(This post was inspired by a recent post on Magical Words about book endings.)

One of the best pieces of advice I’ve heard when throwing a party is to end it while the guests are still having fun.  This may seem counter-intuitive, but in truth it makes a lot of sense.  If people leave the party feeling good they’ll want to come back again next time. If you milk the party until its all fun is gone, concerned your guests will miss out on something if you don’t, their last experience won’t be of fun at all.  It will be of that awkwardness that comes from trying to figure out how to politely get their coats and slip away when no one’s looking because they’ve had enough. Probably not quite the lasting impression you were hoping for when you planned the party to begin with.

The same can be said with your book.

Once you’ve written the climax and the drama has peaked, the plot is essentially over even while the characters, though perhaps maybe not all of them, live on.  Assuming you’ve completed telling the story you set out to tell, all that remains in the writing is the important task of deftly, but seamlessly, shutting down the story (without dragging it out) and tying up any loose ends.  Once that final “peak” has passed, the reader is ready for closure, not more story.  It’s a delicate balance.  The right amount of closure gives readers the freedom to carry on the story in their imagination if they’d like, yet it also satisfies those readers who’ve enjoyed the ride but are ready to move on to something else.

Like maybe your next book!

An Italian court has convicted three current and former Google executives of privacy violations stemming from a 2006 incident involving students at an Italian high school who uploaded a video of they made while bullying a schoolmate with Down syndrome.  You can read more on that story on NPR or at the New York Times.

In essence, the charge alleges privacy violations by Google in connection with the posting of the video.  Google says it took down the video within two hours of being notified by police and that it cannot be held responsible to monitor all uploaded content by users given that approximately 20 hours of video alone are uploaded worldwide every minute.  The Italian court argued that while the video topped the “most entertaining videos” category with 5,500 hits and 800 user comments, Google should have noticed the video sooner.  Google further argued no one would file charges against the mail carrier for the content of letters delivered or against a telephone operator for what’s said during a telephone call.

So who’s to blame?

Given the open nature of the Internet, I tend to side with Google (at least in this case) that they should not be held responsible for individual user’s actions.  If they were, where would it end?

What to do?

Social networking sites live and breath by user participation.  Users drive the sites by sharing content and the content itself drives the growth of new users.  The way I see it rather than making Google responsible for what others are doing why not give some of that responsibility back to those who are already out there?  There are plenty of ways Google could tap back into the Internet itself for the help it needs to police its content while at the same time demonstrating its intention to be a good corporate (and on-line) citizen.

Enter the “Google Content Squad”

Google already provides mechanisms for users to flag offense content on sites like YouTube and others.  Such flags alert Google to take action to review suspected content more closely.  However, this requires that individual users who find content to be offensive 1) know that they can flag it in the first place (and by doing so know what that means), and 2) be willing to actually do it rather than just shaking their heads and clicking off to something else.

What if Google were to establish a volunteer program to allow users to join a “team” of Internet content police, like a volunteer Neighborhood Watch to police content in their spare time.  Google could establish the criteria for what sorts of content to flag and how.  And as an incentive to participate, Google could track team member contributions, including the quality of those contributions, then award points or credits towards “stuff” (i.e. digital media downloads, participating vendor products, etc.) for high performers.  I’m sure more creative minds than mine can think of other kinds of rewards that motivate.

Google looks to the world-wide on-line community to provide the content it indexes and from which it makes $$$ BILLIONS $$$ in advertising revenue.  Why not ask Google to make it easier (and advantageous) for that same community to help them in return?  At the end of the day, we may all be better off for it.

What do you say, Google?

We’re listening . . . and watching.

After I’d finished laughing, what struck me the most about the commercial was just how easy it can be to create the impression of “place” in the minds of others.  A few key props moved around and the actor went from the shower, to a boat, to riding a horse on a sandy beach.  While this commercial employed the magician’s technique of sleight-of-hand, and a little embellishment with special effects (the Old Spice rising from the diamonds) to keep us from noticing the change of scenery before it was revealed, it didn’t take much of that scenery to convince us of where he was where we thought he was.

Imagine for a moment if we could pull back the camera and see the entire set. If we did, we’d see the cut-off ends of the bathroom walls and the boat.  And we’d have seen the horse just off to the side waiting from him to mount as he picked up the clam shell.  Our imaginations filled in the parts we couldn’t see but assumed were there from the few details we could see.

Speaking of direction, Mary Robinette Kowal does an excellent job describing direction and suggestion applying the principles of puppetry in the process of writing fiction.  You can listen the interview in the Writing Excuses podcast.  I HIGHLY recommend listening to it.

Our goal as storytellers is to create an impression of the reality we are creating in the minds of our audience.  Done well, it doesn’t have to take pages and pages of description or narration to do it, only takes enough to suggest it.  Imagination will do the rest.

