Do you Want to Start #Writing Like #Steinbeck?

 

This week marks the 75th anniversary of the the film release of Grapes of Wrath so I thought it was appropriate to re-purpose this post. If you want to start writing like Steinbeck, then take a look at some of the things he found important and include them in your writing. "Learn from the best"

John Steinbeck’s writing methodology was stringent and meticulous. When writer's you love talk about how they write, it’s hard not listen.Steinbeck really wanted Grapes of Wrath to be good  - exposing the exploitation of people in 1930’s Southern California, was a story he thought needed telling. I re-read the novel a while ago, and the style blew me away.

[tweetthis] "Nothing about The Grapes of Wrath is dated."[/tweetthis]

It's incredibly refreshing to read a book with such valuable social commentary that's also just a damn good story. Part of its success lies in the fact that we live, eat and sleep with the Joad family. Everything is personal, so we care about what happens to the characters, and it allows us to see the injustice very clearly, without the point being hammered home. Steinbeck simply tells a story.Below is part of John Steinbeck’s interview in the Paris Review*(Please note: Steinbeck died in 1968. A lot of the quotes were compiled in Steinbeck: A Life in Letters and published in October 1975 by Viking. Hence the Paris Review article was not until 1975.)The comments in italics are mine.

 ON GETTING STARTED

Now let me give you the benefit of my experience in facing 400 pages of blank stock—the appalling stuff that must be filled. I know that no one really wants the benefit of anyone's experience which is probably why it is so freely offered. But the following are some of the things I have had to do to keep from going nuts.

 1. Abandon the idea that you are ever going to finish.

Lose track of the 400 pages and write just one page for each day, it helps. Then when it gets finished, you are always surprised.This is the most important one & can’t be said too often. One page at a time.

 2. Write freely

...and as rapidly as possible and throw the whole thing on paper. Never correct or rewrite until the whole thing is down. Rewrite in process is usually found to be an excuse for not going on. It also interferes with flow and rhythm which can only come from a kind of unconscious association with the material. Don’t worry about anyone looking over your shoulder. Just get the work written. Good tip for all of us procrastinators.

 3. Forget your generalized audience.

In the first place, the nameless, faceless audience will scare you to death and in the second place, unlike the theater, it doesn't exist. In writing, your audience is one single reader. I have found that sometimes it helps to pick out one person—a real person you know, or an imagined person and write to that one.I’ve heard this before, and I think it's an excellent way to keep yourself on track. You can't write for everyone. So write for one.

4. If a scene or a section gets the better of you

...and you still think you want it—bypass it and go on. When you have finished the whole you can come back to it and then you may find that the reason it gave trouble is because it didn’t belong there.Rewriting – its all there is. But don't be afraid to write non-sequentially. Sometimes one just isn't in the mood to write about a dramatic moment, so switch gears and go to a section you do want to write today.

 5. Beware of a scene that becomes too dear to you,

...dearer than the rest. It will usually be found that it is out of drawing.Tough to give them up isn’t it?

 6. If you are using dialogue

...say it aloud as you write it. Only then will it have the sound of speech.Excellent tip. If you read it out loud it will sound strained immediately if it’s not working.On my writers resources page I refer to his book Working Days, which is the diary he kept while he was writing Grapes of Wrath. (He wrote his first draft in 6 months BTW!). It’s a great book for writers if only to show how persistent one has to be to make the end product worthwhile.Are these methods  you can work with? Do you have different ways of attacking the same problems? 

Come join the discussion, and please share this post on your favorite social media. 

Many Thanks!

Connect with A.K. Andrew:

* Follow on Twitter          * Like on Facebook          * Pinterest          *Scoop.it

*Paris Review has rich resource material in their decades of interviews of famous people, writers included.I first saw part of this particular interview in one of my favorite blogs www.brainpickings.org

What is Your #Point of View?

I went onto the Sussex Downs at the weekend and was in awe of the beautiful rolling hills punctuated by the brilliant yellow of the rape fields in bloom. I mentioned to a friend how beautiful they were and his response was tempered by the fact he was allergic to them. We had a different point of view on how great they were. Different opinions.In writing, Point of View or POV, refers to who is ‘speaking’, or from who’s ‘vantage point’ the narrative is written. Before I became a writer, I hadn’t paid much attention to this. Waiting for me was the mine field of 'Point of View', with all it pratfalls.Prior to the 20^th century, the ‘omniscient ‘ POV was the norm. The omniscient author, who knew everything about the plot, the characters, and was often free with their opinion, told the story. Think of this wonderful opening line:  

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times”

‘Tale of Two Cities'  by Charles Dickens

-Yeah it was, but says who? The author of course.

