The Importance of Writing Friends

Just now, I got a package from my dear friend Minion. In it was a writer's survival kit: a cheesy romance novel, a bar of dark chocolate, and a mix CD full of songs to inspire writing. Just add a glass of red wine, and instant sanity.

I am going through a huge period of upheaval in my life right now. A relationship that has been absolutely pivotal in my life is changing. I've left a place where I was very happy for a future that's uncertain. Some days, writing is my only escape--and other days all I want to do is huddle in a corner and cry. My writing friends keep me sane--and keep me writing even through troubled times. Here are a few reasons why you need good writing friends.

They keep you grounded. A good writing friend brings you down to earth when you get caught up in your own mind. She reminds you that you rock when you're mired in self doubt. She convinces you that your dreams are possible when you're sure they're not. She keeps you from feeling overwhelmed with your own puniness in the face of your goals. A good friend reminds you that success happens one page and one word at a time.

They keep you inspired. A good writing friend shares her writing mix and her first drafts. She commiserates with you on your worst sentences and shows you work that keeps you going. She suggests readings. She keeps your mind on your writing even when you become uninspired.

They keep you on track. In my writing circle, we have weekly contests. Whoever gets the word count first gets a prize. It really gets my competitive streak--I'm committed to a word count every week, and I'm answerable if I fail. If you're having trouble being productive, a group of committed writing friends who care about your progress can be a godsend.

There's a cliche about writing being a lonely life--and in a way, it is. But a writing community is often essential to success. A group of reliable writing friends may just make the difference between another unproductive year and your first novel.

Are You a Real Writer?

I wrote a post that touched on what makes a real writer on one of my other blogs. This has been making me think lately, and I'm not sure why I'm not done with this subject yet. But I've been thinking about people's perception of writers, the idea out there that "anyone can write," and the barriers some writers set up to separate themselves from people who, for whatever reason, they consider posers. On the one hand, I think it's elitist to say that one person is a "real" writer and another isn't. On the other, if someone tells me that they're a writer and then they show me their writing and it's juvenile, badly-written poetry about their grandmother--well, I'm going to disagree. Privately, of course.

Here are four "you're not a real writer unless..." assumptions I'm familiar with--and my responses to them.

You're not a real writer unless you get published. Okay, I can see why novelists consider this important. And I think a lot of novelists are so under-paid that they take on the idea that, well, at least they're real writers because they're published--as if the legitimate title of being a "real" writer is somehow adequate compensation for...well, inadequate compensation. But what about well-known authors who make a living at it--everyone from Salman Rushdie to Danielle Steele--before they were published? Were they not "real writers" until the moment their books hit stores? But they wrote manuscripts before they were published. Why should something essentially out of their control--i.e., whether a publisher accepted their first novels--define their existence as writers?

You're not a real writer unless you're not commercially successful. On the other hand, there is a sort of elitist attitude among some literary fiction writers--particularly at MFA programs--that says some bestselling writers aren't "real writers" because they sell out and write popular fiction, or their writing doesn't measure up to some standard or whatever. A lot of literary types don't think genre fiction is "real" writing. I think it is; I think you can find great writing, gripping characterization, and stunning language in romance, science fiction, crime and any number of basically formulaic genres. I also feel that a lot of literary short fiction today leaves me empty and bored.

You're not a real writer unless you feel the burning need to write all the time. I remember talking to some visiting writer at some point who said that you know you're a real writer if you can't not write--if you feel compelled to write all the time. I've written on this topic before, and I feel it's a bit cruel to say this to young writers who will experience ebbs and flows in their writing compulsion, as everyone does.

Get up at five in the morning to write. I think it was the same person who mentioned various poets who held down day jobs and got up at five in the morning to write several poems in a zen-like state before going to work. The implication was that if you don't feel the burning need to get up early in the morning to write, you just don't have the drive to make it. I think this works for some people and not others; I never had the ability to focus on creativity early in the morning, and for a while I thought that made me somehow less of a writer. It's a ridiculous idea.

You're not a real writer unless you make money from your writing. Okay, I do think there's some merit to this one. I do think there are a lot of future novelists and other excellent writers out there right now who don't make a cent from their writing; I'm not questioning their legitimacy. But I do feel as though, when I'm talking to someone at a party and they tell me they're a writer, I usually assume they mean it's their job. If I question them further and find out they keep a journal and they wrote their own wedding vows, I'm not really going to think of them as a writer--unless they show me their work and it's fantastic.

Here's the thing. When you tell people you're a writer, your writing better back you up. I remember getting a snarky comment about this on my other blog about how the person in question didn't get paid for his blogging, so he (sarcastically) said I must think he was a "fake" writer. Not necessarily. But I do think you are a "fake" writer if you think you can write, and you can't. There are plenty of sensational writers who write excellent blogs or even poems about their grandmothers that nobody ever sees. I don't think every good writer out there gets paid--but I do think if you get paid for your work, it's an indicator that you're at least decent at what you do--and ergo, you're a "real" writer.

Six Reasons Why Your Novel Isn't Getting Written

Lots of people talk about wanting to write a book. But how many people actually do it? The truth is that you may consider yourself an author-in-waiting; may think of yourself as a writer; and may see yourself as a professional. But if you're not writing, you're still among those people who say it and don't do it.

So if so many people want to write books, why don't more people do it? I may know a thing or two about this. I have procrastinated, raged at myself, procrastinated, despised myself, procrastinated, wrote a sentence, and then procrastinated some more for years. This year I'm finally getting organized about writing my novel--and I really think this time it's different. Here's why for six years I didn't write a novel--and why you still may be stuck in that bookless rut.

You're too tired. Let's face it, we're all a little sleep deprived lately. If you're getting up early for work and going to bed late, you're not going to have enough mental clarity during the day to be open for inspiration. You're going to be run-down, headachey, grouchy, and have trouble concentrating. That's no condition to write a book in, or even a poem.

The easy solution, of course, is to get more sleep. Sometimes that's easier said than done. But in the meantime, you can use your sleep-deprived state to your advantage. Keep a dream journal and write down the striking images and scenarios you experience in your dreams. When you're woken up from a deep sleep, you're often jolted awake in the middle of a dream--which means that you may be able to recall your dreams vividly and with more accuracy than if you woke up on your own. So write those dreams down, and use them for inspiration.

You keep getting interrupted. Virginia Woolf once said that in order to produce creative work, a woman must have a room of her own. I believe that both men and women need a space of their own and some uninterrupted time to produce creatively. You need to be able to carve out that time and place in your life. Talk to family and tell them that between five and six (or whatever time works for you), you must not be interrupted. Turn off your cell and unplug the phone. Make sure everyone around you knows that you're serious about your writing time and respects your space.