For writers of fiction, that’s a great lesson to keep in mind.

With regards to the Google Book Settlement what concerns me about any future negotiation which still allows for an “opt-out” clause is the precedent this will set for future uses of copyrighted material by entities other than Google. This would put the burden on the copyright holder to monitor the world stage for any and all possible declarations of intent to use their protected material in order for the copyright holder to ensure they have opted-out.

Google has a history of turning existing business models upside down, such as with online advertising. Google pioneered the just-in-time pay-per-click approach to paying for ads vs. the traditional pay-up-front-and-wait model of buying ad space in a newspaper or the yellow pages and hoping customers will find you through it. Innovations like these have been the key to Google’s online success and and others have followed their example. However, Google’s proposal to allow them to using others’ copyrighted material unless the copyright holder specifically says Google cannot is another example of Google turning an existing model upside-down. Only in this instance, Google’s approach disregards existing copyright law.

It appears from the DOJ’s statement that they wants to leave the door open to future copyright negotiation with respect to Google’s proposal, including extended opt-out waiting periods, sending more notices of intent to allow for opting-out, or requesting greater diligence on Google’s part in finding copyright holders to inform them of Google’s intentions.

The DOJ has got it wrong.

Google’s argument is that it is too cumbersome to gather individual copyright holder “opt-in” approval before it can do what it wants. So Google believes it should be allowed to assume that approval in advance? Are we supposed to believe Google’s offer to allow copyright holders the choice to opt out then is an act of good faith?

Seriously Google?

This opt-out approach has been Google’s answer with regards to indexing online content, where the copyright law is a bit less clear. Basically, Google indexes your online, public content unless you tell them not to. Just for fun I looked to see how one would go about getting “unGoogled” and found it’s even harder to do that than it is to keep pace with where to adjust your Facebook privacy settings from going public. Nevertheless, manually scanning printed copyrighted material is another matter entirely.

The DOJ’s stated position suggests they’ve bought into Google’s premise that there is no difference. Google should not be allowed an exemption to existing copyright law, or even considered one, simply because they’ve asked for it and can make a case for all the good they will do with it. When did it become considered acceptable for anyone one to say “oh, I know what the law says, but I can’t be bothered to follow it because it’s just too much work and my intentions are good anyway so I’d like to be excused from it. Thanks.”

Google’s inconvenience cannot excuse them from their responsibility to respect existing copyright law.

The DOJ further proves their acceptance of Google’s premise by arguing that allowing Google to go ahead would give them a monopoly on the digital content (ala Amazon’s ridiculous claim that Macmillan has a monopoly over their own titles) since no one other entity would make similar efforts to create their own archives. As if that is what makes it wrong. Any step down the ‘even if we did allow them to do this then . . . ‘ road is one step too many. The DOJ should be pushing for enforcement of the existing law and insist instead that Google use their efforts to gather consent rather than attempting to lay the burden on those who would be impacted by Google’s action.

I say let Google innovate a new model for finding, requesting and tracking the copyright holder approval the need.  Google is all about innovation.  And since Google has the world’s information at it’s online fingertips, it should be better positioned any anyone on the planet to match copyright holders (and their contact information) with their copyrighted material.

If it was anyone else searching for that information the overwhelming response would be ‘just Google it’.

I could probably recommend plenty, but the one I went with is Wisdom Hunter by Randall Arthur.  I chose this one because I thought I remembered it going out of print, but it is listed right now on Amazon and has apparently gone through two covers since I read it on its first publication.  So, it’s not so likely no one’s ever heard of it.  Nevertheless, here are my thoughts.

****

I read Wisdom Hunter more than 15 years ago, but I still remember how much it impacted me.
It was recommended to me by a good friend and so I decided to read it sight unseen. I don’t like movie trailers (and other spoilers) so I value the recommendation of someone I trust over product marketers trying to convince me of what I’ll like. And I loved it.

This is a story about journey.

It opens with a pregnant young woman, disowned by her father, a conservative, legalistic pastor and a real a$$hole – Jason Faircloth. She tragically dies in childbirth in a traffic jam, but her baby girl survives and is raised the baby’s father (I can’t recall if the two were married), who subsequently takes the baby and moves away. Jason is completely unaware this has happened.

The main character is the pastor, Jason, this story is his journey of faith, forgiveness (and self-forgiveness) and redemption as he spends the next 18 years searching for his lost granddaughter. The journey takes him all over the world and he is truly a different person by the end.

The book is rather heavy-handed at times and there are definitely parts I would rewrite if it were my book (e.g. the father, not Jason, is a bit of a caricature), but it’s an honest, powerful look at the some of the hidden costs of Christian legalism and frankly any stubbornly held “ideals” people may hold which separate them from one another.

