Tag Archives: fiction

Interview with Robert Edric (Part 1)

Robert Edric, author of The Devil’s Beat and The Mermaids (among many others)

Robert Edric is the author of twenty-two books, most recently The Devil’s Beat.  I had the pleasure of talking by phone with Mr. Edric on March 8, 2012.  Our conversation centered around Edric’s novella, The Mermaids, from PS Publishing.  (Special thanks to Peter Crowther from PS for arranging our interview.)

Here’s the first installment transcribed.  I will post more as time allows.

REBECCA KUDER

This spring, I’m teaching a creative writing course, and looking at a examples of well-written fiction and nonfiction, approaching reading as painters look at brushstrokes, to understand how the thing was made.  I’m assigning The Mermaids because I love it, because of its economy, and its unity of place and action.  I think it’s a great text to focus on.

ROBERT EDRIC

With regards to the actual writing itself, it was one of those books that actually got smaller and smaller and smaller.  I wrote it in a week, twelve years ago, when we’d just moved house, and I didn’t have anywhere to work.  And every autumn, I get the urge to write a book again, and so I sat down, and I wrote three novellas, of which The Mermaids was one.  I originally spent a fortnight, I only ever work for a few hours in the morning, and I spent a fortnight writing it, and then I typed it up, which takes a very long time for me, and I put it away.  And I didn’t look at it again for three or four years, because…I don’t know what happens in America, but in England, novellas, short novels, were just a no-no for publishers, and I had another book on the stocks, and I put these three novellas to one side, thinking they would make a nice trilogy eventually.  With The Mermaids, I much enjoyed writing it because as you may have guessed, that kind of language over anything much longer than that length isn’t sustainable.  It’s very unreal language… it’s loquacious and it’s poetic…it hovers between language of the real world, and language of dreams.  The book itself is posited on the notion of the existence of mermaids, of course, and we all know they don’t exist.  So you have to take out of the equation, instantly, the reader’s suspension of disbelief.  You can’t depend on your reader thinking, “Oh, I believe in mermaids, so I’ll read this,” or, “I don’t believe in them, so I won’t.”  The language somehow has to reflect that lack of the concrete… the language itself isn’t concrete because the facts aren’t concrete, because the reality of the situation is that it all exists inside a girl’s head.  She’s fifteen, just about to be sixteen which sort of turns her into a woman in the eyes of them all, so the language is the language of thought, and dream, and fantasy, as opposed to the language of the real world.  Nowhere in the book is there a suggestion of time, and place.  I know where it’s set, and the timing is about the mid 1930s.  There’s a very tiny reference to a major war having been fought fifteen years earlier.  And the language somehow has to be as timeless as the notion of mermaids, which is why the language is as it is, which is a consequence of the book having been revised and revised and revised downward.  My manuscripts are invariably twice the size of the finished product because of the way I work. I work very organically.  I know this sounds a little precious but I sit down, and I write for about two hours, and I produce 6000 or 7000 or 8000 words, usually a whole chapter, in the case of The Mermaids, five or six chapters, five or six pieces rather, and then I literally leave it a year, having written for two or three months, and then go back to see what’s there.  I’m not a planner.  I don’t work things out, I don’t know what happens the day after and the day after and the day after.  I write and write and write until I’m exhausted, and don’t want to do it anymore, and then I go back to create some kind of order out of that particular chaos, and I create the form of the book out of what I’ve written, as opposed to worrying about what’s missing or what should be there.  I see what I’ve written, and then I work out how to best structure it.  And so the language, I suppose, is all there in the very beginning but you need then to create the spaces in the language.  And I’m very conscious of the fact that it’s the most poetic thing that I’ve written.  I’ve written crime novels where the language is completely different.  But I’m also a writer who’s very aware of language.  I love reading well-constructed sentences.  I love finding out how meaning has come into being through language.  One of the important things a lot of reviewers and critics never seem to want to know about, never want to talk about, is how something was actually created.  It always concerns me that there’s a kind of belief that the thing was there, and what the writer’s done is give it some kind of meaning and structure.  You scream at them and say, “No, it’s all been made up!  It’s all come from my head, it’s all come from my imagination!”  But it’s an intangible.  It’s one of the things that they don’t know.  And they don’t know about fine writing.  You never see in a review, “Well, this is beautifully written,” well, they’ll say it as a throw-away, it’s like calling a meal “well-cooked.”  It’s very edible.  Well of course it should be!  And writing should be clear and simple and straightforward.  It should do what the writer wants it to do, and most importantly of all, for me, the writing should reflect the nature of the story being told.  And that brings us back to the idea of this being fantasy, dream… it’s a kind of vaporous language, the language in The Mermaids.  It’s very suggestive, and you can disagree with practically everything that’s written about the mermaids from the girl’s perspective.  The counterpoint for that, of course, are the three men who are questioning the girl.  And their language, and the writing which reflects and represents them, is very very different.

