FREE KINDLE FOR PC

FREE KINDLE FOR PC
So you can read my books
Showing posts with label MEILORI'S. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MEILORI'S. Show all posts

Monday, October 13, 2014

CURSE OF THE GODS_William Faulkner, ghost, here


"A man's moral conscience is the curse he had to accept from the gods in order to gain from them the right to dream."- William Faulkner.



The ghost of William Faulkner here:



When I told ghost stories to my nieces and nephews

at Rowan Oaks, I never thought I would become one.

Would you like to read three of those stories?  Used for under 99 cents!


http://www.amazon.com/Ghosts-Rowan-Oak-Faulkners-Children/dp/0916242072

Reading the latest headlines, I have come to believe each day now is a deadly Halloween.  What are you living to do?

I have found that the greatest help in meeting any problem is to know where you yourself stand. That is, to have in words what you believe and are acting from.


But there is a terrible irony in that.

It took me dying to understand life. I thought I knew what life was as you think you know.

You are wrong.
 

Life is ephemeral, elusive, and beyond the capacity of words to adequately convey.

Your worldview, as was mine, is as simplistic and crude as an Etch-A-Sketch rendering of the Mona Lisa.


I would say that music is the easiest means in which to express life,

but since words are my talent, I must try to express clumsily in words what the pure music would have done better.


You believe McCord is only a creature of Roland's mind.

Roland's Lakota blood brings to life all to which he invests his love and care. 



But then, how can you explain that I can remember meeting McCord in New Orleans in the 1920's?


Is the power of the spirit, of the mind such that it can transcend time itself?

I could try to explain what my ghostly senses have seen but it would be as pointless as giving caviar to an elephant.


Instead I will write of that time when I still was alive, still saw as a human sees.


The aim of every artist is to arrest motion, which is life, by artificial means 


and hold it fixed so that a hundred years later, when a stranger looks at it, it moves again since it is life.

And that is what I will try to do now for you.


The best job that was ever offered to me was to become a landlord in a brothel.

In my opinion it's the perfect milieu for an artist to work in. McCord offered it to me. And I took it for awhile.


I got more than money for that job, I received a way of looking at life that transformed me into the writer that I became.

McCord became my Socrates. He hardly ever spoke but guided my thoughts with a stray word or question, letting me come up with my own conclusions.


The first thing he taught me: the past is never dead. It's not even past.


The second thing he helped me see: the salvation of the world is in man's suffering. The scattered tea goes with the leaves, and every day a sunset dies.

One day during the time while McCord and I walked and talked in New Orleans – or I talked and he listened - 


I found him sitting on a bench in Jackson Square, laughing to himself.

I got the impression that he had been there like that for some time, just sitting alone on the bench laughing to himself.

This was not our usual meeting place. We had none.

He lived in his French Quarter night club, Meilori's. And without any special prearrangement, we would meet somewhere between his club and the Square after I had something to eat at noon.


I would walk in the direction of his club. 


And if I did not meet him already strolling or sitting in the Square, I would simply sit down on a bench where I could see his doorway and wait until he came out.


I can see him still –


A ramrod straight man in his late forties, clad entirely in black: 


black broadcloth jacket, shirt, tie, and slacks. His boots were black, as well, and polished so that the sun struck fire from them. 

Even his Stetson was black.


All of which made the silver star on his jacket stand out like a campfire in the night. It was said he had once been a Texas Ranger.

He never talked to me of those days - at least not before that afternoon.


This time he was already sitting on the bench, laughing. I sat down beside him and asked what was so funny. He looked at me for a long moment.


"I am," he said.


And to me that was the great tragedy of his character, for he meant it. He knew people did not believe he was who the legends claimed. How could he be?


They thought him an actor paid to play a part.


Except when the darkness came for them, then they came running, praying he was what the tales on the street whispered: a monster who killed monsters.

He expected people nowhere near his equal in stature or accomplishment or wit or anything else, to hold him in scorn and derision ... in the daylight.


In spite of that he worked earnestly and hard at helping each wounded soul he met.

