The Five Things I Look for in a Mystery-Romance

 

Valentine's Day is Sunday, so I thought I'd do a little post on what I look for in Mystery-Romance. Because we're all readers, even those of us who are also writers. 

So here's a bit of backstory. I'll admit right off the bat that it took me a really, really long time to settle down, and by the time I did finally marry I was, well...experienced. In the ways of the heart.  Or so I thought. In fact, I'd pretty well run the gamut of romantic tropes: enemies to lovers, friends to lovers, blind date, office romance, secret admirer, partners who were too young for me, partners who were too old for me, light, happy flirtations and passion bordering on obsession. 

I pretty much thought I knew all there was to know about love and relationships.

And then I got married.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

You know that old Judy Collins song?

I've looked at love from both sides now

From give and take and still somehow

It's love's illusions that I recall

I really don't know love

Really don't know love at all

Marriage changes everything, including, in my case, my taste in reading. So what I look for in a mystery-romance might not be what everyone looks for. It might not be what YOU look for. But, for better or worse, here are The Five Things I Look for in a Mystery-Romance--AND if you know some writers out there who can supply these five things, feel free to mention them in the comment section below.

1 - Setting. NO, HEAR ME OUT! 

You know, Hallmark is onto something with all those quaint and cute towns (all in Canada, according to the SO) where love lurks around every corner. But that's not what I'm talking about. Some settings are inherently unromantic: war zones, prisons, outer space. I'm not saying romance can't happen there--there are terrific love stories set in all those places--but it's not what I enjoy. I don't need a cozy setting, but I don't want a war zone either. 

I want the story to take place in believable and interesting surroundings--and bonus points if the setting is appealing. I like the setting to feel real because I have to believe in a world in order to lose myself in it. 

2 - Grown ups. 

I'm not talking physical age so much as emotional age. I wasn't ever a silly teenager. I was either "unusual" or "weird," depending on whether you liked me. So while I don't mind reading about twenty-year-olds, I want to read about twenty-year-olds I can identify with. Which is probably very few twenty-year-olds. This is a roundabout way of saying I CANNOT BEAR CHARACTERS WHO ACT LIKE EMOTIONAL ADOLESCENTS. 

I don't mind characters who make mistakes, make bad judgment calls, do stupid things--we ALL do stupid things, things we regret. (Especially under pressure.) But I don't want to read about people ruled by their emotions, unable to channel their emotions, unable to think about anything but their emotions. I'm not saying there aren't such people in the world, but I don't want to spend time with them. I do not want to read about a cop at a crime scene who is unable to focus on anything but how HAWT his new partner is. But that's just me.

     

3 - Communication. 

Since I'm a communicator by trade, I guess it's no surprise I like characters who communicate. But it goes beyond that, because how we communicate with others reveals who were are. 

Communication reveals a lot about our emotional maturity--but also it reveals a lot about how successful we're going to be (in a variety of areas). If you can't ask for what you want, you're not going to get it. If you can't make your case to someone, again, you're not going to get what you want. If you're a bully and a jerk, you might get what you want, but someone will spit in your cup. So... ?  It's my observation that most problems between people are communication problems. Even smart, articulate people have trouble communicating when ego or hurt feelings or pride gets in the way. So I like stories where communication--good or bad--plays a role. When a guy who has trouble saying what he feels, actually finally says what he feels? That melts your heart. When a guy who never cries, cries? That melts your heart. When a guy who always says what he feels, is too hurt to speak? That melts your heart. 

But you have to establish these communication patterns for these things to register. 

What I don't like in a story is when people (not necessarily the protags) fail to communicate the obvious and necessary things. You know, the sheriff fails to mention the serial killer has been released earlier that day. OR impossibly stupid misunderstandings between lovers which I call BUT DARLING, SHE'S MY SISTER syndrome.

4 - Romantic gestures. 

*Sigh* We all love romantic gestures.

Romantic gestures are how you know things are moving along and people are falling in love. But what makes a gesture romantic really depends on the character. Flowers from a guy who sends everyone flowers, is lovely, but flowers from a guy who has never sent flowers? More romantic. Flowers to a guy who has never received flowers? More romantic. It all depends on the characters and their history. In some circumstances, Character B taking Character A's car to the shop to get his brakes checked can be super romantic. Especially if B previously cut A's brake lines. I'M KIDDING. 

Heck, switching dishes in a restaurant can be romantic. ;-) I love spotting those meaningful gestures in a story--and very often, the smaller and subtler, the more meaningful. I love to be surprised by one character doing something original and thoughtful. 

5 - A Good Mystery. 

It should be obvious, right? 

I am astonished by how often a Mystery-Romance is AT BEST romantic suspense (I do love good romantic suspense though--that's another post). Making your character a cop or a PI does not mean you've written a mystery. The cop or PI would have to actually SOLVE an intriguing crime through detective work for the story to qualify as a mystery. 

If I buy a book based on the promise that it will have mystery and romance, I EXPECT mystery and romance. I will disappointed if the book does not contain these things. I'm not saying the mystery has to confound me, but it has to keep me interested and entertained. Once you've seen and read as much crime fiction as I have, it's no longer about who the culprit is, it's how fun can the author make this game.

Anyway, that's my want list. Who can you recommend?  

By the way, the SO tells me we are celebrating our FOURTEENTH wedding anniversary this month. So maybe I do know love a little. ;-)  

John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt

 

OR John Joseph Galbraith. Which one should we talk about? 

THAT WAS A RHETORICAL QUESTION.

I've been making notes and working on the outline for Bell, Book and Scandal, and that means thinking through the ongoing character arcs of both Cosmo and John. I was surprised after I Buried a Witch by the readers who really did not seem to "get" John. Meaning that they did not seem to understand that John was an emotionally and psychologically complicated personality with a character arc before him.

I don't know why this always surprises me because I've noticed again and again that the very readers who claim they love difficult, complicated characters, often have a lot of trouble with characters who are indeed difficult and complicated outside of a preordained acceptable character traits bubble. 