You have too much on your plate. If you don't have time to write, you can't. It's that simple. But you'd be surprised at the stolen time you can find during the day. Take a notebook with you and write during your lunch break. Commute by train instead of driving, and write on the way to work and back. Keep a small notebook in your purse and write down ideas, lyrical lines, and striking images that occur to you while you're grocery shopping or sitting in a meeting. Take back that free time that occurs while you're out doing something else, and you'll be more productive than you think.

You don't have the technology. My good friend Minion didn't have a computer at home for a long time. She wrote during work, which is dangerous--you never know when your boss is peeking over your shoulder. But you don't need a computer to write. Go back to basics and fill a notebook with character descriptions and plot outlines. You may find that when you have it in hardcopy, it's more solid and real--and you're more inspired to stick with it.

You're scared. I get this a lot. I think my novel has to be perfect, and whatever I write invariably winds up being flawed and much less than I'd thought it would be. Don't let that stop you. Give yourself permission to write a crappy novel whenever you sit down to write. Say to yourself, "Self, what you will write here today might suck. That's fine. Just write it." Remember, writers are practical people who get things done the best they can. Perfectionists wind up being critics--not writers.

You're relying too much on inspiration. I did this for a long time as well. I had a great idea. I typed and typed and typed. I gave birth in a rush of creative ecstasy. But I never quite got the whole baby out. (That's a pretty gross metaphor. Sorry!) Anyway, the problem with inspiration is that when it abandons you, you often don't know what to do next. It's great while it lasts, but it's not dependable. To keep from being left high and dry, write a careful outline and stick to it.

Writing a novel isn't easy. But people do it. Some authors crank out a novel every few months. There is no reason why we all can't do that. Take a hard look at yourself--what's holding you back?

Progress Report: My Big "Client Project"

So, I wrote in January about landing my "biggest client ever"--myself. In the wake of NaNoWriMo, I decided I needed to look at novel writing the way I approach client projects: with a detailed outline and a schedule I can stick to. I wrote an outline of my remaining story, detailed in places and general in others. I set a schedule. This is a big change from the way I used to write, mainly by the seat of my pants. So far, it's been a resounding success in the past month. Here are some of the things I did wrong in the past--that I'm doing right now.

I've learned that the outline is absolutely necessary. I have to admit, I'm not always on the same mental page when I sit down to pick up a narrative thread as I was when I left off. Sometimes I forget where I was going before, or what the point of that scene was anyway and what I wanted to do with it. Other times I'm just in a different mood and that can affect where I want to take my writing. With an outline, I can check back to see where I was in the narrative and what the scene I'm currently in will lead to--I can keep myself on track. I cannot stress how important this is.

Before, I would rely on inspiration to carry me--and sometimes it would carry me quite a ways before abandoning me, lost, in foreign territory--but it would always abandon me eventually. I've learned that yes, inspiration and imagination are key--but I have to use them within the framework of an outline, not rely completely on them. They are undependable, and my writing needs to be regular if I ever want this to be my job.

I also build flexibility into my schedule. My schedule is 2500 words per week. I don't say "per day," I say "per week." I can do them all in one sitting, or I can spread them out throughout the week--as long as I make my quota, it doesn't matter. I've been successful at setting aside a few hours each week, once a day, to work on the novel. I've found that within those few hours, I can usually get more than 2500 words easily. But if I don't, it's okay to do a little more later.

Before, when I set schedules, I'd be very harsh with myself: I must write 1,000 words a day, or I am Not A Real Writer. If I didn't have time one day or just didn't have the energy or inspiration, I would feel like I was doomed to failure. This would make me so discouraged I'd eventually give up on writing at all for a while. With this schedule, I have the flexibility to allow life to intervene--which it always will. It doesn't matter, I still get my work done.

So far, this experiment has been going great. For the first time, I really feel like I'm doing something sustainable. No, I don't feel like I'm being carried away by inspiration. I'm not convinced I'll like my book when I'm done; I'm pretty sure it sucks. The difference now is that my outline is keeping me on track and I'm finding it much easier to resist the delete key--because I have a plan. It's less easy for me to talk myself into believing that if I just start over again from a different place, the whoel thing will be better.

Will I wind up with a full-length book in less than a year? At the rate I'm going now, you bet. It's an exciting thought, but I'm not getting too excited yet. I don't want to jinx anything. Right now, I'm content to just plod onward, one step at a time.

When to Let Go of Your Writing Group

I recently stopped going to a fiction writing group in my town. There was no big blowout; everyone was always civil and pleasant. But still, I felt I just wasn't getting what I wanted out of it. Finding a community is an important part of succeeding as a writer, but it's got to be the right community. If you're not getting what you want out of your writing group, it may be time to move on. Here are a few signs that should let you know when to let go.

Everyone's extremely negative. This one's the most obvious--if your group is full of people who just rip each other's manuscripts apart without much thought to constructive criticism, you need to get out of there. No art can thrive in a hostile environment, and if you leave the group feeling like you never want to show your writing attempts to anyone ever again, the group is just too tough to help you. Even if your draft needs a lot of work, the people in your group should always offer criticism that's meant to help you out--not tear you down. And no matter what shape your manuscript is in, your group menbers should always have something positive to say.

Everyone's extremely positive. Then again, too much positivity can be just as damaging. It can lead you to be blind to your weak points, and it doesn't teach you anything. It feels good to get praise--but it doesn't help you improve much as a writer. Next time you're in your group, listen to what other participants say about the work there. If people heap praise on work that seems like it could use some improvement, this may not be the right group for you.

The other members aren't on your level. Are you the star of the writing group? If so, this group of people may not be challenging you enough. And if you're the scapegoat, your confidence may be suffering as well as your manuscripts. Feeling like the worst writer in the group can be draining, but at least you might be learning--if the other group members are supportive and focused on helping you improve. But being the star is probably worse, because you aren't learning much at all. For most people, the best group is comprised of people within the same ability range.

Nobody is familiar with your genre. Poets, memoirists, genre fiction writers, literary fiction writers, short story writers--all are doing different things with their writing, and a devotee of one genre may not understand all the issues faced by a writer in another. If the other people in your group are versatile enough to comment well on a range of genres, this may not be a problem. But if the people in your group don't understand or just plain don't like or approve of your genre--this often happens when literary and genre fiction writers meet--you may be in trouble. It's often best to work with like-minded people who understand your writing market.

It's the wrong time in your writing process. The main reason I left my last writing group was because it was just the wrong time for me. I was in the middle of a first draft. Things were constantly in flux. I was experimenting with character and plot. I thought that feedback would help me along the way, but I soon found that it only confused me more. I realized that I have to work out the kinks in the rough draft alone--then I can show it to others.

You're putting in more work than you can handle. A writing group is a lot of work. In addition to keeping up with your own writing, you have to read and make insightful comments on others' work. This was another reason I left my group--every member would hand in a thirty-page chapter, often only days before the meeting was set to take place, and I found I was just spending more time than I wanted in critiquing others' work. If it starts to get overwhelming, you may need to take a breather.

