Archive for the ‘Writing’ Category
Guest Blog About the Elements of Romance Is Up
Folks, I’m pleased to tell you about today’s guest blog over at Stephanie Osborn’s blogsite, Comet Tales. The subject I wrote on is the Elements of Romance in Modern Storytelling, which is part of an ongoing series that has featured writers Osborn, Aaron Paul Lazar, and Christine Amsden before me; other authors planning to write blogs for this series include Katharine Eliska Kimbriel and Dina von Lowenkraft, so there’s plenty more to read in this series if you are so inclined.
Because we were allowed to talk about anything regarding romance and what it means to us as storytellers, I decided to talk about it from a historical perspective. Here’s a brief sample of that:
So how did romance as a thing actually come to be? Well, feelings and hormones aside, the lot of women from early on was probably none too good in most societies. Being bartered in marriage was by far the least of these ancient women’s worries. But as our world matured and societies became more stable, there was more leisure time available – especially in the upper classes – and people started to think.
Why couldn’t marriages be made where both people respected and liked each other? Why, if everything else was equal, couldn’t a suitor actually romantically care about his proposed wife? Wouldn’t that be beneficial to all concerned?
Later in the guest blog, I talked a little bit about some of my favorite contemporary authors (including Osborn, Kimbriel, and Rosemary Edghill), and how they use romance — or don’t — in their writing.
So do go take a look at it . . . I promise you, it’s not like any other guest blog you’ve ever read, at least not on this subject.
And enjoy!
Odds and Ends, April 2014 Version
Well, folks, as usual, I’ve been so busy the past week that I have barely had enough time to turn around.
Whenever I get this busy, I don’t blog much, I don’t do much other than what must be done first — editing, in this case, and glad to have the work — and everything else basically takes a backseat.
This is why I didn’t review anything last week at Shiny Book Review (SBR).
This is why I didn’t write a follow-up blog regarding the two elections that the Koch Brothers-backed Americans for Prosperity group threw a lot of money into . . . and it’s also why, despite the Milwaukee Brewers’ impressive sweep of the Boston Red Sox, I didn’t get back here to write about that, either.
That being said, here’s a few quick hits regarding the odds and ends I left open last week:
- The elections in Iron County, WI, and in Kenosha County for the Kenosha Unified School Board seemed to be largely unaffected by the huge amount of money Americans for Prosperity threw into the races. The folks in Iron County basically said in a number of televised interviews that they disliked interference from people who didn’t live in Iron County — so the money that AFP threw into the election seems to have gone by the boards. And the people in Kenosha County didn’t change their minds regarding their candidates, either . . . so it does appear, as my late friend Jeff Wilson once put it, that there is a monetary ceiling to an election where a group (or groups) can spend whatever they like, but after a certain point, people just tune out.
- The Brewers going into Boston and sweeping the Red Sox was completely unanticipated, at least by me. After only scoring four runs in three games and losing two out of three at home in the Brewers’ own opening series, it was particularly impressive that the Brewers could go into Boston, win all three games (including an 11th inning thriller), and actually have some clutch hits in games that mattered.
- What a shame that Wisconsin lost to Kentucky in the NCAA Basketball Tournament. I’m glad the Badgers did so well and got to the Final Four — that’s the one thing I got right in my NCAA bracket — but I wish they’d have had just one more game in them. (C’est la vie.)
- Normally after turning in a really big edit — as I did on Saturday morning — I’d take a few days off. Right now, I can’t, because I’m looking over my master file for AN ELFY ON THE LOOSE. There is a reason for that: The e-book will be up on Amazon and most other major dealers on April 15 — so if you’ve ever wanted to find out what the deal is with regards to my Elfyverse or my character Bruno the Elfy, now’s your chance to set your clocks.
Later in the week, I should have at least a bit of time to get a review or two in over at SBR, and I hope to be able to talk more about baseball, or politics, or maybe even the recent decision by the NLRB arbitrator in Chicago who ruled that Northwestern University’s football players should be able to form a union, as they are employees like any other (as that last really intrigues me, but I haven’t had enough time to do justice to the subject as of yet).
But for now, all I can do is please ask you to let people know that AN ELFY ON THE LOOSE is coming soon . . . and if you think anyone will be interested (or even if they aren’t), tell them that my late husband Michael B. Caffrey’s two stories of military science fiction about his excellent character Joey Maverick, a quiet and responsible man who is nonetheless every bit a hero, are available now at Amazon (here and here).