I admit it. I like writing difficult characters. I like writing characters that push reader buttons. I like occasionally making readers uncomfortable. I'm not trying to write for everyone. I'm not studying the market and analyzing algorithms. I  write what interests me, moves me, inspires me to explore and understand. That's one reason why I quit writing for mainstream. ;-)

Anyway, I was thinking about John and the readers who were riled by him, and I wonder if there were some important clues that not everyone picked up on. Like, there's a big difference between what John says and what he does. John's communication style is very brusque, but his actions frequently do not line up with what he says. John talks a good distancing game, but when it comes to Cosmo, he does not actually preserve much distance.

Some of John's most important character reveals are sub-textual. But some of them are right there in
plain sight. 

For example, John's not sexually controlling. He's open and willing to anything Cosmo wants to do or not do. He specifically says Cosmo should have everything the way he likes every time he has sex. And as Cosmo's sexual interests change, John goes right along with out hesitation or hitch.

Also, right from the start--in Mainly by Moonlight--as ambitious as John professes to be--is--when it comes down to Cosmo or his big important job--even with all his (understandable) doubts and concerns about Cosmo--he chooses Cosmo.

This is a little one, but kind of key to both family dynamics and how John treats others. John backs Cosmo's position within the family hierarchy. We know (or think we know) John's not a patient guy, yet he's kind to his annoying and difficult mother and both loyal to, and protective of, his difficult young sister. He values Cosmo's input and opinions (as much or more than values anyone's--given that he is not a trusting person). Also he appears to remain courteous and respectful to Cosmo's family and friends, despite knowing they detest him. 

In I Buried a Witch, John gives what he believes is an ultimatum and when Cosmo calls his bluff, he backs down, eventually settling on the fairly minimal request of please don't use magic as a first resort. (Which is fair enough from someone who doesn't like magic. ) Should he have made the original request? It's called negotiation. 

Also, as controlling as John seems on the surface, he does forgive Cosmo for trying to use magic on him--not once, but a couple of times. In fact, after his initial rage (again we only see it through Cosmo's eyes) he attempts to retreat from Cosmo. He does not attack him or punish him. He's not out to destroy Cosmo. He doesn't reveal any of Cosmo's secrets.

It's tricky because we mostly see John through Cosmo's eyes, and Cosmo feels insecure and uncertain of the relationship. Subtext is important when analyzing John. But so are Cosmo's behaviors. He repeatedly ignores John's orders and demands--other than the evening where John discovers Cosmo is a magical being who attempted to repeatedly use magic on him--Cosmo shows little real fear of anything but John not loving him. In fact, overall, Cosmo is pretty much a blithe spirit.

And finally, I'd have insisted on the pool too. :-D I mean, he did give Cosmo half the backyard, and Cosmo is a fully cognizant adult, not a tiny child to wander off and fall in the pool. 

Those are my thoughts. YMMV? 

WHERE DO YOU GET YOUR IDEAS: Mainly by Moonlight (Bedknobs and Broomsticks 1)

One of the questions authors hear most often is Where do you get your ideas? And of course, it's not (usually) always going to be the same answer. It's typically going to depend on the project. But anyway, I thought I'd start sharing the inspiration for my new books here on the blog, lest this devolve into nothing more than a calendar update. ;-)

So here we go, starting with Mainly by Moonlight.

It's probably not a surprise that I have a great fondness for witches and witchcraft. They make the occasional appearance in my stories (Strange Fortune, The Hell You Say, etc.) but for a long time I've wanted to make a witch my actual protagonist.

Like a lot of my readers, I grew up watching Bewitched, but even as a kid I had a couple of problems with it. For one, it was a comedy, and believe it or not, I pretty much hate comedy. I know, right? I mean, obviously humor figures a lot in my books--as well as in my real life interactions--I prefer my characters to have a sense of humor (in fact, keeping their sense of humor toned down is more the issue), there are plenty of comedy movies I love, but TV comedy--sit coms and the like--have never been my thing. I like mysteries, I like murder. That's really pretty much it for me. I like it in my reading and in my viewing.

But the bigger problem with Bewitched is Darrin. Darrin is such a dolt. Now that I'm an adult, I can see he had his good qualities, but yeesh. Why on earth would Sam marry someone like that? Let alone be SO besotted? (an echo of Cosmo's adoration of John perhaps?)  Darrin was such a stick figure that I only noticed a couple of years ago that at some point they changed the original actor out for a clone. (But actually, that's okay--for the record, I much prefer changing an actor to killing a character off.)

Anyway, I've wanted to do a romantic witch mystery (with comedic elements) for some time, but my fantasy and spec fiction don't tend to do as well as my contemporary mystery and crime stuff, so the question was one of timing. When is a good time to write a trilogy (series?) that might be entirely for own amusement?

Well, two things made me feel like now was a good time: the popularity of witches in mainstream mystery (even cozy mystery) AND my need to write something new. Something that didn't involve federal agents (as much as I love federal agents--and, hey, I'll be starting a new FBI trilogy next year!) or cops or writers/artists/teachers/librarians who sideline as amateur sleuths.

But a police commissioner? Yes. A bookseller/antiques dealer who is also a witch AND an amateur sleuth? Completely different. :-D

You see how this works?

The second big influence in the Bedknob and Broomsticks trilogy (series?) is the old 1970s crime drama (crime drama????) McMillan and Wife. Talk about a major influence on my formative years! I loved everything about that show, from Sally's football jersey sleep shirt and vintage car to handsome, solemn Mac's indulgent (occasionally paternalistic) adoration of his way younger wife.

That was probably

Five Things I Learned While Writing The Magician Murders

Yep! Now available in audio too!

Part of the fun (or maybe the word is "challenge") of writing a series is how the characters change--sometimes in unpredictable ways--throughout the course of the books.

I mean, characters change (and hopefully grow) in standalone novels too. If at the end of the story the main characters are exactly who they were at the start of the story, there's a problem. Every story--even a short story--is ideally supposed to have some kind of a character arc.

But with a series you have so much more room to stretch out and explore. It feels kind of luxurious. I'm only three books into The Art of Murder series, so there's still room for plenty of surprises and developments.

(Personally, I think five is the ideal number of installments in a series, so I'm pretty sure five books will be the final count for Jason and Sam--but you never know.)

Anyway, here's what I learned in the last book.

1 - Though neither Sam nor Jason is by nature insecure, they trigger each other's deepest insecurities. I'm not sure if I have another couple with quite that dynamic. Everyone is vulnerable during the process of falling in love, but with Sam and Jason it cuts a bit deeper than that.

