It's Oh So Quiet

In here at least. I've been working on new blogs, like this one and this one and this one. But I've also been doing a little bit of writing now and then, so I'm updating this blog to tell you about it.

I sat down in December-ish with a pretty short romance novelette to do some research into how these things are constructed. And as I read this book, I checked off items in "the formula". Yes, we've been through this before - published authors often argue that there isn't a simple formula which holds the secret to being published, but quite frankly, that's a load of rubbish. Take a look at any of the submission guidelines for romance publishers and the formula is spelled out in black and white. For example:

30,000-50,000 words, must have a strong female lead and love interest, story must begin with a conflict, include at least three bedroom scenes featuring safe sex, end with a HEA (happily ever after).

It reads exactly as a formula because that's exactly what it is. It is a tried-and-true method they've used umpteen times in a row to churn out their mass-market offerings month after month. But despite what glowing things might seem to be in store for an author accepted by these publishers, the reality is this: your advance will be three figures, and that's IF your lotto numbers come up and they sign you, and that's probably all you will ever see. For months of your hard work. You will effectively lose the rights on your work forever (read the fine print - you can virtually never regain the rights because they can simply release it digitally in Swahili and that re-starts the waiting period all over again - seriously, they'll do it). The royalties they state will be nothing like what you'll receive because they have sub-companies under sub-companies paying 5c per copy of the book and your 12% royalty will come out of that five cents. Your book will be marketed with a huge chunk of the publisher's branding all over the cover, in text far larger than your name - because let's face it their pretty graphics and their publishing house matters and you, the author, do not. Your book will have a literal shelf life of six weeks. That's how long it will be on supermarket shelves and on the front page of their ebook site before they shove it aside for the next book.

Sound enticing? Dear dog, I sincerely hope not.

There's also the matter of what the works themselves are. It is easy to say that they're trash because a reader with a brain will be able to identify the elbows of the work (the formula). It takes you out of the story when you're thinking to yourself that the girl is only arguing with him because they needed a conflict in the first chapter and that it's all part of the formula. It spoils what could have otherwise been a well-written story. You already know that the two main characters will end up together, happily.

I, personally, do not want to know what happens in the end of a book before I read it - why read it?

And I am not going to bash romance writers here. They are good writers. These, after all, were the ones selected while thousands were rejected. They are by definition the cream of the crop in the romance world, and even if their works conform to the shape of the cookie cutter and can be "seen through" they are still very good, technically, at the craft they do.

Anyway, back to the reason for the post - deconstructing the book. For not-the-first-time I was examining all these aspects and thinking I could write one. I started, by reading and writing in parallel. As things happened in the published book I wrote my versions. Absolutely not plagiarism - I am talking about structure not anything identifiable! -so for example, in the first chapter I introduced the main character and her home life, spelled out why she is single, showed her vulnerabilities (part of the formula).

So I continued. I had written my synopsis and fleshed out the characters. Six thousand words in, so, by now the characters had met and were hell-bent on never getting together.

And then it happened. That worm. Writers will know about that worm. It is the idea that worms its way in and refuses to be put off. In my case, the worm was that the main character has a stalker. An actual, valid reason to be worried about locking doors (which was her vulnerability). I wrote the stalker into the plot so far. I didn't want the reader to know who the stalker was.

I realised that to get my HEA, the stalker had to be someone either benign or arrested and locked up at the end of the book while the hero keeps her safe. How terribly trite. I couldn't bring myself to do it. Not to mention boring - damsel is in distress, hero steps in, she eventually allows him to love her, blah blah blah. No. Not going to do it.

And so the trashy novel has become a thriller. Hero's point-of-view chapters have been obliterated and the entire book will be written from the main character's point-of-view. Which is definitely more difficult. I can no longer have the hero's character shaped by his thoughts - she will need to witness all his "character quirks" so that the reader can understand the sort of person he is. But it has the added bonus that the reader will not know whether he is the bad guy.

I've put the first 1000 words up onto Wattpad, and we shall see if I get any feedback. I hope that readers aren't too bored.

The Good Father - Noah Hawley (review)

I wanted SO BADLY to read this book, and picked it up while working at the library. The book is the story of a father's perspective when a child is accused of murder, and worse, the murder of a future president, with all the public scrutiny attached.

It follows a father's quest for answers. Divorcee Dr Paul Allen is a prominent and well-respected specialist in medicine whose world is turned upside down by the news of what his son has done. Only he never really accepts his son's guilt. Initially he's convinced the boy never pulled the trigger, despite all evidence to the contrary. He makes it his mission to amass evidence himself, researching for umpteen hours, poring over reports and paperwork and generally neglecting his family in an insatiable quest to prove his son's innocence. His son, however, refuses to discuss it, and then pleads guilty.

Despite everyone around him begging him to accept his son's guilt, Paul continues as before. His focus changes from denial to a conviction that someone else must have masterminded the plot. He considers spy activity. He tries to blame terrorists. He points the finger at homeless war veterans. He is absolutely deaf and blind to what is staring him in the face; that his son grew up in a broken home and has grown up and done something terrible, and might face the death penalty.

Don't get me wrong, most parents in this situation would expend ferocious amounts of energy as Paul Allen did. The author did a good job at showing the virtual insanity that such a situation might induce. The problem is that I just didn't care. The book was a little too bogged down in minute details that didn't help move the plot along, and a little too short on positive traits that might have made me LIKE the father. Even his interactions with his son are largely absent - if he was openly hostile to his dad, perhaps I'd feel sorry for the doctor. Unfortunately, Paul's only actions were in denying all rational thought and neglecting his family, which made him a character I couldn't pity.

It's very rare that I can't finish a book, and even more rare that I get three-quarters through before abandoning it. But this is one where I had to. I was bored, and, like everyone apart from the father, I'd dealt with the heartbreak of his son's fate back in the first quarter. I'd finally arrived at the point where I didn't care what happened to the father anymore because his irrationality had just dragged on too long. I was even hoping his second wife and family would leave him, so that he'd be forced to take stock of his life (and to break the monotony of "Not his fault! Not his fault! I need to look into more clues and gather more evidence! Not his fault!").

Two stars.

Side note: my copy had multiple instances where a year was incomplete, such as a trial date like "21st January 20__" - the author had apparently intended to go back and fill the year in, but somehow it wasn't picked up by the editors. Multiple times. Maybe it was never copy-edited (which would explain why the father becomes an insufferable person). I am still giving the book two stars rather than one, simply because the author can actually write well. The book just needed plot work.