Category Archives: Writing

Romans, Horse Asses, US Railroads, Space Shuttles, and Common Writing Paper

Posted on by

Kill Zoners — Bear with me. I promise this headline will make sense. I belong to a police veteran group where this piece was recently posted. Yes, I’m plagiarizing sharing it here because I can’t say it better in my own writing. So please read away, digest the logic or humor, and be sure to comment.

*   *   *

The United States standard railroad gauge (distance between the inside flanges of the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches or 56 ½ inches wide. That’s an exceedingly odd number.

Why was that gauge used? Well, because that’s the way they built them in England, and English engineers designed the first US railroads.

Why did the English build them like that? Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the wagon tramways, and that’s the gauge they used.

So, why did ‘they’ use that gauge then? Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they had used for building wagons, which used that same wheel spacing.

Why did the wagons have that particularly odd wheel spacing? Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break more often on some of the old, long-distance roads in England. You see, that’s the spacing of the long-established wheel ruts.

So, who built those old, rutted roads? Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (including England) for their legions. Those roads have been used ever since.

And what about the ruts in the roads? Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match or run the risk of destroying their wagon wheels. Since the chariots were made for Imperial Rome, they were alike in the matter of wheel spacing.

Therefore, the United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches, or 56 ½ inches wide, is derived from the original specifications for an Imperial Roman war chariot.

Bureaucracies live forever.

So, the next time you’re handed a specification/procedure/process and wonder What horse’s ass came up with this? you may be exactly right.

For perfect balance, Imperial Roman army chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the outside width of the rear ends of two harnessed and pulling war horses. (Two horse asses wide.)

Now, here’s the twist to the story.

When you saw a United States Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad in Florida, you noted the two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. Those were solid rocket boosters, or SRBs.

The SRBs were made by Thiokol at their factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs would have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the Florida launch site.

The railroad line from the Utah factory happened to run through a tunnel in the mountains, and the SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track, as you now know, is as wide as two horse behinds.

So, a major Space Shuttle design feature, of what was arguably the world’s most advanced transportation system, was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of horse asses.

And you thought being a horse’s ass wasn’t important?

*   *   *

Kill Zoners — This chariot-becoming-shuttle story makes sense to me, but what doesn’t make sense (in a completely unrelated way) is why the common paper size we writers use is 8 ½ by 11 inches. Can anyone explain the reason or logic of this? (Wikipedia, Google, Quora, and/or ChatGPT cut ‘n pastes not allowed.) BTW, debunk the horse backside story if you’d like, but remember this is a writers’ site where girls just wanna have fun.

The Other Side of Newsletters

Posted on by

By John Gilstrap

Two days ago, on May 1, our own Sue Coletta posted an outstanding article here about newsletters, with the promise of more to come. As I read her piece, I found myself dealing with a low grade sense of anxiety–not because I disagreed with her, but rather because I think everything she said was exactly right.

I’ve stated here before that social media in general is my Achilles’ heel. I deeply don’t understand Twitter, which seems bloated and toxic, and I don’t photograph nearly enough of my life to drive my Instagram account. My social media safe space is my Facebook author page, where I’ll post a few times a week with interesting tidbits and photos–leaning heavily into dog pix because Kimber is the cutest creature on the planet. I don’t post book news unless it is timely and new, so that leaves me with the daily chores, pleasures and ironies of life.

I never post anything negative about health or family because I’m aware that I live a very blessed life and people don’t need to add my burdens to their own. I’m in the entertainment business, after all, so I figure it’s best to be, well, entertaining.

My YouTube channel, to which I have not posted in a while, is dedicated to helping writers learn their craft, but I would guess that most of my fans have little interest in becoming writers themselves.

Which brings me to my newsletter, which has over two or three times the number subscribers as my Facebook page has followers. Here’s where I start thinking too much. To me, newsletter articles need to reach a higher bar than social media posts. I’m invading a busy person’s inbox, which is a lot more intrusive than having a post sit passively on Facebook for people to see or ignore as they amble by. I use my newsletter for significant announcements about book launches, signings, appearances, that sort of thing, but they tend to all concentrate around the date. At Christmas, I’ll send out a virtual card with a link to the family Christmas letter, if people want to read it.

I know I should do more, if only because everyone tells me that, but what am I supposed to talk about, beyond the topics mentioned above? Fern Michaels’s website is a wonderful mix of newsy newsletter, recipes, a touch of technology and flowers. I think it’s great, informative, and very Fern Michaels-y. Her books aren’t about blowing stuff up, killing bad guys and saving the world.

I could always write about what interests me, such as guns, politics, gardening and cooking, but those pose challenges. Certainly, politics are a non-starter, and guns fall close enough to that high-voltage wire that I don’t want to submit myself to long screeds and diatribes. As for gardening (at which I suck but am learning) and cooking (at which I’m pretty good, if I do say so myself), neither one of those topics does much to advance my brand.

My lovely bride and I took a trip to Alaska back in February, about which I posted extensively on Facebook, but again, is that worth invading someone’s inbox with a newsletter? Isn’t it self-aggrandizing to show people who may be slogging through their day that I have the time and the wherewithal to go mushing and snowmobiling?

It is in my nature to overthink just about everything, and perhaps that’s what’s happening here. Rest assured, though, that if I had a better idea of what to post (outside the confines of book stuff), I’d be much more active with my newsletter.

First Page Critique: Point
Of View Is A Powerful Tool

Posted on by

By PJ Parrish

Our submission today is designated as a “thriller” so that’s all we know going in. The presumed protag is a 17-year-old young man. This is a rather spare sample, clocking in at just over 300 words and I wish the writer had gone on some more, up to our 400 word limit. But the beginning has promise. Let’s dive in.

WHERE PIECES FALL

Kellen Koufax sensed no pleasure in the stranger’s gaze. The young Middle Eastern woman’s straight-lined lips knotted his stomach the way he felt on Christmas morning eight years ago. No positives came from firmed expressions. Reluctance secreted in hers. The woman broke her pause inside the classroom door at Skyline High School and approached the teacher.

The woman’s blazer bulged at her waist. It identified her as someone seventeen-year-old Kellen preferred not to encounter. Not on his birthday, and not because he had committed any unforgivable crime. He chose to avoid anyone who relied on firearms to further their careers.

The teacher approached and whispered, “Kellen, this lady is from Idaho Falls Police.” Concern and curiosity infected the teacher’s tone. “She asked to speak to you in private.”