Even with my own novel coming out, it still matters a great deal to me that Michael’s stories find their audience, especially as, years ago, Michael had hundreds of people who said they wanted to buy them as soon as he was willing to put them out. (I don’t know where these people went, mind you. But maybe at least a few of them are still alive, and if so, perhaps they’ll discover the stories one of these years. Hope springs eternal, and all that.)
Review Delay
For those of you waiting for my review of Vera Nazarian’s COBWEB FOREST, I’m sorry to say that it’ll be another week before I’m able to review it.
Why?
Mostly, I ran out of time . . . partly, it’s because other things have gotten in the way of reviewing and blogging over the past week or so. (As you might’ve noticed from how little I’ve blogged lately.)
I’m hoping to blog tomorrow about a few new books I’ve enjoyed, including my friend Chris Nuttall’s new SCHOOLED IN MAGIC and perhaps discussing in a little more detail Rosemary Edghill’s new short-story collection FAILURE OF MOONLIGHT . . . maybe I’ll throw in a bit of talk about Katharine Eliska Kimbriel’s KINDRED RITES in the bargain.
But that’ll have to wait until the morrow . . . until then, keep on keepin’ on. (And for my fellow baseball fans, enjoy Spring Training — the most optimistic time of the year.)
Lightspeed Magazine Passes on My Story…
Folks, Lightspeed’s “Women Destroy SF” issue has passed on my story, which I still won’t name as I’ve immediately sent it off to another market (as writers must do).
Let us hope the second market will be more interested than the last, hey?
Answering Questions — Milwaukee Brewers First Basemen, Figure Skating, and More
Folks, sometimes people ask me questions . . . and when I’m hunting for a blog subject, as now, I decide to answer them. (Lucky you, huh?)
The first question goes something like this: “So, Barb. Why is it that you get so hyped up about figure skating, anyway? You’re not a figure skater, so why do you care?”
Hmph.
Well, I care because I like to see justice done. I got upset back in 2010 during the Vancouver Olympics when Johnny Weir didn’t get the score he deserved as he should’ve won the bronze medal. So I signed petitions, formed groups, wrote to the United States Figure Skating Association (to no avail) . . . all because I felt injustice should not be a part of sport.
Why?
Obviously, I realize that nothing in life is fair. But we should strive to make our pursuits as fair as we possibly can.
And sports, in particular, should be much fairer than most other things. People spend years of their lives in the pursuit of perfection, so when inaccurate or shoddy judging — or worse, potentially corrupt judging as in the case of the 2002 Olympics — ruins the skater’s Olympic experience, that can’t help but make me take notice.
Another question: “But Barb. Seriously, Yuna Kim is a millionaire with a gold medal from the 2010 Vancouver Olympics. She doesn’t need your help, so why is it you’re so upset regarding Adelina Sotnikova’s free skate in Sochi? Will anyone really care in four years anyway?”
I don’t know if anyone will care in four years or not. But the system needs to be overhauled. Ashley Wagner was right when she said the judges should stop being allowed to hide behind their supposed anonymity . . . if the skaters must identify themselves (as they do), the judges also must identify themselves so if they get something wrong, they can be retrained — or at the very least questioned as to what happened that led to whatever wrongness that occurred.
And again, I go back to Johnny Weir’s skate in 2010. I still care about it in 2014, because justice was not served.
So it’s quite likely that in 2018, I will still care about this if justice is again not served.
Onto another topic: “Barb, who do you think the Milwaukee Brewers are going to trot out at first base this year? They didn’t sign Manny Ramirez, so who do they have as possibilities?”
Heh. The Manny Ramirez thing was something I threw in there just to see if people were paying attention, though I honestly think the man can still hit and could learn to play first base if he wanted . . . but as the Brewers didn’t sign him, here are the potential first basemen in camp at this time:
- Hunter Morris (spent last year at AAA, hit .247 with 24 HR and 73 RBI). He is a bit raw, but has power to burn and a good, solid work ethic. He’ll probably start the year again at AAA but might come up later.
- Lyle Overbay (hit .240 with the New York Yankees with 14 HR and 59 RBI in 2013). Overbay still fields well at first, and continues to have some pop. He’s been with the Brewers before, so he knows Milwaukee well. My guess would be that he starts the year with the Brewers, as Overbay also can pinch hit and is a left-handed bat.
- Mark Reynolds (hit .220 with two teams with 21 HR and 67 RBI in 2013). Reynolds strikes out a ton. He is not a good defensive first baseman, to put it mildly. But he does have some power and it’s very likely the Brewers will keep him around to see what he’ll do as some of his HRs are moon shots of the Russell Branyan variety.
