Interview with author Mark L. Van Name

Posted on April 24, 2011 by Michael A. Ventrella

MICHAEL A. VENTRELLA: Today, I am pleased to be interviewing Mark L. Van Name, who I had the pleasure of meeting at the Arisia convention in Boston recently. Mark has worked in the high-tech industry for over thirty years and today runs a technology assessment company in the Research Triangle area of North Carolina. He’s published over a thousand computer-related articles and multiple science fiction stories in a variety of magazines and anthologies.

How important is it that writers of hard SF especially have a background in science?

MARK L. VAN NAME: There are no hard and fast rules about writing, SF or otherwise. The right good, smart writer can pull off just about anything. You can learn so much via research that not having formal training in an area is no excuse for not learning about it. So, I don’t think it’s vital that hard SF writers have a science background.

That said, I do think it’s helpful to have a solid base in any areas you try to cover in depth. Without that base, you better do your research, because otherwise, you’ll make mistakes, and your readers will spot them.

VENTRELLA: Since all of speculative fiction relies on things that are not, do you think a beginning writer should be wary when writing about things of which they have no experience?

VAN NAME: Wary, yes, but afraid to tackle it, no. You just have to respect the material you’re using. If you haven’t been a fire fighter and want to write about them, reading about their work and talking to some would be a very good idea. Making it up entirely based on what you’ve seen on TV, though possibly better than no research at all, is rarely enough for your work to have the verisimilitude it should.

VENTRELLA: Given your background, are you worried about the growing anti-science attitude we are seeing in much of politics these days?

VAN NAME: Definitely, though I have to say that particular concern is lower on my list than many others, including global climate change, the huge levels of hunger and poverty around the world, our national debt, child soldiers, and many other causes. There have always been groups opposed to rationality, and there always will be.

VENTRELLA: How did you break into the field? What was your first sale and how did it come about?

VAN NAME: My first fiction sale of any type was a short story, “Going Back,” to a now-defunct, small-press, feminist SF magazine, Pandora. My first professional (by SFWA guidelines) sale was a short time later, a story, “My Sister, My Self,” that went to Asimov’s but ended up in their original anthology, ISAAC ASIMOV’S TOMORROW’S VOICES. In both cases, the sale went down in the usual way: I mailed them the manuscript, and they bought it. For the first story, the editors asked that I interview some battered women–the protagonist was one–and then do a rewrite based on what I learned. I did, I learned a lot, I rewrote the story, and they bought it. For the Asimov’s piece, I mailed it, and they bought it. Not very exciting, I’m afraid.

VENTRELLA: Did you get an agent?

VAN NAME: Nope. Only after I’d sold the first four novels did I talk to an agent. I’m not at all convinced that agents help beginning writers sell short stories. More to the point, I suspect that few agents you would want to represent you would take you if you were writing only short pieces, and that’s all I was doing for many years.

VENTRELLA: Tell us about the Jon and Lobo series!

VAN NAME: Talking about a multi-novel series is a lot like describing a multi-course meal of experimental cuisine: whether you focus on the individual dishes or the overall meal, you’re bound to miss a lot. I’ll try it a bit from both perspectives.

The overall series is a future history that I tell from the first-person perspective of one man, Jon Moore. I’ve always found history more interesting when it comes directly from the people who were there, so I wanted to chronicle a very important time in humanity’s far future–I’m writing about a time roughly 500 years from now–but limit myself largely to what Jon can see and experience. Of course, he’s a most unusual man, as far as he knows the only nanotech-enhanced human alive, so he naturally ends up in quite a few interesting situations. In the first novel, ONE JUMP AHEAD, he meets and becomes first the owner and then the friend of Lobo, an extraordinarily intelligent assault vehicle that can go anywhere–on land, under water, in the air, or in space. Over the course of the many books the series will take to complete–I’m estimating about eighteen, but that’s just an estimate–the characters and the universe will undergo many significant changes.

On an individual book level, each part of the series is simply a novel that should stand entirely on its own. You can pick up any book in the series and enjoy it. You can read them in any order. If you read them all, however, and further, if you read them in order, then you should have a richer experience. I’ve talked to lots of readers who’ve joined the series several books in, and so far, all of them have been able to enjoy whatever books happened to be their starting points.

VENTRELLA: You like to attend science fiction conventions. Are they really worth it, given the expense?

VAN NAME: I have no clue, because hard data on the sales value of cons–or blogs or pretty much any other marketing tool–is almost impossible to get. That said, I don’t go simply to increase sales. I attend cons to be part of the community, to see friends, visit new cities, eat at good restaurants, and so on. You can’t be sure you’ll boost your sales, but you can be sure to see friends and have an entertaining time.

VENTRELLA: What’s the funniest experience you ever had at a convention?

VAN NAME: I’ve done a lot of humor panels at cons, and I’ve done stand-up comedy/spoken-word shows, so that’s a tougher question than you might imagine. Certainly one of the funniest hours I’ve spent was listening to my friend, Lew Shiner, give a talk on humorous mimetic short fiction at a long-ago Disclave at which he was the guest of honor. He delivered the entire thing in very scholarly style, but it was just an excuse to tell a ton of jokes–which he did, brilliantly.

VENTRELLA: What process do you use in order to make believable, realistic characters?

VAN NAME: I don’t see that process as separate from the overall writing process. I sit down to tell a story. The story becomes very real in my head, because I spend a great deal of time living in the world of the story. The story includes people. I get to know those people. Like any other folks, they behave the way they do because of who they are. If I try to make a character do something that she or he simply wouldn’t do, it feels bad, wrong, as wrong as it would feel if a friend suddenly behaved completely out of character. I listen to those feelings. I write the story. The characters behave as they would. That’s about it.

I should probably clarify that I’m not one of those writers who believes his characters are real humans. I know they’re not. I know I control them. I know I could make them do anything I want. I also know, however, that doing so, that violating a character’s identity simply for the sake of a plot, would be bad craft. I don’t want to do that.

VENTRELLA: What is your writing process–-do you outline heavily, for instance?

VAN NAME: I generally outline, but how detailed the outline is varies widely. For a thriller, FATAL CIRCLE, that I’m partway through and hope one day to finish, I had to do some research in key areas and consult with some experts. The result was a very detailed, very long outline–over twenty-six thousand words, a quarter of a typical novel. For CHILDREN NO MORE, I went with an outline of barely three thousand words. I outline to the level I feel necessary before I’m ready to start writing the book, and then I write.

I do some writing work every day. That’s been the key to changing me from someone who sold a story every few years to someone who has multiple novels out. I don’t, though, have a word-count quota. I avoid that sort of goal because it’s so easy to fail at it, and I hate failing. Instead, I have a time requirement: I must devote at least half an hour a day solely to writing work. As long as I’ve done that, I’ve succeeded. Most days, I do more. Most days, I get a fair number of words on the page. Some days, I produce very few. As long as I’ve tried for half an hour minimum, I call it a success.

VENTRELLA: What do you see as the future for printed books? For book stores?

VAN NAME: I love books. I really do. My house is full of them. They’re everywhere. Sadly, I believe the printed book is going to become a minority taste. I’m not sure if the transition will take ten years or fifty, but I believe it’s coming. That said, in the fiction world, books are containers for stories, and ebooks are simply other containers for stories. Similarly, I believe bookstores will continue to exist, but they will evolve, and in time their numbers will shrink. I will hate that, because I love bookstores almost as much as I love books.

I hasten to add that I don’t see any of this as the demise of writers or of people paying for stories. They’ll just pay for those stories in other forms.

VENTRELLA: What’s your opinion on self-publishing?

VAN NAME: Rather mixed. I write a blog, so in a sense I self-publish. I sell all my fiction, however, to traditional publishers. I know that some writers can make a great deal of money self-publishing, but being a publisher is a lot of work, and most of that work is not writing, which is what I most want to do. So, for me, selling to a publisher remains the way I hope to continue to bring my fiction to the market.

I also expect most people who self-publish are unlikely to make a lot of money doing so. The sales and marketing experience that a publisher brings to its job helps make each writer a brand–some obviously much bigger brands than others–and it’s hard to manage that feat on your own. Plus, self-publishers have to be good enough at analyzing their own work to know when it’s of publishable quality. I’ve read some who are indeed good at that job, but I’ve also read many who are not.

Like so many things, if others want to do it, I wish them the best. For the most part, though, it’s not for me, at least not now. I add that last bit because even for those of us who work in the future every day, it’s pretty darn hard to predict.

VENTRELLA: With a time machine and a universal translator, who would you invite to your ultimate dinner party?

VAN NAME: I agonized over this question for months. In fact, it’s the biggest reason I’ve been so late getting this interview back to you. I really took the challenge seriously, and I found I simply couldn’t come up with a single ultimate dinner party. I won’t let myself cop out completely, though, so I’m going to give you, in no particular order, a few that particularly caught my fancy.

Each on his own, just so I could focus exclusively on him: Homer, Shakespeare, Keats, and my biological father, whom I’ve met only once for a couple of hours.

My mother as a young woman, but with someone standing by to knock me out if I started to give away the future.

Several women I care about deeply, each alone, each as a young girl, just so I could see who they once were.

I could go on and on, but one thing is clear: I’d be greedy, going for one-on-one time rather than organizing a group.

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment »

Interview with Lawrence M. Schoen

Posted on March 14, 2011 by Michael A. Ventrella

MICHAEL A. VENTRELLA: Today, I am honored to be interviewing Hugo-nominated author Lawrence M. Schoen. Lawrence holds a PhD in cognitive psychology and spent ten years as a college professor. He’s also one of the world’s foremost authorities on the Klingon language. A few years back he started Paper Golem, a speculative fiction small press aimed at serving the niche of up-and-coming new authors as well as providing a market for novellas. In 2007 he was nominated for the John W. Campbell Award for best new writer and in 2010 received a Hugo nomination for best short story. He’s the author Guest of Honor at Lunacon next weekend (March 18-20, 2011), where he’ll have a book launch for his second novel, BUFFALITO CONTINGENCY. (I’m just a regular guest, but I am on at least one panel with him!).

Lawrence, Do you enjoy conventions and do you advise authors to attend them?

LAWRENCE M. SCHOEN: I love conventions! Most of my friends are either authors or fans (or both) and they’re scattered all over. Conventions are often my only opportunity to see them and catch up. It’s become trite to talk about how writing is such a solitary experience and how only other authors can really relate to the tribulations of the life, but the reason it’s trite is because there’s so much truth in it. It’s incredibly comforting to settle in with other writers and listen as they share their own joys and complaints and be reminded that it’s actually a kind of club.

Back in my psychology days, I attended research conferences for much the same set of reasons. One of my graduate professors, a brilliant scholar named Thaddeus Cowan — the only person I know to have invented a new impossible figure! — told me that that when it comes to conferences and conventions you’re looking for three things: 1) meet up with an old friend, 2) make a new friend, and 3) come away with a fresh idea. If you do any two, it’s a good event, and if you manage all three, it’s great. Most conventions I’ve been to, I’ve been lucky enough to hit all three, over and over again.

