Sorry I haven't been here in a while and I won't bore you with the details. I will say I'm so excited to be involved with the Emirates Airlines Festival of Literature (web page here) this year and tomorrow I get to meet Jeffery Deaver (more details after the event). However I might yell at him as he was responsible for me losing sleep last night.
I may be the only one, but I feel if I'm meeting an author for the first time I like to read their work if I haven't before. So as I don't normally read crime/thriller novels (that is DH's department) I began one of Deaver's last night. Mistake. Page turning, sleep depriving....
He's here because of Project X and I will be attending Face 2 Face with Jeffrey Deaver...
Can't wait.
ps...in the opening ceremony of the festival last year Deaver read his poem 'The Death of Reading'. here's the first stanza:
I’ve got what I think is the very best job.
I have no commute; I can dress like a slob
I get paid to make up things-isn’t that neat?—
Just like at the White House and 10 Downing Street
You can find the rest of it here.
pps...do you think I could disguise myself as a Bond girl?
Showing posts with label Emirates Airlines International Festival of Literature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Emirates Airlines International Festival of Literature. Show all posts
Monday, January 17, 2011
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
Now For Something Completely Different
Over on Twitter the lovely @CraftyFushia has been kind enough to be interested in my wardrobe dilemmas for the glamorous 50th Anniversary RNA Awards Lunch. This year it has been a real problem, but a delightful one as I have lost a substantial amount of weight (some day I'll tell that story) and well, to put it mildly nothing fit. It was therefore my duty to prowl every Mall Dubai has to offer in order to find something sufficient glam and flattering.
Well, I came up with three in the end and as nothing else in the wardrobe fit I really had to buy all three, but one is head and shoulders above the rest......
What do you think? Can't show you the other two as they are still at the tailor's being taken in.
PS I'm also having coffee with one of the short listed authors - Rachel Hore, tomorrow who is here for the literary Festival
Monday, March 08, 2010
Emirates Airlines International Festival of Literature Last Year's Notes
In my excitement about this year's Dubai Literary Festival I thought it would be helpful to post my links to the write-ups I did on last year's. So here they are with the caveat that these are not perfect and are my notes:
Friday, March 05, 2010
I Am Alive - promise
It's been a long time since I've been here - sorry. I could give you explanations, but I don't want to bore you.
So rather than looking backwards I want to look forward. Next week bring the Emirates Airlines Festival of Literature to Dubai and no of course I'm not excited - hah. Can't wait. This has been marked on my diary since they announced the dates last year. The only downside is that I won't be here for the whole thing - no, only two days, in fact missing the main days. However this is balanced with the fact that I will be in Cornwall a week from today and will be celebrating the christening of my great nephew - I do keep telling my niece I'm not old enough to be a great aunt but she just laughs....
Then the week beginning 15th March - well, a dream comes true. We complete on a flat, or more correctly a shoebox in London. When DH and I sold our flat in London 21 years ago I never thought we would be able to have a foot hold in London again, but dream do come true and from the 15th we will have just that a foothold or a shoe box which should make this crazy traveling life of mine much easier.
On the 16th of March it is the glittery affair - the RNA's Romantic Novel of Year Award Lunch! This years it's even more glam as it's the 50th anniversary. The stress of what wear and what shoes to wear has nearly done me in.
Now there is lovely link back from the lunch to the lit festival as one of this year's short listed authors, Rachel Hore will here at the festival!
Now have made that nice link I will give you another one or rather two which go together nicely. The are one making your hero likeable....
Finally I'm polishing up the synopsis for A Cornish House for two pitch sessions a the York Festival of Writing. I will try and blog the process about tomorrow as it has been an interesting exercise but right now I am off to read Chapter One again to make sure I saved the cat!(see above links)
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Links Again
If you don't read Nathan Bransford on a regular basis then you must drop by and read this post on character motivation. Today it was one of those hit on the head type of things. I am well back into the rewrite of August Rock and thus far pleased with the new shape and feel. By removing Tristan's point of view - he had become more interesting by being less transparent and much easier to see why Judith struggles with him and his motivations. However so far this has led to a major loss of words, but I feel confident went I tackle the editing I will make them up with filling out the new dimensions of Judith's story.
I am also at that point when I wonder if I am totally deluded and I have wandered off into the far land of writing meaningless tripe. I have taken a fairly straight forward romantic story and twisted it. Nothing is quite clear in it any more. I don't know who if any one Judith will choose - this maybe a good thing - maybe the reader won't either. Toby, my ghost, has remained a constant - what he wants is clear, but in the next edit I may have to shake up his 'current' day activities a bit but not yet. Judith has to reach her goals and I have hit the last third of the story - nail biting time. I wonder if what I had for breakfast will effect which path she takes today or will the film I saw last night (Watchman - which I loved but I have to confess seeing it here in Dubai probably left me with a limited view as I understand the 'full' version is 162 minutes and we were in the cinema a whole lot less than that - more like 120/130!) will reflect in today's production?
The Dubai Literary Festival authors that I listened to gave me much food for thought - especially about my writing.
-Kate Mosse's comment about not having to be the same writer as you are a reader really hit home.
-Rachel Billington's comment about the tension your own values bring to your writing and your characters.
- The vastly different takes on how to work with research.
All of this has bashed around in my skull and I know know what I want to write about and A Cornish House is in the right spot so August Rock is now on the road to becoming more me and I am very clear where the WIP is going once I can put my hand back onto it. I can't tell you the sense of relief to finally know what kind of writer I am. Now my problem is to find a writer in a similar vein - and here lies the problem - I am not the same as a reader and a writer. I know I haven't read him or her yet! So I can't say to agent or editor in the style of .....
Do you know what type of writer you are? Is it the same as your reading voice?
PS- just found this-
I am also at that point when I wonder if I am totally deluded and I have wandered off into the far land of writing meaningless tripe. I have taken a fairly straight forward romantic story and twisted it. Nothing is quite clear in it any more. I don't know who if any one Judith will choose - this maybe a good thing - maybe the reader won't either. Toby, my ghost, has remained a constant - what he wants is clear, but in the next edit I may have to shake up his 'current' day activities a bit but not yet. Judith has to reach her goals and I have hit the last third of the story - nail biting time. I wonder if what I had for breakfast will effect which path she takes today or will the film I saw last night (Watchman - which I loved but I have to confess seeing it here in Dubai probably left me with a limited view as I understand the 'full' version is 162 minutes and we were in the cinema a whole lot less than that - more like 120/130!) will reflect in today's production?
The Dubai Literary Festival authors that I listened to gave me much food for thought - especially about my writing.
-Kate Mosse's comment about not having to be the same writer as you are a reader really hit home.
-Rachel Billington's comment about the tension your own values bring to your writing and your characters.
- The vastly different takes on how to work with research.
All of this has bashed around in my skull and I know know what I want to write about and A Cornish House is in the right spot so August Rock is now on the road to becoming more me and I am very clear where the WIP is going once I can put my hand back onto it. I can't tell you the sense of relief to finally know what kind of writer I am. Now my problem is to find a writer in a similar vein - and here lies the problem - I am not the same as a reader and a writer. I know I haven't read him or her yet! So I can't say to agent or editor in the style of .....
Do you know what type of writer you are? Is it the same as your reading voice?
PS- just found this-
You Should Be a Film Writer |
 You don't just create compelling stories, you see them as clearly as a movie in your mind. You have a knack for details and dialogue. You can really make a character come to life. Chances are, you enjoy creating all types of stories. The joy is in the storytelling. And nothing would please you more than millions of people seeing your story on the big screen! |
Friday, March 13, 2009
EAILF Kate Mosse and Victoria Hislop
Victoria Hislop and Kate Mosse
Liz Thomson explained that both women were given a platform on Richard and Judy and both attended Oxford.
Victoria is a reluctant novelist and only became one at 45. It was a total surprise for her as she never wanted to be a novelist. She is too loud and gregarious but suddenly one day inspiration struck. She was on holiday with her family in Crete and trying to please husband and teenagers and in a guide book she found there was a nearby island that had been a leper colony. She was inspired by the place and they way people seemed to misunderstand the island. There was no real feeling of misery. With the two that she was there she had formulated the story. She felt compelled to write.