REBECCA KUDER

I’d like to pick up on several things you said, but I’d like to start with some very heartfelt praise about what you’re talking about in the language, because I’m very concerned with sentences and phrases.  You have so many watery images and words and so much, I would say, hypnosis, within the sentences, that I felt the sentences and phrases were often mimicking the movement of waves on the shore.  And it just thrills me when words are so beautifully steeped in the essence of the book.

ROBERT EDRIC

Thank you for that.  Do you know something, one of the greatest things for me in writing is being able to do that.  It somehow doesn’t matter that the reader doesn’t pick up on it–it’s always nice when it happens–but it doesn’t matter, because the ability to put things in is more important than the ability to take them out at the end.  And I’m a great fan of something called euphony where words simply look right, the tone… I mean I’m one of these ridiculous writers.  I think James Joyce used to do it.  I read a sentence and instinctively I know if it’s right or wrong.  And if it’s wrong, and I don’t know why it’s wrong, I work out the number of syllables, and it’s a ridiculous way of structuring a sentence, but sometimes it is simply the number of syllables in a sentence which is wrong.  And it’s not something you pick up, it’s instinctive, like walking or running, you know how to do the thing you do well, but it goes wrong sometimes and if you were that good at doing it, why does it keep going wrong?  And yes, you’re right, there’s an incredible amount of watery imagery in The Mermaids, and there’s a lot of reflection, there’s a lot of looking glass, there’s a lot of surface of water, there’s a lot of the tide rising and falling, just as the tide rises and falls through the little village.  And there are a lot of people changing direction just as the tide comes and goes, and there are lots of people being believed and disbelieved in equal measure.  And I live at the seaside, I walk my dog on the beach once or twice a day, and I know what a difference living by the sea makes.  I don’t suspect you get that there.

REBECCA KUDER

I sure don’t!  Sadly.

It’s interesting about sound–it’s such an intimate connection with words and sound and how things look and sound.  I remember being at a seminar that Cathy Smith Bowers, an American poet, was giving, and she handed out this chart of vowel sounds and the feelings that we get from different vowel sounds, and I realize that I hear that and I experience it intuitively, but looking at it now, on later drafts, I can see, “Oh, I have lots of o sounds here, what’s going on with that,” and then make more of it.  In The Mermaids, there is a passage on p. 41 where you have such beautiful repetition: “She herself had told no one except the photographer, and had told no one else of what she hat told and shown to him–told no one that he and she had gone back to the cave together before the sea had returned and filled it again…” and the repetition of “had told” was somehow very luscious.  And the vowel sounds supposedly cause, in the reader, feelings of sorrow, awe, dread, gloom, heaviness, but also of calm and soothing, so it’s an interesting and very complicated way to look at sentences but it’s a poet’s look at sentences, I guess, and I love seeing that in prose.

