Posted by: jpon | May 26, 2012

Fessing Up to the Novel in the Closet

At writers’ group last week, one of my friends alluded to her first attempt at writing a novel. Her unfinished sword and sorcery book sits in a closet, she said, and serves as a reminder of how bad her writing can be if she doesn’t continue to work at it.

The rest of us looked around the table and began to smile. Almost all of us have novels in the closet, under the bed, in the garage—manuscript boxes preserving what was once a proud, hopeful dream of breaking into the writing world, but which now entomb our writing shame.

Since then we’ve been regaling each other with embarrassing tales of literary incompetence. We have an email thread, which has morphed into a special folder in the group’s Dropbox, where we’ve been posting excerpts of long buried failures.

Mine was a mess titled All Politics is Local, technically version one of the novel I finally completed six years later, although any resemblance between the two works is purely coincidental. I found a copy of the book and took a look a few days ago. I knew the writing would be weak, but still I was shocked to see such utterly amateurish prose.[1]

The characters were cartoonish, the plot breathtakingly self-indulgent, the prose a deep shade of purple, and the opening featured almost as much backstory as Jeffrey Eugenides’ The Marriage Plot.[2] Here, with apologies and great trepidation, is a sample:

The differences among opportunities – those worth taking and those not – was one of the things that concerned Papparelli.[3] He’d been burned enough times and thought he’d learned to spot the phonies, mostly by recognizing the all-too-promising outcome in return for the all-too-easy buy in. He disdained those who fell for the ridiculous pitches. Buying foreclosures, indeed. Investing in Kruggerands – please! Couldn’t they see through the scam? You could tell a lot about a person, he believed, just by considering the types of opportunities he or she chose to pursue.

A little investigation beforehand could reduce much of the risk. Better yet, serious work and foresight could help create an opportunity so tightly controlled that it hardly seemed an opportunity at all, but more of an expected result. He liked that approach.

But not every opportunity lent itself to close examination. In some instances, there simply wasn’t time to consider the possibilities. In the supermarket, when the beautiful woman on the other side of the vegetables seemed to be looking – or was she just perusing the broccolini – there was no time for thoughtful debate, only for action. And so occasionally he would find himself suckered, allowing his own desires and frustrations to delude him into believing things would, by shear chance, work out. The woman, in fact, was merely shopping, and married as well, and her look of contempt at his suggestion that he knew the best way to discern vegetable freshness rekindled the burning doubts he had about his ability to make the right choices.

If there’s a bright side to this drivel, it’s that my writing has, at least in my eyes, improved exponentially, and if I can come that far there may be hope for a writing future. And I guess that’s why we keep these embarrassments around—our first novels are like the personal trainers of our consciousness, standing in the background, reminding us how puny we once were, and forever pushing writers to prove we can do better.

Fess up—you’ve got one too, don’tcha? Feel free in the comments to recall your first novel, or even post a sample. If that’s too revealing just pull out the old ms in private and read a few pages. Either way, may you find it as humbling and motivating as I did.


[1] Coming from me!

[2] More evidence that famous writers can write anything and have it published.

[3] Yes, it’s a feeble attempt to write my own life and frustrations. Oh, the shame…

Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens
Bright copper kettles and warm woolen mittens
Brown paper packages tied up with strings
These are a few of my favorite things…

After last week’s posting, my wife hit me with, “You’re getting too cynical.” What?! I had actually been pleased that I’d been receiving more hits than ever on the site, and that more and more people seemed to be commenting.

But maybe she had a point. I looked over my recent blogs and found that I had dissed MFAs, the economy, and bad character names. In the past I’ve gone after the lack of writing in society, the lack of reading in society, scam writing contests, self-publishing, hybrid publishing, traditional publishing, and more.

Honestly, I don’t disdain everything. I do like some stuff. So in the interest of reaffirming my humanity and preserving marital bliss, here are a few of the things I like:

  • Henry, our coffee-drinkin’ dog
  • My job and my pals at The Los Angeles Review
  • My weekly egg
  • Jose Saramago novels

I admit I’m not a sentimental person. When my wife watches a Bridget Jones movie for the thirtieth time, I run—not walk—to our other TV for an ESPN fix. I cringe at short stories in journals or submissions about parents with cancer, parents with Alzheimer’s, memories of childhood, children with cancer or any other fatal disease. Does that make me a meany? After all, I like:

  • A quiet, rainy day, where all I have to do is write
  • Writers’ conferences
  • A good Barolo
  • The Cincinnati Review

Am I really that cynical, that much of a curmudgeon, a misanthrope? Or is it that I see through the bullshit and inane corporate pabulum the world dishes up each day, and feel compelled to call it out? A few more things among the many things I like:

  • Children and babies (as long as they go home with other people)
  • Anything by Lorrie Moore, Alice Munro, Tobias Wolff or Anton Chekhov
  • Victoria, BC
  • Donning headphones at work and cranking the volume so I can stay awake

By the way, cynical means never having to say you’re sorry. Some final likes:

  • My wife, Dona
  • My blog readers, especially those who take the time to comment
  • My blog, just the way it is

See you next Saturday.

Ohhhh…

…Aphids on roses and dogs chasing kittens
Battered old kettles and holes in my mittens
Muting the sound when Julie Andrews sings
These are a few of my favorite things…

Posted by: jpon | May 12, 2012

How’s that MFA Workin’ for Ya?

When I decided to go for the MFA in Creative Writing, a good friend counseled, “Don’t let them ruin you.” I had no idea at the time what she might have meant.

Now, three years after graduating, I understand she was warning me to maintain my voice and avoid falling into what some critics of MFA programs have described as a homogenized tone and style that is characteristic of many MFA grads. The thought of doing some writing self-analysis[1] had been in my mind for a few months, and moved up this past week, as I critiqued a flash fiction written by a new member of my writers’ group.

The story, a mere 900 words, was quite good, and included a brilliant revelation at the close. Although only version two, with a tweak here and there it could easily find space in a variety of publications. But from word one I recognized it as the product of a writer with an MFA. In it, a holdup at a McDonald’s was subordinated to the narrator’s preoccupation over her coworkers’ personalities and the emptiness that characterized her marriage—a thoroughly character-driven piece as opposed to plot-driven. More telling was the author’s use of language—lyrical passages dappled throughout: “I felt giddy and fractured”; “Terry drew deep, forgotten gulps of air”; “the sunrise peaking above the Bungalows…looked bruised.” Few opportunities to sprinkle such literary garnish on the omelet of the story were passed up.[2]

I couldn’t help thinking this writer had been encouraged by the instructors and classmates in the MFA program to develop this writing style. I admit, I’ve written many stories that incorporate this same lyrical tone. The environment at an MFA program seems infused with such poetic sensibilities, perhaps to the point where the writer who speaks in plain language is sometimes thought of as a bit of a primitive, or at least as unsophisticated.

Since graduation, however, I’ve been a member of two groups made up largely of non-MFAs, and I’ve often battled with them over the use of lyrical language. It’s made me start to compare my early work to more recent writing, and to evaluate whether the lyricism is warranted, as well as to weigh the plot v. character aspects. No judgments yet—this will be a long and ongoing process.

But I’m interested to know what MFA grads think of their writing as compared to before the program, and what non-MFAs think of MFA-like writing. Looking forward to your comments.


[1] The unexamined writing life, etc. etc.

[2] Sorry, had to do that.

Some random thoughts on a Saturday morning, lest you think these blogs are meticulously planned:

We live in Dickensian times: the collapse of economies throughout the world (especially Europe) has brought new suffering to millions of people. Here in the states we still have massive unemployment, to the point where many people have given up looking for work. As sad as the situation is for these people, it’s a boon for writers, for we love to write about conflict and suffering. Run out of story ideas? Just listen to the news. It’s a bad time to be a member of the working class, but it’s a great time to be a writer.

Dickens was so well known for writing about the world in which he lived, his name is now used to conjure those times and places. This is how I know I’ll never become a famous writer—who would want to live in Ponepintian times?

