Blog Post 139

Tessera Trilogy Blog Post 139

As of 13 January 2015 Kashan Kashmeeri stands at 163 pages, 83K words.

The results of most recent BAM critique session suggests it is time to summarize, if I haven’t done it before, the critique and update process. I gather all verbal and written comments, though some reviewers seem unable or unwilling to put their suggestions, criticisms, or thoughts on paper. One BAM member in this most recent review session provided comments which were so out in left field as to be unworthy of generalization. Meds may be more important than we think.

My update process works like this – I take my notes of the verbal comments as I wrote then hurriedly while reviewers were providing them, plus their written suggestions and mark up the master copy from which I read. Then I go through each reviewer’s markups, identifying them by name if they didn’t do that. I request the reviewers at the top of each segment to identify themselves. Some reviewers have proved to be of greater value in terms of their critiques; others are of less value in a literary sense … providing just what I deem fluff if you will.

I mark up my master as I go through each written set of comments, giving my evaluation in terms of whether the comments are good, to be ignored, included, or just to note to myself with satisfaction their suggestions or observations.

I then go through a separate controlled computer copy of what I read, inserting changes, highlighting where research or more thought is needed. I print off a copy and review it critically, seeing that I’ve accounted for all suggestions. 

I also then take the collection of reviewers’ comments, by name, and make a separate computer copy without attribution. This last becomes the basis of Posts to the Tessera Trilogy Blog.

After these are done I cut and paste the corrected segment back into the master controlled version of the whole novel, adjusting line spacing, font type and size, and inserting any DROP CAPS as definers of separate portions of the book. As I may use all these blogs for a book on writing, control of versions, like in software configuration management, must be strictly observed. Archives preserve the variant versions, comments, and separately the same for the Tessera Trilogy Blog.

BAM 12 January 2015 critique comments

I provided a brief introduction – Tooley and Anh married, a child. All moved to Paris, London, the War Zone.

BAM member  –

1.       Good description of travel – agree

2.       Liked decisiveness of Anh rushing to door – agree

3.       Good writing – Thanks

4.       Correct split infinitive – agree, reworking

5.       Liked use of “ivy grew absent mindedly” - Thanks

BAM member  –

        1.  Liked segment, you’ve committed to emotion – Thanks

        2.  Good travelogue, then ratcheted to fast emotion –

        3.  Confused than Amir, Munirah et al not informed of Marta’s death – agree, reworking

        4.  Time disconnect about Stefano going to Rome - agree, reworking

        5.  Asked why the use of growing tension – disagree

        6.  Minor editorial changes – agree, disagree (use of poor English)

BAM member  –

1.       Sophia seems disconnected with what comes after – reworking

2.       The friends would know of Marta’s death – agree, reworking

3.       Dramatic segment, but different from previous – agree

4.       Needs more introduction to strife of family - disagree

5.       Why did Amir propose a faster travel plan – evolving story

6.       Spell out BP - agree

BAM member  –

1.       Off the wall comment about third person point of narration – disagree

2.       Interesting story and characters – agree

3.       Asked if Amir had four wives, and of wine – No, disagree

BAM member  –

1.       Agreed with others, timing is off – agree, reworking

2.       Liked description of “absent minded ivy”, well done - Thanks

        3.   Liked use of “words too hard to say” – agree

        4.   Minor editorial changes – agree, disagree (use of poor English)

        5.  Good show of emotion when explaining the death - Thanks

BAM member  –

1.       Liked description of kids and counter tops - agree

2.       The “tattered black ribbon” shows time had passed, friends would know of Marta’s death – agree, reworking  

3.       This was some of your best writing - Thanks

4.       Minor editorial changes – agree

5.       Writing and imagery great – Thanks

6.       I’m confused by time line - agree, reworking

BAM member  –

1.       Mystified by flowers by roadside, did they indicate funeral – no; reworking

2.       Timing is off, 1993, 1994 - agree, reworking

3.       Minor editorial changes – agree

4.       Thought flowers by road might be from funeral – not, working

5.       Second use of flower imagery beautiful, juxtaposed with imminent danger - Thanks

BAM member  –

1.       Agreed with most of others comments, liked the mystery, hesitation in the phone conversation – agree

2.       The description of Italian highways is accurate, like I remember – Thanks

3.       The “tattered black ribbon” was an Aha moment – agree

4.       After above, timing threw me off (went to Rome for four years) - agree, reworking

5.       Can’t believe Stefano and Sophia wouldn’t tell friends - agree, reworking

6.       Nicely painted picture - Thanks

BAM member  –

1.       No written comments

2.       Wonder when, or why Marta died – car crash, reworking

3.       Wondered why their meeting had to be then – agree, reworking

Blog Post 138

Tessera Trilogy Blog Post 138

As of 10 January 2015 Kashan Kashmeeri remains at 160 pages, 80K words. Much work ahead.