- Juan Francisco (His 2013 campaign was split into two parts — he hit .221 with 13 HR and 32 RBI in Milwaukee; before that, he hit .241 with 5 HR and 16 RBI in Atlanta). He is not a good first baseman, though some of that is because he’d never played the position prior to last year. He has astonishing power potential, but strikes out a good deal — nearly as often as Mark Reynolds. It’s likely that the Brewers will keep him around, but they also could trade him if they can find a buyer.
- And finally, there’s always Jonathan Lucroy. Yes, Lucroy’s a catcher, but he played first base several times last year and was competent if not comfortable. Lucroy is a consistent hitter who’s only weakness is grounding into double-plays . . . then again, Carlos Lee used to ground into double-plays all the time and no one complained, so it’s unlikely anyone’s going to say much about Lucroy either.
One final question, this yet again on a different topic entirely: “So, Barb. Why didn’t you review any books last week at Shiny Book Review?”
This one’s easy, folks . . . as I was doing my best to get a major edit out the door for a client, I simply ran out of time.
But I’ll be reviewing at least two books this week, so do stay tuned.
Just Reviewed Four Romances at SBR
Folks, it had been a while since I did a Romance Saturday review over at Shiny Book Review (SBR for short, as always), I thought I’d do more than one.
This time, I reviewed four.
And, because I was feeling a little puckish, I decided to call it a Romance Saturday “Four-Play.” (Pardon the pun. Or don’t. I’m not going to change it, so there. Nyah.)
The best of the lot beyond a shadow of a doubt is Rosemary Edghill’s excellent time-travel romance MET BY MOONLIGHT, recently re-released as an independent e-book. It is outstanding in just about every way there is, but if you are of the pagan persuasion, you probably will like it even better. (Even if you aren’t, though, you should adore this book. Truly.)
I also reviewed a nice debut Regency by Giselle Marks, THE FENCING MASTER’S DAUGHTER. I agonized over this one, as there are some glaring weaknesses mixed in with some strong strengths, but ultimately decided that the couple of big laughs and the excellent historicity was enough to give it a B.
As THE FENCING MASTER’S DAUGHTER would be much better if Ms. Marks had somehow won access to a top-notch editor, I had to say that. (I also said whoever edited for her did a competent job. He or she presented the romance nicely, and it was grammatical and with few typos. Nothing wrong with that, but it’s not as much work as most of the really good editors I’ve been around would do if they’d seen a manuscript like this one land on their desks.)
Then I was presented with two romances by Sherry Thomas, one a YA fantasy romance called THE BURNING SKY and the other a 19th Century English historical romance, THE LUCKIEST LADY IN LONDON. I really like Ms. Thomas’s writing style, and think she’s one of the best younger romance novelists around (by “younger” in this context, I mean “under forty”).
I liked THE BURNING SKY, but did not love it. I thought it had some nice touches, believed in the romance between the two principals, and the magical system was acceptable to better. I didn’t find it ground-breaking, though, as some reviews have called it, mostly because Mercedes Lackey has been doing books about Elemental Magic for years — also set in England, many of them set in late 19th Century England at that — and while Lackey’s Elemental mages aren’t exactly like Thomas’s, they’re close enough for government work.
As for THE LUCKIEST LADY IN LONDON . . . how can I say that I was completely underwhelmed without being a complete and utter boor? (Oops, I just said it anyway.)
Look. Ms. Thomas writes well, so even a C-level romance (which is exactly what I adjudged THE LUCKIEST LADY IN LONDON to be) is probably worth your time, especially if you’ve read nothing else by her before.
But considering the level of her other books — her excellent debut, PRIVATE ARRANGEMENTS, her excellent war romance, NOT QUITE A HUSBAND, or even the recent TEMPTING THE BRIDE — this just was not up to Ms. Thomas’s standards. At all.
I’ve had to give other writers whose work I generally find to be exceptional C-ratings before, and probably will again. Most of the time, I try not to agonize over this, especially if the novelist in question has put out a number of books (by my count, Ms. Thomas has now put out eight full-length romance novels, one fantasy romance novel, and at least one novella, so she’s put out ten books). I figure that someone with a track record, as Ms. Thomas now has, should have to be held to a higher standard than someone who’s just starting out — because really, don’t you want to top yourself?
That’s why I admire the work of Ms. Edghill so much, and Katharine Eliska Kimbriel, too. Those two writers do not settle, ever. They put out top-notch efforts, their books are memorable and lively, and even something that I don’t find to be quite at an A-minus or better is still well worth my time.