ROBERT EDRIC

Most writers who’ve served their proper apprenticeship–I mean, I’ve published, God knows, 20, 22 books now–and so I daresay that intuitively, you do pick up these things without being told what you’re doing.  It almost seems preposterous to tell a creative writing student that there are too many i’s or too many o’s and why do you use the word “told” four times in two sentences?  Well, one answer for that is it’s like a bell being tolled, and if you’re telling someone, you’re not simply whispering or speaking or saying or remarking or answering or suggesting, telling someone is a different thing entirely.  I love deciding which words work best.  And I think with things like The Mermaids, it is an allegory, and most allegories depend on a very very simple language… not childlike, but a language a child would easily understand.  My first instinct on writing The Mermaids was to make it so a ten-year-old could read that book.  And there’s not a word in it that they wouldn’t understand.  I know it has a few dark shadows in the book which children wouldn’t appreciate, and I know it’s about puberty and adolescence, which a lot of people don’t want to sort of face up to, from either side of it, so to speak, but the language of the book is–I hesitate to use the word “biblical”–but biblical language is incredibly straightforward.  If somebody’s saying something, it is “I said” “he said” “I said” “he said” and I think that that’s great.  People worry about this; people worry in creative writing, they say, “Oh, you’ve used ‘he said/she said/he said/she said’” and I normally say to that, “Well, if we know who’s speaking, there’s no need to tell it, but by telling who said it, you’re making another point.  It’s a bit like the old cliché about Raymond Carver, “Oh, God, he overdoes it,” but he doesn’t.  “What’s the weather like?” he said, “It’s raining,” she said.  “Is it?” he said.  “Yes,” she said.  It’s the “he saids” and “she saids” in that sentence that make it the desperate little conversation it is.  And I don’t know how you can tell people that that’s a good thing or the right thing or the proper way to do it, but it is.  Like most writers, you do intuitively know it.

REBECCA KUDER

And it becomes a metronome, sort of.

ROBERT EDRIC

It does.  And part of euphony, part of words looking and sounding right is of course the rhythm.  I love the rhythm of words.  I love words that somehow look to be doing the job they’re doing.  In a very simple way, “he said/she said” does, but then you can describe the flow of water, the flow of seaweed, the flow of air, the flow of time, the flow of a narrative, the flow of a dress, the flow of anything.  You can describe words using the same one, you can describe events using the same few words.  Short stories, and novels, have to have some kind of cumulative effect.  The nice thing about The Mermaids, from my side, is that, with it being only eighty pages long, I can control that flow from beginning to end.  I would love that book to be read in a single sitting because there will be echoes and reflections throughout it which depend upon each other.  You read the first ten pages of a novel, and by the time you get to page 400, there are meant to be echoes and reflections of 400 pages ago, so you might be two or three months away from that first page, whereas with something like The Mermaids, you’re very close to the first page still.  It is, in a sense, like writing a piece of music.

(TO BE CONTINUED…)

Stitches by David Small (how to deal with eyes)

Small print: “by my durn grandson DAVID SMALL Durnit…!!”

One of my students sent me a link to the ten best graphic memoirs, according to Time.  David Small’s book, Stitches, was included.  I find graphic memoir (graphic “literature” in general) fascinating.  (There’s that annoying question of whether anything created in the comic strip format can be considered LITERATURE, to which I say hell yes, but that’s another post.)  Many have commented about how writers contain the uncontainable within the tight frames of comic, and how useful that can be–similar to using tight poetic forms as scaffolding for what is huge, frightening, or unapproachable.

I was engrossed in Stitches, for many reasons, and I look forward to reading Small’s books for children.  One particular greatness of Stitches was Small’s use of eyeglasses to obscure eyes.  In the book, his elders who wear glasses usually have blank space behind the lenses, so their eyes are unavailable, erased, hidden.  It’s not until crucial moments in the drama, when truth is being told, or when the character is suddenly vulnerable, that eyes are depicted.  This is one of the things that graphic literature can do so beautifully–adding visual layers to the storytelling that cannot be done with words alone.

