Spilling Literary Blood

I overheard a portion of a conversation last week between two writers. One was admitting her hesitancy of killing off characters. She just couldn't find the heart to do the deed.

My ears perked up at that and I immediately inserted myself into the conversation.

I have no problem killing off characters. Whether they be unnamed disposable characters like soldiers or named characters that are central to the plot.

I kill 'em off, and do I it with relish.

To me when I'm doing my detailed plotline I'm continually asking myself questions about what choices or character fates would be the most dramatic. I want my readers to experience through my story a full range of emotions and includes feeling revulsion at the horrors of war as well as overwhelming sorrow when Life is unfair and a character dies a premature death.

That's what I like in drama: bold dramatic bangs, cliff hangers and cathartic cries.

In the source material that I'm using to write my legends of Charlemagne epic, there are literally thousands of characters. Not all are named characters, but it was a medieval soap opera with a myriad of plot threads being spun by the two poets, (Boiardo and later Ariosto.) Most of the plot threads eventually came together and you began to see the immense tapestry they wove over the multiple decades it took to write. However, some character arcs were not dealt with in what I consider to be a satisfying manner. They simply trailed off without having their thread tied off or cut off. It wasn't something that bothered me whilst I was reading, because the grandeur of both Orlando Innamorato and Orlando Furioso does not really allow you to reflect on things that are omitted.

It is only when you have read the entire magnum opus and go back to analyze the individual parts would you recognize that there were some aspects that were not as dramatically satisfying as they could have been.

Maybe I'm just spoiled as a reader and a lover of drama. I want everything to be neatly tied off whenever possible. I believe in the idea of Chekhov's gun that if you introduce a plot element like a loaded rifle that it must be fired, otherwise don't bring that prop onstage.

My favorite stand alone novel is Aztec by Gary Jennings. I remember being in awe when I saw what had appeared to be an offhanded remark in the narrative come back into play hundreds of pages later. It is over a thousand pages and there was nothing superfluous in that book.

To me that is my standard to which I calibrate my writing against. I of course, do not measure up but it is my goal.

Therefore, in my version of the legends of Charlemagne, whenever a character is going to no longer be necessary to the plot I sit back and decide how best to tie off their story.

A lot of times that means death.

However, I try to think of how to kill them off in a different manner than other character deaths because I do not wish to be repetitive. So they must die a different style of death, and hopefully in a manner that befits them and their ultimately tragic character arc. There are characters who I will be killing off in the future and I'm looking forward to writing those scenes. Because I'll be able to sink my teeth into them.

It's interesting because one of the members in my critique group had commented that she found my descriptions of some of the battle scenes as being too disturbing, too visceral, too graphic. One scene she had particular problem with did not show any deaths, but instead it was a nasty horrible king who spoke about how to introduce disease into a castle under siege. It included a discussion of dismemberment, decay of corpses and of using catapults to hurl the crude biological weapon amongst their enemies.

They did that kind of thing back then. Her revulsion was actually what I was trying to elicit with that passage.

I shook my head and reminded her that my story takes place in the middle of a war and this was during the medieval period. How did one soldier kill another? By sword, by lance, by battle axe. They either were slashed, stabbed, bludgeoned or possibly burned to death. It's not pretty. Modern warfare isn't pretty either, but the concept of biological weapons isn't a recent invention. It goes back for millenia.

On the other hand, I do have heads sailing through the air because killing by decapitation is quick and decisive. Sometimes I just want to kill a character and move on.

I'm a pacifist in real life, but as an author I am cruel and heartless and I will kill off characters without hesitation.

Does anyone have a problem with that? Or do you find killing off a character makes you so queasy you just can't bring yourself to do pull the metaphorical trigger?

Just wondering...

Linda

San Francisco Writers Conference

I volunteered at the San Francisco Writers Conference this year. Kate Farrell, Tyler Stanley, Pat Tyler, as well as Marlene Cullen and Ransom Stephens were all volunteers as well. I felt proud to be in such company, and know were all a part of the Sonoma County writing community.

This was the fourth annual San Francisco Writers Conference and it was sold out. Three hundred and fifty writers of varying levels of experience came from thirty one states and Canada.

I had several assigned tasks, but it was the impromptu interactions with attendees that I enjoyed the most. There were times when I felt like a roving ambassador, giving directions, answering questions and engaging people in conversation when people were waiting. I felt that my experience and knowledge gleaned from going to other conferences and being a CWC member bore fruit. I networked with writers, extolled the virtues of belonging to the nation’s oldest professional writers club and told them various places to find information they sought. I had printed up 20 business cards, but should have made more as I ran out before the conference was over giving them out to writers.

The conference had forty workshop sessions to attend and opportunities to talk with agents and editors. Part of the conference dealt with creating the perfect pitch. There was a morning session devoted to this subject as well as an after hours session where people were invited to practice their pitch and compete against one another. This led to a debate as to whether the ideal pitch should be 25 words or 25 seconds. I had not attended that competition, and I’m glad I hadn’t. That’s way too much pressure to put on people.

Yes, a pitch is important, but it is not the be-all-and-end-all of how to interest someone in your writing. I understand that by describing your project succinctly it might become the description an agent uses with an editor, which might later be used by the editor to sell the idea to the acquisitions team, then in a further incarnation it might wind up being used on a back cover to tempt the book buyer. So, while a pitch is important I don’t think you need to sweat the exact number of words nor the exact number of seconds it takes to say it. Egads, talk about performance anxiety.

I had read several agent blogs in the last few weeks discussing their viewpoint on the “speed date” sessions. Agents generally cringe at the mere thought of these events because they are bombarded by nervous writers desperate to make a good impression in less than three minutes. As if an entire life’s work and self-worth could be boiled down and encapsulated into three stress-filled minutes. Of course it can’t, and therein lies the rub.

The nervousness over meeting with agents and editors seemed pervasive and I did my part to try and alleviate some of the stress. I told people that they would be better served to relax, smile and show your human side first before launching into a spring loaded pitch that you’ve been obsessing over. Because not only are agents interested in your writing project, but they’re also interested in knowing whether or not you’ll be a client from hell. Being nervous or tetchy if you didn’t get your exact full three minutes will not play in your favor.

So I tried to be as relaxed as possible. Two of the three agents I met at the Speed Date session I had met several times over the weekend in my volunteer capacity, so when I sat down at their table I was a familiar friendly face. I exchanged some pleasantries before giving my pitch.

The third agent I had not met before. I had researched the different agents the weekend prior to the conference and saw a mention on her agency’s website that she liked damp castles. That description was not in the conference blurb about her, nor did she say anything about it when she introduced herself. So I started my time with her by saying that I was approaching her because of her stated fondness for damp castles.

Then I gave her my pitch.

As it turned out, I received three requests for partials. Three for three. That’s a lot better than my batting average at previous conferences.

By Sunday afternoon, I said goodbye to many of the writers that I had met and talked with over the weekend. They all said they felt it was worth their time, expense and travel to come to the conference. They were grateful for the advice and encouragement that they had gotten along the way.

And that, made me feel good.

Linda

Anyone who was interested but unable to attend the conference – you can listen to the various workshops either by CD or MP3 file. Each session was recorded and available on www.vwtapes.com That website also has recordings from other writers conferences as well.