Having said that, I don’t think every author should attend conventions. Conventions aren’t a one-size-fits-all kind of thing. I’m an extravert, a big guy with a loud voice. Having been a professor for ten years, I’m very comfortable standing in front of a room full of people and telling everyone what I think about something, at length. I’m completely at home in that kind of setting, but I know people who can’t abide crowds, let alone being trapped in a room with a bunch of loud people with big egos. Fortunately, it doesn’t have to be an either/or kind of thing. I think you can be very successful as a writer without stepping into the spotlight and bloviating. A shyer author can attend a convention, hang out in the background and chat quietly with other authors and fans, attend functions and make connections. There’s plenty of room for variety, and even people like me get tired and calm down eventually and welcome a quiet conversation before the day’s out.

VENTRELLA: You are known in large part for your promotion and publication of Klingon translations of Shakespeare and other works. What led you to the interest in the language?

SCHOEN: I’ve always been fascinated with languages. I’m not necessarily particularly talented at them — it’s not like I have a great ear for languages, or learn them quickly, I just enjoy them. My academic expertise is in psycholinguistics. I stumbled into Klingon with the right set of skills at the beginning of the internet explosion. So I was in the right place at the right time. Traditionally, the two things that hinder any language, natural or constructed, are 1) time, and 2) distance. I became immersed in Klingon at the precise moment when these factors ceased to be an issue, when the technology and expertise allowed real time communication with people almost anywhere in the world, something that other constructed languages hadn’t previously enjoyed. It was like being on a linguistic rollercoaster, and the ride’s been going nonstop for twenty years!

VENTRELLA: You also established a small press company called “Paper Golem” a few years ago. What led you to that decision?

SCHOEN: I’m extraordinarily lucky. I have a good job that pays me a decent wage for part time work. That leaves me free to do things like write. A few years ago some members of Codex (an online community of writers) were kicking around ideas for generating more group identity, and I offered to edit a reprint anthology for them. When I looked at the numbers, I realized it wasn’t that much more time and money to set myself up to do additional books as it was to do just that one book. Basically, I was in a position to commit an act of “paying it forward” and that’s how Paper Golem came about. It’s not intended to make a lot of money. The goals of the press are much more modest. I’m very happy to have a book break even, and anything extra gets folded into the next project. We’ve put out four books to date, with another one due in May. And the last book, ALEMBICAL 2, has an original novella that’s up for a Nebula Award. As you can imagine I’m feeling pretty chuffed about that.

VENTRELLA: What works have you released through Paper Golem that have impressed you?

SCHOEN: We have two “series” that we do. First, I’m committed to providing a venue for novellas, because there aren’t a lot of places where you can sell a story that’s in the 20K – 40K word range, particularly if you’re not a Big Name Author. That’s what ALEMBICAL is for. Second, I like the idea of doing single author collections for writers who are producing incredible stories but haven’t yet written and sold a novel. These are authors who deserve to be read, who deserve to have their work gathered in one place so that potential readers can find them and be delighted. Our first single author collection was for Cat Rambo, and it’s absolutely beautiful. The next one, which I’m finishing up even now, is by Eric James Stone, and contains a novelette that’s also just been nominated for a Nebula Award. It’s incredibly satisfying to work with such talented authors who are going to transform this field as they progress through their careers.

VENTRELLA: Has Paper Golem been the success you hoped?

SCHOEN: Absolutely, particularly because (and this may be the same mindset that originally set me on the road of being an academician) I don’t measure success in terms of how much money is produced. Paper Golem is bringing quality fiction to print, and if you love reading good science fiction and fantasy then there really isn’t a higher mark to hit.

VENTRELLA: What does a small press offer than the larger publishing houses cannot?

SCHOEN: The ability to take chances. The opportunity to work with authors as a labor of love without having to justify it to the accountant. There are tradeoffs, of course. Would I love to publish a best seller? Sure. More sales would mean more money to do more books, but it would also mean reaching more people and introducing them to authors they might not have otherwise found. Don’t get me wrong, I love big presses, and I love what they do. But small presses serve a different niche. Small presses are all about the long tail, the specialized market. For Paper Golem that’s novella-length fiction and newer authors, and seriously, that’s not all that specialized. Somewhere I’m sure there’s a small press that is specialized to serve the reading desires of people who want nothing but humorous SF stories about talking, vampire cats solving computer crime in space. Hmm… I wonder if anyone has a novella about that…

VENTRELLA: What bugs you most about the publishing industry and what would you change about it if you could?

SCHOEN: Lately I’ve become more and more upset about the economics and how that drives what publishing does. I’ve seen author friends who are working on series get dropped by their publishers because while the series is profitable, it’s not as profitable as hoped, so the author has to change publishers, and in effect end their series (the big exception to this being Carrie Vaugh) because what new publisher would want to pick up a series with book #5 when the rights to books #1 through #4 are tied up elsewhere? I understand that publishing is a business, and it would be criminally naive to imagine otherwise, but I don’t read because doing so puts money in some editor’s pocket or employs a proof reader or marketing department; I read because I enjoy what a given author creates.

VENTRELLA: Who do you like to read for pleasure?

SCHOEN: I read anything by Walter Jon Williams, Karl Schroeder, Daniel Abraham, China Mieville. I go on binges where I’ll read everything I can get by a particular author that I’ve stumbled over or rediscovered in my library, and I’ll keep tearing through all of that author’s work for a while until I’m sated and have to come up for air. Last year I devoured books by the late Kage Baker. Right now I’m in the middle of Michael Chabon.

VENTRELLA: How has your background as a psychologist influenced your work?

SCHOEN: I trained as a researcher, and so everything comes back to a question. Everything gets turned into a testable hypothesis. Why does the character do X. What happens if the bad guy is thwarted by removing Y from his path. What are the systematic variables that can affect the outcome? This kind of worldview permeates not just my fiction, but also my daily wife. It drives my wife nuts!

VENTRELLA: How did you come up with the concept of The Amazing Conroy?

SCHOEN: Some years back I was enrolled in the two week workshop that James Gunn offers out of the University of Kansas. It was the last night; we were done. Everyone had gathered and in a celebratory mood, and this line of dialogue just popped into my head and right out of my mouth without any control. It was “Put down the buffalo dog and step away from the bar!”

As soon as I said the room went quiet and everyone was staring at me. I had no idea what it meant or where it had come from, but I vowed to one day write a story with that line. It took years, but then, one day, I found myself writing “Buffalo Dogs.” At the time, I had no idea it was going to lead to another quarter million words and a branded identity.

VENTRELLA: There seems to be a theme in much of speculative fiction about super-humans – the “chosen one” who has special powers no one else has who is the subject of a prophecy to save the world blah blah blah. Of course, that’s an old theme going back forever. The main characters in my books are just normal guys who do their best, make mistakes, yet win in the end, and you have the same attitude in your work. So why do these kinds of characters appeal to you?

SCHOEN: I blame Thornton Wilder. I had to read a lot of his stuff back in high school, and he spent a fair amount of time championing the “every man.” Ordinary people finding themselves in extraordinary circumstances are much easier for a reader to relate to than someone who is superhuman in extraordinary circumstances. Most of us are never going to be James Bond, but we very well could be the guy who lives in the apartment next door to him (of course it’s not his real apartment, just one he keeps as a cover). I like protagonists who aren’t jaded by the chaos and adventure of their lives, but rather are dragged into it by surprise, kicking all the way.

VENTRELLA: Of what work are you most proud?

SCHOEN: The answer to that is constantly changing, because I’m constantly changing as a writer. I’m very happy with the new novel, and I think it represents a new high point in my ability to craft a complex story and tell an entertaining tale. There’s a short story I wrote a while back that came out in January of last year and that I secretly (well, not so secretly now) harbor an unlikely hope that it will make the Hugo ballot. It’s called “The Wrestler and the Spearfisher” and it’s one of my infrequent jaunts into Fantasy.

VENTRELLA: What is your writing process? Do you outline heavily, for instance?

SCHOEN: I’m constantly changing how I work, trying new things. Nowadays, I’m trying to get better at blocking out the scenes in a story or novel before I do too much of the writing. I’m somewhat transitioning from being a seat-of-the-pants writer (what some like to call a “discovery writer”) to an outliner, but I suspect I’m going to stop far short of the end. I’m enjoying knowing more about a work before I sit down to write it though. It’s very different from the way I used to work. But will it last? We’ll just have to see.

VENTRELLA: What advice would you give to a starting author that you wish someone had given you? What is the biggest mistake you see aspiring authors make?

SCHOEN: Problems in Perspective. There are always going to be bigger fish, and if you constantly compare your attainments to them, you’re always going to make yourself miserable. Keep a perspective on things and don’t view this business as a zero-sum game. Instead, if you have to be competitive, compete with yourself. Are you further along now than you were at this time last year? Is your prose improving? Are your plots more involved? Work on improving yourself, rather than trying to be as good as someone else. You’ll get there sooner, and you’ll be happier along the way.

16

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment »

Interview with author Joel Rosenberg

Posted on October 13, 2010 by Michael A. Ventrella

MICHAEL A. VENTRELLA: I’m pleased to be interviewing Joel Rosenberg today. His first published fiction, “Like the Gentle Rains”, appeared in Isaac Asimov’s Science Fiction Magazine in 1982. The following year, he published his first novel, THE SLEEPING DRAGON which was the first in his long-running Guardians of the Flame series. The “Keepers of the Hidden Ways” trilogy similarly places people from the real world into a fantasy setting, making heavy use of Norse mythology. He’s also written in a number of other genres.

I remember reading THE SLEEPING DRAGON when it was first released, and thinking “Oh, this is interesting; a group of gamers who get sucked into another world where they must actually play their characters for real.” A few years later, I helped to found one of the first major fantasy LARPs in America. Coincidence? I think not.

JOEL ROSENBERG: 🙂

VENTRELLA: Anyway, my question is this: It became clear very soon in THE SLEEPING DRAGON that this was no cute little adventure when (spoiler alert) one of the main characters dies fairly quickly. Further books in the Guardian of the Flame series also had no problem handing death to characters we have followed and loved for years. Was there anything specific you were trying to say by doing this?

ROSENBERG: Yup. What I was trying to say, explicitly, is that innocence is no shield, and that I wasn’t using any Plot Armor on my characters. Two reasons: 1. I think that makes a story more entertaining, and 2. I think it’s an important truth, for real life.

At the moment, we’re wrapping up a horrible experience — in mid-August, my wife, Felicia Herman, was falsely arrested and maliciously charged with domestic abuse of our sixteen-year-old daughter, Rachel, and it wasn’t her utter innocence — and I want to be clear: she didn’t do anything wrong, or unlawful — that caused the charges to be dropped just over a week ago, but damn good lawyering by our attorney, David Gross.

It could, absent David, easily have gone the other way.

VENTRELLA: In retrospect, do you think this willingness to kill your characters off has strengthened the popularity of your books or hurt it?

ROSENBERG: I dunno. If I had to guess, I think it’s probably hurt the popularity, but there’s so many other factors in publishing that it’s hard to say what causes any success … or failure, for that matter.

VENTRELLA: Do you have any interest in ever publishing another book in the Guardian of the Flames series?

ROSENBERG: I have to write one; that’s part of my deal with Walter Slovotsky for his collaboration on the nonfiction book in progress, FAMILY MATTERS II: GREENER’S LAW. (see http://familymattersii.com/.) Whether or not somebody publishes it isn’t my call, but I expect that the next Guardians book will find a publisher. First, though, I’ve got to finish FMII.