Among some pieces of wisdom I’ve been given by writers and teachers (and give, now, to my students) is to take care when writing about eyes.  I’ve included this advice in a handout I give to students.  The following may sound overly dogmatic, and in the whole document I do discuss  how rules can (and often should) be broken, if broken well and with foresight, but sometimes it’s necessary to remember:

USE CAUTION WITH EYES, FACES, AND FACIAL EXPRESSIONS

Be careful when you are describing how a point of view (POV) character looks, unless the person is looking in the mirror.  However, it can be a cliché to use a character looking in a mirror just so the writer can describe the character’s appearance.  Showing a POV character’s face (reddening, for instance) can sound stiff and inauthentic.  If you are going to describe how a character looks, focus on more interesting details beyond the data that would be listed on a drivers’ license (hair color, eye color, height, and weight) unless those details are integral to the story.  And these glimpses of characters should come naturally from the story, lest they feel pasted on to assist the reader imagine how the character looks.  (Readers like to use their imaginations!)

Another note about eyes

You can get into trouble when depicting ANY character’s eyes doing things, and describing facial expressions in general.  Eyes and faces, in real life, do convey nonverbal messages, but it’s difficult to translate these things into prose.  Be aware of how you do this, if you choose to do this.  It’s often better to let the actions and dialogue of your characters illustrate their inner states of being, rather than description from the outside.  It’s always good to be careful with the actions of eyes, for instance “his eyes followed her across the room,” because such descriptions, if taken literally, can draw the reader out of the story.

The Lucky Seven Meme

(Gratuitous photo of Jobs with Tangerine iBook because I wish I still had mine, unrelated to this post.)

Marly Youmans, author of the freshly-released novel A Death At The White Camellia Orphanage, tagged me on her lovely blog.  Marly is a wonderful writer, and if you haven’t read her work, you should.  As for the meme, I’m playing.  Below is from my novel in progress, The Eight Mile Suspended Carnival.

Here are the meme rules:

  • Go to page 7 or 77 in your current manuscript
  • Go to line 7
  • Post on your blog the next 7 lines, or sentences, as they are – no cheating!
  • Tag 7 other authors to do the same

***

Mim stopped herself telling Cleopatra anything about Beede.  She wanted to hold him inside herself, alone, to hoard him, as long as she could.  If she told of him, it would water down his essence.  And there was something hungry about Cleopatra that made Mim not want to share Beede with her in particular.  Tonight Cleopatra smelled sharp and musty, like she had been cooking remedies, or maybe she had been outside with a man, but Mim couldn’t separate the smells to divine which man, and Cleopatra never told when or if.

“Where did you come up with alabaster?” Cleopatra asked.

“Suspenders.”  Mim wanted an answer.

***

So with no intention to annoy, I’m tagging seven friends who write…

  1. Elaine Gale
  2. Candace Kearns Read
  3. Chris Tebbetts
  4. Cyndi Pauwels
  5. Jennifer New
  6. Jaime Adoff
  7. Jennifer Bennett

“I’ve got a theory, it could be bunnies”

In which Anya confronts her demons...

I’ve always loved that scene in the Buffy musical where Anya rocks out against bunnies. If you haven’t seen it, do.  (Joss et al seem to have locked down movies I used to find on youtube, but you’ll get the idea.)

Because everyone in the land called Facebook seems to be posting something about rabbits today (why? I ask you) I’d like to share a snip from a story I’m writing called “Rabbit, Cat, Girl.”  Here goes:

You want to know about the girl.  I want to tell you.  But I must begin with rabbits.

Here’s what I know: there have been rabbits since the start of the world, gnawing the sharp drygrass when there are no tender green spring shoots.  They burrow into the bases of catalpa trees, and under bushes, hiding like vermin.  Some people find rabbits endearing, benevolent like the smiling Easter Bunny, a chocolate charade, lurking beneath false rebirth of spring.  Soft and so helpless, they hop like little innocents, and grow like armies, eating everything.  Have you ever studied a rabbit’s teeth?

