Well, I guess I've completed my down-sizing. Hafan Deg is sitting at around 95,000 words, which is the best I can do. I figure somewhere between 90,000 to 100,000 words is the accepted norm for first books, so I'm happy to leave it as it is. Once I have interest in the work, I'm sure an agent won't reject my submission for the sake of a few extra pages.
I'm going to spend the weekend finishing my research on agents. There are so many truly delightful ones out there, and I'll approach them in order of my enthusiasm for them. The British agent search is more difficult. For some odd reason, few of them accept email submissions. 95% of U.S. agents do, celebrating the era we live in. That's not to say I won't submit hard copy, but it's an unwieldy, inefficient way to do it, I think. I wonder how many of you have decided email is the only way to go. We are all so thoroughly spoiled now. I'm not even sure what the cost of a postage stamp is these days.
It's possible that my little readership includes some Jane Austen fans. For you, or someone you know, there is a British competition for an Austen-inspired, 2,000-2,500 word short story . I enjoy her books, but never had the inclination to try to write in that style or particular romantic genre. (I'm a died-in-the-wool Thomas Hardy nut. Sorry to mention the wool - Far From The Madding Crowd, remember?)
For those of you who'd love to show how familiar you are with her writing, give it a shot. You have until the end of March, tons of time to whip something together. It doesn't have to be a period piece, but it should reflect the Austen theme, from a character, situation, location, even a sentence, derived from her work. There is a nice little prize - One Thousand Pounds Sterling, although I think you Austen lovers would do it just for the love of it. You can find all the details at Chawton House Library Competition.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The Query
I've reduced Hafan Deg by another 1000 words. More would have been achieved yesterday, but it was a running-around day with grocery shopping, dentist, house-cleaning - all those things you can't quite picture when you think of the literary process. I mean, try to imagine Martin Amis or Joanna Trollope at the supermarket; it's difficult. I CAN, however, see Stephen King, standing in two feet of snow, packing the groceries into the back of his car, so there are exceptions.
When I first completed Hafan Deg some time ago, I received a request from publishers Allen & Unwin, in Sydney, for the full MS, as a result of my dynamite query letter. That letter is still my first choice, because the editor commented on how intrigued she was by it, and nothing has changed to warrant further refinements. I have a couple of new ones, ready to go, for agents I've since become familiar with, where I understand precisely what they need to see, over and above my first option.
So far I have around thirty agents to pursue, vetting each one as I go through my list, because I won't approach an agent I think will be a poor fit, regardless of what genre they claim as their preference. I want to know as much as possible about them, down to what kind of coffee they drink, if necessary. (We are going to have to work closely together, after all.) We could easily become too eager to be read, writing willy-nilly to all and sundry. Why waste time on that, especially as we're bound to get rejection slips from even the likeliest ones? Although my list presently reflects the U.S. market, I am actively seeking British agents, because I'm more Brit than anything else, and speak the vernacular. I know a good British agent will sell to the U.S. anyway, but I'm sentimental.
Which leads me to the word 'shilly-shally', a good word that Lapillus of Literary Rambles wanted to know more about in her blog yesterday. I explained it to her. Brits have no difficulty understanding Americanese, because we grew up on U.S. film and books. The U.S. notoriously have never quite understood the British, whether they just haven't been exposed to it as much or are more insular in their tastes. Anyway, if you want to know how to use the word 'shilly-shally', don't mess about, don't shilly-shally, go to Lapillus's blog.
I'm re-reading 'Eats, Shoots & Leaves', by Lynne Truss, a book about the pitfalls of poor punctuation. If you haven't already laughed over this one, you must get it. I am a punctuation nut, probably from years of professional editing, and I expect the written word to be in clear, unambiguous form (English or US usage), so for me it's a case of preaching to the choir with this book, but it is just so funny. For those of you who are less particular - or just plain insecure - about punctuation, you might want to take a little look, just to remind you of how important it all is. And you'll have a good giggle.
