Gee whiz. Guess what? Yes, my new book proof showed up as promised. So now it's just some final adjustments and then its off to the bookstores for Cole Calling.
But, that leaves me back at square one as far as authoring goes, because now there aren't any more excuses. I've got to sit back down at the keyboard and start producing. And that reminds me of something I heard Albert Brooks the author/writer/actor/director once opine.
According to Mr. Brooks, writers are always writing, whether they realize it or not, and the physical aspect of putting words in print is simply an exercise to memorialize them for others. So, he concludes, you don't have to be physically typing to be writing, because the words have indeed been there, it's just that until whenever it is that they hit the paper, you've simply been carrying them in your head.
Now that I'm ready to test Mr. Brooks theory, I'll soon find out if I've been subliminally writing or not. And I certainly know what blank pages look like, I face them all the time. I just hope that the same blankness isn't what's really in my head.
Moving on to another subject, in the last few days I've found that I've had many recurring thoughts of my past, likely arriving there because I've stirred them awake while considering what might interest readers of this blog. Regardless of how or why these memories have resurfaced, however, the fact of the matter is, they're there, and many of them relate to my business career.
There was an instance, for instance (think about that one), where I was writing a scene about a character in Manhattan in one of my fiction books. A vision of a person popped into my head and I put that description on paper. As I wrote, the person in question turned out be less than savory, one might even say disgusting. And that's often what happens when I write. Characters, situations, scenarios just seem to show up on paper as I type, ala Albert Brooks.
Anyway as this character developed, I sent the work off to my editor, who reviewed every word I wrote, for consideration. And the editor in question was not only first rate, but someone whose wordsmanship talent I knew well because we'd both worked for the same employer in the past. The reply I got was immediate, the fastest one ever, and it was lethal. "You cannot write this." I was told. In fact, it was suggested I tear up the pages, then burn them. "Why? What's the matter?" I pleaded.
"Because," the editor replied, "everyone who knows you will know whom you've described, and you'll not only face a barrage of displeasure because of your words, you might even get sued for defamation." "Hold on a minute here." I answered, "Are you telling me that my description of this character is so clear, I've put something on paper that jumps off the page for readers so vividly, they'll shout 'I know that person?" The editor's answer was simply, "Yes."
I replied that while I certainly understood the editorial concern, especially in the area of potential litigation, I still had one more question. Are you saying, I inquired, that where I've put in my character description the information that the person was unkempt, grungy, decrepit, seedy, disheveled, marginally rational, and distasteful in appearance, and so on, people will immediately realize whom I've described? And furthermore, I asked, should this situation truly wind up in court, do you truly believe that when the person you're concerned about reads my description to the judge, that this person will say, "Believe me you honor. As sure as I'm standing here, I know that the author described me."
Needless to say, I followed the editor's advice and took the scene out of the book anyway. But, now that I've remembered the issue, I truly do wonder what would have happened had the description stayed in print and ultimately wound up in court. The scene in the courthouse could have become the storyline for a whole 'nother edition.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment