Tuesdays with Story
September 18, 2020
The first word . . .
Courage does not always roar. Sometimes courage is the quiet voice at the end of the day that says, “I will try again tomorrow.”
And they gathered once more . . .
Seven hopped on Zoom, Tuesday evening, to critique the works of six of their colleagues. Here is some of what was said:
— Jack Freiburger (2 poems) . . .
— Jaime Nelson Noven (chapter 2, Outsleep) . . . Chapter 2, Outsleep: We looked at flashbacks and the reason for them, misleading descriptions of bubbly doctors who aren’t bubbly and cow eyed wives who aren’t disliked, and the stereotype of the fainting woman. Jack suggested a “regular stranger” alternative to the confusing “regular waiter” image. We corrected my hospital logistical errors and honed in on clunky descriptions. Very helpful stuff!
–Amber Boudreau (chapters 30-32, Second Nature) . . . Amber’s chapters we’re pretty well received anything there was some question of how fast a small cabin would burn and there should be some mention of the roof feeling in at some point. Jaime wanted to know why the main character didn’t tell another who ordered the wolves after then.
- Also, I will be doing a virtual book launch at A Room if One’s Own on September 22nd at 6 pm for my debut YA fantasy, The Dragoneer. I’ll have a conversation with writer Tracey S. Phillips and we’ll talk about writing and answer questions.
— Larry Sommers (chapters 19-20, Dizzy) . . .
There were several issues with the tension between Mom and Dad over the breakfast table. John suggested moving Izzy’s prediction of a fight down a few paragraphs. Izzy’s destruction of the radio seemed out of character and needs re-working. Jack suggested it also clashed with the warm, fuzzy description of the “trusty old Philco” at the start of the chapter. Jerry pointed out confusion over the speaker when Mister Wintrub announces “Sputnik,” and Huckle straightened out the math teacher’s approach to beginning algebra. Thanks, everybody, very helpful.
— Huckle Rahr (chapters 24-25, Wolf Healer) . . . This week I was reminded that, even though a 15 year old feels that they are the center of the world, not everyone reacts to anything. Some people don’t notice, some people don’t care. I can take out some of the detail, both when Jacob sees Jade’s shirt, less is more, and when Jade is walking home with Piper. I should save why Jade reacts so much to Piper’s question to when she processes later with Owen.
— John Schneller (chapter 25, Broken) . . . Chapter end—the nonverbal failing grade given by Witomzil—also received a failing grade. No hook. The other concern expressed was that the type of training Kotel received was unclear. The Karate Kid was given as an example. It seems we all remember “wax on, wax off”. Since there are no rusty old autos for Kotel to polish, I will need to come up with something as different but memorable. Chapter 26 was also submitted as a read to show Kotel’s awareness/spiritual training. This chapter will be submitted for critiquing at the next meeting.
Who’s up next . . .
September 15
Kashmira Sheth (???)
Amit Trivedi (???)
Mike Austin (???)
Larry Sommers (chapter, Dizzy)
John Schneller (chapter, Broken rewrite)
Jerry Peterson (chapters 10, For Want of a Hand)
How much or little to submit . . .
John noticed that the length of submissions for critiques has been growing and asked what the maximum length should be. Jerry suggested 10 to no more than 15 pages, unless the writer’s submission is really clean. Amber said she’s willing to read longer submissions only if they’re posted early. “But post it a couple days before our meeting, and I don’t have time to read it,” she said.
Our editor . . .
John Schneller continues this month as our editor for Writer’s Mail. You have something you’d like him to include in the next issue, please email it to him.
Clarity and color, yes, go for it . . .
In A.A. Dornfeld’s 1983 book, Behind the Front Page: The Story of the City News Bureau of Chicago, Dornfeld tells how old-hand reporters frequently coached the newbies. Robert Klockau of the United Press went out of his way to show a new reporter how language should be used with clarity and color to avoid the deadly dullness which too often infects news writing. Could be advice for us fiction writers, too.