A surprising development from the Writers Group - a meeting was been called for a one-time-only critique session for materials of an adult theme. The person posting the call seems an unlikely originator, so I expect it was another RWG member who set the ball rolling.  I attended  and participated in the critique.

Follow-up  Observation – At the Adult theme critique session I was quite surprised by the suggestions, poems and prose segments brought out. While I can’t see the social value of explicit prose I suppose there are writers whose imaginations spur their need to write such material.

It was suggested that the new group put together an anthology of adult themed materials, ranging from humorous mild sexual suggestion to explicit material. The group agreed that bondage perhaps should be excluded. Several absent writers with potential interest (or who used other activities as an excuse for missing the meeting) suggested that perhaps there was wider interest. One of the segments reviewed was very graphic and explicit sexually … surprising from the age of the author, a grandmother. One attendee mentioned having gone (in jest) to Confession before coming. Asked whether I would participate in future reviews, or submit any material I said my work on Kashan Kashmeeri, TNO, research into a detective novel, and family research keep me quite busy enough.

After the session was over I confronted the BAM member who had made what I considered an unprofessional, gratuitous, non-constructive, and condescending cheap shot in review of my last segment. I said I hoped his comments did not signal a turn of BAM reviews to a darker direction. He apologized several times.  It is not easy trying to write, and I expect reviewers to be constructive. I’ll keep that hope. The BAM member apologized again at the RWG meeting. 

RWG 10 January 2015 critique comments

I provided a brief introduction – Tooley and Anh had married, and had a son. All cousins moved to new positions in Paris, London, and the War Zone.

RWG member  –

1.       Realistic and credible dialogue – agree

2.       Thought use of “smirk” was good word choice – agree

3.       Uncomfortable with use of “can’t disclose location”, as a given – working

4.       Thought Anh relearning Vietnamese a nice touch of irony – agree

5.       Enjoyed use of “spice things up” as reality of life - Thanks

RWG member  –

        1.  First part good, blended well with Stefano’s conversation – agree

        2.  Still uncertain where story going – agree

        3.   Better than last segment, better flow – agree

        4.  Suggested Stefano think about safer locations - agree

RWG member  –

1.       “Editor” technique not advancing the story, too esoteric - agree

2.       Some segments had good descriptions, but they don’t hold together - working

RWG member  –

1.       Missed first part of story

2.       Good dialogue and interactions – agree

3.       There is building expectation of disaster, good - agree

RWG member  –

4.       Overall OK, enjoyed – agree

5.       Questioned mention of gun safety course - agree

        3.   Liked use of prayer beads – agree

RWG member  –

1.       Good continuation of story - agree

2.       Suggested changing “smacked” to “punched” – agree

3.       Tension building about what Stefano is about to experience – agree

RWG member  –

1.       Better, more believable – agree

2.       Thought “smirk” was negative term, not between a couple - disagree - smile in an irritatingly smug, conceited, or silly way.

3.       Suggested minor editorial change – agree

4.       Reads well – Thanks

5.       Liked description of discussion of warzone conversation – agree

6.       Liked description of fear of soldiers at front - agree

RWG member  –

1.       Liked dialogue - agree

2.       Thought “warmth of their passion” was corny – disagree

3.       Story rang true, want to read - Thanks

RWG member  –

1.       Enjoyed – agree

2.       Thought “smirk” was negative – disagree

3.       Intrigued by Stefano – Thanks

4.       Thought there was disconnect between Tooley and Anh about talk of war – disagree

5.       Thought use of knowing sunrise was a good metaphor - Thanks

RWG member  –

1.       Didn’t like use of smirk, thought meant one was in doghouse – disagree

2.       Had problem with use of phone to war zone, about time zones, whether cell phones existed – disagree, two hour time zone change applied, cell phones did exist.

3.       Suggested incorporating Anh’s response to Tooley’s phone suggestion – agree

4.       Liked the dialogue, questioned the secrecy of Stefano’s location - agree

RWG member  –

1.       Suggested using grin vice smirk – disagree

2.       Concerned with time zone impact on phoncon - disagree

RWG member  –

1.       Enjoyed dialogue – agree

2.       Liked more show than tell with characters – agree

3.       Thought use of “warmth of their passion” was corny - disagree

4.       Liked insight about not wanting more children after Bai – agree

5.       Liked character insight on Stefano - agree

RWG member  –

1.       Enjoyed smirk, hang on to it - agree

2.       Minor editorial change – agree

3.       Enjoyed banter and dialogue – agree

Before the RWG meeting there was a brief discussion of the adult theme meeting and its outcome.  I shared a brief summary of its major points. I said before the RWG meeting that if our minds didn’t fantasize at some points we wouldn’t be here.

