Showing posts with label Laurie R. King. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Laurie R. King. Show all posts

Friday, August 14, 2009

Laurie R. King Guest Post: It’s a Crime: The end game


In the end is the beginning.

When I first started writing novels, I always knew the final scene. It might change as I went along, but knowing who was still standing when the dust settled, and where, made it possible for me to traverse the long path between my first lines and that last scene—which I wouldn’t write until I got there, since its job was to pull me on, like the nearby tree on which a jeep winches itself out of a ditch.

Around the seventh book, I was about a third of the way into the work in progress when the awful realization dawned on me that I didn’t know the book’s end. I had no image in mind, no purpose, no tree. Only dust. I couldn’t write for days as my mind desperately tried to cobble a vision together, and couldn’t. But because the book was already sold, and because I hadn’t been having any particular trouble to that point, I made myself sit down and keep working as if the end was clear. And I learned that it isn’t necessary to have a tree nearby, if you just keep driving on the road.

But endings are tough. I personally dislike the artifice of a final scene in the library When All is Revealed, but without one, how do I show how the plot works? I try to sprinkle as much as possible before the actual ending without robbing the reader of all surprise, but that means there are times when doing so deflates the final scene of any satisfying heft: one of my books has a thrillerish end when all the puzzles have been solved and the only question is whether or not the protagonist is going to survive. And after I’d written the line that she was still breathing, I couldn’t think where to go: scene in hospital? Scene with the two children she’s been sheltering, some months later? Trial scene? Everything felt like anticlimax, so I just ended the book with the fact that she was breathing. And got letters from readers asking if their copy had left something off, because it was too abrupt.

In crime fiction, a book’s ending has to complete the story by tying off at least the majority of loose threads. I have a particular dislike for would-be literary crime writers who turn around at the very end to dangle a question before the reader: ambiguity is not a sign of superior creativity.

Still, in my last book, The Language of Bees, I had to leave a couple of threads unclipped because they were going to lead into the next book. And to indicate that I was well aware that there were unclipped threads, I put at the end three dread words: To be continued. And received a ton of flack for that because people hearing about it assumed that all the threads were unclipped, which really, honestly, they are not.

But beyond finishing off the story, the end needs to reward the emotional commitment of the reader. It has to gather up not only the plot threads, but those of theme and what can only be called flavor, and entwine them all in a sturdy and aesthetically pleasing knot. If the book was a thriller, the end needs to remind the reader of all the sweat they’d had while reading it. If the flavor was comic, the end needs to preserve that light touch. One of Dorothy Sayers’ novels deals with dark issues but has its share of lightheartedness, yet when she came to its end, I suspect that the darkness overrode everything else in her mind, because the final note is jarringly bitter.

So, just a simple matter, right? No responsibility there, to leave the reader, who has sunk twenty-five dollars and several nights into the story, with a note of satisfaction and an impulse to close the book and pat the cover with gratitude.


My current work in progress, (its working title has been The Green Man, although we’re still fiddling with the final title—and if you’re interested you can follow the blog posts about the writing process in “Mutterings"), has seven points of view and five intertwining plot-lines. It is, as mentioned, the conclusion of lat year’s book, which means its conclusion has to carry the weight of two years and 800 pages of story. It has to make sense, and it has to make sense of the story—logically and emotionally.


When I gave the first draft to my editor in April, I wasn’t satisfied with the ending—although hey, at least it had one. In the rewrite, one POV at a time, I shoved and bullied and cajoled the characters to play nice and come together. And when I finally reached the place in the rewrite where I either had to bring all those plot strands together or tell my editor that we’d be publishing this one with a do-it-yourself ending, I sat down one morning and in six hours, hammered out 3500 words of a new ending. And it worked. All those long musing times drifting to sleep, all those weeks of wrangling and wrestling with intractable characters moving around an illogical countryside, the seven points of view came together on Westminster Bridge at half past two in the morning, and gave me their ending.


The first line of the book is—


A child is a burden, after a mile.


The last line is—


Honestly, you didn’t expect me to tell you that, did you? But rest assured, when you read it next year, you’ll remember the first line.


*******
Laurie R. King’s twentieth novel will be published next spring.

You can read excerpts of the others, and her blog and book club and Twitter and… at http://www.laurierking.com/

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Laurie R. King’s guest post: It’s a Crime II: Plots; or, The Part in the Middle


A couple of months ago, I was having plot problems. This is what happens when you can’t outline for the life of you, and also when a book is being written when your husband is ill and things are crazy and, well, when life happens. But even if life had been normal and calm, I probably would have had plot problems because the book had five separate and fully realized points of view, which meant five separate and fully realized story lines that not only had to run in balanced and interesting parallel tracks, but to intersect at given intervals, and finally come together in a great crescendo at the end.

And it wasn’t—or, they weren’t. I had finished the first draft in good time, back in April, after which I’d talked it over in New York with my editor, who told me some things I knew, and some things I hadn’t seen, and gave me her invaluable viewpoint (which, being based on the question, Will it sell? acts as a necessary counterpoint to my own attitude, which is based on the question, Is it fun?) The editor is a writer’s First Reader. If she doesn’t see something, if she doesn’t like something, it’s a good bet that nine out of ten readers won’t get or like it either. And since, much as I enjoy the writing process, I don’t spend a year on a story just to entertain myself and my patient family, I figure it’s nice to keep the readers in mind at some point before the book is finished.

And the hard fact is, readers appreciate a plot that makes sense, even when the writer herself would much rather play with the characters and then send them off into the rosy mist of sunset with a cheery, “Have a happily ever-after, guys.”

So: plot difficulties.

At precisely this time the good folk running the Book Passage crime writing conference wrote to say that they had scheduled me for a 90 minute discussion with Tim Maleeney about, yes, plot. Doesn’t Fate just love to rub it in?

Whenever I’m desperate for something to say, I look around to see who I can steal from. I picked out one of my favorite books on writing, John Gardner’s The Art of Fiction—I know it’s subtitled “Notes on Craft for Young Writers” and I’m neither young nor even very new, but it’s never too late to learn, right?—and sure enough, he has a chapter all about plotting. I make my way through that, and I read:

Since plotting is ordinarily no hasty process but something the writer broods and labors over, trying out one approach, then another, carrying the ideas around with him, musing on it casually as he drifts off to sleep…
But, but—that doesn’t help any, that’s what I’m doing now! You mean to tell me even John Gardner had to wrestle his plots to the ground, one point at a time?

Sigh.

My books are three parts first draft and five parts rewrite—not necessarily in the page count, but in the effort. The first draft is a 300 page sketch of what the book ought to look like; the rewrite is when I try to make it actually get there. During that time I use stacks of PostIts, make time lines for the wall, write out the sequence for the overall story and for each of the characters, back-story and present. All this sound and fury (lots of fury) is like a diesel train engine getting its line of cars into motion: much slippage of wheels and billowing of smoke, but the burden jerks, and inches forward, and rattles and moves and fights the urge of inertia.

That’s my mind getting the 390 pages of closely linked action and personality into motion, huge effort that only slowly shows results, until the train is in motion, then picks up speed, and moves from a walk to a jog to a run until last week I sat down to rewrite the final scene…

And The End will come on Friday.