When I first completed Hafan Deg some time ago, I received a request from publishers Allen & Unwin, in Sydney, for the full MS, as a result of my dynamite query letter. That letter is still my first choice, because the editor commented on how intrigued she was by it, and nothing has changed to warrant further refinements. I have a couple of new ones, ready to go, for agents I've since become familiar with, where I understand precisely what they need to see, over and above my first option.
So far I have around thirty agents to pursue, vetting each one as I go through my list, because I won't approach an agent I think will be a poor fit, regardless of what genre they claim as their preference. I want to know as much as possible about them, down to what kind of coffee they drink, if necessary. (We are going to have to work closely together, after all.) We could easily become too eager to be read, writing willy-nilly to all and sundry. Why waste time on that, especially as we're bound to get rejection slips from even the likeliest ones? Although my list presently reflects the U.S. market, I am actively seeking British agents, because I'm more Brit than anything else, and speak the vernacular. I know a good British agent will sell to the U.S. anyway, but I'm sentimental.
Which leads me to the word 'shilly-shally', a good word that Lapillus of Literary Rambles wanted to know more about in her blog yesterday. I explained it to her. Brits have no difficulty understanding Americanese, because we grew up on U.S. film and books. The U.S. notoriously have never quite understood the British, whether they just haven't been exposed to it as much or are more insular in their tastes. Anyway, if you want to know how to use the word 'shilly-shally', don't mess about, don't shilly-shally, go to Lapillus's blog.
I'm re-reading 'Eats, Shoots & Leaves', by Lynne Truss, a book about the pitfalls of poor punctuation. If you haven't already laughed over this one, you must get it. I am a punctuation nut, probably from years of professional editing, and I expect the written word to be in clear, unambiguous form (English or US usage), so for me it's a case of preaching to the choir with this book, but it is just so funny. For those of you who are less particular - or just plain insecure - about punctuation, you might want to take a little look, just to remind you of how important it all is. And you'll have a good giggle.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Words That Count and Stephen King
My word count is now down to 97,000 words with around 7,000 to go, literally. It's a tiresome slog, whittling away - first chunks, even whole pages, and now sentences and words. I can't say it's been difficult to do. It just takes immense patience, looking at the work as an unknown editor would.
When we read our own work, we often skim over things, perhaps a bit of dialogue that's not saying much, or paragraphs that are oh-so-familiar that we hardly see them. Our eye jumps to the next important bit. Well, it's those skimmed-over pieces that need to come out.
We even skim-read our favorite writers, and it's a pity it's necessary. It's fine for text books, articles, blogs, when we're just looking for the facts, but it shouldn't be true of fiction. I do it with many novels, and I don't resent it, hold no grudge against the writer, because if the good stuff is really good I'm forgiving of the superfluous words. A great book holds our attention the whole time. We feast on almost every word. Heck, we even go back and read the introduction and acknowledgements. THAT'S a good book.
So that's what word reduction is about. Despite some regret at the exclusion of what I considered remarkable passages that took hours to write, much of it will be used in other books. I have cut the equivalent of around 100 pages - almost a novella in itself. It's satisfying to know that I have all this other material tucked away, ready for the next manuscript.
I've just finished re-reading Stephen King's, On Writing. This is a must-have for writers, written in such an entertaining way that you're sad when it's finished.
I'm not a King fan, because I don't particularly care for blood-curdling, graphic violence. I read all of The Shining, despite how I felt about some scenes, because this man is a great writer (and a humorist). I recall reading the first chapter or so, thinking how perfect the setup was for a thriller, how beautifully he set the scene for us. But then everything went King-Crazy, weird and way too over the top for me, so that I read the rest with my head half-turned away, scared about what would come next. Okay, so I'm a wimp. But I love his writing, not necessarily his subject matter.
On Writing is a really good read, whether you are a writer or not. Stephen King comes across as a genuinely nice guy, full of wit, wisdom, and a down-to-earth approachability. He has a sort of 'Oh, shucks,' humility about him. This book reveals so much of his guy-next-door voice, it's hard to imagine how he can be as wealthy as he obviously is. Perhaps he's given most of it away. I urge you to read it, whether for the first time or again.
