I just finished the first draft of my next book. It’s taken three months of late nights and turning every free moment into writing time to finish it in this soon. But the first draft is complete.
I’m off to bed.
I really need some sleep.
Peggy Noonan: A Life's Lesson
Peggy Noonan, one of the best speechwriters who has ever lived and one of my favorite writers, had some poignant commentary in The Wall Street Journal today. Though writing about Tim Russert’s death, she had some good points for all of us to keep in mind as we go through this life.
In a way, the world is a great liar. It shows you it worships and admires money, but at the end of the day it doesn't. It says it adores fame and celebrity, but it doesn't, not really. The world admires, and wants to hold on to, and not lose, goodness. It admires virtue. At the end it gives its greatest tributes to generosity, honesty, courage, mercy, talents well used, talents that, brought into the world, make it better. That's what it really admires. That's what we talk about in eulogies, because that's what's important. We don't say, "The thing about Joe was he was rich." We say, if we can, "The thing about Joe was he took care of people." …
I'd add it's not only the young, but the older and the old, who were given a few things to think about. When Tim's friends started to come forward last Friday to speak on the air of his excellence, they were honestly grieving. They felt loss. So did people who'd never met him. Question: When you die, are people in your profession going to feel like this? Why not? What can you do better? When you leave, are your customers—in Tim [Russert]'s case it was five million every Sunday morning, in your case it may be the people who come into the shop, or into your office—going to react like this? Why not?
I’ve always believed the sum of our lives is how we treat the others and whether or not we leave the world a better place than we found it. Hopefully our lives can have the same impact that Russert’s did on those who knew him.
Self-Management: The Key to Success
Japanese novelist Haruki Murakami never wanted to be a writer. He just “had the strong desire to write a novel.” Or so he writes in his essay “The Running Novelist” in the June 9 & 16 issue of The New Yorker. This essay is a must read for anyone who wants know what it takes to be successful not only as a writer but profession or endeavor. (Side note: I wish this essay was online. It’s a keeper – one that I’ll be cutting from the magazine and saving for the rest of my life. So run out and find the aforementioned issue of The New Yorker at your local library or bookstore and read it. If you can’t find a copy, e-mail me or leave a note in the comments section and we’ll figure out a way to get a copy of the essay to you.)
Murakami’s essay tells the story of how he became a professional and successful writer and a daily running. But a deeper reading of Murakami’s essay reveals it isn’t about being a dedicated runner or becoming a best-selling author but mastering the art of self-management – the ultimate trait of successful people.
Before he decided to write full time, Murakami ran a jazz club. He would come home late at night (or early in the morning) and type until he was sleepy. After publishing two novels, Hear the Wind Sing and Pinball 1973, he decided writing was something he wanted to do for a living. The first thing Murakami did was get rid of things that could distract him from writing.
So, after giving it a lot of thought, I decided to close the business and focus solely on writing….Most of my friends were adamantly against my decision, or at least had doubts about it. “Your business is doing fine now,” they said. “Why not just let someone else run it while you write your novels?” But I couldn’t follow their advice. I’m the kind of person who has to commit totally to whatever I do. If, having committed, I failed, I could accept that. But I knew that if I did things halfheartedly and they didn’t work out, I’d always have regrets. (Emphasis added.)
Everyone has dreams. But most people won’t totally commit themselves to make their dreams a reality. They lack the ability to stick with something until it’s a proven success or failure. All it takes is a few days or a couple weeks for them to become distracted or give up entirely and return to their old habits and routines. Murakami gave himself two years to either succeed or fail. Note that Murakami didn’t just quit his job overnight. He achieved some modest success first so he knew he had the talent and ability to succeed. But he also put a lot of thought into the decision. He didn’t drop everything and rush into it. He was patient and planned it out. He self-managed.
