Writing Advice 3

While I was finishing Specials my fictional brain started to break, so I decided to take some time off from narrative. Fortunately, a collection of letters written by the great hard-boiled writer Raymond Chandler leapt from the depths of my Sydney storage unit and into my hands.

Chandler’s technique for writing letters was to stay up at night drinking and talking into a tape recorder (a wire recorder in those days, actually). The next day his secretary would type up his rantings and send them in the mail. This led to many a drunken tongue-lashing, and a fair amount of solid writing advice, being preserved for posterity.

As I re-read the letters, I realized that I’ve stolen a lot of Chandler’s writing techniques over the years, especially his “four-hour rule” (see below), which I’ve expounded to many a writing class. So I figured it was time to ‘fess up and show all of you the source material.

So here is the unalloyed Raymond Chandler on the subject of writing:

1. Letter to Frederick Lewis Allen, editor of Harper’s Magazine
7 May 1948
My theory was that [the readers] just thought they cared about . . . the action; that really, although they didn’t know it, they cared very little about the action. The things that they really cared about, and that I cared about, were the creation of emotion through dialogue and description; the things they remembered, that haunted them, were not for example that a man got killed, but that in the moment of death he was trying to pick a paper clip up off the polished surface of a desk, and it kept slipping away from him, so that there was a look of strain of his face and his mouth was half opened in a kind of tormented grin, and the last thing in the world he thought about was death. He didn’t even hear death knock at the door. That damn paper clip kept slipping away from his fingers and he just wouldn’t push it to the edge of the desk and catch it as it fell.

That paper clip image is very goosepimple-making, a classic noir example of the crumpled little guy facing oblivion. Of course, we all know that a guy trying to pick up a paper clip on a hoverboard would be cooler. And like, especially if the paper clip exploded . . .

This next motivational technique is one I always tell aspiring writers to try:

2. Letter to Alex Barris, an interview by mail
18 March 1949
The important thing is that there should be a space of time, say four hours a day at least, when a professional writer doesn’t do anything else but write. He doesn’t have to write, and if he doesn’t feel like it, he shouldn’t try. He can look out of the window or stand on his head or writhe on the floor. But he is not to do any other positive thing, not read, write letters, glance at magazines, or write checks. Write or nothing. It’s the same principle as keeping order in a school. If you make the pupils behave, they will learn something just to keep from being bored. I find it works. Two very simple rules, a. you don’t have to write. B. you can’t do anything else. The rest comes of itself.

Put those two rules on your refrigerator and you’ll have a novel within a year. Or at least someone else who uses your refrigerator will.

The letter below reminds me of something Kingsley Amis said: “Sometimes the hardest part of writing is getting the characters out of the pub and into the cab.” Writers don’t just get stuck at the earth-shattering, life-changing decisions that our characters make; the little details of reality management are actually quite tricky and frustrating. Never assume you’re a crap writer just because you can’t get someone across a room—it happens to all of us.

3. Letter to Paul Brooks, a publisher working on a Chandler collection
19 July 1949
When I started out to write fiction I had the great disadvantage of having absolutely no talent for it. I couldn’t get the characters in and out of rooms. They lost their hats and so did I. If more than two people were on scene I couldn’t keep one of them alive. Give me two people snotting at each other across a desk and I am happy. A crowded canvas just bewilders me.

This letter to Alfred Hitchcock contains fantastic advice for writers as well as film-makers. Just substitute the words “wicked-cool sentence” or “scintillating simile” for “camera shot.”

4. 6 December 1950
As a friend and well-wisher, I urge you just once in your long and distinguished career . . . to get a sound and sinewy story into the script and sacrifice no part of its soundness for an interesting camera shot. Sacrifice a camera shot if necessary. There will always be another camera shot just as good. There is never another motivation just as good.

Beyond his anti-Agatha Christie snark, there is an excellent point below about the difference between novels and short stories. A lot of writers who excel at the story level don’t think to “turn the corner” when attempting the longer form.

5. Letter to Dorothy Gardner, secretary of the Mystery Writers Association
January 1956
The trouble with most English mystery writers, however well known in their world, is that they can’t turn a corner. About halfway through a book they start fooling with alibis, analyzing bits and pieces of evidence and so on. The story dies on them. Any book which is any good has to turn the corner. You get to the point where everything implicit in the original situation has been developed or explored, and then a new element has to introduced which is not implied from the beginning but which is seen to be part of the situation when it shows up.