2 - Sam is willing--well, maybe willing isn't exactly the word--but Sam will make compromises for Jason in every aspect of his life, including the job, that he would not (or at least never has) made for anyone else. That's kind of a big thing. Sam might not be ready to get married and settle down at this exact moment in time, but he's prepared to make the kinds of concessions that preface that kind of commitment.

3 - Though Sam has been in trouble for cutting through red tape with a chainsaw, and will not waste time on diplomacy when blunt force trauma can achieve faster results, Jason might actually be the one willing to break the law in his mission to protect our artistic and cultural heritage. I'm still thinking that one through, but yeah.

4 - Sam is, um, ambidextrous. ;-)

5 - Sam scares Jason a little. Not in a...I'm afraid HE'S a serial killer too!!!! way, but Jason has an uneasy awareness that you can't stare into the abyss and not be changed by it. Mostly his fear is for Sam--but maybe not entirely.




Next week we've got something special! On Thursday Dal MacLean is posting on the ever-delicate topic of infidelity in romance--and on Friday we dig deeper into the topic with a bit of back and forth discussion on the topic. I hope you can join us!

5 Books That Taught Me Everything I Know About Writing

Okay, not really. It took more than five books. And everything I know about writing didn't solely come from reading--a huge part of it came from working with editors through the years, starting with Jacqui Bianchi back at Mills & Boon  (!?).

But a lot of what I've learned did come simply through reading.

Here are five of what I consider my "break-thru" books.


SUBTEXT - The Hollow by Agatha Christie 

What the hell are these people talking about??!!! That was my initial reaction reading The Hollow. I was in high school and I was on a mission to read every book written by Christie. The Hollow turned out to be one of my all time favorites by her, but when I started reading it I was confused by the fact that the Angkatells were clearly speaking in code to each other. Even the servants were speaking in code to the Angkatells! So much of the conversation was verbal shorthand. In fact, most of the key communication was unspoken or delivered in the personal, private language of families.

This was the first time I understood what was meant by subtext and saw how very effective it could be in, amongst other things, illustrating relationship dynamics.

 BACKSTORY - Weep and Know Why by Elizabeth Ogilvie 

Did I miss something? This was another book I read in high school, and a lot of it takes place in flashback, which I was a little confused by. Not because I hadn't read stories with flashbacks before, but because the flashbacks were woven so subtly, so craftily throughout the text. No asterisks, no double spaces, no time stamp. Just the memories of Mirabell as she's working her way through some pretty terrifying events.

Not just that, it was clear that all the characters had complicated histories and relationships, i.e., backstory and Ogilvie did not painstakingly explain them all in convenient info dumps for the slower kids in the class. I had to read the whole book to understand both past and present--which is how it's supposed to be, though that didn't dawn on me until this very book.





SETTING - The Moonspinners by Mary Stewart

I read The Moonspinners in junior high school. I'd seen the movie and I was a little taken aback at how very different the book was--but in the end was won over entirely. It was wonderful, and one of the most wonderful parts about it was how vivid the descriptions were of...well, everything. Everywhere. Every single place the heroine went...from the goat-scented interior of a gassy, groaning bus to the chilly dank interior of a tomb... it was all so real.

In fact, the writing was so evocative, I didn't skim past all "The Description" as I usually did with the generic settings in so many novels. This was the book where I realized that setting was a key element of making the story world come to life.










DIALOG - The Masqueraders by Georgette Heyer

Okay, this--possibly my all-time favorite of Heyer's work--is a beautiful illustration of how to handle subtext, backstory, and setting, but what really made Heyer stand out for my junior high school self was the dialog. It wasn't just what Heyer's characters said--though my God, she was funny--no, witty--it was their delivery too. The timing! The expressions! The tone! It was a revelation to see how someone who understood how to use descriptive tags could enhance already really strong dialog.

Even as a very inexperienced aspiring writer I couldn't help noticing that every single conversation was either amusing in its own right or served to advance the story. There was no filler, no babble, no turning pages to get to the action because there was plenty of entertaining action in the dialog itself.









METAPHOR - The Lady in the Lake by Raymond Chandler

I didn't get around to reading Chandler until I was in college, and had it not been part of the course curriculum I probably wouldn't have read it then (which means...holy moly! I might not have ended up marrying the SO--because it was at least partly our love of hard-boiled fiction and Chandler that
brought us together)! Anyway, until college I assumed Chandler, Hammett, Macdonald were all on a par with Mike Hammer and The Executioner. :-D So imagine my surprise when I stumbled across lines like:

“He looked about as inconspicuous as a tarantula on a slice of angel food cake.”

“She gave me a smile I could feel in my hip pocket.”

“Dead men are heavier than broken hearts.”

Coming from the world of He was as tall as a six-foot, three-inch tree, this was enlightenment. Until that moment my use of metaphor had been constrained to similes.





BREVITY - Fadeout by Joseph Hansen

Ironically, Hansen was a writer who knew his way around a metaphor or two--as evidenced by his work as James Colton--but part of what set him apart from his contemporaries, was his sparing, occasionally spartan, use of language. Less is more was the lesson I learned from Hansen--and it was a lesson that came long after college and after I had published my own first novel. Quality over quantity. Cut, cut, cut down the bone. Brevity, may or may not be the soul of wit, but the tighter the prose, the sharper the point.









Any books change the way you write or even the way you read? Share them below!

The Amazing Story Generator

A few years ago a reader sent me a copy of THE AMAZING STORY GENERATOR.

This is a book--a tool?--that "Creates Thousands of Writing Prompts" for writers having trouble coming up with ideas. Now, in my experience, ideas are not a problem for writers (and by "writers" I don't mean those people who decide to create books as a get-rich-scheme--those folks actually do have trouble coming up with ideas, judging by the bizarre comments in some of the groups I belong to). FOLLOW THRU is the challenge for the rest of us.

Right? Ideas are a dime a dozen. It's the work--work--of writing the book we'd all love to find a short cut for. :-D But I digress.

Anyway, I was idly flipping through this book (Mix-and-Match-Creative-Writing-Prompts!) and I started to think about the very nature of storytelling. Why are some ideas so compelling--and some ideas so...not?