Life is full of surprises and this required a complete change of lifestyle. She made the comment that when the book was book into the many translations that you lose control – the readers respond not to just the book but also the translation.
Kate Mosse then spoke and mentioned that she too is inspired by place and that she was a writer who had not written as a writer up to 43. Writing was a pragmatic decision then she wrote Labyrinth.
Be proud of what you do- keep trying. Many writers are not comfortable in their skin – you are not necessarily the writer you are as a reader. Your reading voice is different than your writing voice.
She fell in love with Carcassonne then began to read. It was a private love affair.
If you use real history you must get it right so that you can be free with your imagination. She met her character ten years before she began to write.
Victoria had also met her character before writing. She just knew she had to write it – compelled, a responsibility to write about it. Victoria is more interested in modern history – 20th century is what she likes.
She did also no research because it was all in Greek and she didn’t speak it then. The Greeks didn’t seem to mind that she made it up. It is now being made into a 26 part Greek TV series.
Kate was she was pedant and totally immersed in the history.
Victoria said The Island was very hard to sell and it’s first print run was 5000. It was just a good story and nothing more. She clarified that she did research leprosy.
With historical fiction people wanted to be entertained and learn something. A novelist can be biased (telling only one side of the story) a historian has greater pressure. Novelist have freedom.
Victoria was asked about second books – awful. Third is worse. She would only write another one if she had an idea for it. She only wrote the two because she had ideas for them. She doesn’t want to bore people so she may not write another unless she is struck by an idea. She must be compelled to write the story. Victoria said her website
Are websites important? Victoria wasn’t a big website person. It works well for overseas readers but she would much rather meet readers in person. She also said she was too old to get excited about them.
On the other hand Kate said hers was really important to her. It was part of a teaching programme and it was to reach people who would not come to events. It was a good way to engage with others. She spoke about blogs – the writing is the exact opposite of what is required for novels. Blogs are quick, succinct and novels take time.
She felt it was the job of a successful writer to support other writers. Course can be helpful to learn skills. You can’t teach creativity but skills can be taught.
Liz Thomson explained that both women were given a platform on Richard and Judy and both attended Oxford.
Victoria is a reluctant novelist and only became one at 45. It was a total surprise for her as she never wanted to be a novelist. She is too loud and gregarious but suddenly one day inspiration struck. She was on holiday with her family in Crete and trying to please husband and teenagers and in a guide book she found there was a nearby island that had been a leper colony. She was inspired by the place and they way people seemed to misunderstand the island. There was no real feeling of misery. With the two that she was there she had formulated the story. She felt compelled to write.
Life is full of surprises and this required a complete change of lifestyle. She made the comment that when the book was book into the many translations that you lose control – the readers respond not to just the book but also the translation.
Kate Mosse then spoke and mentioned that she too is inspired by place and that she was a writer who had not written as a writer up to 43. Writing was a pragmatic decision then she wrote Labyrinth.
Be proud of what you do- keep trying. Many writers are not comfortable in their skin – you are not necessarily the writer you are as a reader. Your reading voice is different than your writing voice.
She fell in love with Carcassonne then began to read. It was a private love affair.
If you use real history you must get it right so that you can be free with your imagination. She met her character ten years before she began to write.
Victoria had also met her character before writing. She just knew she had to write it – compelled, a responsibility to write about it. Victoria is more interested in modern history – 20th century is what she likes.
She did also no research because it was all in Greek and she didn’t speak it then. The Greeks didn’t seem to mind that she made it up. It is now being made into a 26 part Greek TV series.
Kate was she was pedant and totally immersed in the history.
Victoria said The Island was very hard to sell and it’s first print run was 5000. It was just a good story and nothing more. She clarified that she did research leprosy.
With historical fiction people wanted to be entertained and learn something. A novelist can be biased (telling only one side of the story) a historian has greater pressure. Novelist have freedom.
Victoria was asked about second books – awful. Third is worse. She would only write another one if she had an idea for it. She only wrote the two because she had ideas for them. She doesn’t want to bore people so she may not write another unless she is struck by an idea. She must be compelled to write the story. Victoria said her website
Are websites important? Victoria wasn’t a big website person. It works well for overseas readers but she would much rather meet readers in person. She also said she was too old to get excited about them.
On the other hand Kate said hers was really important to her. It was part of a teaching programme and it was to reach people who would not come to events. It was a good way to engage with others. She spoke about blogs – the writing is the exact opposite of what is required for novels. Blogs are quick, succinct and novels take time.
She felt it was the job of a successful writer to support other writers. Course can be helpful to learn skills. You can’t teach creativity but skills can be taught.
That's the last of my reports on the festival. I can't wait for next year's. It was brilliant and I personally gained so much more than I could have hoped. Through the words of the various authors I have clarified in my mind exactly what type of writer I am and where it fits. This has been a huge struggle for me but with the lightbulb moments from Kate Mosse and Rachel Billington I have a much clearer vision of where my voice fits and the stories I am compelled to write. So now head back down to the real work at hand - writing!
Thursday, March 12, 2009
EAILF Margaret Atwood
Here are my notes from Margaret Atwood at the Emirates Airlines International Festival of Literature.
The first topic was the ‘banned book’ by Geraldine Bedell. Margaret said it took her five days to track down sources. There was no launch planned she just hadn’t been invited like many other writers. In the end Margaret went with the meaning of the word banned. Something happened but it wasn’t what people thought.
She would much rather be here in the sun. Margaret asked what’s the line between taste and censorship or call it sensibility and censorship.
What motivated her writing? What’s it like to go into a new book? She said it’s dark and then it get lighter.
She spoke about her path to becoming a writer back in the 1950s. She said she had very little real choice. She began writing with pen and paper – she cannot type. She now uses a computer as she she can correct without the little white brush. Her mother comment when told that her daughter was going to be a writer – you had better learn to spell and Margaret’s reply was other’s will do it for me.
Everybody comes from somewhere…write from that…the weather, the economy, the history, the language – all enter into who you are as a writer. Then she comment on the fact that being short she had a distinct point of view as she saw things differently than a tall person.
Who you are is all part of your writing.
Labels publishers use can be helpful but limit. They think its helpful as a marketing tool. Bookseller need to know where do I put this?
Quality transcends genre. Using the title literary limits interest.
Asks if she was starting now – she would despair as it is all marketing led. Publishing is not a business it is an art or a craft with a business element.
All books are unique. She likes to write book by book. For new authors it is tough to sell this way. Today you have to make money. Publishers in the past were willing to invest time and money in developing a writer – they are less willing to do this now. Writers are now much more living hand to mouth. It is brutal now.
She writes in many varieties yet most are pigeonholed. She can do this because she is old and no one has told her any different. She has had a free field – no structures.
Her ideas come from Shakespeare, history, politics….Her new novel’s title is The Year of the Flood. It took 15 titles before they settled on that one which they felt would stand the transatlantic divide however the covers will be different.
The question came from the audience about hope for the future. She said the questions she received in the 70’s were about gender then moved onto free speak. Now the questions were about hope. This reflects today.
-uncertainty
-can’t see where we are going
-environment
-human population
-the relationship of the last two
-people’s rights
-women’s rights (when jobs start to go then its is usually the women’s jobs that go first)
She said that humans are inventive/creative
-many minds are trying to solve these problems
-we have the ability
-hopes we have the political will
-it has taken us a while to see the problems
People are working hard and they have the will plus the ability which gives us hope. We have to look at water, air, energy and use the above to make sure that there is a sustainable future.
A member of the audience stated, “The west has betrayed it own values…How familiar with you with literary tradition with Arab world.
-more familiar history – it is easy to translate
-not with poetry because the meaning lost in translation
-novels fall in-between with the translation difficulties
-there is tremendous interest now
She would much rather be here in the sun. Margaret asked what’s the line between taste and censorship or call it sensibility and censorship.
What motivated her writing? What’s it like to go into a new book? She said it’s dark and then it get lighter.
She spoke about her path to becoming a writer back in the 1950s. She said she had very little real choice. She began writing with pen and paper – she cannot type. She now uses a computer as she she can correct without the little white brush. Her mother comment when told that her daughter was going to be a writer – you had better learn to spell and Margaret’s reply was other’s will do it for me.