Because omniscient authors are god-like, they know what’s in everyones mind at all times, which they may or may not share with the reader. The author can choose to have a ‘limited omniscient’ POV, and in that situation the author focuses on only certain characters, and their inner thoughts.The other end of the spectrum is first person - the story is told, not by the author, but by a character in the novel. While they can act as a narrator, more often than not they are the main protagonist.In first person, the reader is in the mind of the person telling the story at all times. It's sometimes considered an ‘easy’ way to go for a debut novel, as you only have one POV to put forward. But the main drawback to first person POV, is that the reader is limited to the  experience of the character telling the story. We can only know what they know.There are ways around this e.g. someone else recalling an experience to the character. Murakami usually writes in first person, and uses this technique of a separate individual telling a tale in the ‘Wind-up Bird Chronicles’. We’re taken from the world of Murakami’s quirky narrator who enjoys cooking and music, to a Japanese soldier’s recollection of wartime Manchuria. For me, the latter was in some ways the most memorable part of the novel, in part because of an exceptional, albeit graphic, portrayal of a brutal scene. First person POV is often used when the protagonist has a very strongly defined character. Catcher in the Rye is a perfect example of first person, prominent protagonist. We immediately catch a glimpse of the kind of strong character Holden Caulfield will be. Not all first person novels have protagonists with such a striking personality, but the POV certainly lends itself to doing so.

 ‘If you really want to hear about it, the first thing you’ll probably want to know is where I was born and what my lousy childhood was like, and how my parents were occupied and all that David Copperfield kind of crap, but I don’t feel like going into it, if you want to know the truth.”

'Catcher in the Rye' by J.D.Salinger

  In second person POV, the author tells the story. It’s a very underused POV, but it too can have an intimacy to it – as if we’re being told secrets by the author that only we the individual reader will know. It’s more often used in an instructional way, like in a ‘How To Book’.                                                                                 

 “Rub a little on the back of your neck, your forehead and your wrists before you start fishing, and the blacks and skeeters will shun you. The odor of citronella is not offensive to people. It smells like gun oil. But the bugs do hate it.”

 Camping Out.’ by Ernest Hemingway

 The most commonly used POV is third person. The narrative is told by the author, but from a particular person(s) point of view. Third person has the most variety of possibilities of all POVs and though the term suggests objectivity and distance, it doesn’t necessarily mean the reader is remote. We create distance or closeness in the way we write. Closeness can come in third person by the description of concrete things and letting us hear a character’s thoughts.

“His chest was heaving. He could smell Jack –the intensely familiar odour of cigarettes, musky sweat and a faint sweetness like grass, and with it the rushing cold of the mountain.”

 'Broke Back Mountain'  by Annie Proulx,

 Using more than one POV, once considered radical, has become more commonplace. Innovative novels such as 'Cloud Atlas' by David Mitchell and Margaret Atwood’s 'Oryx & Crake' used this technique. It lends itself to interesting work, if it's well written.Generally speaking, switching POV’s is most successful if the entire chapter is in one POV, or at the most, only changed paragraph by paragraph. A classic novice mistake is to change the POV in the same sentence without even noticing e.g. ‘I was two hours late, and ran upstairs to avoid my mother, who was more relieved than angry.’ – In this first person excerpt, how could the narrator know what the mother was thinking?Though it's more usual to have a novel written in one or two POVs, modern fiction constantly challenges the so-called rules. However, if there are too many POVs for the content to support, then it becomes an unconvincing piece of writing. In 'The Sacred Art of Stealing', a satirical thriller  by Christopher Brookmyre, there are five POVs. It was a humorous read until the author turned to lazy writing, adding in POVs merely as a convenient way to move the plot along, without any of the initial punch of the novel.Literary agents typically want to know ‘whose story is it’? So then it’s a tough call for an inexperienced author to give multiple POVs without making sure there is one clearly rising above the rest. I sometimes question if visual entertainment can successfully have an ensemble cast, then why can’t novels do the same?Trying to convey a theme, or premise can be done using any Point of View. But deciding which POV is best to use to present your premise, is one of the biggest challenges a writer faces, and will most likely determine the success of the novel.What POV do you prefer either as a reader or writer? What problems or frustrations have you had with this issue?   Footnote: This post is dedicated to the writer Ged Duncan. He and I have  spent countless hours over the past few years discussing POV. He's also allergic to rapeseed flowers. To follow this blog, click on "FOLLOW" at the bottom  of the page, or SUBSCRIBE at the top of the page!  

Cantoni Sisters - What's in a Name?

I've changed the name of my first novel to The Cantoni Sisters.What's in a name? Depending on what it is  - everything.  For a person, it's either a moniker they're stuck with and hate their entire life, or probably for most of us it's one we're ok with, maybe we play around with abbreviations, nicknames, but settle for what we're given. But names are important. Rightly or wrongly, they can give an impression of what that person is like, or let us foolishly go along with our preconceptions.Would we think of a strong, manly figure being called Pinkie? Well, I would have said no But take the main character in Brighton Rock, by Graham Greene. He's called Pinkie and he's a mean spirited thug. But did that make him strong and manly?  You make the call.For writers, and particularly novelists, as we need to live with the characters for so long - as do our readers - names are incredibly important. I spent hours deliberating names for my characters for my first novel. The fact they are Italian names did not make the job easier. We each have personal associations that interfere with potential choices - people we know, or someone we don't care for; perhaps a teacher who was particularly mean. Our own history colours our decision as well as the characters we're trying to portray.Some people say having names that begin with the same letters make it confusing for the reader. Two brothers called Harry and Henry, I can imagine being easy to mix up, unless their characters are either extremely well defined and/or very different from each other. Take the Kray brothers - Ronnie and Reggie Kray.  Can anyone remember which was which despite the publicity at the time, or the filmic portrayals etc.? I can’t.The younger sister in my novel is called Alma. But initially the older sister, the main protagonist of the novel, was Essie (an Italian abbreviation of Esther). For me I knew who they were, but other people found their names too similar. They had the same number of syllables and they found them confusing. I eventually changed Essie’s name to Raffaella, which instantly made her a different character both in my mind and on the page. I also had to admit, part of the problem was her character hadn’t been clearly enough defined. So changing her name helped me shape her character. I talked about character in my blog a few weeks ago (see Real Characters Feb 18^th).So where does that leave us with the title of the work, in this case a novel? That too has to fit, has to mean something to someone who picks up the book and has only the blurb on the back cover and the title to help them decide whether or not to buy it. For the past 3 yrs the novel has been called Tracing Paper. And it fit the novel when I began. But the novel has changed so much, that the meaning behind it has become diluted.So after a professional critique of the beginning chapters and other writers who thought it no longer fit, I have changed the title to The Cantoni Sisters.Letting go of the original name has been hard – almost like letting go of a friend. But as with any rewrites, you have to be prepared to be brutal, even if it was a favourite piece of the work. Publishers often change titles, so I may have to let go of it again. But to me, writing is all about change and rewrites. How else can the work grow and improve? My hope is that long term it will help me deal with change in real life, which is usually just a tad bit harder than a quick tap of a key or stroke of a pen.How do you go about choosing names, or the title for your latest work? Was it a difficult process? Is it one that's ongoing?I’d love to hear from you.

Real Characters (orig. post Jan 13th)

Real Characters

I recently watched a US hospital drama in which Alfre Woodard (an excellent, but underrated actor) played a writer desperate to finish a novel before her aneurism burst. She said the characters in her book were her family. I understood what she meant. They were real to her and her readers. That’s when you know if the character is successful or not. The three-dimensional nature of characters is to me the test of a good book. Plot is great, but without characters it's worthless.When writing Radio Echo, I struggled for months writing the characters of the two sisters. Then I started to write the character of the homosexual fascist. I was staggered that he just fell off the end of my pen. I instantly cared about him despite his unlikeable nature – or at least his distasteful politics. I realised in part that with the two sisters, I’d focused on what happened to them, rather than who they were; trying to nail the plot of the entire novel, at the expense of their character. I re-worked them, and now they’re three-dimensional.I think the response of the viewer for any art form is an integral part of the process. Arguably, the end product could be considered incomplete without the response of the viewer, however different that individual response is. I could go further and say that fictitious characters are as important as real flesh and blood characters if they have had an effect on you as individuals. If fictional characters can evoke emotion, isn’t that about as good as it gets in terms of anything meaningful? Okay you can't hug or touch a character in a novel, call them up and have a chat. But to miss them when the novel ends and to wonder what happened to them or to feel changed by them is to learn something about one's self. Especially as an adolescent, but also as an adult, a good character in a book might express what you’ve been thinking all along, but didn't have the words to say it. How often have you finished a good book and said –‘yeah that’s what I meant’?Much of Radio Echo is set in Bologna. The central piazza there, Piazza Maggiore features in the hearts and minds of the characters. “We’ll be dancing with GI’s in Piazza Maggiore before the end of the year,” one of the characters says after the Allies have taken Rome. The sentiment encompasses the hope that people had at that point in Northern Italy. Because the novel is historical, characters have root in real life. They all are fictitious; none of them are based on real people per se. None of the individual events are based on real events. But of course in other ways they are based on things that did actually happen. So when I went to Piazza Maggiore myself, I was fighting back the tears. I had lived with those characters for a long time and it was as if I, in their place, had made it back to the piazza. And of course the citizens of Bologna and returning resistance fighters did congregate there and celebrate with the Allied troops when Bologna was liberated in April 1945.The memorial in Piazza Maggiore is very different to any of the war memorials I’ve seen in England. It is dedicated solely to the men and women who died fighting in the Italian resistance. Instead of just a list of names, there’s a photo of each person printed on a tile and so you have an image of that person as they were in the mid 1940s with their name beneath it. More than just a list of names, the sight of the images together makes them truly real characters.   

Route 66 to Writing Rooms (orig. post Jan 9th)

Route 66 to Writing Rooms.I started this week by having a spinal MRI. In order to get this layered X-ray, they slide you into a big white tube, somewhat similar I imagine, to being in a cylindrical coffin. The ceiling is about 4 inches above your head. I've had a number of these over the years and initially claustrophobia ruled big time. An MRI doesn’t scare me now. I don’t have the hideous panic of having to claw my way out of the tube. But its taken work. To combat my claustrophobia I started some years ago by never, ever opening my eyes while I was in the tube. To open them gave way to panic. Then, eyes shut, I’d meditate or at least imagine being in a different place. By the ocean or some wide-open space. Anything but an enclosed environment.This time I put myself in a different place by thinking about a character in ‘Under the Bed’, the novel I’m working on. Instead of focusing on the closeness of the ceiling my character took me to the main thoroughfare of Albuquerque, New Mexico in 1951. Walking up Central Avenue, I was surrounded by flashing neon both sides of the street; motels and all kinds of American Southwest kitsch popular back in the day. Central Avenue was Route 66. It still is Route 66. The cache of going from ‘Chicago to LA’ on a single highway has been lost, but you can still see the remnants of the motels that used to be crowded with travellers looking for somewhere cheap to spend a night. Central Avenue is still thriving in it’s own way, although you might ‘get your kicks on Route 66’ with one of the hookers who wander up and down the strip at night. Some of the motels have been renovated, but most either don't exist or are in disrepair.I then followed my character to 1969 Harlem in New York City. There’s a loud drilling noise that accompanies an MRI, which is similar to the opening bars of a Ramones song or a jackhammer. I prefer the Ramones analogy, but it was bizarre to hear that noise and yet I was in a gospel church a couple of blocks off Seventh Avenue up in Harlem. The choir and the congregation were singing ‘Just a Closer Walk with Thee’.This isn’t the first time I’ve used hospital time to write. I always take a notebook with me wherever I go, but especially to the hospital as wait times are often long. In Radio Echo, my first novel, I decided on one of the main characters fate while I sat shivering in one of those charming little tie gowns they give you that make you look ridiculous with shoes and socks still on, white legs poking out. I sat in a cubicle with the curtains drawn, writing frantically, wanting to get down the plot epiphany before the nurse called my name.So writing has become a liberation in terms of hospital visits, because now it’s not a waiting room but a writing room. We all know a writer should carry a notebook, jot things down, make notes at every available opportunity. Easier said than done. I’ve picked up the habit by having enforced periods of what would otherwise have been mind numbing boredom. Instead I’m freeing up time to be creative that would have been lost in a frustration of waiting for the doctor or waiting for a friend to arrive or waiting for the car to be repaired.So now, waiting rooms are not something to be dreaded or avoided. Waiting rooms are writing rooms.CommentsGed DuncanFri, 06 Jan 2012 01:13:39'Would you get hip to this kindly tipAnd go take that MRI tripGet your kicks on Route 66'thanks for the heads up on journeying in the mind and redeeming the time - hope the soundtrack didn't show up on the scan xxA.K. AndrewFri, 06 Jan 2012 02:37:25Thanks for the comment Ged. I'm hoping the soundtrack does show up on the MRI. Might make it easier to twist again.RowenaFri, 06 Jan 2012 04:23:34Thanks Kathy, It's a great message that no time is dead time when you can use it to write, or imagine a story.You've reminded me of the concentration it takes to believe that you're not in a coffin when you're inside an MRI machine - I had white knuckles clutching the panic button.....A.KFri, 06 Jan 2012 04:41:13Thanks for the comment Rowena. Its easy to forget all the times one could have to write. Yeah - I've gripped that button pretty hard myself at times.tom tomMon, 09 Jan 2012 22:58:18Hospital machinery is sometimes the only way to travel. I wrote significant parts of Under the Singer in my early days of writing, while waiting in X ray departments. Deciding to use my own experiences to fatten out the character of Joseph allowed me to consider the fact that these quiet, slightly detached people looking after me, may well be about to discover I have cancer and it would really screw up their day.I look forward to the next instalment of your road trip.AKMon, 09 Jan 2012 23:02:33Thanks Tom. Hospital machinery is a cheap ride in UK at least. Now the US - ah .. a different beast altogether. Theirs is more shiny & expensive.NoelMon, 09 Jan 2012 23:26:03Oklahoma City sure looks pretty... If I don't have a notebook or pen I use the notes app on my phone. God, I'm so modern it's frightening.KateThu, 12 Jan 2012 21:01:30I'm booking an MRI. Thanks for the journey, Kathy.