Why are some ideas so universal, so timeless that they become tropes? I mean, I understand why falling in love and trying to build lasting relationships is timeless and universal. Most of us at some point in our lives fall in love and attempt to build lasting relationships. But amnesia, marriages-of-convenience, solving a murder, anything to do with cowboys or firemen or policemen? Why are those so enduring?

The way the AMAZING STORY GENERATOR works is it takes three different elements which can be combined to create "unique" story ideas.

For example, if you just go with the first three panels you get:

Upon winning the lottery
A reformed hit man
Meets the ghost of Ernest Hemingway

I don't know about you, but for me this was a Wah Wah Wah Fail Sound Effect.

So close and yet...so far. I mean, yes, it worked for Woody Allen, but it's a hard sell for most romance readers.

A few more page flips and we've got...

Upon winning the lottery
A reformed hit man
Assumes a new identity

Okay, workable, right? Not my kind of story idea, but I can see others turning this into a workable, even winning idea.

Some of these are just weird.

Upon winning the lottery
A sassy nun
steals a baby

WTH. I do not like nuns stealing babies or playing the lottery. Just saying.

Honestly, I find the whole "winning the lottery" trope SO boring. So flip a few pages...

Ugh... post-apocalyptic worlds (kill me first) suffering from amnesia (okay, I do like amnesia) while dog sitting (where's my sad trombone?) hoping to impress an old flame (oh! okay...)

Hoping to impress an old flame

A sassy nun (NO!!!!) a gold prospector (Thar's gold in them hills...REALLY?) a clown in training (hahahahaha NO) a computer hacker (sigh...okay)

Hoping to impress an old flame
A computer hacker
steals a baby

WHAT??? No. NO.

Discovers who really killed JFK (Spoiler alert, it was the CIA, MOVE ON) Makes a deal with the Devil (BO-RING) Receives a very important phone call (Huh? That's not a hook, that's an inciting incident) Discovers plans for an impending alien invasion (so...more baby stuff...) Develops the ability to fly (WTH -- how would this aid in your romance?) Accidentally runs over the family dog (sad trombone...wait...if it's a certain kind of black comedy...maybe...not in this story though) GROWS AN EXTRA ARM (...the better to grope you, darling...) Refuses to leave the bathtub (I. Give. Up.)

Clearly the third part of the equation is the tricky part.

I flipped through the entire book and all the options were equally bizarre: Stumbles upon the fountain of youth, is elected Mayor of Chicago, Inadvertently starts World War III, Burns down house (hmm...again, black comedy MAYBE) creates a family of robots...finds a 17th Century Treasure map (I love that idea, but does it work with the first part of the premise? IMHO no)

I think it would be REALLY fun to put one of these together for romance writers. Just imagine.

First piece of the premise: An embittered cop...A disgraced journalist...A retired fireman...A suicidal grad student...A widowed rancher... 

Second part of the premise: And his estranged former partner...Discovers a plot to...Is trapped in an isolated cabin with...Learns a trusted friend is...

Right????

Third piece of the premise...

No, wait. I'll leave that to you. :-D

You choose the first two pieces and come up with the third part of the equation.

Generate your Amazing ROMANCE Story idea in the comment section below.

I mean, could you possibly do worse than:

After too many cups of coffee
A Shakespearean scholar
Slowly transforms into a centaur

??

Epic Fail

I was reading an article the other day about how writing "short" will maximize profits--this was right after I'd watched a webinar on writing to market, which was right after I'd watched another webinar on understanding Amazon's algorithms.

Now I do enjoy writing short stories. They're excellent for exploring theme or a particular character dynamic--and I'm good at them! So I had no objection to that article. I thought it was interesting. And I think in this publishing environment, authors do need to think in practical, i.e., businesslike terms. There's nothing wrong with identifying and analyzing your target audience. Nor is there anything wrong with understanding Amazon's algorithms.

But yet I still felt a little depressed after an afternoon of...authorial self-improvement.

Which is probably illogical because writing is a business, and I'm the first one to get impatient with people who don't conduct themselves like professionals. But writing is also an art, and lately everything seems to be about the business of fiction writing and very little, if anything, about the art.

Even the rare posts that are ostensibly about writing, are usually thinly disguised promotion.

And I get it. This is an insanely competitive market. And by "this" I mean any genre you can think of.  There is no sub-genre of commercial fiction that it isn't swamped with new books and new authors, so it's only natural that we're all looking for an edge. It's like the Olympics. Now days winning is determined by a fraction of a fraction of a second. Your sunscreen can make a difference.

It makes perfect sense that we're all studying formulas and algorithms and trends like we're searching for a cure for cancer. I don't care how good you are, when the market gets this crowded and this competitive, you have to run a lot faster just to stay in one place.

But writing is also still an art.

I don't care how many of these marketing courses tell you it's not about writing, it's about productivity...if you consider yourself to be a real writer, if you take pride in the idea of being a writer, then you need to care about the work. You need to care about the words.

And that means you need to have the courage to experiment. To, yes, fail. Because it's through trial and error that you get better. That you get to the goal--at least, I think it should be a goal--of excellence. Excellence doesn't happen through copying what everyone else is doing. It doesn't happen through homogenization.

I mean, think for a moment about the numbing sameness of what's being published in this genre alone. The same covers, the same blurbs, the same promo tactics--and yes, even the characters and plots all sound the same. For. The. Love. Of. God.

Last year I wanted to experiment. I wanted to try something new. I was eager to push myself to try something new. So I put out two books that had some readers scratching their heads. Murder Between the Pages was a semi-satirical take on classic locked room mysteries. Some readers got it -- but a disconcerting number of readers did not get it. Were actively hostile to the very idea of it. HATED it.

It was one of my least successful titles -- joining the ranks of other not terribly successful experiments like Blood-Red Butterfly.

The other experiment was a monster mash-up. The Curse of the Blue Scarab. An Edwardian murder mystery with supernatural overtones. Some readers got it -- some did not. It too was not as successful as my contemporary crime thrillers. Several one or two star reviews. Genuine grievance at the idea that I would turn out something like that.

IT'S LIKE A DIFFERENT PERSON WROTE IT!!!!! 

:-D :-D :-D

(It's okay, by the way. I don't expect everything to be a huge hit with every single reader. Hell, even the most enormously successful of my books have a few people screaming they can't understand why anyone ever reads me.)

