Writing Life: I Wish I Could Be "Limitless"

I saw the Bradley Cooper vehicle "Limitless" a few weeks ago and loved it, despite the somewhat mixed reviews. Early in the movie, he starts taking a drug that grants access to the 9/10ths of the brain we supposedly don't use, and the first thing he did was overcome his writer's block and finish his novel in four days. He went on to do lots of other things unrelated to writing and entirely related to shady dealings, but for me, the writing fantasy was simply wonderful. And my fascination, despite the negative side effects the character suffered, certainly worried my friend -- she kept leaning over the armrest to whisper, "No! No drugs!"

Luckily, the drug was fictional, and given that I don't indulge in anything stronger than Diet Coke (and the occasional mojito or three), I'm not in serious danger. But I read a Salon book review today that brought it all rushing back. And if that book can cure my block without the side effects of a (fictional) drug, perhaps it's worth exploring.

The article is here; it briefly discusses "Limitless", but is more focused on a book called "The Midnight Disease: The Drive to Write, Writer's Block, and the Creative Brain" by neurologist Alice Weaver Flaherty. This quote from the article stood out to me: "In other words, beyond a certain point, the more difficult a writing task, and the more you think it matters, the more likely you are to become blocked."

I'll have to buy that book and get back to you on the rest of it, but that pretty much sums up my writing experience to date. If I'm just writing for fun, or if I have a pressing deadline, the words come out automagically. But if there is no deadline, just an exhortation to write the best book possible, and if the idea I have is so wonderful that I despair of ever getting it onto the page, I end up curling up into a ball and staring at the ceiling, wishing that my calling was something less difficult and more lucrative, like dentistry or accounting. (note: no offense meant to dentists or accountants)

I eventually manage to get the story out of my head, once I get over the fear, but the fear stage is a dark one. And if someone offered me a pill and said that it would cure the block...

...I don't think I would take it. Not out of any sense of nobility or morality -- I'm not a saint. But I would question whether whatever I wrote was really me, whether the experience was an authentic one or was somehow twisted as the chemicals in my brain realigned themselves. And for all that I complain about the block, I love what I produce when I overcome it -- and overcoming it is just a part of my process, the same as proofreading or daydreaming or rewriting is.

Do you struggle with writer's block? How do you handle it? And would you take the magic pill or suffer on without it?

How to Follow One of the Top Romantic Comedies of All Time

This is so totally not Regency-related; it's not even book-related. But, I trust that you will give me the liberty to occasionally post other things that amuse me. And right now, I am amused by this short movie for a supposed sequel to "When Harry Met Sally". This isn't a fan-made ripoff; it stars Billy Crystal and Helen Mirren. Let's just say that their attempts to refresh the story for a modern audience are hilarious. Check out the video here and let me know what you think! And if you have other videos I should watch while procrastinating, please do share.

There, but for the grace of God...

One of the authors I follow on Twitter is Courtney Milan, who has released a series of excellent historicals over the past year and has another book, UNVEILED, coming out in January. If the cover alone wasn't enough to seduce me, I'm quite intrigued by the premise - the hero has just found information to get the heroine (and her brothers) declared illegitimate, which means that he will inherit their father's dukedom while the duke's kids will be cast out of society. But, as these things happen, the hero and heroine meet and fall in love despite all that. Sounds lovely, right? So I was quite saddened for Ms. Milan when my Twitter feed gave me all the details of a review for her book that went horribly awry.

Basically, Publishers Weekly's review (scroll to the middle of the page) of UNVEILED proclaimed "the love story...genuinely satisfying and Margaret's dilemma movingly portrayed", which is a v. good thing. But, the reviewer also said "the conflict [is] dependent on the unlikely scenario of Parliament legitimizing a bigamist's bastards, fatally marring an otherwise promising novel."

Daggers, right? That's the kind of review that kills a little bit of a writer's soul, or at least I imagine it is - particularly writers who really, truly care about and strive for historical accuracy. And Ms. Milan does care about accuracy; while she didn't respond to the review directly, she did a very calm, thorough post about the historical research that went into her plot, and there really was a case in Britain in which a family under similar circumstances was legitimized by an Act of Parliament. As a result of the tempest in the Twitter teakettle over this, PW did revise the review slightly to say "unlikely scenario" (before, I believe it said something more along the lines of "impossible", but don't quote me), but the review still stings.

Now, I don't know Ms. Milan (although I have won two different books from her on Twitter, so I suppose I'm biased towards thinking she's a v. nice person), I don't know the reviewer, and I don't know the deep intricacies of English inheritance law. But the hard thing about writing historical romances is that there is a divide between "history" (i.e. what really, factually happened) and "romance history" (i.e. what is commonly accepted as fact in the world that Smart Bitches/Trashy Books would call "Romancelandia"). As a minor example, in Romancelandia, the waltz is danced in nearly every London-based Regency romance -- but in the real world, everything I've read indicates that it wasn't danced until at least 1813, and didn't get a broader blessing until 1816 or later.

So the readership and the reviewers have what they consider a very clear sense of what "Regency" (or, in Ms. Milan's case, Victorian) is, and writers who stray away from Romancelandia into the "real world" are treading a very narrow line. And I must admit that before this brouhaha, I would have also said that the plot sounded unlikely - I'm part of the Beau Monde online special-interest chapter of RWA geared toward the Regency, and the fact that bastards cannot and will never inherit has been rehashed in that group many times. But, the legal case that Ms. Milan found has never come up there either, and I believe her now that I've seen it.