Everybody comes from somewhere…write from that…the weather, the economy, the history, the language – all enter into who you are as a writer. Then she comment on the fact that being short she had a distinct point of view as she saw things differently than a tall person.
Who you are is all part of your writing.
Labels publishers use can be helpful but limit. They think its helpful as a marketing tool. Bookseller need to know where do I put this?
Quality transcends genre. Using the title literary limits interest.
Asks if she was starting now – she would despair as it is all marketing led. Publishing is not a business it is an art or a craft with a business element.
All books are unique. She likes to write book by book. For new authors it is tough to sell this way. Today you have to make money. Publishers in the past were willing to invest time and money in developing a writer – they are less willing to do this now. Writers are now much more living hand to mouth. It is brutal now.
She writes in many varieties yet most are pigeonholed. She can do this because she is old and no one has told her any different. She has had a free field – no structures.
Her ideas come from Shakespeare, history, politics….Her new novel’s title is The Year of the Flood. It took 15 titles before they settled on that one which they felt would stand the transatlantic divide however the covers will be different.
The question came from the audience about hope for the future. She said the questions she received in the 70’s were about gender then moved onto free speak. Now the questions were about hope. This reflects today.
-uncertainty
-can’t see where we are going
-environment
-human population
-the relationship of the last two
-people’s rights
-women’s rights (when jobs start to go then its is usually the women’s jobs that go first)
She said that humans are inventive/creative
-many minds are trying to solve these problems
-we have the ability
-hopes we have the political will
-it has taken us a while to see the problems
People are working hard and they have the will plus the ability which gives us hope. We have to look at water, air, energy and use the above to make sure that there is a sustainable future.
A member of the audience stated, “The west has betrayed it own values…How familiar with you with literary tradition with Arab world.
-more familiar history – it is easy to translate
-not with poetry because the meaning lost in translation
-novels fall in-between with the translation difficulties
-there is tremendous interest now
Tomorrow my last report from the festival.....Kate Mosse and Victoria Hislop.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
EAILF Censorship Debate
First let me apologize for the long delay in continuing my posts on the festival. After weekend rugby break I have found it hard to put my head back into a more intense place. No surprise there really. I have also struggled with writing up the censorship debate. There are many reasons but the key one is that in a way there is no point as those truly interested can watch it all on video here. So rather than giving you my rather detailed notes please watch the the video. It is well worth it but not if you wanted more info on the whole banned or not banned book fiasco. The highlights me were:
- Andrei Kurkov's almost cheeky hit at the thing that no one was speaking about - banning a book these days was a surefire way to receive publicity
-Margaret Atwood's comment that lie was not freedom of expression
- Nelofer Pariza's commented that writers write to engage in dialogue
- the general gist of the western writers was that in the west the biggest censorship was that of self censorship and this was mainly due to political correctness
-Rajaa Al Sanea spoke about portraying humans as humans not being forced to a postive or negative stereotype. She didn't feel she had to portray women one way or other but to portry life as it is - not sugar coated; then it can cross boundaries and this is positive
-Margaret Atwood asked what is our relationship with our audience; you write by yourself then it is published; you are not there then but separated by time and space; sometimes that feel gives you a sense of safety; it was key to remember that in today's world your audience can be anyone; it is like a message in a bottle throw into the sea - sometimes it is a life line and some will be affronted. You can't control how people will react so just make it the best book possible. Your responsibility is to the work - make it the best it can be
-Rachel Billington commented the west was seriously threatened by political correctness, the pressure to be saleable, commercial pressures; writers have to be strong about what they need to write
Finally it was Rachel Billington who gave me greatest gift as a person who at times struggles with my faith and its part in my writing. She was responding to a comment on the Catholic Church and censorship which she felt was justified. She said if you are a novelist you have to feel completely free and able to create characters; that doesn't mean you don't start somewhere with your beliefs and values...in fact that is what gives the tension most writing is looking for - you gather the complications of your own beliefs with the way you are allowing your characters to behave and do dreadful things which provides great tension.
Paul Blezard blogs about the festival here .
Tomorrow - Margaret Atwood
Friday, March 06, 2009
World Cup Rugby 7s
Just a quick note to say realistically that I won't get to the notes on the censorship panel today or tomorrow. The World Cup is on and as dh is keen we will be enjoying two days of rugby - no complaints from me. The weather is perfect and well the sevens style of rugby suits my attention span.
So hopefully will a have a few photos to show for the days away and then will return to the serious business of reporting of the festival.
So hopefully will a have a few photos to show for the days away and then will return to the serious business of reporting of the festival.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
EAILF Penny Vincenzi
First a few more links to the Festival:
Kate Mosse blogs again here
English PEN's blog picked up my post yesterday and opened discussion here and continues the debate about censorship with regard to the festival here
Sameer Rahim's blog post for the Telegraph are here
Penny Vincenzi
Liz Thomson opened the session with the comment that Penny said the best perk of the job was flying business class! Liz said Penny’s first book was Old Sins which came out in 1989 and that Penny was the doyenne of the modern blockbuster.
The conversation then came around to how Penny became a novelist which had never been her plan. She spent her early years in Devon then moved to London in her teens. Although the publicity states that her first job was working in Harrods she said it was actually leading donkeys on the beach, but in all seriousness her first proper job was as a junior secretary at Vogue. This led to a discussion of how different things were then – the journalist wore hats at their desk and never went out without gloves.
From Vogue she moved to the magazine Nova as a journalist. The most amazing story she worked on was ‘How to Undress in Front of Your Husband.’ She said that the photo shoot was the most fascinating part was the model who was actually a beautiful transvestite and she had to keep switching in her head from these beautiful feminine images and to this deep masculine voice.
She had never planned to write fiction and she found it obscenely easy to become a novelist and luck played a big part. In fact her first novel sent in by her agent landed in the slush pile by accident. The reader had written a comment that it was rubbish across the top. Fortunately the editor noticed that an agent had sent in it and pulled it out. The editor went onto publish the book.
She said she found her voice quickly and she loved it. Writing the first book was easy the second was the worse, the curse of the second book. She sees no point in a synopsis before she writes. Her characters write the books. She starts with a ‘what if’ and follows with ‘why and how’.
-then characters come on - like at a party
-she gradually gets to know them
-she keeps a list of characters but that is all and yes she has found that their eye colours change through out the book (she thanks good copy editors for picking these things up)
-the story is just in her head
-she writes from 9 to 6
-she loves writing, she loves watching it grow
-she writes 4000 words a day
-she begins the next day by revising these words
-her editor is her first reader
-she talks the story through with her husband, Paul
Absolute Scandal's came from at a cocktail party. She met a couple that had been very rich and now had nothing. The following day she asked her hostess about them who explained that they had lost all in Lloyds. She knew then that she had her next book. She had never done so much research as she had for Absolute Scandal. She wanted to describe the terror of it.
Her latest book begins with a catastrophe and how it brings people together. Each book is about one year in the writing. She researches on the hoof and that can change the story.
She has stated that to be a writer all you need is a kitchen table and paper. It is a seat of pants on the seat of chair thing. Tenacity is the key. If you have talent you will get to the end.
She never takes her luck for granted.
She said it was extraordinary – for so long it is you and the book and then it’s out there. If she sees someone reading it she watches and if the reader’s attention wanders she can’t bear it. She is neurotic about it.
When asked about endings she you can’t rush it. It’s a bit like having a baby. You are waiting but then it doesn’t arrive when expected and the suddenly it’s there. You can’t rush the end.
When asked about her favourite authors she said she loves her genre and in particular Jilly Cooper, Joanna Trollope, Maeve Binchy, and EJ Howard. She loves story tellers and loves the detective stories of PD James. She loves biographies.
When idea comes it is like a tingle down her spine. She talks it through with husband and then her editor.
She then finds she goes away and starts writing and inevitably it is a false start. Usually at chapter four she realizes it. It is a leaden feeling when it goes wrong. The best thing to do is to go back to the point where it still feels right and just press delete. You’re your darlings. Then she is more confident and the story grows but still not knowing exactly what is going to happen.