You don't feel inspired. The ultimate purpose of any writing group is to inspire you to keep going. If your group is making you feel like you never want to write again, it's not helping. Find a group that makes you feel great about your writing--but also points out where you can improve.

Not every writing group is created equally. If you're putting in more than you're getting out of it, or if you don't feel inspired to write more after every meeting, it may be time to let your writing group go.

Why a Novel is Like a Maze

As I toil through my novel-writing, it's occurred to me why so many people claim to want to write novels but never get around to it--and why it's so darn difficult. Writing a novel is like navigating a maze.

Think about it. You construct detailed characters who go in directions you never intended them to go in. You write pages and pages of plot only to find the path you've chosen is a dead end. A path you passed ages ago now looks much more promising, if only you can find your way back to it. And--wouldn't you know--you seem to have forgotten to bring your magical golden thread to help you find your way back. Soon your characters have ditched you to wander about on their own, refusing to do as you say, and you're helplessly lost in a mess of your own devising.

I wouldn't say I'm highly qualified to give advice--I'm well known for clear-cutting the whole maze and starting over at inopportune times. This is more like advice to myself. Advice that anyone else who's lost in a maze might benefit from, too.

Know your characters. Where your plotting skills falter, a strong character should be able to take over. If you know your characters well, you should know their behaviors when confronted with any situation. You should hear their voices in your head, see them in your mind's eye, and be able to pick them out of any crowd. I know this sounds crazy, but sometimes when I'm stuck on a plot detail I turn to whatever character I'm working with, and I ask them: what do you think about this? Then I close my eyes and write whatever comes to mind, without judging. This works surprisingly well.

Just keep making things worse. Part of knowing your characters is knowing what would be the absolute worst thing that could ever happen to them. What is their deepest desire or motivation--and how can you really screw with their world? First, boil your character down to their one essential motivation: maybe your heroine just wants to be loved, or your hero just wants to stay in control. Then take what they want away: separate her from everyone she loves, or put him in a position where he's completely lost control of events.

When you're stuck for a plot detail, think to yourself: "how can I make this situation even worse?" The answer may vary depending on which character you're dealing with.

Before you hit that delete key, take a breather. Sometimes we just get so lost in the maze that we want to take a big chainsaw and start hacking away. But before you start deleting your work, stop and think. What seems hopeless and horrible today could look pretty decent--or at least salvageable--once your frustration has subsided. Make a deal with yourself: you will give it a day before you delete anything big. Or maybe a week. Sometimes I need a week.

Have a little faith. Sometimes it's the most unlikely path that leads to the center. Have faith in your own imagination. Have faith in your characters--they may know where you're going, even if you don't. If you see yourself getting lost, stop and skip to the next scene you feel fairly sure about. Try to stay on the train of thought you've set for yourself, and worry about the details later. Remember: it doesn't matter if your first draft smells to high heaven, as long as you have one. Perfectionists wind up being literary critics, not writers.

Like a maze, a novel presents us with endless choices: turn right or left? Kill off the heroine's first love or make him stick around? Even the tiniest little wrong turn can get you hopelessly lost. But have faith and follow your characters down every path they take, and hopefully you'll come out on the other side--with a finished manuscript.

Why I Love the Dark Heroes

I just finished reading Karen Marie Moning's Bloodfever. This author normally writes paranormal romances, and while I find her to be extremely over-the-top--the first novel of hers I read had the heroine breaking into the hero's home and hiding under his bed, among giant-sized condom wrappers, when he came home--I also find her writing to be oddly compelling and extremely sexy. I think, despite the camp, she absolutely nails her heroes. She gives them just the right amount of darkness and danger--which is quite a bit more than political correctness would think--without making them irredeemable.

Her Fever series--which has two books so far but I hear is supposed to have six or seven by the time it's through--isn't really romance; it's more like fantasy with a touch of romance thrown in. And despite that, I think it's much more erotic and compelling than her more run-of-the-mill romances. The erotic tension is building over a span of novels, not just one--and there's much more room for character development and growth. In the first book, the hero and heroine kiss once, sort of by accident--and in the second one, they're still not on a first name basis. And yet despite all the formality, there's an extremely hot sexual charge that's vibrating just below the surface.

The hero of the Fever series is much darker and less warm than other heroes I've met in her books; he's a true bad-ass without much of a "save-the-kitten" factor. Towards the end of the book, in a rare tender moment, he touches the heroine's face. The heroine says that "Being touched in kindness [by the hero] makes you feel like the absolute most special person in the world. It's like walking up to the biggest, most powerful lion in the jungle, kneeling and putting your head between its jaws. Instead of taking your life, it licks you and begins to purr."

I read that sentence and I had this weird moment of epiphany. I thought, she gets it. This author really GETS it.

Ever since I read my first romance novel, I've been most attracted to fictional heroes like this--scary, dangerous guys who have the power to be very nasty, but instead treat the heroine with kindness. The point isn't the kindness. The point is that they could be unkind. The more dangerous these heroes were to others in the story, the more their later kindness toward the heroine seemed like an incredible gift. The more special she is for bringing out tender feelings in him.

I wasn't sure exactly what this feeling was when I was younger--I just knew that the scarier the guy was, the more I liked him, for some odd, inexplicable reason. And I didn't understand why I felt the same way into adulthood--despite the fact that I'm an intelligent, college-educated woman who is passionate about women's rights and believes in equality and decency in relationships. But there are lots of reasons why we love those dark, scary heroes--the less politically correct, the better--that shouldn't leave us feeling too guilty. Here are just a few.

That passion is irresistible. Those bad guys are ruthless. They want what they want, and they don't stop at anything to get it. And when what they want is us--uh, I mean the heroine--that's absolutely irresistible. Every woman wants to be desired; there's no female on the planet who doesn't get a little shiver of delight at the thought that a guy braved rain, cold, snow, an angry boss, or maybe a whole army to be with her. And a bad guy is less likely to follow the rules, play nice and be fair in his quest to get what he wants--including the love of the heroine. It might not be politically correct, but it's enough to make any woman feel loved and wanted.

The heroine who can make a bad guy love her is special. Moning said it perfectly when she put it in terms of lions and jungles. When you can make the baddest, meanest, scariest creature in the jungle roll over and purr, you must be something special. He'll rip the throat out of anyone else that comes near--but for the heroine, he's all snuggles. That's sure to make any woman feel pretty amazing about herself.

It's wrong and we know it. Let's face it--we're not supposed to like these guys. We're supposed to like the clean-cut, hardworking guys who are sweet and funny and decent. And that's exactly why the dark hero is so attractive. He's not a tame, ideal husband you can bring home to mom and dad. He's the personification of our deepest, darkest desires--the ones we'd rather mom and dad never knew we had. The dark hero is the personification of freedom and wildness--the antithesis of civility. His very nature is illicit. What's wrong and illicit is always incredibly tempting--just because we're not supposed to want it.