 

The latest from Marly Youmans

Having read the first page of A Death at the White Camellia Orphanage by Marly Youmans, I’m eager to read the rest.  For me it’s a moment of “can’t wait, have to wait” because some work reading must precede this novel, but I hope time will expand so I can get to this novel sooner.  I had the pleasure of participating in Marly’s decentralized interview leading up to the novel’s recent release.  You can read that brief interview here.

“One of the savers”

Wilbur, Charlotte, and some of her work

I am reading my four-year-old daughter Charlotte’s Web, by E.B. White.  I had forgotten how great the book is–easily one of the best novels I’ve ever read.

The first line: “‘Where’s Papa going with that axe?’ said Fern to her mother as they were setting the table for breakfast.”   Seriously, I can’t think of a better hook.  When I took it from the shelf last week, my daughter was hesitant to read what, a year or so ago, she had with odd prescience named “the bacon book.”  I said, “I’m just going to read the first line.”  I did.

E.B. White’s hook worked.

I love reading this book aloud because it’s so easy to read aloud.  E.B. White did his work well.

Today, after reading her the chapter where Wilbur et al prepare to go to the Fair, my daughter acted out part of the story.  She needed a spider, and I remembered my husband’s wonderful Steiff spider, now known as “Charlotte.”

My daughter (“Fern”) quickly made a tent for Wilbur and Templeton (because, she informed me, they were going to kill Templeton, too).  She said that Charlotte was “one of the savers.”  Fern and Charlotte were saving Wilbur and Templeton.

So another reason to love this book: from it spins the truth that it’s not only males who do the saving around the farm.  Females do, too.  Children who hear animals talking are taken seriously by most adults, even the medical establishment, in the form of Dr. Dorian: “Children pay better attention than grownups.  If Fern says that the animals in Zuckerman’s barn talk, I’m quite ready to believe her.  Perhaps if people talked less, animals would talk more.  People are incessant talkers–I can give you my word on that.”

I can’t wait until bedtime, so I can remember what happens next.

Stories help make us more human!

One of many fantastic books by Vivian Gussin Paley

And yes, I grant myself that exclamation point!

Here’s an interesting piece by Annie Murphy Paul about the neroscience of reading fiction.  It validates things that many know intuitively: among other things, reading fiction makes more empathetic humans.  (And it slashes through those conversations–conversations which, frankly, piss me off–about how nonfiction is somehow more important than fiction in helping people deal with “the real world.”  I love that the study corrects for things like whether people who are more naturally empathetic read more fiction.  Take that!)

Described in the piece is how we register sensations as we read descriptive language: how the evocative qualities of words like “cinnamon” work our sense of smell.  This aligns with something I heard the poet Cathy Smith Bowers discuss: when we read a word aloud, its sound affects us emotionally, but even when we read a word silently on the page, our bodies experience similar sensations.  As a writer of fiction, all this helps me understand why I care about what I do.  Why it’s important to make stories.  As a reader, it all sounds very true.

Last night, I finished reading Vivian Paley’s book, A Child’s Work.  Its emphasis is on the importance of fantasy play and stories in developing a young child’s ways of processing and coping with the world.  All the books by MacArthur Fellowship recipient Paley that I’ve read have moved me–she is a gifted writer, and her subject is so vital.  In her work, in addition to her observations as a wise teacher, she records and shares dialogue from real children in real classrooms, making sense of their real worlds and lives through fantasy and imagination.  In this book, Paley rightfully despairs at the push to bring academics to children too soon, leaving less and less time for preschool children to dream and do their natural thing.  Among many passages in this book that move me and are so true, Paley writes, on p. 102:

“Every day brought me new evidence of the preeminence of fantasy in children’s thinking.  It has reinforced my certainty that we perform a grave error when we remove fantasy play as the foundation of early childhood education.

We are going too far in the opposite direction.  Some school people feel that because young children engage in magical thinking we must pull them on to another track as early as possible; having added extra years of schooling to their lives, we are emboldened to counteract fantasy play with ‘reality-based’ activities.

