Prolificness

I've read a couple of her books and though I found her " . . . in Death" series a tad prosaic and jejune (see here), there is definitely something to be said for Nora Robert's prolific writing.


This article (here) Keeping the Noraholics Happy by Alexandra Alter that I read and then had forwarded to me by a former employer speaks to that astounding prolificness. The first few paragraphs say it all:


Romance writer Nora Roberts didn't bother to celebrate when she finished her 200th book, "The Witness."

"I don't really count," says Ms. Roberts, a 61-year-old grandmother with red hair and a gravelly smoker's voice.

She took a couple of days off to catch up on chores and gardening. Then she launched into her 201st, "Celebrity in Death," the next installment of a futuristic romantic suspense series that she writes under the pen name J.D. Robb. She's since finished her 202nd, a romance novel set near her home in Maryland, and her 203rd, "Delusion in Death," another J.D. Robb book. She's now writing her 204th, "Whiskey Beach," a romantic suspense novel set in coastal Massachusetts.

The passage that I like, and I've always enjoyed passages like this, speaks to how she got started. Sort of like the J.K. Rowling, sitting at home making up stories for her children story line. 


Ms. Roberts was raised in an Irish Catholic family in Maryland. She began writing one day in 1979 during a blizzard, when she was stuck home with her two young sons. Silhouette, a romance imprint, published her debut novel, "Irish Thoroughbred," in 1981. Over the next three years, she published more than 20 novels. Her books broke traditional romance conventions: They featured non-virginal, flawed heroines, ensemble casts and snappy dialogue tinged with sarcasm, and were occasionally written from the hero's point of view. Her unconventional stories helped transform the genre, which has exploded into a $1.4 billion industry.


Its alot like Janet Evanovich just on an even grander scale. Probably not the best writing, but it appeals to so many you have to be awed by it. 

Can't We All Just Get Along

I don't understand why they can't both exist. What am I talking about? This article in the WSJ Opinion page (here) by L. Gordon Crovitz just about has me regretting my previous blogs on this subject about Apple's agency model. Why should an app and a book be different. Basically, they shouldn't be. It's a good key theme within this article.

Whether it's news, games, apps or books, Apple's position is the same. The market determines the price, and Apple gets 30%. The Justice Department fails to acknowledge anywhere in its 36-page complaint against Apple and book publishers that this is the standard approach. (Indeed, the government complaint inaccurately refers to "30% margins" for Apple. Operating margins are very different from sales commissions.) The government says this "agency model" is inherently wrong ("per se" wrong, in legalese) and "would not have occurred without the conspiracy among the defendants."

I'm not quite all the way there yet, not all the way to completely agreeing with this next statement, but I'm close.

Pricing flexibility for publishers is necessary to allow innovation. Why shouldn't some e-books cost 99 cents and others that come with video and hardcover editions be $49.95? Why not give people the option to pay 10% more to access an e-book on all e-readers? Consumers should decide, not Amazon or the Antitrust Division.

 Perhaps I'm feeling open to the argument because it appeared directly below the article about Argentina coming one step closer to nationalizing Respol for their own means (here). When compared to that the agency model seems like chicken feed.

Book Review of Eye of the Needle

Much better than Hornet Flight and far better than The Man From St. Petersburg, that's the quick summation of Eye of the Needle.



I remember in one of the writing classes I took we discussed what makes a thriller and what makes a mystery. That instructor said that Dick Francis wrote mysteries. I've heard others say that they are thrillers. This one instructor said that Thrillers need to deal with subjects that are grand in scale and possibly Earth-shaking. The Man From St. Petersburg, Hornet Flight and The Pillars of the Earth all lacked this grandiose scale. Eye of the Needle made up for what the others lacked and made the novel better than the others if only for that reason.

Another thing that Ken Follet's books demonstrate is how great novels are based on good characterization not great plots. You can have both, but without great characters you can't have a great book. Eye of the Needle, as so many of Follet's novels, is filled with terrific characters.

I marked one passage:

"It is for places like this that the word "bleak" has been invented. The island is a J-shaped lump of rock rising sullenly out of the North Sea. It lies on the map like the top half of a broken cane, parallel with the Equator but a long, long way north; its curved handle toward Aberdeen, its broken, jagged stump pointing threateningly at distant Denmark. It is ten miles long. Around most of its coast the cliffs rise out of the cold sea without the courtesy of a beach. Angered by this rudeness the waves pound on the rock in impotent rage; a ten-thousand-year fit of bad temper that the island ignores with impunity."

I loved the book and can't wait to read another from Follet.

Back to Writing and Reading

Enough with chickens in sweaters, onto Oliver Twist. I just finished reading Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist for the second (maybe third) time. It must not resonate with me till the end of the book because I only remember that I've read it before when I get to the very end. This time I read it, and just as Sikes is trying to get away, I remembered having remembered reading it before. This makes me think it is my third read through.




