Research is now more about selecting than searching

I enjoyed both writers’ conferences last month, but especially enjoyed leading a workshop on research in fiction at Imaginarium. Research is a necessary part of fiction writing because the reader has to believe in the authenticity of the tale. In years past, research was an onerous process of visiting libraries, searching through encyclopedias and card catalogues, visiting locations, and chatting with experts. Ever since the advent of the internet, however, all knowledge is virtually at your fingertips. You can see location details on google maps and learn about almost anything on sites like Wikipedia and YouTube. So, the focus has shifted from searching to selecting, meaning that the most important aspect is knowing what to leave out of your writing. Too much technical detail slows the pace and makes your thriller read like a training manual.

There are several ways to simplify the research process. First, the old adage, write what you know. A plumber who wants to write a courtroom drama has to do a lot more research than a lawyer. Another important point is to sometimes let the reader’s imagination fill in the blanks. That is to say, one doesn’t necessarily need to describe bars, offices, or police stations because the reading public already knows what these places look like (or think they know.). These are two of my top six tips on researching fiction. If you are interested in learning more, just drop me an email.

Summertime--and the reading is easy!

Summer is here, which is always a good time for reading. As a boy, I spent many afternoons in a Detroit library. It was free entertainment and free air conditioning as well. 😊

I love reading novels from the 1950s through the 1970s. The writing was so much richer then. Some of the books are overwritten, such as The Manchurian Candidate that I recently read. But a lot of the authors get things right. I’d say that applied to Harvest Home by Tom Tryon. I had never read a book by the painter turned actor turned novelist, so I thought I’d give it a try. I once watched the miniseries (The Dark Secret of Harvest Home) so already knew the ending. But even so, I found the writing to be tense, spooky, and richly descriptive. I would highly recommend it.

Sumer is also a time for writing conferences. I have two coming up this month. The first is The Imaginarium in Louisville, KY. I’m looking forward to this eclectic collection of writers, gamers, musicians, and independent film makers. I’ll be teaching a workshop on using research in fiction writing and will be sitting on two author panels.

I’ll only have a few days off before heading to the Midwest Writer’s Workshop in Muncie Indiana. I’ve attended this conference for several years and will enjoy touching base with writing friends and mentors such as Larry Sweazy, Matthew Clemens, and John Gilstrap. Always enjoyable and hopefully I’ll sell a book or three.

Hope to see you at a conference or elsewhere down the road.

Stay tuned!

It would ruin my book!

I know a published author who was approached by LifeTime about turning one of his novels into a teleplay. The network wanted to make some changes that would have altered the location and updated the time period, among other things. He considered their offer, then declined with the phrase, “No. It would ruin my book.” What exactly does that mean?

A book exists whether or not they make a movie based on it. It has substance and can be purchased exactly as you wrote it. The book still exists unaltered even if you sell the movie rights to someone who changes the story and characters around. Ultimately, a book stands on its own, regardless of derivative treatments. The book is the book. A movie based on the book is a movie. These two things do not necessarily overlap.

I enjoy reading the source material for movies I like. Recently I read The Authentic Death of Hendry Jones, on which the great Marlon Brando vehicle One-Eyed Jacks was based. These two treatments were poles apart. With the exception of some character names, locales, and one or two scenes, they had nothing in common. Evidently, the movie producer, screen writer, and director (Brando) had a vision quite different than the book author (Charles Neider). Yet I enjoyed both. More importantly, both existed and were entertaining despite the fact that they were quite different.

In my opinion, authors (especially little-known authors) shoot themselves in the foot by this pompous attitude. A movie or teleplay treatment of your book does not alter the book, so it is not possible to ruin it. What it does is provide additional monies and publicity for your book. Even if the movie treatment is lousy, your book still benefits from a new cover with something like “Now a major motion picture” on it.

Win! Win! Win!