She told of a time when she was three quarters through a book and she got the feeling that something wasn’t right. A person had died at the beginning of the book. So she was out walking the dogs mulling this feeling over – then she realized that he hadn’t died - he had been murdered. Then she died thinking she would have to go back and rewrite but when she checked the script her subconscious had made that decision right from the start and there was nothing to change.
She must follow her characters and trust them – they are so real to her. She must trust herself and slog, slog, slog.
She couldn’t stress the importance of a good editor enough and the respect that you need to have for them.
She said it’s harder these days to find an agent. She had been lucky enough to have the most wonderful agent, Desmond Elliot, who passed away recently. She said to find a good one asked around. Study the Writers’ and Artists’ Yearbook. A good agent is crucial. A good one will work miracles for you. They are very clever people and you have to trust them.
She was asked how much she used dictionaries and thesauruses and other tools. She said she uses the thesaurus mostly. Otherwise she just works through.
She reads the papers a lot. She suggested studying other writers work. One writer she knows spends the first hour of her work day reading really good writers before she begins to write.
She said you must always try and make your deadlines. Her background as a journalist made this part of her being. A deadline a powerful thing.
Tomorrow should be the Censorship Panel but as the World Cup Rugby 7's is on going tomorrow I make no promises!
Kate Mosse blogs again here
English PEN's blog picked up my post yesterday and opened discussion here and continues the debate about censorship with regard to the festival here
Sameer Rahim's blog post for the Telegraph are here
Penny Vincenzi
Liz Thomson opened the session with the comment that Penny said the best perk of the job was flying business class! Liz said Penny’s first book was Old Sins which came out in 1989 and that Penny was the doyenne of the modern blockbuster.
The conversation then came around to how Penny became a novelist which had never been her plan. She spent her early years in Devon then moved to London in her teens. Although the publicity states that her first job was working in Harrods she said it was actually leading donkeys on the beach, but in all seriousness her first proper job was as a junior secretary at Vogue. This led to a discussion of how different things were then – the journalist wore hats at their desk and never went out without gloves.
From Vogue she moved to the magazine Nova as a journalist. The most amazing story she worked on was ‘How to Undress in Front of Your Husband.’ She said that the photo shoot was the most fascinating part was the model who was actually a beautiful transvestite and she had to keep switching in her head from these beautiful feminine images and to this deep masculine voice.
She had never planned to write fiction and she found it obscenely easy to become a novelist and luck played a big part. In fact her first novel sent in by her agent landed in the slush pile by accident. The reader had written a comment that it was rubbish across the top. Fortunately the editor noticed that an agent had sent in it and pulled it out. The editor went onto publish the book.
She said she found her voice quickly and she loved it. Writing the first book was easy the second was the worse, the curse of the second book. She sees no point in a synopsis before she writes. Her characters write the books. She starts with a ‘what if’ and follows with ‘why and how’.
-then characters come on - like at a party
-she gradually gets to know them
-she keeps a list of characters but that is all and yes she has found that their eye colours change through out the book (she thanks good copy editors for picking these things up)
-the story is just in her head
-she writes from 9 to 6
-she loves writing, she loves watching it grow
-she writes 4000 words a day
-she begins the next day by revising these words
-her editor is her first reader
-she talks the story through with her husband, Paul
Absolute Scandal's came from at a cocktail party. She met a couple that had been very rich and now had nothing. The following day she asked her hostess about them who explained that they had lost all in Lloyds. She knew then that she had her next book. She had never done so much research as she had for Absolute Scandal. She wanted to describe the terror of it.
Her latest book begins with a catastrophe and how it brings people together. Each book is about one year in the writing. She researches on the hoof and that can change the story.
She has stated that to be a writer all you need is a kitchen table and paper. It is a seat of pants on the seat of chair thing. Tenacity is the key. If you have talent you will get to the end.
She never takes her luck for granted.
She said it was extraordinary – for so long it is you and the book and then it’s out there. If she sees someone reading it she watches and if the reader’s attention wanders she can’t bear it. She is neurotic about it.
When asked about endings she you can’t rush it. It’s a bit like having a baby. You are waiting but then it doesn’t arrive when expected and the suddenly it’s there. You can’t rush the end.
When asked about her favourite authors she said she loves her genre and in particular Jilly Cooper, Joanna Trollope, Maeve Binchy, and EJ Howard. She loves story tellers and loves the detective stories of PD James. She loves biographies.
When idea comes it is like a tingle down her spine. She talks it through with husband and then her editor.
She then finds she goes away and starts writing and inevitably it is a false start. Usually at chapter four she realizes it. It is a leaden feeling when it goes wrong. The best thing to do is to go back to the point where it still feels right and just press delete. You’re your darlings. Then she is more confident and the story grows but still not knowing exactly what is going to happen.
She told of a time when she was three quarters through a book and she got the feeling that something wasn’t right. A person had died at the beginning of the book. So she was out walking the dogs mulling this feeling over – then she realized that he hadn’t died - he had been murdered. Then she died thinking she would have to go back and rewrite but when she checked the script her subconscious had made that decision right from the start and there was nothing to change.
She must follow her characters and trust them – they are so real to her. She must trust herself and slog, slog, slog.
She couldn’t stress the importance of a good editor enough and the respect that you need to have for them.
She said it’s harder these days to find an agent. She had been lucky enough to have the most wonderful agent, Desmond Elliot, who passed away recently. She said to find a good one asked around. Study the Writers’ and Artists’ Yearbook. A good agent is crucial. A good one will work miracles for you. They are very clever people and you have to trust them.
She was asked how much she used dictionaries and thesauruses and other tools. She said she uses the thesaurus mostly. Otherwise she just works through.
She reads the papers a lot. She suggested studying other writers work. One writer she knows spends the first hour of her work day reading really good writers before she begins to write.
She said you must always try and make your deadlines. Her background as a journalist made this part of her being. A deadline a powerful thing.
Tomorrow should be the Censorship Panel but as the World Cup Rugby 7's is on going tomorrow I make no promises!
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
EAILF Women Writing From the Arab World
Women Writing from the Arab World – Mansoura Ez Eldin, Haifa Bitar, sahar el-Mougy and Rajaa al-Sanea with Hani Nakshabandi
“What are the implications of being a writer for Arab women? Can one speak of women’s literature as opposed to men’s literature?”
Before I begin to share my notes I need to say two things. First this was the session I was most looking forward to. This stems from my education – I went to Mt. Holyoke, all women’s university which has made me more acutely aware of women’s issues and struggles from the past to the present day. This awareness brought me to one of the cross roads of my life – move to England or remain in Boston and attend Harvard Divinity School to do my masters in theological studies. I wanted to pursue women’s spiritually through history as I felt women experience religion through emotions (they feel it) not analyze it. So a woman of today reading a manuscript from the middle ages will still feel the emotions – it hasn’t dated, it still rings true and speaks to modern women despite the archaic language. My premise was that women’s experience of God has not altered because it is based on the emotions rather than how it works or is implemented. For me this was not to belittle women’s ability to be analytical, but to say that their focus has always been what is truly important and therefore has not dated. (note – I moved to England and have been a very mobile expat since)
The second thing to consider in my notes is that I was listening to a simultaneous translation of the discussion and no matter how excellent - I know that the subtleties were lost. I will simply quote one of Dh’s experiences at a conference in Kazakhstan where the translator translated drilling for oil are ripping from the entrails of the earth (more poetic no doubt but not necessarily the exact meaning).
Hani Nakshabandi opened the session by introducing the panellists. He said he hoped that they would not ‘genderize’ literature. It was human experience – man’s experience, woman’s experience. It was all based on perspective and the author doesn’t matter. He allowed each panellist ten minutes to state their case so to speak.
Rajaa al-Sanea, the author of the Girls of Riyadh, began by saying there were many differences in the Gulf States.
-culture was controlled by men and fed to children through their mothers
-it was difficult to be free of it and difficult to control because you can’t express it; too many limitations and then there is reputation
-this has led to a certain type of reader; readers looking for novels about women; novels that try to be free – transparent and this varies from country to country
-there is less exposure to men in some of these cultures; not seeing men in daily life; difficult to describe their relationships and therefore must rely on imagination
-women novelist do try but it is difficult without research
-Saudi women excel because they are writing out of their imagination
-they struggle with no liberty of movement
-politics affects the writing
-women are always expressed in novels as psychologically repressed which is probably true
-women try to overcome oppression through writing; it is a way to break through
Of her best seller, Girls of Riyadh, she said when asked that 50% was imagination. She began writing when she was 18 and was published at 22.