Klockau and a newbie attended a neighborhood horse show. For the lesson, Klockau sat at ringside with his portable typewriter on his knees and pounded out this story:
The winner of the bareback riding event was a veritable razorback hog of a horse, a sort of two-by-six plank on edge with a leg on each corner. Extremely flatulent too—his flatulence was so noisy that he seemed to be jet propelled. It was a mystery how the rider stayed on at the turns Perhaps he was equipped with a prehensile posterior.
The final story that carried on the UP news wire was not nearly as colorful. Said Klockau, he was just showing the new reporter how the story should be written.
One more story from Dornfeld’s book. City News Bureau reporters loved it when the newspapers the Bureau supplied ran their stories verbatim—ran their stories as written, without edits, cuts or rewrites.
Stories run verbatim were rare, thus cherished by the CNB reporters who wrote them.
Joe Ator had one of those back in the 1920s. The Chicago Tribune ran his story boxed on the front page. This is it:
Fireman John Cosgrove of Engine Company 39 was toiling with grappling hooks yesterday on the dock at the foot of Iron Street on the south branch.
“He’s looking for a body,” said the first bystander to the second bystander.
“O,” said the second bystander, turning to the third bystander. “He’s looking for a body. It’s a girl.”
“O,” said the third bystander, and he turned to the fourth and fifth bystanders and said, “He’s looking for a body. It’s a girl. Her fellow threw her down. She left a note.”
“O,” said the fifth bystander. “Who was this dastardly fellow?” he asked Fireman Cosgrove.
“It was Fireman Harry Hammergreen,” he replied, “and I hope someone pours glue in his boots.”
“And who was the beautiful maiden?”
“What do you mean, beautiful maiden?”
“Why, the one you’re trying to get out of the river.”
“What are you talking about?” asked Fireman Cosgrove. “I’m fishing for my hat. Hammergreen knocked it into the river when we came down here on a fire last night.”
“O,” said the first, second, third, fourth and fifth bystanders. And they went home.
Writer House Rules: Publishing News from Jamie
The “Big 5” publishers in the U.S. (and indeed in New York) today are HarperCollins, Penguin Random House, Hachette, Simon & Schuster, and Macmillan.
In 1989, the book publishers Harper & Row and William Collins, Sons came together to form HarperCollins—leading to a somewhat awkward attempt to combine the two companies’ conflicting logos: fire and water.
In 2013, two of what was then called the “Big 6” publishers Penguin Group and Random House merged to form Penguin Random House in what can only be described as the biggest letdown in book publisher naming history. There were bets, there were polls, there were debates. We all had our money on Random Penguin House, Random House Penguin, Penguin House, Random Penguin, or basically anything that wasn’t the unpoetic Penguin Random House.
This week’s news is that the company who owns Penguin Random House has told the Financial Times that they are interested in buying Simon & Schuster, which will soon be up for sale. If this merger goes through, how will American publishing be affected by the likes of Random Penguin Schuster (the name I’m ready to bet on)? And more importantly, how will the design company Pentagram manage to convey a piece of architecture, Millet’s The Sower painting, and an arctic bird all inside the space of your thumbnail? Start sketching, is all I can say.
The last word . . .
From a Labor day post titled Happy Laborious Day, written by Steve Laube of the Steve Laube Agency.
In the future I plan on doing a blog about “overwriting,” which is a similar problem to one’s writing being “laborious.”
Check Your Work
Take a quick look at your writing. Could you delete 20% of your most recent chapter and not lose any meaning or storytelling? Could it be that the lure of “more words” has crept into your style? Are you being pedantic? Using too many thesaurus words? Throwing words at the scene or topic to see what sticks?
Dare I write the next paragraph in this blog? Or did I already make my point? Do I need a second illustration here? Do I really need to explain my point further? No more labor for me.
Tuesdays with Story 
Leave a Reply