Kellen glanced at a Grizzly football teammate, shrugged, and paced to the detective’s squish-squash footfalls from the classroom to the principal’s office. The school’s guidance counselor waited with a uniformed officer. The counselor ushered Kellen and the detective into her adjoining office. The officer followed and posted himself near the door.

The detective motioned Kellen to sit in one of two chairs in front of a small desk. She sat and leaned forward. “My name is Detective Sahar Osman. I work in Idaho Falls Police Department’s Crimes Against Person’s Unit. Officers responded to a fire this morning at Sandy Downs. I’m sorry to have to tell you your father and mother did not survive.”

Kellen bowed his head. The detective’s words burst into the whoosh of red-orange flames sucking oxygen from the air while they lashed his parents who struggled to inhale their final breaths and flailed arms to beat off the flames. He flinched when a hand touched his left shoulder from behind. It was the only part of his body to sense warmth besides the tears on his cheeks. Everything else stiffened and ached as if the detective’s statement sealed him in cryonic suspension.

_________________________________

There are some good things going on here. We definitely have a disturbance in the norm — what can be worse than being called out of class to hear your parents have died in a fire? Too often, writers feel they must first world-build a “normal” day in order to make the disturbance, when it comes, feel more dreadful. I used to think this was the way to go early in my writing career. But I learned to make waves first and then explain later what was left behind in the wake. So kudos, writer, for not falling into that trap.

Other things that are good: We know who we are following, the protag’s gender, how old he is, and where we are (a real high school in Idaho Falls…I looked it up). You’d be surprised how many writers leave out this basic info.

Given the shortness of the scene, we don’t have much time to get to know Kellen or establish empathy with him. I’m sure that will come later. I wish the writer had taken the care and time to slip in a few telling details about Kellen. How do you do this? Maybe he nervously fiddles with a brand new class ring (which tells us he is about to graduate). Maybe he exchanges a nervous glance with someone specific before he leaves. (which tells us he has a good friend or even a girlfriend). Or maybe everyone stares at him weirdly or even laughs (which, in his reaction, tells us he’s a loner).  I mention this because of this line:

The woman’s straight-lined lips knotted his stomach the way he felt on Christmas morning eight years ago. No positives came from firmed expressions.

Someone happened to Kellen when he was seven that must have scarred him to the point that this stranger’s expression made his stomach knot again. This is good! This is a tease of backstory! I found it the most interesting thing in the whole submission. This opening needs a few more dabs of this kind of intrigue. The TELLING DETAIL is so important. These imprint on the reader’s mind, providing flesh on your character’s bones, a hint of intrigue and the promise of more to come. Slow down in your writing, dear writer, and look for opportunities to provide this.

Also, this is his birthday! So important for someone so young. At 17, you’re on the cusp of manhood. Kellen surely feels this. And he is being thrust, on this very special day, into a nightmare. Surely some thought crosses his mind about this as he is being ushered out by a policewoman. Again, slow down and let the drama play out more.

Okay, now I have to talk about confusion. There were a few times, I had to stop and think about what I was reading and figure it out. We call these hiccups. You don’t want hiccups in your opening. You want clarity and conveyance of plot.  I was a little confused by the opening paragraph:

Kellen Koufax sensed no pleasure in the stranger’s gaze. The young Middle Eastern woman’s straight-lined lips knotted his stomach the way he felt on Christmas morning eight years ago. No positives came from firmed expressions. Reluctance secreted in hers. The woman broke her pause inside the classroom door at Skyline High School and approached the teacher.

First, he has no reason at this point to know the policewoman is there for him. That info comes later from the teacher. UNLESS…you make a point of the teacher looking directly at him first and then the detective does. Only then would he feel targeted.

“Young Middle Eastern woman” is also confusing. Coming in the second line of the book, I hiccupped and thought we were in the Mideast somewhere. And I don’t know how Kellen can realistically pinpoint her ethnicity at a glance. Unless she’s wearing a head scarf? (Yes, women cops wear them). What’s the point of even bringing this up?

The second graph has issues as well.

The woman’s blazer bulged at her waist. It identified her as someone seventeen-year-old Kellen preferred not to encounter. Not on his birthday, and not because he had committed any unforgivable crime. He chose to avoid anyone who relied on firearms to further their careers.

The woman’s blazer does not “identify her as someone Kellen preferred not to encounter.”  The gun, which is hidden, does. Detectives wear guns on their belts, and badges. Why be coy? It’s more interesting that he sees them. And that the detective keeps staring at him!

What’s going on in the class right now? Wouldn’t there be a low hum of curiosity? Wouldn’t heads be craning toward him by now? Given our gruesome times, a cop showing up in a classroom is not a good thing for anyone. Again, you’re missing chances to up the drama and tension in your scene by moving through it too fast.

Next graph:

Kellen glanced at a Grizzly football teammate, shrugged, and paced to the detective’s squish-squash footfalls from the classroom to the principal’s office. The school’s guidance counselor waited with a uniformed officer. The counselor ushered Kellen and the detective into her adjoining office. The officer followed and posted himself near the door.

So Kellen plays football? I almost missed that detail because the wording “glanced at a Grizzly football teammate” is so awkwardly phrased. Maybe something like:

Kellen looked over at Ted. His friend’s eyes were wide with questions, Kellen looked down at his teammate’s sweatshirt, focusing on the logo of the bear print until the word GRIZZ was just a blue blur.

Personalize! Be specific. Connect. (I looked up Skyline HS, home of the Grizz) Make us feel what Kellen is feeling right now. All we get is a shrug? This, after what you told us about a knot in the stomach? I recognize teen boys can be laconic. But again, I think you’re missing a chance to inject drama.

Next graph:

The detective motioned Kellen to sit in one of two chairs in front of a small desk. She sat and leaned forward. “My name is Detective Sahar Osman. I work in Idaho Falls Police Department’s Crimes Against Person’s  Persons Unit. Officers responded to a fire this morning at Sandy Downs. I’m sorry to have to tell you your father and mother did not survive.”

Again, I have to advise the writer to slow down. Because here’s another missed opportunity to add tension. Split the detective’s dialogue into parts and let Kellen react to each new piece of info. I think she would be less blunt, for starters. And second, it gives you a beat — a second or two for Kellen to react and readers to learn something more. There’s no reason to race through this crucial scene. Sandy Downs is a real place, a equestrian arena and popular concert site. Maybe something like this:

“My name is Detective Shar Osman. I work in Idaho Falls Police Department’s Crimes Against Persons Unit.”