VENTRELLA: How were you able to sell your first book?

ROSENBERG: It was pretty straightforward. I got an agent; the agent submitted it all around; Sheila Gilbert (then at NAL) made an offer.

VENTRELLA: It has been a long time since your last published work. What happened? What have you been doing?

ROSENBERG: Firearms instruction, tech writing, political activism — you’ll find a lot about it in fmii. It’s been . . . interesting, in a Chinese Curse sense. Never thought I’d walk into Streichers — a local cop shop — and say, “Wayne, I need you to fit me out with body armor. Now.” But I did. Some of the stuff that’s been happening lately is kind of, well, close to the edge.

VENTRELLA: What clichés do you see in the fantasy genre that you hate? How do you avoid them?

ROSENBERG: I try, really hard, not to see cliches. That said, the society that seems to consist solely of muscular warriors, voluptuous barmaids/peasant girls, and evil minor nobility bugs me, so I try to avoid it.

VENTRELLA: You’ve also written science fiction and mysteries. Is there a genre you enjoy above all others?

ROSENBERG: Nah. There’s books I’ve enjoyed writing more than others — writing HOME FRONT was an utter joy, and both of the Guardians Road books had their moments, although I think they cut too close to the bone, personally.

VENTRELLA: What techniques do you use to make sure your characters are realistic and believable?

ROSENBERG: Let me give you two honest answers: 1. All of them. 2. Damned if I know. I don’t mean to be flip, although I don’t mind, but I don’t care if my characters are realistic; I care, to the point of pain, that they’re believable.

VENTRELLA: How do you prepare? Do you outline heavily?

ROSENBERG: Nah. From my POV, an outline is something an agent uses to sell a book that hasn’t been written. That’s a noble endeavor, honest, but it has nothing to do with how I write. (Dave Drake, a writer who I respect tremendously, outlines extensively; I’m not knocking the practice at all. So do Pournelle and Niven, when they collaborate.) Feist and I wrote an outline, kinda, for MURDER IN LaMUT, and then when I took my crack at the first draft, I avoided it. Well, no, that’s not true; I more bent it over a table and violated it.

VENTRELLA: A common theme in your work has to do with freedom, and the consequences (good and bad) that can come from it. What is in your background that makes you interested in this theme?

ROSENBERG: Child abuse. Receiving end. Not that that’s a secret to anybody who has read my books and noticed some similarities to, and some obvious attempts to rewrite, my own family history. (When my sister Dale read D’Shai, she wrote me: “I love it. I didn’t even mind the part where I died.”) Truth is, I’m the dog who has been beat too much, and have been, for more than forty years; writing is one of the ways I deal with it. So, for that matter, is the political activism.

Sorry about the answer, but, hey, you asked. 🙂

VENTRELLA: I always liked the idea in the Guardians series that despite the fact the main characters were the “heroes” they still had problems being elected the leaders. Do you find this a fault or a strength of democracy?

ROSENBERG: All in all, I think that a public who elects heroes is looking for trouble, and will find it. Heroes work best as dictators — temporary ones; see Cincinnatus, or, for that matter, Churchill, or Rudy G. — and then it’s best to put them back behind the glass, with the big sign that says, “In case of emergency, break glass”, and make sure that they can’t break the glass from inside.

VENTRELLA: Do you think that being a successful author has more to do with skills that can be taught, or is it more something more intangible?

ROSENBERG: Neither. I think it has to do with skills that can be learned, as opposed to being taught. On the FMII site, I’ve got partial list of my teachers, and I’ve learned a tremendous amount from all of them.

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

Interview with author Allen Wold

Posted on September 24, 2010 by Michael A. Ventrella

MICHAEL A. VENTRELLA: I’m pleased to be interviewing Allen Wold today. Allen Wold has published nine novels, several short stories (mostly for the Elf Quest anthologies), five non-fiction books on computers, and a number of articles, columns, reviews, and so forth, also concerning computers. He is a member of SFWA and teaches writing.

ALLEN WOLD: Many people have complimented me by assuming that I teach writing classes, at NC State or somewhere. I am not associated with any college, or university, or even a high school. The only “classes” I teach are my writing workshops, which I do at science fiction conventions. Because of people’s comments, I have begun to think of myself as a teacher, and I am quite flattered that people think of me as one. I do have some ideas about how writing can be “taught,” and about college courses in “creative writing” (Manley Wade Wellman said that “creative writing” is redundant, all writing is creative), but some of these are best saved for private conversation. There are, and have been, some excellent writing teachers in various colleges and universities, teachers who’s stories you can read in magazines, or who’s books you can buy in bookstores. But I am not one of them.

VENTRELLA: How did you first get published? Did you have an agent?

WOLD: I did have an agent. I no longer remember the exact details, I was sending my first novel THE PLANET MASTERS around over the transom. Sharon Jarvis, then fiction editor at Playboy if I remember correctly, suggested two agents to me. I picked one, Lea Braff, and she agreed to represent it. At this time, I had no knowledge of submission protocols, and it probably showed. Lea sold my book to St. Martin’s Press, and after some fluffling around in the editorial department, it finally came out in 1972.

VENTRELLA: How has the publishing industry changed since you entered it?

It has changed a lot, but I’m not really qualified to talk about that. I do not study the industry, and what I have seen, has been seen by many. So many imprints now being owned buy umbrella companies (pun intended); restriction or elimination of non-agented submissions; agents themselves taking new clients only by introduction; and, fortunately, the rise of the small independent publisher.

I felt many years ago, that the small press would, or should, or could become more important, to the average fiction writer, than the large houses, and nothing I have seen so far changes my mind about that. Some small presses lack editing skills, distribution, or money, but some have all of that and more. Big publishing is dominated by the marketing departments of the various houses, rather than by the editors. Sol Stein, one of the founders of Stein and Day, complains about that in his own company. But small presses are usually not subject to their accountants. Baen is probably the largest “small press” in the business, and the publisher, Toni Weisskopf, and her editor in chief, Hank Davis, make their own decisions. At least, that’s how I understand it, I’m sure Toni will correct me if I’m wrong.

My point here being that big publishing, it seems to me, is less concerned with books than with moving product — books or fried chicken, whatver, let’s just sell a lot. I’m not the first to think that.

VENTRELLA: How much should a writer consider the market when deciding what to write?

WOLD: Being aware of the market is essential. If you know, for example, that nobody is publishing paranormal erotica (they are, oh yes they are), and that’s what you want to write, then you have to be prepared to struggle to find a publisher, or perhaps make your story seem more like a similar genre which is being published. I don’t like that idea. Not too long ago, cross-genre work just couldn’t make it. Now it hardly matters. I suppose Lovcraftian Romance (in the sense of a story of love, as opposed to the original idea of a work of fiction) might be a hard sell, and I don’t know if anybody has tried it. Or would even want to. I could be wrong. Anime hentai tentacles…?

But if you devote too much energy to trying to figure out what is going to be popular two to three years down the line, you’ll always be wrong, and you’ll be wasting your time. Right now, paranormal romance is, in fact, doing quite well. And if you write one, just because it is doing well, by the time the book is written, and submitted, and rejected and resubmitted, it may no longer be so popular. Or it might be. But you’re worrying about anticipating a market, rather than about writing your story. If your story is good enough, somebody will take it, even if it is a bit difficult to find its place on a bookstore’s shelves.

So yes, be aware of the market, but don’t write for the market. Write what you have to write. Write a book that you’d like to read. You may start a trend. More likely you won’t, but hey, there are no guarantees in this business. None.

VENTRELLA: Do you think the emphasis on e-books is going to help the individual author?

WOLD: How can it hurt? Every sale is a sale. The more readers a writer has, the better. Several publishers, Baen for example, offer e-book versions of their hard-copy books, usually at a discount. Their cost is minimal, their profit margin is high, distribution costs them only download expenses, which is nothing compared to paper, ink, printing, trimming, binding, and so on. I’m not talking about reading books on line, but buying e-copies which you can read on your computer or your Kindle or Nook or iPad or whatever. These are actual sales, you own the book. It’s just not on paper. And the more people who read you —

Well, you have to have a good story to tell, and you have to tell a good story (not the same thing), or it doesn’t matter what format you’re in. Bad fiction goes nowhere (though some of it does get published, see Pel Toro for example). Good fiction gets found out, and is read. E-publication is something I’m keeping in mind for some of my projects, but not all. As is going with a small independent press. But never vanity, that’s a waste. If you have to pay for it, become your own press. It’s a lot cheaper.

VENTRELLA: What techniques do you use to make sure your characters are realistic and believable?

WOLD: I don’t use techniques. I use my ever increasing understanding of human nature and behavior. I watch people constantly, not deliberately most of the time, but automatically. Everybody I meet becomes a part of that compost heap in the back of my head, from which characterization (not characters) is drawn. Everything my characters do is what I have observed real people do (though I couldn’t tell you who is the model, or how many models there are), it’s the way real people behave.

Once a character begins to reveal himself, or herself, or itself to me, my task is to make sure that that behavior is consistent. One of my main gripes with the second version of Star Trek was that developed characters frequently acted out of character. Also true of the TV series V (the original, not the remake). That destroys a story for me.

I discover my characters, or at least, those that work. I discovered Larson McCade, Morgan Scott, Rikard Braeth, Freefoot, and all their supporting characters. I didn’t actually create them per se. And once I got to know them, it wasn’t that hard to portray them as they were, rather than make them go out of character for the sake of the plot.

Larson McCade, from THE PLANET MASTERS, is instructive. The story came to me in a flash of inspiration (lasting about two hours) while I was walking across the UNC-CH campus. But who would be my hero (or anti-hero, as it turned out)? I thought, what if I based McCade on myself, but on my darker self, the aspects of myself that I would never let anybody see, never allow myself to express, the shadow-me. Badly done with Spiderman, unfortunately. So I did. Since McCade was an aspect of me, I knew him intimately. I didn’t direct him on how to get from one plot point to another, I let him do it, that is, I did what I would do if I were he and in his situation, and I just wrote it down as it happened. Fortunately, I’m not Larson McCade, and we should all be thankful.

It’s taken me a long time to perfect that method, and I’m still working on it. I failed many times between now and this century. I didn’t even know what I was doing when I was doing it right. But I do now. All my Elf Quest characters, though I didn’t understand it at the time, were independent people in my head. I just presented them with problems, and let them solve them.

VENTRELLA: How do you prepare? Do you outline heavily?

WOLD: I used to outline, but not any more. My outlines could be five, ten, twenty pages. For my most recent book (rejected twice so far), I had just three plot points: I had to get here, then there, then somewhere else.

At a convention many years ago, I was on a panel with Fred Pohl. The question of outlines came up, and I said, yes, I use an outline, like a road map, or a blueprint. Some people said they hated outlines, because then they were trapped. I couldn’t understand that. Just because it’s in my outline doesn’t mean I have to do it. They said they wanted to be surprised. I felt like I didn’t want to be surprised if, without a blueprint, I discovered that I’d left out a door, or a bathroom. That has actually happened to people I know, with real houses. But Fred Pohl said “I used to outline, but I don’t any more.” I didn’t understand that either. Now I do. I do not predetermine what is going to happen, what people are going to do, what they are going to talk about. I select destinations. He discovers he’s up against a vampire and decides he has to destroy it but doesn’t know how; he is killed by the vampire and in his spirit form discovers how to destroy it but needs a corporeal body to do it; he finds a body he can take over and does what he has to do. Three points, 80,000 words. Rejected twice. But my vampires don’t sparkle. Dracula didn’t sparkle.

