Saved!

I missed the last meeting of my large writing group. I heard they just talked politics and not writing. Today they mostly talked politics. I read some of Suffrage and we read two poems--one of which was political. Then most of them talked politics.

I like to talk politics with people who analyze the issues, but my writing group has an emotional approach to politics. They believe that politicians can "help us" and think in terms of good and evil.

Here is an armchair analysis, as opposed to emotion. I have heard that the president can "create jobs." Politicians could create jobs by hiring people to stand under trees to catch falling leaves. That will also destroy jobs, since the "leafcatcher" salaries will be appropriated from people who are now, with their spending, paying other people's salaries.

Private markets, left alone, can create jobs only when those workers create value for consumers. If the private market has not already created leafcatcher jobs then those jobs must not support enough value in the market to pay the workers' salaries and benefits.

The politician will create more jobs than he destroys only if government is smarter at spending your dollars than you are--if the most massive bureaucracy in existence is more smart, knowledgable, and efficient at pleasing us than we are. Alas, I am begging the question, since the answer is obvious.

This kind of analysis leads me to believe that politicians do not have much power to make our lives better. We have that power, and politicians can help us by giving us more power to act in our own interest and in the interest of others, but they cannot, by their own actions, make us better off.

Alas, few politicians want to run on the platform, "I am going to leave you alone." (I can just hear the response those with the emotional approach, "Leave us alone? Please don't! We don't want to be alone.")

The writerly types and others in the publishing industry seem oriented toward emotional, rather than analytical approaches to policy. Perhaps I will always be the quiet one in the room, since I do not want to try to convert the convinced. Policy is more of a religious matter with those folks and I do not want to try to talk them out of their religion.

More Founder Critiques

Last night my online writing group met. They gave feedback on Founder, my experiment in mood fiction. All the news was good. They found it basically sound, but had questions that pointed toward improving the story.

In particular, from my Gang of Three and from the online group, I got feedback that the husband, Mason, seems too controlling of the wife, Jenna--that she seemed more like his child. I was mostly OK with that. He is a "fixer." However, without too much effort, I think I can amplify the theme--that trying to live in the past can be harmful to your health. After all, if I more plainly bare Jenna's actions as running contrary to Mason's preferences, then she is clearly more culpable for the unfortunate outcome.

Related to Jenna's clear choice, is her motivation--that her family is dead, so she feels as if she has lost her mooring. This makes a more accessible motivation than racial guilt.

I also got a few tidbits that amplified the Gang of Three. I had an extraneous red herring that I did not spend much time on--the villain's name is also that of a dead poster artist. In this story, which should be like a car's emergency brakes coming off and rolling downhill, it's better not to have the distraction. Also, I called a light bulb a "helix bulb"--those curlicue bulbs that are so energy efficient. Two people have not known what those were from my description. However, any more precise description would involve technical language that is out of place in the story.

Piazza

My gang of three group met. B. J. is somewhat stuck at her current place in the novel, so she skipped some scenes. The result was great. She had some great action, capped off by a description that conveyed such attitude that I had to laugh. "Bror dropped the body into the hole, kicking the dirt over it, contemptuously, like a dog marking its territory."

Barbara's scene had people playing a tense card game in which the players' wagers attack each other so that if the betting does not end soon, the stakes may vanish. "Tense" is the key--she does great description of the battle of wills.

They critiqued Founder. As I mentioned before, reading it makes my head buzz and spin, so I was not sure how others would read it.

Barbara liked it a lot. Since it was much shorter than what I usually write, it was easier to like because it was less work. I think she got involved with the characters. She liked the minimalist style and foggy perceptions of the first person narrator.

B. J. had problems with both main characters, but she did not think that the whole thing was a hopeless mess--which I considered a distinct possibility. I am mulling her suggestions. I think I agree with her, and can redirect things with a couple of words here and a clause there.