Kellen stared at her, not understanding. Crimes against persons?

“Our officers responded to a fire this morning at Sandy Downs,” she went on.

Sandy Downs? The horse place, the arena where they hold rodeos? I was there once, That’s where Ted and I went and saw The Cure. It burned down?

“I’m sorry to have to tell you this, but your parents were involved and did not survive.”

One aside: Most average people (outside us crime dogs) don’t know “crimes against persons” is another name for homicide et al.  Why is a homicide detective going to a school when the crime here is arson? Since the fire was “this morning” it would not realistically be ruled homicide yet. At some point very soon this has to be addressed.

Now, you are at a critical point. Kellen’s reaction is everything here. And depending on your plot, you have to be clear on his emotions. Did his parents work there? If not, why were they there in the middle of a school day? If they DID have good reason to be there, THAT is where his thoughts go first. If they DIDN’T, then his reaction is completely different.

And I think, at 17, he’d almost not understand what she’s saying: “Did not survive” is a cop’s way of couching bad news. I can imagine him thinking:

Did not survive. Did not survive what? Wait….a fire. There was a fire. Does she mean they’re dead?

Such moments need to be that strange. People, especially kids, process awful news in an almost detached away, like they’re trying to tune in a bad radio station signal. Which leads us to the last paragraph:

Kellen bowed his head. The detective’s words burst into the whoosh of red-orange flames sucking oxygen from the air while they lashed his parents who struggled to inhale their final breaths and flailed arms to beat off the flames. He flinched when a hand touched his left shoulder from behind. It was the only part of his body to sense warmth besides the tears on his cheeks. Everything else stiffened and ached as if the detective’s statement sealed him in cryonic suspension.

I don’t think this works, for the reasons I cited above. You must give words to Kellen’s thoughts. I can buy that dreadful news creates a “whoosh” in the brain. But nothing as articulate and “writerly” as what is in this graph.

The detective’s words burst into the whoosh of red-orange flames sucking oxygen from the air while they lashed his parents who struggled to inhale their final breaths and flailed arms to beat off the flames.

What has happened here, dear writer, is that you have abandoned the view point of a 17 year old boy and lapsed into omnisicient. This is you being writerly, not Kellen feeling and reacting.

Then you need a new graph:

Kellen closed his eyes. He flinched when a hand touched his left shoulder from behind.  It was the only part of his body to sense warmth besides the tears on his cheeks. Everything else stiffened and ached as if the detective’s statement sealed him in cryonic suspension.

I think that last line needs to go. It’s a toke over the line after flames, warmth, stiffening. I doubt a 17 year old teen who’s just gotten such news thinks in terms of “cryonic suspension.”  Again, that is the writer talking, not the character thinking.

I’m not going to red line edit today because I don’t think we need it. I’ve tried to cover the main points and hope the writer takes my critique in the spirit it is intended. This is one person’s opinion, dear writer, and meant only to help you down your path. I like this set-up and would definitely read on.  But you need to get inside this young man’s head more and see this terrible event through his eyes only. Point of view is a potent tool. Put it to work for you more precisely and you’ll add more power to your story.

 

In The Air Around Us

Posted on by

When I finished my talk to a large civic group last month and took questions, a lady’s hand shot up. “Where do you get your ideas?”

I shrugged. “They’re everywhere. Willie Nelson once said that songs are just floating in the air and all we have to do was reach up and grab them. It’s the same for me when I’m writing. They come from nowhere, and everywhere.”

I’d been discussing my most recent upcoming release and a gentleman on the front row spoke up. “So did your idea for Hard Country come from the news or is it totally from your imagination?”

The question was one of those softballs I love. “It’s real, in a sense. A few years ago, we had a ranch in Oklahoma that should have been heaven, and it was in most cases, but our house was across a gravel road, three hundred yards from a ‘buy house’. Cars ran the roads at all hours of the day and night, coming and going to buy drugs.

“during the same period of time, meth-heads broke into our place more than once, kicking in the door and ransacking the house. I got pretty good at repairing door frames and locks, that did little good. Then they stole my brother-in-law’s truck and we learned that the first place the thieves drove it to that night was buy house to trade some of our stolen items for drugs. The law was little help, because more than one member of that small-town sheriff’s department were related to the dealers, so they tended to look the other way.

“It took an unconnected DPS officer to arrest one of the criminals before they launched an investigation. It did little good, and as far as I know, they were still selling drugs out of the old trailer house today. That idea eventually became the basis for the first Tucker Snow novel that will release August 1, 2023.”

Another hand. “So do you have any ideas for another book?”

“I have dozens, and some of them will never be written by me.”

“Name one.”

“Are you a writer looking for ideas?”

The audience laughed and the lady answered. “No, I just like to hear what writers are thinking.”

“When you’re talking to a thriller or mystery writer, they’re most likely thinking of interesting ways to kill you.” I paused for effect and she gave a nervous laugh that the others enjoyed. “But here’s one you might be interested in, because I believe my grandson has a paranormal connection some people won’t believe…”

And that gave me the idea for today’s post. Consider this proposal for your consideration.

My two-year-old grandson, Caden, piqued my interest in a possible book when he could barely talk. Sunday afternoons are usually pure chaos at our house as both daughters and their families come over to what we call here in Texas, supper. All five kids always want to get in the pool, and that’s where our story starts.

That weekend the Bride bought floats and several water toys, including a package of old-fashioned water guns. The older kids immediately filled them from the pool and commenced to spirting each other and any unwary adult who might wander past. I was one of the first victims, and in response, I took up arms and looked for a target, immediately ruling out the Bride.

Caden saw me and that’s when things got weird. This kid who only watched Bubble Guppies and Paw Patrol grabbed one of the water pistols and squeezed the trigger. His eyes lit up when the stream of water shot out, and the next thing I knew he held the plastic gun at High Ready, looking for a target.

He saw me and I swear this is true, advanced using sophisticated footwork, as if trained by a SWAT team. His form was perfect, and if you want to see an example, find any video of a trained soldier or law enforcement officer moving up in a dangerous situation. He was letter perfect and he shot me several times before ducking out of sight with his back against a wide support pillar under our huge patio cover.

The Bride saw him holding the pistol against his chest, still at High Ready, as I proceeded to find an angle on him. That twenty-four-month-old moved with me, keeping the column between us, then turned the corner to fire again before procceding, again, looking like he’d spent years in the military, or as a law enforcement officer.