On the other hand, for another novel which hasn’t been rejected yet, I had a list of 198 scenes. Each scene was an objective, not a description. I kept to that “outline” as a form of discipline, and it worked. Each scene had a viewpoint character, fifty two in all, and each character was, in my mind, a real person. Sometimes the scene description was something like: Riding in the back seat, the little girl sees the blue lights around the house. Now, what happens? Well, I wrote the scene, and all the others, and we’ll see what happens.

How do I prepare? I need my main character, without which nothing happens. I need my setting, my world, however simple or complex that may be, though I don’t need elaborate details, as I’ll discover more about it later. I need the situation in which my character finds himself, or herself, or itself. (Clumsy, isn’t it? How about themself? Check the OED for the use of they/them as equivalent to “he or she.”) I need to know what my character wants. And I have to know what I, as the Creator — um, creator — want my ending to be. Luke Skywalker wants off Tatooine, to go to university, and become a pilot. George Lucas wants to destroy the Death Star, and has to lead, not push, Luke to that ending.

Then it happens.

VENTRELLA: What is the biggest misconception beginning writers have about the craft?

WOLD: That they need talent. Talent is nice. Talent makes things easy. But talent is not necessary. There are plenty of writers who do quite well and have no talent to speak of, but who have acquired the necessary skills, and the reader can’t tell the difference. Skill is far more important. Talent is what you are born with. Skill is learned, and you can learn an awful lot. Any writer who has written more than one book improves from book to book (or they don’t, depending on their talent rather than acquiring skill, and it shows). Dorothy L. Sayers first novel, WHOSE BODY, is nicely done, somewhat frivolous, and LORD PETER is definitely silly. By the time she gets to GAUDY NIGHT, she is a master, telling a story that is neither romance nor mystery, but a deep tale of two people caught up in a distressing situation. Lord Peter and Harriet Vane are real people. The book can stand alone. Dorothy L. Sayers’ talent was revealed in her first book. Her extensive skills are shown in her last book. (BUSSMAN’S HONEYMOON is a novelization of her own play, and something of a disappointment.)

There are other essentials, such as making, not finding, time; developing discipline; acquiring patience; and having the dedication to actually do it.

This last is truly important. You cannot become a writer if you don’t write. You must make the decision that you are, in fact, going to do it. You decide to acquire those other essentials, putting other aspects of your life aside, and you write. You read extensively, especially what you like to read (and you should write what you like to read, not what you “ought” to write), but read outside your field too. And read non-fiction, especially biography, history, mythology, archaeology, and anything to do with human nature and behavior.

You may discover you don’t really want to do this after all, that it takes too much effort and time, that it’s too hard, that the rewards aren’t worth it. In which case, give it up with a clean conscience. Many people who take my workshop discover that they don’t really want to be writers after all, and that’s fine. They’re now free of that obsession, and can go on to something else.

VENTRELLA: What is the biggest mistake you see beginning writers make?

See above. But not giving it enough time, thinking there’s an easy way, not listening to competent comment, not reading enough, taking TV as their model. (Oh, yes, that’s a good one. Thinking that science fiction is what you see on TV or in the movies. Thinking that characters are what you see on TV or in the movies. Huge mistake.) Not paying attention to the real world.

All good fiction is based on, and derived from, the real world in some way or another. The most bizarre fantasy has roots in the real world, at least in the way people react to the bizarreness. Also, trying to write SF without understanding science. You don’t have to have degrees, but you must have a basic understanding of how the world really works. And if you don’t know, either stuff it in a black box, or do some research. The old Tom Baker Dr. Who did this extremely well. They did not make mistakes in their science. They either knew how it worked, or they black-boxed it. I was quite impressed.

Another is not checking a publisher’s submission guidelines. Always check the guidelines, and submit that way, whether you like it or not. Do not try to save paper by printing single spaced on both sides of the page. Always use adequate margins, a header with name and title and page number. And so on. You can learn basic submission formatting, most publishers with tell you. Follow the guidelines, or you’ll be rejected out of hand. Really.

VENTRELLA: Some of your novels are currently out of print. Do you have any desire to have them released as e-books? Is that possible?

WOLD: I would love to have them come out in any format. Currently, THE PLANET MASTERS should be released soon in a print on demand format from Warren Lapine’s Wilder Books, but I don’t know when. Contact Warren and ask for it. He may be doing something more.

VENTRELLA: Do you think writers should begin with the short story market?

WOLD: A story is as long as it takes to tell it. If you try to condense an idea to a short story format, it won’t work. If you puff an idea to novel length, it won’t work. The short story market is tight, not counting on-line publication, but it’s still there. You have to do your research. Back in the day, most SF&F writers started with the magazines, back when there were more than five or six national magazines that actually paid money. These days the whole industry is completely different. If you love flash fiction, and write it, that’s what you should try to sell. If you prefer the short story format, there are all kinds of magazines (some pretty bad), and open anthologies to which you can sell. If you prefer novels, say 100,000 words or so, that’s what you should do, though it won’t be easy. Especially if you’re a beginner. I know well established writers who are suddenly being dropped by their publishers, though their books continue to sell. I have no idea why. Maybe because the publishers are more interested in moving product than selling books. I don’t know.

Write what you write, know what the market is, and find the right home. You can not write to a market, it’s too volatile, and your heart won’t be in it.

VENTRELLA: What’s the best resource a writer should use in order to find a market for their short stories?

WOLD: There are two: Ralan and Duotrope .

VENTRELLA: What have you been up to lately? What are you working on now?

WOLD: Lately? Writing, of course. That’s what I do. Every day that I can. I have obligations on Saturdays, and Sundays I try to restore my energy, but otherwise, unless something unavoidable comes up, oh, say, having my gall bladder removed, or like that, I write. Every day. See, I’m writing this today.

And I read, mostly non-fiction. And watch movies, to take me away from my writing rather than for inspiration. And attend to my household management responsibilities (my wife works full time and supports me in every way).

Right now I’m doing a complete rewrite of a book I first wrote in 1990. I learned then the absolute necessity, for me, of having my personal Death Star in mind. I threw away four false starts, totaling about 100,000 words, before I finally asked myself, how do I want this to end? When I had that, everything drove toward that ending, though my hero wanted to do something else.

When we came back from England, in ‘98, I reread it, and it wasn’t very good. I had always wanted to do a character-driven story, instead of a plot-driven story, so I rewrote it, giving my characters free rein. It didn’t sell. Then I reread it again, saw how undisciplined my description and dialog was, and I’m rewriting it from scratch, not revising it, keeping the story as written, but tightening, cleaning up, making my characters internally consistent, cutting out unnecessary description, and tons of bad dialogue. It’s turning out pretty well. But we’ll see. When this draft is done, I’m going to do a new book set in THE EYE IN THE STONE world, then come back to STROAD’S CROSS for a final pass, and try to find a market for it. It’s a haunted village, not a haunted house, forgotten by people who live in the small town a mile away, perfectly preserved for fifty years, abandoned with food on the stove, money in cash registers, toys dropped on the floor. Finding out the truth is what the story is about.

Don’t hold your breath. These things take time.

12068598_10156131026780416_4173342998411499168_o

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment »

To Hell With Outlines!

Posted on September 21, 2010 by Michael A. Ventrella

OK, not really.

But still, the point of today’s blog is to remind myself (and you) that outlines are not straightjackets, but road maps. And it is sometimes very desirable to veer off and take a different, more scenic route to get to your destination.

One of the reasons I started this blog was to discuss what I am learning along the way. I’ve managed to get two novels and a short story published with small publishers, but that hardly makes me a successful author. My writing still isn’t where I’d like it to be, and I am still a student of the craft. (Literally. I’m taking a writing course now.) There’s always something new to learn.

My first two novels were very organized and outlined, as I blogged about a while ago. It was very important for those two, because the plots were like mysteries, where everything had to fit in place to be explained in the end.writing

I didn’t need that kind of complexity for my current project BLOODSUCKERS (about a vampire who runs for President). I made a very simple outline. I wrote a sentence or two with every idea I had for the book and then put them in order. When I was done, I had a list of about sixty items that I felt were necessary. It looked like this:

      Democratic frontrunner finds naked girl in hotel room night before convention; she charms him into jumping off balcony

Reporter Steven Edwards woken by call from editor; turns on TV to watch coverage of the “suicide”

NY Times article about the incident

Edwards travels to convention floor and is shocked to discover that the Virginia delegation is supporting Norman Mark, even the conservatives; becomes suspicious

Hardball episode with discussion about what the Democrats will do; word gets around media that Mark is surging, everyone astounded

Mysterious conversation where powerful businessman says that Mark must be stopped or he’ll “ruin everything” – hires Karl to assassinate him

AP bio of Mark; multi-billionaire computer genius, inherited from immigrant father, never married, educated in Europe, no college, philanthropist

Edwards talks to protesters calling Mark a vampire

Conservative talk shows talk about Mark

Mark accepts nomination, gives amazing and inspiring speech, saying that unlike other politicians, he cannot be bought; pushing a very populist platform

News article about police investigation of suicide after autopsy; no drugs, no suicide note, but no one saw anyone enter the room, video shows him jumping

Interview with woman who wrote book about charisma, looks and (for men) height and how important it is in business and politics, emphasizing how Mark is very charismatic and surrounded by equally charismatic people

Steve is back in Richmond, lamenting how boring his life and job are

Steve appears on local conservative talk radio, caller discusses vampires

Karl plans the assassination, realizes he will need Nick’s help

…And so on (as Kurt would say).

I skipped a few of those points when I realized they slowed the story down too much. About ten points later on in the outline turned out to only comprise one chapter.

And even though I was following my outline, I was not satisfied.

My original idea was very political, about corruption in politics and whether we would be willing to accept an evil vampire as President if he was going to do good things. Originally, my main character Steve was to learn of the real existence of vampires at the end of Act One, and would then spend the rest of the book trying to prove that the Presidential candidate is one. But as I continued, I became less and less attracted to that idea. It just wasn’t enough fun. There wasn’t enough adventure. Where was the action? Where was the thrill?

So I suddenly moved an important assassination scene that originally had been scheduled for near the end of the book to the end of Act One.  But even that wasn’t enough. Then the idea hit for Steve to be framed for the assassination by other vampires out to get the candidate.

Now we’re talking.

This pushed the novel into high gear. It went from a humorous political satire to an action-paced thriller with political undertones. Much more exciting!

And that outline? Well, it’s still there but it’s all out of order, and a lot of new plot points have been added. The destination is still the same — I know exactly how it’s going to end — but now I am coming up with something more.

And that wouldn’t have happened if I had remained glued to my original outline.

So my lesson this time is simple: Definitely outline, but never be afraid to toss it out the window if something better comes along!