It was as if he said to himself: 


'They will not hurt as I have hurt. I will show them that they matter because their pain matters to me.'


"Why do you speak of yourself like that?" I asked.


"Today marks the hundred year anniversary," he said.


"Of what?"



"Drop by my table at the club this evening, and I will tell you."


And that evening I did just that. We sat, with a bottle now, and we talked.

At first he did not mention the hundred year anniversary. It was as if he was slowly working himself up to something long avoided.


We talked of everything it seemed.


How a mule would work ten years for you willingly and patiently just for the privilege of kicking you once. How clocks kill time, that only when the clocks stop does time come to life.


And how given a choice between grief and nothing, he would choose grief.


When he had said those last words, McCord met my eyes with his own deep ones and said,

"There is something about taking a stand against the darkness, something that makes you feel good. Perhaps it's the risk, the gamble. In any event it's a thing I need."


His eyes seemed to sink into his wolf's face. "But there is a price."

"What price?" I whispered.


"To understand the world, you must first understand the human heart. But none of us understand that mystery. So we make mistakes."

He closed his eyes. "And those mistakes kill those we love."


He rose from the table, walking into the shadows and speaking to me from over his shoulder.


"No battle is ever won. They are not even fought for the reasons you tell yourself. The battlefield only reveals your own folly and despair. And victory is an illusion of philosophers and fools."


The darkness swallowed him, and the night suddenly seemed to be my enemy.

***

Thursday, September 4, 2014

HIBBS ON THE RUN FROM ASGARD!





  
I was trying to write in Meilori's again.  It is always an chancy thing.

Each day in it is whatever day it was when the last visitor entered.

You can go from Thanksgiving to Mardi Gras with the entrance of one visitor.

 I heard a scampering of heavy furred feet. 

I looked up. 

Hibbs, the cub with no clue.

Hibbs, being a magical being, can appear in Meilori's at any stage of his life.  This time, the cub looked frantic.

"Hide me, Mr. Roland!"

There was a scurrying of sharp nails and Ratatoskr, the Asgardian squirrel, leapt to my table. 

Hibbs groaned, "Too late."

Ratatoskr took my ice tea tumbler in both hands and gulped down nearly half of it.

"Poooie!  Not enough sugar!"

He scurried to the sugar bowl and dumped its entire contents into my glass as I muttered under my breath. 

Ratatoskr gulped down the rest of my tea.

"Ah, just right!"

Ratatoskr's eyes brightened as he spotted Hibbs.  "There you are!  Why can't you borrow money from a leprechaun?"

Hibbs grumbled, "If I tell you, will you go away?"

"Oh, you're funny!  Like you, they're always short!"

"Where is the Turquoise Woman when you need her?" sighed tiny Hibbs.

"Oooh, another one," grinned Ratatoskr.  Why don't you iron 4-leaf clovers?"

I frowned, "I don't know."

Hibbs pleaded, "Don't encourage him!"

Ratatoskr snickered, "Silly Roland, you don't want to press your luck!"

He scampered up on the shoulder of the fidgeting Hibbs and snorted, "How do you know an Irishman is having a good time?"

"Like I'm not having," moaned Hibbs.

"He's Dublin over with laughter!"  Ratatoskr slapped Hibbs on the back of his furry head. 

"Get it?  Dublin over with laughter!!"

With a trilling moan as of a thousand Apache spirit flutes, a swirl of snowflakes suddenly appeared beside my table. 

My breath frosted in tiny clouds at the sudden chill.

The minature snowstorm twirled and flaired into a column of bright sparkles that slowly breathed into the tall Turquoise Woman. 

Eyes, terrible and beautiful beyond the singing of them, lanced into the startled Ratatoskr who tried to swallow but couldn't.

In a voice like icicles singing, the Turquoise Woman asked the Asgardian squirrel as tiny lightnings formed at the end of her pointing forefinger.

"What do leprechauns love to barbeque?"

"Wh-What?" stuttered the terrified squirrel.

She zapped the rump of Ratatoskr with a minature lightning bolt.  "Short ribs."