I don’t consider myself to be conservative by any stretch, but 15+ years ago when I first read it came at a time just when I needed to hear it.  Come to think of it, maybe it’s time I consider reading again.

Some days this is more true than others.  On my good days that inner voice, the one that tells me I need to stay grounded in reality and not let myself get too far ahead of what I can “see”, is just a quiet whisper on the breeze.  On my bad days that voice is like thunder.  And on those in-between days, which can seem as infrequent as leap year or a blue moon, the coast is clear without a cloud in the sky and I can see all the way out to the edge of the horizon (and perhaps a bit beyond it).

Our dreams touch on our innermost, secret selves.  It takes courage to be willing to look that deep inside because we never know what we might find there.  But once we do (if we do) and we discover what our dreams truly are, our first instinct is to protect them.  So we carry them around, safe inside us, like we’re guarding them a precious treasure.  We know they’re there and just knowing is enough.  But knowing your dreams and chasing your dreams are not the same thing, and there comes a time when every dreamer is inextricably drawn to do something about them.

The brave ones are those who’ve discovered their dreams and are willing to let other people see them too.  But naming your dreams calls attention to them and shines a penetrating light in those safe, dark places.  ‘What if other people think my dreams are stupid?’  ‘What if my dreams really ARE stupid and I’m the only one who doesn’t see it?’ Or worse yet, ‘what if I name my dreams out loud and they never come true?’

Maybe.  Could be.  Possibly.  Who knows?

Dreaming can be a risky affair.  The one thing you can be certain of is whatever your dreams are, you’ll never know what they can be until you’re willing to do it out loud.  Whether it’s sharing them with a family member or a close friend, or just simply writing them down (on real paper with a real pen) so that you name them aloud to yourself, your dreams won’t ever be anything more than that until you do.  And some day you might awaken from dreaming only to realize you’ve forgotten how.

So how about it?  How loud are you willing to dream?

In the world of information technology a style sheet is a master file used to easily manipulate the look-and-feel of an entire graphical user interface system (e.g. a blog, website, certain software applications), but in the world of publishing the style sheet (a.k.a. “style guide”) serves as a set of standards or conventions for a particular manuscript.  (See this Wikipedia article for more on this.) You can also read an excellent post about them on Deanna Houk’s blog!

I appreciate Mary sharing this and even posting a .pdf of the “Shades” style sheet to her blog.  It offers a fascinating glimpse into the publishing process for those of us still working towards it.  As I read over it, the character, place and term indexes are what really stood out for me.

Like many writers, I maintain my own private list of “things to keep in mind” when I’m revising a manuscript.  Thanks to Mary, now I’ve got a few more.

(edited to correct link URL for Mary’s post)

It was back in the early 1980’s when I middle school and the Halloween, Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm Street slasher-style movies series were just gaining in popularity.  (I hate to admit now that as a kid I think I’d seen them all.)  As a parent now I cringe at the idea that my own parents let me see such movies at that age.  This was also the time of the film Red Dawn and the television mini-series V (linked here as they are likely lesser known).  These all served as constant source of conversation around my 7th grade lunch table.  Somewhere along the line I got the idea to write some of my own.  However, in my versions my friends and I would be the heroes and the kids and teachers we didn’t like would be the victims.

Even though I crafted countless imaginative and gruesome ways for the people I didn’t like to die (lots of interesting things happened in the shop class!) I was in no way a “dangerous” kid.  It’s interesting to consider that a child in school today doing what I did back then would be expelled and possibly even charged with a crime. {sigh}

Nevertheless, I would spend some time in the evening writing a “chapter” or two then read them aloud to my friends the next day during lunch.  (Quietly of course so the kids we didn’t like wouldn’t overhear.)  Incidentally, a few close friends and I even crafted a game (played on notebook paper) based on the ‘V’ television series.  There were rooms to search, objects to seek, caches of red powder to discover and use (you’d have to have seen it the program to understand), and Visitors waiting in ambush when you’d least expect it.

I do remember writing one other story in middle school which preceded my lunch table writing.  This one was actually an assignment to write a Christmas story.  I remember writing what I thought was a really funny one about the Christmas that Santa got drunk and couldn’t deliver any presents so one of his reindeer had to step up and save Christmas.  Unfortunately, my English/Lit teacher decided it wasn’t appropriate.  She began reading it aloud then stopped in the middle,  informed the rest of the class that it was “garbage” and then gave me a failing mark on it.  That one took quite a while to get over which probably explains why I started killing off teachers in my later work.

So there you have it.  Those are my first real memories of writing creatively for an audience.  My friends would give me feedback on the parts that they liked and parts they didn’t.  Over time I learned how to leave the story hanging at the end of lunch so they’d want me to read more the next day.  Regardless of the . . . er, questionable nature of the subject matter, it was very rewarding and a lot of fun!

What about you?  What are your earliest writing memories?