More to the point, I never forget what those two write about. Never.
Whereas with THE LUCKIEST LADY IN LONDON, I put the book down for a week and a half. I forgot everything about it. I had to go back and re-read, then I saw a few really good, sparkling passages that reminded me of how good Ms. Thomas can be when she puts her mind to it — and a bunch of passages where the editing was not there (something rare in a mass-market romance, where the editing is usually outstanding), or the focus was not there, or something just was a bit off.
Worse yet, even in THE BURNING SKY, I put the book down for a week and a half and wasn’t really inclined to finish it excepting I’d already said I’d review the thing. I was pleasantly surprised by it, as it picked up considerably after a very slow start, and I think Ms. Thomas shows promise as a fantasy novelist.
That’s the main reason why the latter book got a B from me, while the first one only received a C. A book that’s uneven, poorly edited, and unfocused — no matter how good the writing is at its best — can only garner a C.
But a book that gets significantly better as time goes on, and holds my interest despite putting it down for a week-plus at a lull, can still get a B or maybe even better, depending.
Look, folks. My own novel isn’t yet out. I know people could be coming after me with pitchforks, for all I know, because I’m willing to tell it like it is when it comes to some of my otherwise-favorite novelists.
I also know that sometimes the demands of contemporary publishing schedules means that the quality of books will sometimes be lacking.
My view is simple: Ms. Thomas can ascend to the same level of storytelling as seen by Ms. Kimbriel and Ms. Edghill, but Ms. Thomas needs to demand more. Whether she needs to get her agent to buy her more time to turn something in so she can polish it up, whether she needs to just write fantasy romances for the time being as that seems to be where her heart is, I don’t know — but whatever it is, she needs to do that.
I don’t care how many places, some of which are very well-known, give these last two books high ratings or say that they’re up to the standards of Ms. Thomas’s other books. The plain and simple fact of the matter is, they aren’t.
Anyway, this is why I wrote these particular reviews — my “after-action report,” as it were. I hope you found it of interest.
Now I’d best get back to editing, as I have an author eagerly awaiting my latest comments . . . and who am I to make him wait?
Story Complete, Sent to Lightspeed’s Special Women Destroy SF Issue
I’m pleased to report that I was able to finish my military science fiction story to my satisfaction, and sent it off earlier this evening to Lightspeed magazine for their “Women Destroy SF” special issue.
The main reason I’m discussing this, other than the fact I mentioned I was writing the story in the first place and wanting to give y’all an update, is because it’s Valentine’s Day.
I know that sounds like a non sequitur, but it isn’t. (Hear me out, OK?)
This particular story is set in my husband’s universe, the same one used in both Joey Maverick stories (available right now at Amazon, here and here). It does not feature Joey Maverick. Instead, it features a doctor, Amanda Hirschbeck, and the choices she must make during a brutal firefight.
I don’t want to give too much away about the plot, partly because I’m hoping that somehow, some way, this story is going to come out and you’ll all be able to read it. But I will say that it deals with loss, redemption, sacrifice, and personal integrity . . . I’m proud to have written it, and I’m even more proud to say this is the first story I’ve written in Michael’s universe that’s entirely mine.
When I started working on Michael’s stories, years ago, I wasn’t sure I could do this. I really didn’t think I’d ever get to the point I could write a decent-to-better story set in a milSF milieu, as that’s not my normal genre — I usually write fantasy, and humorous fantasy at that.
But I’ve had some very good people cheering me on, including the inestimable Katharine Eliska Kimbriel, the incomparable Rosemary Edghill, my first writing mentor (she told me years ago that I needed to make these stories my own, and I wasn’t ready to listen; now, though, I finally am, and I owe it all to her for planting the seed in my mind that I could, indeed, do this), and everyone involved in my writer’s group Barfly_Slush.
Note that the reason I mentioned both Ms. Kimbriel and Ms. Edghill is because they are both outstanding writers and editors. They have many good books out. And as I can’t possibly ever repay either one of them, much less both, for all of their advice and guidance, it seems wise to let you all know about them in the hopes that maybe you’ll go to their respective Amazon Author Pages (Ms. Edghill’s is here, Ms. Kimbriel’s is here) and find a book you like — then buy it.
At any rate, I’m proud that I was able to write a story in my husband’s universe. It’s a good story. I hope it’ll find a home.
But I hope you can excuse me if I think of it as my own, personal Valentine’s Day gift to Michael . . . because without him, and leaving his universe behind for me to play in it as much as I like, this story would not exist.
Barb Caffrey's Blog 