Christmas Eve in the world of “Dover Beach”

In this excerpt from my novel Dover Beach, the bookish would-be private eye Walter Sands spends Christmas Eve alone in a grim London hotel room, where he is haunted by memories of Christmases past.  Things have not always gone well for him in the bleak post-apocalyptic world he inhabits.

The e-book of Dover Beach is still free on Amazon, for some reason.  Which is a pretty good deal, when you come to think of it.  It is ranked #21 among technothrillers, for some reason.  It is not a technothriller; technothrillers don’t quote Dickens, at least not this liberally:

I took a bath. I reread the newspaper. I reread the Gideon Bible. I stared out the frosted window of my dreary room and gazed at the ruddy faces passing by in the dark, alien world. And I waited for a visitor.

It was the Ghost of Christmas Past. I knew he would come. He always came, so why should he make an exception now that I was in London, in his hometown?

“Rise, and walk with me!”

There was no refusing him, of course. Some nights, perhaps, but not on Christmas Eve.

Through the window, across the frigid London sky, over the fierce, churning ocean—to the awful abode of memories, still alive, still waiting to claim me…

“Why, it’s old Fezziwig!”

Not likely. It was a solemn, gaunt man—too gaunt, far too DOVER-BEACH-COVER1Lsolemn—his bony hand resting on my shoulder, light as a leaf. I was warm—the wood stove was kept well filled. But I was hungry. Always hungry. The man’s eyes glittered, reflecting the oil lamp’s flickering flame. “Tomorrow is Christmas,” the man said. “Least, Mrs. Simpkins says so. I’ve kinda lost track myself. Thing is, well, there’s nuthin’ to give you. I’ve tried—you’ve seen how I’ve tried, haven’t you? But everything’s gone. The entire world is gone. Oh, I’m so sorry.”

The man’s glittering eyes turned liquid and overflowed, wetting his leathery skin, his gray beard. His hand moved down onto my back and pulled me toward him. He held me against his chest, and I heard the ka-thump ka-thump of his heart beneath the frayed flannel shirt. The intensity of the sound scared me. The sudden strength of the hand scared me. I stayed there, listening, and eventually the hand loosened its grip, and I stepped back. The man looked at me—looking (I know now) for forgiveness, and if not forgiveness, at least some sort of understanding. But he was looking for something I was far too young to offer.

“Daddy,” I said, “what’s Christmas?”

“These are but shadows of things that have been,” said the Ghost.

“That’s swell,” I said. “That’s really swell.”

The Spirit pulled me along.

And I was chopping wood outside a familiar, broken-down barn. I was sweating, despite the cold, and my arms ached. A woman came out of the barn, carrying a scrawny chicken she had just killed. Her face was lined and wind-burned, her body shapeless under a heavy coat. She stopped and looked at me, and I kept on chopping. “Walter,” she said, “things is tough.”

“Yes, ma’am,” I said. I kept on chopping.

“Mr. Simpkins says we’ll have to leave here pretty soon if things don’t get better. I don’t know what we’ll do if we leave, where we’ll go, but there’s got to be someplace better.”

“I expect,” I said. I put another log on the block.

“But we’ll take care of you, Walter. We made a promise, and no matter how hard things get, we keep our promises. You understand?”

“Yes, ma’am. Thank you, ma’am.”

The woman nodded, satisfied. “Christmas is coming, but I’m afraid there won’t be any gifts. We can have a tree, though. You like them old ornaments, right? We can make the place real festive. Won’t that be nice?”

I split the log neatly. “Very nice,” I said. “Much obliged.”

The woman nodded some more. Chicken blood dripped onto the snow. “It’s the spirit that counts, that’s what I always say. We don’t have much in the way of things anymore, but we still have the spirit, don’t we, Walter?”

“Yes, ma’am. We still have the spirit.”

The woman smiled and went inside. I picked up another log and put it on the block.

“Spirit,” I said, “show me no more! Conduct me home. Why do you delight to torture me?”

“One shadow more!” exclaimed the Ghost.

“No more!” I cried. “No more. I don’t wish to see it. Show me no more!”

But the relentless Ghost pinioned me in both his arms, and forced me to observe what happened next.

The three of us were sitting in the parlor that first year together, and Stretch was expounding. “If we’re going to preserve our civilization, we have to preserve its rituals. Rituals are what bind us together. They shelter us from the terror of loneliness and death. They give life meaning and shape.”