Hani, before introducing the next speaker, suggested that women writers were moody (!)
He then introduced Sahar EL Mougy who is an Egyptian author and lecturer at Cairo University. She began by saying that all through history women had been marginalized (here I think the translation may have let me down because I think she meant Arab history).
-women should write of the crisis of culture identity, modernity – adherence; what is the dividing line – keeping cultural identity and moving forward in women’s rights
-women are the carries of the cultural identity and they are paying the price for this role when they try and move society forward.
-women have only written for a century and a half (again I think she meant Arab women)
The next woman to speak was Haifa Bitar from Syria who had written collections of short stories and novels while working full time as an ophthalmologist. She spoke of her impetus to write, a divorce at 25 and her seven year struggle with the church. She fought against the only aspirations allowed for women were children and marriage. This shaped her as a novelist. She described it as being in a small room like a cage and they only way to turn the fear (the cage) into endless space was to write. She also said that writing for her was like having a photocopier for what was in her mind.
The next woman to speak was Egyptian Mansoura Ez Eldin, a novelist and writer of short stories. She asked is a novel a work of art or self expression. She said we should judge a novel as a work of art through ideas.
Now here is where my own questions were lost in the translation so to speak as so many ideas were jumping around with what was being said – so I apologize as there is no dividing line here between my own thoughts and what was filtering in through the headphones. These were my thoughts:
My premise has always been that women’s writing is timeless – think Jane Austin (it is more the emotional that still speak to an audience today rather than the social mores she portrayed)
I wanted to ask did they feel it was more important that they wrote social commentary at this stage (which I feel much of men’s writing covers – or should I say fiction targeted male readers covers) or the emotions that the society evokes in women?
I kept thinking that for me great novels speak of emotion and don’t date, but social commentary alone does (then I challenged myself on Dickens etc).
One of them commented that feminist writers should focus on women’s issues – literature is an expression of the human state.
I thought - women write of emotions which transcend time and place – or are you trying to achieve social change or write social commentary.
Ranjaa spoke at the end in English saying that she could not have published without her family’s support, but still had to go to Lebanon to publish. She mentioned that with access to the internet true censorship can never really be in place. Women needed the support of men their society or they would never be able to cross the bridge.
She was asked can a novel change reality? It would be very difficult to effect changes in the Arab world this way as there are not enough readers.
The questions from the audience were fascinating in that they were very different from the ones taking place in my mind. One local woman was offended by how Rajaa portrayed women as not honourable. Rajaa replied that literature must contain both.
As I mentioned at the beginning of the report, I know I lost much of this valuable discussion for which I was very sad. It did highlight to me again how uniquely each culture views the world and the absolute need for respect of these cultures and their perspectives.
So I ask the key question in my head – what is the novel for you as a reader? Should a novel be social commentary and if so does it limit it lifespan and does that matter? Do you prefer Dickens or Austin? (I do know that Austin railed against the condition of women, but is that what most of today’s readers feel – does a young western women reader approaching Austin now even see that side unless it is pointed out to her as he life is so far removed from it? And if a young Arab women reads Austin what does she see or relate to?) Who are the examples that come to your mind? Should we limit this discussion to the form of the novel or open it to all fiction? Here I am thinking of two male writers that I adore – Chaucer and Shakespeare. Chaucer for me was social commentary but done with such humour and insight into human nature that it transcends time. Shakespeare’s emotions are what linger with me although if I put my analytical hat back on (which is very dusty indeed as I have not analysed literature from this point of view since I left university nearly 25 years ago) I can remember the social commentary of his time - then I ask what would he want to think about now – the political question of his lifetime or the emotional struggles we all face today? If you are a writer what do you want your readers to leave your novel with?
I apologize to those of you who may have wandered by looking for a straight out report as the past three have been. For me this couldn’t have been as I have read very little Arab literature (a huge failing on my part), listening in translation, and my own feelings on women’s literature. I also ask for forgiveness for inadequate coverage of the session as you can see from the report my mind was flying off on so many questions.
For tomorrow Penny Vincenzi.
BTW here's the link for Kate Mosse's blog post on EAIFL.
“What are the implications of being a writer for Arab women? Can one speak of women’s literature as opposed to men’s literature?”
Before I begin to share my notes I need to say two things. First this was the session I was most looking forward to. This stems from my education – I went to Mt. Holyoke, all women’s university which has made me more acutely aware of women’s issues and struggles from the past to the present day. This awareness brought me to one of the cross roads of my life – move to England or remain in Boston and attend Harvard Divinity School to do my masters in theological studies. I wanted to pursue women’s spiritually through history as I felt women experience religion through emotions (they feel it) not analyze it. So a woman of today reading a manuscript from the middle ages will still feel the emotions – it hasn’t dated, it still rings true and speaks to modern women despite the archaic language. My premise was that women’s experience of God has not altered because it is based on the emotions rather than how it works or is implemented. For me this was not to belittle women’s ability to be analytical, but to say that their focus has always been what is truly important and therefore has not dated. (note – I moved to England and have been a very mobile expat since)
The second thing to consider in my notes is that I was listening to a simultaneous translation of the discussion and no matter how excellent - I know that the subtleties were lost. I will simply quote one of Dh’s experiences at a conference in Kazakhstan where the translator translated drilling for oil are ripping from the entrails of the earth (more poetic no doubt but not necessarily the exact meaning).
Hani Nakshabandi opened the session by introducing the panellists. He said he hoped that they would not ‘genderize’ literature. It was human experience – man’s experience, woman’s experience. It was all based on perspective and the author doesn’t matter. He allowed each panellist ten minutes to state their case so to speak.
Rajaa al-Sanea, the author of the Girls of Riyadh, began by saying there were many differences in the Gulf States.
-culture was controlled by men and fed to children through their mothers
-it was difficult to be free of it and difficult to control because you can’t express it; too many limitations and then there is reputation
-this has led to a certain type of reader; readers looking for novels about women; novels that try to be free – transparent and this varies from country to country
-there is less exposure to men in some of these cultures; not seeing men in daily life; difficult to describe their relationships and therefore must rely on imagination
-women novelist do try but it is difficult without research
-Saudi women excel because they are writing out of their imagination
-they struggle with no liberty of movement
-politics affects the writing
-women are always expressed in novels as psychologically repressed which is probably true
-women try to overcome oppression through writing; it is a way to break through
Of her best seller, Girls of Riyadh, she said when asked that 50% was imagination. She began writing when she was 18 and was published at 22.
Hani, before introducing the next speaker, suggested that women writers were moody (!)
He then introduced Sahar EL Mougy who is an Egyptian author and lecturer at Cairo University. She began by saying that all through history women had been marginalized (here I think the translation may have let me down because I think she meant Arab history).
-women should write of the crisis of culture identity, modernity – adherence; what is the dividing line – keeping cultural identity and moving forward in women’s rights
-women are the carries of the cultural identity and they are paying the price for this role when they try and move society forward.
-women have only written for a century and a half (again I think she meant Arab women)
The next woman to speak was Haifa Bitar from Syria who had written collections of short stories and novels while working full time as an ophthalmologist. She spoke of her impetus to write, a divorce at 25 and her seven year struggle with the church. She fought against the only aspirations allowed for women were children and marriage. This shaped her as a novelist. She described it as being in a small room like a cage and they only way to turn the fear (the cage) into endless space was to write. She also said that writing for her was like having a photocopier for what was in her mind.
The next woman to speak was Egyptian Mansoura Ez Eldin, a novelist and writer of short stories. She asked is a novel a work of art or self expression. She said we should judge a novel as a work of art through ideas.
Now here is where my own questions were lost in the translation so to speak as so many ideas were jumping around with what was being said – so I apologize as there is no dividing line here between my own thoughts and what was filtering in through the headphones. These were my thoughts:
My premise has always been that women’s writing is timeless – think Jane Austin (it is more the emotional that still speak to an audience today rather than the social mores she portrayed)
I wanted to ask did they feel it was more important that they wrote social commentary at this stage (which I feel much of men’s writing covers – or should I say fiction targeted male readers covers) or the emotions that the society evokes in women?