Hibb snickered as the squirrel grabbed his bottom with both small paws and leapt off onto the floor, scampering away for dear life.

The Turquoise Woman flowed without effort after the running Ratatoskr and asked, "When is an Irish Potato not an Irish Potato?"

She sent another sizzling bolt into the poor squirrel's butt and laughed coldly as he yelped, popping up in the air, "When it is a FRENCH fry!"

The two of them disappeared around the nearest corner in Meilori's, but we heard the faint voice of the Turquoise Woman:

"What is the main difference between an Irish wedding and an Irish funeral?"

Hibbs huffed and squirmed onto the chair beside me with a bit of an effort. 

"Darn.  They're out of earshot.  Now, I'll be wondering all day what the answer was."

Suddenly, the Turquoise Woman appeared beside him and tweaked his ear.  "One less drunk at the party!"

Hibbs yelped but she was already gone back to "rewarding" Ratatoskr for tormenting the cub she loved.

Saturday, August 9, 2014

BILL WATTERSON INTERVIEWED BY THE GHOST OF MARK TWAIN


Ghost of Mark Twain here.  What to say of Meilori's?

I will tell only of the lone jazz club in the darkest of the French Quarters alleys;

the feared tomb of many a New Orleans visitor.  It is an old and whispered-about haunt whom none remembers ever not being where it is tonight. 

I cleared my throat as old Bill warily eyed the ghostly clientel milling through Meilori's

"I admire you, Bill.  You had an idea, executed it, then moved on. And you ignored the clamor for more. Why is it so hard for readers to let go?"

He took a sip of his iced tea ( he told me Meilori's did not encourage one not to be at his sharpest). 

"You can’t really blame people for preferring more of what they already know and like. The trade-off, of course, is that predictability is boring. Repetition is the death of magic."

I tapped his drawing of Calvin and Hobbes as Groot and Rocket.  "Thanks for drawing this for me, Bill."

Bill made a face.  "How could I not?  You're one of the greats ... and you threatened to have the ghost of H.P. Lovecraft keep reading me bedtime stories until I did!"

"Speaking of movies, Bill, you spoke well of Pixar awhile ago.  Would you consider letting them animate your strip?"

" I have zero interest in animating Calvin and Hobbes. If you’ve ever compared a film to a novel it’s based on, you know the novel gets bludgeoned.

It’s inevitable, because different media have different strengths and needs, and when you make a movie, the movie’s needs get served. As a comic strip, Calvin and Hobbes works exactly the way I intended it to. There’s no upside for me in adapting it."

I scratched my moustache.  "I’m assuming you’ve gotten wind of people animating your strip for YouTube?"

Bill nodded, "Every artist learns through imitation, but I rather doubt the aim of these things is artistic development.

I assume they’re either homages or satiric riffs, and are not intended to be taken too seriously as works in their own right. Otherwise I should be talking to a copyright lawyer."

"Talking about lawyers, your fight over protecting Calvin and Hobbes from licensing deals, and your battle to increase the real estate for your Sunday page comic, are legend."

Bill sighed, "Just to be clear, I did not have incredible autonomy until afterward. I had signed most of my rights away in order to get syndicated, so I had no control over what happened to my own work, and I had no legal position to argue anything.

I could not take the strip with me if I quit, or even prevent the syndicate from replacing me, so I was truly scared I was going to lose everything I cared about either way.

I made a lot of impassioned arguments for why a work of art should reflect the ideas and beliefs of its creator, but the simple fact was that my contract made that issue irrelevant."

I cackled a laugh, "One story that made the rounds was that a plush toy manufacturer once delivered a box of Hobbes dolls to you unsolicited, which you promptly set ablaze.

For people like me who share your low opinion of merchandising, this is a fairly delightful story. Did it actually happen?"

"Not exactly. It was only my head that burst into flames."

I cocked my head at Bill.  "Is Calvin autobiographical?"

"Not really.

Hobbes might be a little closer to me in terms of personality, with Calvin being more energetic, brash, always looking for life on the edge.

He lives entirely in the present, and whatever he can do to make that moment more exciting he'll just let fly...and I'm really not like that at all."

I lit my cigar.  "Would it be the accurate to call Charles Schulz the major influence on you?"  

Bill nodded, "Oh yeah. As a child, especially, Peanuts and Pogo were my two biggest influences.  Schulz, in Peanuts, changed the entire face of comic strips.

Things that we now take for granted--reading the thoughts of an animal for example--there's not a cartoonist who's done anything since 1960 who doesn't owe Schulz a tremendous debt."

"You took up painting after the strip ended. Why don’t you exhibit the work, Bill?"

"My first problem is that I don’t paint ambitiously. It’s all catch and release—just tiny fish that aren’t really worth the trouble to clean and cook.

But like with Harper Lee, my second problem is that Calvin and Hobbes created a level of attention and expectation that I don't know how to process."

I grinned crooked, "Have you ever peeled one of those stupid Calvin stickers off of a pickup truck?"

Bill sipped his tea and smiled wide. "I figure that, long after the strip is forgotten, those decals will be my ticket to immortality."

I started to fade from my chair, and Bill yelped, "Hey!  Don't go!  Who's going to get me safely out of this nightmare?"

I just chuckled and faded clean away, leaving Bill yelling, "This is NOT funny!!  Mark!  Maaaark!"

* "Rocket and Groot" by Adi Fitri
* Based in part on Mental Floss Interview with Bill Waterson:
http://mentalfloss.com/article/53216/mental-floss-exclusive-our-interview-bill-watterson

What Thea Gilmore was singing in the background at Meilori's:

Saturday, August 2, 2014

DON'T LOSE YOUR DINOSAUR




Hibbs, the cub with no clue, here:

So what with Ebola, that terrible Gaza stuff going on, and Toledo, Ohio's water contaminated with this Mycrocystin yuck that poisoned it ...

I decided you guys needed something different.


So I interviewed Kanye West at Meliori's --


Hibbs:

Hello, Mr. Kanye.


Kanye:

What is this?  Are you disrespecting me?  Is this some kind of put-down?  A talking bear?


Hibbs:

A cub actually.  And Captain Sam promised not to shoot you if you gave me this interview.


Kanye:

Oh ... I got compassion for little things like you.  I'll do the 'view.


Kanyne (Looking around):

This place is weird.  I could saw that bar in half and make things look righteous.


Hibbs:

I get sick at the sight of blood, and gunshots hurt my ears.  Please don't do that. 

Ah, what with things like this Ebola virus, I thought people might want to know what you think about it.


Kanye:

Like they said in Step Brothers: Never lose your dinosaur. This is the ultimate example of a person never losing his dinosaur.

Meaning that even as I grew in cultural awareness and respect and was put higher in the class system in some way for being this musician, I never lost my dinosaur.

So I would tell folks not to lose their dinosaur.


Hibbs (wrinkling his muzzle):

English isn't your first language, is it, sir?


Kanye:

You don't understand me, do you?


Hibbs:

Does anyone?


Kanye:

I don't have fangs. I'm a porcupine.  I'm not a shark, I'm a blowfish. So that perfect example about me not being understood, it's like a blowfish. 

People have me pinned as a shark or a predator in some way, and in no way am I that. I wouldn't want to hurt anyone. I want to defend people. I want to help people.


Hibbs (Scratching his head):

You say stuff like that just to give me a headache, right?


Kanye:

You're a paparazzi, aren't you?


Hibbs:

I can't even say it much less be it.


Kanye:

Celebrities are being treated like blacks were in the '60s, having no rights, and the fact that people can slander your name.


Hibbs:

I have too much trouble getting into trouble without saying lies about people ... if that is what a papa-pizza is.


Kanye:

What you need is Kim K skills.  In order to win at life, you need some Kim K skills, period.


Hibbs (his head cocking):

And just exactly what is her skill set, sir?


(Kanye just looks at him)  Hibbs, clearing his throat:

Ah, are you happy?


Kanye:

What makes me happy is land, and we're on a boat now. This is Christopher Columbus. This is uncharted waters we're on.