Speaking of snark . . . bet you didn’t know that Raymond Chandler’s brief foray into science fiction actually predicted the rise of Google as an information search service. Check this out:

6. Letter to H.N Swanson
14 March 1953
Did you ever read what they call Science Fiction? It’s a scream. It’s written like this: “I checked out with K19 on Abadabaran III, and stepped out through the crummaliote hatch on my 22 Model Sirus Hardtop. I cocked the timejector in secondary and waded through the bright blue manda grass. My breath froze into pink pretzels. I flicked on the heat bars and the Bryllis ran swiftly on five legs using their other two to send out crylon vibrations. The pressure was almost unbearable, but I caught the range on my wrist computer through the transparent cysicites. I pressed the trigger. The thin violet glow was icecold against the rust-colored mountains. The Bryllis shrank to half an inch long and I worked fast stepping on them with the poltex. But it wasn’t enough. The sudden brightness swung me around and the Fourth Moon had already risen. I had exactly four seconds to hot up the disintegrator and Google had told me it wasn’t enough. He was right.”
They pay brisk money for this crap?

Yes, Mr. Chandler, they do.

You can buy the collection, edited by Tom Hiney and Frank MacShane, right here.

Retouched Pretties

Since writing Uglies, I’ve been asked a lot whether I think it’s dangerous for kids to be exposed to so many images of beautiful celebrities. Well, yes, comparing your own body and face to “perfect” celebs leads to unrealistic expectations. But what most people don’t realize is how unrealistic these images are, because of this one important fact:

Celebrities aren’t as pretty as we think we are. Their flawless skin, gorgeous bone structure, and radiant faces are mostly the result of technology. No, not futuristic cosmetic surgery: Photoshop.

Here’s a great example from a Swedish site called G!irlpower:

The image on the left is the original photo; the one on the right shows it after typical magazine retouching.

Click here for the entire experience, which allows you to zoom in on all of the parts of the girl before and after the retouching.

But one word of warning: Don’t start thinking that this girl was in any way “ugly” before the retouching. She’s actually quite cute. And frankly, I think the original image is much more attractive and more human, less false and exaggerated. It’s only “ugly” if your eye gets calibrated to accept only flawless skin. (And blue eyes and blond hair . . . hmmm.)

It’s not just magazines that retouch people—films do it too. My sister-in-law does visual effects for Hollywood movies (like King Kong). And believe me, for every hour she spends making sure Naomi Watts and Kong have the same lighting, she’s spent ten getting rid of certain stars’ zits and pores and wrinkles.

For more retouching examples from magazines, check out Model 1 and Model 2. These examples will show you why photographs of you don’t look like photos of models in magazines. Because you don’t spend 20 hours Photoshopping your own image.

And really, why would you want to?

I got the G!rlpower link from E. Lockhart, via Justine, and the last two links from Boing Boing.

Sydney Sizzles

My apologies for not posting, responding to comments, or answering much mail for the last week or so.

I’ve been finishing the rewrites on Specials, which included writing a totally new ending—a much better one, I hope. I have to turn the book in tomorrow night, so that it can be released on schedule. (Maybe early! I’ll let you know.)

In a related story, Cory Doctorow gave the Uglies trilogy a lovely write-up on Boing Boing yesterday, pushing my Amazon ratings into three figures. (I believe that is a w00ting offense.)

In the meantime, Sydney weather has been weird. On New Years’ Day, temperatures reached their historical record for this time of year . . . at 11AM! By 2PM it was the second hottest day on record in the city ever. The temperature? 45 Centigrade. But what’s that in Farenheit? Ah well, allow me to give you Americans a little lesson in metric.

As readers of Uglies know, I’m a fairly metric guy, and I think we’ll all be metric-users at some point in the future. But temperatures are much harder to convert than most measurements, because the zero-point is different. Metric uses the freezing point of water; US measurements use the freezing point of salt water. (Which I find slightly random.)

So when I came to Australia I learned this handy Centigrade poem:

30’s hot.
20’s nice.
10’s a jacket.
Zero’s ice.

Pretty easy, huh? Except you will note that 45 isn’t in there!

Well, to assist your imagination, we have this handy photograph:

That’s from today’s Sydney Morning Herald. It’s happening not terribly far from us.

This is the arid continent, after all. When it gets up to 45, things start to burn. At present there are 27 bushfires out there blazing on the edges of Sydney. I live in the middle of town, so you don’t have to worry about me. But do give a thought to the fireys (as they say here) who are out saving people’s homes.

And just so you know, 45C is 113 Farenheit. A hundred and thirteen!

Here’s the weirdest thing: After the southerly breezes finally arrived last night, the termperature dropped freakishly fast, down to 20C (68F). The discrepancy was so great that this morning when Justine and I made breakfast, the air that spilled from the kitchen cupboards was still noticeably hot—like opening an oven.

