I refuse to be held accountable.

Sherwood Smith and Beth Bernobich are responsible for this, not I.

A Writer's Rebuttal.

What a character!

A sad excuse for a correspondent I've been lately. First, let me pimp my friends.

Jason Sizemore, comely young editor and publisher of Apex Digest: Science Fiction and Horror, will be hosting an Apex meet and greet on Sunday, August 5th at Destinations Booksellers in New Albany, Indiana. The crowd will include Apex editorial staff, as well as authors who have or will be published in both Apex Digest and Apex Publications' upcoming anthology, Aegri Somnia. To find out more, including how to get to Destinations, click here.

Mari Adkins, assistant editor of Apex (i.e., the one who does all the work), recently guest-blogged at Mr. Sizemore's site. Go read!

Now for my own thoughts, which are scarce enough at the best of times, but which seem to desert me entirely when I sit down to write. I think what I'll preach talk about today is characterization. My friend Maria Zannini recently quoted James Gunn's observation that science fiction is about ideas, whereas most other fiction is about people. If you know a science fiction writer, you can infer the "only" before "people" in the last sentence.

But when I pick up a book to read for enjoyment, if I'm not hooked into at least one of the characters, I'll put the book down. Right now I'm soldiering through Terry Pratchett's Hogfather. Normally, I love Terry Pratchett, but last night I realized I was three-quarters of the way through the book and I really didn't care what happened to anyone in it. I'll finish it because, after all, it's Terry Pratchett, but this situation is not good. In the case of this particular novel, Pratchett has so many characters running about, and so many different plot lines spinning (the secrets of which he refuses to let me in on lest it spoil the big surprise at the end), that I've just been turning pages rather than becoming really engaged.

Good characterization engages me. I wish I could say that was a universal rule, but I've read too many highly lauded novels with poor characterization to believe it so. Many readers don't give a hang about characterization. They don't care if the protagonist suddenly does something completely stupid or totally out of character just to advance the plot. Rather, they want lots of plot points, no matter what the contortions necessary to produce them. Other readers don't give a hang about plot or characterization, as long as the novel's Grand Theme is something they feel strongly about.

For instance, I recently tried to read Octavia Butler's The Parable of the Sower. This was a very well-written novel with high-minded ideas about teaching the world how we should live and how we should behave to each other. But the fictional world was only dysfunctional to the extent that it didn't listen to the protagonist, who had all the answers and was, except for being too young to have her opinion given the respect it was due, completely perfect.

I don't like characters who are perfect, because I don't like people who are perfect. I don't like characters who do stupid things just to advance the plot for the same reason I don't like people who do stupid things just because they're bored and want a little action. I don't like protagonists who are weak and foolish, because it's the protagonist that the reader is supposed to identify with. Why would I want to throw my lot in with someone whose survival chances depend entirely on luck?

On the other hand, I love to read Jane Austen. I've spent the past few weeks re-reading Sense & Sensibility, Pride & Prejudice, Northanger Abbey, Emma and Mansfield Park. Jane may not have had the most exciting plots in the world, but hers were all characters I knew, some of them too well. I admit, Mansfield Park was rough-going, given how sickly sweet and smarmy its two romantic leads were. Yet the characters were real. On the other hand, I won't pick that one up to reread again for at least another twenty five years, assuming I live so long.

Jane Austen's characters are all so finely drawn, such perfect representations of people we've all known at various times in our lives, that her worlds seem alive and rich to me. With the exception of Mansfield Park, there's almost no setting detail in any of her novels, nor much in the way of physical description of characters. With the exception of Northanger Abbey, there's very little in the way of manipulating tension through the insertion of plot points (i.e., Catherine being thwarted repeatedly by the odious Mr. Thorpe). Yet, sitting down with those novels is like settling in for a chat with an old friend.

Good characterization keeps me coming back to a novel again and again. I can't count how many times I've re-read the Nero Wolfe series; often enough that I can usually remember by chapter two whodunnit. Yet it's Nero and Archie and Fritz, and their interaction in that brownstone on West 35th Street, that make me want to go back and spend more time with them. The same for Donald Westlake's Dortmunder and Richard Stark's Parker series. I know these guys. I want to hang out with them. And it doesn't matter if we do the same thing every time we see each other, because we're friends. (At least, I hope Parker is my friend. I don't want to be his enemy.)

So I will finish Terry Pratchett's Hogfather, and make sure the next Discworld novel I pick up is a Granny Weatherwax or Sam Vimes story. Them's my friends.

So what do you think, Tonstant Weader? What matters to you?

Me-me-me-me! (And some others too)

The latest issue of Apex Digest Online is, er, online, featuring many wonderful articles, stories, and reviews, not the least of which is my interview with the lovely and talented Eugie Foster. Go and hie ye hence to see and marvel at Eugie's wonders, not the least of which include the Delicate Hobkin, my favorite skunk.

How to write a novel, by an unpublished novelist

Maria Zannini says that it's important to keep your blog fresh. I rarely post here, because this is a blog intended to be strictly about writing, and quite frankly, I'd rather just write than wank about writing.

But in an effort to keep this as fresh as a summer's eve, here's what I've learned about writing novels:

1. Just write. Set a word limit for your day, set a time for each day when you must at least meet that word limit, then sit yourself down and write until you reach that limit. Don't shut down the word processing software until you have or, if you're a Luddite, don't shut the notebook and cap the pen.

2. Keep writing until you reach the end. Don't stop in the middle of the book (or a third of the way or two-thirds or one-eighth) to do a rewrite, not even a minor one. Plow through to the very end. It doesn't matter if you don't know what's going to happen next. You're the writer -- make something up. It doesn't matter if what's happening now doesn't jibe with what happened earlier. You can fix it on the revision. Persevere. When was the last time you saw a marathoner stop and decide he didn't run the first mile and a half correctly and start over from the beginning? Never. Don't be a wuss. Keep going.

3. Keep it to yourself. I know many of my writing friends would and do disagree. Several of my friends have posted chapters of their novels-in-progress to workshops and critique groups before they've written those all-important words, "The End." Maybe that works for them. Doesn't for me, and I think it's dangerous. Here's why. You are the writer. That means you're the boss of your novel. You're in charge. When you let other people critique your novel before it's finished, you're giving up control. You may tell yourself you only want to make sure you're on the right track, but it all comes back to two needs. First, to have someone tell you you're on the right track. Second, to get praise. Let's examine the second need first. If you want praise for your writing, write sappy poems and show them to your mother. She's your mom, of course she's going to tell you how wonderful you are. Now, as for wanting reassurance that your novel is on the right track, how can anyone else know if you don't? This comes down to the desire to write a perfect first draft, and honey, nobody does that. Nobody. The desire to be perfect is the most deadly pitfall for a writer. You are never going to be perfect, and neither is your work. Accept that and move on. Finally, by sharing your work and seeking feedback before the first draft is complete, you run the risk of writing a Novel by Committee. Again, you're the boss. Take charge.

4. Be merciless in your revision. Anytime you feel yourself wincing when you read your sucky first draft, draw a red circle around that section. It means it really does suck and you really do need to fix it. Work on it and work on it and work on it until it doesn't make you wince anymore.

5. Listen to the people who offer you critiques of your finished draft. 'Cause, darlin', they didn't read it for their health. They're trying to help you. Maybe they didn't express themselves in the most tactful way, and maybe their advice is totally wrong. But listen to them and consider their advice anyway.

6. Make the call. After you've considered all the critiques, especially the harsh ones, be willing to throw away the ones that just don't feel right. It's your novel.

So that's it. Thus endeth the sermon.