So if you love the bad guys, don't worry. You're in good company--no hero sells more books than the alpha male. It doesn't mean you're doomed to fall for the wrong guy all the time or that you have some sort of weird masochistic tendencies. It just means that you want it all. You want wildness, freedom, excitement--and love and stability. In real life, this combination never happens--they're mutually exclusive. But in fiction, we can have our cake and eat it too. That's why my favorite scary, dangerous guys are fictional.

Managing Power in Fantasy and Romance

This Thanksgiving weekend, I listened to Philip Pullman's The Golden Compass on tape while driving back from a visit with family. I've read this book several times--it's one of my favorites. I love re-reading my favorite books; I always notice things I missed on the first go-round. This time, however, I noticed something I wish I hadn't.

In The Golden Compass, the heroine comes to possess an alethiometer--a device that always tells the truth about any situation, if you know how to read it. It's a device of immense power. And at several points in the story, particularly when tensions were high and the heroine was getting worried, I wondered why she simply didn't check in with the alethiometer to see how things would turn out. I sure would have, if I were facing a life-and-death crisis. There were several points in the story where it seemed odd that the heroine didn't simply ask the alethiometer how things would work out--and what could be done to fix the problems she faced.

Like many fantasy and romance lovers, I'm fascinated with power. Objects and people with mysterious powers captivate me and draw me in, and I'm always interested to observe how special powers affect the personalities and relationships of the characters. But too much power is a bad thing for your plot. The more power a character has access to, the more difficult it is to keep up the plot tension. If your character is all-powerful, why can't he simply wrap up the problems he faces in the plot in a few minutes? If he's all-knowing, what does he have to worry about?

If you're dealing with supernatural powers in your plot, here are a few ways to put limits on them without rendering them insignificant.

Limit knowledge. In The Golden Compass, the heroine can read the alethiometer instinctively. This may have been a mistake. If Lyra had more trouble reading the device, it may have made more sense that she'd be worried about problems she encountered in the plot. I'm writing a psychic heroine into my current story, and I realized early on that her powers couldn't be consistent--otherwise she'd know too much and the plot would lose tension. Her psychic powers are unpredictable and sometimes fail her when she needs them most--making her world much more dangerous.

Make magic more difficult. You can give your hero or heroine fairly modest powers, but still make them seem impressive by limiting the amount of magic available in your world. If your world is a place where magical powers are extremely rare, a little magical gift is a big-time miracle--and an extremely powerful magical person is an almost impossible villain. A little magic goes a long way--and making it more rarified may up the tension in your story.

Make some things off limits. In Karen Marie Moning's paranormal romances, it's extremely difficult to see the future. She deals with some extremely powerful characters, from magicians and druids to the otherworldly Fae--but she does put limits on their abilities. Consider the limits of your world carefully, and make sure there are some things known to be beyond everyone's ability.

Watch out for weird inconsistencies. When I was a teenager, I loved David Eddings' endless series novels. His characters were witty, well-drawn (if a little stereotypical), and extremely powerful. Re-reading them years later, I realized they were too powerful. Eddings had trouble limiting them. Because they were so powerful, he had to force them to follow the complicated and meaningless dictates of a cliched prophecy--or there wouldn't be much of a story; the characters could simply blast apart everything and everyone in their way. An all-powerful goddess couldn't heal a character's heart injury because "hearts jump around too much." Characters inexplicably went to great lengths to hide from enemies much weaker than they were.

This is the problem with making your characters too powerful--it becomes more and more unlikely that these all-powerful people would have any serious problems. So set limits that make sense.

Balance strengths with weaknesses. My boyfriend is a Batman guy--but I love Superman. He's a fan of the tortured, dark-horse style hero, while I'm a sucker for pure, unadulterated power. Batman and Superman are two very different heroes, and each has a balance of strengths and weaknesses that works.

Batman is a principled guy, but he's not hung up on his morals. He's a dark horse. He won't hesitate to kill a bad guy just because killing is wrong in general. But he's not extremely powerful; his powers are mainly in technology and cleverness. His ruthlessness gives him a helpful edge in his struggles to protect Gotham.

Superman is much more powerful. He's got the super strength, the X-ray and heat vision, the power of flight, and much more. His main limit is his sense of ethics--he absolutely will not hurt an innocent, and he won't kill anyone he doesn't have to--even if it's a bad guy. He could do just about anything--but he won't do a lot of things. Many people criticize Superman for what they see as his "boy-scout" personality. But he needs that. If he had the ruthlessness of a dark-horse kind of hero, he'd be too powerful to plot around.

Power is fascinating in all genres. But the more power your characters have, the harder it will be for you to put them in believable danger. Limit their powers in a way that makes sense, and you're less likely to twist your plot into tortured elaborations just to give them a problem they can't deal with.

Writing My Novel: Resisting the Delete Key

So I decided to take on the NaNoWriMo challenge this month. I cheated, of course; I started with a novel I was already thirty pages into. But "winning" by their rules doesn't really matter to me; I just want to write this thing. I chose an idea I've been chewing on for several years: a paranormal romance in traditional Regency England. So far, my cute little debutante has had her parents killed in a freak supernatural attack of some sort, been propositioned and locked in a tower by an evil cousin who's been hitting the opium too hard, and nearly fallen off several roofs. I swear, whenever I need something interesting to happen in a scene I put the heroine on a roof and watch her nearly fall off. She must hate me.

My hero, fifty pages in, has remained a man of mystery so far. He's made a few cameo appearances, but he's yet to be formally introduced to my roof-dangling heroine. I'm always a little apprehensive about writing heroes. Why? I think it's because I really fell for the heroes in my favorite romances--paranormals included. I fell hard for a certain, specific and very subtle mix of arrogance and vulnerability that I have an innate fear of not being able to capture myself. I hold my heroes to near-impossible standards. Every word he says must be spine-tingling. Every glance must be smoldering. Every touch must be...well, you get the idea. I think I've got to break down this idea of perfection and write like he's just an average guy/vampire/werewolf/whatever. Then maybe things will get rolling.

I came very close to hitting the delete key today. My unfortunate heroine had escaped from a house fire of possibly-supernatural origins and wound up (where else?) on the roof. Then she wound up in the clutches of an unsavory distant relative who wants to marry her so he can inherit her property. I'm planning to have her escape and unwittingly crash a party of very rich and good-looking regency people, including my hero. And that's how they meet. The whole evil cousin thing is just a plot device to get her closer to meeting the hero. But I was toying with the idea of having her meet him much more directly--maybe she falls off the roof and lands on him--and cutting out the evil cousin altogether. I'd be deleting about ten pages, and starting with Chapter 3 all over again. Several times I highlighted the offending scenes and deleted them. Then hit "Ctrl-Z" and put them back. That's how it went, for about five minutes: delete, put back. Delete, put back. Delete, put back.

