Paige Hawthorne: Blog

Just so you know … I actually read every one of my SOL emails. And, I occasionally copy & paste one in my Futures folder. These saved letters might contain a good tip on writing, they could suggest different styles, explain the inner workings of the reader scoring system. Or otherwise engage me.

I also cache some of the recommended-authors suggestions. A couple of you boyos promoted a local writer's first story:

"An Equine of an Alternative Hue" by Danny Sildenafil.

His pen name alone signals a sense of humor. And his story description contains what is, I assume, an on-purpose misspelling. In any case, I got a kick out of the Damon Runyon paean.

Danny's score is lower even than mine, but I don't pay attention to scores anyway. Who does?

Paige

As my reader ratings continue to plummet, it becomes time for introspection. For serious inner-examination. I have to ask myself … what the fuck is wrong with you guys?

Prose written at the Winter caliber should have readers throwing confetti parades for me.

But perhaps there's a low-score clue buried in the hate-mails. One consistent gripe is that my stories meander around too much. Why can't I start a theme and just see it through? Before starting on another narrative?

Several readers tell me they've given up reading me because of this zig-zag pattern.

So, I may experiment with "Winter's Voyage" by, sigh, going A, B, C. Who knows, maybe it'll be an improvement. But if I don't like the result, that emended version will never breath SOL oxygen.

Paige

A guy told me it's better to write: 'Winter said, "You are so wrong."'

That version is preferable to: '"You are so wrong," Winter said.'

He claims it's better to put the 'who' in front of the quote rather than behind it. It's a subtle reader prompt, an aid, to make narrative flow a bit more smoothly.

Of course boys have been telling me a lot of stuff for a lot of years, hopeful hands sliding up toward hopeful goals.

Paige

When I'm reading a pretty compelling book, I find myself having imaginary conversations with the writer. We discuss character quirks. Plot detours. Certain lines and phrases that are particularly felicitous.

I find myself rather erudite on a surprising number of topics. In fact, I'm sometimes so eloquent that certain authors, alive or dead, encourage me to pursue a writing career.

Some of my best conversational encounters have been with John D. MacDonald, Janet Evanovich, Michael Connelly (Lincoln Lawyer), Lawrence Block (the Hit Man series for some reason), Thomas Perry, P. G. Wodehouse (I speak in an English accent of course) and Donald Westlake (especially John Dortmunder).

How about you guys?

Paige

Apparently someone wrote a laudatory review praising my writing skills. Several readers (a couple of them gleefully) explained that this is the kiss of doom.

There seems to be a contingent of folks in here who react negatively to the positive. Readers, many of whom wouldn't have otherwise read my stories, celebrate their contrarian nature and low-score me.

The teeming masses - - go Teem go! - - become resentful of those who are praised.

Is this true? Or an urbane legend?

Not that I pay the slightest attention to reader scores.

Hmm … now that I consider the nature of this treachery … obviously the favorable review was penned by an envious author, jealous of my scores, and determined to undermine them.

No, that's paranoia at work.

A reasoned, meditative, investigation will surely reveal that it's not a single author who is sabotaging my efforts. It's obviously a consortium of many writers, banded together in common cause, who fear my literary efforts will outshine theirs.

Zounds!

Paige

P. S. This devilish ploy will not succeed. I am toiling away at "Winter's Voyage" despite the duplicity rampant in here.