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , | Leave a comment »

Interview with author Dennis Tafoya

Posted on June 11, 2010 by Michael A. Ventrella

MICHAEL A. VENTRELLA: I’m pleased to be interviewing author Dennis Tafoya today, whose latest novel THE WOLVES OF FAIRMOUNT PARK has just been released. His first novel, DOPE THIEF, was published by Minotaur Books in 2009. His short story “Above the Imperial” will appear in Philadelphia Noir, coming from Akashic Books in November as part of their award-winning City Noir series. He is a member of the Mystery Writers of America, the International Thriller Writers, and the Liars Club, a Philadelphia-area writers group. He lives in Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

Dennis, let’s begin by talking about how you first got started. What got you interested in being a writer?

DENNIS TAFOYA: Writing is something I’ve always done. When I was nine I wrote a story about a monster with my friend Keith Parker. We thought it was pretty good, but looking back I have to admit it was basically a rip-off of an episode of the TV show, One Step Beyond. I associate my love of writing with a love of reading, and my early stuff was very much influenced by the science fiction and horror authors I loved when I was young, like Ray Bradbury and Robert Bloch and Harlan Ellison. I would still like to write something in a paranormal or horror vein, and I still think those authors are amazing.

VENTRELLA: Do you think starting authors should concentrate on perfecting short stories first? Do you feel the skills needed for novels is different?

TAFOYA: That’s a really interesting question, and I’ve never thought about short story writing as a prerequisite for the aspiring novelist. I know people who are very comfortable in the long form who really don’t like writing short stories, and short story writers who really struggle with the requirements of the novel. I think the best novel chapters are frequently short stories in themselves, though, and trying to master the short story can teach the writer a ton about tight control on the elements of story.

I love writing short stories — I’ve got a bunch of them out or coming out in the next few months, and I’m really proud that I’ve got a story in upcoming Philadelphia Noir from Akashic Books. I did write shorts before I tried a novel, I think to show myself that I could write a complete story. It’s also a lot easier to find a home for a short story because of the explosion of story sites on the web. I frequently advise my aspiring writer friends to take advantage of those sites, both to get work out there and get reactions, and as a way to meet people who are writing in your genre, too.

Actually, my only creative writing teacher was a poet, and I think writing poetry is an excellent path to writing fiction. Writing good poetry requires a brutal discipline, and it kind of distills the tension that should be present in all good writing to a very fine point. Poetry teaches an awareness of rhythm and word choice, too. I think making demands on ourselves as writers is the only way to get better at what we do.

VENTRELLA: Why did you decide to be a “crime writer”? What sort of background do you bring to the genre?

TAFOYA: Oh, not much other than a deep interest in crime. The threads that inform my work are literary fiction and true crime, I think. I have a few relatives with a little Damon Runyon quality to thier lives, but mostly the characters in my novels and stories are out of my imagination, applied to what I’ve read and heard about criminals and the criminal life. I’ve been lucky to know police officers and prosecutors and defense lawyers, and I’ve gotten some amazing things out of those associations, but I’m pretty boring and middle class personally. I think that’s a little disappointing to people who meet me, and I was thinking I should get some tattoos or something to sell the image a little more.

VENTRELLA: What kind of research do you do when preparing a story?

TAFOYA: I’m a fiend for research. I want to get the details right, and I want to write about those worlds as well as I can. I did a ton of research for both DOPE THIEF and WOLVES OF FAIRMOUNT PARK. I read, go to the library and spend thousands of hours on the internet trying to learn the things I want to know.

The cool thing is that research itself can generate new story ideas and take me in directions I wouldn’t have thought to move. Reading about crime in Philly for WOLVES OF FAIRMOUNT PARK, I stumbled on stories about ‘hoppers,’ kids who ride freight trains and live in squats in the city. So I added a couple of hopper characters to the novel, and the stuff I’ve learned is tucked away in my brain in case I want to spend more time developing characters or stories that involve that world.

VENTRELLA: Do you like being called “hard boiled”? What the heck does that mean, anyway?

TAFOYA: I’m not entirely sure. I guess it’s fiction with a gritty edge. I don’t mind the label, but I hope it doesn’t keep people away who might enjoy the books but who think my work might be too intense. My stories are character-driven, and while the stories do involve violence and drug use, I really want to arouse the interest and sympathy of the reader, not shock or alienate anyone. I write about people who struggle in the margins, who live compromised lives but who are still smart and aware and want more from life than their roles would suggest. I hope people recognize themselves, at least a little, in characters like Orlando in WOLVES or Ray in DOPE THIEF.

VENTRELLA: How did you interest a publisher in your first novel?

TAFOYA: I was extraordinarily lucky. Basically, a very nice woman from California, a writer and producer named Cori Stern, took an interest in my work and started me toward publication. She introduced me to her manager, Brooke Ehrlich, who agreed to represent me. Brooke found me an amazing literary agent, Alex Glass of Trident Media, who sold the book to Minotaur. It was all so painless I feel guilty when I hear other writers tell me about trying for years to find representation and get their work in front of editors. Like Blanche Dubois, I depended on the kindness of strangers, but it went much better for me than for Blanche.

VENTRELLA: THE DOPE THIEF was released first in hardcover. Why was that decision made? Do you think it was the right decision?

TAFOYA: It’s been Minotaur’s decision to release both books in harcover. I’m still a little worried that, times being what they are that people will balk at the price, but I have to trust that my publishers know what they’re doing. I think there is more interest and attention aimed at hardcovers, but there is that price issue, too. It’s a tremendous vote of confidence from Minotaur and my editor, but I feel a huge responsibility for it all to go well.

VENTRELLA: Let’s talk about characters. The best and most memorable are flawed in some way yet believable. What sort of process do you take when developing your characters? How do you make sure they don’t turn cliche?

TAFOYA: Trying to avoid cliche is one of my major preoccupations, in my characters, in the plot and in the prose itself. My aim is to write something readers haven’t seen before, but that delivers a satisfying experience and engages them emotionally. It’s a lot to try to accomplish, but I think I’m a better writer for at least moving in those directions.

I’m really only interested in characters who are deeply compromised. Maybe because I see myself that way, maybe because people who are self-contained, capable and sort of unassailable are cyphers to me. I don’t know many people like that in real life, either. Good writing is about tension, and I think that tension between the way we live and the way we want to live is what generates story in a really interesting and organic way.

VENTRELLA: Also difficult is making unsavory characters appealing to a reader. What do you find works best?

TAFOYA: I think some degree of self-knowledge is the key. My characters are drug addicts and criminals, but their awareness of themselves and the gap between what they want for themselves and the lives they lead is something we can all identify with. In DOPE THIEF, the main character is trying to figure out where things went wrong for him and whether he can get to a better life that’s about connection and engagement with his own best impulses. You don’t have to be a criminal to feel that way.

VENTRELLA: What is your writing style? Do you outline heavily, jump right in, start at the end…?

TAFOYA: I outline very briefly and generally, a couple of pages. I find so much in the writing that I don’t want to limit myself. The story will demand it’s own level of planning, too. WOLVES was a mystery, and there are logistical issues that need to be worked out with a little precision when you’re working on that kind of project, but I always find new characters or new ideas, so my sense of the story remains pretty fluid. I do have an image or scene that I’m writing toward, usually, a kind of state I want things to be in at the end. That’s pretty important for me.

VENTRELLA: WOLVES was bought by your publisher based on a one sentence synposis, about a heroin addict trying to solve a mystery. Did that provide a challenge? Are you pleased with the result?

TAFOYA: I don’t know what I was thinking promising to write a mystery. I have so much respect for writers who can deliver those on a regular basis! I’m really glad I did it, and I’m pleased that the book is getting good reviews, but it was a real challenge. It stretched me in new ways, and not just because of the requirements of the mystery form. I knew I was going to have to plan much more extensively, create red herrings and keep control of the way information is revealed, but I was also working for the first time with multiple viewpoints and a much larger palette. It was pretty ambitious, and I can’t tell you how relieved I am that the book is getting good reactions.

VENTRELLA: WOLVES also deals with the seedy underbelly of Philadelphia. What is it about Philly that makes it unique to your stories? Could your fiction work in any other place?

TAFOYA: I was asked that in another interview recently, and I’ve been thinking about how Philadelphia and its characters might be unique. I’ve spent a lot of time in New York and Washington and some other places and I can say people in each of those places really seem different to me. I recently set a short story in Vegas that dealt with characters from the west, and I think the speech patterns, the way people engage one another, reflect a slower pace and sometimes a little more recalcitrance than the people I know here. My friends and relatives from Philly talk fast and loud and share different kinds of information. We’re on display in a way that a guy from rural Nevada might not be.

Another thing I think is interesting is that here in Philly we’re more rooted to the place we live. In my family we used to joke about that, about our relatives who thought they needed a passport to leave South Philly. We’re defined by neighborhoods, by where we grew up and where our families live. Our accents are very specific and we’re very conscious of class and income. My relatives from Oregon Avenue regarded the Main Line as a different planet.

VENTRELLA: Can we expect your third novel to do the same?

TAFOYA: I’m working (very slowly) on a new novel dealing with little criminals from South Jersey. It’s an excuse to do a ton more research, of course, and to spend time in the area getting to know the places and reading local papers, eating in the diners. Research like that is always fun and it always yields really interesting stuff, some of which might actually make it into the book.

VENTRELLA: And finally, what advice would you give the aspiring writer that isn’t obvious (“write better”)?

TAFOYA: Find other writers. I meet people who have been working alone on novels for years, hoping to finish that novel or screenplay, or endlessly refining work they’ve already done. Meeting other people who are doing the same thing you are will help you gain confidence, it will get you help and advice, and it will hopefully let you get reactions from people who are engaged in the same work. Your friends and family might be really supportive, but they’re rarely able to help you get better at your craft or help you find ways to get your work in front of readers or agents or editors. Your best bet is to meet other writers. I think you’ll find, like I have, that writers are extemely generous and supportive. Nearly all of the great things that have happened to me have been because other writers went out of their way to help me or give me advice.

Tafoya

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Interview with Author and Editor Cecilia Tan

Posted on May 4, 2010 by Michael A. Ventrella

MICHAEL A. VENTRELLA: I’m pleased to be interviewing Cecilia Tan today. Cecilia has been writing and editing professionally for the better part of two decades, both independently and for the small press she founded in 1992, Circlet Press, who specialize in material that mixes the erotic with the fantastic. She has written numerous erotic romances for Ravenous Romance, has edited anthologies for Alyson Books, Thunder’s Mouth Press, Carroll & Graf, Masquerade Books, Blue Moon Books, and others, and collections of her short stories have been published by HarperCollins and Running Press. On top of all that, she also writes and edits publications on baseball.

Cecilia, What brought about the founding of Circlet Press?

CECILIA TAN: I had written a story called “Telepaths Don’t Need Safewords” and just knew at the time I finished it that it was the best story I had written to date. It mixed explicitly kinky erotic action with a science fiction plot. Then I looked around for somewhere to submit it. There was nowhere. Science fiction magazines had explicit rules against sexual content. Porn magazines had explicit rules against both science fiction and any plot beyond “two people meet, then have sex.” The BDSM magazines of the time were either exclusively lesbian or exclusively gay, and my characters were neither. I had been working in book publishing for a few years at that point so I knew the business and I thought “this is nuts. Someone has to do this!” And of course that someone ended up being me.

VENTRELLA: Has it met your expectations?