That being said, I still liked it. Sure it's a tad slow in the middle, par for the course for Dickens I say, but it has a far more climactic ending than many other of his novels. You can find my list of interesting vocabulary (here) and passages (here and here as well as here) in my past posts but what I think what I find funny is the importance so many readers, reviewers et al put on a moment in the book that has such throw-away level significance. The moment when Oliver, an inmate of the workhouse as a child, asks for more food (see the above cover art) is almost the one facet of the book so many folks latch onto, but in the book is little more than a one passage instance. Does it play into who Oliver becomes? Somewhat, sure but no more than some other moments. I think the hike he takes toward London is more profound, his fight with Noah are just as prescient and revealing. Funny.

Nevertheless, glad I read it again. I'll go another year I suppose before my next Dickens classic, and at that time, as this time, I'll wonder why I didn't read more sooner.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

My wife never ceases to amaze me. She read The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo in under 48 hours. Well, that could be incorrect, if you include the time she slept as non-reading time, she really finished it in under 24 hours. Why do I mention this? It should prove to any reader what a compelling novel it is.




I remember when I first read Jurassic Park I was so drawn in that I finished it at 2AM in my bed cause I couldn't put it down. Despite my wifey's intensity, it took me longer to finish The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo but I still liked it quite a bit.

I think it was a bit slow in starting. If I hadn't heard so many great reviews I might even have given up a quarter of the way through. During much of the first half of the book one thing that is a bit off-putting and also intriguing is trying to figure out how Stieg Larsson is going to get the two main characters together. Eventually they do come together and completing the book is worthwhile overall.

What I liked about having my wife read it, things that took a long while to complete for me took only moments for her. Where the time it took me to get from point A to point B might be three or four days, my wife will ask me about point A and then thirty minutes later will talk about B. If I had to do it over, I'd have done it her way and knocked it out all at once.

Book Review – Way Behind here

I think I’ve read two or three books since I finished The Faithful Spy by Alex Berenson. This book was recommended to me by a fellow National Noveler and I’m glad she did so. It is a thriller in every since of the word. Sadly, like my own first novel, this thriller screams, “This is my first novel!”



I don’t think there was a single vocabulary word underlined throughout the course of the novel, but I did like a few passages, again, not enough to underline them.
The plot was riveting. Who wouldn’t want to read about CIA agent thrown into Al Queda before September 11th, trying to make amends to his handlers and his family for having missed the clues that would have helped him alert the US about the attack. Secondly, having planned a couple of terrorist attacks of my own for thriller writing purposes, Berenson’s idea is really quite interesting and keeps the reader on edge.

I look forward to reading his second effort and I hope it does scream, “I’m better, I’m a second novel.”

Book Review - Hunger Games

The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins (here) was not bad at all. The characters were fun to read about, the situation, although not terribly original (see here), was as fresh as a stale idea can be. My one concern is that how good can the writing be if I didn't highlight a single word or sentence?




Word? I can see that. This is a Young Adult book and although I don't have the most high brow vocab, I throw out the nickel words every now and then. So, I can't ding Collins for her limiting the four syllable words. But not a sentence? That doesn't say much. Usually I identify an amazing analogy, a moving metaphor, or a stupendous simile in everything I read. Here? Not.

That being said, I read it, and like the first time I read the DaVinci Code or Jurrasic Park it drew me in so much that I didn't want to put it down. I stayed up late nights to read it. That alone says alot about the authors ability to reel in the reader. Not only that, but I'm looking forward to the follow-on novels, particularly because the ending is so aburpt and non-redeeming. But, as much as I liked it, I wish I had liked it even more.

Rejections

You kinda set yourself up for rejection when you send out so many queries. When reading JA Konrath's blog, he said he sent out almost 250 queries before he got a positive response. I'm at 115. I guess I should get ready for more disappointment. I figure if I get 250 "no's" it's time for a re-edit and another impartial read through for some ideas.

The worst part is waking up I see rejections in my inbox, going to the mailbox, I come away with rejections, sitting at the computer at night, I find a rejection. If nothing else, at the end of this I should have a thicker skin.

The Novel

So the novel for which I'm trying to find representation is entitled Toe the Line. 68,000 words, light cozy mystery. It's not my best work, but it is the best I got so far. I'm hoping my next novel, Body Count, will be better, but it is still mired in production.

Nevertheless, I'm applying many of the lessons I've learned via the Writer's Market, several different blogs, and other venues to try and find an agent. The novel is complete and edited. At the moment I'm querying.

Thus far I've queried 115 times both through the web and through snail mail. My spreadsheet that tracks my queries is getting quite out of control. I started querying on July 20. I've sent 115 in less than a month. I think that is pretty aggressive.

I have screwed up a few times. I can count on one hand the number of times I've misspelled an agents name (Rubio instead of Rubie) or accidently written to two agents at the same agency, but all in all I've not done too bad.

I've gotten one positive response. 115 queries, about 18 rejections and one request to read the manuscript. Inside I'm thrilled, but tentatively thrilled.

The positive response came from Firebrand Literary Agency, specifically Stacia Decker. I think she is building her client list. I can only hope that I become a brick in that foundation.