Divergent Paths

I read somewhere, I forget where, that getting what you want out of life is quite simple. You decide exactly what it is you want, exactly how you’re going to get there, and then you make it happen. Simple, right? Goal, plan, execution. I’ve never doubted this as a truism for a moment, and yet it’s also obvious how hard it is for most people to implement. I’m certainly no exception. Most people have only the vague sense of what they want to accomplish in life, and of those that have a concrete goal, most either lack a plan or the commitment to make it happen. That’s why it’s so striking when you meet someone who has all the ingredients.

This weekend I went out to dinner with my friend Michael Totten, a writer who’s about to embark on a six month stay in the Middle East. Great things have been happening for Michael lately. He’s been a self-employed writer for over a year, and his blog gets over two thousand unique visitors a day. He writes mostly about politics and travel, both on his blog and in his published articles, and he always has fascinating things to say. I’ve known him since we met in a writing class at the University of Oregon in 1992 (strangely we went to the same high school, but since he was several years older, we never met), and he’s the one who introduced me to the weekly fiction writing workshop run by Kristine Kathryn Rusch and Dean Wesley Smith. Kris and Dean have been great teachers and mentors to me (much more so than any of my college professors, but that’s another story.) In fact, even though Michael writes mostly nonfiction these days, he still calls Kris and Dean his most important teachers as well.

On the way home, I was musing about all those late nights we spent at coffee shops talking about something related to writing fiction — something that seemed of vital importance to us at the time, but would probably seem pretty silly now. We took very divergent paths from that point, but we still both reached a critical juncture where we decided it was time to get serious about writing. My own commitment came at the end of 2001, spurred by my wife’s pregnancy, and I think that’s about the time Michael started to get really serious about his writing as well. His goal isn’t to be a full time fiction writer (although I’m sure he’ll write fiction again), but he does have a goal. He wants to become a renowned travel writer along the lines of Paul Theroux. Not only that, he has a plan. He’s putting himself in a place where few travel writers will go, a place that also allows him to write about politics, which he is already paid to do.

Michael and I don’t see each other much these days — in fact, we were both surprised that a year had elapsed since our last visit — but I’m still glad to count him as a friend. I’m very happy for his success. He decided exactly what he wanted, exactly how he was going to get there, and he’s making it happen. I have little doubt he’s going to get there.


P.S. Sale to Postscripts

A nice short story sale to the cool British magazine Postscripts, edited by the esteemed Peter Crowther. Really happy with this one, partly because of the magazine, but also because it’s my twentieth short story sale. It also made me realize, once again, how important it is for me to do my best to completely forget about my work once it leaves the house. I found myself slipping lately, worrying about things I can’t control, and I’m much happier person when I just focus on producing the very best stuff I can. The sales come, sometimes in torrents, sometimes in dribbles, but they always come, and often from places you least expect.

And speaking of work, I’m excited about the new novel, a mystery with one of the most unique characters I’ve come up with so far. It continues my genre-hopping tendency, but I’ve made my peace with that. If I end up having to publish under five or six pseudonyms, fine, because I just can’t make myself write in the same genre over and over. I think I’m prolific enough that I can handle three to four books a year under different names. There’s just so many stories to write, and I don’t want to limit myself.

Recent Reads: The Deep Blue Good-by by John D. MacDonald. The first of the Travis McGees, and it’s a great one. I’ve been reading more mysteries lately, as I gear up to write my own, and I’m definitely going to be reading more MacDonald. McGee is one of the seminal figures in modern mystery fiction, and it’s easy to see why. Even from the first book, he’s a provocative character — one that I want to spend more time with. Here’s hoping I can capture a little bit of that feeling with my own mystery.

Third Time’s The Charm — I Hope

Finally finished the young adult fantasy this weekend and mailed off a package of sample chapters and synopsis to an editor who asked to see it. Finishing a novel is a wonderful feeling as it is, kind of like finishing a short story times a hundred, but finishing this one is really gratifying. It was my third run at this book. The first I tossed without giving to anyone because I knew it wasn’t anywhere close to what I wanted it to be. A handful of people read the second draft, and while I got some pretty enthusiastic responses from most of my readers, I also got a pretty good consensus on what the book needed. It was much more painful throwing away that draft, but I knew I needed a fresh start, and that I didn’t want to be tied to the old manuscript in any way. Now I think I’ve really got something. Of course, that feeling doesn’t always gaurantee people will share my enthusiasm, but it’s not a bad sign either. I can say that when I believe a manuscript is bird poop, editors usually agree with me. And I don’t think this one is bird poop. Hmm . . . Not exactly the pitch I’d use in an elevator with an editor, but you get the drift.