I kept thinking that for me great novels speak of emotion and don’t date, but social commentary alone does (then I challenged myself on Dickens etc).
One of them commented that feminist writers should focus on women’s issues – literature is an expression of the human state.
I thought - women write of emotions which transcend time and place – or are you trying to achieve social change or write social commentary.
Ranjaa spoke at the end in English saying that she could not have published without her family’s support, but still had to go to Lebanon to publish. She mentioned that with access to the internet true censorship can never really be in place. Women needed the support of men their society or they would never be able to cross the bridge.
She was asked can a novel change reality? It would be very difficult to effect changes in the Arab world this way as there are not enough readers.
The questions from the audience were fascinating in that they were very different from the ones taking place in my mind. One local woman was offended by how Rajaa portrayed women as not honourable. Rajaa replied that literature must contain both.
As I mentioned at the beginning of the report, I know I lost much of this valuable discussion for which I was very sad. It did highlight to me again how uniquely each culture views the world and the absolute need for respect of these cultures and their perspectives.
So I ask the key question in my head – what is the novel for you as a reader? Should a novel be social commentary and if so does it limit it lifespan and does that matter? Do you prefer Dickens or Austin? (I do know that Austin railed against the condition of women, but is that what most of today’s readers feel – does a young western women reader approaching Austin now even see that side unless it is pointed out to her as he life is so far removed from it? And if a young Arab women reads Austin what does she see or relate to?) Who are the examples that come to your mind? Should we limit this discussion to the form of the novel or open it to all fiction? Here I am thinking of two male writers that I adore – Chaucer and Shakespeare. Chaucer for me was social commentary but done with such humour and insight into human nature that it transcends time. Shakespeare’s emotions are what linger with me although if I put my analytical hat back on (which is very dusty indeed as I have not analysed literature from this point of view since I left university nearly 25 years ago) I can remember the social commentary of his time - then I ask what would he want to think about now – the political question of his lifetime or the emotional struggles we all face today? If you are a writer what do you want your readers to leave your novel with?
I apologize to those of you who may have wandered by looking for a straight out report as the past three have been. For me this couldn’t have been as I have read very little Arab literature (a huge failing on my part), listening in translation, and my own feelings on women’s literature. I also ask for forgiveness for inadequate coverage of the session as you can see from the report my mind was flying off on so many questions.
For tomorrow Penny Vincenzi.
BTW here's the link for Kate Mosse's blog post on EAIFL.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
EAILF Rachel Billington and Anne Fine
Before today's post I just want to say again that these are my notes and they are far from perfect. I have obviously focused on the writing aspect of the sessions. So many things that were discussed had resonance with me that I tried and failed to capture it all. Here are some links to some of the press coverage from here:
Becoming an Open Book
Dubai Should Host More Events says author
First Literature Festival
Festival Has to Exert Own Right
Rachel Billington and Anne Fine with Liz Thomson
Liz Thomson opened the session by highlighting the differences and the similarities between the two writers. Anne Fine, the second children’s laureate, began writing with children’s literature and has added adult fiction and Rachel Billington began with adult fiction and added children’s. Rachel is from a privileged background and Anne is not. Both write about families and relationships.
Rachel had written 18 adult novels and 4 children’s. She comes from a family of politicians and writers. She is one of eight children and this she feels is how she came to writing. She could be heard this way. She feels fiction is the most exciting occupation for both reader and writer. She said if you want to write then read to find your voice.
Her comments on being writer were:
- humiliation is part of it
- you have to learn to be immodest and pump up your ego
- you have a complicated balancing act; you want to be part of the world but when you are writing you are alone and become a god like figure creating worlds
- a writer is a bit psycho – making up things and being in different heads: being in the real world and the one in your head
When Rachel began writing she started with characters but as she progressed she enjoys the plots more. She has become bolder with them. She read many thrillers in order to achieve this. She usually has her theme first and she likes working with many characters. She is interested in the challenge of the form. In her latest release she has seven characters all written from the close third person pov. It is a ‘filmatic’ way of writing – the switching of pov but it should be invisible to the reader.
She was asked how she felt about writing degrees – and she prefers self taught writers. She can spot those who have been through programmes as they write well but many times are missing the ‘soul’. The writing may have a mechanical feel or feel if it has been written by committee.
Anne struggled to be seen as anything but a children’s author initially. On her return from living in California she was compelled to write adult fiction. The topics seized her but in the UK it is hard to move from kids to adult but the other way is easier as people think – isn’t it good the quality writers are going to write for children.
In her adult work she has focused around Passion, Marriage and Families. She never signs a contract until the book is finished which gives her freedom.
The discussion then moved to the difference in writing for children as opposed to adults. Children are much more discerning that adults. If you don’t grab them immediately then they dump you. It is brilliant training. Children want to laugh and to be scared. The process of writing is exactly the same but with children you start with the reader having no assumed knowledge and cut at a different angle but never underestimate the child.
Both women were asked if the shared their work with anyone. Anne does not. Her agent is her first reader and her agent has more input than her editor. Rachel’s first reader is her sister.
They were asked about adults reading children’s’ book – the crossover book. The said what do you want to be first? A children’s novel or and adult. Anne could think of only one true cross over novel – The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night. She said don’t confuse books with toys.
There was a comment that there seemed to have been a push in film and in books to reach the lowest common denominator. This was a dangerous concept. One quoted P. Roth who said for every one reader born you have 70 dying off. It can take some effort to get in to a novel and now readers don’t. Rachel added that they are not taught to read the whole book any more.
They were asked how much of themselves is in their novels. One quote M. Sparks – write a novel as if no one you know will read it.
Anne admitted there is loads of herself in her books. She always asks what if? How far would she go? Anne said she sails very close to the wind
Rachel said writers are like actors – they enter a different form.
Their final comments by Anne were on publishing in general. She said that marketing had taken over from editorial judgement. She quoted T. Thomson who said …publishing is too marketing led.
Becoming an Open Book
Dubai Should Host More Events says author
First Literature Festival
Festival Has to Exert Own Right
Rachel Billington and Anne Fine with Liz Thomson
Liz Thomson opened the session by highlighting the differences and the similarities between the two writers. Anne Fine, the second children’s laureate, began writing with children’s literature and has added adult fiction and Rachel Billington began with adult fiction and added children’s. Rachel is from a privileged background and Anne is not. Both write about families and relationships.
Rachel had written 18 adult novels and 4 children’s. She comes from a family of politicians and writers. She is one of eight children and this she feels is how she came to writing. She could be heard this way. She feels fiction is the most exciting occupation for both reader and writer. She said if you want to write then read to find your voice.
Her comments on being writer were:
- humiliation is part of it
- you have to learn to be immodest and pump up your ego
- you have a complicated balancing act; you want to be part of the world but when you are writing you are alone and become a god like figure creating worlds
- a writer is a bit psycho – making up things and being in different heads: being in the real world and the one in your head
When Rachel began writing she started with characters but as she progressed she enjoys the plots more. She has become bolder with them. She read many thrillers in order to achieve this. She usually has her theme first and she likes working with many characters. She is interested in the challenge of the form. In her latest release she has seven characters all written from the close third person pov. It is a ‘filmatic’ way of writing – the switching of pov but it should be invisible to the reader.
She was asked how she felt about writing degrees – and she prefers self taught writers. She can spot those who have been through programmes as they write well but many times are missing the ‘soul’. The writing may have a mechanical feel or feel if it has been written by committee.
Anne struggled to be seen as anything but a children’s author initially. On her return from living in California she was compelled to write adult fiction. The topics seized her but in the UK it is hard to move from kids to adult but the other way is easier as people think – isn’t it good the quality writers are going to write for children.
In her adult work she has focused around Passion, Marriage and Families. She never signs a contract until the book is finished which gives her freedom.
The discussion then moved to the difference in writing for children as opposed to adults. Children are much more discerning that adults. If you don’t grab them immediately then they dump you. It is brilliant training. Children want to laugh and to be scared. The process of writing is exactly the same but with children you start with the reader having no assumed knowledge and cut at a different angle but never underestimate the child.
