July 5th, 2007

atom

Readercon Schedule

For anyone who wants to find me at Readercon this weekend, I've been scheduled for two items:

Saturday 1:00 pm "Reading"
Michael A. Burstein reads "The Soldier Within" and/or "Moving Day" (two short stories). (30 min.)

(I had asked for either a half-hour or full hour reading slot; with the half-hour slot, I can only read one of the stories. I'll probably read "Moving Day." And as usual, I'll give away the manuscript, signed, to one lucky audience member.)

--

Sunday 1:00 pm Panel: "I Have a Truly Marvelous Proof of This Proposition Which This Story is Too Commercial To Contain." Panelists: Michael A. Burstein (L), Jeff Hecht, Donald Kingsbury, Louise Marley, Peter Watts.

Precis: Actual calculations are generally excluded from sf—they're not what the reader is looking for. But hard sf often requires that the writer do the math and / or the physics and chemistry, and many stories are backed up by thick sheaves of notes that the reader never sees. Our panelists discuss examples from their personal experience. Should the "technical appendices" be published more often? Isn't the Web the natural place for them?

--

I'll also be hanging around just outside the Meet the Pros(e) event on Friday night, as always, and I would never miss the Kirk Poland contest on Saturday night.
atom

Robert's Rules of Writing #68: Kill the Passion

[Rule quoted from Robert's Rules of Writing: 101 Unconventional Lessons Every Writer Needs to Know by Robert Masello (Writer's Digest Books, 2005). See my original post for the rules of this discussion.]

With rule #68, Masello warns us against writing in a fit of passion. He seems to be reacting to a piece of advice he's found in other books, which is to write when you feel most passionate about something. But he warns that such writing tends to come out less than coherent, and will most likely need a good dose of revision.

From my own experience, I have to say that I tend to disagree with this rule. Perhaps I'm confusing passion with obsession, but in general I've found that the stories I'm most passionate about are the ones that flow the easiest, and the ones that garner most of the attention.

If I may, allow me to discuss how I tend to come to write one of my own stories. (Yes, I know this is a digression. I'm using Robert's Rules as a springboard in this case.) What usually happens is that I start with an idea. Or, rather, I should say that an idea comes to me. Furthermore, the idea comes to stay for a long time. It takes up residence in my mind, and refuses to even consider leaving until I've started to jot down a few notes on how to turn it into a story. In fact, in order to exorcise the idea completely, I generally have to write the story, submit it somewhere, and see it published. (Examples of such stories include "Time Ablaze" and "Paying It Forward.")

So when I'm obsessed by a story, I tend to write it next. And, interestingly enough, those stories usually require the least revision. It's the stories whose words flow like molasses in winter that require the most rewriting.

So does this mean I would dismiss rule #68 entirely? Well, not quite. Because I can understand how in the throes of passionate writing, writers might rush through so many thoughts that they lose the narrative thread that holds the words together. To me, Masello's rule #68 is just another way of saying that it's always a good idea to take a second look at your work before you offer it up for publication.


Copyright © Michael A. Burstein