I finally decided to keep the evil cousin for now. He might wind up being important later, but that's not the point. The point is that the delete key is the call of the Siren, and I must resist. Or I will be dragged down to the bottom of the ocean by some chick with seaweed for hair, and never have access to a computer ever again. And I just can't write anything longhand.

So: that's how it's going for me. Resisting the call of the delete key, one cheeseball paragraph at a time. For those of you who might be tempted to respond with the advice of listening to my delete key so the world is spared another awful novel, don't bother. I tell myself that every day, and I don't listen. What makes you think I'd listen to you?

My Take on the Writers' Strike

TV and film writers are now on strike after they failed to come to terms with the TV and movie industry about payments for new media distribution of their shows and movies. The industry is making money on downloads, despite the proliferation of pirated DVD's and downloads--but they're resisting giving writers a cut of the profits. Here are my thoughts on the strike.

There are plenty of established procedures in writing careers that strike me as exploitative. Ever since I started looking seriously at writing as a career, it's occurred to me that at some crucial point--or maybe consistently for decades and centuries--writers didn't stand up for their rights. As a result, certain practices became common procedure that seem horribly unfair, at least to me.

Kill fees, anyone? This one's at the top of my list, since I'm a freelance writer in my other life. I strongly feel that if you finish a project, you should get the full price for it--end of story. If the client doesn't like it, that's what the revision process is for. What writer took a look at a contract that stated he would get paid only a fraction of the full price if the publication decided--through no fault of his own and for any reason whatever--not to use his work, and thought "now this is a good deal"?

Book remaindering. If your book doesn't sell well, the publisher sells it at a steep discount--and you don't get a dime. How is that fair? And that's only if you're talking about a hardcover or trade paperback. They don't even bother trying to sell at a steep discount when it comes to mass-market paperbacks; the booksellers just rip the titles off and send 'em back to the publisher to be pulped. Jeez, why not at least give them to a used book store?

Royalty percentages are based on net, not gross. For every copy of your book that's sold, you'll get a check for some percentage of the profit (not a big percentage; something like 5% to 10%). But we're not talking gross profit here. We're talking net profit. That's the money left over after the publisher deducts printing costs, shipping costs, and all sorts of other costs it took to get your book from manuscript to Borders. Even movie stars get a cut of the gross, not the net, profit of movies they're in--but not writers. Guess actors have better agents.

No pay for DVD sales. Back when DVD's were getting big, writers failed to negotiate royalties for movies and TV shows that went to DVD. As a result, no writer gets a cut of any DVD of his movie or show. This is really unfair--in my opinion, any time money changes hands on something someone wrote, that writer should get a cut.

That's what this strike is about--new media rights. Writers want to get paid for movies and TV shows distributed over the web. And they have every right to, in my opinion. For decades, other people have been getting rich off the hard work of writers. It's time they took a little piece of the pie back. If there's any justice in the world, this will be only the beginning.

Making a Commitment to My (Really Awful) Novel

It's National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo: say that ten times fast!) and I've officially made a commitment to write a novel in a month. This is a big deal for me, as I'm a compulsive eraser. I've started dozens of novels. Somewhere around a hundred pages in, I always manage to convince myself that what I'm writing should never, ever see the light of day--and I erase the whole thing and start over. Not this time!

I signed up for NNWM after I saw that my partner in crime, Minion, had done it. The goal is something like 50,000 words in a month. Shouldn't be too hard, right? That's something like 2,000 words a day for a week, if you don't write on weekends. I usually do write about that much per day when I take time to write my novel. The thing is that I do it once a week, not once a day. But this month, I've decided to push all other projects (except paid client work) to the side.

The thing about such a close deadline is that it leaves no time for editing. No time for second-guessing. I can't worry that my plot isn't making sense or my characters aren't deep enough or I always forget to describe my surroundings. I can't stop midway through and think "geez, this is really awful." If I'm writing this fast, of course it'll be awful. And I don't care. I'm giving up trying to write a masterpiece. I've even given up trying to write a halfway decent book.

The story I'm working on now is a paranormal romance novel. Before, I always tried to make this book literary and poetic and sexy all at once. I wanted it not only to be a romance, but a genre-busting masterpiece of contemporary fantasy. Yeah; I've given that up. In this book, the plot will not make much sense. The dialogue will not always sizzle and snap. I might lose my way and wander off course for a bit. Do I care? Nope.

The thing is, I always wanted to be a novelist. But I never quite hit my stride in novel-writing. I never got to the midpoint of the plot, let alone the end. I never allowed myself to have faith in the storyline and see how things unfold. A brand new book idea has the potential to be a brilliant masterpiece, but a book that's halfway through is limited. A hundred pages in, you've chosen your voice, your basic characters, your plot arc. And if you're a perfectionist like me, it's easy to look at the choices you've made and say "that's not good enough"--no matter how sound your choices were.

This time, I'm not doing that. Instead, I'm going to stretch my legs and see what I'm really capable of as a writer.

Writing Prompt Wednesday

It's Wednesday, and it's also Halloween! That means a scary writing prompt that's sure to get you on your way to a great scary story. Here goes:

Night had come early. That's what Amanda thought when she looked out the window; it was only late afternoon, but the sky was so overcast she thought it was near dark. She shook it off as nerves. She and Ted had unpacked the moving boxes last week, but the new house still didn't feel like home.

Suddenly, deeper in the house, she heard a sound. Beside her, the cat bristled and began to yowl.

What Football and Fantasy Have in Common

Just a warning to any football fans out there who might be reading: I will be expressing negative views about your sport. They may not be fair. They may not be politically correct. You may completely disagree. But they are my views and this is my blog. So, deal.

I hate football. (And I mean American football here). I don't like the idea of getting worked up about a game on television instead of actually participating in something. I don't like the lowest-common-denominator nature of football. I don't like the fact that football players get paid millions of dollars to prance around and tackle each other when people who actually do important things for a living get paid peanuts. I don't like how the passion of its fans is inversely proportional to the larger human significance of the game itself.

My boyfriend is a football fan.

This past weekend, he had some friends over to watch a football game. I spent the day curled up in the bedroom, re-reading my battered old copy of Lord of the Rings. Somewhere between the Mines of Moria and Shelob's lair, however, I realized something: what we were doing wasn't all that different. Here, to my great mortification and embarrassed wonder, are a few things my beloved fantasy novels have in common with (ugh) popular sports.

Heroes. C'mon, admit it: you cheered when Eowyn defeated the Witch King. When Sparhawk delivered his last one-liner to Martel before running him through. When Lyra pulled the wool over the eyes of Iofur Raknisson. Whatever your favorite fantasy series is, chances are you loved it because you fell in love with its heroes and you loved watching them succeed against impossible odds.

It's the same with sports. Just as my heart soared in rapture when Roland burst into Eddie's world, guns blazing, to save him from the mobsters--and ultimately himself--in The Drawing of the Three, my boyfriend is uplifted by every success of his favorite sports heroes. If I could, I would give a few examples. But I really can't think of any.

A close-knit group of friends. The absolute best thing about fantasy novels is the close-knit group of motley companions--an unlikely and sometimes unwilling gathering at first, but they come to depend absolutely on one another. In the best fantasy novels, every character has his or her own distinct strengths, weaknesses, and personality traits. They're all interesting on their own. But as a group, each character serves an important role. They fit together like jigsaw puzzle pieces.

It's the same for a well-cast sports team. You have your guys who throw the balls. You have your guys who catch the balls. You have your really big guys who jump on the other guys to keep them from attacking the other two types of guys. Uh...you know what I mean. The team is larger than its individual characters, and each person plays a crucial role.

A common enemy. The world of most fantasy novels is reassuringly simple. You know exactly who the bad guys are. Most of the time you can tell on sight--the bad guys look different from the good guys, either because they're a different race or they're a whole different species. In a complicated world where nobody's totally good or totally evil, it can be comforting to know exactly who's on your side and who isn't.

It's the same with sports teams. You know exactly who the bad guys are. Your team is in one uniform; their team is in another. There's no moral ambiguity here--you always know who to cheer for.

A clear and obvious goal. Find the magic stone, defeat the evil enemy, escape the dark castle--in fantasy novels the goals aren't always easy--but the path is always clear. It's the same with sports. Your objective is clear, there's no moral waffling, and everybody is on the same page.

Pure escapism. The attraction of fantasy is pure escape. The richly imagined, all-encompassing worlds; the clear objectives; the characters that make you fall in love, laugh and cry, and miss them when the book is through--all combine to completely take you out of the ordinary problems of your own world and into a place that's full of wonder and absent from the bewildering gray areas of real life. It's the same with sports. You'll find all the hero worship, clear goals and objectives, and strong cast of characters there. You may love fantasy and hate football, like I do--but they serve the same purpose. Maybe I'm a closet football fan after all.

Shakespeare Was a Working Writer

"He should have stuck to short stories. If his novels are read at all in the future, people will wonder what we saw in them."

"A middling playwright...often crude and crass...two of [Beaumont and Fletcher's plays] being acted through the year for one of his."

"...imitative, annoying, and tiresome."

What do the three authors that recieved this criticism have in common? Three things:

1. Their work was written for the common reader, rather than to academics, scholars, and literary critics of their time.
2. They enjoyed enormous popular success and mixed literary success during their time.
3. They are now considered three of our greatest authors.

They are (in order): Dickens, Shakespeare, and Mark Twain.

I remember I was at a writing conference this summer, and one of the speakers was L.A. Banks. This woman is a serious working writer. She writes vampire fiction and romance novels, and churns 'em out at a jaw-dropping one book every six weeks or so (if I remember correctly). I remember listening to her talk and thinking, gosh, I would LOVE to have her career.

But I also want what every other writer wants: validation. I want to be considered a literary genius, my work passed down through the ages, plastered with lofty awards. Yeah, I have delusions of grandeur. But I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that we all do, to an extent. And even though L.A. Banks is a working writer with a healthy career, nobody is comparing her to Toni Morrison or Jamaica Kincaid.

There is definitely a perception that you can have literary merit or popular success, but not both: that a really excellent piece of writing is so rarified that it's only a chosen few who can truly appreciate it. But when I look at writers like Dickens, I think that he's not really the Faulkner or Fitzgerald of his day; he's more like the Danielle Steele. He wrote popular fiction. And when I look around at the writing out there, I start to think that maybe it's not the recognized authors of our time who will stand the test of centuries. Maybe it's the Stephen Kings and the Danielle Steeles and the Harlequin authors that readers of the future will venerate.

L.A. Banks gave a great talk, but that's not what I remember. I remember standing near her while she was speaking to another writer. They were having a conversation about writing popular genre fiction versus literary fiction. And Banks said something about how there's no shame in being a working writer; after all, Shakespeare was a working writer.

I guess what I realized then was that you don't have to give up a paying career as a writer to be recognized. You don't have to write literary fiction that doesn't sell and work as a creative writing professor. Your genre of choice may be snubbed by the critics of today, but it could be the biggest thing to hit 2100. After all, it's not the most "literary" works that stand the test of time. It's the work that reaches and inspires the common people.

Writing Prompt Wednesday

Welcome to Wednesday! Okay, here's my attempt at a writing prompt:

It was eight in the morning. The alarm clock rang, and Liza slammed it quiet again. Her head was pounding from last night, and she was seriously considering calling in sick. She rolled over—and suddenly sat up in surprise.

A naked man was stepping out of her shower.

Self-Employment or a Day Job: Which is Right For You?

If you're an aspiring novelist, you're probably someone who'd really rather be in a room alone, writing, than doing anything else. The problem is that writing books isn't exactly a career you can get paid to learn. You can't get a paid internship, a middle management job, and work your way up the ladder while collecting a steady stream of paychecks. Nope: you're stuck doing all the hard work with no pay, and then hoping that somehow you'll eventually collect a fair wage for that work.

Unless you have a trust fund or a saint for a spouse, you'll be stuck working for a living--at something other than what you consider your actual career. There are two ways to do this: get a normal job somewhere, or work for yourself.

The Steady Job: Costs and Benefits

There are benefits to having a steady job. The most obvious is that it's steady. You don't have to worry about money, and for some, that means dreaming about your novel instead of worrying about your paycheck. Then there's the benefit of having to get up and go to work around other people. The characters you meet at work can give you lots of ideas for your writing.

Of course, a day job can also suck the soul right out of your head. You can come home drained and exhausted every day--even though you didn't do much more than sit at a cubicle. If you don't like your job, you're not a good fit with the company personality, or you don't work with like-minded people, you could be miserable. For some, it's just too much misery to trade for a regular paycheck.

The Entrepreneurial Route: Pros and Cons

At first glance, opening your own business sounds like the best way to go. One of the most frustrating aspects of a full-time job is that it must come before your writing. Your boss might want you to work during a time of day when you'd rather be writing, or object to you using the company copier to make copies of your 400-page manuscript. But when you run the company, you're the boss. You can work whenever you want, however you want, and nobody can tell you otherwise. You can truly craft your schedule around your writing time.

For some, freelance writing sounds like an ideal business. There's nothing quite like the joy of getting paid to do what you're good at. I had several jobs where my duties were definitely not within my areas of talent, and I hated every minute of it. I knew I was talented--just not at what I was doing. And I hated the fact that I was seen as a bit of a screw-up. With freelance writing, I know I excel. I like getting up and going to work--even though I only have to go so far as my desk.

