In December, I read a New York Times article about a new Tom Cruise movie called “Jack Reacher.” It’s based on the Jack Reacher books written by Lee Child. I’m embarrassed to admit that I’d never heard of Jack Reacher or Lee Child, and apparently those books are wildly popular and big money makers for Child. So I read the first book of the series, Killing Floor. Damn good. A page tuner. One of those books you can’t put down and are dying to get back to. There is an introduction at the start of the book, and Child explains that it was his goal to write a popular book, a blockbuster, a guilty pleasure. Although he doesn’t think of it as guilty. I found his approach to writing very illuminating, anti-snob. I tracked down a few quotes of his online; they are a little controversial, I don’t necessarily agree with him completely, but here they are:

Show, Don’t Tell (Child says to ignore this rule)

Picture this: In a novel, a character wakes up and looks at himself in the mirror, noting his scars and other physical traits for the reader. “It is completely and utterly divorced from real life,” Child said.

So why do writers do this? Child said it’s because they’ve been beaten down by the rule of Show, Don’t Tell. “They manufacture this entirely artificial thing.”

“We’re not story showers,” Child said. “We’re story tellers.”
Child said there’s nothing wrong with simply saying the character was 6 feet tall, with scars.

After all, he added—do your kids ever ask you to show them a story? They ask you to tell them a story. Do you show a joke? No, you tell it.
“There is nothing wrong with just telling the story,” Child said. “So liberate yourself from that rule.”

Child believes the average reader doesn’t care at all about telling, showing, etc. He or she just wants something to latch onto, something to carry them through the book. By following too many “rules,” you can lose your readers.

Thriller vs. Literary Fiction

‘To me it’s a Zen proposition: if you write a novel and no one reads it, have you really written a novel at all? There has to be art, skill and creativity but you need an audience or there’s no point. I could easily write a work of literary fiction. It would take me three weeks, sell about 3,000 copies and be at least as good as the competition. But literary authors can’t write thrillers. They try sometimes, but they can never do it.’

I’ve also kept up my reading of Haruki Murakami. I recently finished A Wild Sheep Chase. Loved it! His fiction really speaks to me.

I’m currently reading Kafka’s last novel, The Castle. He died before he could finish it. It’s definitely not a page turner, at least not for me. But it haunts me. The prose is dense and the plot bizarre. It’s dream-like. I like it, and I’m sure it’s be of those books that will stay with me.

Oh, and I just learned that my story “Poisoned Pawn” was accepted by Crime Factory magazine. That makes two for me in that journal. It will run in April. I’m pumped!

Anyway, here are the quotes. I like how she emphasizes the importance of just getting better:

On advising young writers about their careers

“It’s all about your determination, I think, as much as anything. There are a lot of people with talent, but it’s that determination. I mean, you know, I would cry when the rejections came in — the first couple of times, anyway — and I would go to sleep feeling down, but I would wake up in the morning optimistic and saying, ‘Well, maybe they didn’t like that one, but wait till they see what I’m going to do next.’ And I think you just have to keep going.

“You know what? The thing is that nobody writes unless they have to. So if you have to write because it’s inside you, then you will.”

***

For two years I received nothing but rejections. One magazine, Highlights for Children, sent a form letter with a list of possible reasons for rejection. “Does not win in competition with others,” was always checked off on mine. I still can’t look at a copy of Highlights without wincing.

I would go to sleep at night feeling that I’d never be published. But I’d wake up in the morning convinced I would be. Each time I sent a story or book off to a publisher, I would sit down and begin something new. I was learning more with each effort. I was determined. Determination and hard work are as important as talent.

Don’t let anyone discourage you! Yes, rejection and criticism hurt. Get used to it. Even when you’re published you’ll have to contend with less than glowing reviews. There is no writer who hasn’t suffered.

The Literary Review bills itself as “An International Journal of Contemporary Writing.” Frankly, I hadn’t heard of it before, but I just signed-up for a subscription. A few years back, when I started writing short stories, I decided I should read the journals and get a sense for what is being published. You can’t succeed at writing if don’t read (and read!).