How weird is that?

Specials will be finished tomorrow, and I’ll start blogging more and answering fan mail again. Thanks for all your patience.

WARNING: The comment thread of this post contains massive spoilers if you haven’t read Pretties.

Face Expert

Sorry I’ve been offline so long, but I’ve been in Byron Bay relaxing with Justine‘s family. We did lots of body surfing, ate lots of good food, and I slipped out of the fun occassionally to work on Specials rewrites. (Thanks to my sister-in-law Niki for the invite!)

The coolest thing we did at Byron was swimming in a tea-tree lake. That’s a salt-water inlet surrounded by melaleucas trees, the soothing oils of which saturate the water. The lake is the color of tea, and it’s very peaceful and supposedly really good for you.

While I was marinating, that article I was interviewed for in the New York Times came out. Featuring this scary-ass picture:


Stephan Elleringmann/laif

Ahhhh! Although I guess any story that starts with a dog eating a woman’s face couldn’t have a nice picture. Still.

They quoted me twice! Apparently, writing Uglies and Pretties makes me an expert on face transplants.

You can read it here, or if you don’t feel like registering, here’s my quotes:

A new face might one day be a covetable luxury item, suggested Scott Westerfeld, a science fiction writer, whose novels “Uglies” and “Pretties” project a future in which a compulsory operation at 16 makes everyone conform to an ideal standard of beauty. In that future world, “it’s not just how much cosmetic surgery you get, it’s how often,” Mr. Westerfeld said, adding, “There will come a day when having extreme cosmetic surgery will be like buying a $1,000 Gucci bag, an indication that you are a member of the privileged class.”

. . . and then somebody else talks, and then . . .

Mr. Westerfeld noted that such themes, once the province of science fiction, now parallel mainstream attitudes about the self and identity. There is increasing acceptance that “as human beings we get to choose who we are,” he said. “And the line between what you get to choose and don’t choose is moving all the time.”

I can’t remember what I was trying to say there exactly. But at least I didn’t sound like too much of a wanker.

In other news, Uglies is an Amazon Top Ten Teen book!

That is all. We’re tired. But stay tuned for my Sydney Opera House photo essay!

Specials Cover + News!

So S&S have been promising to send me the cover photo of Specials, but haven’t yet. And lo, I find this on Amazon?

It seems to be missing a tagline.
Uglies: “In a world of extreme beauty, anyone normal is ugly.”
Pretties: “What happens when perfection isn’t good enough?”
Specials: “???”

Discuss . . .

Also: awards news from Australia!

Both Justine and I have been nominated for the Aurealis Awards! Her for Magic or Madness, and me for Uglies and Peeps!

This is wonderful news, and it’s also the first time we’ve been in direct competition for a prize. People always ask us if we get competitive about this sort of thing, and now we can finally make up some really gnarly stories of spousal conflict! (But really, no, we’re not. We’re only competitive about stuff like who can spit the farthest.)

And congrats to all the other nominees, especially our pals Cat, Sean, Rjurik, and Garth, as well as Rob for his editorial successes. w00t!

The Last Days Is Done

The first draft of The Last Days is finally done!

And it was even in time for the seasonal Penguin sales conference. Of course, I had an extra 16 hours, thanks to a little trick that I call “living in Sydney.” Finished the draft at 10:26PM, and my editor got it at 6:30AM the same day. (Hah!)

It’s 60,000 words, and has a beginning, middle, and end–though I think the finale needs to be rather more fleshed out. It went longer than I thought, because what I expected to be the denoument turned out to be a whole ‘nother climax. Argh.

Records indicate that I wrote 10,000 words in the last three days. Don’t try this at home.

But all in all, it’s a worthy quasi-sequel to Peeps. It’s set in the same universe, but a few months farther along (by the end of the book) so you get to see much more of the vampire/zombie apocalypse hinted at in Peeps. What I mean by a quasi-sequel is that it follows different characters through the same time period in New York City, although Lace and Cal do make sizeable appearances. What’s interesting (to me, anyway) is that the characters in TLD know a lot less about what’s going on than Cal did in the first book, being as how they’re civilians and not in the Night Watch. So someone who’s already read Peeps will have more knowledge than the narrators, which was kind of a cool tension to play with.

Now all we need is a cover. Oh yeah, and lots of editors’ notes and rewrites.

Today I recovered by lying in a bathtub and reading Raymond Chandler’s letters. (Re-reading, actually.) I’m going to do a compendium of his writing advice for a post soon, but not before a Specials surprise tomorrow.