Let me make this clear, this kid performed as a trained, seasoned warrior and at that age, had never seen anything like it on TV. Neither of his parents watched movies when the kids were up, because his dad works most nights and is interested in nothing but sports. Good or bad, that son-in-law who only had a vague notion of who John Wayne was, cared nothing for war or cop movies or series.

That wasn’t all. When we wrestled, Caden had moves. He never retreats, but attacks. If one of us played chase with him, he used one hand to slap things in our path to slow us down. If you’ve ever read Lee Child’s Jack Reacher series, Lee describes his protagonist when he was a child. He could have been describing Caden.

When he was threer, he loved to play policeman, and wanted to put us in cuffs.

The Bride’s “office” became a jail.

That made us think he’d been on this earth before. I started thinking about reincarnation and remembered two well-researched events involving a boy and girl who are prime examples of this phenomenon.

James Leninger began to experience nightmares at the age of two. When his parents woke him up, they report he kept saying repeating the same story. “He developed a habit of saying “airplane crash on fire,” and slamming his toy planes nose first into the family’s coffee table. When they woke him from those bad dreams, he often shouted, “Little man can’t get out!” (Jim B. Tucker, M.D. University of Virginia.)

He repeated this behavior over and over, producing dozens of scratches and dents on the table and began to describe being an American pilot in WWII who was killed when his plane was shot down by the Japanese during the battle of Iwo Jima. He gave details that included the name of an American aircraft carrier, the Natoma, the first and last name of a friend who was on the ship with him, and a location and other specifics about the fatal crash, Somewhere around three years of age, he described how a Corsair plane reacted upon takeoff, always pulling to the left, and that particular war plane’s tires and tendencies for them wear out.

His parents eventually discovered a close correspondence between James’ statements and the death of a World War II pilot named Jack Larson. They eventually tracked Jack down and the veteran remembered Huston who was a pilot and friend. He described how Huston’s plane hit by Japanese gunfire and he saw the explosion when on the plane’s nose. Jack confirmed they both took off from the aircraft carrier Natoma, and saw Huston’s plane crash in the ocean, reporting that the nose was on fire.

Little James told his parents his last images from that past life was the sky covered by water, and his feet trying to kick the plane’s clear canopy open, and then nothing.

It gives me chills.

They released a book titled, Soul Survivor: The Reincarnation Of A World War II Fighter Pilot.

Here’s one of many interesting studies of their fascinating story: https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-studies/wp-content/uploads/sites/360/2017/04/REI42-Tucker-James-LeiningerPIIS1550830716000331.pdf

And a detailed, well-researched article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1209795/Reincarnated-Our-son-World-War-II-pilot-come-life.html

The more I researched that youngster who is now an adult, it reminded me of another account I read way back when I was in college. It revolved around an Indian girl, Shanti Devi, who was born in 1926.

Not long after she learned to speak, Shanti told her parents about a past life in a town neither she nor her parents had ever been to. Small events reminded her of former memories in India, such as foods she enjoyed, or the clothes she used to wear.

As the years passed, Shanti remembered her name in a past life was Lugdi, and she died shortly after delivering a son in 1925. She even added details about labor pains and surgical procedures she endured. She described in detail the shops and streets in town, and though she refused to reveal her husband’s name, the youngster described a man with fair skin, a wart on his left cheek, and wore reading glasses.

At around age ten, an uncle decided to investigate her continuing and detailed claims about a past life in Mathura,75 miles away. Her story panned out, and the man she insisted was her husband existed. They took Shanti there, hiring a driver to follow her directions without question.

She led them directly to her former house. Devi’s father went in first, and in an effort to trip her up, had the man’s relative come forward, telling her it was her former husband. She said no, it was his her “husband’s” brother, but when Pandit Kedarnath Chaube came to the door, she threw her arms around him and wept, shocking everyone. She said he was her husband, and even identified others by name, including children and the child she says she delivered, and other familial relationships. Shani eventually became part of their family and died in 1987.

There are dozens of websites that discuss this story. Here’s one: https://allthatsinteresting.com/shanti-devi

Whether or not you believe these stories or not, or believe in reincarnation, the fact is they are great concepts that can lead to interesting books in hundreds of different ways.

Feel free to steal these ideas because I don’t need ‘em. They are flying in the air all around us.

 

True Crime Thursday – Vicious Vishing by Voice Cloning

Posted on by

Photo credit: Jason Rosewell, Unsplash

By Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear.

That saying has been attributed to sources like Benjamin Franklin and Edgar Allen Poe. It’s appeared in song lyrics like Leon Haywood’s “Believe Half of What You See (and None of What You Hear)” and the third verse of the immortal Marvin Gaye classic, “I Heard It Through The Grapevine.”

Today, those wise words are even truer because of Voice Cloning, a new tool created by Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the cyber-scammer’s toolkit.

Phishing and Vishing are scams where criminals contact victims, often posing as a bank, reputable business, government agency, hospital, law enforcement, or other entity in order to gain access to your personal and/or financial information.

Phishing contacts victims by email, urging you to open an infected attachment or click on a link that downloads malware. Phishing attacks are generally sophisticated and massive in scale, targeting thousands of businesses and individuals at a time using automation.

Reportedly 74% of organizations in the US have been successfully targeted by phishing attacks.

Vishing (AKA voice phishing) is when a scammer contacts the victim by phone, impersonating a law officer, banker, charity, etc. who convinces you to verbally share your confidential information. The caller ID is spoofed, making the call appear to come from a legitimate source like a bank, Social Security Administration, credit card company, etc.

Vishing requires a scammer to contact one victim at a time, to persuade them to give up sensitive personal and financial information on the phone, making it less efficient than phishing.

However, vishing can still be devastatingly effective, especially now thanks to Voice Cloning. AI can take a sample of someone’s voice and create speech that’s impossible to tell from the real person.

Voice cloning is a boon for scams like Family Emergency, Friend Stranded Overseas, or Grandchild in Trouble. Scammers harvest voice samples of your loved one from YouTube, TikTok, and other online sources.

They can also call the person to record their voice or even use their outgoing voicemail message.

In a few seconds, criminals can download enough of a person’s voice to create a convincing imitation.

Now when “Johnny” calls Grandma saying he was in a car accident and needs bail money, the voice is identical to the real Johnny. That triggers panic, and the victim is more likely to act without thinking. And lose money in the process.

“Johnny” will ask for gift cards, cryptocurrency, or want you to wire money. Once you do, the funds are instantly transferred to the scammer and the transaction can’t be reversed.