Is this not the adult version of magical thinking?  To imagine that the purpose of early childhood education is to reorder the stages of human development is like the story of the prince who was turned into a frog.  In attempting to turn children into creatures that are unchildlike, we ignore all the messages young children give us as they play.  The frog turns back into a prince when the princess recognizes his need to be treated with kindness and respect.  In the case of our children, this would include the kindness of acknowledging that their perceptions and premises are not the same as older children’s or as our own.”

This idea of how we think we can reorder the natural stages of a child’s development haunts me.  Paley’s work speaks to me in particular now as the mother of a young child.  And pausing to read it has helped me slow down enough to more fully engage in the play my daughter is about.  So many of her sentences start with “Pretend that…” and I’m paying closer attention, and doing more active pretending with her.  (It’s good for adults, too!)  But anyone who is interested in stories and storytelling and their central importance to our humanity ought to read Paley’s books.  The Boy On The Beach is a really good one, too, and gets at why storytelling is important to building communities.

Now, back to my story in progress…

Interview with Marly Youmans

I love what I’ve read of Marly Youmans’ work.  Her words remind me of snowdrops.  I’m using her story, “The Horse Angel,” for a class I’m teaching this spring.  The story is quiet, lovely, and tender without being sticky-sweet.  It’s also great example of how to do tricky maneuvers well, for example, using two points of view in a short story.  In the story, Youmans performs feats that new writers are often told not to attempt, but shows why rules should be broken, if broken well.  I am eager to read her forthcoming novel, Winner of The Ferrol Sams Award for Fiction, A Death at the White Camellia Orphanage from Mercer University Press.  I’m also honored to participate in the collective interview she’s giving at several blogs, in anticipation of the novel’s release on March 30, 2012.  You can order the novel from the publisher here.

 Rebecca:

As I re-read your story, “The Horse Angel,” I noticed a fascination with layers of orphandom.  Of the ghost in the mirror, you write, “…Edward and I thought that he looked as though he’d mislaid something of value and couldn’t think where it might be.  Or maybe it’s his family he’s mislaid. Maybe he can’t find his way back to them.”  The newly widowed Elsbeth dreams of her past, of being a sort of parent orphan: “…we are young man and woman again but changed, and often I hold my lost boy in my arms.”  And Mary, the younger neighbor of Elsbeth was violently orphaned when her stepfather killed her mother and then himself.  Your new novel, A Death at the White Camellia Orphanage, centers around the journey of a young orphan Pip Tatnell.  What is it that compels you to write about the orphan?

Marly:

Reading that quote from “The Horse Angel,” I immediately remembered the Rachel in Moby-Dick: how Stubb thinks that the captain of the ship has lost something, perhaps his watch, only to find that it is his precious son that he has lost to the sea. Some of my favorite characters are orphans—Ishmael is an orphan, and the indomitable Jane Eyre, and that other Pip from Great Expectations, and many more. “Orphan” is a state that often produces maximum trials and also may allow maximum freedom of thought and movement; it is automatically a condition set apart, a kind of state and place where dramatic things may happen. Fairy tales and stories often kill off the parents before or at the start.

I had not considered a relationship between “The Horse Angel” and A Death at the White Camellia Orphanage until you mentioned the two together. Perhaps one of your students assigned to read the story will read the book and tell me about it!

Although I am reticent about such matters and don’t care much for author talk about family or personal life (I have a distaste for the idea of misfortunes being used as a sensational marketing “hook,” though it is often done), I will say that my family suffered a death of one of its members in my childhood.  Such losses shape people and do not end or go away but leave traces. The sense that something is terribly missing can be quite strong and leave a child with the sense of being orphaned from the way the world ought to be. No doubt that childhood feeling colors “The Horse Angel” and A Death from the White Camellia Orphanage as well.

**

More about the novel can be found at Marly Youmans’ blog.