I feel there is questionable social or writer value to having or participating in an adult themed writers group, email forum, or anthology. At the RWG meeting one member sarcastically mentioned going to Confession both before and after the meeting. I interpret that as suggesting minimal support, and attendance as mere curiosity.

Coming up in a future RWG meeting, guest speaker (and RWG member) Greg Mitchell will talk on “How to know when your writing sucks … and what to do about it.” Sounds like required attendance. 

Blog Post 137

Tessera Trilogy Blog Post 137

As of 31 December 2014 Kashan Kashmeeri remains at 160 pages, 80K words. Much work ahead.

To expand reader base I’ve been giving away CDs with the first two novels on them, and giving out business cards with the promise of sending e-mailers the first novel as a PDF file.  Two have responded and I’ve sent them a free copy of Golden Gate.

A surprising development from the Writers Group - a meeting has been called for a one-time-only critique session for materials of an adult theme. The person posting the call seems an unlikely originator, so I expect it was another RWG member who set the ball rolling.  I plan to attend and perhaps even bring material to be critiqued. Mine, if I bring one, will be a mild effort, and bears explanation. Decades ago I watched the movie “Tom Jones”, which has several risqué segments. The narrator interrupted the narration at several points and offered a PG explanation for skipping the scenes. In my segment, as the characters begin lovemaking the editor and publisher break into the narration, excuse the less than PG nature of the action; yet describe it in more or less direct terms. It was an artistic technique I just put in the segment I’m working on. It will be interesting to see what kinds of comments I receive; see those comments below.

BAM 03 January 2015 critique comments

BAM reviewer –

1.                  1.   Really good writing in past couple of weeks, but not this time – agree

2.                  2.    Framework of separated couples good, needs work – agree

3.                  3.   Was curious of use of “my private war” – disagree

4.                  4.   Questioned use of “gypsy” – disagree, part of Paris’ unsavory charm

5.                  5.   Questioned use of “story board” – agree (based only on reception) – disagree as a writer and                      personal choice of style

6.                  6.   Use of my story board as a technique – “almost makes me gag” – disagree

BAM reviewer –

        1.  Liked first part, with the tension of male characters discussing dangers – agree

        2.  The second part derailed, but concern for Anh’s safety can lead onward - agree

        3.   Minor editorial changes – agree

        4.   Perhaps use “story” as a technique to calm his fears for her safety – agree

        5.   Suggested dropping “editor” technique - agree

BAM reviewer –

1.                       1.   “Editor” technique not advancing the story, too esoteric - agree

2.                       2.     Some segments had good descriptions, but they don’t hold together - working

BAM reviewer –

        1. Lost since characters left KOSA – sorry, it’s an evolving story

BAM reviewer –

1.                    1.  Overall OK, enjoyed – agree

2.                    2.  Questioned mention of gun safety course - agree

        3.   Liked use of prayer beads – agree

        4.   Correct overuse of “lack of sleep” and dreaming of visitors – agree

        5.   Minor editorial changes – agree

BAM reviewer –

1.                    1.  Conversations too forced for a real couple – working

2.                    2.   Suggested minor editorial changes – agree

3.                    3.  Make the intimate scenes grab the reader – working

BAM reviewer –

1.                    1.   Suggested correcting saying can’t go across Channel, then saying planning to – disagree,                         change of direction 

2.                    2.    Storyboard technique not useful - agree

BAM reviewer –

1.                   1.    Asked if storyboard technique was a tool to reduce her fears about assailant – No, but good                       idea

2.                   2.    Remove editor technique - agree

BAM reviewer –

1.                   1.     Liked banter between couple– agree

2.                   2.     Improve transition between phone conversation and walking home - agree

BAM reviewer –

1.                   1.     Suggested improving intimate scenes - agree

2.                   2.    Questioned use of editor technique - agree

        3.   Liked use of prayer beads – agree

General Observation – I had attempted in the segment reviewed to use a different, even radical technique to impose an outside narrator (The Editor, censor staff segments) to remove the reader from the characters’ intimate interaction and observe those scenes from a different, outside point of view. This was accompanied by the technique of having the characters discuss a storyboard of the assault on Ahn as she walked their baby in the park. The reaction was almost totally negative to the outside observers, though two BAM reviewers suggested how to change the storyboard approach.

One reviewer offered an observation in an unprofessional, gratuitous, non-constructive, and condescending way. The unworthy comment made me wonder if BAM critique sessions are taking on a dark, personal direction.