The point of writing is not to never get a bad review. The point of writing is not for every story to be a huge financial--or even critical--success.

What is the point of writing?


This is not rhetorical.

Why do you write? If you don't know the answer, ask yourself: why do you read?

What is the point, the purpose of all this literary exercise?

 If the answer is...to make a lot of money fast...well, okay. Whatever. This is not the post for you. But if you actually care about the work, care about what it means to be a writer--versus just another author--you can't be afraid to experiment, to try new things, to push yourself a little further. You must not be afraid to fail. 

Don't sacrifice art for the algorithms.

The 7 Habits of Highly UNsuccessful Writers

I discovered a new writing biz tool last week and FOR ONCE it's actually worth every penny. It's called Amazon Book Report and you can discover more about it here. It's perfect for writers like me who have a pretty good idea of the math, but rarely sit down and actually DO it.

Anyway, I was inspired to then go and do the math on my audio backlist, and that's a different story. A sad story if you love audio books--and my audio books in particular.

But I'll save that post for another day. In the meantime, I can't help noticing that my FB feed (and Twitter) is full of people handing out writing and/or marketing advice OR people in despair over their writing careers. Okay, and also people gloating about their writing careers, but there are fewer of them and they haven't been at it long enough to know how seriously to take that gloating.

I've been around a while and I'm reasonably successful, so I thought I would share some of my observations with those who feel they are not getting the success they deserve.

THE 7 HABITS OF HIGHLY UNsuccessful WRITERS

1 - You never submit anything because you're convinced it's "not good enough yet." You started what you believe will be your greatest work five years ago, and so far you have written the finest three chapters known to man. But they do need a little more work before you move on to Chapter Four...

2 - You submit everything -- or you self-publish and you don't have time or money for editing, cover art, formatting or even another re-read. You are terrified that the gold rush will be over before you can partake of the shiny. You firmly believe that "good enough" is all it takes these days to be successful -- especially when combined with aggressive advertising and marketing.

3 - Instead of analyzing your target audience, you spend hours writing ranty posts in which you attempt to redefine genre or sub-genre and offer guidelines as to who should be allowed to play in the sandbox. You are sure that if you just keep ranting, you will ultimately part the waves and convince readers they don't like what they do.

4 - You write hostile reviews of other writers under a sooper-sekret name on Amazon and elsewhere. Don't worry, you're not going to be found out. The danger lies not in being unmasked. The danger lies in the fact you've let your jealousy and insecurity get the better of you. Instead of focusing on YOUR career, you're busy worrying about someone else's. This is not a winning mindset. Or a sign of mental health.

5 - You believe everything you hear about writing not mattering-- that's it's all about social
networking, your mailing list numbers, marketing and advertising. Here's a tip. The "writing" may not matter, but the "storytelling" sure as heck does. You need to write stories that a lot of people can't wait to read.

6 - You believe your reviews. The good ones, anyway.

7 - You think because you've had some success, you now know all there is to know and you don't have to keep trying new things, pushing yourself, reading, honing your craft...you don't have to pay attention to the market or your readers (you don't even know who your core readership is) or what's happening in the world around you. You believe that success is a stable thing and once you've reached it, you're set.




Agree? Disagree? Pretty basic stuff, right? Feel free to offer your thoughts below!  

Happy Labor Day!

It turns out I have no Labor Day appropriate photos! 

I'm just about to leave town for a long (though not long enough) weekend, and because my head is still in the fictional realm of Fair Chance (oh, POOR Elliot...) I thought I would simply share a couple of my all-time favorite essays with no purpose in mind other than to share something I love--writers being witty on the subject of writing.

The first is by James Thurber and it's called "The MacBeth Murder Mystery". You can read it right here.

The second is Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) on the topic of James "Fenimore Cooper's Literary Offenses," which you can read here.

Do you have any favorite witty essays on the subject of writing?

Wishing you all a happy weekend! Have fun and stay safe!

I Got Those First Draft Blues...

The challenges of this writing week have been the death of my desktop (ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!) and the return of wrist problems AND a surprise visit from my pop on a day set aside for nothing but research and writing.

Which wouldn't be so bad if I wasn't already behind.

But I am. Mostly due to circumstances outside my control, but that's life. Or the writing life.

Writing a first draft is just the weirdest thing. You start with basically nothing. Even when it's a series book and you have the advantage of knowing the characters and their dynamic...there's this feeling of trying to make a snowman out of sand. I hate this stage. It is all blood, sweat and tears. And Sam-E and motrin and sleeping with wrist braces and typing with copper thread gloves and begging my computer not to leave me...

I'll do anything you ask, just don't die, my little graphics card...

Anyway, here's a messy, clunky  wee snippet from the first draft of FAIR CHANCE, third and final book in the ALL'S FAIR trilogy, which is the current project (though not due out until next year)


CHAPTER ONE

“I knew you’d come.”

Andrew Corian, dubbed “The Sculptor” by the national press, was smiling that same old smile. Supremely confident and a little scornful. For a moment it was as almost as if he was seated at his desk in his old office at PSU and not in this dingy interview room at The Federal Detention Center in Sea-Tac.

“Sure you did,” Elliot said. He had been second-guessing the decision to meet with Corian from the minute he’d acceded to SAC Montgomery’s request, and Corian’s supercilious attitude just confirmed his doubts. They were not going to get anything useful out of The Sculptor.

Corian’s big hands, wrists handcuffed, rested on the resin table top. He spread his fingers, palms up in a have a seat gesture as Elliot took the chair across the table.

 “How could you resist? A chance to play hero one last time. A chance to convince yourself you got the better of me.”

“You’ve been hitting the psych shelves in the prison library pretty hard,” Elliot commented, folding his arms on the table top. He glanced casually around the room. He’d been in plenty of these interview rooms back when he’d been with the FBI. Neutral colors. Durable furniture. Mesh over the windows. Generic right down to the two-way mirror behind which stood Detective Pine of Tacoma Homicide and FBI Special Agent Kelli Yamiguchi.

Just in case they missed anything, the cameras overhead were recording the interview.

Corian’s eyes, a weird shade of hazel that looked almost yellow in the institutional light, narrowed at Elliot’s jibe, but his broad smile never faltered. He seemed to be a in great mood for a guy looking at a multiple life sentences.