Gernsback

The first meeting of The Gernsback Continuum went well. I had initially worried that the group was stillborn. My mail to group members asking if they were going to participate garnered a couple of grouchy replies. Apparently my diplomatic skills are lacking.

It went down to the wire. A few minutes before the meeting, I did not know if we would be able to do a private chat with Yahoo Messenger, the tool that another group had recommended. Yahoo's help files say, "We do not have private chat," and when one chooses Chat/Create A Room, the "Create A Room" option is greyed out and inoperative.

I guess Yahoo is worried that someone will say, "A strange man took me to a private chat room and invited me to his house and took pictures of me." So Yahoo does not have private chat rooms--but they do have Conference Rooms, which is pretty much the same thing. Yahoo's help files do not say, "We do not have private chat rooms, but you can open conference rooms," though. So I tried the last option on the menu that I was unsure of, and it worked.

We critiqued two members' stories--including Suffrage. The most important thing that I got from the critiques was that the story's big turning point should be better prepared for, which is what B. J. previously told me--but I uploaded Suffrage for critique before I met with B. J. Alas.

The other author under the microscope got some good advice (I think). She has a solidly conceived world that is well researched and fleshed out. I have not attempted to create such an extensive literary environment as she has created.

We have two more on the block for our meeting in two weeks--more if time allows.

The group members are good readers. I am looking forward to the next meeting.

September Gang

Yesterday we got back from visiting with Roberto's family. We got home at about 3:00 in the afternoon. I had a Gang of Three meeting that evening, so I read the one short piece that another member submitted, took care of the family, then showered and left.

One of my fellow gangsters, B. J., made it, but Barb thought we were supposed to meet on Thursday night. B. J., "got" Suffrage. She got the black humor and the tenderness and the ironic twist ending. She also pointed out one of my usual problems--I often have to work on forshadowing the weird stuff.

She even liked this: I saw Sarge’s shredded face, grey as spoiled pork, with pine straw and leaves matted, missing one eye, part of the other eye staring into Monihan’s face, a silvergreen beetle crawling.

B. J. usually challenges me on description. A frequent comment is "How does that look?" asking for concrete, specific, showing description. The "Sarge" sentence did not need any more vivid description. But that is just a testimony of how her past comments have bored into my brain.

Associating with good readers and good writers has helped me improve. Perhaps I will eventually be "good enough," if that matters.

Gernsback

Hugo Gernsback published Amazing Stories and a bunch of other science/science fiction pulp magazines. He is acknowledged as a father of the genre; the Hugo Awards are named for him. My online writing group is also named for him.

At present, I wonder if it will launch. My doubts are based on the plummeting level of activity already--after just over a week. Members seemed to want to start quickly, so I got things going. Then over the short period of time, only three people, including me, continued to interact. Many of the twenty-someodd workshop participants signed up but have not participated beyond that.

Tonight I mailed everyone at the address they listed at the workshop, asking if they intended to participate. The group is a Yahoo! group. Plenty of participants created Yahoo! accounts just for that group, so perhaps monitoring the group is out of their "internet" way.

I think the group has potential, but I do not intend to push on a rope for long.

Another Writer's Group

I have told you all about my writing group. Now I have another.

The participants in the workshop that I recently attended have formed a group. We are still organizing, but things are going smoothly. Whereas the Gang of Three meets face-to-face, the new group meets online.

From the critiques I got at the workshop, I think the group members read quite well. They "get it." So I am looking forward to entering this brave new world.

That was seriously overdramatic. Internet writing groups are an "old world." In fact, two weeks ago I found critiques I did for a Hatrack writing group ten years ago. I was good!

I am so arrogant. I am the perfect writing partner.

Heartbreaking

The Gang of Three met a couple of nights ago. The work of mine that we talked about was Bryton Wyld. One of my gang members was heartbroken at the ending. The gang member wanted the romantic tension resolved in a pairing off, not a breaking up, as the story now stands.