Hibbs (digging into his ears, hoping to understand better what he is hearing):

You mean this Ebola scare, right?


Kanye:

I'm totally weird, and I'm totally honest, and I'm totally inappropriate sometimes.

And the thing is, for me to say I wasn't a genius, I would just be lying to you and to myself.


Hibbs (muttering):

Does everyone picture duct tape over your mouth so early in the conversation?


Kanye:

Were you involved with anything last year that was as culturally significant as the Yeezus tour or that album?   You just a hairy furball.


Hibbs:

I've been called worse by better.  But thank you for making Ebola not seem so bad anymore. 

Do you think there might be a market
for a small children's book
on new adventures of
Hibbs, the cub with no clue?

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

DEAN KOONTZ at MEILORI'S

{Photo courtesy Steve Z Photography:

{This post based on two excellent interviews by STRANGE HORIZONS and NOVEL ROCKETS.

Go to these links for much more revelations and tips}:

http://www.novelrocket.com/2007/10/bestselling-author-dean-koontz.html
http://www.strangehorizons.com/2008/20080428/1mccarty-a.shtml 

Stan Getz was doing an evocative version of  "Skylark" as Dean Koontz sat opposite me at Meilori's.

Thanks for agreeing to come here and talk to those who, like VR Barkowski, edit as they write.

http://vrbarkowski.wordpress.com/2014/07/07/in-defense-of-editing-as-you-go/

I've read that you will rewrite a page until it's right before moving on, sometimes redoing a draft thirty or forty times. This must make for a slow process. Approximately how long does it take you to write one novel?

I work 10- and 11-hour days because in long sessions I fall away more completely into story and characters than I would in, say, a six-hour day.

On good days, I might wind up with five or six pages of finished work; on bad days, a third of a page. Even five or six is not a high rate of production for a 10- or 11-hour day, but there are more good days than bad.


And the secret is doing it day after day, committing to it and avoiding distractions.


A month--perhaps 22 to 25 work days--goes by and, as a slow drip of water can fill a huge cauldron in a month,

so you discover that you have 75 polished pages. The process is slow, but that's a good thing.

Because I don't do a quick first draft and then revise it, I have plenty of time to let the subconscious work;


therefore, I am led to surprise after surprise that enriches story and deepens character.

I have a low boredom threshold, and in part I suspect I fell into this method of working in order to keep myself mystified about the direction of the piece--

and therefore entertained.

A very long novel, like FROM THE CORNER OF HIS EYE can take a year. A book like THE GOOD GUY, six months.

What kinds of things are you doing during that time:
Writing? Plotting? Rewriting? Outlining? Character development?

I sit down at my desk about 7:30 [a.m.], or 8:30 if it's my turn to walk the dog—9:00 if I also have to polish the alligator—

and I'm there until dinner, because I rarely eat lunch.

When I need an excuse to avoid taking out the garbage, I usually claim to have been abducted by extraterrestrials,

because deadlines aren't a sufficient excuse to deflect Gerda.

Why she buys the evil-aliens story, I don't know, but she's never called me on it.

Outline?

I never outline.
 

For me, fiction is character driven, not plot driven,

so I start with one or two interesting characters and a brief premise—and then leap off the narrative cliff.

On the way down, like a circus clown, I'm desperately opening a series of ever larger umbrellas, hoping to slow my speed of descent and land on both feet.

Character development?
 

That isn't something I do as a separate task.

I don't cobble up lists of a character's favorite foods, habits, preferences in clothing, political attitudes, favorite game shows, or his excuses for not taking out the garbage.

That's all useless.

If characters come alive, they do so by virtue of their actions, their decisions and choices,

and it's in the writing that they assume dimension, not in some portrait or capsule biography written prior to launching the book.

Though I was once a Freudian writer, showing how every character's traumatic past shaped the person he became,

I have in the '90s become virulently anti-Freudian because I believe it's all bunk, and dangerous bunk to boot.