But as an author, how do you handle these questions of historical accuracy? As a reader, can you trust that the author has done their research, or do you throw the book against the wall when it violates the precepts of Romancelandia? As editors and agents continue to look for new and fresh stories, writers must go farther afield in search of inspiration - and what they bring back, while based in fact, may not meet the sniff test for those who believe that Romancelandia's Regency period and the real Regency are the same thing.

Ms. Milan said that perhaps an author's note explaining her research might have helped; perhaps that really is the only way to win over the disbelieving reviewer. It's certainly something I will consider if I publish a story that doesn't match readers' understanding of the period - after all, if I felt major sympathy pangs for the author after reading the review, I can't imagine how it would feel to be the direct recipient of that kind of unfounded criticism.

But what do you think? Are most readers more forgiving than the reviewer was? Or is an author's note the only way to deal with this?

On the Value of Non-Romance Writing Classes

I'm blogging today over at the Ruby Slippered Sisterhood (the wonderful group of ladies who were fellow Golden Heart finalists in 2009) about my experience with non-romance-related writing classes and one of my favorite techniques for exploring and developing your voice. Please stop by and join the conversation! Beyond that, I have very little of interest to report -- I'm still slogging through Madeleine and Ferguson's story (ONE NIGHT TO SCANDAL), while my agent slogs through the submission process for ONE NIGHT TO SEDUCTION. As soon as I have any news about either of them, you'll hear it here!

NaNoWriMo = NoNoNoNo

Actually, NaNoWriMo is going okay, provided that you define success in terms of what you've learned rather than what you've produced. I've blogged all about it on the Ruby Slippered Sister blog (the group blog for my fellow Golden Heart finalists).

In general, my writing is going really well right now; I'm feeling inspired and excited by Madeleine and Ferguson's story, and I'm looking forward to just getting on with it already. Unfortunately, I went through a bit of a slump in September and October; part of it is my natural despair over another birthday + the shortening days + the cooler weather, but most of it was because I didn't see the way forward with my second book. Now I do, and even if November is generally a bleak month until the saving grace of Thanksgiving, I'm in a much better mood.

What you won't see, however, is completely regular blogging here. There are only so many hours in the day, and given that I'm not published and only my mother reads this, there seems to be little point. Once the book sells, I'll blog more frequently; until then, please check back and get excited when something new appears :)

My Golden Heart Sisters Are Blogging!

I've been oh-so-shamefully silent on my own blog -- suffice it to say that I have been completely drowning in work for the day job (that thing that is supposedly giving me the money necessary to support myself, even if I don't have time to actually enjoy my earnings), and that I've prioritize my novel-writing over my blog-writing. I'll get back to this soon... ...but in the meantime, my fellow 2009 Golden Heart finalists and winners have started a group blog! We call ourselves the Ruby-Slippered Sisterhood; if you want to know why, you'll just have to visit the blog :) Check it out: http://www.rubyslipperedsisterhood.com/rss/index.php/. I'll be posting there occasionally, and will link to my posts when it's my turn! And if you're an aspiring Golden Heart entrant yourself, definitely check out the Sisterhood's blog -- we're giving away critiques of partial manuscripts this month.

Now, back to the day job; more later!

I Need To Get On the Rewriting Classics Train

My favorite new deal from Publishers Marketplace for this week is:

Janet Mullany's THE IMMORTAL JANE AUSTEN, a humorous novel about Jane Austen in Regency England who joins the vampire resistance in Bath when England is invaded by French forces, to May Chen at Harper, in a nice deal, in a two-book deal, by Lucienne Diver of The Knight Agency (world).

WTF? What is it with Jane Austen being rewritten in a variety of ridiculous ways? I need to get on this bandwagon; it's just too bad that by the time I finish a book for this trend, the trend will already be dead. I suppose that means I should focus on submitting AN INCONVENIENT MARRIAGE, rather than developing a version of Upton Sinclair's THE JUNGLE in which he explores the horrors of the meatpacking industry and discovers that all meatpackers are, in fact, syphilitic zombies intent on infecting the American population in an effort to upgrade from their filthy tenement apartments.

Actually, given the state of the market, that idea may have promise...

Social Networking == Quicksand

With the exciting news that AN INCONVENIENT MARRIAGE finaled in the RWA Golden Heart contest, I feel like I need to be building out my web presence in anticipation of the day when I sell my novel (or the day when I realize I'm never going to sell my novel and need some e-friends to cry to). In my quest to efficiently tackle the online space, I set up a new Sara Ramsey Facebook account and decided to dedicate more time to blogging here. I've been on Facebook for around twenty-four hours, but thanks to some support from my personal friends and the addition of quite a few of my fellow finalists, I've built up a not-too-shabby friend list. I'm looking forward to branching out more into the publishing world as I start to build out content, but I feel like this is a good start.

However, social networking is such a time sink that I wonder if I would be better off spending the time writing. In addition to Facebook and the blog, I also started a Twitter account today (you can follow me @ramseyromance -- linked to in the sidebar on this page). I've stayed away from Twitter, believing it to be yet another plague in the multitude of procrastination-enabling addictions that litter the web. With my blogs, my website, my email, my Google Reader, and the fact that I work for a tech company and spend ten hours a day online there, I'm already online enough -- Twitter seemed like the last straw. But I signed up today because it's all the rage, and I need to go where the potential readers are. Whether I'll stick with Twitter remains to be seen (the pressure to come up with something witty in 140 characters is intense, particularly since I'm used to writing 140 lines), but I do feel like there's some happy medium between the amount of time I spent getting things set up today and the practically nonexistent social networking that I do in my personal life.

What do you think about Twitter? Is it the Facebook-killer, or a flash in the pan?