Your money is gone.

How do you protect yourself against a voice that sounds exactly like your loved one?

The FTC advises:

“Don’t trust the voice. Call the person who supposedly contacted you and verify the story. Use a phone number you know is theirs. If you can’t reach your loved one, try to get in touch with them through another family member or their friends.”

A simple low-tech safeguard is to have a password or code that only you and your family knows. If something about a call with a loved one sounds suspicious, ask them for the password.

But be careful how you select a code. Criminals often scour social media accounts for clues to possible passwords.

If you post a photo of “my dog Spot” and choose that for your password, it could be guessed.

Speaking of Spot, to wrap up this post on a light note, does anyone remember the old Cal Worthington TV commercials that always featured “My Dog Spot”?

The last Worthington family car dealership was sold in February, 2023. End of an era but Cal’s jingle lives on.

~~~

TKZers: Has someone you know been taken in by voice cloning?

Can you think of ways to use Voice Cloning in mystery, suspense, or thriller fiction?

~~~

 

Investigator Tawny Lindholm plunges into an alternate reality where video is fake but death is real.

Please check out my new thriller Deep Fake Double Down.

Tell Don’t Show

Posted on by

Tell Don’t Show
Terry Odell

Something we’ve all heard since we took writing seriously was “Show, Don’t Tell.” It’s been called the “Golden Rule” of writing. Showing gets readers involved with the characters. Showing connects readers to the characters. Readers will experience things along with the characters instead of just watching. All that is true enough, but as with any rule, there are exceptions.

Showing everything can be exhausting for the reader.

I was reading Michael Connelly’s Desert Star. I think the man’s earned enough kudos over the years to be considered someone we can learn from. Although I prefer reading a deeper point of view, Connelly’s an exceptional storyteller, and I don’t mind stepping back. He still draws me into the story. And you know what? He’s not afraid to TELL his readers stuff.

Michael Connelly

Image from Wikimedia Commons, by Mark Coggins

While showing might create a connection, there are times when you don’t need to show things. Times when your shouldn’t show things. As Lee Child (and probably others) said, “Write the slow parts fast and the fast parts slow.” Telling is a way to get through the slow parts. The parts where there are things the reader ought to know, but not in the same way as the action parts of the story.

Example:

Harry Bosch is looking at a cold case file. This is how Connelly writes it:

The crime scene photographer had been thorough and had taken dozens of “environmental” shots depicting the victim’s entire home—inside and out—at the time of the murder. These included shots of the contents of closets and cabinets and drawers and of photos framed and hung on the walls. All of this allowed the case investigators ready access to the entire environment of the killing location. It also allowed them to better understand the victim by seeing how she had set up her home. It gave them an idea of the things that were important to her in life.

Did we need to see every picture? See Bosch’s visceral reaction to each of them? Experience what it feels like to turn pages in a binder? How much would it add to the story? Probably very little. But now, when we see the term environmental shots later in the book, we’ll know exactly what the term means.

It’s tough to “tell” well in a close POV, because you’re deep in the head of the character, experiencing everything as though there’s a movie camera embedded in his brain. Getting information across to readers when you’ve got characters on the page who already know the terminology, or how something works, ends up being “As You Know, Bob” speech. I’ve worked my way around it by bringing in a naïve character if possible, so she can ask questions and my in-the-know characters can answer them. There’s also no rule that you can’t step back from deep POV a little when it’s necessary for pacing.

Here’s a way Connelly dealt with the issue. Ballard is bringing Bosch up to speed.

“… Back then, the ODs were leaning on the theater director, a guy named Harmon Harris, because they heard he and Wilson had an affair a year before her death. They thought maybe there was bad blood between them. Harris denied the affair and they dropped it when he offered up Beecher as an alibi.”

She knew that Bosch would know that OD was cold case lingo for original detective.

OK, so we get a quick peek into her thoughts, and we readers now know what OD means and Connelly can use the term whenever he needs to.

And another, this from Echo Park:

“I have no idea, Olivas. What?”

“Your fifty-ones from Gesto.”

He was referring to the Investigative Chronology, a master listing kept by date and time of all aspects of a case, ranging from an accounting of detectives’ time and movement to notations on routine phone calls and messages to media inquiries and tips from citizens. Usually, these were handwritten with all manner of shorthand and abbreviations employed as they were updated each day, sometimes hourly. Then, when a page became full, it was typed up on a form called a 52, which would be complete and legible when and if the case ever moved into the courts, and lawyers, judges and juries needed to review the investigative files. The original handwritten pages were then discarded.

Harry would think of this in far less time than it took me to type it, but readers can accept that the simple reference to the “fifty-ones” would send his mind to what they were. Readers have the information, and it’s presented a lot more efficiently than using “show.”

Throughout his books, Connelly gives readers a lot of information about how the police department works, and he manages to keep readers—at least this reader—willing to accept that Harry Bosch is thinking these things, be it the history of the Parker Center in LA, where the chief’s office is, or how the desks are arranged in the homicide department. And that, to me, is the skill. Get the exposition in there without the reader feeling like you’re stopping the story to tell.

What about you, TKZers? Showing? Telling? How do you balance them? Do you even notice, or can you keep things seamless?

Any authors who do telling well?

Cover image of Deadly Relations by Terry OdellAvailable Now in digital, paperback, and audio
Deadly Relations.
Nothing Ever Happens in Mapleton … Until it Does
Gordon Hepler, Mapleton, Colorado’s Police Chief, is called away from a quiet Sunday with his wife to an emergency situation at the home he’s planning to sell. A man has chained himself to the front porch, threatening to set off an explosive.

Terry Odell is an award-winning author of Mystery and Romantic Suspense, although she prefers to think of them all as “Mysteries with Relationships.”

Editor/Janitor

Posted on by

By Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

From 1965 to 1985, the Kalispell Weekly News was great regional paper in northwest Montana. It was owned and operated by George Ostrom, a colorful character who’d been a smokejumper, mountain climber, journalist, author, radio personality, and legendary raconteur. His stories and op-eds were always entertaining and full of folksy, rustic humor.

The masthead of his newspaper read:

George Ostrom, Editor/Janitor.

That masthead always made me smile because it perfectly sums up the life of a small business owner. The title “owner” may sound impressive but that’s also the poor schlub who gets called in the middle of the night when the plumbing stops up.