“I don’t need to read a psychology book to understand you, Mills. There’s nothing complicated about your psyche.”

“But enough about me,” Elliot said. “Let’s talk about your favorite subject. You. Or more exactly, why you wanted to see me.”

Corian sat back in his chair. He looked a bit like a cartoonist’s idea of the devil. Gleaming bald head and immaculately trimmed Vandyke. He was a big man and prison had made him bigger. Leaner. Harder. He looked like he ate steroids for every meal and spent all his free time body-building. Maybe the body-building wasn’t far from the truth. There wasn’t a hell of a lot to do while sitting around waiting for trial. Not when you’d been caught red-handed, as it were, in a series of brutal slayings and mutilations spanning more than fifteen years.

He said, “I didn’t want to see you, Mills. I gave you permission to visit. That’s all.”

“Two letters in two months? We’re practically pen pals. Come off it, Corian. You want me to sit here and listen to you explain in detail how brilliant you were. How brilliant you still are compared to the rest of us.”

Corian’s smile widened. “That wouldn’t be the only reason.”

“It’ll be the main reason. You’re sure as hell not interested in bringing closure to the families of the victims.”

“You’ve never understood me, Mills.”

“You’re right about that.

“But you’re afraid of me.”

Elliot sighed. “No, Andrew. I’m not.”

They had never been on first name terms. Corian replied, “You should be, Elliot.”

“This is bullshit.” Elliot made sure his tone revealed nothing but boredom. “If the idea was to get me here so you could practice your bogeyman routine, you’re wasting both our time.” He pushed his chair back as though to rise.

Corian sat back and expelled an exasperated sigh. “Goddamn, Mills. Can’t you at least buy me a drink before you screw me over?”

“Look, you wrote me. I’m not looking to continue our relationship--if you want to call it that. I don’t need closure. I got my closure when they slammed those cell doors on you.”

That wasn’t completely true. Like everyone else involved in the case, Elliot wasn’t going to truly breathe a sigh of relief until Corian was tried and convicted. He wanted the reassurance of knowing Corian was locked up in a maximum facility until the end of time. The numerous court date postponements were wearing on everyone’s nerves.

Corian had the gall to look wounded. It was only partly an act. Being a psychopath, his own pain and his own frustrations were very real to him. It was the suffering of other people he was indifferent to.

“I’d appreciate a little courtesy. A few minutes of intelligent conversation. Or as close as you can manage.”

Elliot eyed him without emotion. “All right. But we don’t have all day. If you’ve got something to say, you’d better say it.”

Corian leaned back in his chair, smiling. “How’s the fall session shaping up? Have they hired someone to replace me yet?”

 “Oh, no one could replace you,” Elliot said sarcastically.

“True.” Corian grinned. “How’s Rollie? I read his book. When you think about it, it’s pretty ironic. The only child of a celebrity sixties radical joining the FBI.”

 “Yep. Ironic. Are we done with the chitchat?”

Corian’s smile faded. “All right. Ask your questions.”

“As of this date, sixteen bodies have been removed from the cellar of your property in Black Diamond, bringing the number of victims to twenty-three. Is that it? Is that an accurate headcount? Or are there more?”

“Headcount.” Corian’s smile was pure Mephistophelian. Partly he was acting. Partly he was simply…evil.

He did the mash, he did the monster mash...

I mentioned in an earlier post that I'm working on this crazy extra project called The Curse of the Blue Scarab. I call it my "monster mash-up," because that's what it is. It's a literary mash-up of a 1912 horror novel called The Mummy by Riccardo Stephens.


Now you may be wondering what the heck is a literary mash-up?


And here's Wikipedia to explain it:


A mash-up novel (also called "mashup" or "mashed-up novel"), is a work of fiction which combines a pre-existing literature text, often a classic work of fiction, with another genre, such as horror genre into a single narrative. Marjorie Kehe of the Christian Science Monitor renders this admixture of classic text as "somewhere between 60 and 85 percent original text, with new plot twists added by contemporary co-authors". These "twists" often include horror fiction elements like vampires, werewolves or zombies.


That's pretty much it in a nut-shell. However a key point is that these works are almost always works that have fallen into public domain. Meaning, they are no longer under copyright.


Now given that in my case the book is already about a mummy, you might wonder what it is I'm bringing to the mix besides a male/male romance? Well...time will tell.


How on earth does it work? Sometimes better than others.


But, for example, here's the original opening bit of The Mummy.


I was sitting at breakfast one February morning, about nine o’clock, two years ago, with Mudge, my servant, ex-sergeant of Marines, at my back telling some yarn about what he said he had done at Ladysmith.

Though 1 live in the West End, it is only in a little flat over a grocer’s shop, in a small side-street off Piccadilly, where my patients are principally the servants (and principally the men- servants—butlers, coachmen and such-like) from the big houses and clubs.


A couple of news-boys began yelling something through the morning fog, about exclusive information and special edition of the Daily Tale. I knew nothing would satisfy Mudge till he got a copy. So I sent him out.

Presently the outer door was pushed open, and a man's voice asked loudly whether the doctor was in.

“Second door right-hand side of lobby,” 1 shouted, and the man was in before I could swallow another mouthful.






And here is a rough idea of the opening of The Curse of the Blue Scarab.

I remember the fog was particularly thick that February morning.

Pressing its formless face to the steamy window panes, grey and dreary as a specter, it crept down the chimney, dripping and hissing onto the smoking logs.

Drip. Hiss. Drip. Hiss.

An otherwise unremarkable start to the day that was to change my life forever.

Bird, my servant, an ex-sergeant of Marines, was spinning some lengthy and involved yarn about his exploits at Ladysmith while I attempted to read my magazine and finish my breakfast before the business of the day began.

“Those were weary hours. Lying on that hill while the bullets hailed down on us. I can still hear ‘em cutting through the air and clacking on the rocks. You couldn’t hear yourself think...”

“One can only imagine,” I murmured.

My name is Armiston. I’m a physician living and working in the West End. This sounds grander than the reality which is a little flat over a grocer’s shop in a small side-street off Piccadilly. My patients are principally the servants (and principally the men-servants—butlers, coachmen and such) from the big houses and clubs.

