yes, we are reading through the entries for the Audience with an Agent contest. We are close to choosing the winning entries, but I'm afraid you'll have to wait a bit longer before we announce them. I know! I know! Ick to waiting!

If I had read Patti's most recent post a few weeks ago, I might have come up with a different response - but I read it this week, and it just so happens that this week is the week several things happened in tandem to reshape my thoughts about the writer and social media.

I'm on Twitter, Facebook, Shoutlife, Virtual Bookshelf, and several other social media sites - truthfully? I've managed to forget about many of these sites. Yesterday, I received a friend request in my e-mail to a group I didn't think I'd ever heard of never mind belonged to. Turns out I do belong to the group.

Later, I was on Twitter reading a few tweets - and I read a jaw dropping tweet from someone I'm following - the person broadcast details of a phone conversation she'd just had with a friend of hers. Personal details. Very, very personal details. I felt betrayed by proxy - my heart broke for the friend who would have never guessed that the details of the conversation she'd just had with her trusted friend would, moments later, be broadcast to the internet. Frankly, it stopped me in my tracks. And it got me thinking more carefully about not just the time I spend online, but the quality of my contribution.

I haven't chosen to fast from being online, but I have recently trimmed down my online activities to the most valuable, interesting, and compelling sites that I will participate in on a regular basis (you can bet this site tops the list!). I also have a short list of questions and criteria I run by everything I post - especially those quick 140 characters, so tantalizingly easy to write. But once they are out there - they are out there. You can't "un-send".

I've found an online rhythm that works for me. And I promise you won't see me my Facebook status reporting a friend's secret, or me tweeting the details of my PMS episode, or how bored I am (all stuff I've seen). Instead, I'm working to succeed at the most important thing about being online; connecting with people in meaningful ways.

How about you? Have you seen things online that made you rethink what you were doing? Have you found your online rhythm? We'd love to hear about what you've learned and accomplished.

Watch Your Mouth, Young Man

Let me take you back to Friday, August 14 on this blog, to the insightful (and incitive) guest post by Zondervan editor Andy Meisenheimer. Do you remember all the conversation he stirred up by implying that a writer might find better ways to spend her time than hanging out on Twitter or Facebook or even (ulp!) her blog?

Well let me tell you, that was nothing - nothing - compared to the kerfuffle raised amongst us bloggers here at Novel Matters before his post even went live. Really, you have no idea. Well - If you were observant, you might have noticed this phrase: “this book sucked but they have such a (killer) brand" If you were impressively astute you might have guessed at the reason behind the parentheses.

But probably not, so I'll tell you: In the original, Andy didn't say "killer." He said something that started with the same letter, only... less seemly.

We couldn't believe it.

Because Andy and his ilk had told us more than once that this word or that word was unacceptable to a Christian audience. And I'm talking about words a lot milder than (killer). So what would we do? Edit the editor?

Believe it or not, we didn't all agree.

I'm a non-swearer myself - mostly. I hardly ever, almost never say a bad word. There have even been memorable occasions when I dropped heavy objects on my foot and bravely clenched my lips against the barrage of expletives clamoring just this side of my teeth.

However, I was raised not so much in church as in Alcoholics Anonymous (my mother stopped drinking when I was seven). And growing up, I knew a lot of very good and brave people for whom naughty language was the native tongue. To this day it's hard - though not impossible - to offend me with swear words.

Not only that, but my personal take is that we Christians sometimes get a bit too precious about the whole thing. Because Jesus said if you call your brother a fool you are in danger of judgment. "Fool" is not a cuss word; it's a put-down. And there are those among us who would never say (killer) but would call you a fool twice a day. So my first reaction to Andy's transgression was "Oh, what the heck."

Oh boy. I didn't even notice Andy had used a no-no word. Let me explain.

Soon after becoming a Christian, I abandoned my bad-girl vocabulary and thought less of anyone who used swear words, whatever their belief system. I asked people not to use certain language around me. The result? I became a holier-than-thou personality and a caricature of a churchgoer. My zeal for the menial built a wall between me and those around me.

And then...one night at Bible study, a young man said something like this: Our most powerful witness is to walk humbly alongside the lost as sinners saved by grace.

As I grow in my ability to walk humbly in this world, my need to edit people's vocabulary has lessened. After all, Jesus probably heard swear words as he hung on the cross. His response was to die for them. This is why I don't have a knee-jerk reaction to swear words.

But I don't use swear words in my novels.

Why?

Because they would be a stumbling block to readers, and I love my readers. We are the body of Christ! Besides, creativity without any strictures is not creativity at all. The challenge for the inspirational writer is to convey intensity of emotion with truly powerful language and action. Honestly, it would be a lot easier to use swear words.

And so, I voted to leave Andy's original words. There are so many other things more worthy of our passion.

~
When Andy sent me his guest post via e-mail I read it through - not with the intention to edit, but because, well, because I could. I loved its meaty goodness, it metaphorical bent, and its insider fun. This, I thought, is (killer).