Freudian-colored writing—which is 99 percent of all fiction in this century—

reduces every character to a victim on some level; and the writer who either consciously or unconsciously uses Freudian dogma to explain his characters' motivations

is reducing the mysterious complexity of the human mind to a monkey-simple cause-and-effect mechanism.

Dicken's characters were not given depth by mechanistic psychological analyses of their childhoods;

Freud hadn't yet started to infect the world, and Dickens defined his characters by their actions, by their decisions and choices and attitudes.

Some critics won't get what I'm doing, because they're conditioned to looking for certain devices and techniques as signs that characterization is taking place—

but, happily, most have not only caught on to it but have supported it as more natural and, ultimately, deeper reaching.

Strangers
 
As for plotting . . .

well, this is also something that resolves itself in the process of writing, not in an outline.

If I keep the characters moving, keep them thinking and feeling, the plot will evolve as I go. An outline always felt unnatural to me,

and I stopped using one when I began Strangers. Before that, I created outlines, but the books never followed them anyway.

Rewriting is also not a separate task for me.

I don't bang out a book, or even a chapter, and then go back to revise it.


I rework every sentence before moving to the next, and then rework every paragraph before moving to the next,

and then revise each page twenty, thirty, fifty times before moving on to the next.

When I reach the end of a chapter—which has by that time been revised exhaustively—

I then print it out and pencil it three or four times, because I see things on the printout that I don't see on the screen.

By the time I reach the end of the book, every line in it has received so much attention that there's nothing to go back and revise—

unless the editor spots a problem that, on reflection, I agree needs to be addressed.

I've sometimes described this method of writing a novel as being similar to the way coral reefs are formed from the accreted skeletons of marine polyps—

though I must admit I've never polled any polyps to see if they agree.

Some writers have wondered how I maintain spontaneity when working in this fashion, but it's no problem at all, because you get so intimately involved with the fine details of the story

 that it remains eternally fresh to you on a lot of levels rather than just on the level of plot.

I'm sure all those polyps feel spontaneous and full of life as they form colonies, reproduce, and finally die in the service of creating underwater tourist attractions and providing the raw material for junk jewelry and dust-catching paperweights.


Do you think a new novelist should take the route you did and write some easier to place genre fiction to get their foot in the door or begin with the type of fiction they hope always to write?

Out of the gate, run with what you most love.

Starting in a genre--if you don't expect always to stay there--will label you,

and the labor needed to strip off a publisher's label, once it has been applied, is Herculean. I know because I've had to reinvent myself more than once.

{Just look at his private library and his 18 year old computer}



Monday, November 18, 2013

DEAN KOONTZ talks to NaNoWriMo


{Photo courtesy Steve Z Photography:

{This post based on two excellent interviews by STRANGE HORIZONS and NOVEL ROCKETS.

Go to these links for much more revelations and tips}:

http://www.novelrocket.com/2007/10/bestselling-author-dean-koontz.html
http://www.strangehorizons.com/2008/20080428/1mccarty-a.shtml 

Stan Getz was doing an evocative version of  "Skylark" as Dean Koontz sat opposite me at Meilori's.

Thanks for agreeing to come here and talk to those who have decided to do NaNoWriMo.

I've read that you will rewrite a page until it's right before moving on, sometimes redoing a draft thirty or forty times. This must make for a slow process. Approximately how long does it take you to write one novel?

I work 10- and 11-hour days because in long sessions I fall away more completely into story and characters than I would in, say, a six-hour day.

On good days, I might wind up with five or six pages of finished work; on bad days, a third of a page. Even five or six is not a high rate of production for a 10- or 11-hour day, but there are more good days than bad.

And the secret is doing it day after day, committing to it and avoiding distractions.


A month--perhaps 22 to 25 work days--goes by and, as a slow drip of water can fill a huge cauldron in a month, so you discover that you have 75 polished pages. The process is slow, but that's a good thing.

Because I don't do a quick first draft and then revise it, I have plenty of time to let the subconscious work; therefore, I am led to surprise after surprise that enriches story and deepens character.


