Back to Top

Category: Writing

Posts in which we talk about the writing craft and process

I can’t imagine why anyone reads books by the well-known adulterer Charles Dickens or that spiteful gossip Jane Austen (no wonder Cassandra burned most of the letters).

Yet I frequently hear, particularly from other romance writers, “Oh, I don’t like Author X. I’m not reading her books.” And it always puzzles me. Sure, not buying an author’s book will deprive her of the few pennies of royalties she might earn through your purchasee. Of course, that begs the question of whether it would be morally responsible to borrow said book from the library, read it illicitly in a couple of expensive java visits at your local Borders, or pay a quarter for a copy at the thriftstore. A further ethical question might be raised if you enjoyed the book—oh horrors—what then? Does it mean you, the reader, are tarred with the same brush, or, rather like earnest clerics researching pornography, corrupted without even knowing it? Chances are you might flip it closed with the satisfaction that Author X is indeed confirmed as a Bad Person—”I knew it when the heroine’s kitten drowned and that sweet lisping child fell into the midden”—and feel your point is proved.

Part of the trouble is there’s just too much information on romance authors. And it’s our own fault. We’re all over the place, chatting away on blogs and websites, and thinning the line between promotion of our books and promotion of ourselves, just being just so darned nice all the time. And if that niceness slips into real opinions and passions, it may raise some hackles. I’m not excusing bad author behavior or authors who are rude to people in public (I think most of us have had experience with those), but it seems you can get away with a lot more as a dead literary lion (most of whom were not Boy Scouts in real life) than as a live genre writer.

Is good writing good writing—whatever?

Janet

Posted in Reading, Writing | Tagged | 7 Replies


I like my art over the top. My favorite movies, actors, books, music, paintings and couture all share the common element of being pushed further than it might seem possible. Recently I found something I thought epitomized what pushed something in my opinion from “good” to “special.”

Nick Cave is most famous for being a musician, but he is also a writer, most recently penning the script for The Proposition starring Guy Pearce. I bought a book of his writings recently–song lyrics as well as fragments of short stories and an essay or two–and found something he wrote about the German band
Einsturzende Neubauten:

“They are simply a ‘great’ band–and I use the word in the classical sense. To me, the essence of their greatness does not lie in their unorthodox attitude toward making music–rather it is based on a fundamentally orthodox premise. What makes Einsturzende Neubauten great in my eyes is the same thing that makes Johnny Cash–or the Velvet Underground, John Lee Hooker, Suicide, Elvis, Dylan, Leadbelly, The Stooges–great. They are all innovators but what sets Hank Williams apart from the bulk of his contemporaries is the same thing that sets Einsturzende Neubauten apart from the huge, faceless morass that modern New Wave music has become. Through their own hard work, by steadfast lack of compromise, through the pain of true self-expression, through a genuine love of their medium, they have attained a sound which is first authentic, and which is utterly their own. But not for the sole purpose of being different. They are a group which has developed its own special language for one reason–to give voice to their souls.”

My goal, when I write, is to give voice to my soul, even though that might sound pretentious coming from someone who writes fairly light romance; the means here, the motivation, is more important than the end. I might never feel as if I have truly developed my own ‘special language,’ as Cave says; but I can strive for that goal. No matter what genre an author writes in, in what style, I think the reader can tell when a soul has been given voice. Your favorite soul vocalists are no doubt different than mine (and I’m not talking Aretha). But what they share is an authentic sound.

What do you think makes a great artist?

Thanks–

Megan
www.meganframpton.com

Posted in Music, Writing | Tagged , | 5 Replies


There were four-and-twenty virgins come down from Inverness

And when the night was ended there were four-and-twenty less…
trad. rude song
As long as the plots keep arriving from outer space,
I’ll go on with my virgins.
Barbara Cartland
This topic started off as a conversation with my buddy Pam Rosenthal as part of our meanderings on our workshop at the 2006 Beau Monde Conference. (Yes, the workshop is called Pam and Janet Evening. It’s on writing erotic historicals.)
Virgins.
A dime a dozen in romance-land.
Why?
Granted, they were around. Virginity was by implication an important part of the business deal that upper-class marriage was even in the Regency period–the groom wanted to be sure that his heirs would truly be his, and not the in-laws’ third footman’s. Yet we still have extraordinary plot twists to ensure that the heroine is untouched when the Big Bang occurs–virgin widows, husbands who had to rush off to take part in Waterloo (sorry, honey, not before the big game), couples who didn’t want to marry and so therefore didn’t want to…you know. Or the hero turns out to be her first and last, with diversions in between (guilty as charged). And not just in historicals, where the concept of a virgin heroine is justified, but all through the genre.
Consider also the typical defloration/consummation, where after some minor carnage, the heroine gets to Nirvana with very little effort (and snorts of disbelief from me)…and despite the bloodbath, they keep doing it. Or, we’re told, if she has had previous partners, there (1) weren’t many, and (2) it wasn’t that good, so therefore she holds blank slate status.
Yes, I know these are huge overstatements and I can come up with exceptions too, but why do these conventions exist? Is it the only way we can show that this is IT, the Real Thing, the Big Banana?
Despite the boom in erotic romance and erotica, why are we still so wary of a true depiction of female sexuality?
Thoughts, anyone?