“Nine hours we clung to that pile of stones. Cartridges dwindling and men dying. I can tell you hope was fading…”

“I feel as though I’m there beside you.” I turned the page of the magazine, studying the dubious claims in the advertisement for Madam Harper’s hair tonic.

In the street below a couple of news-boys began yelling about exciting information  exclusive to the special edition of the Daily Tale. I knew nothing would satisfy Bird till he got a copy. So I sent him out.

Drip. Hiss. Drip. Hiss.

Presently the outer door was flung open, and a man’s voice demanded whether the doctor was in.

“Second door right-hand side of lobby,” I shouted, and the man was in before I could swallow another mouthful.

It's the same and yet... It is transformed into something new. And hopefully amusing.




This is my relaxation in between working on FAIR CHANCE, the final book in the All's Fair trilogy. That one's turning out to be a rather tense book, so mummies and supernatural goings-on are kind of a relief!

Just a little fooling around

I'm in the midst of writing a little quickie story that I hope will be accepted for the
Magic and Mayhem GRNW Charity Anthology. Hey, and if you're interested, the submission guidelines are right here!

Anyway, yesterday on Facebook we were all getting a bit silly and I thought I'd share an abbreviated version of that silliness with you here -- and invite you to join in. 

Basically you just answer the following questions. It's always fun learning new stuff about each other, right? ;-D

So here are the questions with my answers.

Four names I go by:
 1. Josh Lanyon
 2. Diana Killian
 3. Her Supreme Satanic Majesty
 4. Hi-can-you-tell-me-where-the-restrooms-are? (Any author who has ever toughed out a mall book signing can relate to that one)

Three places I have worked:
 1. Los Angeles Unified School District
 2. Caretaker for tiny elderly crazy lady
 3. Robinsons-May

Four things I love to watch:
 1. True crime documentaries
 2. Film Noir
 3. Anything with Audrey Hepburn
 4. The X-Files (only the monster of the week episodes though -- conspiracy theories are boring)

Three things I am looking forward to:
 1. Retirement (HA HA there is NO SUCH THING FOR A WRITER)
 2. Getting a puppy
 3. WAVECON

Okay. Your turn! Amaze and astound us.

Five Things I Didn't Know About Jason West and Sam Kennedy Until I Started Writing Them

 

Well, time is running out on my beach resort vacation. Knowing me, I'm looking forward to being home but already missing Catalina Island.

Anyway, on Tuesday The Mermaid Murders goes live! It's always exciting to launch a new series. I plan to write this particular trilogy quite quickly with a book out each March for the next two years. I think I've made a mistake in letting so much time lag between books in all these other series. But you know, to some extent this is all determined by creative drive. You don't want to thwart it too often or it really takes the joy out of the work.

The next adventure for Kennedy and West will be The Monet Murders. Which, to my ire, turns out to be a surprisingly popular title for a mystery. HOW DARE SOMEONE(S) THINK OF THAT BEFORE ME?!

Nonetheless that's what I'm calling it.

I'm a big advocate of doing a lot of the work before you ever begin writing. I like to outline and I like to have a pretty good idea of who my characters are and what their big conflict will be. That said, writing is an organic process and there are always surprises and discoveries along the way. That's why writing is as addictive for writers as it is for readers. We also get to lose ourselves for hours at a time. Not in the same way, but it's equally powerful for all that.

So here are a couple of things I discovered about Jason West and Sam Kennedy as I began to write their story:

1 - Sam is from Wyoming and was raised by a single mom in a conservative small town.

I had originally thought he might be from Texas and that he would come from a large family. But no.

2 -  Jason is a winker. (NOT a wanker! I did not say WANKER.) He's one of those smooth, maybe a little too smooth guys used to offering one of those knowingly charming smiles and winks...and watching everyone melt into a puddle.

But that's because he was a skinny, fragile kid with braces and a chronic case of heart-on-his-sleeve, so he's worked hard and long to build up that aura of cool charm.

3 - Sam has a masters in Criminal Psychology.

I thought his background would be law enforcement! I did not see him as someone who had actually spent a lot of time cracking psychology books.

4 - Jason's parents are elderly. He was a surprise baby who arrived after they'd already raised their two daughters.

I pictured him as a middle kid with a middle kid's insecurities. But he's actually not particularly insecure. About really anything. He's more emotional than I expected, more passionate. Very loud during sex. :-D I was thinking he'd be more quiet and restrained.

5 - They both love the artist Granville Redmond.

Where the heck did that come from?! I don't know. But it's a sure sign they are Meant To Be Together.

The Meat on the Bones

My Christmas tree is still up.

I confess to this only to reassure you that if you are waiting for a book from me, it's coming. I mean a printed book, not the one I'm writing, but that one is coming too. And because that one is coming too, I'm a bit behind on things like answering emails, mailing parcels, packing up the tattered remains of Christmas. I'm in what I consider to be the "manic" stage of writing.

I thought that writing at a more moderate (it feels luxurious, to be honest) pace might eliminate this phase, but no. Once a project reaches a certain stage, the project takes over and there just isn't room for anything else. In fact, it's maybe even worse this time than usual because I've had so much space to sink into the story--and not just this story but the other two books in the trilogy.

There has also been a lot of time to think about my own writing process, which is something I haven't considered for years. Once you achieve a certain mastery of your craft, it becomes instinctive. And frankly, thinking about it too much is potentially detrimental, in the same way that thinking about how to ride a bicycle results in you falling over. Or maybe that's just me lying there in a tangle of barbed wire a few feet from my slightly crumpled bike. (That's a true story -- and I've only just realized how potentially disastrous that crash nearly was...I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT THE BRAKES!)

Anyway. Writing, writing, writing and I wake up every morning with my brain buzzing and the tendency to shriek all Edgar Allan Poe-like at every disruption.  NEVERMORE!

Actually, even if you never achieve a certain mastery of your craft, the work becomes instinctive. In the same way that pulling the lever on a chute does.

I joke a lot, but I do take craft very seriously. Partly because it took me so long to get published (or so it felt to my sixteen-year-old self) at a time when getting published was no easy matter. I have a library of books on craft--and I've actually read them all. Numerous times. They were enormously helpful. But the biggest help was working with editors. Even the editors who rejected me. Partly because back then editors occasionally took the time to spell out what was wrong with the work (possibly they recognized how really young I was). If you don't know what you're doing wrong, it's hard to fix it.