TAN: Circlet Press has met all my hopes and dreams except for the financial one. We grew by leaps and bounds, garnered fabulous critical acclaim, excellent notice, a great reputation, helped to blow the doors off the old restrictions and show how good mixing the genres could be, jumpstarted the careers of a whole generation of writers … but once the Returns Crisis hit the book publishing industry in the late 1990s, it’s been a financial uphill battle ever since. I’m too stubborn to quit, though, and the ebook has suddenly allowed us to start reaching the readership that mainstream bookstores abandoned. So all of a sudden, there’s some cash flow! Who knows? Maybe someday we’ll turn a profit. What’s most important to me is that we’re still able to connect authors to readers, and then put money back in the pocket of the authors. That part of the business is the same as always … in fact, it’s better.

VENTRELLA: There are many examples of small press these days; do you think this is good for the publishing industry or does it tend to water down the field?

TAN: Oh no. It’s the mainstream presses, not the small presses, who are the most watered down. That’s where you’ll find the most mediocre, recycled pap being packaged and put on the shelf. Granted, it’s not 100% the fault of the big publishers — it’s also the fault of the buyers at Borders and Barnes & Noble, who just want the same thing over and over again, in the hopes that what sold before will sell again. They are all chasing the book equivalent of the Top 40 radio hit and making a lot of boring noise in the process. The small presses are more directly connected with the readership and what they actually want. The small presses occupy the specialty niches.

Another way to look at it is with a comparison to restaurants. The big presses are the chain restaurants. They’re Applebee’s and the Olive Garden and Budweiser. The small presses are that great little gourmet Italian restaurant in your neighborhood, and handcrafted microbrews.

Small presses are also the minor leagues, but for the most part the authors being published in the small press aren’t any less talented than the ones in the mainstream press. They are sometimes less experienced, or less marketable, or just less lucky.

VENTRELLA: As a small press author, I thank you for that!

Has the rise of self-publishing been good for the business?

TAN: Absolutely.

VENTRELLA: When acting as an editor, what is it you look for? What will immediately get a story chucked in the trash?

TAN: The first thing I tell my assistant editors when its time to read the slush pile is DO NOT read the cover letter until after you read the story. Far too many authors think that the job of a short story cover letter is to build you up into a froth of excitement about how great the story is going to be, thus ensuring that a) you’ll be let down, and b) any suspense or joy of discovery in the story has been killed for the reader. I think many amateur writers are confused about the difference between submitting a short story and pitching a novel proposal to an agent or editor, and some just can’t imagine that all they should introduce in the letter is THEMSELVES and let the short story speak for itself.

We get a lot less utter garbage than we used to, though, honestly, and I think the reason why is that thanks to the Internet, writers are actually better informed about how to go about submitting, and they are much more likely to have practiced their grammar and spelling skills on a daily basis. It’s that or the Internet has somehow
swallowed up the attention of most of the crackpots who used to send us wacky submissions in red crayon and the like.

VENTRELLA: What sorts of things do you want in a query letter?

TAN: Since most of what we read is short stories, we don’t read queries. We just want a professional introduction of the author, with whatever credentials they have, but if none, just a firm, no-nonsense hello. It’s professional courtesy to include a cover letter. Sticking a post-it note shaped like a heart on the story is not professional.

Actually, these days, we only accept manuscripts by email, so whenever anything arrives in the mail, I know it’s likely to be from the land of psychoceramics.

VENTRELLA: As a writer of erotic and romantic fiction, what would you advise to someone wanting to enter this field?

TAN: Both romance and erotica have a lot of cliches. The whole trick to writing something that will thrill the pants (sometimes literally) off your readers is to satisfy their expectations while at the same time exceeding them. Be aware of the boundaries of any genre that you write in, and then find out how you can play with and cross those boundaries.

That is, unless thinking about that sort of thing paralyzes you and saps your will to write. In that case, forget everything I said and JUST WRITE. That’s probably the best advice. Step one, start writing. Step two, finish what you started. You’ll get better every time.

VENTRELLA: What trends do you see in the publishing industry that excite you? Which ones worry you?

TAN: I’m very excited at how social networking is allowing authors and readers to connect directly. But the problem is how do you find out about new authors you might like if you’re a reader, when now there isn’t just a publisher-wholesaler-retail chain delivering you a limited selection to choose from? A lot of things are changing now because of that.

It worries me a little that the newer system rewards authors more based on their marketing savvy than on their writing ability … but then I look at a lot of the junk that was published that still hit the New York Times best-seller list over the past 20 years and I realize that’s ALWAYS been true. There have always been populist and popular writers who weren’t particularly great artists.

VENTRELLA: Writing a short story is much different from writing a novel. What are the difficulties you have found? Why do you think some authors specialize in one or the other?

TAN: I’ve written a fair number of both and I really think they are different arts, just like painting and sculpture are different arts. A short story writer has to have guts and brio; a novelist has to have stamina and vision. For me short stories have always come pretty easily. I grab an idea and just pound it until it’s done. A novel takes a bit more planning. The one time I just grabbed hold of a novel with minimal planning, it took six years to finish and came out three times too long to be a commercial novel. (That’s DARON’S GUITAR CHRONCILES, which I’m serializing now on the web.) The next time I plotted out 12 chapters of 5,000 words each and bam, I hit my target right on the nose.

The secret to writing outlines for me is realizing that in the second half I’m going to deviate quite significantly from the outline I wrote, but that some kind of internal logic is at work in my subconscious, so if I forge on, it will all work out. I still have to write the outline, which to me is like sketching out the map of the mountain I’m going to climb. But when I get to the top, exactly halfway through the journey, and am at the turning point, I look down the other side of the mountain… and discover it always looks totally different from the top than it did from where you started at the bottom. Some of the landmarks are the same, but how you get to them changes.

VENTRELLA: Are you sick of vampire stories yet? Is there any plot you have seen too often?

TAN: I love vampires! But even sixteen years ago when I edited my very first anthology of vampire stories, called BLOOD KISS, there were some cliches I didn’t ever need to see. Like setting your vampire story in a goth nightclub … cliche cliche cliche! It really isn’t very imaginative to think “what if those spooky kids who look like vampires actually WERE?” Not exactly an original idea. I actually had to turn down a lot of stories where the “surprise” ending was that one of the two people who met in the bar turns out at the end to be… A VAMPIRE!

I had to write rejections that said things like “It’s a vampire anthology. Every readers KNOWS at least one of them is a vampire.” Then there were the millions who tried the surprise twist: they’re BOTH vampires! Argh. Or surprise twist two: the other one is a vampire hunter! I saw literally hundreds of stories with these plots even after I explicitly banned them in my submission guidelines.

Then there are some ideas that go through fads. I kid you not. One year I received no fewer than four stories all with this exact same plot: an artist falls in love with a model in a painting (usually a Renaissance painting) and gets artistically blocked, can’t paint, is wasting away… until the day the model shows up at the door to have
fantastic sex, looking just like the painting, because s/he is a vampire. Somewhere, once upon a time, that was an original plot. Now, it’s a cliche.

VENTRELLA: How do you think your education has helped your writing?

TAN: Well aside from the actual writing courses I took, it was important to me as someone who writes science fiction to learn some high level science. In college I went right for what was cutting edge at the time, cognitive science (artificial intelligence, neurology, etc) and genetics. Anything you learn that stimulates your brain is going to help your writing. I took a fair amount of psychology in that mix, as well as literature, music, etc. … Long live the liberal arts.

VENTRELLA: Besides “keep writing” what specific advice would you give an aspiring author that you wish someone had given you when you began?

TAN: I think I must have started out with some pretty good advice, because I can’t think of anything. I suppose the advice I would give is this.

You need your reader to trust you to lead them on a rollercoaster ride. For them to trust you, you have to trust yourself. To trust yourself, you have to know your craft and be constantly improving it, constantly learning about yourself and the way your writing affects your readers. So don’t write in a vacuum because you’re afraid people won’t like it. Find the ones who do like it, and write more for them!

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Interview with author Marie Lamba

Posted on April 19, 2010 by Michael A. Ventrella

MICHAEL A. VENTRELLA: I’m pleased to be interviewing Young Adult author Marie Lamba today. Marie is the author of the humorous young adult novel WHAT I MEANT…, which Publisher’s Weekly has dubbed “an impressive debut.” She has two more novels which will be coming out soon. In addition to her fiction writing, Marie has written and published more than 100 articles, including features in national magazines such as Garden Design, Your Home, and Sports International. Her most recent piece, “Plotting a Novel Group,” appears in the February 2008 issue of Writer’s Digest. Her web page is www.marielamba.com.

MARIE LAMBA: Hi Michael. Thank you for having me on your blog.

VENTRELLA: Marie, what is it that makes a novel a Young Adult novel?

LAMBA: To me, a young adult novel is categorized primarily by the age of the main character. Since readers read about characters older than themselves, if you have a 13-year-old protagonist, you’ve just written a middle reader (not a YA), and will have mostly elementary school aged readers. Also, content figures in. Sometimes the content is not right for the YA market. But these days, almost anything goes for YA readers. The edgier the better, though you may just be banned by schools…which usually reaps great press and even better sales, interestingly enough.

VENTRELLA: You keep a pretty active blog. Do you think this is necessary to help promote your work?

LAMBA: My site helps me promote my work every single day. I’ve heard people say that if you don’t update your blog at least 3 times a week, then don’t bother having one. I heartily disagree. Sometimes it’s not about getting a huge number of subscribers, but about having a presence, and being able to be found in various ways.

While my blog may seem really active, I sometimes post as rarely as once a month. I just don’t think there’s a point in posting unless I really have something to say. Yet the site is dynamic and gets a fair number of hits everyday because I’ve got a lot going on there. In addition to offering updates about my work, essays on writing, and book reviews, I’ve made it function as my website, www.marielamba.com. So folks are going there to find out about my appearances, to read my bio, to read excerpts from my books, etc. And with links to my Twitter feed, there is always something new to see.

By combining my website with my blog, people stumble onto it while doing the weirdest searches. Like when looking for the menu of Nat’s Pizza. And then they see that my novel has a scene set there. Then they click on my link to buy my Doylestown-based novel. All because of a blog post that tagged Nat’s Pizza in it, if that makes sense?

VENTRELLA: Should unpublished authors have a blog?

LAMBA: Absolutely. It’s a great way to start establishing yourself and your voice. Everything from the color scheme you use to the tone of your bio can help create a feel for who you are. Have a page on your blog with short excerpts of your work, but don’t give away too much material there. Just enough for a taste.

If you really want to be savvy, then you could use your site for things such as book reviews and editor and publisher interviews, which would make your name familiar to the “powers that be.”

VENTRELLA: What can an author do to make their blog stand out among the many out there?

LAMBA: I think it goes back to your voice. Who you are should come through in the tone of your writing, and what you choose to highlight. Then, of course, you need to connect with your audience. That’s where bringing your site to the attention of an organization can help. For example, after I wrote a post about plotting, I saw on a children’s writing message board that I belong to that there was some recent discussion about plotting. I immediately commented there, providing my link to my post.

VENTRELLA: You also make extensive use of Twitter. How can you make your tweets stand out when there are so many people on Twitter? And do you think this is an efficient use of your time?