All writers have an extra-special fascination with words; they’re our toolbox, the hammers that drive in the nails. My word fascination started when I was about nine years old, and my also word-loving parents brought the game Perquackey into the house. The game is basically an anagram game, with the point being to make words out of letter cubes. Within about a month, I was beating my parents. Since then, no-one has ever beaten me at the game, and it’s also given me a life-long obsession with anagrams. When I’m particularly stressed or worried, I start doing anagrams in my head, and I’ve developed certain rules for my anagramming to make it interesting.

So when my book club read Word Freak: Heartbreak, Triumph, Genius, and Obsession in the World of Competitive Scrabble Players a few years ago, I was in alt. Finally, I was reading about people even MORE obsessive than I was.

And its author, Stefan Fatsis, revealed a new type of word obsession, I was even more excited. He talks about names and words that have each and every vowel once and only once: Julia Roberts, for example (sidenote: My best friend, whom I call the Picky Vegetarian, has one of these names. Do you know how excited I was when I figured that out? She almost became my ex-best friend, I went on and on about it so much). Since then, I’ve added that obsession to my repertoire, and am excited to find words like “sequoia,” “Metalious” (as in Grace, author of Peyton Place), and “auctioned,” “cautioned” and “education,” which have the bonus of being anagrams of each other.

It makes sense, then, that I would have signed up for the daily email of Worthless Word of the Day. The email yesterday had this gem that was right up my alley:

the worthless word for the day is: gravedinous[ad. L. gravedinosus, fr. gravedo, heaviness]obs. rare : drowsy, heavy-headed {in Bailey}

this is one of those words that contains the 5 vowels (aeiou) in alphabetical order without repetition; some that are more(?) common: facetious, abstemious, arterious, arsenious,adventitous, abstentious, bacterious, and tragedious — the shortest word of this type seems to be the obs. term aerious (7 letters), meaning “airy” (if you’d like to include ‘y’,you can add -ly to these; e.g., facetiously) hence, gravedinously, I suppose.

To sign up for WWTD, go here: http://home.mn.rr.com/wwftd/

Oh, words just make me shiver. Some of my favorite words are interstitial, penultimate, roil, internecine and solipsistic. Do you have any favorite words? Or word/language obsessions? What are they? Which authors seem to have an especially developed word obsession?

Thanks for feeding my obsession,

Megan
www.meganframpton.com

Posted in Reading, Writing | Tagged , | 5 Replies

What do you listen to when you write or read? Or do you need dead silence? Do you have recordings you associate with particular books? I like to have music to write too, but I find it distracting when I read, although I was raised in a house where all the major activities took place in one room, and I learned to either block out or blend in the music.

I thought I’d share a few of my favorites with you. I’ve blogged before about how fond I am of opera, and I find the human voice very…inspiring, particularly when it comes in the form of Thomas Hampson, who is tall (6′ 4″) and unbelievably good looking with great blue eyes. And, oh yes, he can sing too, everything from Wagner to lieder to Annie Get Your Gun. (Pause to wipe off drool.)


This next one is a crossover album that actually works–mezzo-soprano Anne Sofie von Otter with Elvis Costello. Now I think Elvis Costello is sort of weird and I don’t much like his singing voice, but this collaboration was his idea and I thank him for it every time I listen to it (which is very frequently. This and an Ella Fitzgerald album were the greatest hits of Dedication). She sounds like an opera singer only in a good sort of way–great breath control, and the occasional amazing high note that comes effortlessly out of nowhere. Just gorgeous.

I don’t think this is the Steeleye Span album I have in mind (note to daughter: please return my Steeleye Span!)–I haven’t seen it in so long I can’t remember which one I own. A bit of pure nostalgia here–SS was one of the folk-rock bands around in the late 60s/early 70s. I didn’t realize how skilled they were until I came across their lyrics and realized what a genius their vocalist Maddy Prior was with the words and phrasing.


And, Rachmaninov to die for. Krystian Zimerman (sorta cute in a tortured artist way) is my favorite pianist and this is my greatest hit of the moment. I’m writing an erotic historical, and alternate between this and the Messiah as inspiration, something I can’t explain.

Tell us about your favorite background (or otherwise) music!