I Need Your Help!

I began work on chapter 5 of Underground yesterday, which returns to Christopher Sherwood’s point of view.  In this chapter, Sherwood and fellow medical student, Sam McGregor, go in search of the resurrectionists, who supposedly did business with students in a rather seedy pub somewhere in Kingston’s current downtown core, though the exact name of the establishment is never mentioned, and an internet search of nineteenth-century pubs and taverns in Kingston brings up nothing but a lot of great tourist information.

So, I’m reverting to rule number 1: When in doubt, ask.  Does anyone have any ideas for historically seedy pubs for my characters to visit?  Full credit will be given in the chapter notes to anyone who helps find an answer!

Thanks to those who suggested the Prince George Hotel (too up-scale), and the Grimason House or Royal Tavern (presumably also too up-scale, since Sir John A. MacDonald used it for his campaign headquarters).  You’re help is appreciated!

Editing Work for Others is Mutually Beneficial

One of my writers’ group members recently got asked to send the first one hundred pages of her manuscript to a literary agent.  In the past, I had offered to do line edits and substantive edits for group members, providing my school schedule permitted; she asked me to have a look at her work.

So, I took a break from Underground and began editing.  The novel was historical fiction, though set in a time period with which I was unfamiliar—Anglo-Saxon times.  I found myself questioning phrases like “last nail in my coffin,” (did Saxons use coffins?) and historic terms like ceorl, and began to understand why Sam Hiyate (an agent at The Rights Factory) had suggested modernizing some of the Welsh terms in The Harper’s Word.  “Is using this term really necessary?” has become a question I now ask of myself, as much as of other historical fiction writers.  There is a tightrope to walk between historical authenticity, and readability, and editing my friend’s work made me much more aware of that fine line.

In addition, I began asking the question “is this really necessary?” of plot devices: is it necessary to give us the whole back-story now, or can we find out in bits and pieces?  Is it necessary to give a history lesson, or can we infer historic context from the things characters discuss? Is this character important enough to warrant describing him/her?  These questions, among others, I put to my friend, and now ask of myself.  One chapter of The Harper’s Word was edited down from four pages to six, simply by removing unnecessary plot devices and as I begin editing the fourth chapter of Underground, I’ll be asking the same questions all over again.

I have always admitted that cutting my own work is difficult.  Although I don’t think of each sentence in terms of the time it took to construct it (I know some authors who do), it is often easier to spot flaws in others’ work than in my own.  Editing my friend’s work has made me more aware of what is necessary and what isn’t, and has allowed me to bend a more critical eye on my own writing. 

If you have a writing group of your own, try swapping writing with someone, and go through their story with a fine tooth comb.  Be critical, but not cruel.  Ask the questions that aren’t answered.  If you think something is too long, say so.  If something doesn’t make sense, say so.  If something seems inaccurate, point it out and ask if the author did research.  Not only will this help the writer, but it can teach you to recognize problematic passages in your own writing, and it’s better to find them now, than to wait until you’ve been rejected by agents and editors because the manuscript isn’t tightly written.

Thanks to my writers’ group for all the critiquing, and for letting me learn more about editing on their work!

Join CMG Books and Have Posts Delivered Straight to Your Inbox!

Keep up to date with all my literary endeavours—from updates to Underground, to comments on what I learn in one-on-one encounters with literary agents, publishers, and editors—by subscribing to my feed.  The best part is, you’ll know the very day new material is added here; the second-best part is, it’s free! ;)

Type your email address into the box on the right of your screen (for screen reader users, it gets bumped to the bottom of the current list of posts).  Feedburner will send you a confirmation email with a link.  If you don’t click the link, your subscription won’t be processed, so be sure to follow through.  Once you’ve clicked, you’re set!  Each new post submitted to CMG Books will be delivered right to your inbox, so you’ll never miss a thing!

A new chapter of Underground is added at the end of every month, school schedule permitting, and by signing up for the feed, you’ll be the first to know!  The pdf files can be read on your computer, or downloaded to your tablet or e-reader so you can keep up with Ronan, Christopher, and Caroline wherever you go.

Underground Update

Just a quick note to let you all know that the fourth chapter of Underground, “Robbed,” is written and currently in the process of being edited.  Provided the website doesn’t give me any trouble, it will be posted right on schedule.  Thanks to everyone who has sent emails about the previous chapters, and encouragement for the upcoming ones.  I’m looking forward to sharing the next instalment with you!

Underground - Chapter Three Posted!

The third chapter of Underground, “A Proper Crutch,” is now available at www.cmgbooks.com/5.html.  I’m sorry it’s late; some last-minute research turned up some last-minute plot problems.  For instance:Lieutenant Mills was originally posted to Fort George in Niagara; Fort George was abandoned in the 1820s.  You see the problem? ;).  This was then complicated by exams and a major research paper. 