The problem with running your own business, though, is that it quickly takes over your life. You might want to spend the day writing your novel--you might even be planning to--but if there's client work to do, you'll probably do that instead--especially if your novel's hit a snag and you'll do anything to procrastinate. And when your day job is writing, it can be tough to summon the enthusiasm to write a novel when you've already spent all day writing other things.

The right choice depends, of course, on your circumstances. If you've got kids to support and a mortgage to pay, you might be stuck with the steady job--at least for a time. But if you're independent-minded and your steady job makes you want to poke your eyeballs out, you might be happier choosing the entrepreneurial route. I've tried them both--and I know what's best for me.

Keeping the Faith

I've wanted to be a writer all my life. And for most of that time, I've been optimistic that I could do it: that it was, in fact, the thing I was born to do. Sure, I read a few things about how difficult it is to make a living from writing. But I sort of waltzed through life, telling people I was going to be Stephen King when I grew up, and not really thinking about what it takes to get there.

But now that I'm an adult and I have the rest of my life to do this, the reality of the publishing world gets me down a lot. When I allow my mind to wander down the path of shrinking markets, blind luck slush-pile transcendence, fickle publishing houses that drop your marketing campaign, and the idea of actually trying to sell my books face-to-face to indifferent bookstore patrons, I start to get depressed. More than depressed, really. I start looking around for something high to jump off.

And when I write, I suffer from Perfectionitis. I think I have to write the Best Book Ever. And about a hundred pages in, I invariably become convinced that what I'm writing is something that should never, ever see the light of day. So I start to look at that "delete" key long and hard. I can't tell how many novels I've abandoned because I've been convinced that they stink.

So when you're in the midst of writing your first novel, how can you keep the faith in yourself and in your future? Most of it, I've found, is mind tricks: surround yourself with positive reinforcement, and filter out the negative. Here are some things that work for me:

Listen to your fans and ignore your critics. When you're done with your novel, you need a critical eye to look it over and give it to you straight. But when you're in the process of writing a book, that's the last thing you need. Instead, look for supportive people who love your writing and will tell you how much you rock. Having a strong fan base will keep you writing through the times when you're sure you're writing the most horrendous book in the world.

And even more important--if someone doesn't like your first chapter, don't show it to them again until the book is done. They may have constructive criticism, or they may just hate your genre. Whatever the case, you don't need negative feedback right now--even if it's helpful. And if someone just isn't a fan of your genre--do not show them your manuscript. End of story.

Set easy goals. You can do two hundred words a day, right? That's about half a page. Too much? How about a paragraph? A sentence? Pick a goal that sounds too easy to take seriously, and then take it seriously. Aiming for ten pages a day might sound grand and ambitious when you make the goal, but on days when you Just Don't Feel Like It, you'll give up--guaranteed. Then you'll get so frustrated at your inability to meet your own goals that you'll give up entirely. Instead, set an easy goal--the easier the better. Then you'll be more likely to stick to it.

Give yourself permission to write a bad book. My biggest downfall is I hate everything I write. No matter how brilliant I think it is to start with, I eventually start to think I'm writing the worst book in the world. Then I delete everything I've done and start again. Instead, whenever that irrational little demon is jumping up and down on your shoulder and screeching that you'll never win the Nebula with that one, say something like this "You're right. This book sucks. And that's fine, because I'm going to finish it anyway. THEN I can fix it."

Do you have anything better to do? This is my secret weapon. Whenever I look around and panic about whether or not I'll ever have an actual career--assuming I'll ever finish an actual book--I remember that, hey, I have nothing more important to do with my time than follow my dreams. I could just give up, but then I'd just be sitting around and wasting time. So I might as well try; it's not like I have anything to lose by trying.

It isn't easy to keep the faith. But it is possible. Let yourself write a bad book, give yourself easy, achievable goals--and try not to let the critics in. And besides--do you have anything better to do than try?

In Defense of Romance Novels

My librarian mom will roll her eyes. My professors from college will throw things at me. But eventually, the secret will have to come out: I have a not-so-secret love of romance novels.

I think the first one I read was when I was around ten years old. My mom ran the local library, and I had the run of the place. There were some books I was emphatically NOT allowed to take out, though, and among those were romance novels. Of course, once I found out how strictly forbidden they were, I had to read one. So I grabbed one off the paperback rack--I still remember; it was Man of My Dreams by Johanna Lindsey--and I hid it in my backpack. I didn't even check it out, because my mom would find out I had it if I did. I took it home, hid it behind my bed, and waited for mom and dad to go to sleep. Then I took it out and read it under the covers, with a flashlight. I stayed up all night reading it, and man--was I tired the next morning.

Men and women were a bit of a mystery to me when I was a kid. I didn't really "get" relationships. But when I read my first romance novel, it's like a light went off in my brain: "oh--so THAT's what it's supposed to be like!" Which, unfortunately, led me to years and years of comparing the guys I met in real life to the guys I met between the covers of my clandestine books (all through high school, I never actually checked one out).

A lot of people I know don't really get romance novels. People say they're trashy. My boyfriend (yes, eventually I did actually fall in love with a real guy) thinks they're porn for girls. Strong women I respect think they're sexist and demeaning. And I think there's a bit of a grain of truth to some of these things.

But the thing about romance novels is this: much of mainstream media is all about the male gaze. You can't really have an average-looking heroine in most movies; even with romantic comedies geared toward women, the heroine is pretty and the guy can be cute, or not (um...Billy Crystal in When Harry Met Sally? Ben Stiller in There's Something About Mary?). It's very rare that you find a romantic comedy where the guy is gorgeous and the girl is just so-so. I mean, yes, it's true that a lot of amazing guys aren't perfect tens--but that's not the point. The point is that these movies are, even subconsciously, geared towards men's fantasies, not women's.

Romance novels, however, are completely and totally oriented towards women's fantasies--and that's relatively rare in our society. The heroine in romance novels is often beautiful, but she does NOT have to be. In older books the women are always gorgeous, but in the newer ones some of them can be downright plain. And that's really refreshing to me: because the hero (who's always good-looking) is also always insanely attracted to her. It's not because she looks like Nicole Kidman--she's just got some certain something he can't keep his hands off of.

I read an article somewhere that if guys want to know what women really want, deep down, they should read romance novels. And I think that's true--romance novels speak to many of us more strongly than romantic comedies and television. Because the nice, friendly guy with the great sense of humor is wonderful--but he's not the guy women fantasize about. Our greatest fantasies are all about meeting this incredible Matthew McConaghey-type who is way out of our league and who, somehow, falls completely head-over-heels for us and sweeps us off to travel the world in his yacht. It's kind of a new variation on the old one about the prince who fell in love with the peasant girl and made her a princess. That's what makes our toes curl.