LAMBA: You know, Twitter is so quick that it isn’t the time suck that sites like Facebook seem to be. At least not for me. Here’s the trick though: when you post there, make it under 40 characters so that you can easily be retweeted to others. Also, try to always provide a link, whether it is to a relevant blog post or a Facebook invite to an event. Links are always too long, so go to www.bitly.com, paste the link there, and you’ll get a shorter link that you can use. And don’t always make your tweets about you. Highlight the accomplishments of others. It’s fun to do, plus I think it’s just good karma.

As for making your tweets stand out, I definitely avoid the whole “I’m getting a cup of coffee now” variety of posts. Again, I only go on there when I have something to say or I really want to respond to someone. I think then people will pay more attention to you. You aren’t the annoying talker everyone wishes would go away. And I try not to follow just anyone or anything. My list is made up of people I know, and of publishers, editors, librarians, media, authors. In short (in the spirit of Twitter), folks who might actually care to hear what I have to say.

VENTRELLA: What is your writing process? (Do you outline heavily, create character backgrounds first, come up with the basic concept and run with it, etc.?)

LAMBA: Good question. It’s evolving. For my past few novels, I knew my final scene. I had my opening dialogue. And then I was off! Kind of like knowing I’m driving to California, and therefore start heading west, but without a map. I do get to the end eventually. The fun thing about this method is the unexpected twists and turns. The not-so-fun thing is cleaning up the mess that I’ve created, trying to make it more direct and cohesive. It can take a long time.

With my current novel, I’m trying to be more organized. I’ve plotted it out, and now I’m in the outlining stage. Then I’ll start writing. I’m hoping that this will help me write faster. My last novel DRAWN (which is now out on submission), took over a year and a half to write. I want to be much more productive than that.

VENTRELLA: What are you doing in your fiction that no one else is doing? What makes your book different and exciting?

LAMBA: I think, again, it comes down to voice. I’m the only person with my point of view and my humor, and that flavors the plot and the characters. With WHAT I MEANT… (Random House YA), the book’s cast of bi-racial characters mirrors my own family’s blend of Italian-American and Asian-Indian personalities. Because WHAT I MEANT… has a mixed race protagonist, yet it is a mainstream story not focused on race, it became a standout in the field.

VENTRELLA: Have you received any surprising results from your writing?

LAMBA: It is always touching to have readers contact me saying that they identified with the characters and that WHAT I MEANT… is their favorite book. One girl even said that she never cries at anything, yet she found herself bawling at the end of my novel because it touched her. That was humbling.

On a funny note, an ex-boyfriend from high school assumed that one of the guy characters in the novel was named after him. He wasn’t.

VENTRELLA: You do a lot of personal appearances to promote your books. What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing these? How do you organize them?

LAMBA: The main advantage is making a personal connection with a reader. If someone meets you and enjoys talking with you, they’ll also remember you and feel a connection to your writing. This is really how books are sold: one reader at a time. I love meeting people, and appearances take me away from my isolated little writing spot and out into the real world. All good. The disadvantage? I can’t think of a single one. I’m careful to pick and choose where and when I go so it doesn’t take away from my writing time.

Events happen many ways. Sometimes booksellers or conferences or teachers contact me. Sometimes I get in touch with them if I have a specific event idea. And I have done presentations to hundreds and hundreds of scouts. I also have to mention that I’m a proud member of the Philly Liars Club, a collection of 13 authors who basically lie for a living. Together we stage a slew of oddball events, and have a blast.

VENTRELLA: Let’s discuss the publishing business a bit. With self-publishing and e-books becoming more prominent, how do you think this will change the demand and market for new writers?

LAMBA: I really think that self-publishing and e-books represent a revolution in publishing, the likes of which we haven’t seen since the 1460’s when old Guttenberg came onto the scene with his printing press, displacing those hard-working monks and their illuminated manuscripts. Documents at that time show that people didn’t realize the magnitude or ramifications of what was going on. Quite simply, the change was so huge that they couldn’t envision the implications.

And so it goes with us. We speculate, but we can barely foresee what all these huge changes mean. I say look to the music industry, to prevalent iPods and the dearly departed record stores. And be cautious. Will books on paper no longer exist? Will bookstores and libraries disappear? Will publishers become obsolete? The only thing I know for sure is that no matter what form content will take, someone will have to write it.

Cling to that, writers and future writers. We are not replaceable.

VENTRELLA: Do you think the stigma of being self-published will continue? Do you think it’s deserved?

LAMBA: Some self-published books are brilliant. Others are painful and shouldn’t see the light of day. Books that are horribly written and barely edited definitely ruin the reputation of others out there, sadly.

I do think that as distribution of self-published novels improves, and more established authors step into this arena, that this stigma will fade. I mean, what does an author like Stephen King really need a publisher for? Couldn’t someone of that stature just put books out into the stratosphere by himself by self-publishing? J.A. Konrath has started to do it with some success, though he still also goes the traditional route.

VENTRELLA: Who are your favorite authors? Why?

LAMBA: Anne Tyler for her beautiful imagery and quirky characters. T.H. White for his epic storytelling, sense of grandeur, and sense of humor. Audrey Niffeneger for her amazing plotting abilities. Sarah Dessen for her touching and real YA voice.

VENTRELLA: What’s the biggest mistake you see aspiring writers make?

LAMBA: Not taking the time to polish their work, and really learn their craft. Writers need to work so hard to improve everything they do. Established authors are always struggling to polish, to edit. They value pointed criticism, and vigorously revise. When I see someone with talent refusing to do this type of work to polish their manuscript, or not absorbing decent criticism, I know that they are limiting themselves, and that’s a shame.

VENTRELLA: What advice can you offer that you wish someone had offered you?

LAMBA: Writing is not only an art, it’s a business. And sometimes in this business really nasty crap will happen to you. In fact, expect it. Your novel, no matter how important it is to you, is just a commodity in the business world. Be as businesslike as you can, while protecting the sensitive artist within. And write another book. And another. And another.

VENTRELLA: And what’s next? What can we look forward to seeing from you?

LAMBA: My YA paranormal DRAWN (excerpt on my blog/website) is under consideration right now. It’s about a teen artist who moves to England in search of a normal life. But then she starts channeling one very hot ghost through her drawings. Not normal at all.

And right now I’m working on a novel for adults: When an Italian grandmother shares old fashioned recipes for sauces and for a happy life, her three granddaughters test the ingredients in fresh ways, cooking up a surprising blend of spice, passion, trouble and true love.

That pretty much sums it up! Thanks, again, for having me here.

7.28.13g

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Interview with Hugo Award-winning author Lawrence Watt-Evans

Posted on March 7, 2010 by Michael A. Ventrella

Lawrence Watt Evans grew up with parents who were science fiction readers, so he grew up reading the stuff, and decided at the age of seven or eight that he wanted to write it. He has been a full-time writer for more than thirty years, producing more than forty novels, over one hundred short stories, over one hundred and fifty published articles, and a few comic books. Most of his writing has been in the fields of science fiction, fantasy, and horror, and he has received a few awards, including the Hugo for best short story in 1988, for ”Why I Left Harry’s All-Night Hamburgers.” He served as president of the Horror Writers Association from 1994 to 1996. He lives in Maryland with his wife and the obligatory writers’ cat.

MICHAEL A. VENTRELLA: Lawrence, thank you! Let’s start by letting us know what your latest work is that is available and what we can expect next.

LAWRENCE WATT-EVANS: My latest novel is called A YOUNG MAN WITHOUT MAGIC; Tor released the hardcover in November of 2009. This is the first volume of a fantasy series called the Fall of the Sorcerers; the second volume, ABOVE HIS PROPER STATION, will be out in November 2010. Whether there will be more remains to be seen. If there’s sufficient interest from readers and publishers, this series could go a long time — I have about a dozen novels plotted.

VENTRELLA: You try to break down traditional plot cliches in your stories. What are your plotline pet peeves?

WATT-EVANS: My biggest is simply people doing things, or failing to do things, because it’s necessary to make the plot work, and not because that’s how real people would act. Plots that depend on people not telling each other important things when there’s no reason to keep them secret, for example. Real people generally like to talk, and keeping a secret is hard, so why do so many characters in books go to such lengths to not tell each other things?

Why don’t characters in novels call the cops more often? Why don’t they tell their friends what they’re up to?

VENTRELLA: I’ve commented on this blog before about how I dislike the typical fantasy hero who is a noble-born chosen one with special powers. Why do you think it’s important to avoid those kinds of characters?

WATT-EVANS: I don’t think it’s important to avoid them; I just think they’ve been overdone, and I prefer to focus on more ordinary people.

VENTRELLA: Do you ever worry about genre when your work crosses the line? Do your publishers and editors ever give you a hard time about it?

WATT-EVANS: When I started out I never used to worry about genre. Back in the ’80s, I wrote whatever I wanted and let the publisher worry about labeling it. By the ’90s, that looked like a bad idea — my fantasy was much more successful than my science fiction or horror, so writing SF or horror was dragging down my sales and hurting my career. My agent eventually convinced me of that, and I mostly stopped writing SF and horror novels. (In short fiction, no one cared.) I’d intended to go on writing SF under a different name, but that never really worked out. By the turn of the century I was purely a fantasy writer.

But the thing is, the market kept changing, and now readers and publishers want cross-genre stuff — pure traditional fantasy isn’t selling well anymore. Urban fantasy, crossing fantasy with hard-boiled detective stories — that’s selling. Paranormal romance is selling. Historical fantasy is selling. Since I write for a living, I can’t afford to ignore that, so I’m currently working on an urban fantasy novel called ONE-EYED JACK, and I’m looking at some other genre-bending possibilities.

I’m perfectly happy working in various genres, but I do try to keep up with what publishers are buying.

VENTRELLA: Are humorous stories easier or harder to write?

WATT-EVANS: Easier than what?

For me, each story has its own natural tone, and that has nothing to do with the difficulty of writing it. Some funny stories are easy, some are hard; some serious stories are easy, some are hard.

VENTRELLA: What difficulties and pitfalls face someone trying to write humor?

WATT-EVANS: The tricky thing about writing humor is that senses of humor vary. What one person finds funny may leave another cold. When Esther Friesner and I were writing SPLIT HEIRS, while we were mostly in accord, I found out that Esther has a more vicious sense of humor than I do, but isn’t as fond of pratfalls — with one exception, any scene in the book where death or serious injury is played for laughs, Esther wrote it, while I think all the falls are mine. Knowing what readers will find funny — well, I’m not sure there’s anything that every reader will find funny. There are people out there who don’t find Terry Pratchett funny, which I find incomprehensible.

So what you need to do is to incorporate a variety of humor. Don’t stick entirely to one thing — there’s no gag that won’t get old eventually. Maybe you think puns are the epitome of wit, but relying entirely on puns is going to leave most readers cold. SPLIT HEIRS had puns and pratfalls and pain, contrived explanations and elaborate absurdity, double entendres and drunk acts, so if a reader didn’t laugh at one bit, the next might get him. Overusing any one joke can kill it. Change it up.

Also, don’t try too hard. Don’t overdo it. Humor has to have some grounding in reality in order to work. There’s a reason the classic comedy acts always included a straight man. Have some respect for your characters, no matter how absurd their situation may become. It’s much funnier when something ridiculous happens to an ordinary guy than when it happens to a capering buffoon.