In any event, exams are finished, all the plot bugs are now ironed out (I hope) and the chapter is ready for your enjoyment!

Some Notes on the Chapter:

The Watkins wing of Kingston General Hospital was constructed in 1863 as an isolation ward.  Many of the beds were reserved for charity, but a few on the second floor could be used by patients of a slightly higher class who were able to pay for the medical attention they received.  .

Murney Tower is one of four Martello towers constructed along the shore of Lake Ontario in the mid-nineteenth century to provide additional fortification to Kingston.  Like Fort Henry, Murney Tower never saw action, as the conflict with the United States was concluded by treaty, though it was used by the British army until the 1870s, and by the Canadian forces until the 1890s.

Caroline’s comment on what Lieutenant Mills is wearing is not, perhaps, as out of place as it might seem.  In the nineteenth century, only officers in the British army were allowed to keep their civilian clothes.  Ordinary soldiers’ clothes were taken and burned, so the only coat they owned was their uniform coat; being bright red, this made it very difficult for men to desert. 

Resources:

Angus, Margaret. Kingston General Hospital: A Social and Institutional History. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1973.

For information about nineteenth century Kingston, including a basic chronology and details about Murney Tower, check out the Kingston Historical Society at www.kingstonhistoricalsociety.ca.  I should note here that Murney Tower contains a museum of nineteenth-century military artefacts that is open during the summer months (more information on the website above).

Both Fort Henry and Fort Wellington are still standing, and are open to the public from May until October.  You can visit their respective websites at

www.forthenry.com and www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/on/wellington/index.aspx

Enjoy “A Proper Crutch,” and check back soon for chapter four!

First Writing Retreat: A Total Success!

There’s something about fresh air, a fantastic view over busily writing writers that gets the muse to work.

This weekend, I joined the other ladies in my writing circle at a cottage, where we all found space to write and reflect.  With seven of us chipping in, the cottage was more than affordable for the weekend; it also helped that it isn’t yet peak season.  We each made one meal or large snack to bring up, and one of our members (a yoga teacher) led a short yoga session Saturday morning that got everyone jazzed up and ready to write.

I can’t believe the industriousness I saw this weekend, or the way in which being away from home succeeded in severing my brain from “exam mode,” and planting it firmly in “novel land.”  Chapter Four of Underground was half finished, and I got to chapter 5 of the sequel to The Harper's Word.  In total, I wrote more than 10,000 words, edited 20 pages (chapters one and two of The Harper’s Word and chapter three of Underground), and I’m excited to keep going tomorrow!

You should find Underground, “Chapter Three: A Proper Crutch,” on the website tomorrow evening.  I’ll post as soon as it’s up.

Too Much Explanation? Watching How Much you Share about your Characters' Motivations

Unfortunately, although the third chapter of Underground is just about finished, it has been moved to the backseat while I focus on exams and a final paper for my second-year law classes.  Somehow, though, I find even my legal studies bringing me back to telling stories.

I was allowed to choose the topic for my final paper in Intellectual Property Law (a good thing, since I have to write 25-7 pages on the subject!), and decided to look at how a traditional art—storytelling—can help preserve folklore in a way that current copyright and intellectual property laws have not.  I’ll inevitably wind up arguing that the only way to protect oral culture is not to protect it at all, since a key aspect of oral stories is the way they change and grow with each new telling, but before I get to that point, I have to demonstrate the social utility of storytelling as a profession.  My research led me to an article by Walter Benjamin, “The Storyteller: Reflecting on the Works of Nikolai Leskov,” and a quotation that spoke to the writer in me:

"The most extraordinary things, marvelous things, are related with the greatest accuracy, but the psychological connection of the events is not forced on the reader. It is left up to him to interpret things the way he understands them, and thus the narrative achieves an amplitude that information lacks."

My writers’ group discussed this very concept only a week ago, when one of us received comments from another writer suggesting she explain why her character did what he did.  This brings us back to one of the primary rules of writing: show, don’t tell.  A reader should be able to understand why your character behaves the way he does without in-depth explanation.  Leaving understanding to the reader not only creates a smoother, less-intrusive style of writing, but acknowledges your readers’ intelligence and draws them deeper into the story by letting them engage with the characters in a way that is meaningful to them.  Too much explaining, Benjamin argues, is one of the reasons storytelling as an art is dying.

Consider your favourite books; does the author tell you everything, or let you figure it out for yourself?  Are you told how you should feel, or simply allowed to experience the plot in your own way?  Can you think of any authors who do this well?  Poorly?  I’d love to know your thoughts!

If you’re a writer, keep this in mind when you write or edit your next chapter.  I know I’ll be checking for “whys” when I go through chapter three of Underground again!