4th of July Weekend

Where To Start

July 2, 2009

Typically, we're taught in life to start at the beginning and proceed to the end. Which isn't necessarily a good idea in fiction. Not that you want to start at the end and go backwards, although from time to time a writer will try that. Or use some sort of framing device or a prologue, etc.

So, without giving too much away, I'm reading a couple chapters of a thriller novel by an accomplished novelist friend of mine who shall remain unnamed (Erica), and I'm pondering (not powdering) the first chapter. Because it's good. Very good, probably.

But it starts with description, moves on to character development, and then gets going with a nice surprise, action, twist toward the end.

But...

I'm thinking: this is a hell of a way to start a thriller.

Or is it?

I'm biased, because I like to start my novels pretty much in the middle of something very dramatic. Here's the first couple paragraphs of a novel I'm probably going to write next.

Grozny, Chechnya

The Russian agent, Pyotr Sidorov, was dying and he knew it. He barely made it back to one of the UAZ Patriots his team had come in, stumbling in the dark over uneven, potholed concrete. Should have brought a fucking Vodnik, he thought through his pain, referring to the Russian Army’s version of the Humvee. He flung open the driver-side door with the last of his strength and tumbled behind the wheel.

Behind him the warehouse burned. All dead, he thought, and fumbled with the keys to the Patriot. Glancing down in the gloom, he saw that the hand clenched against his gut was scarlet with blood. The pain was immense, unlike anything he had experienced. It seemed to stretch onto infinity, some bizarre, unending sensation that took away all other sensations. How the hell did I make it this far?

* * *

Granted, not all novels, thriller or otherwise, need to start in the middle of something filled with action. It's my preference that they do. Maybe I'm ADD. And I think there are a lot of good reasons to set the stage and develop your character before setting him on fire (for instance). But I also think readers, especially readers that don't know your work, need to be able to pick up the book at the bookstore on the basis of the title and cover, look at the first couple sentences, and either be drawn in by the story or by your voice. Maybe I just don't trust readers, which is a topic for a different time, I think.

So should She-Who-I'm-Not-Naming (Erica) change her first chapter? Well, I'm not sure. I would probably recommend a prologue. Given the nature of the book, she should check out, for instance, James Rollins' latest, The Doomsday Key, to see how he starts it--with an historical prologue; or some of David Morrell's novels like The Fifth Profession or The Brotherhood of the Rose.

Or not. Because I read it, after all, and was surprised and drawn in by the end of the chapter, if not earlier. I was entranced by the idea of a person being killed by a pack of wild dogs, which struck me as being a potential prologue, rather than a brief mention.

It depends. The technique of starting in the middle of things is called in media res, and it works very well, although some readers want to be seduced into a story rather than thrust into it. Maybe I'm just a guy who wants to get over the foreplay and onto the, er, main event. That said, scene setting can be important, and if there's a weakness in my books (not "if" actually) it's related to scene-setting and characterization. How you do it, when you do it, those are all complicated decisions.

What do you think?

Cheers,

Mark Terry

Copy Edits

June 30, 2009

I'm going over the copyeditor's edits on the manuscript of The Fallen, due out from Oceanview Publishing in April 2010.

Oy.

I find this exhausting. It's not because I have a terribly cluttered manuscript. I don't. It's pretty clean. But I find I have to really think about some of the edits. Generally they're stylistic--this copyeditor wants serial commas, which I generally don't. The copyeditor doesn't seem to want to capitalize titles, like chief of staff versus Chief of Staff, whereas I generally do. From time to time I just plain disagree and say so.

She's made one or two suggestions for changes in words and sometimes I say, okay, whatever, and other times I say, No, I prefer what I had.

Like most edits, you still have to spend some time trying to figure out what's going on in the head of the editor. That's what's tiring, I guess.

Cheers,

Mark Terry

p.s. for your own post-it note: 

Powder Grace

June 29, 2009

Driving home after picking up my youngest at swim club, I saw a bumper sticker that read: Powder Grace.

Which, frankly, made no sense whatsoever.

Then I realized, by squinting, that it actually read: Ponder Grace.

What a difference a single letter makes.

Not, really, that out of context "Ponder Grace" makes much sense. Youngest Son, at the age of 11, said, "What's that mean?"

To which Leanne said, "Think about grace."

And I said, "It's a religious thing. Grace of God. Unless it refers to pondering something graceful. Or maybe pondering someone named Grace."

As a zen koan, though, I sort of like: Powder Grace.

I suppose if you know Grace, your willingness to powder her may have some variables. I don't know.

Cheers,

Mark Terry

Yeah, That's What You Think It Is

June 28, 2009

Home, finally. It was a long trip, but pretty good. I do this same conference every year with varying results--I'm the editor of The Journal of the Association of Genetic Technologists. Yes, that photograph was taken by the meeting organizer and my friend, Joyce Miller, from the conference room of the Jacksonville Hyatt Regency Riverfront on Friday night. And yes, as a matter of fact, it IS what you think it is.

Like I said, every year is different.

Cheers,

Mark Terry