Both women were asked if the shared their work with anyone. Anne does not. Her agent is her first reader and her agent has more input than her editor. Rachel’s first reader is her sister.
They were asked about adults reading children’s’ book – the crossover book. The said what do you want to be first? A children’s novel or and adult. Anne could think of only one true cross over novel – The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night. She said don’t confuse books with toys.
There was a comment that there seemed to have been a push in film and in books to reach the lowest common denominator. This was a dangerous concept. One quoted P. Roth who said for every one reader born you have 70 dying off. It can take some effort to get in to a novel and now readers don’t. Rachel added that they are not taught to read the whole book any more.
They were asked how much of themselves is in their novels. One quote M. Sparks – write a novel as if no one you know will read it.
Anne admitted there is loads of herself in her books. She always asks what if? How far would she go? Anne said she sails very close to the wind
Rachel said writers are like actors – they enter a different form.
Their final comments by Anne were on publishing in general. She said that marketing had taken over from editorial judgement. She quoted T. Thomson who said …publishing is too marketing led.
Tomorrow's post will be on the session discussion Arab Women Writers.
Monday, March 02, 2009
EAILF Kate Mosse
The next session I attended was Kate Mosse in conversation with Paul Blezard.
The discussion began with Kate saying you can’t be a writer unless you are a good reader and her reading began with her father reading to her at night. He read Jules Verne and R Haggard and many other old fashioned adventure stories. When she began to choose her own reading she moved to Agatha Christie and she remembers the first one being – Murder at the Vicarage.
Although Kate had always been scribbling away in her words she felt she didn’t become a writer until she was 43. She moved from music through theatre onto publishing and literary prizes.
Paul pointed out that Labyrinth was not her first novel but Kate says in a way it was as it was the book where she found her voice as a writer. She found her inspiration in the landscape and from that the characters grew. From this she found her sense of place and her sense of her voice. She found that her voice compelled her to write ‘old fashioned’ adventure stories with a clear moral landscape with a female heroine. That she was interested in the ways that men and women can be themselves and how they chose to be.
She said that it was key turning point that she realized “the person you are as a reader is not who you as a writer.”
She quoted Picasso when asked about inspiration and working practice –
When inspiration arrives I want it to find me working.
For her some days it was a case of sentence following sentence and paragraph following paragraph. This she described in the words of Margaret Atwood – labouring at the word mines.
She was asked how she worked in all her different roles – wife, mother, publisher and so on. She replied she ‘puts’ different hats on and the writing one was the grubbiest. She closes herself in and only lets her family near.
Her travelling as a writer has brought knew learning. It has taught her about herself as a writer because the question asked of her are different which reflect the place from which her work has been read.
She went onto say that anyone who has finished a book has achieved something. She then said she continually asks is this chapter good? Will my readers care about the character? She tries not to think about the finished product when writing first draft but focuses on character and page turning qualities.
She said it was important to ask yourself why are these readers giving you their time? If you don’t care then why would a reader carry on. Stories can only work if the characters carry it.
When beginning she has a sense of who the characters are and who they’ll turn out to be but if she rushes it – it will be too quick and they will turn to dust. She can’t just put her hand out and grab the character but must be pacient and let them come to her and they will reveal themselves. The character’s lives are their own.
She said that you don’t have to like your characters.
Once published the book exist out there for the writer and the readers. For the writer it stops there but for the reader it lives on. The readers have a more enduring relationship with the book and characters.
Paul asked her about the ‘time slip’ (Two separate time periods but both happen ‘live’) aspect of the Labyrinth and Sepulchre. She said she found both were real and didn’t work in flashback which felt to her if it showed less respect for one part of the story.
Her next book coming out is a novella –Hungry Ghost. This is not time slip but seen through the prism of 1928.
She went back to her inspiration – the landscape of South West France. She spoke of the frozen emotion that she sense. It’s bleakness. She could see stories in the images. For her place image, words and music work together.
She is working on another book based in SW France which will be a love story at its heart. She is a sprinter when she actually sits down to write. First she reads, researches, sketches then she writes straight through for it is an adventure story and if she doesn’t then it will lose pace. When she is writing she works eight hours a day seven days a week. The only interruptions are family – nothing else. During the first draft momentum is so important.
The work is never at the place you want it is to be. You need to be kind to yourself. For Labyrinth she worked through four drafts which took a total of seven years. Sepulchre needed three drafts and only four years. First she writes ¾ of the historic part of the story then she writes all the modern then finishes the historic. This is done partially to ensure that both heroines have different voices. The second drafting is when she puts the two stories together creating a work of 300,000 words. Then she can see the story properly and tighten it.
She was asked how she knew she was at the end of the story. Desperation strikes – it’s like being pregnant. You are so bored you look forward to the end and it gives the needed burst of energy. She said you mustn’t lose energy at this point. You have to respect the reader. The end must be as strong as the beginning.
No one is ever finished with a book – it just gets published.
Try to write every day. This way you have something work with. Think of like a musical instrument – practice, practice, practice.
She was asked how much research she did and she replied that she does much more than is ever needed. It is for her reassurance. She feels the reader will trust her more.
Does she see herself in her characters? Actually, no. Readers always assume that writers write themselves. There are tiny bits of her in all her characters but she feels she is in the landscape. If she writing herself all the time how would she write a man? She does get rid of bad bits into her villains.
The discussion began with Kate saying you can’t be a writer unless you are a good reader and her reading began with her father reading to her at night. He read Jules Verne and R Haggard and many other old fashioned adventure stories. When she began to choose her own reading she moved to Agatha Christie and she remembers the first one being – Murder at the Vicarage.
Although Kate had always been scribbling away in her words she felt she didn’t become a writer until she was 43. She moved from music through theatre onto publishing and literary prizes.
Paul pointed out that Labyrinth was not her first novel but Kate says in a way it was as it was the book where she found her voice as a writer. She found her inspiration in the landscape and from that the characters grew. From this she found her sense of place and her sense of her voice. She found that her voice compelled her to write ‘old fashioned’ adventure stories with a clear moral landscape with a female heroine. That she was interested in the ways that men and women can be themselves and how they chose to be.
She said that it was key turning point that she realized “the person you are as a reader is not who you as a writer.”
She quoted Picasso when asked about inspiration and working practice –
When inspiration arrives I want it to find me working.
For her some days it was a case of sentence following sentence and paragraph following paragraph. This she described in the words of Margaret Atwood – labouring at the word mines.
She was asked how she worked in all her different roles – wife, mother, publisher and so on. She replied she ‘puts’ different hats on and the writing one was the grubbiest. She closes herself in and only lets her family near.
Her travelling as a writer has brought knew learning. It has taught her about herself as a writer because the question asked of her are different which reflect the place from which her work has been read.
She went onto say that anyone who has finished a book has achieved something. She then said she continually asks is this chapter good? Will my readers care about the character? She tries not to think about the finished product when writing first draft but focuses on character and page turning qualities.
She said it was important to ask yourself why are these readers giving you their time? If you don’t care then why would a reader carry on. Stories can only work if the characters carry it.
When beginning she has a sense of who the characters are and who they’ll turn out to be but if she rushes it – it will be too quick and they will turn to dust. She can’t just put her hand out and grab the character but must be pacient and let them come to her and they will reveal themselves. The character’s lives are their own.
She said that you don’t have to like your characters.
Once published the book exist out there for the writer and the readers. For the writer it stops there but for the reader it lives on. The readers have a more enduring relationship with the book and characters.
Paul asked her about the ‘time slip’ (Two separate time periods but both happen ‘live’) aspect of the Labyrinth and Sepulchre. She said she found both were real and didn’t work in flashback which felt to her if it showed less respect for one part of the story.
Her next book coming out is a novella –Hungry Ghost. This is not time slip but seen through the prism of 1928.
She went back to her inspiration – the landscape of South West France. She spoke of the frozen emotion that she sense. It’s bleakness. She could see stories in the images. For her place image, words and music work together.
She is working on another book based in SW France which will be a love story at its heart. She is a sprinter when she actually sits down to write. First she reads, researches, sketches then she writes straight through for it is an adventure story and if she doesn’t then it will lose pace. When she is writing she works eight hours a day seven days a week. The only interruptions are family – nothing else. During the first draft momentum is so important.
The work is never at the place you want it is to be. You need to be kind to yourself. For Labyrinth she worked through four drafts which took a total of seven years. Sepulchre needed three drafts and only four years. First she writes ¾ of the historic part of the story then she writes all the modern then finishes the historic. This is done partially to ensure that both heroines have different voices. The second drafting is when she puts the two stories together creating a work of 300,000 words. Then she can see the story properly and tighten it.
She was asked how she knew she was at the end of the story. Desperation strikes – it’s like being pregnant. You are so bored you look forward to the end and it gives the needed burst of energy. She said you mustn’t lose energy at this point. You have to respect the reader. The end must be as strong as the beginning.
No one is ever finished with a book – it just gets published.
Try to write every day. This way you have something work with. Think of like a musical instrument – practice, practice, practice.
She was asked how much research she did and she replied that she does much more than is ever needed. It is for her reassurance. She feels the reader will trust her more.
Does she see herself in her characters? Actually, no. Readers always assume that writers write themselves. There are tiny bits of her in all her characters but she feels she is in the landscape. If she writing herself all the time how would she write a man? She does get rid of bad bits into her villains.
Tomorrow Rachel Billington and Anne Fine with Liz Smith.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
EAILF Opening and Peter James
Okay, here goes on the beginning of my notes for the EAILF. I have to say it was brilliant and I will confess to still being cross that one person came so close to messing it all up. ‘Nuff said on that. It was fabulous and I want to thank the organizers for the wonderful job that they did in pulling all together.
First location – it was held in Festival City which sits on the Creek in Dubai. You can stand on the beautiful walkways next to fabulous yachts and watch the ancient dhows being built across the creek. The contrast of new and old appeals to me and very much speaks of ‘my Dubai’.
I was torn at the start of the festival. I wanted to see the session on glittering prizes because I was curious if they felt these prizes did make a difference to writers and readers. Do you buy books because they have won a prize?
First location – it was held in Festival City which sits on the Creek in Dubai. You can stand on the beautiful walkways next to fabulous yachts and watch the ancient dhows being built across the creek. The contrast of new and old appeals to me and very much speaks of ‘my Dubai’.
I was torn at the start of the festival. I wanted to see the session on glittering prizes because I was curious if they felt these prizes did make a difference to writers and readers. Do you buy books because they have won a prize?
NOTE: Remember these are just my notes and as such rely on my memory ( which is dodgy these days - age!) and my notes. So apologize for mistakes and inaccuracies
However it clashed with Peter James’s Criminally Accurate. Now I don’t write crime and rarely read it (Lesley Cookman is the only exception however Dh and my dad love his work) so why did I choose crime over prizes? To be honest I hope to do both but the prizes began late and I have met Peter before as a friend of my bil. However I have never heard him speak about his writing process or research for that matter. Research is something I will come back at the end of the reports as it was a reoccurring topic.
Peter opened with - writing was an ego bruising business. He felt there were three important aspects to writing a novel:
character
plot
research
He felt that the research was as important as the other two.
Before he went further on this subject he went through a brief summary of his career leading up to crime writing. His writing career began in Toronto when he was dogsbody on the set of the children’s programme Polka Door. One day the writer was ill and thus began his career – writing for fluffy puppets. He then moved to low budget horror film which by his own admission were truly terrible. However the film that he is most proud of his involvement was The Merchant of Venice starring Dustin Hoffman and Jeremy Irons.
His fascination with crime began at the age of twelve with Sherlock Holmes. He wanted to be able to create a detective that was as sharp as Holmes. He was also very wary of writing UK crime. He felt the weight of Agatha Cristie and others on him – in the country, big houses…. He said he had the best first line he had never used to cover all these angles (pls forgive me as I may not have all the words!)
“F**k me, he’s been shot,” said the vicar’s wife as Nicholas hit the library floor of Ponseby Towers.
He then went onto explain about the distinct culture of the world of Police. He said what to detectives do? Solve puzzles. Where did Roy Grace come from? How did the character arrive? He told us that the missing persons helpline ¼ of million people disappear every year. If they don’t return in 30 days then they probably never will. Those they leave behind have no closure. Grace’s wife disappeared when he was 30 and by then time he was 39 she had not reappeared… That colours everything that Grace does.
Peter spends on average one day a week with the police. Research is building block for his research.
He advised writers to make sure your characters evolve. He plans the first 20% and the end then he surprises himself. When stuck he finds inspiration comes with a vodka martini and music blaring. (Personally I really like the sound of this idea - maybe tonight?)
However it clashed with Peter James’s Criminally Accurate. Now I don’t write crime and rarely read it (Lesley Cookman is the only exception however Dh and my dad love his work) so why did I choose crime over prizes? To be honest I hope to do both but the prizes began late and I have met Peter before as a friend of my bil. However I have never heard him speak about his writing process or research for that matter. Research is something I will come back at the end of the reports as it was a reoccurring topic.
Peter opened with - writing was an ego bruising business. He felt there were three important aspects to writing a novel:
character
plot
research
He felt that the research was as important as the other two.
Before he went further on this subject he went through a brief summary of his career leading up to crime writing. His writing career began in Toronto when he was dogsbody on the set of the children’s programme Polka Door. One day the writer was ill and thus began his career – writing for fluffy puppets. He then moved to low budget horror film which by his own admission were truly terrible. However the film that he is most proud of his involvement was The Merchant of Venice starring Dustin Hoffman and Jeremy Irons.
His fascination with crime began at the age of twelve with Sherlock Holmes. He wanted to be able to create a detective that was as sharp as Holmes. He was also very wary of writing UK crime. He felt the weight of Agatha Cristie and others on him – in the country, big houses…. He said he had the best first line he had never used to cover all these angles (pls forgive me as I may not have all the words!)
“F**k me, he’s been shot,” said the vicar’s wife as Nicholas hit the library floor of Ponseby Towers.
He then went onto explain about the distinct culture of the world of Police. He said what to detectives do? Solve puzzles. Where did Roy Grace come from? How did the character arrive? He told us that the missing persons helpline ¼ of million people disappear every year. If they don’t return in 30 days then they probably never will. Those they leave behind have no closure. Grace’s wife disappeared when he was 30 and by then time he was 39 she had not reappeared… That colours everything that Grace does.
Peter spends on average one day a week with the police. Research is building block for his research.
He advised writers to make sure your characters evolve. He plans the first 20% and the end then he surprises himself. When stuck he finds inspiration comes with a vodka martini and music blaring. (Personally I really like the sound of this idea - maybe tonight?)
That's it for today. Tomorrow I will cover the session with Kate Mosse.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Emirates Airlines International Festival of Literature
Quick post. Off for day three and first session is on censorship. Lots to report on. It was been absolutely fabulous. Here's me chatting to the lovely Kate Mosse.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Emirates Airlines International Festival of Literature
I can't help it. I am so excited about this despite all the controversy that has raged around it. I have very strong views about this but I will keep them to myself. Discretion being the better part of valour. I love living here but I have found Dubai to be a literary desert (yes, pun intended). I am sure there are other writers around but I haven't found them. Hopefully this will pull them out of the sand!
Today I will be attending a discussion on literary prizes and their impact, Peter James talking about Crime and Penny Vincenzi in conversation. I hate the fact that many of the ones I would like see overlap the others! I need Hermione's times twisting thing from Harry Potter.
Needless to say I will report back fully.
I am hoping that on Saturday they will have the promised discussion on censorship with Margaret Atwood attending by video link - of course this means I will miss part of Philippa Greggory but.....
p.s. the radio 2 interview went well. dd actually overcame her nerves and spoke :-)
Today I will be attending a discussion on literary prizes and their impact, Peter James talking about Crime and Penny Vincenzi in conversation. I hate the fact that many of the ones I would like see overlap the others! I need Hermione's times twisting thing from Harry Potter.
Needless to say I will report back fully.
I am hoping that on Saturday they will have the promised discussion on censorship with Margaret Atwood attending by video link - of course this means I will miss part of Philippa Greggory but.....
p.s. the radio 2 interview went well. dd actually overcame her nerves and spoke :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)