Now I am stopping typing because my wrists feel like hamburger.

Announcements!

Two of them:

I woke up this morning (Saturday in Sydney) to an email from my S&S publicist telling me to immediately call a reporter for the NY Times. They wanted to interview me for an essay about cosmetic surgery, pegged to the recent face transplant in France. Apparently thanks to Uglies, I am the man to call when someone’s face gets eaten by a dog.

But luckily for my breakfast, the piece was about cosmetic surgery in the future. The questions were smart, and despite the fact that I hadn’t had any coffee yet, I think I said some intelligent stuff. I’ll let you know when (and if, always if) the article appears.

Announcement 2:

The book that has been optioned is So Yesterday! I can’t tell you the producers yet, but one of you has got it right! Which Justine and I didn’t think would happen, because it’s kind of out of left field.

But let’s say for now that I have met with them and am thrilled with their ideas. I’ll be able to reveal all before the end of the year, or so my agent says.

Let the serious casting begin! Here are the parts:

Hunter Bracque: a 17-yo trend-spotter with an ambiguous relationship to “cool.”
Jen James: his innovator love interest. A cross between Kim Possible and . . . well, pretty much just Kim Possible.
Mandy Jenkins: Hunter’s smart alecky boss at a certain athletic shoe company. I get dibs on Sarah Silverman.
Lexa Legault: Technogeek and visual effects artist.
Tina Catalina: Hello Kitty geek supreme.
Antoine: Bronx God of athletic shoes.
Hiro Wakata: Lord of All Things With Wheels: bikes, inlines, skateboards, etc.
Hillary Winston-Smith: escapee from Gossip Girl world.
Mwadi Wickersham: anarchist of cool, and the Missing Black Woman not in all those Nike ads.
Futura Garamond: ace designer and anarchist sidekick. Dresses like a “gay body-builder doing an ironic take on NASCAR fandom.”
Hunter’s Mom and Dad: perfume designer and epidemiologist, respectively. Hmm.

Those of you who haven’t read the book, feel free to bone up with the recently released paperback edition.

More Last Days Covers

Thanks for all your cantankerous, feisty, opinionated comments about the possible The Last Days covers revealed in my previous post. I appreciate your brutal honesty. And you know what? They’re just rough versions and certainly I didn’t design them, so I don’t mind if you blast away.

Frankly, I didn’t much like the direction those covers were going in. I agree with a lot of you that the images weren’t genre-rific enough. Not really making me think horror, sf, dark fantasy. More like . . . Bop Magazine.

Like many of you, I have been asking for fangs, so maybe we’ll see one of these re-imagined with more tooth. Or maybe some Peeps-esque eyes. I also agree with those of you who want more goth, more zombie-licious grime, and more intimacy. We shall see what happens.

Just as long as they don’t go with this.

Below are two more possibilities. Now we all know we want more fangs and such. So don’t forget to talk about the composition, fonts, colors and such.

Rock on:

Last Days Covers

I’m back!

Man, a couple of weeks without internet is like . . . having to look stuff up in books.

But I’m back online, and I’ve got some new pretty pictures from my Penguin/Razorbill editors. They’re very rough covers for The Last Days, the sort-of sequel for Peeps. It’s not about Cal and Lace, but it’s set in the same zombie apocalypse reality. It’s about a band struggling to make it big before the world ends.

I’m only about 10,000 words away from finishing the book. But it’s due next Monday. Argh.

So without me saying anything more, here’s the cover number 1:

And cover number 2:

Let me know what you think. Would you buy such a book? What would you think it’s about?

But remember, the designer is just playing with images, and these aren’t completely cleaned up. So don’t be mean. I’ll be posting two more possible covers soon.

Also: I’ll be telling you which book is going to be a movie . . . on Friday!

New View

Sorry it’s been so long between posts. But we’re in a new apartment with no internet (argh!). At least we’ve got a phone now.

NEWS FLASH: Our new apartment in Sydney rocks! It’s big and bright and in a really cool neighborhood.

Here’s the view from where I’ve been writing The Last Days, the sequel to Peeps:

That’s downtown Sydney, the Centrepoint Tower is the spaceship-looking thing, and of course that’s a great big exhaust fan. (It’s kind of industrial around these parts.) We can walk to the Sydney Opera House in about 40 minutes, which is how all distances in Australia are measured, by law.

The whole neighborhood is full of cool sights and sounds, and I can’t wait to start exploring.

Meanwhile, thanks for all your great guesses (and general hilarity) in the mighty movie thread. As soon as we get solid internet in house, I’ll be posting the name of the book!

See you then.