I closed this book, once more, with a smile on my face. How could Stephen King possibly achieve that with me, wimp that I am?
When we read our own work, we often skim over things, perhaps a bit of dialogue that's not saying much, or paragraphs that are oh-so-familiar that we hardly see them. Our eye jumps to the next important bit. Well, it's those skimmed-over pieces that need to come out.
We even skim-read our favorite writers, and it's a pity it's necessary. It's fine for text books, articles, blogs, when we're just looking for the facts, but it shouldn't be true of fiction. I do it with many novels, and I don't resent it, hold no grudge against the writer, because if the good stuff is really good I'm forgiving of the superfluous words. A great book holds our attention the whole time. We feast on almost every word. Heck, we even go back and read the introduction and acknowledgements. THAT'S a good book.
So that's what word reduction is about. Despite some regret at the exclusion of what I considered remarkable passages that took hours to write, much of it will be used in other books. I have cut the equivalent of around 100 pages - almost a novella in itself. It's satisfying to know that I have all this other material tucked away, ready for the next manuscript.
I've just finished re-reading Stephen King's, On Writing. This is a must-have for writers, written in such an entertaining way that you're sad when it's finished.
I'm not a King fan, because I don't particularly care for blood-curdling, graphic violence. I read all of The Shining, despite how I felt about some scenes, because this man is a great writer (and a humorist). I recall reading the first chapter or so, thinking how perfect the setup was for a thriller, how beautifully he set the scene for us. But then everything went King-Crazy, weird and way too over the top for me, so that I read the rest with my head half-turned away, scared about what would come next. Okay, so I'm a wimp. But I love his writing, not necessarily his subject matter.
On Writing is a really good read, whether you are a writer or not. Stephen King comes across as a genuinely nice guy, full of wit, wisdom, and a down-to-earth approachability. He has a sort of 'Oh, shucks,' humility about him. This book reveals so much of his guy-next-door voice, it's hard to imagine how he can be as wealthy as he obviously is. Perhaps he's given most of it away. I urge you to read it, whether for the first time or again.
I closed this book, once more, with a smile on my face. How could Stephen King possibly achieve that with me, wimp that I am?
Friday, January 23, 2009
Calling All Tuscaloosa Cat Lovers
Ok, this is not my usual writers' posting, but I was so moved by a blog I read early this morning that I've just spent the whole time trying to connect with people who might be able to help. I've done everything else I can think of: Etsy convo-ing, forum links, twittering, and my blog is my last resource.
Just saw a sad blog that is totally obsessing me. This poor woman, Victoria, has an aunt who must go to a retirement place, leaving her house AND her CAT. Victoria hasn't been able to find anyone to take it, and it seems she will have to drop it off at a KILL shelter today.
Do you have any contacts in Tuscaloosa, Alabama? I'm trying to reach as many people as possible.
If you have any forum links, can network, or twitter, could you put the word out?
Her blog is http://accrispin.blogspot.com/
If someone could even give temporary shelter until a new owner could be found, it would be wonderful. They should leave their email on her blog for her to contact them.
Sorry to do this to you. I don't usually do things like this, but I am an animal lover and this really upset me.
Just saw a sad blog that is totally obsessing me. This poor woman, Victoria, has an aunt who must go to a retirement place, leaving her house AND her CAT. Victoria hasn't been able to find anyone to take it, and it seems she will have to drop it off at a KILL shelter today.
Do you have any contacts in Tuscaloosa, Alabama? I'm trying to reach as many people as possible.
If you have any forum links, can network, or twitter, could you put the word out?
Her blog is http://accrispin.blogspot.com/
If someone could even give temporary shelter until a new owner could be found, it would be wonderful. They should leave their email on her blog for her to contact them.
Sorry to do this to you. I don't usually do things like this, but I am an animal lover and this really upset me.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
That Darned Word Count
Well, folks, if you've been looking at that little counter up there, I've got my MS words down from 126,000 to 105,000. Feeling pretty good about it, in fact. Still more to go, but it's reading well, and I don't think any characters or major points got dropped off accidentally.
Sue H commented that she's done 400,000 words! Oh, my! Look, Sue, it's okay to have longer books for fantasy, and, as you used Marion Zimmer Bradley's The Mists of Avalon (what a great book that is!) as your example, it's probably okay. But that book of yours had better be pristine and wonderful, to capture that agent's eye. Second idea, why not make it into two or three books? If it's a hit, you're into the Potter Series money. I did note that Rowling's first book was the slimmest. Even she had to build up to really thick volumes.
Also, agents like writers with other books up their sleeves; it means they're not one-offs, and can deliver the goods long-term.
Oh, and I know about all those first novelists with huge books; my favorite writer, Jonathan Franzen (The Corrections), is one of them. But we must assume they are anomalies and, with the economy the way it is, and the skittishness of the publishing industry, not easily repeated today.
Out of the blue, as a result of a spur-of-the-moment pitch I sent off this morning, I received a request from an agent for twenty pages of Hafan Deg. This is good. This is my first. It would be nice if it were the last. But I am nothing, if not a realist.
Oh, and I received an award from dear Kit, in England. I get these from time-to-time on my art blog, but this is the first for my writing blog. Very nice. Thank you, Kit.
I'll put up the details tomorrow, and let you know who I think also warrants it.
There are so many of you...
Sue H commented that she's done 400,000 words! Oh, my! Look, Sue, it's okay to have longer books for fantasy, and, as you used Marion Zimmer Bradley's The Mists of Avalon (what a great book that is!) as your example, it's probably okay. But that book of yours had better be pristine and wonderful, to capture that agent's eye. Second idea, why not make it into two or three books? If it's a hit, you're into the Potter Series money. I did note that Rowling's first book was the slimmest. Even she had to build up to really thick volumes.
Also, agents like writers with other books up their sleeves; it means they're not one-offs, and can deliver the goods long-term.
Oh, and I know about all those first novelists with huge books; my favorite writer, Jonathan Franzen (The Corrections), is one of them. But we must assume they are anomalies and, with the economy the way it is, and the skittishness of the publishing industry, not easily repeated today.
Out of the blue, as a result of a spur-of-the-moment pitch I sent off this morning, I received a request from an agent for twenty pages of Hafan Deg. This is good. This is my first. It would be nice if it were the last. But I am nothing, if not a realist.
Oh, and I received an award from dear Kit, in England. I get these from time-to-time on my art blog, but this is the first for my writing blog. Very nice. Thank you, Kit.
I'll put up the details tomorrow, and let you know who I think also warrants it.
There are so many of you...
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Monday, January 19, 2009
First Novel Word Count
Marsha's comment on my post on maximum word counts for first novels proves that I wasn't alone in my ignorance. Of course, nothing is set in stone here, just solid recommendations for an easier (if it can ever be easy) path to an agent's door.
The following two blogs are worth reading: Blood Red Pencil and Fiction Factor.
For a very detailed account of all things related to this, along with hundreds of other tips for making your manuscript agent-worthy, you must read Author! Author! Anne Mini's amazing blog. You name it, she covers it. You can spend hours poring over her postings, but every one of them is a gem. I challenge you to find one thing that you didn't find of value to your writing journey.
I set my Word Counter to show the maximum 90,000 words as the goal, and my newly reducing word count which results from the daily pruning. So now I still show 100% complete, but each day the current words will be getting lower and lower.
Did you know that an italicized word or words should always be underlined in the final manuscript? Apparently italics don't show up well in Courier or Times New Roman, which is the font you should be using for submission. This is just another little thing I'd overlooked through all my research.
And one more that I missed: when you want to show a true paragraph break, where you include an extra line space, you should include the Hash or Pound sign # as a clear indicator for the copy editor, because if your break comes at the end of a page, where an automatic break can occur anyway, you need to be clear that this is, or isn't, a true break point. Hope that makes sense.
Stay well, out there - especially all you folks hanging around in Washington over the next day or so. Poor Kit in England still has the dreaded cough bug. When I read her posting today, I developed one, too, out of sympathy.
The following two blogs are worth reading: Blood Red Pencil and Fiction Factor.
For a very detailed account of all things related to this, along with hundreds of other tips for making your manuscript agent-worthy, you must read Author! Author! Anne Mini's amazing blog. You name it, she covers it. You can spend hours poring over her postings, but every one of them is a gem. I challenge you to find one thing that you didn't find of value to your writing journey.
I set my Word Counter to show the maximum 90,000 words as the goal, and my newly reducing word count which results from the daily pruning. So now I still show 100% complete, but each day the current words will be getting lower and lower.
Did you know that an italicized word or words should always be underlined in the final manuscript? Apparently italics don't show up well in Courier or Times New Roman, which is the font you should be using for submission. This is just another little thing I'd overlooked through all my research.
And one more that I missed: when you want to show a true paragraph break, where you include an extra line space, you should include the Hash or Pound sign # as a clear indicator for the copy editor, because if your break comes at the end of a page, where an automatic break can occur anyway, you need to be clear that this is, or isn't, a true break point. Hope that makes sense.
Stay well, out there - especially all you folks hanging around in Washington over the next day or so. Poor Kit in England still has the dreaded cough bug. When I read her posting today, I developed one, too, out of sympathy.
Friday, January 16, 2009
What Next?
The deconstruction of Hafan Deg is going fairly well and shouldn't take me very long. I am working with a much more positive attitude now. Christopher - who's such a know-it-all - seems to know it all, after all, and I am in awe of his succinct, perhaps not always welcome, suggestions.
As I remove said chunks of words, I find myself wondering what that bit was about and why I felt it was imperative to include it. Someone recently wrote that some backstory need never appear, as long as the character is influenced by it through the story, and I see that this is true. Another writer echoed this. The history of each character is a totally separate exercise, outside the manuscript itself, and will be obvious to the reader from the careful drawing of each character.
I think I always knew this. I've been writing for decades, and read everything I could about the craft. Yet I blythely ignored these writers' tips, believing - what? - that I was above it in some way?
So the streamlined version is coming along nicely. The original, larger MS is still on the website, but I will replace it when the shorter one is finished.
In this final slowing-down period, where the worst is over for the creation of this book, I've already begun to think about the next one. Should the manuscript of Hafan Deg be taken up by some agent, or publisher, it could be months, even a year or more, before publication. This isn't the time to sit back and lazily follow its journey. I intend to begin the new one in the next few weeks. I'm also considering a re-write of my first book, because it's a nice story, and no one else has done it, as far as I know.
So I feel the pressure is off for the time being. Christopher has been quite clear about my need to de-stress over it. When I began this blog, I had hoped for clear, firm, constructive criticism - mixed, I'd hoped, with some sympathy, even empathy, to soften the blows. Christopher has done a stellar job of that. Thank you, Christopher.
And I didn't mean it about McDonalds...
As I remove said chunks of words, I find myself wondering what that bit was about and why I felt it was imperative to include it. Someone recently wrote that some backstory need never appear, as long as the character is influenced by it through the story, and I see that this is true. Another writer echoed this. The history of each character is a totally separate exercise, outside the manuscript itself, and will be obvious to the reader from the careful drawing of each character.
I think I always knew this. I've been writing for decades, and read everything I could about the craft. Yet I blythely ignored these writers' tips, believing - what? - that I was above it in some way?
So the streamlined version is coming along nicely. The original, larger MS is still on the website, but I will replace it when the shorter one is finished.
In this final slowing-down period, where the worst is over for the creation of this book, I've already begun to think about the next one. Should the manuscript of Hafan Deg be taken up by some agent, or publisher, it could be months, even a year or more, before publication. This isn't the time to sit back and lazily follow its journey. I intend to begin the new one in the next few weeks. I'm also considering a re-write of my first book, because it's a nice story, and no one else has done it, as far as I know.