Indie authors are small business owners and monarchs over their writing realm. My kingdom consists of a messy dining room table, littered with sticky notes, piled with draft manuscripts, cluttered with invoices, ISBN records, etc. My throne is a secretary chair on casters with a donut cushion. The royal duties are a to-do list that grows longer every day. As fast as I cross off one task, five more are added, each requiring a different skillset.

Today is launch day for Deep Fake Double Down, # 8 in my Tawny Lindholm Thriller series. By the eighth book, the publication process should be polished, refined, and trouble-free, right?

Wrong, dead wrong.

Each new book presents its own set of unforeseen and unforeseeable problems.

Deep Fake Double Down had its fair share of (mis)adventures.

Here’s a synopsis: A corrupt prison warden covers up the murder of an inmate by creating deep fake “evidence” against an innocent female corrections officer. The videos go viral on social media and soon every cop in Montana is gunning for her. 

Initial drafts went well with encouraging comments from critique groups.

Target release date was January, 2023. Notice the past tense.

The story was on a roll, about 75% done. Then in December, my beloved Windows 7 computer died. Here is the obituary.

Now I had to learn a new Mac computer with unfamiliar commands. At the same time, the all-important third-act climax of the story needed to be written. The process forced me to reach deep inside my creative soul…

…to come up with adequate curse words to express my frustration!

The working title “Deep Fake” was dramatic, punchy, and hinted at the story conflict. My initial research found only a few books using “Deep Fake” in the title. All were several years old, and one was categorized as “humorous erotica.” Whatever that is, it wasn’t a comparable for my story.

My talented cover artist Brian Hoffman designed an excellent cover here:

I checked off those tasks on the to-do list…or so I thought.

Now to research. Artificial intelligence and deep fakes are complex and rapidly changing. The more research I did, the more I knew I was over my head. I had to find experts to guide me. The story needed enough detail to give readers a taste of technology but without slowing down the momentum of a fast-paced thriller.

With seven previous books, I’d been fortunate to find experts easily. From drones to elder fraud watchdogs to fire lookout towers, specialists were willing and generous about sharing their knowledge.

Not this time.

I reached out to authors, engineers, and software designers whose articles I’d studied. I explained I was writing a thriller about deep fakes and asked if they’d review passages for accuracy and authenticity.

Two initially agreed. A month later, the first one ghosted me. Two months later, the other one, from a major university, unexpectedly had to clear it with the “compliance department.” She wrote back that the compliance department told her manuscript review was not permissible because they were an “FFRD center.”

What’s FFRD? I had to look it up.

Turns out it’s “federally funded research and development.” Not sure what that has to do with a fictional story but no means no. Scratch that source.

Contacted more experts in the field. No responses. Clock ticking.

Back to the title. If my book had launched in January as originally planned, the title Deep Fake would have been fine. But…

…in March, bestseller Ward Larsen released his new political thriller entitled…Deep Fake. With deep fakes prominent in the news, obviously I wasn’t the only writer eager to tackle the subject. Ward beat me to the punch and I’m glad he’s doing well with his book.

However, now my book needed a new title. I enlisted help from a focus group of trusted writing colleagues. They came up with a slew of good alternatives. Brian created a new cover with the new title, Deep Fake Double Down.

A month before release, I put the book up for pre-order, certain I could finish the remaining items on the to-do list before the deadline to upload the final manuscript.

Some parts of the process fell into perfect alignment. Steve Hooley came up with a terrific marketing idea. Recently he wrote about side hustles for writers, including his own hand-crafted legacy wood pens.

The McGuffin in my story is a secret mine of rare Montana Yogo sapphires, a treasure that’s worth killing for.

Deep Fake Sapphire Pen by Steve Hooley

Steve kindly offered to create a custom design as a marketing premium: the “Deep Fake Sapphire pen.” What a thrill when these arrived in the mail! For a chance to win a beautiful pen and a signed paperback, please visit my website.

Other marketing opportunities arose, including several speaking invitations, a magazine interview, and a radio chat with TKZ’s own John Gilstrap and his cohorts, retired Admiral Bill Stubblefield and Rob Mario.  Many thanks, John!

Meanwhile, the clock was ticking but I still hadn’t connected with any deep fake/AI experts.

Finally, an astrophysicist friend connected me with TED fellow Peter Haas, but he wasn’t available to talk until a week before the deadline. Gulp.

Peter’s input was worth the wait. He corrected info that was outdated because of new developments. He taught me cool new jargon like NerF (neural radiance field, not to be confused with those squishy game balls), Tor (a web browser that makes you anonymous), and exit node (a relay to anonymously send and receive traffic on the net).

The explosion of deep fakes has understandably led to increasing distrust of news sources. Peter talked about two groups with the mission to protect provenance of information. Content Authenticity Initiative and Project Origin are supported by Adobe and Microsoft/EDC/New York Times respectively, using digital watermarks to verify that videos, photos, and other digital data do indeed come from the sources they are purported to be from.

Don’t worry—the above won’t be on the test!

Needless to say, Peter’s input required frantic rewrites of several scenes.

At the dizzying rate that AI is changing, it’s impossible to stay current. The best a writer can do is choose a moment in time and set the story at that moment.

Remaining tasks on the to-do list:

  1. Read the entire book out loud.
  2. Final, final, final proofread (this occurs after copyeditor proofreads).
  3. Format the ebook. Here are screen shots of two formatting styles offered by Draft2Digital and Kindle Create.

Side note: you can format with D2D then upload the epub or pdf to Kindle. Although I prefer the appearance of D2D templates (this example is called “Grime”), the Amazon process goes smoother if you use Create to format the Kindle version.

 

 

 

 

 

 

4 Final, final, final read-through of the preview.

5. Upload to Kindle Direct Publishing (KDP).

6. Upload to other markets through D2D (using the Grime template).

Another side note: In a perfect world, the ebook and paperback would go on sale the same day. Rather than delay release until the paperback was ready, I decided it was more important to meet the April 25 launch date for the ebook.

  1. Format the paperback (formatting for ebook and print book are different).
  2. Upload the paperback to KDP.
  3. Order a proof copy, which is scheduled to arrive in a few days.

Two days before the deadline, I crossed off the remaining items on the to-do list except for:

10, After reviewing the paperback proof, hit the final “Publish paperback” button.

11. Order a box of author copies.

12. Stock the warehouse (otherwise known as the fireplace hearth in our home).

Yes, I proudly wear the crown of Queen in this Publishing Empire. My masthead reads: Author/editor/researcher/spell-checker/formatter/publisher/marketer/inventory control/warehouse stocker/bookkeeper/janitor.