“Christmas sucks,” I said.

Gwen smiled.

“It isn’t Christmas that sucks,” Stretch explained earnestly, “it’s your experience of Christmas. That’s why it’s so important to create our own experiences—to overcome those other experiences, to connect with the best of the old civilization, to keep us alive. Don’t you see?”

Yeah, I saw.

And then it was Christmas Eve. The pine boughs had been strewn, the popcorn strung, the fire roared wastefully; and at midnight we all kissed and exchanged presents that we couldn’t afford.

I gave Gwen a typewriter I had bought at the Salvage Market.

Gwen gave me a book from Art’s special stock. It was called The Maltese Falcon.

“See?” Stretch said. “Isn’t this good? Isn’t this the way life should be lived?”

And then later, lying upstairs in each other’s arms. “What do you think of Christmas?” I asked Gwen. “Is Stretch right?”

“I think,” she said, “that I have never been happier in my life.”

“Spirit,” I said, in a broken voice, “remove me from this place.”

“I told you these were shadows of the things that have been,” said the Ghost. “That they are what they are, do not blame me!”

“Remove me!” I exclaimed. “I cannot bear it!”

He let me go finally—back to my bleak hotel room, back to my guilt, back to this present that I had so longed for all my life—while he went off, presumably, to torture some other undeserving soul. No other ghosts came to call—I didn’t expect any—and eventually I drifted off to a tense and restless sleep.

When I awoke it was Christmas Day.

Print version of “The Portal” now available from Amazon!

Right here.  It’s more expensive than the e-book version, of course, but don’t you like the feel of a real physical book in your hands?  Also, don’t you think it would make a great Christmas present?  Actually, I’ve given this a lot of thought, and I can’t come up with a better Christmas present than this book.

OK, maybe a Samsung 40-inch 1080p 60Hz LED TV.  But just barely.

9781614174639

Temporary Monsters

Now that you have dutifully purchased Dover Beach at its amazingly low price of $0.99, you will want to also purchase my friend Craig Shaw Gardner’s new funny fantasy novel Temporary Monsters.  If you are wondering whether this novel is worth the $4.27 that Penguin Group (USA) LLC is charging for it, I have just three words for you: Bob the Horse.  Bob the Horse is perhaps the most irritatingly comic character ever invented.

Here is the clever cover:

 

“Dover Beach” is an Ereader News Today book of the day

I’m not sure how this works, but look here.  Not Dangerous Flames or Arielle Immortal Quickening, although I’m sure they are both very fine novels.  Scroll down to the third one.  That’s mine.

Ninety-nine cents is pretty cheap for a book this good, don’t you think?  It used to be free for a while, but you were too busy and didn’t get around to downloading it, now did you?  Will it ever be free again?  I wouldn’t count on it, if I were you.  If I were you, I’d spend the $0.99 and see what all the excitement is about.

DOVER-BEACH-COVER1L

Should a character’s name mean something?

The other day I had to introduce a couple of new characters in my novel and, as usual, this meant I had to pause and figure out what their names should be.  Why is this so hard?

This rule covers some of the basics–don’t confuse your readers with names that are too similar to each other; don’t give a character an ethnic name unless the ethnicity matters…  But there’s a deeper level at which a character’s name may feed into his characterization.  Or not.

Many names have connotations, and a writer needs to be sensitive to them.  “Brittany” says something to readers about a character, and “Edith” says something different. That doesn’t mean you can’t have an Edith who is trailer trash.  But if that’s what you’re up to, you’d better take a little time and explain what you’re doing.

So, the basic question is whether you want the character’s name to carry some of the weight of the characterization.  The more important the character, the less you want to rely on this, I think.  Even Dickens pulled back from his wonderfully evocative names–Havisham, Magwitch, Gradgrind–when it came to his most important or serious characters–Copperfield, Brownlow, Summerson.

Anyway, after ten minutes of pondering the state of my fictional universe, I welcomed Mrs. Fitz and her son Biff into it.  Will they survive my rewrites and second thoughts?  Only time will tell.

How come no one told me about Lee Child?

He’s pretty good!  Which is refreshing, after my experience with Dan Brown.

My friend Doug lent me One Shot. (I’m mistrustful of Doug’s taste in non-Shakespearean Elizabethan drama, but that’s another post.)  The style was clean and serviceable, the characters were sufficiently well developed for a thriller, and the plot was bullet-proof, if you were willing to get into the spirit of the thing.

