How Do I Know What I Think Until I See What I Say?

I know I've talked about critique groups before, but there's something so fraught in joining them and in staying in them that the topic keeps coming up in the blogs that I read. For example, here is a great entry from Becky Levine about what makes a group the right group for you. Right now, I have the good fortune to be in a group that is working well for me (and, I hope, for the others involved). Here are the things that work for me: 1. a set schedule. We meet once a month, on the same day every month. We only vary that rarely, when the date conflicts with a major holiday. If people can't be there because they're on vacation, or traveling, or sick, or what have you, that doesn't matter. The group goes on. With or without me or whoever else is missing. 2. a process. We send in our manuscripts by email, which means that we aren't constrained to what we have time to read in the meeting. Most of the people in the group are working on projects for mid...

1. I have too many pairs of shoes. I don't know why I didn't realize this before, but somehow it just occurred to me. Note to self: STOP BUYING SHOES. You already have some! 2. I think that by the time we've reached February, we have had quite enough winter already and it's time for it to be over. Some people may not agree with me (people who like skiing, for example), but they would be wrong. As a result, I'm just going to start pretending that it's no longer winter. It's spring, now. Just a very cold, snowy spring.* 3. I saw Precious this weekend, and...wow. Just...wow. There were a lot of problems on the story level with that movie, but Gabourey Sidibe and Mo'nique deserve the Oscars for that one, seriously. I've always liked Mo'nique--she's hilarious--but until now I didn't know she could act. And she can , man. And Gabourey? Talent oozing out of her pores! And if you've seen her in the movie and then seen her ...

A long time ago, in the Land of Enchantment, I was a graduate student in English. And as graduate students are wont to do, I got all worked up about sometime and went to complain to the dean of my college about whatever it was.* My dean was an awesome woman named Dr. Patrice, and, after hearing me out, she said this: Jay, you gotta decide which rock you're gonna die on. This isn't it. In other words, Dr. Patrice was saying, the thing that I was getting all het up about wasn't worth it. Sure, I could go on a rampage and make things happen and whatever, but ultimately it would be a lot of heat and light and energy for something small. I was reminded of this story recently, when Jessica Faust over at Bookends blog took some heat for saying that writers might have to censor themselves in their online personas, and in their work, in order to sell their projects. The most succinct statement of her position is this: Certainly I don’t support censorship. I think we should all ...

Over at Mysterious Matters, mysterious wrote a post recently in which he says that, no matter what they say, more readers (at least of genre fiction) don't want their characters to develop. I can't speak to mystery fiction -- I don't read much of it, and I don't write mysteries -- but I wonder if that's a problem with series fiction moreso than genre fiction. If you're writing a trilogy or something, I think it would be a good idea for the characters to develop, but I can't imagine what you would have to say about one character over the course of ten or fifteen or twenty books. It seems...impossible. So if I were a writer of a series like that, I wouldn't work very hard on character development. I wouldn't want my characters to develop very much. Mysterious points out that in Agatha Christie the detectives didn't develop because they weren't supposed to--the focus of the reader was on the mystery and the puzzle, and the detective was jus...

1. I've been watching The Real World D.C. this season and I have to say that the women on the show thus far have been pretty cool. Sure, they have their issues, but they also seem to be bright and fun and they seem to stick up for each other and other women in a way that you sometimes don't see on reality shows.* 2. On the other hand, The Deep End , which is about first year lawyers, is not a good show. It's too melodramatic and silly, and the first years are allowed to do stuff that no first year would be allowed to do without any guidance or help. There are so many shows about lawyers, it's hard to understand why there are so few any good ones.** 3. I just got these shoes: Nice, right? Linea Paolo at Nordstrom . As an inveterate wearer of high heels, I can tell you that all of their shoes are superbly balanced and make it feel like you're not wearing a 4 inch heel. I also like the Gianni Bini line at Dillards, which has the same balanced quality. 4. Huma...

A while ago, Kathy Teamen posted a list of things that editors are thinking about when they read manuscripts. The whole list is good, but my favorite item on the list is this one: Am I personally moved by this story or situation? This is a question that matters in two ways, I think. First, this is the way I edit. At some level, when I revise my stories, I'm always gauging how I feel about what's happening. In every book I've written, there are parts that I find myself skimming over or moving past without really seeing them. These are the parts, I have learned, that are the boring parts. Yeah, that's a harsh truth. But it is a truth. When I, the author, am not moved by a certain scene, that means that it's not, well, moving. Of course, every scene doesn't have to be high melodrama, but even the parts of stories where characters have to share information or things have to be described, the scenes can be moving. There can be conflict and character detail. ...

A long long time ago in land called 2007, I wrote a little bit about characters and likeability . Here's how I feel about it: Characters don't have to be likeable. They have to be relatable. There's a difference. The reason why this topic comes up again now is that I read a post on the Bookends blog in which Jessica talks about characters and likeability . She says, in part: I do believe that characters have to be likeable for a book to work. That doesn’t mean, however, that characters can’t have flaws or unlikeable characteristics. I tend to use Hannibal Lecter a lot as an example, but I think he’s such a fabulous example and tends to be a character most people are familiar with. Who could imagine creating a horrific serial killer who is actually likeable? On paper that doesn’t make any sense. On the book page you see how it works. Okay, maybe he’s not entirely “likeable,” but he’s certainly fascinating enough that you need to keep reading about him. Sure, he eats peopl...