So I feel the pressure is off for the time being. Christopher has been quite clear about my need to de-stress over it. When I began this blog, I had hoped for clear, firm, constructive criticism - mixed, I'd hoped, with some sympathy, even empathy, to soften the blows. Christopher has done a stellar job of that. Thank you, Christopher.
And I didn't mean it about McDonalds...
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
First Novel - Are You Saying Too Much?
Did you know this? I was advised by someone I trust in the business that a first novel should never have more than 90,000 words.
This was a terrible blow to me, having just completed, triumphantly, 126,000 words. It seems that agents and publishers have enough trouble assessing new writers, without the added problem of too fat a book; such wordiness no doubt would cause increased costs, with the possibility of insignificant revenues, should the book do poorly. I am unable to find the words to say how much this upset me. Perhaps my book will do well, but it certainly won't be doing it with the original 500 pages.
I've already begun the task of whittling away words, paragraphs - even pages, to get my MS down to the prerequisite number, and it seemed impossible, at the beginning. Now I find it's not quite as bad as I thought. There is a sense of serious spring cleaning, not just the weekly chores. I was saddened to cut sections that I saw as imperative to the story, but, in fact, they weren't. For instance, my heroine travels a lot, but I chopped out all reference to one particular country, because it had no bearing on the forward movement of the book, even though it was a nice read. I save these abandoned chunks to another document file as I go, where I can probably use them in another book, with revisions, in the future.
So, if you are in the middle of a 500-page saga, hang on a bit. Are all those words really necessary?
Thanks, Christopher, my writing buddy, for pointing this out to me. I'm not happy, and the writing ego is somewhat crushed, but I get it.
I have a cunning plan up my sleeve, however. I'm keeping the original 126,000-word MS in its original state. If some agent gets really excited over my work, and is full of huge optimism and grand plans for me, I can always whip it out and say, "I just happen to have a larger version. Want to check it out?"
We moan and whine at writers' block; we blog excitedly about our daily word count; we agonize over revisions; we use a lot of expletives during proofing; we expect to squirm at the query stage. And all the while, we are blissfully unaware that we're writing too much. Who would have thought it?
This was a terrible blow to me, having just completed, triumphantly, 126,000 words. It seems that agents and publishers have enough trouble assessing new writers, without the added problem of too fat a book; such wordiness no doubt would cause increased costs, with the possibility of insignificant revenues, should the book do poorly. I am unable to find the words to say how much this upset me. Perhaps my book will do well, but it certainly won't be doing it with the original 500 pages.
I've already begun the task of whittling away words, paragraphs - even pages, to get my MS down to the prerequisite number, and it seemed impossible, at the beginning. Now I find it's not quite as bad as I thought. There is a sense of serious spring cleaning, not just the weekly chores. I was saddened to cut sections that I saw as imperative to the story, but, in fact, they weren't. For instance, my heroine travels a lot, but I chopped out all reference to one particular country, because it had no bearing on the forward movement of the book, even though it was a nice read. I save these abandoned chunks to another document file as I go, where I can probably use them in another book, with revisions, in the future.
So, if you are in the middle of a 500-page saga, hang on a bit. Are all those words really necessary?
Thanks, Christopher, my writing buddy, for pointing this out to me. I'm not happy, and the writing ego is somewhat crushed, but I get it.
I have a cunning plan up my sleeve, however. I'm keeping the original 126,000-word MS in its original state. If some agent gets really excited over my work, and is full of huge optimism and grand plans for me, I can always whip it out and say, "I just happen to have a larger version. Want to check it out?"
We moan and whine at writers' block; we blog excitedly about our daily word count; we agonize over revisions; we use a lot of expletives during proofing; we expect to squirm at the query stage. And all the while, we are blissfully unaware that we're writing too much. Who would have thought it?
Monday, January 12, 2009
Hafan Deg - The House
Having photographs on this blog is a first, but I came across these as I was sorting through my writing files. I thought you'd find them interesting.
This is the house in Wales that inspired Hafan Deg. It's the large one, close to the water. You can see why it captured my imagination. Add to this the fact that the place was becoming a ruin, not visible in these pictures, and you might understand how I reacted to it as I did.