VENTRELLA: I know there isn’t a template that is used each time, but when creating a new world, what is your process? Do you first concentrate on the story and characters and then think about the politics and religion of the world?

WATT-EVANS: Oh, it varies. A lot. I mean, a lot.

Ethshar started out as a map I drew during a boring geometry class in ninth grade; the locations of Aldagmor and the three Ethshars were where the point of a compass had marked the paper when I used it as backing for an assignment. That was 1969. I added names and worked out some of the linguistics between then and 1972, and figured out some of how warlockry functioned, then put it aside until 1977, when I started designing the other kinds of magic. History and politics and religion came along between 1977 and 1983, but I didn’t have any stories to set there until about 1982. I started writing THE MISENCHANTED SWORD in December 1983. I’m still adding details.

For the Lands of Man, on the other hand, I knew the story first, and wanted a setting. I started with the history, from the wars against the dragons to the opening of DRAGON WEATHER, but I didn’t know the geography or magic, or history before the wars, until after I started writing the novel. I never did get the linguistics straight.

NIGHTSIDE CITY was inspired by the Los Angeles of Ross Macdonald’s Lew Archer novels — “inspired” not meaning copied, at all. Lew Archer’s L.A. is a city of night, where the real world Los Angeles is a very sunny place, and that got me thinking about a city where it’s always been night, but the sun’s about to come up. (A “Little Nemo in Slumberland” strip where the sun dissolves King Morpheus’ palace may also have figured in.) So I started designing out a world where that would be possible, and even hired a planetologist, Dr. Sheridan Simon, to work out the physics for me.

VENTRELLA: Do you prefer writing short stories or novels?

WATT-EVANS: I used to find novels easier, though obviously they take longer, but somewhere in the late ’80s I got the hang of writing short stories, and since then I don’t find one more difficult than the other.

As for which I prefer, do you prefer steak or chocolate cake? They’re different. Sometimes I want one, sometimes I want the other.

VENTRELLA: What do you see as the primary difference between the two?

WATT-EVANS: The primary difference is that a short story is about a single change, while a novel is about something developing, step by step. The first time I was asked this question, many years ago, I said that a short story is a kiss, and a novel is a courtship, and I still think that’s a pretty good analogy.

VENTRELLA: Publisher’s Weekly said of your latest (A YOUNG MAN WITHOUT MAGIC) that the characters were “unlikeable” but that the “the tight plotting and absorbing new world make this tale readable.” Do you agree that the characters are “unlikable”?

WATT-EVANS: I didn’t think they were unlikable — not all of them, anyway. I like Anrel quite a bit. Several of the others are less than charming, I admit, including Anrel’s best friend, but I thought I’d come up with a protagonist readers would find pleasant company. I suspect the reviewer found him too fatalistic, a trait that fades greatly in the sequel, ABOVE HIS PROPER STATION.

VENTRELLA: How do you deal with negative criticism?

WATT-EVANS: Mostly, I ignore it. I know I can’t please everybody. In one case, though, a reader’s comment about TOUCHED BY THE GODS me rethink the whole story, which is a part (though only a small one) of why there’s no sequel and will never be one.

VENTRELLA: What themes do you find yourself revisiting in your work that may pop up without planning?

WATT-EVANS: How broadly are you defining “theme”? A lot of my stories turn out to be about someone finding a place for himself in the world. I also seem to write about a lot of immortal (or at least ancient) characters who have lived in isolation and are reconnecting with the world. And characters who are struggling to control some power that could cause great destruction if unleashed.

I don’t know why.

VENTRELLA: What is your writing style?

WATT-EVANS: It varies, but usually it goes like this:

Come up with central concept, which can vary hugely in complexity — it could be a gadget, a spell, a characteristic of the setting, a plot element, a scene, a character. THE MISENCHANTED SWORD started with the spell on the sword, NIGHTSIDE CITY started with the doomed city, THE CYBORG AND THE SORCERORS started with the scene of Slant talking to the wizards of Teyzha. Sometimes this concept is the result of combining two or more old ideas I had kicking around.

Usually, I let this stew for awhile, accreting material. If I didn’t start with a character, figure out who the characters are who would be involved. Work out a background where this could take place — which might be a setting that already exists, or a new one.

Write an opening scene, to get the material fixed in my head. Sometimes this comes before the stewing.

Figure out how the story ends.

Come up with some rough plan for getting from the opening to the ending.

Start writing.

Usually, I’ll stop after awhile — usually the first time I hit a plot problem — and write up a working outline, running from three to thirty pages; when I’m satisfied with that, I’ll go on writing the story.

The first draft is usually skimpy; the second draft is largely filling in details I skipped over while working through the plot. I generally don’t know the characters all that well when I start, but I get to know them writing the first draft, so the second draft lets me flesh them out.

And after that it’s just polishing.

However, not every story follows this model. I do whatever works. Sometimes I never do write an outline. Sometimes I write one, but don’t follow it. Whatever works.

VENTRELLA: Of what work are you most proud?

WATT-EVANS: DRAGON WEATHER. That one came out really good. Some others came close, but I’d rate that one as my best.

VENTRELLA: And finally, who do you like to read?

Terry Pratchett, Fritz Leiber Jr. — right now I’m not sure who else, as I seem to be in a transitional period where I’m losing my taste for old favorites (e.g., Robert Heinlein) and haven’t yet settled on new ones.

51

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Interview with Tony Ruggiero

Posted on January 2, 2010 by Michael A. Ventrella

MICHAEL A. VENTRELLA: Tony Ruggiero writes science fiction and fantasy with an edgy realism designed to make people wonder: could it actually be true and could it be happening right now? His eye opening approach within the genre has run the gauntlet of responses from laughter to having people look over their shoulder more often. Either way, Tony is a very happy man. His published novels include OPERATION IMMORTAL SERVITUDE, ALIEN DECEPTION, and SATANIC CREATURES WANTED: HUMANS NEED NOT APPLY. His books are published by Dragon Moon Press (who will also be publishing a short story of mine soon as well). His web page is www.tonyruggiero.com and his email is aruggs@aol.com

TONY RUGGIERO: Hi Michael — I would like to thank you for this opportunity to talk with you as well as your readers.

VENTRELLA: One of the more difficult tasks authors have is convincing potential readers to try someone new. Tony, what do you say to readers to get them to check out your books?

RUGGIERO: If discussing my vampire series, I suggest that if they want to read something different in a vampire novel then they will want to look at the “Team of Darkness Chronicle” Series which begins with OPERATION IMMORTAL SERVITUDE. In this day of vampire stories that show a more “friendlier” vampire, I believe that my series (which has been described as “What If Anne Rice and Tom Clancy had a baby?”) has maintained the traditional lore of vampirism, yet added an approach that not only includes a military aspect, but also a point of view where the vampires see themselves as a creature of God and have a purpose in life to fulfill.

For my science fiction work, if you are a fan of space opera type stories, you will like my ALIEN DECEPTION and ALIEN REVELATION books. These are written in the classic space opera tone that has always been a favorite of mine, but I have added a bit of a twist by setting it in a current and real life scenario that involves Earth politics but also reveals that it doesn’t matter if it is alien or human politics, the same problems exist. It also begins as a light hearted story, but becomes precarious for our two protagonists, Greg and Sarah.

VENTRELLA: Do you think that your web page helps or do people generally already know you by the time they visit it?

RUGGIERO: I think it is a combination of both. We live in an age where information on the internet is a main way of communication especially for writers, so I think this is a good way to have people see their work. But I think it is also important to meet as many people as possible in person and that is where the life blood of science fiction conventions comes into play.

VENTRELLA: You are currently posting a work in progress on your web page, chapter by chapter. Tell me a bit about that story.

RUGGIERO: I was posting some chapters for a new novel called COVEN, which is a thriller-type novel that deals with witches in a modern day setting.

VENTRELLA: Have you completed the entire book and are just serializing it, or are you posting the chapters as you write them?

RUGGIERO: I stopped posting chapters because the book went into editing and my editor and I thought it was best to stop until we are done and then relook at it at that point.

VENTRELLA: What are the copyright considerations? Won’t your publisher consider it an “already published” work?

RUGGIERO: I plan to hopefully publish COVEN soon. If I do it with Dragon Moon Press, I have a very good relationship with the publisher and this will be a non-issue. The publisher realizes that as a small press, you have to work harder than a traditional press and find innovative ways to garner reader’s interest and if this means posting a good part of it on the web for free — then that’s what we need to do.

VENTRELLA: Have you had any formal writing training? Do you think that is necessary?

RUGGIERO: No formal training. I do have a master’s in English, but I believe that most of the writing skills are developed through practice. Three words of encouragement — write — write — write! I am a firm believer in learning through practice. If you have the desire to get formal training, then I am sure that it can’t hurt, but is it a prerequisite? I don’t believe so.

VENTRELLA: How did you end up with your current publisher? Do you have other long term goals to grab a more “mainstream” publisher?

RUGGIERO: Sure, I am always looking for that mainstream publisher. In terms of small press publishers, I have been with several over the past 10-12 years. I remember selling my first story for $5.00. My current relationship with Dragon Moon Press has been by far the best and I look forward to continue working with them in the future.

VENTRELLA: What’s your opinion on self-publishing?

RUGGIERO: It’s another option. If it fits your needs then you should do it. My only thought is that it should not be your first choice. Self publishing involves a cost to you and I think you should avoid that if you can. The distribution issue can also be another reason why you should look elsewhere first.

VENTRELLA: What’s next? What are you working on now?

RUGGIERO: I have two novels in the editing process: COVEN and a new science fiction novel called LAST CHANCE, which includes vampires and werewolves. I have sporadically been working on the next and last vampire novel called OPERATION END GAME. I have been teaching a full load so I am a little behind on the vampire novel which I hope to catch up with for a 2010 release.

VENTRELLA: What is your writing style? Do you tend to rely on outlines first or do you just plow right in?

RUGGIERO: Both and neither. I really don’t have a set pattern. Sometimes I just start writing and then develop an outline later. I also have a large dry marker board where I cram all those ideas on and then try to sort them out.

VENTRELLA: People say authors should “write what they know”. How has your military background influenced your writing?

RUGGIERO: It has certainly helped especially in the way that the vampires interact with the military. But it also helps with writing about diverse cultures and developing relationships. The fact that in the military also helps me to develop a good approach to the writing process by scheduling and setting time aside to accomplish writing has also been a big help.

VENTRELLA: What was your biggest mistake so far in trying to make it as an author?

RUGGIERO: Thinking that the writing was the hard part. It’s really all about selling your work to publishers and readers. Unless you’re a “name,” you have to constantly sell yourself and try and not come off as being too pushy. I think a lot of writers fail at this and they come on too strong and they alienate the reader.

VENTRELLA: Do you have any specific advice you would give a writer trying to make it in the publishing business that they may not have heard before?

RUGGIERO: Have hope and use common sense. Sure, always set your sights on that big contract, but don’t let disappointment make you file it away forever where no one will ever see it. I think it’s better to please 100 readers then to please none. If you do not make that big New York contact, then spend time in the small press realm. Dragon Moon Press has seen its share of writers that have made the transition from small press to big press so it is possible.

Me and Tony

Filed under: writing | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »