Love and Madness: The True Story

This is a piece I wrote many years ago. As I've been cleaning up my old blogs (what Nano?!), I thought a repost would be in order.


A long time ago, before the world was created and humans set foot on it for the first time, vices & virtues floated around and were bored, not knowing what to do.

One day, all the vices and virtues were gathered together and were more bored than ever.

Suddenly, Ingenious came up with an idea: "Let's play hide and seek!"

All of them liked the idea and immediately Madness shouted: "I want to count, I want to count!"

And since nobody was crazy enough to want to seek Madness, all the others agreed.

Madness leaned against a tree and started to count: "One, two, three.."

As Madness counted, the vices and virtues went hiding.

Tenderness hung itself on the horn of the moon... Treason hid in a pile of garbage... Fondness curled up between the clouds...and Passion went to the centre of the earth.... Lie said that it would hide under a stone, but hid at the bottom of the lake... whilst Avarice entered a sack that he ended up breaking.

And Madness continued to count: "... seventy-nine, eighty, eighty-one ..."

By this time, all the vices and virtues were already hidden - except Love. For undecided as Love is, he could not decide where to hide. And this should not surprise us, because we all know how difficult it is to hide Love.

Madness: "... ninety-five, ninety-six, ninety-seven ..."

Just when Madness got to one hundred, Love jumped into a rose bush to hide. Then Madness turned and shouted "I'm coming, I'm coming!"

As Madness turned around, Laziness was the first to be found--because Laziness had no energy to hide. Then Madness spotted Tenderness in the horn of the moon, Lie at the bottom of the lake and Passion at the center of the earth.

One by one, Madness found them all - except Love. Madness was getting desperate, unable to find Love. Envious of Love, Envy whispered to Madness: "You only need to find Love and Love is hiding in the rose bush."

Madness grabbed a wooden pitch fork and stabbed wildly at the rosebush. Madness stabbed and stabbed until a heartbreaking cry made him stop.

Love appeared from the rose bush, covering his face with his hands. Between his fingers ran two trickles of blood from his eyes. Madness, so anxious to find Love, had stabbed out Love's eyes with a pitch fork.

"What have I done! What have I done!" Madness shouted. "I have left you blind! How can I repair it?"

And Love answered: "You cannot repair my eyes. But if you want to do something for me, you can be my guide."

And so it came about that from that day on, Love is blind and is always accompanied by Madness.

Nano update

I've been rather lax in my daily goal of 1,667 words. I should have over 25,000 at this point but currently my word count stands at 23,848.

Getting rid of the blackmail that had me hosting Turkey day helped. I should get a few thousand words done tonight and tomorrow at the write-in. If only life had such a guarantee!

Random House is a censorship twat

Housewife wins battle with publisher to remove swear word from book by best-selling children's author

By Daily Mail Reporter

A housewife has taken on the combined might of one of Britain's best-selling children's authors and a leading publishing house and won.

Random House Children's Books has agreed to remove a four-letter swearword from a popular book by Dame Jacqueline Wilson, after complaints from Anne Dixon, who insists she is standing up for values of common decency.

The 55-year-old said she was horrified when she came across the expletive in the best-selling book My Sister Jodie - a gift for her nine-year-old great-niece, Eve Coulson.

She complained to Asda, in Stanley, County Durham, where she bought the book, and the store initially removed it from sale.

Now the publishers said they will – by altering one letter – substitute the word with “twit” when the book is reprinted.

Decency fight: Anne Dixon and her 9-year-old niece Eve Coulson. The housewife has won her complaint against publishing giant Random House

On the publisher's website, My Sister Jodie is recommended for children aged from nine to 11.

Mrs Dixon, of Stanley, said: "I am not a prude. In fact, I am quite broad-minded, but this is completely inappropriate for children.

"I bought the book for my niece as a present and was reading it when I came across the word.

"The book has an attractive cover and is clearly for children. They should not have to be subjected to trash and vulgarity.

"I did not expect this from a well-respected author and do not want my young niece to have to see this obscene slang."

Mrs Dixon, who regards herself as an ordinary housewife with no bone to pick with anyone, said she had always encouraged her great-niece to read.

She said: "She comes to visit me regularly and we read to each other.

"We have all the Enid Blyton books, such as the Famous Five and Secret Seven, and had finished all of them.

"I thought I would get her something a little more modern and had heard about Jacqueline Wilson through the popular Tracy Beaker television series."

Jacqueline Wilson: Best selling children's author

Dame Jacqueline has sold more than 20 million books in the UK alone and her stories have been translated into more than 30 languages.

"I knew she was held in high regard and had been a Children's Laureate, but thought I ought to read through the book to make sure it was not too sad," said Mrs Dixon.

"I got to the page where reference was made to a 'toffeenosed twit'.

"On the next page the word changed. I thought I was mistaken, but then I saw to my shock it had been repeated twice again."

Mrs Dixon decided to email the author.

She said: "I asked her if she was aware of this word and if she could do something about it.

"I would like her to explain how she would want me to explain this to my daughter even if it is in the context of the character."

Mrs Dixon complained to Asda when she heard nothing from Dame Jacqueline.

A spokesman for Random House Children's Books said: "In the context of the character, we felt it was used in a way that accurately portrayed how children like Jodie would speak to each other.

"The book is aimed at children aged ten and over, and we felt it was acceptable for that age range.

"However, in light of this response we have decided to amend the word when we reprint the book."

A spokesman for Asda said: "Since the book was launched in March this year, we have sold over 28,000 copies and this is the first complaint we have had.

"Jacqueline Wilson books are extremely popular with our customers, and are the top-selling children's books in most high street stores.

"The book is aimed at children aged ten and over, and we felt it was acceptable for that age range.

"The publisher is aware of the word that is featured in the book and has agreed that it is not appropriate for children and will be reprinting copies.

"As soon as these copies are available, we will stock them in our stores. We are sorry for any upset caused."

However, the spokesman said that Asda had since reviewed the matter and would continue stocking My Sister Jodie in all its UK outlets. Dame Jacqueline was unavailable for comment.

Like a Phoenix Sinking

So its been a few months since I last posted here. I got into a snit about the new controls and took my words elsewhere (I have 11 other blogs to blather).

All was well until I decided to move. I still haven't sold my old house, the new house is complete chaos and the only computer I was using up and killed its motherboard right before the start of NaNoWriMo.

Which meant I wasn't blathering to anyone but my over-stressed doctorate-candidate friend, who had their own problems.

Lots of scrambling later, I have a working computer to hopefully finish NaNo and be a good ML. Which means I can also go online and blather wherever will have me. Hence the new post on here.

Between here and my LJ, I will catch up-- but I don't expect anyone to be as interested as I once was.

The title of this post refers to my favorite mythological creature. Only instead of rising from the ashes, I'm sinking in a pool of frenzied chaos. Maybe I can rise in the New Year.

Pulped fiction: Publishing is booming. So why are writers struggling?

(note: this article is from a British/UK paper. The current exchange rate is $.52 to the £. To understand the money involved, roughly double the pounds to equal dollars.)

Peter Kay is laughing all the way to the Book Awards with two nominations. But while a few authors strike it rich, a new study shows most earn a pittance

Authors do love to moan, don't they? There's no heavy lifting or wiping other people's bottoms for a living; it's just sitting there going tap-tippety-tap all day, complaining about how little you're being paid, isn't it? And yet... new research just published shows they (we, to be honest) may have something really worth moaning about. Something shocking is happening in the world of publishing that means we could end up with very few books at all except the ghost-written memoirs of airhead footballers and models.

The average author earns about £16,000, a third less than the national average wage, it is revealed. So what? They're doing what they love. But hidden behind that figure released by the Authors' Licensing and Collecting Society (ALCS) is a grimmer truth: when you take away the superstars who are earning shedloads, the actual figure for the rest is closer to £4,000.

That's less than it was last time anyone looked, seven years ago, and far less than the distant days when the Net Book Agreement kept prices high. Forget living on baked beans in a garrett; this is barely enough to buy stale bread and a tarpaulin for shelter.

And it is only for the lucky ones: fewer authors are being signed up unless they're famous, advances are shrinking, and those who sell only moderately well are dropped, ending careers early.

Peter Kay need not worry. His autobiography The Sound of Laughter sold a record-breaking 600,000 copies in its first six weeks. The comedian may now win both the Biography and Book of the Year prizes at the National Book Awards, whose shortlists were announced on Thursday. The Nibbies, as they insist on calling themselves, will be the usual glamorous, televised affair at the end of the month, hosted by Richard Madeley and Judy Finnigan. Famous names dominate the shortlists as usual: TV chef Gordon Ramsay is up for Best Biography; England footballer Steven Gerrard may win Sports Book of the Year; and the relentless advance of Ricky Gervais on all media fronts continues with Flanimals of the Deep in the kids' category.

These people are earning fortunes. "The top 10 per cent of authors earn more than half the total income," says the ALCS, whose job is to make sure its 55,000 members get what they are owed. Altogether, British authors earn £907m each year - but the 5,500 bestselling authors get at least £453m of that.

Most were already rich and famous before they put their name to a title: the second rank of contenders includes the US politician Al Gore and Richard Dawkins, the fundamentalist evolutionist whose ability to make science understandable is exceeded only by his talent for self-publicity. He was at it again last week, goading Kay about God.

People like that live in a different world from "Jane". She is now on her fourth book, in her forties, with a devoted band of readers. They see her on stage at literary festivals, elegant and eloquent and just a little bohemian, and think: "There is a writer who's made it." They don't know that the advances have dwindled down to £10,000 a time (from which the agent and taxman take their share; and for a book that usually takes about two years to write). They don't see the bills threatening to make her sell her house.

Jane doesn't want me to use her real name in case it upsets her publisher or fans. Neither does she want them to know that she works in the local Waitrose for cash, as well as teaching and tutoring.

"People come and see me all bright-eyed, dreaming of being a writer," she said.

"They've got the idea that anyone can do it. That's what people think: that it's so easy. I wish! I tell them I've been training since I was seven." Others do have talent. "They tell me it's their calling. I say it will have to be. I don't want to crush them, but the best advice if you want to eat is: 'Do something else.'"

Jane did not go to the crisis meeting called by the ALCS at the British Library on Thursday, but some of the most distinguished names in British literature were there to discuss the plummeting income of authors and the copyright issues that threaten to make it worse. Some raged against Google's plans to make whole books available online for free. The poet Wendy Cope lamented the ease with which you can download her own works and those of other poets for free.

"With every new technological development, our copyright becomes more precious," said Maureen Duffy, writer and honorary president of the ALCS, "and yet seemingly less understood by those who want to use our work."

Internet users have become used to getting words for nothing, and many just don't see why they should pay. Many authors and publishers, in turn, have been spectacularly slow in looking for ways to make the new webworld work for them. They just know that it is almost impossible to have a hit unless the buyers from Tesco, WH Smith and Waterstone's like your title and jacket. "You can still take a chance on a writer," said an editor with a big-name publisher, " but if they don't get in the three-for-two promo it's really not worth bothering."

The twist in the tale is that the one place new authors can break through in spectacular fashion is on the telly: Richard & Judy on Channel 4. The hosts, who will present the Nibbies, have a viewers' book club that has brought success to the likes of The Girls by Canadian author Lori Lansens. Judy Finnigan called it "one of the most wonderful books I have ever read". Virago might have been lucky to sell 25,000 copies in this country without that - instead, sales exceed 130,000.

The result is inevitable. "Publishers of literary fiction are not considering anything they don't think will get on to Richard & Judy," said one agent. "That has become everything."

It hasn't, of course, in more general terms. Authors include those who write local history pamphlets and academic texts which they never get paid for. They do it for love, vanity, therapy, academic advancement or to get away from the kids - lots of reasons besides money. They won't stop, however bleak things look.

"Writers do not act together," said the author Maureen Freely. "We are always happy to believe that although things are terribly difficult for everyone, we will be part of that happy 10 per cent that strikes it rich." She smiled. "Speaking for myself, I have not."

Antony Beevor probably has. His two bestsellers, Stalingrad and Berlin, have shifted more than 2.5 million copies between them. But Professor Beevor argued passionately at the British Library that modern publishing was a betrayal of our literary heritage. It was ridiculous, he said over coffee, that some publishers gave authors who were not already famous just one chance to prove their worth. "How many first-hit wonders are there? Monica Ali, perhaps. Zadie Smith. But very few others. Hardly any."

As a result the "mid-list" of people like Jane who have written a number of books with respectable but only moderate sales - for now - is disappearing.

Why does that matter? Stalingrad was Professor Beevor's ninth book. "If I were starting out now, those books would not have happened," he said, with a weary shake of the head. "I never would have made it. If we carry on like this, how much will be lost?"

Who ate all the royalties?

Peter Kay sold 600,000 copies of his autobiography 'The Sound of Laughter' in the first six weeks of publication. But research conducted by the Authors' Licensing and Collecting Society shows just how unusual he is. A survey of authors' earnings found that a few superstars are sharing more than half the money made from writing books in this country. For the rest, however, incomes are low:

£907.5m is earned by the 55,000 authors in Britain every year but 50 per cent of the cash goes to 10 per cent of the authors, meaning that the 5,500 bestselling writers share at least £453.75m of it, giving them an average annual income of £82,500 while the other 49,500 authors share the rest, typically earning £4,000.

(another note: The average range considered poverty level in the USA is $9,000/year.)

Lackluster

I find myself getting bored with a new project again.

I went into it with great enthusiasm. I was excited about the plot, a few of the characters and the overall creepy tone I was going to have fun writing.

Two days into the research and I'm wishing I had picked something different.

Its not that the information or the topics are boring, I think I'm just scared I won't do it all justice. If I get 'bored' and leave now, I can't finish and be yelled at later.

I'm not going to leave you before you leave me. Its a New Year. Not everyone will love me if I write the most beloved book ever. Even if the critics and public agree and its a runaway best-seller (shh, reality later) and hit movie and tv series. Some people will hate it...just because.

I'm not writing for anyone but myself so why am I letting circumstances that will always be completely out of my control affect the project at THIS state?

I'm wondering if there are therapists strictly for creative types?

For now, I'm going to give it a few days more (of research) and then fill in the 'outline'. I will make myself write at least 30 pages before I give up. I'm hoping I find myself needing to continue at that poing.

Love or Murder?

I love my family. There are days I don't like one or more members. But I love them enough to not try and kill them (or have them killed).

I'm watching Dateline NBC . One twin is going undercover to 'smoke out' the killers (based on the preview clips, I'm guessing the ex-husband of the dead twin is head of the list) of her missing twin.

I also watch 48 Hours Mystery. Years ago, there was a newsmagazine every night. Now cable leeches off most of the footage and Law & Order or CSI recovers the "if it weren't true, you wouldn't believe it" story.

I admit I tape these shows (along with many others from Discovery Channel, Learning Channel, National Geographic Channel, PBS, A&E, Biography Channel as well as network and cable dramas). I find when I'm stuck for an idea, rewriting these tales into something more fantastic is a great exercise.

Murder can be a good plot, but it makes for lousy family relations. Just say no.

How many balls?

I have specific ideas for novels (stand-alones and series), short stories (some connected with a novel universe, some complete one-offs), and [screen]plays.

At the moment, I have been working on a novel in a children's series, a novel in a skiffy series, a pair of unrelated (to anything) short stories and a bunch of poems (a separate blogful).

I know I should focus, but I like the scattershot approach. However, I honestly feel that it is no longer beneficial. Overlapping projects means everything is always in a different stage. Different mind-sets are required for drafting, revising, editing, polishing, beta feedback redoing, sending out, more revising from notes...lather, rinse, repeat until sale.

Once in one mode, I'm finding it harder to go 'back' to another. Yes, I want to work on another piece, but doing whatever function on it as I was just doing. For example, when finished with Project A (a short story), I want to move onto Project E (a novel). I had been revising A. E is still between an outline and a first draft. I want to keep revising, not initially writing.

So I think I'm going to write, write, write until I have a stack of different projects and then take them all step-by-step through the processes together, rather than bouncing up and down the ladder across the board.

I'm hoping it will keep my creativity functionable while giving it some breathing room. I won't be reducing how many balls/projects I'll be juggling, just allowing them to be equally weighted rather than in such contrasts of light and heavy (in addition to large [novels] and small [poems]).

Am I crazy...no, wait, I've already accepted and embraced that tag. Am I unrealistic or trying too hard?

Quiz me baby one more time

Here's a terrifying quiz. Are You Right for Writing? (snagged from Holly Lisle)

Question 1:

You've turned off the t.v., the stereo, and every other possible entertainment device, you have removed all books, and you are sitting in a dimly-lit room doing absolutely nothing. So. . . how long can you sit without going crazy?

• A. 5 seconds. I get cold sweats just thinking about power outages.
  
• B. 15 minutes -- but only if I have a bag of potato chips.
  
• C. 1 hour -- I can always replay my last argument and come up with wittier things I could have said.
  
• D. Man! I lost track of the time. I started watching people in my imagination doing interesting things, and the next thing I knew, it was nighttime and I'd missed supper.

Since E) Fell asleep is not an answer option, D comes closest.

Question 2:

You're writing and the phone rings. You:

• A. Answer it.
  
• B. Finish your sentence, then answer it.
  
• C. Let the answering machine get it.
  
• D. Have no phone access in the room where you work.

Honestly, I write in the wee hours, so no one really calls me unless its bad news. I do check the caller ID first and avoid unknown calls during other times. I guess its a combo of C and D.

Question 3:

The person calling is one of your dearest friends, who wants to get together for brunch and a good long chat about his/her ex. Unfortunately, this juicy brunch will take place during your peak writing time. You:

• A. Decide to go. You haven't heard the latest dirt on the evil ex in ages.
  
• B. Reschedule for a later hour.
  
• C. Reschedule for a non-writing day.
  
• D. Pass.

A. Most of my friends live out of my state. If they're actually willing to eat with me at 3 a.m., its for good reasons. Plus I get to take notes for, uh, future 'research'. ;)

Question 4:

You're out at the restaurant with your friend when you have a fantastic idea for a novel. You:

• A. Have to hope you'll remember it -- you have nothing to write with and nothing to write on.
  
• B. Will manage. You always have a pen, and there are napkins in restaurants.
  
• C. Carry a special notebook, an organizer, or even a laptop with you everywhere -- you're completely prepared.
  
• D. Aren't at the restaurant; that would cut unacceptably into your 14-hour writing workday.

C. I carry a microcassette recorder everywhere with batteries and tapes in coats, car, and writing bag. I have also used napkins and eyeliner in pinches.

Question 5:

When you see yourself as a successful writer, what is the image that is clearest in your mind:

• A. The rounds of publishers' parties, autographings, and talk shows where you are lionized for your work of immortal literary genius?
  
• B. Your name on the spines of a shelf full of beautiful books?
  
• C. A vision of sending off a completed manuscript to a waiting editor or agent?
  
• D. Your butt in your chair, your fingers on your keyboard, and your eyes on your monitor (or whatever tools you use to produce your stories or novels.)

B. A is unrealistic, C happens and D is what I'm doing now!

Question 6:

You anticipate being able to quit your day job to write full time:

• A. immediately -- you have a great idea for a book you know will be a bestseller;
  
• B. as soon as the first book sells;
  
• C. when you have three or four on the shelf;
  
• D. when you're making as much from writing as you make at your day job . . . and have for a couple of years.

I would love for it to be B or C but I know its D--although it could happen like C.

Question 7:

Do you have. . .

• A. an idea for the Great American Novel -- a certain best-seller;
  
• B. a few ideas for different stories;
  
• C. background and development for a number of related books, a timeline, and a whole handful of novel ideas;
  
• D. half a dozen fully developed worlds, including maps, costume worksheets, fully developed languages, cultures, flora, fauna, religions, sciences, and much more, plus enough story ideas to get you through this lifetime, and the next one.

C. I sorta have D regarding a series (detailingly developed) and a box of ideas but C is closer.

Question 8:

You figure the biggest benefit of becoming a writer is:

• A. Money & fame;
  
• B. Flexible hours;
  
• C. Creative control and being your own boss;
  
• D. The writing.

D. I've had C via other work. D is the creative desire to do what I really love and hopefully get paid a living amount doing it.

Question 9:

You read:

• A. The occasional newspaper, magazines, and remember having read books . . . but not recently;
  
• B. You read in your free time if you don't have something better to do;
  
• C. You invented the term multi-tasking because reading IS your "something better to do -- you usually have a book in hand no matter what else you're doing at the time;
  
• D. Your house doesn't need insulation; the triple-stacked shelves of all your books will serve quite nicely, thank you.

D. Another toughie. C is pretty close. Although I don't read WHILE driving, I keep a book just for the car (I have ones I'm reading stashed all over) that gets use during trains, traffic jams and playing family taxi. But D is dead on (if the video tapes are also included; I have thousands of both.).

Question 1O:

Where is the weirdest place you have ever written?

• A. Your desk . . . _maybe_, in a crunch, at the kitchen table;
  
• B. In bed. (An extra 1O points for this one if you were on your honeymoon at the time);
  
• C. On the toilet;
  
• D. Don't ask.

D. And I used my own blood. The resulting piece sold so it was totally worth it.

---

Scoring the Quiz

Give yourself 1 point for each A answer you gave, 3 points for each B answer, 6 points for each C answer, and 10 points for each D answer. Add up your answers, then check out the short key below before going on to the discussion.

10 - 29 points -- You have some seriously romanticized ideas of what writing for a living is like. You're going to be badly disappointed by the reality.

30 - 49 points -- There's hope; you suspect some of the darker truths about the profession, and have an idea of what some of the rewards are. If you really want to do this, you'll face some disillusionment, but also stand a good chance of finding the real joys of the profession.

50 - 79 points -- If you can write, you're in there. (76)

80 - 103 points -- You'll probably make a great writer. You should think very carefully before getting married, having children, or buying a pet, however. Walking into your living room and discovering the dust-covered skeleton that was your cat -- or your spouse -- can be really bad for morale.

And Now The Discussion

Note: The I's here are Holly's.

Quizzes have always seemed pretty worthless to me if they didn't include a discussion of why any given answer was good or bad. So my quiz includes a question-by-question discussion.

Answer 1 -- That empty room with nothing going on was not a hypothetical situation. That's the writer's work day. You, a quiet room, and nothing happening except for what's going on between your ears. This is pretty much a make-or-break question: if you can't entertain yourself for at least a few hours a day with no source of entertainment but your thoughts, you're not going to have much fun writing for a living.

Answer 2 -- As long as you have no one depending on you, D is the ideal answer -- but most of us live in a world where _someone_ we love might, at some point, need us. So we don't have the option of seclusion. The self-control of screening out all but emergency calls with an answering machine becomes the real-world, practical answer.

Answer 3 -- This one depends on how much you want to hang onto your friends, but also on how often such invitations come. The friend who routinely disrupts your writing time (if he _knows_ it's your writing time -- making sure he knows when you write is up to you) isn't much of a friend.

However, if you're passing on spending time with someone who is usually respectful of your schedule but who could use some support now, _you_ aren't much of a friend. Writing needs to hold an important place in your life, but if you plan on having a life, it can't hold the number one spot.

Answer 4 -- I come in with a solid C on this one: because I always (yes, always) have my Visor with me, I could actually write the book on the spot, were I so inclined. You need to keep some tools with you all the time. Visor, tape recorder, or even just a little notepad and a pen -- you need to have something to record great lines, bits of dialogue, or character or story ideas while you're out. And you can't count on everyone to have napkins you can borrow.

Answer 5 -- If you chose answer A for this question, sit down. I have bad news. No one is going to hold a ticker tape parade in your honor because you wrote a book, or even a bunch of books. Aside from your spouse, your agent, and your eventual fans, no one CARES that you're a writer. You won't be recognized in restaurants and hounded for your autograph. Hell, you won't even be recognized in bookstores unless you introduce yourself. And maybe not even then.

If your answer was B, you're getting warmer. The name-on-the-books thing is big. But you're looking for happiness a long way from its source. In almost all cases, it takes a minimum of about two years from the time you start writing the book until the time it sees print. That's best case, when you have a contract for the book. If you have to write the book and then sell it, you could be in for a very long haul.

If you chose answer C, mailing off a finished manuscript, you're edging close to home, but not there yet. If you're very prolific, you'll complete two or three first-draft novels in a year. I usually do one or two. I have friends and colleagues who do a book every two years or less. That's a long time to wait for the thrill.

If you picked D, you have the best chance of being happy enough with what you're doing to do it long enough to succeed. To be a career writer, you really ought to like to write. You ought to have fun sitting in your little corner of the kitchen or your office, if you're lucky enough to have one, coming up with neat stuff to do to your characters. If you can learn to get your joy from that, you can be happy nearly every day.

Answer 6 -- I know the temptation to quit the day job. Boy, do I. As someone who once dumped a _really_ good straight-days weekend-Baylor nursing job on the strength of just an idea -- and then had to go get a job that was less good a year later when things didn't pan out, I'm aware of just how strong that pull can be. And what a mistake it can be to give in to it.

If you're desperate to get out of your day job, you're probably not going to listen to me, but I'll say this anyway; the longer you hold on to your day job after you start selling your work (and the smarter you are about hanging onto the writing money), the less likely you'll be to give up on writing in desperation a year or several years down the road, when the grind of never knowing when -- or if -- you're going to get paid drags you under.

Answer 7 -- An idea for one book is a good start, but except in the rarest of cases, one book does not make a career. If you are already giving some thought to what you're going to do for an encore, and for the encore after that, you're thinking like a pro.

Answer 8 -- If you think the main benefit of being a writer is money and fame, think again. When most first novels sell for around $5000 to $7500 dollars (and this is for something that may have taken years to write), and most novels disappear from shelves in weeks, never to be seen again, and most readers cannot tell you the names of the authors of most of the books they liked, much less recognize those authors by sight, your chance at finding great wealth or public adulation in this business is vanishingly small.

As for flexible hours . . . yes, they are flexible. When I was getting started as a pro, they flexed from the minute the kids left for school in the morning until they got home in the afternoon, and then from 9 p.m., after they went to bed, until I couldn't force my eyes open any longer, every day off. Since I worked 12 hour weekend nursing shifts and had older children, I at least had long blocks of time to write. Before the kids started school, it was a lot harder to find time.

As for taking days off -- you can take off any day you want. You just don't get paid. I've had one vacation since 1991, when I sold the first book. I don't work 10-hour days anymore, which is nice. I do work seven days a week most weeks. And I never have enough time to do everything I want. Rule of thumb for the self-employed: it's illegal for anyone to ask you to work as long or as hard as you'll be working for yourself.

Creative control is great. No caveats there. Being your own boss is great, too -- except that your boss is probably going to have to be a slave-driver if you're going to make it professionally.

If your reward is the writing, though, even the long hours, the poor or nonexistent pay, and the anonymity will be no big deal.

Answer 9 -- I've never known a successful writer who wasn't also a compulsive reader. The only real difference between the third answer to this question and the fourth is that some of us are book packrats, and some of us aren't. But if you aren't a big reader, you're going to have a terrible time figuring out what is a truly different approach to a story and what has been done to death.

Answer 10 -- You may be asking, "What could it possibly matter where I've written, or under what circumstances?"

Writing at odd times and in unlikely places simply serves as a clear sign of how deeply the writing bug has bitten you. Case in point -- I'm writing this right now on the backlit screen of my Visor, sitting on the floor in the middle of a neighborhood blackout, hanging out with my family. And writing. This isn't the wierdest place, or the wierdest situation, in which I have written. I definitely earn a D "you don't want to know" response to this question.

The presence of that unstoppable -- sometime unbearable -- urge to put words on a page is a good sign that you have a chance of outlasting the early-career hard times. If you can stay writing long enough to learn your craft, and still be hungry for the next word after years of next words, you just might make it.

I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes about writers by a writer:

"I could claim any number of highflown reasons for writing, just as you can explain certain dog behavior as submission to the alpha, or even as a moral choice. But maybe it's that they're dogs, and that's what dogs do." Amy Hempel

News 101

This is my 101st post. Considering this blog is almost three years old, that seems slightly pathetic to me. Yes, I have 13 other blogs, but I only post 'regularly' on five. (A list is somewhere in the links.)

As a celebration for the New Year, I'm making an unresolution. I will make a list of resolutions on July 3rd. It was good enough for those dudes 231 years ago, its a good enough time for me.

I've also decided to keep this blog, my most-pimped, completely about writing (and related). I would like it to be a sort of what-not-to-do-but-watch-me-try unmanual on getting published (in the good, noticeable way).

On that front, I'm sure my next post will be one of those quizzes I find on others' blogs and go "ooh, me likey" and snag. Because I am that lazy. I won't guarantee I'll be writing instead, but I will be heavily researching...something. :D

Here's to 2007. May everyone make good choices and create good luck within.