Comments from writers about A Death at the White Camellia Orphanage:

“A Death at the White Camellia Orphanage tells of a young boy’s travels through the black heart of Depression America and his search for light both metaphorical and real.  Writing with a controlled lyrical passion, Marly Youmans has crafted the finest, and the truest period novel I’ve read in years.”  –Lucius Shepard

“Marly Youmans’ new book is a vividly realized, panoramic novel of survival during The Great Depression. There is poetry in Youmans’ writing, but she also knows how to tell a riveting story.”  –Ron Rash

“In A Death at the White Camellia Orphanage, Marly Youmans gives us a beautifully written and exceptionally satisfying novel. The book reads as if Youmans took the best parts of The Grapes of Wrath, On the Road, The Reivers, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time and crafted from them a tale both magical and fine. Her rich language and lovely turns of phrase invite the reader to linger. Ironically, there is at the same time a subtle pressure throughout the novel to turn the page, because Youmans has achieved that rarest of all accomplishments: she has created a flawed hero about which we care. A Death at the White Camellia Orphanage is one of the best books I have read.” –Raymond L. Atkins

From the cover:

After a death at the White Camellia Orphanage, young Pip Tatnall leaves Lexsy, Georgia to become a road kid, riding the rails east, west, and north. A bright, unusual boy who is disillusioned at a young age, Pip believes that he sees guilt shining in the faces of men wherever he goes. On his picaresque journey, he sweeps through society, revealing the highest and lowest in human nature and only slowly coming to self-understanding. He searches the points of the compass for what will help, groping for a place where he can feel content, certain that he has no place where he belongs and that he rides the rails through a great darkness. His difficult path to collect enough radiance to light his way home is the road of a boy struggling to come to terms with the cruel but sometimes lovely world of Depression-era America.

On Youmans’ prior forays into the past, reviewers praised her “spellbinding force” (Bob Sumner, Orlando Sentinel), “prodigious powers of description” (Philip Gambone, New York Times), “serious artistry,” “unobtrusively beautiful language,” and “considerable power” (Fred Chappell, Raleigh News and Observer), “haunting, lyrical language and fierce intelligence” (starred review, Publishers Weekly.) Howard Bahr wrote of The Wolf Pit, “Ms. Youmans is an inspiration to every writer who must compete with himself. I had thought Catherwood unsurpassable, but Ms. Youmans has done it. Her characters are real; they live and move in the stream of Time as if they had passed only yesterday. Her lyricism breaks my heart and fills me with envy and delight. No other writer I know of can bring the past to us so musically, so truly.”

What I thought inessential is essential

 

This is a different mess of mine, but looks similar

So I’ve been working on this terribly overwritten draft of my novel in progress.  Gone through the printed pages carefully, cutting, pruning, taking out piles of adjectives and phrases.  The typed pages are a mess now, not unlike this other mess from a previous project.  I keep thinking, “Which gremlin scribbled all over these neat pages here that I now have to type up?” though the gremlin is me.  This novel I have been writing since 2004.  Part of its problem is uneven terrain: while I was figuring out what it was, I was writing along, letting time pass in the story, and the story emerged like sourdough bread (a terrible metaphor!) that, 100 or so pages into it, actually begins to take shape.  So now as I comb through the years of words on these pages, I see where things need to be built up, and where torn down.  With this project, I pushed language and narrative beyond anything I’d ever done.  On purpose.  Because I could!  Here I gave myself license to write a really bad first draft, and use all the purple colorful clang I heard in my head.  (Knowing I would cut later.)

Too many adjectives!  Oy vey!  Too many phrases strung together that unwound from my mind and at one moment in time made sense but now hang like random junkyard decoration.  Get that egg beater out of there!  What did I just step on?  Is that stench overripe bandanna?  And so on.

Get it out of here!