Jack Reacher is a bit of a stretch.  I expected not to like the superhuman above-the-law vigilante aspect of the character; I prefer heroes with flaws, or at least foibles.  But there was just enough of a sense of humor about the character that I could put up with him.

Here’s what I didn’t like:

  • Amnesia was a major plot device.  Child handled it much better than Dan Brown did, but it’s still a cheap cop-out.
  • The plot seemed a bit too focused on letting Jack Reacher hurt or kill as many bad guys as possible without legal repercussions.  I could do without that, but it seems to be Reacher’s thing.
  • Ultimately, the stakes were too low for all the mayhem.  Spoiler alert: the whole story revolves around kickbacks for paving contracts in a medium-sized Midwestern city. Again, the mystery behind this was handled well, but when it was finally revealed, my attitude was: “People are getting killed left and right for this?”

Still, on the basis of this one novel I’d put Lee Child on a par with Michael Connelly.  Which means I’d happily read or listen to more of his books, without having terrifically high expectations.

Why do authors rewrite?

I’m a big fan of rewriting.  But here’s an article from the Boston Globe making the point that rewriting hasn’t always been the standard.  One reason was technology:

In the age of Shakespeare and Milton, paper was an expensive luxury; blotting out a few lines was one thing, but producing draft after draft would have been quite another. Writers didn’t get to revise during the publishing process, either. Printing was slow and messy, and in the rare case a writer got to see a proof of his work—that is, a printed sample of the text, laid out like a book—he had to travel in person to a publishing center like London.

Another was a philosophical opposition to revisiting your original inspiration.  If you believe that poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful emotions, you’re not going to approve of a writing method that is deliberately unspontaneous.

The author points to Modernism as the source of our current deification of rewriting:

The Modernists wanted to produce avant-garde literature—literature that was less spontaneous and enthusiastic than it was startling and enigmatic. In an interview with the Paris Review, Hemingway famously described his “principle of the iceberg”: “There is seven-eighths of it under the water for every part that shows. Anything you know you can eliminate and it only strengthens your iceberg.”

This is all pretty straightforward, although I’d point out that there’s solid evidence that Shakespeare did do some rewriting–for example, of King Lear, where the Quarto version is substantially different from that of the First Folio.  And I think the author doesn’t give enough weight to writing-as-a-job vs. writing-to-create-art. If your next meal depends on getting your novel finished, you’re not going to spend months revising its conclusion.

I’m on board, though, with the author’s discussion of the typewriter’s effect on rewriting.  The typewriter didn’t actually make rewriting easier; in a sense, it made the process harder.

Today we equate a keyboard with speed, the fastest way to get words down, but as Sullivan points out this wasn’t always the case. In fact, a typescript offered a chance to slow down. Most Modernist writers, like Hemingway with “The Sun Also Rises,” wrote by hand and then painstakingly typed up the results. That took time, but seeing their writing in such dramatically different forms—handwritten in a notebook, typed on a page, printed as a proof—encouraged them to revise it aggressively.

This was certainly my experience when I wrote my original drafts by hand.

Finally, the author points out that the computer may paradoxically make us less inclined to rewrite:

Today, most of us compose directly on our computers. Instead of generating physical page after physical page, which we can then reread and reorder, we now create a living document that, increasingly, is not printed at all until it becomes a final, published product. While this makes self-editing easier, Sullivan thinks it may paradoxically make wholesale revision, the kind that leads to radically rethinking our work, more difficult.

I think that’s right.  As I approach the end of the first draft of the novel I’m working on, I’m mulling how to approach the rewrite.  Do I start with the existing Word document, and just edit and add and cut and paste until I’m satisfied with the result?  Or do I re-keyboard the whole thing?  The former is certainly easier; just thinking about the latter makes me tired.  But re-keyboarding might cause me to re-imagine the story at a deeper level, and that might ultimately lead to a stronger finished product.

What’s a writer to do?

Is Jeff Bezos the antichrist? Or maybe just one of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse?

Jonathan Franzen isn’t sure.

In an article for Guardian Review before the publication of his new book, The Kraus Project, he writes: “In my own little corner of the world, which is to say American fiction, Jeff Bezos of Amazon may not be the antichrist, but he surely looks like one of the four horsemen. Amazon wants a world in which books are either self-published or published by Amazon itself, with readers dependent on Amazon reviews in choosing books, and with authors responsible for their own promotion.”