(I think I misspelled Matthew McConaghey's last name. Now he'll never fall in love with my cartoon avatar and sweep me off my feet. So much for my master plan...)

The graphic sex is another thing people tend to misunderstand. A lot of people think it's porn for women. And I guess in a way you could say romance novels are exactly that. But it's emotional porn, not physical. The sex in romance novels always, always serves the relationship. The graphic descriptions aren't gratuitous; they're showing us an intimate moment that the whole book has been building toward. If the author cut us out of the action right at that crucial moment, she'd be cheating us of an enormous emotional payoff.

And I guess if real porn shows you what guys fantasize about, romance novels show you that women's fantasies are more complex. We want the hot sex, yes. But we also want to feel fundamentally desired. Like the guy we're with will slay outlaws, storm castles, and brave anything to have us--both physically and emotionally. The ruthless alpha male is a mainstay of the genre, and with good reason: these guys want what they want, and they don't care what they have to do to get it. And when the thing they want is US, that's absolutely irresistible.

Whose Gaze?

I had a friend once in college who was an Art History major. She was continually talking about something called “the Male Gaze.” She was particularly into Renaissance art, and told me that a piece of artwork was actually a conversation between the subject of the painting—usually a beautiful female—and the person looking at the painting. Every artist had an ideal viewer in mind, and, according to my friend, Renaissance artists pictured their ideal viewer as male. So they painted a lot of beautiful women in various stages of undress, looking at the viewer provocatively. They weren’t looking at another woman that way. They were performing for the Male Gaze, not the female one.

Renaissance art may be part of history—but the Male Gaze is as contemporary as it gets. The modern media caters to it relentlessly. A really obvious example of this is the typical beer commercial—it’s rare to find one without a scantily-clad model implying that she’s available to any slob who orders this beer in a bar.

But you find it elsewhere, too. There’s no question that sex sells. But whose sex? Beautiful women shill for everything, from cell phone plans to cars to vacation cruises. This is odd, when women control at least half of all household spending money in the country. You occasionally see advertisers using these tactics on women as well—I remember reading an article from some advertising exec for Mr. Clean, suggesting that they wanted women to “fantasize” about their chrome-domed spokes-cartoon. But compare the number of beautiful women you see in ads to the amount of beautiful men, and you’ll probably see that the women are much more ubiquitous.

It’s not ads, though, where I really notice the Male Gaze. It’s movies and sitcoms. Have you noticed, in TV-land, how often beautiful women get with average—or even sub-average—guys? I think I first noticed something was up when I saw There’s Something About Mary. I just remember thinking, “Come on—Cameron Diaz chooses Ben Stiller over that football player? The guy looks like a tree stump with eyebrows!” And then there’s Cider House Rules—if Tobey Maguire wasn’t a movie star, do you really think he’d have a chance with someone who looks like Charlize Theron? Puh-leeze.

You notice it a lot in sitcoms, too. King of Queens is an obvious example. So is That 70’s Show—Donna was so out of Eric’s league. You even see it in cartoons—the fat, kinda slow guy is so often paired with the good-looking, smart wife, it’s become a cliché. These movies and shows clearly aren’t written with women’s desires in mind—they’re written by, for, and largely about guys.

Our culture worships a feminine ideal that most women can’t attain—and then pairs that ideal with male icons who couldn’t be more ordinary. It sends women a bleak message: you have to be gorgeous. And even then, you’ll probably wind up with the fat guy. Or the one with the overbite. Guys, of course, are conditioned to think it’s realistic to date women who look like models, no matter what they themselves look like. All this is bad news for normal-looking girls, who find themselves competing with Charlize Theron, as well as for beautiful women, who get pestered by potato-shaped guys in bars who think they actually have a chance.

So what can we do about it? Easy. Let’s make a bunch of movies that pair Judy Dench with Brad Pitt. Let’s have some more sitcoms about older women paired with Latino hotties ten years their junior (hey—it worked for I Love Lucy). Let’s show women that guys aren’t half as shallow as the media says they are.

And let’s think a little more about the Female Gaze in ads. There are a lot of products out there who are missing out on half their potential customer base. I’m not a big fan of Bud Light, for example. But I’d probably drink it, if I really believed it had the power to compel that hot guy by the jukebox to come over and hit on me.

Which is why I love romance novels. But that's another blog post.

What I'm Reading: Jasper Fforde's The Eyre Affair

I have to admit, I wasn’t crazy about this book right away.

The Eyre Affair is a mystery/fantasy—an interesting blending of the genres. In a world where the arts dominate daily life, detective Thursday Next must catch arch-fiend Acheron Hades. Hades has stolen a machine that allows people from the “real” world to enter the worlds of individual books. They can change stories and even bring fictional characters over into the real world. Hades is using the machine to kidnap characters of famous novels and hold them for ransom.

In Fforde’s vision of the world, literature and the arts dominate society. There’s a lively black market for forgeries of famous manuscripts; when we first meet Thursday, she’s working as a LiteraTec, breaking up crime rings of counterfeit literature. French impressionists lurk in alleyways and assault surrealists, who riot in the streets. Baconians go door to door, proselytizing that Sir Francis Bacon wrote Shakespeare’s plays. Panhandlers recite Longfellow to earn their handouts. Fforde clearly loved his literature, but at first it was a little too cutesy for me. It seemed like an interesting construct of a world, but I didn’t know if it was interesting enough for me to want to stay with it for 300 pages.

I think one of the reasons I wasn’t wild about it to start with was the lack of characterization. Good characters really draw me into a story, and fantasy and mystery are both genres that traditionally depend on crystal-clear characterization. But Fforde is clearly more interested in his world than in his characters. The heroine is strong and fearless, but she's not fascinating--although she is funny, in a dry sort of way, and she has a cool backstory. But her love interest, her fellow law enforcement officers, and others she interacts with aren’t quite real enough for me to become invested in this world.

Acheron Hades perked the story up when he made his first appearance; he’s a formidable rival who can exert some sort of mind control on his adversaries. And I started to allow myself to be won over when Thursday goes to see Richard III. This is no ordinary production of Richard III, however. It’s been playing regularly for fifteen years. It’s got audience participation like you’d get at a showing of Rocky Horror Picture Show, and the audience puts on the play. If there was a showing like that in my town, I’d become a regular. And I have to admit, this book is slowly beginning to grow on me. Like a fungus.

I haven’t finished the book yet, so I can’t give you the final verdict on it just now. Will Thursday Next catch Acheron Hades and save Jane Eyre? Will she get back together with estranged boyfriend Landen, or will she succumb to the charms of her coworker/vampire, Spike? Will I stay interested enough to finish the book? Hard to say at the moment…we’ll have to wait and see.