I realize at least two things about this draft, both of which were essential to my authority in telling the story.  I needed both:

1) The self-indulgent “let everything be in there” messiness.   As author and creator of this world, I had to see how dingy and dusty and clangy and rotten the nouns were.  I had to see the layers of adjective like paint on an old carnival sign, repainted over crack and crumble.  How else would I know the patina of this place?  And;

2) The excessive phrases that are stage directions: “She put the scissors on the round table to the left of the door” and so on.  If it’s even important that she put the scissors down (question everything!) does it matter where?  She put them down.  Fine.  But the writer, again, to establish authority, must see the whole thing happening like a play, must know and track where the scissors are put down.  In case someone else needs to bob her hair!  And so on like that.

If I know this world I’m writing is dusty and clangy and I know where the scissors are, I don’t have to tell you (unless it’s important to the story).  If I am doing my job well enough, the reader will trust me.  She will thank me for sparing her unnecessary words.  Doing so will leave me more room for the things that really need to be there.  It’s like all the doing of research that doesn’t end up in the novel.  Having those things, knowing them, seeing and breathing them, is what allows me to tell the story in a way that will keep people reading.

I hope.

 

Eating potatoes, greedily

Flann O'Brien, of whose prose I could not get enough last month

Like tucking into a vat of potatoes after long without food, during winter break, I read in rapid (rabid?) succession Flann O’Brien’s The Poor Mouth and The Hard Life. Truly when I finished reading The Poor Mouth, I was still hungry and needed more.  Good thing I stocked up on both books!

Anything I say about Flann O’Brien will clunk like a can down malnourished and decrepit steps into the void of my own unworthiness, but my evangelical urge I can no longer ignore.  So.

If you’re into the show “Lost” perhaps you’ve heard of or even read O’Brien’s The Third Policeman.  I didn’t watch many episodes of that show, so I’m blind to the connection, but I’m glad more people heard about (and possibly read) O’Brien’s novel.  (The which I need to re-read, and soon.  I first read it as part of a seminar in grad school with Rod Val Moore.  The book was suggested in preparation for a field trip to the Museum of Jurassic Technology.)

Reading The Poor Mouth (published in 1941) is like diving into a pool of hilarity and squalor (yes) and eating it all with a spoon.  Yum, hyperbole!  My favorite!  Among other things I hope to grasp as soon as I re-read The Poor Mouth, O’Brien becomes a sort of cantor, invoking lyrical phrases of misery, a tapestry of moments in which, for instance, we hear, “…generally no sound except the roar of the water falling outside from gloomy skies, just as if those on high were emptying buckets of that vile wetness on the world.”  A tattered weariness in which scenes begin with openings like: “One afternoon I was reclining on the rushes in the end of the house considering the ill-luck and evil that had befallen the Gaels (and would always abide with them) when…”  Reveling in this luxurious squalor and over-the-topness, I laughed loud and often as I read along, even more than while reading Wodehouse.  To rip a phrase from O’Brien and twist it terribly, each chapter is like a thesis, proving without doubt that the plight of O’Brien’s Gaels is a bad life “whose like will ever be there again.”  (Just read the book.  It’s short.  If you hate it, I’ll give your money back.)  I also need to read it again to see how it lines up with another hyperbolic novel on the topic of poverty, though not nearly as hilarious, George Orwell’s Down and Out in Paris and London.

Literary belly still grumbling, I took up The Hard Life.  Published in 1962, the story was more shaped and plotty than The Poor Mouth.  At intervals, two characters tussle in flappy rants about the shadowy political power of Jesuits within the Catholic church.  Their dialogue was so well written that I didn’t struggle, despite my lack of knowledge about the issues they debated.  To press these two characters into a modern context, their arguments could have been mouth-offs between two old school rappers, one-upping each other (mostly) good-naturedly, but with no self-censor.  They were funny.  And the mountingly bizarre plot twists were delectable.  (See, I’m still on this stuff as if it’s food!  And really, it is.)  The end was unexpected and brilliant.  I’ll say no more, so as not to spoil a good meal.

Bon appetit!