Excuse me, Her Highness must now go vacuum.

~~~

TKZers: what are your various job titles? Which is your favorite? Which is the one you dread?

~~~

 

 

For a chance to win the Deep Fake Sapphire pen and a signed copy of Deep Fake Double Down, please join my mailing list here.

Buy links for Amazon      Other online booksellers

 

Revision and Omar Khayyam

Posted on by

The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.

* * *

That powerful verse from The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam must surely resonate with every adult of a certain age who reads it.

Fortunately for us on The Kill Zone, however, Mr. Khayyam wasn’t writing about writing. Authors can indeed go back and cancel half a line, delete a few sentences, or even start the whole darn thing over from scratch. So, let’s talk about revision.

* * *

There are a variety of opinions on the need to revise a manuscript. Here are a few:

Clearly, not everyone agrees on the need to revise, or how much time should be spent on it. But for those who do favor spending that time, how should they approach the revision process?

* * *

In my limited experience, revision is a serious part of my writing. Although I don’t keep detailed time sheets, I’m guessing I spend at least half my time revising. (When I talk about revision, I’m not talking about fixing grammar, typos, or punctuation mistakes. Those can be fixed by software and good editors. To me, revision concerns the story itself, the way it ebbs and flows, how the underlying theme plays out, and the rhythm of the words.)

My first draft is an act of getting the story out of me and onto the page. Some of it may be good, but some of it is just plain vanilla story-telling without any spice. Revision is an opportunity to transform that first story idea into an entertaining, thought-provoking novel. But it’s also a balancing act. How do I keep the voice, the tone, the essence of the thing I created while changing it? It’s like trying to make sure you don’t spoil the wine while polishing the cup it’s in.

* * *

There are plenty of books and online resources with information about how to revise, but here are a few pieces of advice I’ve found helpful:

  1. To get a clear perspective of your work, take some time off between finishing the first draft and starting the revision process. (Sue Coletta wrote a TKZ post on Critical Distance last week.)
  2. After taking the break (which may last a week or a month), read through the first draft at one sitting, if possible. Some craft experts recommend printing the manuscript so that it’s easy to make notes on the pages.
  3. Review the overall arc of the plot: I use Scrivener’s outline feature to get the number of words in each chapter, and I add a sentence or two to describe the timeframe and goal for each chapter. Then I download this to a spreadsheet and calculate the percentage through the book for each milestone. I may rearrange the chapters (easy to do in Scrivener) or even delete sections that don’t serve the story. I may add new scenes or chapters.
  4. Revisit the characters. Is the main character well-defined and can you trace his/her arc through the plot? Do the secondary characters add spice to the story?
  5. Reread each scene. Does it tell a story in itself? Does it end with a reason for the reader to turn the page? Is the dialogue snappy?
  6. Check the pacing. Does the pacing give the reader a chance to catch his/her breath after a tense scene?
  7. Back to the beginning. Review the first sentence, the first paragraph, the first page of the manuscript. Will this hook a reader?
  8. Get feedback from Beta readers. Their first-time-through reactions are invaluable.
  9. Never Give Up

This list appears to be linear, but my process is more iterative. I go back through steps #3-#7 as many times as I think I need to, and I employ a developmental editor and a copy editor to help me refine my work. I also have the good fortune to have a novelist husband who listens to my concerns and helps me figure out how to solve all the little problems that pop up as I make my way through this labyrinth called Writing.

  • So, TKZers: How important is revision to you?
  • What steps do you take to revise your manuscript?
  • What percentage of your writing time is spent revising?

Brave Words of Wisdom

Posted on by

In my experience, a vital part of creating a fictional narrative is being willing to screw up when writing, followed by figuring out how to fix your mistakes, as well as understanding that very few stories are truly perfect, and, finally, knowing when to trash what you’ve written and begin anew. If I’m not careful, perfectionism and fear of failure can hold me back from creating fiction.

Today’s trio of words of wisdom is about being brave in your writing (and rewriting) and being willing to embrace mistakes, fixing what you can, and learning from what you can’t fix.

First Clare Langely-Hawthrone talks about her revision process. Then Boyd Morrison explains why it is important to not avoid making mistakes at all costs when writing. Finally, Joe Hartlaub shares another author’s courage in being willing to discard a novel that didn’t work.

I view revising as adding the second and third coats of paint to a project – each layer adds a subtly and a depth to the characters, to the setting, and to the themes that swirl around the plot. What I find the biggest challenge is avoiding what I call ‘tinkering’ – changing my mind over a minute plot point only to find it has rolling ramifications and then (in total disgust) I find I have to go all the way back and return it all to the way it was. I guess this is what people call a ‘learning process’ but I seem to be a bit ‘learning challenged’ when it comes to this – and still find myself adding complexity where NO MORE is needed! ‘Keep It Simple Stupid’ is a motto I need to have branded to my forehead.

Those who want to see the writing process in action can find me sitting in my writing studio, a converted garage in the back of our house, bleary eyed at one o’clock in the morning, determined to finish the next chapter as I’m ‘on a roll’. I might be on the internet checking on a historical reference, looking up the architecture for a historic home or searching The Times database for an event the latest fashions for that year. I might even be using the delete key to liberal advantage as part of the revision process involves getting rid of all the extraneous stuff that I find stops the flow of the narrative (sometimes bringing tears to my eyes if it was a point of historical research I spent hours on!)

Yesterday I deleted a whole chapter – painful but necessary. I then merged two minor characters to streamline the plot. I decided one scene moved like molasses and I got bogged down in worrying whether the house should have gothic archways or not…Time passed. It was one am…Time to call it quits till the red pen, the axe and the delete key were brought back out to do it all again.

Ah the joys of revision. You just got to be brave…

Clare Langley-Hawthorne—September 15, 2008

 

In writing, trying to eliminate mistakes is the mistake. Yes, there are objective errors that you want to avoid in a novel. Don’t put a safety on a Glock pistol. Don’t make your continuity and timelines inconsistent. Don’t change the name of a character halfway through. These are indisputable mistakes, and yet I have seen them all in novels. Bestselling novels.

In one of my own books, THE ARK, I explained that the elevators of a slowing airplane lowered to maintain altitude. Of course, this is incorrect. The elevators should go up to pitch the aircraft up. I’ve flown planes myself. I have a degree in mechanical engineering during which I studied fluid dynamics. I know that it was wrong, and I still made the mistake. No one—including my brother, who is a former Air Force pilot—caught the error until the book was in stores. No one died, and only one reader has ever brought it up (in fact, it’s the only reason I know the mistake happened). However, the error still bugs me.