When is a writing contest not a writing contest? When it’s a marketing scam. The Hay House Visions Fiction Writing Contest offers the grand prize winner “a publishing contract with Hay House Visions and a $5,000 advance.” Sounds decent. Scroll down, though, to this: “Thirty Round-Two finalists will receive a 20 percent discount off any Balboa Press publishing package.” A click through to Balboa shows packages run from $999 to $7,999. Or to put it another way, “Thirty Round-Two finalists will have the opportunity to pay us $800 to $6,400.” Whee! Where do I sign up?

The thing about the writing business is that anyone can jump right in. A computer and a copy of Word and lo, you’re a writer. (Or a pencil and a grocery bag if you’re one of the new poor.) Unlike other callings like doctor, lawyer, accountant, you don’t need years of schooling and proof you’ve passed some test to order your business cards. That’s as it should be, since creativity cannot be legislated or quantified, but one of the things they teach you in those other disciplines is the business of the profession—how to make money, not lose money, at what you’re doing.

Seriously, when was the last time you saw a doctorin’ contest—who can carve up the most patients in a two-hour block of time? Or one for lawyers—a $2,000 prize for the most convoluted language in a contract.

Writing, as an industry, is largely unregulated. That means it’s a target for scammers of every persuasion, from sleazeball vanity presses to sophisticated contests/con jobs like Hay House’s. And because so many writers don’t understand the business into which they’ve entered, and are desperate for some kind of writing success, scammers like Hay House make big money off hopeful scribes.

How many of those “Thirty Round-Two finalists” will get not only a 20 percent discount, but also a pushy salesman on the phone assuring them “a step up to the $7,999 package could mean the difference between writing success and failure?”

And how many of those finalists will forego car repairs or school clothes for the kids to take that chance with Balboa?

Conflict. Suffering. Corporate bull versus the hopes and dreams of the naïve. Who says there’s nothing left to write about?

It is the best of times; the worst of times.

(This didn’t turn out to be as random as I planned.)

Posted by: jpon | April 28, 2012

Would a Character by Any Other Name Sound as Sweet?

How do you name your characters?

I hate it when I see banal, run of the mill character names that read like they’ve been lifted from 1950s conformist literature. When I read an opening that starts like this: “Bill Edwards stopped before he entered the room,” my literary hackles rise instantly. I don’t like him. I don’t identify. Why choose such a bland, uninspired tag for a protagonist?[1]

To me, names like Bill Edwards, or Alice Reynolds, or John Nelson or a thousand others like them carry no meaning, no attributes other than to connect the characters to a whitewashed mainstream society completely lacking in individuality. And I’ll go as far as to say it shows little effort on the part of the writer to infuse the character with any personality or culture or meaning. Just give him any name, the writer must think; they’re all about the same.

So wrong.

I thought of this as I drafted a short story recently. I needed a companion for a field trip to the Amazon. Just a minor role, but the name needed to convey a sense of the place and purpose. To me that meant Hispanic in origin. The character would be highly educated and in charge of the expedition. Cartagena came to mind, perhaps because I once knew a man named Dan Cartagena, and he was like that. It certainly fit the first two requirements, and it seemed to impart a connection to the travel and science aspects of the trip, the “carta” half invoking cartography.

Readers, I believe, pick up on those things whether they are conscious of them or not.

Other writers often ask me why I choose the names I do. All I can say is I look for subtle meanings to help illuminate the themes of my stories:

A man who accidentally kills a famous writer, and then struggles with the religious and cultural implications of his involvement: Jonathan Pagán.

A troubled teen who shoots his abusive father and becomes a role model for another boy in a similar situation: Michael Gale.[2]

Too transparent? Au contrare, I don’t think writers do this enough.

My best names[3] I saved for my novel, Mr. Neutron. Without giving too much away, I can say the title character is a man who can’t catch a break, and seems to have no effect on situations no matter how hard he tries. After much deliberation, I settled on Gray Davenport. The “gray” part should be obvious. Davenport, most of you know, is another word for couch, which makes Gray Davenport a sofa of a man, someone to be sat upon by asses of all weights and sizes. Well, it is a satire, after all.

What are your favorite character names—both those you’ve invented and those you’ve read?


[1] And why intro the name before we get a sense of the story—but that’s another blog.

[2] Yes, definitely a ripoff of James Joyce’s Michael Furey in “The Dead.”

[3] IMHO, of course

Older Posts »

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,774 other followers