Live to Write and Live to Read

Live to Write and Live to Read

Live to Write - I'm over 70 years old and that is my motto.
Write to Live - A life that would be otherwise unavailable to me.

Live to read - I hope my audience believes that. I'm retired and still learning everyday.
           A life without reading is dull and uninformed.
Read to Live - a life/story you want to discover that is unique, and yet, obscure to you.
           The key to discovery is exploring the written world, fact, fiction and fantasy.

Why Noir Mysteries Work

Noir Mysteries as a genre were created during the struggling times before World War ii. The world seemed broken then, as men with no morals made lots of money while good men seemed to struggle to get by. In America, the economy teetered on the edge of prosperity, and looked into the deep crevice of the depression.

Tough men took what they wanted and good men were victims. The world did not look past men as women were an afterthought, a temptation, or a side story on the way to a conclusion. They stayed home and raised families. Only good girls and bad girls existed, and neither was a fleshed out character. 

Yet, the noir stories worked so well, because somehow during the course of the mystery, evil was thwarted and justice preserved. The world returned to some balance of fairness and “the good guys” or at least, "the less bad guys" won.

It was every reader's wish for the real world to correspond to the written one. 

Eighty years later, the genre can still work. Madoff, Strehli, and insider trading the cheaters make profits and the honest suffer. When a President declares himself rich even though he declared bankruptcy in the past - building his empire on the backs of his broken creditors - and when police shoot innocent people without much justification – they always seem to have their body cams off when they do it. The world of the noir has become real life. We retrogress back to the world as it was in the 1930's and 1940's, but with the modern threat of environmental pollution recognized as fact not fiction. 

Reality offers justification for the noir mysteries on my pages. 

In my written world, I want a person who is Machiavellian enough to consider the path to justice immaterial, as long as justice is serviced. Forget the map, trespass, scam and swindle in the name of justice, but get it done right at the conclusion. 

I don’t want that in real life, but in fiction, I am so ready for Sam Cochran and Catherine Worthington. Let’s twist the noir paradigm and rebalance world through them. They are females who matter, because they won't let the world throw them aside. Welcome to the Sam-Cat mystery series.

L.A. Preschel  

the Arts and the Crafts of Writers  by L.A. Preschel.

This essay was originally written for Clued-in the newsletter of the Central Jersey Chapter of Sisters in Crime. I reprint here because ... no other reason than I want to. 

When I first became involved in writing fiction (at the age of 50), an editor/friend noticed that I was grammatically challenged. My excuse is that from 2nd to 4th grade in the Bronx school system, they experimented with a new way to teach reading. I never learned phonetics and I never was taught grammar. 

My friend who edited my first attempt at fiction (a vampire manuscript that sucked my life's blood, but will never see the light of day?) physically brought me to Barnes & Nobles and pointed me to "the little book," The Elements of Styleby Strunk & White. She felt this was a rite of passage involving editors and writers since the middle of the twentieth century. 

Report/author Charles Osgood is quoted on the cover of the little bookthusly, "... still a little book, small enough and important enough to carry in your pocket, as I carry mine." 

I have had several editors since my initiation rite into authorship. Everyone has said to me at one time or another, "Where is your Strunk and White. You have no idea how to punctuate English." And sadly, they are right, but my French is even worse. I keep the little book near me, and if I have a grammatical question, I look at it. Often, I have no idea that I have mis-punctuated. I guess that is what editors were created for.  

In the forward to the fourth edition of Strunk & White, p. x, Roger Angell wrote concerning the rules and concepts within the little book: "How simple they look, set down here in White's last chapter: 'Write in a way that comes naturally.' 'Revise and rewrite.' 'Do not explain too much,' and the rest; above all, the cleansing, clarion 'Be clear.' 

Strunk & Whiteis a great reference for writers. As evidence, I offer its section headings: 

1. Elementary Rules of Usage; it contains eleven simple rules with examples. 

2. Elementary Principles of Composition: 10 more rules to help a writer communicate to the reader. It instructs while not being condescending or complex. It has more examples.  

3. A Few Matters of Form: he details the usage or avoidance of colloquialisms, exclamations, headings, hyphens, numerals, formatting, quotations, references, etc.

4. Words and Expressions commonly misused: i.e. affect vs. effect, etc.   

5. An Approach to Style: a discussion of how an author goes about maximizing his or her impact on the reader. He emphasizes story telling is communicating an event clearly and concisely without the reader's attention or interest being broken, and without the author interposing their image/ego between the reader and the story. The reader must readily absorb the story without being distracted or losing interest. If the reader is willing to put down your manuscript, you have failed as a writer.   