What’s more insidious for a writer is the avoidance of subjective mistakes. We want to get everything right in a story: characters, plot, twists, literary merit, creativity, emotional resonance. We want the story to be perfect, and impatient people like me want it to be perfect from the moment we start typing it.

But it never is. It can’t be. Ever. I bet you’d only be able to come up with a tiny list of  stories that didn’t have a single thing you’d change. And even then, go look at the Amazon reviews for those books. You’ll find at least a few people (and sometimes hundreds of them) who don’t agree with your definition of perfection.

Voltaire is considered the originator of the phrase, “Perfect is the enemy of good.” We’re afraid that if our story isn’t perfect, it won’t be good enough. The idea for a novel that we have in our minds never comes out on the page like we imagine. Sometimes we can’t write at all because we’ll be disappointed that it won’t come out perfectly formed on the first try.

What we have to come to terms with is that making mistakes is part of the process. That’s how we learn. That’s how we make art. My wife, who is sometimes frustrated when I delay delivering pages to her to edit, gave me a T-shirt for Christmas that says, “Even if it’s crap, just get it on the page.” That notion can be freeing if you take it to heart. You can’t make it better if it doesn’t exist in the first place.

I’m getting more comfortable with making mistakes, but it’s a daily struggle. The lesson slowly worming its way into my head is that to fixate on creating the perfect novel results in creating nothing. So I’m learning to focus on the right thing: getting a story out that reflects my voice, where even the flaws and imperfections are unique to me.

Boyd Morrison—April 22, 2013

 

You may know of John Clarkson. He is an extremely talented author whose novels, particularly those in his current James Beck series, stand as an example of what the job of writing looks like when it is perfectly and professionally done. John intermittently blogs and recently told a story about his current work-in-progress. I will summarize it but you really need to read John’s brief dissertation to get the full flavor of what happened. John describes the process of writing what would have been the third novel in the Beck series, and realizing, upon completion, that it didn’t work (and why). He concluded that it could not be fixed so he trashed it and started over. His account is illuminating, tragic, hopeful, and ultimately inspiring. Oh, and it is very brave, too. John, in workmanlike, understated prose gives us the reasons why what would have been his latest novel didn’t come together. Ouch. How many of us would willingly and intentionally exhibit what we perceived to be a screwup on the internet town square in a forthright manner and without reservation? I know of at least one person who would pause before doing so. He’s typing these words right now.

The truth is that John is not alone in what he went through, though he is certainly walking point when describing the experience. Not every written volume of every successful series makes it to the finish line.  They lay on the blacktop and the finish line rises up to meet them. Sometimes being successful is as much knowing what doesn’t work as what does work, and being brave enough to pull the pin, rather than hoping that no one will notice. There is a term used for these books which don’t make pass the author’s own white glove test. Such manuscripts are called “trunk novels.” I am reasonably sure that every successful author has at least one. I daresay that we will probably not walk with Jack Reacher down every mile of middle America that he traverses, or that we see the account of every mystery that Spenser or Bryant and May encounter and/or solve. What is different here is that John takes us through the process of determining whether the book goes to the agent or the trunk. It’s not a pretty sight, but it’s an informative one.

Joe Hartlaub—July 13, 2019

***

  1. Do you revise bravely? How do you kill your darlings?
  2. How do you deal with perfectionism? Do you embrace your mistakes?
  3. Have you ever had to trash an entire novel and start over? How did you handle that?

***

Brand-new librarian Meg Booker is just supposed to be checking out books.

Instead, it’s the patrons who are being checked out–permanently.

A Shush Before Dying releases in ebook on April 29, 2023, with print to follow.

Preorder from these retailers.

Your Elusive Creative Genius

Posted on by

What’s the source of human creativity? Where’s the house of imagination? The plane of intelligence where endless thoughts are stored and originality is delivered upon demand?

I’m sure every writer—alive or long gone—has pondered these questions, and I’m not sure if anyone’s discovered the truth. The truth, that is, whether there’s one single answer. I sure don’t pretend to have that answer, but I’m comfortable there’s some sort of… call it a non-tangible muse.

What got me going on this morning’s piece is spending the past two months experimenting with artificial intelligence (AI) as a writing aid. A creativity tool to help with writing research and, to some degree, with creative content production. The result is a new release titled OpenAI/ChatGPT—A Fiction Writer Talks Shop with a Bot.

My conclusion was simple. Although AI is a game-changer in the content writing world, it in no way comes close to what an inspired human being can produce. So that circles back to my opening questions. What’s the source of creativity, imagination, and original  thought? I’m certain it’s certainly not a bot.

I’ll defer to Elizabeth Gilbert. She’s the author of the successful (by anyone’s standards) book Eat, Pray, Love that became a movie starring Julia Roberts. I just rewatched a marvelous TedTalk given by Ms. Gilbert called Your Elusive Creative Genius. You can view it here.

Gilbert reflects on why her book was so successful. She also ponders a psychological follow-up where she felt she was doomed in never being able to produce better work. “I was afraid to top that. Paralyzed by rejection where I’d die on a scrapheap of broken dreams, my mouth filled with the ash of dismal failure.”

She felt her greatest success was behind her, and she talked of why artistry leads to anguish with so many creative minds fading away into a tragic death count.

Elizabeth Gilbert discusses the source of creativity. She talks of Greek and Roman history where the Greeks believed Damon entities inspired creativity and the Romans believed creativity dwelled with the Genius. Gilbert then speaks of the Renaissance where the enlightened were certain all human creativity existed right inside the person themselves, not with outside inspiration from their muse.

As Gilbert says, believing humans were at the center of the creative universe brought with it unimaginable expectations because the creative process doesn’t always behave rationally. Isn’t it better, she asks, to share responsibility with another force. Can we divide both success and failure with our muse and credit it when things go right and blame it when things go wrong?

Gilbert’s grasp shows as she speaks of African dancers who transcend into a detached state when inspired by a deity—an inspirational force not of this world. Then she brings it back to earth and wraps up with a look at writing reality.

To be creative and imaginative, Elizabeth Gilbert says, consistently do your job. Show up, do your piece, and the inspiration—the elusive creative genius will come to you.

Kill Zoners—What’s your creative source? Where does your creativity come from?