I have a low boredom threshold, and in part I suspect I fell into this method of working in order to keep myself mystified about the direction of the piece--and therefore entertained. A very long novel, like FROM THE CORNER OF HIS EYE can take a year. A book like THE GOOD GUY, six months.

What kinds of things are you doing during that time:
Writing? Plotting? Rewriting? Outlining? Character development?

I sit down at my desk about 7:30 [a.m.], or 8:30 if it's my turn to walk the dog—9:00 if I also have to polish the alligator—

and I'm there until dinner, because I rarely eat lunch.

When I need an excuse to avoid taking out the garbage, I usually claim to have been abducted by extraterrestrials, because deadlines aren't a sufficient excuse to deflect Gerda. Why she buys the evil-aliens story, I don't know, but she's never called me on it.

Outline?

I never outline. For me, fiction is character driven, not plot driven, so I start with one or two interesting characters and a brief premise—and then leap off the narrative cliff. On the way down, like a circus clown, I'm desperately opening a series of ever larger umbrellas, hoping to slow my speed of descent and land on both feet.

Character development?

That isn't something I do as a separate task. I don't cobble up lists of a character's favorite foods, habits, preferences in clothing, political attitudes, favorite game shows, or his excuses for not taking out the garbage.

That's all useless.

If characters come alive, they do so by virtue of their actions, their decisions and choices, and it's in the writing that they assume dimension, not in some portrait or capsule biography written prior to launching the book.

Though I was once a Freudian writer, showing how every character's traumatic past shaped the person he became, I have in the '90s become virulently anti-Freudian because I believe it's all bunk, and dangerous bunk to boot.

Freudian-colored writing—which is 99 percent of all fiction in this century—

reduces every character to a victim on some level; and the writer who either consciously or unconsciously uses Freudian dogma to explain his characters' motivations

is reducing the mysterious complexity of the human mind to a monkey-simple cause-and-effect mechanism. Dickens's characters were not given depth by mechanistic psychological analyses of their childhoods;

Freud hadn't yet started to infect the world, and Dickens defined his characters by their actions, by their decisions and choices and attitudes. Some critics won't get what I'm doing, because they're conditioned to looking for certain devices and techniques as signs that characterization is taking place—but, happily, most have not only caught on to it but have supported it as more natural and, ultimately, deeper reaching.
Strangers
As for plotting . . .

well, this is also something that resolves itself in the process of writing, not in an outline. If I keep the characters moving, keep them thinking and feeling, the plot will evolve as I go. An outline always felt unnatural to me,

and I stopped using one when I began Strangers. Before that, I created outlines, but the books never followed them anyway.

Rewriting is also not a separate task for me. I don't bang out a book, or even a chapter, and then go back to revise it.

I rework every sentence before moving to the next, and then rework every paragraph before moving to the next, and then revise each page twenty, thirty, fifty times before moving on to the next.

When I reach the end of a chapter—which has by that time been revised exhaustively—I then print it out and pencil it three or four times, because I see things on the printout that I don't see on the screen.

By the time I reach the end of the book, every line in it has received so much attention that there's nothing to go back and revise—unless the editor spots a problem that, on reflection, I agree needs to be addressed.

I've sometimes described this method of writing a novel as being similar to the way coral reefs are formed from the accreted skeletons of marine polyps—

though I must admit I've never polled any polyps to see if they agree. Some writers have wondered how I maintain spontaneity when working in this fashion, but it's no problem at all, because you get so intimately involved with the fine details of the story

 that it remains eternally fresh to you on a lot of levels rather than just on the level of plot.

I'm sure all those polyps feel spontaneous and full of life as they form colonies, reproduce, and finally die in the service of creating underwater tourist attractions and providing the raw material for junk jewelry and dust-catching paperweights.


Do you think a new novelist should take the route you did and write some easier to place genre fiction to get their foot in the door or begin with the type of fiction they hope always to write?

Out of the gate, run with what you most love. Starting in a genre--if you don't expect always to stay there--will label you, and the labor needed to strip off a publisher's label, once it has been applied, is Herculean. I know because I've had to reinvent myself more than once.

{Just look at his private library and his 18 year old computer}