Story trumps writing

I’m a bit of an odd duck in that I like reading the source books for movies I enjoy. This is a no-no for many because the plot is no longer a surprise. However, knowing how things turn out doesn’t bother me, and I like to see how the books differ from the movies.

In this vein, I just finished reading The Manchurian Candidate, a 1959 political thriller by Richard Condon. Some of you might be familiar with the story from the movies, one in the 1960s with Frank Sinatra and one in the 1990s with Denzel Washington. I’m a big fan of the 1962 movie, so I jumped on a chance to buy the book as a used paperback.

There is an adage that the book is always better than the movie. But I didn’t have to read long before I knew this wasn’t always the case. I was prepared for Condon’s writing style to be dated and a bit flowery, given that the book was published in the 1950s. But I wasn’t prepared for the wasteful verbosity that greatly slowed the pace without adding appreciably to character development.

My beloved Elmore Leonard once said that he never described anything unless it added appreciably to story or character development. This is especially important for a thriller, where the story has to trip along like a ticking timebomb. Condon evidently didn’t know this, or if he did his ego got in the way. There were loads of darlings that needed to be killed here. 😊

Condon describes everything in excruciating detail and provides a vast (probably thirty pages worth) backstory on Raymond’s parents and stepfather. This is not integral to the plot and simply exhausts the reader with minutia about the lack of character of these people. That is to say, you don’t need thirty pages to show that Senator and Mrs. Iselin are miserable people, and that Raymond hates them.   

As I read, I was reminded of another adage: story trumps writing. This means that a killer plot that captures public imagination always triumphs over quality writing. I think that was the case here. Condon’s story of how brainwashing is used to remove will and conscience, turning an otherwise law-abiding if dull individual into a perfect assassin, is brilliant. It came out at a time when people had just learned how these techniques were used by Chinese and North Koreans to torture American prisoners and, in some cases, turn them against their own country; techniques that would be continued by the North Vietnamese. Even today, this idea captures the public consciousness, which is probably why both the 1960s and 1990s movies were successful.

As a fiction writer, it can be frustrating to see someone overwrite to this degree and still publish a bestselling thriller. But, instead of bemoaning it, I strive to improve the impact of my own plot ideas. In some respects, this was inspiration for Project Suicide, which is a high-concept political-technothriller. Now, all I need is someone in Hollywood to notice it. 😊

Editing the King.

I started rereading Stephen King’s Christine or a recent train trip and just finished it. Great book! It wasn’t as good as the first time I read it, but books rarely are. Still, it takes a real master to hold your attention the second time through 720 pages.

As I read, I found myself noticing things that I hadn’t when I first read it forty years ago, back before I was a fiction writer. Things like pacing, tension, and the use of repetition. But I also noticed that it was a bit overwritten. I’d come across phrases or sentences and say (almost aloud) ‘that should have been edited out.’ Some of these were just torturous ways of saying something, others extraneous material that didn’t add to story or character. In all cases, they slowed or detracted from the narrative a little. Let’s bear in mind that King’s narratives are so compelling that they can survive considerable detracting and still be great. But it was interesting to see that even the King of horror has flaws.

It is hard to say if the editor missed some things or if King overrode him. Either way, doesn’t matter. The fun thing for me was that my writer’s eye had picked them up. I think they call that reading like a writer and maturing in your craft. Both are good things.

Learning from negative examples

I recently attended a lecture on writing. It was a memorable hour and a half that reinforced several lessons I had learned about writing and public speaking.

Lesson 1. Be prepared

The speaker had no notes and did not appear to have prepared at all for the talk. In the world of public speaking, winging it is never a good idea. The best “extemporaneous” talk you’ll ever hear has been meticulously prepared and practiced.

Lesson 2. Actually speak on what you’re assigned

In the talk I attended, the speaker said virtually nothing relating to the publicized topic. The vast amount of time was spent reading one of his own stories.

Lesson 3. Be an interesting reader

Mumbling, monotone speaking, and stumbling over your own writing is uninteresting. Read the material often enough that you can leave the page from time to time to connect with your audience. Keep potential readers engaged.

Lesson 4. Write well

The story read on that fateful night was subpar (to be polite). It stumbled from topic to topic with no real purpose, moral, or conclusion. Rambling is not writing.

Lesson 4. Never censor your own work

The speaker’s opening remarks dealt with the fact that he has recently thrown out several stories and rewrote others because he worried that his emotional experiences might be less important than those of women, gays, and people of color. He was just an old white guy who maybe needed to shut up and let underrepresented groups have the floor. It is important to remember that Dickens, Hemingway, Twain, Browning, Frost, King, Shakespeare, and Ian Fleming were white guys, and our lives and our language are richer because of them. If you think something is important or meaningful enough to write, there is an audience that will appreciate it. Only throw out the crap.

In closing, negative examples serve a purpose. They encourage us in many ways, reinforcing lessons and showing us that our work might be better than we thought.

I recommend John McManus

I had the pleasure of hearing award-winning author John McManus speak at a library event a few months ago. It inspired me to read his Fox Tooth Heart collection of short stories. Wow!

First off, be ready for something completely different. McManus delves deep into his mind and pulls out all the stops; those barriers we put up to keep the Id at bay. He forgoes traditional story lines and delves into the deep psychology of the perverse and disturbed. Some may find the story lines disturbing, but I assure you it will be unlike anything you’ve read before.

Be prepared for great writing. There is little wasted exposition or description. Each of the punchy, almost stream of conscious sentences has utility somewhere either before or after they are uttered. I found myself reading past my intended stopping point just to keep hearing the writing in my head.

Be prepared for reflection. I found myself thinking about each story long after it was read. His stories leave a lasting impression.

I recommend him.

Podcasts and reviews--perfect together!

Hi All,

Had a very enjoyable podcast last week with Andrew Stamper exploring thriller movies, with a focus on Three Days of the Condor with Robert Redford. I’ll post a link when it becomes available.

Here are links to two recent podcasts you may enjoy, including Talking Codswallop with James Stafford from the UK.

https://thequidditasfactor.buzzsprout.com

https://www.podbean.com/media/share/pb-cjrjm-12a0ff7?utm_campaign=w_share_ep&utm_medium=dlink&utm_source=w_share

Four podcasts are scheduled for next week and I’m always ready to do more. If any of you know a podcaster looking to discuss thriller writing or writing in general, please pass on my contact info. johnb@thrillerjohnb.net.

I’m thirteen thousand words into the sequel to Project Suicide. No title yet, so if anyone can think of something other than Project Suicide 2 I’d be interested in hearing it. 😊 All I can tell you right now is that Amy and Deacon are reunited, and they face a new threat from weaponized 606.

The book-club talk is coming up fast. If you’re in the Knoxville area September 8 and want to hear me speak about Project Suicide, just let me know. If you know of any other book clubs or stores in eastern Tennessee that might be amenable to a book signing or reading, likewise let me know.

Checkout Time went off to the publisher last week. I’m looking forward to hearing comments from Paul and Doug. I’ll keep you all apprised.

I’m up to sixteen five-star reviews (yeah), four of them verified purchasers. However, I’m still looking for many more. Even if you were gifted the book (especially if you were gifted a signed copy) I’m counting on your review. Once I get into the 30-40 range, Amazon will put me on the lists they send out to customers, which would be huge. Reviews are easy and don’t take much time. Just click on www.projectsuicidenovel.com and go to the bottom past the other reviews to the tab “Write a review.” Please give it a rating and a few lines. I’d consider it a big favor.

Thanks and stay tuned!

John Bukowski

Johnb@thrillerjohnb.net

PS. If you know anyone who might enjoy following my writing journey, please forward them this link so they can sign up: https://tremendous-motivator-8914.ck.page/95736090a5