The writing is not perfect--I guess it never is. But I think my gang member's frustrations came because she fell for the characters and their struggle. After Bryton went through so much, with such deep feelings for his romantic interest she wanted them together. But I just do not want it to be that kind of story. Bryton does change. There is a resolution. But it is not the resolution my gang member wanted to see.

Of course, it might be the case that the romantic connection at the end would make the story an easier sell. If I face the dichotomy--cannot sell in a good market with current ending vs. can sell easily in a good market with romantic connection, then let me at my keyboard, I'm editing.

Gangland

Last night my Gang of Three met at our usual restaurant. They helped me with my short story, Killing Words.

Besides talking about writing, we talked about everything. We probably have disagreements over current events, since I am of the mindset that government should try to do only 5% of the things that it now does and (I think) another member thinks the government does not do nearly enough. Somehow we mostly get by without disagreeing.

I probably come off as being obnoxious around people with temperaments different than economists. We throw our opinions out there and are ready for someone to tell us we are wrong, and why, then we tell them why they're wrong, and so it goes. But other folks are into being supportive, not inquisitive and argumentative. In general, the supportive people could be referred to as "people," while economists and our ilk might be referred to as "nerds."

There is a special place in my heart for Killing Words. My favorite thing about the story is that it is "self-similar," though not in the strict mathematical sense.* The overall story contains a story within the story that is representative of the overall story. And the story within drives the main story as well as reflecting it. In fact, the story within the story contains a story within it, that is identical to the story that is resides within. BUT, even with all that complexity, Killing Words is easy to follow.

Or maybe my favorite thing about Killing Words is the protagonist's journey from being in a community that she hates to taking ownership of the community and loving it.

It is bad form for me to talk about all the great stuff in my story, but I already mentioned that I am a nerd. That does not excuse my bad manners, but maybe it explains them.


*A truly self-similar story would be infinite. I am considering writing one, but it would have to be a novel, not a short story.

Gang of Three

My small writing group met last night. The gnocci was excellent. As usual, my group, the Gang of Three, had great suggestions. They were looking at Furnace Angel.

I have aimed Furnace Angel at three horror magazines that accept simultaneous submissions. I was 500 over the maximum word count for one of the magazines and 500 under the maximum word count for the other two.

One of my GoT said that I needed to more clearly show one of the antagonist's flaws by showing more of him in action--an excellent suggestion, since those flaws motivate much of the story. She suggested that I reduce a particular conversation in order to find room for the new addition. My dialogue was somewhat tightly written, so now that conversation is rather spare, but I think the sacrifice was worth it.

My other GoT partner said that she did not feel that I provided enough threat to motivate the final, terrible choice of the protagonist. She suggested fleshing out the protagonist's loved ones, who were threatened, and providing some portents that keep the level of threat high going into the final passage. Again, I think the story is stronger for it.

All this help, and I get to read their excellent writing, as well. Oh, and the gnocci, too.

Gang of Three

Last night one of the members of our Gang of Three brought her brother and his two older teens along. They were probably bored out of their skulls by 2.5 hours of people reading their stories and discussing each others' stories.

We looked at Nirvana Cat. Group members confirmed Julia's (my wife's) view that the story is engaging, except for part of the first scene. Since the first scene of any story is crucial to holding a reader's attention, I'm fixingfixingfixing it.

The only other problem the group had with the story was that the transformation at the end of the story needed more preparation. They told me this in response to my direct question, "Does it need more preparation?" I had an inkling that it might be a problem. Julia had not seen a problem with the ending, so I was not certain that I was correct. Julia is seldom wrong. She is a woman, after all.

My Writing Group

My writing group met today for the first time. The members have different needs and skills. One of the members of my subgroup is a technology goddess at the university. Through her, have access to excellent recording equipment and software, as well as the ability to post audio feeds. I want to record audiobook short stories.

The highlight of the meeting was when B. J., our fearless leader, said, "I know people have been introducing themselves, but I'd like everybody to introduce themselves in order because I'm anal."

To which another group member replied, "I thought you were B. J."

There is a joke in that somewhere.