Anyway, Minna’s post detailed the process that she and her staff go through when selecting stories to include in their journal. I found it really interesting and informative. On the plus side, every story is read and treated seriously. On the negative side, it can take over a year for a story to work its way through the review process.

Like most aspiring writers, I’ve sent stories to a lot of journals. And, of course, I’ve received a lot of rejections. I’ve also had stories accepted (I think seven or eight). I’m always rather amazed when a story is accepted, because I’ve been dubious that they are even read! But that’s the cynic in me. It’s nice to know that there are people out there like Minna.

Cash Out is a wonderful combination of the bizarre, hysterical, and gruesome. I was first turned on to Greg Bardsley’s writing a few years ago when I read his short story “Upper Decking.” Amazing! He has a very distinct voice: funny, somewhat crime centric, off-beat characters, a little violence thrown in. I agree with another review that I could see Cash Out being turned into a movie. A future cult classic, like The Big Lebowski. Buy it. Read it.

I’m sure I liked the story, in part, because I’ve always found Bobby Fischer’s life to be so interesting (and tragic and bizarre). His was definitely a life of myth, a Greek tragedy. For me, the story’s end works: no one could respect what Fischer became, but damn it, you can’t help but pity him and have a perverse affection for him.

I’ve actually written two short stories over the past year that were inspired by Bobby Fischer, and I’m working now to try and get them placed.

I just finished her new novel, Inside, and it is very good. The story is centered on four characters: Grace, Anne (aka Annie), Mitch, and Tug. It follows them over a 12-year period, from 1994 – 2006. A theme that runs throughout a lot of Ohlin’s story telling is people trying to connect, often romantically, but not always. Of course, since Ohlin writes literary fiction her characters don’t typically achieve the connection they want. (I can hear my mother – “Why are all the stories you read so sad? What’s wrong with happy endings?”).   Inside definitely covers that “connection” territory, but it is primarily focused on what Ohlin says is, “What it means to be a good Samaritan. What drives us to try and help another person. And what the emotional complications of that are.” Each of the four characters try to help someone (or more than one person), and in each case the helper is hurt by the effort. Again, my mother: “Why to sad?”

One of my favorite chapters is focused on Anne, a sexy actress, who moves from Manhattan to Hollywood to join the cast of a TV sitcom. It’s a riot! I had a feeling that Ohlin really enjoyed writing it, and I suspect that was her easiest chapter to crank out. But that’s just a guess.

In another chapter, Tug recounts his efforts as a relief worker in Rwanda. Before reading Inside I had just finished Haruki Murakami’s novel The Wind-Up Bird Chronicles, and the Tug/Rwanda chapter reminded me of the scene in “Wind-Up” where an older man recounts his role in WWII and tells a story about a man being skinned alive. But I suspect I’m the only person in the world who would make that connection!

So, I was planning to write my blog entry on Inside last week. I did a Google news search of “Alix Ohlin” and discovered an extremely negative review of the book that ran in The New York Times. There was another article in The Wall Street Journal that said that review had fomented something of a firestorm on Twitter. Despite the fact that I work in Silicon Valley and I’ve written more than a few speeches for tech execs on the wonders of social media, I had never used Twitter before (don’t tell anyone). So, I got an account, read a few tweets and links to blogs/aritcles that all  discussed whether the tone of the review was appropriate or not. Interesting stuff. I’ll leave it to others to come to their own conclusions on the review’s tone and approach. But, most of those articles and blogs that expressed offense to the review would include a line or two that went something like this: “I haven’t read Inside, and I’m not familiar with Ohlin’s work, so I can’t really comment on whether it was accurate or not…” Well, to me that was the problem with the review: its conclusion was wrong. Inside is a good book. Alix Ohlin is a very good writer. She clearly gives a lot of thought to the prose she uses, and carefully thinks out her plots. We’re all welcome to our opinions, and that’s mine.

If you’ve read The Wind-up Bird Chronicles I’m interested in what you thought of the book.