I know I lucked out in graduate school when I ended up in a seminar lead by Paul Lisicky. The man is not only an exceptional writer, he simply rocks as a teacher. I learned so much from him that I felt it was imperative to note his influence in the acknowledgments when writing my book.
I religiously read his blog because he takes me places that I’ll never otherwise go . . . especially to the streets of New York City and to a music scene that is simply foreign to my ear (except for when he digresses on Joni Mitchell). Recently, he was in the Bay Area and he did a photo collage on his blog of a bunch of Eichler homes that tickled me to death because I dream of having a atrium like those in the buildings this real estate developer designed in the 1950s. Paul is really into buildings which is pretty obvious by the title of his second book, a memoir called Famous Builder.
But what I really want to share with you is one of his recent blog entries called “Alive with Current” in which he addresses the question: why I write! Please go read it . . .
It’s spectacular writing! It will make you feel alive! It will make you want to sit down and write.
Last summer, fellow writer Kate Evans turned me on to GoodReads, a website where readers befriend one another and share book titles and reviews. It’s also a place where authors can maintain a page about their published works and invite friends to events.
Here is a review that I just posted on Good Reads for The Story of Edgar Sawtelle by David Wroblewski.
Wroblewski has certainly managed to mix an unusual array of elements in this thoroughly enjoyable book. Employing a setting in the lake country of Northern Wisconsin and a time period some forty years ago, he evokes a sense of displacement–not in the manner of sci-fi but simply offering a time and place that is at once familiar and foreign. The farm where the story is set has a mysterious aura, for the original settler built a wonderful home and barn and then for unknown reasons suddenly departed, selling the place from afar. Then Wroblewski adds a novel breed of dog and a voiceless boy to the mix–a boy who not only communicates non-verbally with the dogs but who also has a strangely believable connection to other spheres as well.
I won’t spoil the story by saying more than that. I’ll just conclude by saying Wroblewski is a fine and compelling story teller as attested to by the huge popularity of this book. I listened to the audiobook version and though it took a bit longer than usual to hook me, by the midway point I was fully invested in the characters’ lives and the intriguing narrative.
Check out GoodReads, and if you do, please invite me to be your friend.
Tonight I’ll be reading with fellow writer Kate Evans at Books Inc in the Castro. I met Kate at a writer’s conference several years ago, and coincidentally our books were published in the same month last year. To learn more about Kate read the interview that I posted here on Editeyes about her book For the May Queen.
Readings are one way of promoting one’s book. Though most authors agree that you don’t sell a slew of books at a reading, one can hope they make the book more visible and then that viral thing happens . . . you know, a friend tells a friend who tells another friend. This post is one of those telling moments: check out Kate’s book at Amazon and buy it.
And while you are there, take a minute to write a review for Between Two Women. There is apparently a pretty good correlation between 5 star reviews and book sales. And if you are any where near San Francisco tonight (2/5), join us at Books Inc at 7:30.
I’m a huge believer in the writer’s critique group. Near the end of my first writing workshop about 20 years ago, the facilitator talked about writing groups and encouraged us to hook up with one another to continue sharing and responding to one another’s work. During the workshop I had realized the merit of hearing a reader’s response, so I took the initiative to form a group. I’ve been a self-designated writing group coordinator ever since.
Admittedly, this can be a discouraging role as folks definitely ebb and flow in their commitment to belonging to a critique group. Life intervenes! People move away! A writer quits writing for a time. Another decide she needs to put all discretionary time toward the act of writing rather than using time for group work.
A writing group requires a time commitment, and I think that’s the biggest deterrent to ongoing participation. But for me, the dialogue and the feedback serve as motivation. And there is the deadline. Getting work ready for and submitted to the group in a timely fashion keeps me moving forward with my writing when I might otherwise let it slide.
It also takes time to figure out workable guidelines. Having been a writing group coordinator for a long time, I also serve as the keeper of the guidelines . . . AND I have to admit, I think our critique group guidelines are terrific. Here they are:
Our protocol for responding to pieces is as follows:
Readers come to group having read each piece in advance and prepared written commentary to offer the writer to supplement verbal critique.
Readers discuss each piece for a predetermined amount of time while the writer listens and takes notes after which the writer is invited to participate.
Readers discuss the piece saying the writer or the narrator or the writer’s name, but not using the pronoun you.
Responses begin with what is working in the piece, specific places where language is exciting or full of energy, images that are sparkling, writing that is fluid, etc. Sufficient time should be given to discussing the merits of the piece before turning to critique.
When pointing to places that don’t work well in a reader’s opinion, the reader is as specific as possible. We offer suggestions with the clear understanding that the writer ultimately decides what will work in her piece.
Writers listen carefully to the opinion of others, recognizing that this is simply one opinion in many and that others, including the writer, may view the work differently. Writers take what is useful and leave the rest.
Writers needn’t defend content, style, or word choice. Critique is simply meant to give one reader’s response. The impulse to defend comes from protectiveness around our work but can also be a signal that something deeper needs to be communicated on the page.
We are not an emotional support group. Our discussions come from a writerly perspective. We agree that if a conflict among members arises it will be managed with honest self-examination and one-to-one communication as the first option and a separate full group business meeting as a last resort.
We agree to keep our criticism fresh, focused, honest, and generous.
Next post, I’ll talk about bring a full lenght book to the critique group. Until then, put writing first,
I religiously read his blog because he takes me places that I’ll never otherwise go . . . especially to the streets of New York City and to a music scene that is simply foreign to my ear (except for when he digresses on Joni Mitchell). Recently, he was in the Bay Area and he did a photo collage on his blog of a bunch of Eichler homes that tickled me to death because I dream of having a atrium like those in the buildings this real estate developer designed in the 1950s. Paul is really into buildings which is pretty obvious by the title of his second book, a memoir called Famous Builder.