I have always been obsessed by houses. Naturally, some of them were my own; there is nothing I love more than buying an old place and re-doing it with whatever limited funds I have. I've owned a few houses, over the years, but once they were redecorated, improved, I moved on.
However, I love all old houses, particularly if they appear unloved. Going for a drive in the country, seeing so many derelict places, I long to just wave some magic wand and make them all whole again, with people living in them. In fact, if you've ever looked at my website, I've painted this kind of house more than once.
My first novel involved an empty house, eerier than Hafan Deg in my current book. But that house had a ghost. I don't believe in ghosts, but I love to write about them. How silly is that?
I think that I'm saying that I believe in the energy of a house, something that perhaps scientists can, or have, explained at one time or another. When I walk through a place - again, when it's empty - I feel the breath of it, somehow. For a woman who is extremely pragmatic, and not into fantasy at all in my non-writing life, this is very odd. Of course, I imagine that we all get that feeling in ancient churches, and it can be overwhelming in some of the grand heritage houses run by the National Trust in England, but, in those places, we already know their history, as the plaques and booklets are right there as we walk around, revealing their sagas.
But it's strange that a very ordinary, sometimes extraordinary, old family home, in its abandonment, can carry that same sense of story, hint at the previous lives spent there.
I'm not complaining about my eccentricity. If it's a psychological problem, it's a gentle one, unlikely to cause harm to me or anyone else, and definitely helpful to the old houses I sometimes buy.
Perhaps there are others who feel this way - practical, scientifically-minded, non-fantasy kinds of people who also get that gut reaction to a place.
I said I don't believe in ghosts, but I know I couldn't spend a night alone in, say, Hampton Court, or the Tower of London. What's that about? Is this a case of 'I-don't believe-in-ghosts-but-I-wouldn't-want-to-meet-one'?
Whatever it is, it makes for a good read, and certainly makes me write. I wonder what you think about it.
This is the house in Wales that inspired Hafan Deg. It's the large one, close to the water. You can see why it captured my imagination. Add to this the fact that the place was becoming a ruin, not visible in these pictures, and you might understand how I reacted to it as I did.
I have always been obsessed by houses. Naturally, some of them were my own; there is nothing I love more than buying an old place and re-doing it with whatever limited funds I have. I've owned a few houses, over the years, but once they were redecorated, improved, I moved on.
However, I love all old houses, particularly if they appear unloved. Going for a drive in the country, seeing so many derelict places, I long to just wave some magic wand and make them all whole again, with people living in them. In fact, if you've ever looked at my website, I've painted this kind of house more than once.
My first novel involved an empty house, eerier than Hafan Deg in my current book. But that house had a ghost. I don't believe in ghosts, but I love to write about them. How silly is that?
I think that I'm saying that I believe in the energy of a house, something that perhaps scientists can, or have, explained at one time or another. When I walk through a place - again, when it's empty - I feel the breath of it, somehow. For a woman who is extremely pragmatic, and not into fantasy at all in my non-writing life, this is very odd. Of course, I imagine that we all get that feeling in ancient churches, and it can be overwhelming in some of the grand heritage houses run by the National Trust in England, but, in those places, we already know their history, as the plaques and booklets are right there as we walk around, revealing their sagas.
But it's strange that a very ordinary, sometimes extraordinary, old family home, in its abandonment, can carry that same sense of story, hint at the previous lives spent there.
I'm not complaining about my eccentricity. If it's a psychological problem, it's a gentle one, unlikely to cause harm to me or anyone else, and definitely helpful to the old houses I sometimes buy.
Perhaps there are others who feel this way - practical, scientifically-minded, non-fantasy kinds of people who also get that gut reaction to a place.
I said I don't believe in ghosts, but I know I couldn't spend a night alone in, say, Hampton Court, or the Tower of London. What's that about? Is this a case of 'I-don't believe-in-ghosts-but-I-wouldn't-want-to-meet-one'?
Whatever it is, it makes for a good read, and certainly makes me write. I wonder what you think about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)