Once he started writing full time, Murakami noticed two bad side effects: he started putting on the pounds and was smoking 60 cigarettes a day. He realized this wasn’t good for his health or his writing. To help him write and combat the side effects of writing he started running, and quit smoking.
After I closed the bar, I resolved to change my life style entirely, and my wife and I moved out to Narashino….Not long after that I quit smoking. It wasn’t easy to do, but I couldn’t really run and keep on smoking. My desire to run was a great help in overcoming the withdrawal symptoms. Quitting smoking was also like a symbolic gesture of farewell to the life I used to lead.
Often when someone tries to change their life, they have a hard time letting go of past places, friends, or habits, that keep them moving backwards instead of progressing toward their new life. Murakami not only quit smoking and started running, but he moved somewhere new to help get a fresh start.
Next Murakami was able to discipline himself (there’s that self-management thing again) and get on a writing schedule that meshed with his body’s internal clock.
The best thing about becoming a professional writer was that I could go to bed early and get up early….Once I began my life as a novelist, my wife and I decided that we’d go to bed soon after it got dark and wake up with the sun….Different people are their best at different times of the day, but I’m definitely a morning person. That’s when I can focus.
He also used the afternoons, after he was done writing to run. As a result, writing and running become part of his life just “like eating, sleeping, and housework.” And he doesn’t let other people or things get him off track.
Thanks to this pattern, I’ve been able to work efficiently now for twenty-seven years. It’s a pattern, though, that doesn’t allow for much of a night life, and sometimes this makes relationships with other people problematic. People are offended when you repeatedly turn down their invitations. But, at that point, I felt that the indispensable relationship I should build in my life was not with a specific person but with a unspecified number of readers. My readers would welcome whatever life style I chose, as long as I made sure that each new work was an improvement over the last. And shouldn’t that be my duty – and my top priority – as a novelist? … In other words, you can’t please everybody.
Part of self-management is being able to set priorities. Murakami decided what was important in his life and did it. Period. He didn’t make excuses or exceptions when things – even good things -- would interfere with his writing schedule.
Of course everyone has days where they feel like they don’t like doing whatever is on their plate that day. Murakami is not different. Often writing is a chore for him but he continues to work at it one day at a time. There are even days when he doesn’t feel like running. But he pushes through those days when he doesn’t feel like running just like he does when he doesn’t feel like writing.
No matter how much long-distance running might suit me, of course there are days when I feel lethargic and don’t want to do it. On days like that, I try to come up with all kinds of plausible excuses not to run.
Now, whenever I feel like I don’t want to run, I always ask myself the same thing: You’re able to make a living as a novelist, working at home, setting your own hours. You don’t have to commute on a packed train or sit through boring meetings. Don’t you realize how fortunate you are? Compared with that, running an hour around the neighborhood is nothing, right? Then I lace up my running shoes and set off without hesitating.
Pushing through the times when we don’t want to do something is the ultimate form of self-management. Right now I could still be sleeping, reading from the pile of books, or going for a walk outside on what looks like a perfect summer morning – both things that ultimately have more appeal then waking up and writing at 6:00 a.m. But I’m not doing those other things. I woke up early today to write this entry because I made the commitment that I’d have this posted on my blog today. I’m writing this early because this is the only time I have to write a blog entry. After the kids go to bed is when I spend a couple hours working on my book because I committed to have it done before summer is over.
It doesn’t matter if you want to be an athlete, artist, entrepreneur, salesperson, doctor, lawyer, police officer, mason, or entertainer. In order to succeed, you need to self-manage every aspect of your life. Control your emotions. Eliminate the distractions. Give the most on the days you feel like giving the least.
Your dreams aren’t going to be handed to you. You have to work in order for them to become a reality.
Writing Confrence and a Contest
Read below to see how you can win a free copy of Room for Two. This might strike some as a strange confession, but I’ve never been to a writing conference before. It’s not that I haven’t wanted to check one out but, for one reason or another, things have never fallen into place so I could attend. So I didn’t know what to expect when I presented at and attended Cedar Fort’s writing conference on Saturday.
Thankfully the writing conference turned out to be a fabulous experience. I did a good job on my presentation (or so everyone told me) and it was nice to meet people whose blogs I read or have only communicated with via email. Additionally I was also able to meet some writers whose books I’ve read and others whose books I’m looking forward to reading. (There’s a big pile of new books to read on my nightstand – which Marathon Girl has already begun to devour.)
The best part though was a piece of advice the keynote speaker gave at her presentation on what all successful writers have in common. Her advice gave the extra push I needed to make some small changes in my life and sprint toward finishing the first draft my next book. (I wrote an entire chapter last night!) Coincidently, this same piece of advice was subtly reinforced by an article in an essay titled “The Running Novelist” (sorry, no online version is available) by the Japanese writer Haruki Murkami in the June 9 & 16 issue of The New Yorker that I read Sunday afternoon. (No, it’s not running.)
I’ll tell you what this common trait is and how Murkami applied it to his life, and the small changes I've made in my next entry. Until then, I’ll offer a free copy of Room for Two to the first person that correctly guesses what trait all successful writers have in common. Guess by leaving a comment below.
Note: Those who attended the writing conference are ineligible to participate. :-)
Update 1: Per an email I received: 1) Yes, you can guess more than once but each guess has to be a separate comment. 2) I'll announce the winner (if any) on Friday.
Update 2: Four of the five comments are close. Yes, writing every day is important. But think of a specific trait or characteristic that describes the ability to do that. This trait isn't something that is unique to successful writers but to successful businessmen and women, sales people, and other highly successful professionals.
Writing Confrence and Writer's Block
I apologize for the dearth of posts this week. I’ve been preparing for the writer's conference I’m presenting at this weekend and been struggling with a bit of writer’s block on my next book which, for some unknown reason, makes it also difficult to blog. Maybe I need to write a diet cookbook. (See cartoon below.) :-)
Orson Scott Card vs. J.K. Rowling
Orson Scott Card’s written some interesting commentary on J.K. Rowling and her frivolous lawsuit against Steven Vander Ark and his Harry Potter reference book Lexicon.
Card writes:
If Steven Vander Ark, the author of Lexicon, had written fiction that he claimed was original, when it was actually a rearrangement of ideas taken from the Harry Potter books, then she'd have a case.
But Lexicon is intended only as a reference book for people who have already paid for their copies of Rowling's books. Even though the book is not scholarly, it certainly falls within the realm of scholarly comment.
Rowling's hypocrisy is so thick I can hardly breathe: Prior to the publication of each novel, there were books about them that were no more intrusive than Lexicon. I contributed to one of them, and there was no complaint about it from Rowling or her publishers because they knew perfectly well that these fan/scholar ancillary publication were great publicity and actually boosted sales.
But now the Harry Potter series is over, and Rowling claims that her "creative work" is being "decimated."
Of course, she doesn't claim that it's the Lexicon that is harming her "creative work" (who's she borrowing from this time?); it's the lawsuit itself! And since she chose to bring the suit, whose fault is it? If she had left Vander Ark alone to publish his little book and make his little bit of money, she wouldn't be distracted from her next novel.
When I first heard about Rowling’s lawsuit, I thought she was overreacting. I sure didn't see any copyright infringement by Vander Ark – especially since Rowling herself has praised Vander Ark’s website and claimed to have used it at times when writing her books.
For the record, if I ever write a series of books that are even a tenth as popular as the Harry Potter series, I’d be thrilled if someone wanted to write a reference guide or a scholarly work to complement it. Rowling should have been flattered that there was someone out there that cared enough to actually compile such a guide. It sounds like her success has gone to her head.
I’m probably one of the few people that has never read a single Harry Potter book. Card’s article, along with Rowling’s despicable behavior, makes me never want to even read any of them. (OK. Who am I kidding? I’ll probably give in once my kids express interest in reading them or want me to read the books out lout to them. But I will wait until then.)
You can read Card’s entire article here.
The judge is expected to rule on the case Friday. Stay tuned for updates.
Public Appearances
If you check out the menu bar, you'll notice I've added a Sightings tab. This is where I'll list my upcoming public appearances. There are two in the coming weeks. Book Signing
May 17, 2008 Pioneer Books 2820 E University Dr # 102 Mesa, Arizona 85213 2:00 - 4:00 p.m. Directions
Writing Conference
June 7, 2008 Cedar Fort Writing Conference 2373 West 700 South Springville, Utah 84663 10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
Presenters include Abel Keogh, Janet Jensen, and Eloise Owens. The cost is $25 and includes lunch. Seating is limited. To register call 801.489.4084.
Update: You can find out the details of the writing confrence here.
LOST: The Shape of Things to Come
Sometimes I wonder if LOST would have lost its way if it wasn’t for Benjamin Linus.
Before Ben became part of the series, we had a bunch of intriguing characters who survived a plane wreck but none of them could really be considered a main character of the show. (You could make a strong case that Jack or Locke fit this bill. I would say that the island itself was the main character through the first season and half.)
After Ben was introduced, we saw how everything revolves around him, his decisions, and his actions. All the other characters are responding and reacting to whatever he does. And last night’s episode illustrated this perfectly. We saw how Ben manipulated Sayid into becoming an assassin and how Hurly, Claire, Sawyer and others now rely in him for their lives, and how even the rich and powerful Charles Widmore is simply reacting to whatever Ben does.
But it isn’t the fact that the LOST universe revolves around Ben that makes him a great main character. The writers have shown us enough of his background and human side that we feel sorry for him. We’ve seen enough of his sad childhood and his unloving father that we can’t help but see that maybe part of the reason he’s evil is because, in part, some of his past experiences.
And even though we know he’s very evil and manipulative person, we couldn’t help but feel his shock and sadness when his disavowment of Alex backfired and she was executed. No one really blamed him for turning the smoke monster on the soldiers. And now his quest for revenge in flashforwards doesn’t seem pointless – even if we don’t agree with his actions we can last least see the motivation behind them.
Ben makes LOST tick. And I’m looking forward to (hopefully) two more seasons of this intriguing character.
Questions from Weber State Univesity Students
Yesterday I had the wonderful opportunity to talk to a literature class at Weber State University that is using Room for Two as one of their books. I was very impressed with the students and their questions, comments, and insight they had. The following are some of their questions and my answers I thought others might find interesting.
Q: What audience did you have in mind when you wrote Room for Two?
A: I was trying to write for a very broad audience. I wanted to tell my story in such a way that even those who have never lost a spouse, child, or had a friend or loved one take their own life could enjoy it. It seems to have worked. Though I’ve received a lot of positive feedback from young widows, young widowers, and suicide survivors, most of the emails I receive have been from people who don’t fall into any of those categories. No matter what group the reader falls in, however, the vast majority of respondents tell me the book has touched their lives in very positive ways.
Q: Why did you write Room for Two?
A: The biggest reason was that I read or, rather, tired to read a lot of “memoirs” about losing a spouse soon after my late wife’s death. I found most of them to be completely worthless. Most of the time the writer would try to make him or herself out as a “wronged hero.” I felt authors were being less than honest about their experience and were hiding their own faults and imperfections. Because of this, I had a hard time relating on any level to the story they were trying to tell. I wanted to write a book that, in my opinion, showed the human side of the surviving spouse as well as the pain that that accompanies the death of a loved one.
In the case of books that dealt specifically with losing a spouse to suicide, I thought the authors were trying to make excuses or justify the actions of their loved ones that killed themselves. Some of the books went as far to romanticize suicide. I find that to be extremely dangerous. The reasons people take their own life is very complex and trying to rationalize or validate their actions is impossible without being able to talk with that person. And since they’re dead, that impossible. Instead of justifying the actions of my late wife, I tried to portray the devastating effect suicide has on those left behind.
Q: There’s a strong religious undercurrent in Room for Two. After reading the book, one can tell that you’re very religious but you don’t much in the way of specifics about what faith you belong to. Was that intentional?
A: Yes. Outside of the mountain west, most people don’t know much about the LDS (Mormon) Church. I didn’t want to alienate or distract readers who are unfamiliar with the church. Hence the reason I used very generic terms to describe my religious affiliation. Those who are familiar with the LDS church will, I think, know what faith I’m a member of rather quickly.
Q: If you were to rewrite Room for Two for a Mormon-only audience, what would you change?
A: Nothing.
Q: How did you come up with the title for your book?
A: The working title of the book was Running Forward. However, that never seemed to fit with the story I was telling. One day I was editing a part of the book where I was struggling with making room in my heart for another person. Though the exact phrase “room for two” doesn’t appear in the text, while reading that paragraph, those words formed in my mind as I read it. I immediately knew I had the perfect right title for my book.
Q: I really enjoyed reading your late wife’s poem “Ten Toed Children of Eve” that was in Room for Two. Have you considered about publishing the rest of your late wife’s poetry?
A: I’ve thought about putting a website up that contained her poetry and some of her other writings. Right now it’s more of a time issue. I have other writing projects are more pressing.
Q: Which writers have influenced you the most?
A: Orson Scott Card, Ethan Canin, and my dad.
Q: How do you find the time to write?
A: I make time. Once my kids are in bed, I spend some time with my wife and then write until I can’t keep my eyes open. It’s easy to talk about being a writer but hard to actually put in the hours required to write something worth publishing. I went to school with a lot of “writers” that were more talented than me. However, I’m the only one with a book. Though talent has something to do with getting published, most of it has to do with dedicating the time to writing, editing, and rewriting your manuscript.
Q: Are you writing more books?
A: I’m currently writing a work of fiction. If I can hold to my self-imposed deadlines, I should have a publishable manuscript sometime this summer.
Q: Do you have any plans to write a follow-up to Room for Two?
A: Yes. After I complete this work of fiction, the plan is to write another book that picks up where Room for Two left off. The main focus will be on the early years my marriage to Julie. The working title is Seconds because the book is going to focus a lot on second chances, second marriages, second loves, etc.
Do Travel Writers Go to Hell?
According to The Daily Telegraph, writer Thomas Kohnstamm admitted to faking large sections of The Lonely Planet guidebooks he wrote.
THE Lonely Planet guidebook empire is reeling from claims by one of its authors that he plagiarised and made up large sections of his books and dealt drugs to make up for poor pay.
Thomas Kohnstamm also claims in a new book that he accepted free travel, in contravention of the company's policy. His revelations have rocked the travel publisher, which sells more than six million guides a year.
Mr Kohnstamm, whose book is titled Do Travel Writers Go To Hell?, said yesterday that he had worked on more than a dozen books for Lonely Planet, including its titles on Brazil, Colombia, the Caribbean, Venezuela, Chile and South America.
In one case, he said he had not even visited the country he wrote about.
"They didn't pay me enough to go Colombia,'' he said.
"I wrote the book in San Francisco. I got the information from a chick I was dating - an intern in the Colombian Consulate.
"They don't pay enough for what they expect the authors to do.''
If the pay was so bad, one has to wonder why Kohnstamm agreed to write the travel guides in the first place. If he was talented enough to fool The Lonely Planet’s editors, one would think he should have tried his hand at fiction.
But more striking is why a publishing company (in this case Three Rivers/Crown) would reward a writer who admits to defrauding another publisher with a publishing contract. With other non-fiction books having difficulty passing the truth test, I’d think that a publisher would be hesitant to publish a book from an admitted liar.
(Blog entry cross-posted here.)