Writing Isn't for Sissies

Writing isn't for sissies.

That's what a good friend tells me I once said in one of my "inspirational tirades," and I believe her, though I have no memory of the event. I do know I have a habit of attacking like a pit bull when one of my writing buddies says, "I'm a horrible writer!" or "I should just give up on this writing thing!" or some variation thereof. I will latch on to their pant leg, metaphorically speaking, and not let go until they admit that writing is hard work, self-validation is often the only kind we get, and whoever quits first, loses. I often lose consciousness during these tirades, and only come to after the person weepily thanks me for bucking up their spirits. Then, of course, I slink away and wonder if I'm a horrible writer and maybe I should just think about giving all this up.

Yes, it is true. I am in one of my "depressed" periods. Monet had his "blue" period (I think), and I've got my "depressed" periods. Now, I'm not talking depressed in the clinical sense in which normal, non-writing people occasionally endure. No, I'm creatively depressed in the "my gosh, how much longer will this take, and can I hold out until it does?" sense. I realized recently that the five year goal that I had set myself when I first embarked on this "three-hour tour" had been met and passed this January. In Jan 2001, I set a goal that I wanted to be a "working" writer, earning a modest living from my books in five years. How naive was that?

Okay, so, now what? Do I give it up now that I haven't met my goal? Do I devote the time I spend typing at the computer, talking to people who don't exist and making up stories that are important, but not real, to my children? To my husband? My students? All of whom have been mostly patient, unless they want something at the same time I need to write?

Part of why I wanted to publish was, yes, to tell my stories, to entertain. It also had to do with leaving my mark, being something other than a wife, mommy, employee. Those are all important things, don't get me wrong. But as Margaret Atwood says in her poem, "Spelling,"

A child is not a poem,
a poem is not a child
There is no either/or.
However.

In other words, having either is not a substitute for the other. A child can't fulfill the need I have to "mainline words," as Atwood says in another part of her poem. Nor does writing fulfill my need to be a good mother, wife, and teacher. All which leaves me feeling chronically guilty for not doing any of them well, and yet I can't seem to stop.

When I started this, I let my kids see me struggle, strive, fail, pick myself up, and start again and again. "Mommy's working," I would say, even though I didn't have the paycheck to prove it. I wanted to teach my kids to strive for something hard, something worthwhile that is worth having. I wanted to teach them not to settle, not to give up if what they wanted didn't come easily, if their dreams were too big to fit into other people's perceptions of "should."

They were babies when I started, and now they are old enough to ask with a sigh, "Mommy, when are you ever going to get published?" They know Mommy is a writer, but one who teaches to earn a living. They know not to talk about Mommy's writing outside the home, because, you know, she writes romance, and not everyone will understand. They know writing is hard work, and they've even taken to pecking out their own stories at their own computer, tossing around ideas and searching for just the right words to tell their tale.

Am I teaching them an addiction from which they won't be able to quit? Am I setting them up for failure by pursuing a dream they might never be able to catch? Should I say, "Well, writing well is important, but make sure you get a good degree, so you can earn a living and take care of your family if your writing doesn't take off"?

I don't know. Jennie Crusie said something recently about writers having to choose between relationships and careers (can't be more specific about that, because then the loop police where I saw this posted would have to kill me), and it struck me as truth. To be successful, do I really have to choose?

A child is not a poem,
a poem is not a child
There is no either/or.
However.

TJB

Another defection from Graybill and English

Word up: Graybill and English has lost another agent. Coming on the heels of the recent departure by Jeff Kleinman to start Folio Literary Agency with Paige Wheeler, et al, comes word that Literary agent, Elaine English, has left the agency as well. Like Jeff, she has set up her own company. She can now be reached at Elaine English Literary, 4710 41st Street, NW, Suite D, Washington, DC 20016. Telephone: (202) 362-5190.

TJB

Character development

"The good have flaws, and the bad have reasons." ~ Bonnie Hearn Hill


This is another writing lesson I’m learning. Characters that are perfectly good--who have no flaws--are boring, or even worse, annoying. Remember that perfect girl in high school with the perfect skin, perfect figure, and perfect grades? Hated her. Bet you did, too. Now, give that girl a zit on the end of her nose on the most important night of her life--prom night--and make her worry that the boy she’s dating really loves another girl and only asked her out because she said no, and you’ve made that perfect girl more vulnerable. Give her a backstory in which she always tried to be perfect because her father was both demanding and exacting, and for whom a 4.0 grade point average was considered merely “acceptable,” and you’ve made her poignant. Add in the fact that she struggled with anorexia in her teen years, but conquered it and helps others to do the same, and you’ve made her courageous.

A perfectly evil character is just as boring. In my current work-in-progress, I resisted making my villain--a “healer” gone bad--a true evil guy. Something in me understood him, even though he is a murderer. He has a reason for the choices he has made, reasons rooted deep in his psyche, and he genuinely believes he is the hero of his own story. He has noble qualities, the ability to make great sacrifices, and, unfortunately, very poor judgment. He might have been the hero of this story, but he had a desire to do good in the absence of the will of his God. This leads to great evil, in which, while trying to search for a universal cure for disease, he falls under the belief that the end justifies the means, and innocent people die as a result. My goal is to make this character so sympathetic, yet so wrong in his choices, that the reader aches for the lost potential of his life. Sort of like how Darth Vader’s backstory makes you realize how much lost potential there was as a result of Anakin’s choices.

In actuality, it is a character’s own traits which move the plot forward: his or her choices force action to occur, and then the character must react to that, driving the plot along. So remember, as trees don’t appear on the landscape fully grown, neither do your characters. Ask yourself, what formed him or her? That backstory may never make it into your final story, but knowing it will make all the difference.

TJB