I set about scheduling the post, but a wee voice in my head said, "(Killer) though it is, some may not appreciate the vernacular [My inner voice sounds very much like Stephen Fry]. I sent out a quick e-mail to my co-bloggers: Andy's post contains the word (killer). Are we okay with that? The six of us took the back roads getting to the answer.

Whenever you ask a novelist a question, expect a long, well thought out multi-dimensional response. It's to be expected. Ask six novelists and, well, I hope you packed a lunch. Those of us who agreed to leave in (killer) agreed for very different reasons. Those who preferred an edit did so for very different reasons. Me? Well, I was more like Pontius Pilate, trying to wash my hands of the whole thing. Edit Andy? Well, gee - how would that go over? I actually like this guy as a person as well as an editor. But risk offending readers? No!

It was a gong show for awhile there. What if I just posted a disclaimer? [Early risers may have seen it Friday morning before it was unceremoniously deleted]. What if we added dashes? If Lisa Samson* can get away with it, why not us? So many issues to consider. For me, the decision to change it became clear when I asked myself, "What compelling reason do we have to leave (killer) in? What great purpose is the word serving?" The word didn't strengthen Andy's idea, wasn't necessary to convey meaning - it other words; editable.

We want to hear from you - naughty language in your Christian fiction? Where do you draw lines? [Keep in mind, in an interesting and deliberate oversight, we left in the word "sucks"] Do you put a book down if it contained certain language?

*Lisa Samson employed the use of dashes for profanity in her latest, The Passion of Mary Margaret.
~

I confess to objecting to the questionable word Andy used in his guest post a week ago Friday, the (killer) word that was edited out. I respect the opinions of those in our NovelMatters group who voted to leave Andy's post as it was submitted to us, but I also appreciate their willingness to edit out the offensive word.

~

Profanity has become so commonplace in our society that it's easy to become desensitized to its usage. The argument for or against profanity in Christian literature is endless and one we'll never all agree on. We don't even agree on what constitutes profanity. But here's where I'm coming from. As a Christian author I feel my books, my blog, my website, whatever I put out there from a professional, public platform is my pulpit. I believe I'm held to a standard of conduct of which Christ would approve, and to me that means taking care not to offend those who read what I write, not to place a stumblingblock in anyone's path, and most especially not to offend the One I represent. Liberty isn't always license.

~

Yeah, we rub shoulders with the world, we don't live in a bubble. But who's supposed to be influencing whom? I have a feeling this will generate a lively debate. We look forward to your input.

When the Lord Shuts a Writer Down... or Up

Remember if you comment on any of the posts this month, you qualify yourself for an autographed copy of The Mormon Mirage (Zondervan, 2009.) In fact, this is the book mentioned later in this column. So, speak up!

I often hear published writers often talking about how the Lord has advanced their careers, or put them in advantageous positions in landing a good agent or happening on just the right editor at a conference. And surely He does work that way.

But for some of us, there are two sides to the story.

I believe there was a certain point – in fact, a day and hour -- in my life at which the Lord told me that He wanted me not to write for money nor recognition, until He released me from that stricture. He shut me down completely. I had been a published writer since I was in grade school. Suddenly I found myself in an open-ended situation in which it felt that my very breath was restricted. Not for days, or months, but for years.

For about eight years in fact, I continued to write but did it anonymously and/or without publication. When He began to release me it was to write business articles about utilities – gas, electric, sewer, water, and nuclear --and about military, financial, and technological subjects. All my religious writing I kept to myself or posted anonymously on a web site. My books all went out of print except one. The most popular one I offered free for download to anyone who wanted it.

I prayed for a very long time before I felt He would allow me to approach an agent. Year after year, prayer after begging prayer, His answer was “no.”

When He released me to write for the Christian marketplace, I knew it. I can tell you the day and place when I knew He was going to let me contact Janet Grant (and only Janet Grant). And in other cases, publishers approached me for books I’d been working on during that dry, dry time.

He’s a tough Master, but He knew what was best for me. It surely didn’t feel “glorious” at the time, though. There was no sense of being honored. I was under discipline, and I knew it. I’m not proud of that.

When he underwent great trial, Job asked the question, “When God sends us something good, we welcome it. How can we complain when he sends us trouble?”

I believe I must be a better writer than I would have been if I’d kept trying to market my work during those arid years. I have concluded that there is no such thing as "lost time" in God's economy of obedience.

In fact, I wonder just how different the quality of Christian writing as a whole would be if God put those kinds of restrictions on everyone.

Or maybe He is doing that, but we’re not listening?

Have you ever felt that the Lord hemmed you in or restricted you? What was the result?

Walking the High Wire and Other Novel Techniques

I really enjoyed Debbie's post on Monday about artistic license in story structure, and I enjoyed the several comments to the post. Katy said, "I love it when authors walk the high wire." I love the image that conjures, because, really, don't we all feel like we're working without a net from the first sentence we write to the last, every time we write a novel?

~

Nicole said, "Rules were made to be broken in my world." We've all heard that saying, of course, along with the caveat that you must know the rules in order to break them. And I completely agree on both counts. But Nicole goes on to say, "If (emphasis mine) the story works, bravo to the one who told it in a different way."