He goes on to say:

“As fewer and fewer readers are able to find their way, amid all the noise and disappointing books and phony reviews, to the work produced by the new generation of this kind of writer, Amazon is well on its way to making writers into the kind of prospectless workers whom its contractors employ in its warehouses, labouring harder for less and less, with no job security, because the warehouses are situated in places where they’re the only business hiring.”

This is the dystopian vision of Scott Turow and the Author’s Guild, where every move that Amazon makes is greeted as the next step towards the end of literature as we know it.  And I just don’t get it.  Amazon, and the e-book revolution, have certainly made publication more democratic.  It’s now open to anyone, which of course means there will be more junk available.  But do these folks really believe that there will be no way for readers to distinguish the good writers from the bad?    My novel Senator has a bunch of reviews on Amazon, and the review deemed most helpful by readers also happens to be (in my opinion) the best of the bunch.  Read that review, and you’ll get as good a sense of the novel as any newspaper review.

Further, do they really think that, even if Amazon controlled the entire publishing industry, it wouldn’t have an incentive to find and publish great books? And do they really think that Amazon can control the entire publishing industry?  Jonathan Franzen is a world-class writer with a large following.  If he wanted to bypass Amazon and self-publish on jonathanfranzen.com, he could do it.  Or, he could start his own publishing house, giving his imprimatur to the kind of fiction he thinks the world wants; no one is going to stop him, and the barriers to entry are minimal.

I’m also a little baffled by this view that Amazon is destroying the financial prospects of good writers.  Writers have no financial prospects!  They have never had any financial prospects!  If anything, Amazon has opened the doors to a whole class of writers who were shunned by the traditional publishing industry but now at least have a chance at reaching an audience, thanks to the Internet.

Finally, I just want to say that the Red Sox are back in the playoffs thanks to a complete-game victory by John Lackey.  And that’s one of those sentences I never thought I’d write.

Still looking for reviews of “The Portal”

I’ve gotten three very nice ones so far, but I could use some more.

In case you’ve forgotten, here’s the outline and first chapter.   And here’s the cover, which helpfully informs you that it’s an alternative history novel:

9781614174639

 

And, apropos of nothing, here’s a photo of my little town’s charming harbor on a late summer’s day:

2013-09-15 17.18.13

Rules for writing — Rule 12: End a chapter with a bang, not a whimper

My last post, on short sentences, reminded me that I haven’t been adding to my rules for writing, a somewhat randomly numbered series of guidelines that I try to follow, and you probably should too, if you’re writing mainstream novels.

The short sentence I discussed in that post came at the end of a chapter, which, as the Times article rightly pointed out, is a very good place to put a short sentence.  But what’s up with chapters?

Chapters are a nebulous concept.  If you were to ask me “How long should a chapter be?”, my response would be “I dunno.”  I don’t have a rule for that.  Sometimes you have a set piece that demands to be its own chapter, and the length is determined by the length of the set piece, but at other times you have a more or less continuous flow of action, or rapid-fire viewpoint changes, and it’s not at all obvious what function the chapter is playing, other than giving the reader an obvious place to stop reading, turn out the light, and go to sleep.

But you don’t want the reader to stop reading!  You don’t want the reader to go to sleep!

So the obvious thing to do is to end the chapter with something that forces the reader to keep reading into the next chapter.  And then I heard the screams. End of chapter.  What screams?  Who is screaming?  Better turn the page and find out.

This is the cliff-hanger approach to movie serials, and it’s such an obvious narrative ploy that I shouldn’t have to explain it to you.  Except that I keep screwing this up!  Twice so far in the first draft of the novel I’m writing I’ve ended a chapter with my narrator going to sleep.  That’s nuts — it’s an open invitation to the reader to go to sleep too.  If the narrator is safe in bed and nothing is going to happen till morning, there’s no reason to keep reading.  My writing group has had to gently remind me that the narrator shouldn’t go to bed at the end of the chapter — he should get whacked on the head by an unseen adversary, or discover a corpse, or fall into a bottomless ravine.  Or, you know, hear an unidentified person screaming.  And they couldn’t be more correct.

I’ll get this right in the second draft.  But in the meantime, I should print out this blog post and pin it next to my computer.  Let’s not screw up again.