It's not hard to get criticism these days, but it is very hard to get informed and knowledgeable criticism. It just is. It's the new paradigm. You've got a lot of people at the same stage of development advising each other. That's the blind leading the blind. Which can be helpful, I hasten to say, because we're all readers as well as writers. But it's not the same thing as having the opportunity to work with someone who has a lot more experience. Someone who is a lot more successful.

Ah. Yes. THAT. If I'm going to take advice that goes against my own instinct, it's going to be from someone who is more experienced or more successful than me.

Which is how I came to take the James Patterson writing course.

Yes, I know. Now you're giggling.

Maybe you're thinking That's funny, I never knew Josh was such a fan of James Patterson. And...the truth is I've never read a James Patterson book (although I probably will now) but I was looking for an online writing course and this one kept popping up. So I signed up.

And I am LOVING it. Patterson always struck me as a smart and affable guy, and it turns out he's also full of good advice. Or maybe I think he's so brilliant because he confirms so much of what I already think and do (though not with the staggering success as Mr. Patterson). But that doesn't matter because what's happening is there's a lot of commonsense reassurance there--and a lot of reminding me of things I'd forgotten. It's just incredibly relaxing listening to him talk in those little podcasts.

And of course, he knows what the hell he's talking about -- which makes ALL the difference.

I was so pleased with the Patterson experience, that I popped over to Audible to see what else I could find that I could listen to while falling asleep, but aside from the wonderful Anne Lamott, there really wasn't anything -- particularly anything for mystery and suspense. Meaning, there was nothing by anyone I'd ever heard of, and part of the problem with taking writing advice from people who are not successful writers in their own write--er, right--is that it's all theory with them. And theory is great as far as it goes, but...

Anyway, one of the things Patterson talks about is using a writing outline. His rough draft is essentially a detailed outline--and that's what I do as well. But for some reason I had started feeling guilty about writing this way. I'm not sure why--like I was being lazy writing that first draft? I don't know. I know intellectually that there is no "wrong" way to write--so long as you get the work onto paper, it's all good. And yet... it felt like cheating to jump ahead and write all the bits I already knew. But holy moly it's a relaxing way to produce words.

And then when the time comes to do the second draft, yes, it's pretty much as hard as ever, but it's like riding your bike up a hill. Pump, pump, pump. Ah! Then you hit one of those prewritten bits and you skim for several pages. It's like flying.

Plus it's fascinating how much does not change. The bones almost never change. Some of the connective tissue gets altered, but the bones remain.

Advent Calendar - Day 23

I am a planner.

I outline novels. I make Things to Do lists. I check my stats. (And yes, compare them.) And as I reach the end of the year, I make plans for the next year. Hey, it's not The Law, but I do think it's one reason why I'm reasonably successful. I think having a plan is a good thing. A necessary thing. I think knowing where you are in relation to where everyone else in the room is standing is useful. A more useful thing is knowing where you want to be.

But you know what the single most important thing is? Do you like the people you're standing with?

Seriously. The secret to a happy life is LOVING the people you are standing with in line.

As this year winds down, ticking away like a tired clock at the end of her gears, do you have a plan for next year? Do you set goals? Do you make resolutions? Do you at least plan your vacations?

Can We Talk?

BEGIN RANT.

 

Did your heart just sink?

 

Mine does every time I see those words--and I seem to see them more and more. In fact, it feels like every time I go on Faceback or Twitter there’s an endless stream of links to the outrage du jour. The initial rant is promptly followed by rants in response. And then rants in defense of the right to rant. And then rants in defense of the right to be angry about other people’s rants. And then meta rants, which I guess is where I come in.

 

I know--we all know--that ranting is the result of fear, frustration, outrage, anxiety--or, yes, sometimes just general anti-social acting out--but mostly it’s about stuff people feel strongly about and want other people to…to…

 

Well, this is the problem, isn’t it? When someone jumps up on a soapbox it’s because they are moved to speak about important issues or valid concerns. Certainly important or valid to them (though mileage may vary for the rest of us). We should assume, it is only fair to assume then, that the author/orator is hoping for some productive result. Like people will change their votes or stop posting nekkid pictures or donate to a worthy charitable institution or quit abusing semicolons or adopt a pet NOW.

 

The problem is, when someone resorts to screaming and kicking, the audience inevitably focuses attention on the messenger rather than the message. If there is a discussion, it becomes a discussion about the delivery system and not the content.

 

Blaming, berating, scolding, however righteous, is not conducive to conversation. It’s not productive. It does not persuade. It does not change hearts and minds. A speech is not conversation. A rebuttal blog is not dialog. Let alone détente. And unless you’re the dictator of a small, isolated country with an economy based on the export of cucumber bath gel, you’re not going to force people to do things your way no matter how clever and cutting you are from behind your monitor screen.

 

We all have the “right” to rant. That’s beside the point. Does ranting serve a useful purpose? Because if it’s just venting, then it’s essentially a temper tantrum, and however much we may sympathize with other people’s need for a nap, it’s not a good idea as a society to condone or encourage temper tantrums. Communication via shrieking provocative statements at each other is not communication, it’s verbal assault.

 

What happened to our ability to discuss ideas without making everything personal?

 

I partly blame social media for our culture of rant. Social media is predicated on the idea that we all have something important and interesting to say--and that there is an audience waiting for our words. There really isn’t, so maybe that’s where a lot of the frustration comes from. The dawning suspicion that nobody is listening. Because everyone is talking at the same time.

 

Listening has become a lost art, and that’s not good for the future of intelligent conversation. Let alone for solving any of the world’s problems.

 

When I was a kid (yes, I know, blah, blah, blah) and I would get into the occasional school yard rumble, the adults would advise “looking at the situation through the other person’s eyes.” That’s not a phrase we hear a lot these days, and I think it’s because we’re all gazing at the world from the POV of selfie sticks.

 

Here’s a crazy thought. Maybe the next time we have something important on our minds we could begin a conversation and ask questions rather than start by informing everyone of our conclusions on the matter while assigning motive and blame? We have a lot of tools for communication these days. Maybe once in a while we could try…talking to each other?