~

Ah, therein lies the rub.

~

Because in taking artistic license, we take the chance that it won't work. And not simply that it won't work, but that it could fail miserably, and do so even before it gets past the pub committee.

~

And then there are the copycats who think "because a long, rambling letter worked for Marilyn Robinson, it'll work for me." Well, probably not. Because the whole idea is to be unique in our breaking of the rules. And once it's done, it's old news. That's not to say another novel written in the form of a letter can't work, and work well; it just means it must break the new rules established by the former rule breaker. See how complicated this becomes? Yet, what's the alternative? Tried and true, safe, ho-hum fiction, of which there's already for more than enough in the world.

~

Humorist Chris Dunmire writes, "A rule is 1) A guide or principle for governing action; 2) The usual way of doing something ... While guides and principles are in place for good reason, 'the usual way of doing something' as a rule in your creative work is flexible and open to change." http://www.coachingyourcreativity.com/

~

We must know the difference. A novel written entirely without punctuation breaks point #1 above, to no end. But a novel written as notes between a mother and daughter, left on a refrigerator door, that doesn't just skirt the 'usual way of doing something,' it annihilates it in a most remarkable -- and useful -- way.

~

Bonnie makes a good point that a "nontraditional structured novel ... needs to adhere to the other aspects of traditional novels -- story arc, character development, and a rich, well-drawn ending." Sort of a breaking-the-rules-while-staying-within-the-rules idea. But none of those elements need to be sacrificed for the sake of creative license. In fact, they must not be.

~

Had I known all this, I'd have become a novel writer with fear and trembling. Strike that; I would not have become a novel writer at all. I'd have, I don't know, gone into something simpler instead, like black widow spider poison extraction. But you know what they say, ignorance is bliss.

~

The bottom line is this: successfully breaking the rules in fiction quite often leads to the success of the novel. Or at the very least, it makes the piece memorable. If that's what we're after -- creating successful and memorable books -- we need to do all we can to avoid the usual way of going about it. As we listen to that still small voice, coming from the One who had the power to speak His creative thoughts into existence, we just may find the creative license to take us successfully way, way outside the lines.

~

Would you take a moment to respond to this impromptu, non-scientific poll? All you need do is post the letter A or B under "Comments." (But feel free to share your thoughts if you have time.)

~

A. I prefer a novel that follows a more traditional format as opposed to one that experiments with the rules.

B. I prefer a novel that breaks the rules. Even if it misses the mark, I'm willing to stick with it to the end.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Therein lies the rub." A misquote from Shakespeare's Hamlet.

"Devoutly to be wish'd

To die, to sleep;

To sleep: perchance to dream

ay, there's the rub (defined snag or obstacle)

For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,

When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,

Must give us pause; there's the respect

That makes calamity of so long life;"

The Shape of Story

A big 'thank you' to all who posted comments to Andy Meisenheimer's post on Friday, and a huge 'welcome' to folks who stopped by for the first time. Did you know that we will choose one lucky person to win a copy of Latayne Scott's Mormon Mirage? Every time you post a comment, your chances multiply.

I just finished reading The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society. What a great story and what a creative way to have it unfold! This story about the German occupation of the Channel Islands is told exclusively through letters exchanged between the characters after the war is over. It handles a weighty and horrific topic in an approachable style by using the distance created by the use of letters and by interjecting subplots which lightened the tone, at times cutting away to a budding romance and points of humor. If it had been written any other way, I don't think I would have finished it, but I'm a lightweight. The right- or the wrong - book can leave me with bad dreams. (Like The Historian - shiver! I stopped reading a third of the way through.)

This unusual story structure led me to consider the art involved in the shaping of stories, and how it can both enhance and hamper a reader's enjoyment. Take, for example, The Time Traveler's Wife. The main character travels through time unexpectedly and against his will. As an adult, he travels back and meets his future wife when she is only a child. Later, when she meets him as an adult, he doesn't know her. At times it was a mental workout to keep up, but it was worth it. (I offer a word of caution about the sometimes gritty content.) If I put the book aside for too long, I had trouble picking it up again, like dropping a string in Cat's Cradle. But I was invested in the story enough to see it to the end, and the structure was intriguing. The flashbacks weren't there to provide backstory - they were the story.

By contrast, Isabel Allende's Zorro is largely narrative with limited dialogue. She had an interesting and very human perception of the man behind the legend, but I kept wishing she would show me instead of telling me. Hmmm...

Story structure should take into consideration the nature of the story and should be complementary. For example, Gilead is written in the form of a long, rambling letter full of wisdom (along with regrets) from an elderly father to his young son. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time is told in the first-person viewpoint of an autistic teenager, using the charts, maps and diagrams he uses to break down his world into comprehensible chunks, along with prime numbers for chapter headings. Some stories are more suitable as allegory (The Screwtape Letters) and some are best recorded as diary or journal entries (The Princess Diaries). Structure should never get in the way of or detract from story.

While having a great story is, of course, the most important part of the equation, having an interesting or unique structure can greatly enhance it. How important do you think story structure is, and what are some interesting treatments that you have read? How much of story structure is art?