And in the department of the weird, I used a search engine I’d never used before and came across a college student doing an assignment based on my stories:

http://thewaterinmyear.blogspot.com/2005/01/fiction.html

And then getting reprimnaded by the instructor for not following the instructions:

http://thewaterinmyear.blogspot.com/2005/01/citation.html

Since I’ve sold about twenty short stories, only about half of which have seen print, I found this very weird. The best I can guess is that this student read my story, “The Red Scarf,” in Cicada, then did a search of me and read the two stories I had up on Chizine. I did like what she had to say about my stories being very readable, as accessbility is something I work very hard at.

Recent Reads: Trouble in Paradise, by Robert B. Parker. The novel follows Police Chief Jesse Stone in the town of Paradise, Massachusetts as he investigates the grisly murder of a teenager who had been something of a nymphomaniac. The murder is almost an afterthought, because the book works best when it’s focusing on Stone dealing with his tumultuous life. Nothing spectacular, but a good solid read, and I like his prose style.

You made me laugh. You made me cry.

My friend Matt Cheney had some interesting things to say on his blog concerning the overuse of the term “self-indulgent” among reviewers. Although I don’t have much to add to that discussion — chiefly because I think of a review as just another artistic creation that often has little do with the work being reviewed — it did get me thinking about what I really respond to as a reader, and what I think your average reader responds to in fiction. And for the sake of discussion, let’s define “average readers” as people who love good fiction but who aren’t writers and don’t give a rat’s ass whether a particular story should be defined as slipstream or modern fantasy, or whether third person limited point of view is more distancing than first person point of view. People who just want a good tale. And that’s heart.

Oh, yes, I can hear the snickering from the fellows in the back row dressed in black turtlenecks, obscured by their haze of cigarette smoke, and trading witty barbs that are just regurgitations of something Nietzsche said much better. Yes, heart. It’s easy to toss that off that as sentimental nonsense, but great fiction, fiction that is remembered for more than a few weeks, that keeps coming back when stories that are far more clever (which might be another way to define self-indulgent) with their structure or their style become part of a great blur of other clever stories, is fiction that moves you in some way.

It makes you laugh. It makes you cry. It makes you stay up until the first gray light of dawn just to find out what happens next.

I guess that’s my chief complaint about a lot of what’s called experimental fiction these days. While I don’t mind a nonconventional story structure or style, I find that 90% of the time these stories do nothing for me emotionally. And therefore they’re quickly forgotten. A story like “The Cold Equations” still gets to me after all these years, despite its almost total lack of ornament, because it has heart. “Flowers for Algernon” is one my favorite stories, not because it’s nonconventional, which it certainly is, but because it moved me to tears when I read it. Oh,
gosh. Did I admit that? I’m a man who cried at something he read? Well, yeah, that’s the whole damn point. I read because I want to feel like I’m not alone, that other people share my misery, my joy, my loneliness, that I’m part of something larger than myself.

Now, as a writer, how do you achieve that? How do you move readers to laughter or to tears? I have no idea. But I can tell you how you won’t do it: if you write something that doesn’t move you, that doesn’t do anything for you other than to reaffirm just how clever you really are, the chances of it moving someone else beyond that same level (“Boy, isn’t this writer clever!”)
is pretty much nil. There is a danger in becoming melodramatic or overly sentimental, and an even greater danger in being called melodramatic or sentimental by those too jilted by their haze of cleverness to respond emotionally to anything, but the reward is that every now and then, when you least expect it, a reader drops you an email to say, “Your story made me cry, man. Thanks.” Or, “You had me laughing so hard I nearly peed my pants.” It’s what I reach for.
Do I fail? Oh yeah, big time, far more often than I succeed, but I keep reaching. It’s why I write.

You made me laugh.

You made me cry.

For me, there’s no better review than that, and none that’s necessary.