The history of the little bookis interesting as well. William Strunk Jr. was a professor at Cornell in 1919 and taught English. E.B. White - the future author of Charlotte's Web- took his classes. They developed a friendship. Strunk's self-published the little book. It was universally known on campus, but unknown elsewhere. Being a self-published author, we should consider him ahead of the curve, a trendsetter, but he had no public relations department, and no internet presence. The little bookwas not yet a universally praised text. It wasn't carried by Amazon prime or Mississippi regular. That's a stream of thought joke, sorry.  

E.B. White, Strunk's student, went on to write for The New York Times, and eventually his writing and his looks caught the eye of Katherine Sergeant Angell. She wrote for the New Yorker, as well as being the fiction editor for that magazine. She convinced her boss, Chief Editor Harold Ross that he should hire E.B. as a staff writer. 

The notoriously shy White was seduced by the New Yorker, and Katherine, who became his wife after she divorced her first husband, Ernest Angell. With the marriage to Katherine, E.B. became the step-father of the above-mentioned Roger Angell - a famous sportswriter who also worked for the New Yorker under Chief Editor William Shawn. Roger eventually became the fiction editor at the New Yorker- almost like incest or a soap opera, As the World Press Turns? 

In 1959, with Mr. Strunk no longer living, Macmillian obtained the rights to the little book from Oliver Strunk, but the text needed revision and updating. Mr. White took on the job having previously written an article for the New Yorker(1957) concerning the little bookand it value. It had been revised in 1935 by Edward A. Tenney in association with William Strunk Jr., and so the third and fourth editions were revised by E.B. White. However, the New Yorkermagazine seems to have had a large part in making this wonderful text (sold for under $10) known to writers and educators across America. I recommend it for your literary library.           

The Elements of Style, the fourth edition. Strunk, William Jr. & White, E.B., 2000, 1979. Pearson Boston, et al.  (previous edition 1959, 1972 Macmillian Publishing Co. Inc. New York, N.Y. 

ISBN 10: 0-205-31342-6.          ISBN 13: 978-0-205-31342-6.

Literary Writing is Rembrandt; Noir Mysteries are Rubik’s Cubes

Sometimes I wonder why people “look down on non-literary writing.” To dismiss such people as literary snobs diminishes them, and at the same time, you diminishes the value of your opinion on the subject of writing. Why do they debase the mystery novel as an art form, as if it were a feeble step-sibling of the writing family. 

Professor's pat answers  - the tried and true response - never explain the problem or get an honest answer. They are repetitions of the Great Wiz, don't look at the man behind the curtain. The Great Oz has spoken, accept it at face value and move on.  Yet it is only through producing a transparent thought  process showing the reasoning to your conclusion, that the conclusion becomes significant and reproducible. By the way, it is the reasoning and logic that a reader performs to solve a mystery that makes that form of literature interesting to the reader and involves them in the story.  The reader's participation makes a mystery superior. 

Still, the fact that "literary snobs" look down on pulp fiction, diminishes the snobs and their opinion, for the reasons cited above. It excludes further discussion, because they post it as accepted fact. I don't accept it. Let's forget them, and discuss the merits of Noir mysteries.  

Each genre has a deserved audience, but the audience reads them for different reasons. Occasionally someone like the wonderfully talented James Lee Burke combines flowery expressive language with a good mystery or thriller plot, but the literary audience probably avoids his writing. They ignore an author that holds two Edgar Awards (for two different detectives.). He creates a world the reader can feel, see and live in, as well as any author. Oh and by the way, as per wikipedia: He taught at five different colleges before getting on the tenure track teaching creative writing at Wichita State University, during the 1980's. Not bad credentials for a mystery writer.  

In literary novels, the milieu and the setting are often the greatest character – augmented by the “emotions” portrayed in the story. “Heathcliff” anyone? Historicals make statements about society and life the way it was. Some literary fiction opines about the way life still is. The audience lives in the past or see the light about today universe from the observer’s position. Inert, inactive, passive. The reader trespasses inside the body of the author - as if the author was a pod from the Invasion of the bodies snatchers, and the reader's soul crept inside that pod for the duration of the book.         

Literary writing excites me the way some Broadway shows equate the scenery to a character. Oh wasn't that scenery fantastic, worth the price of admission ($250), i.e. Phantom of the Opera or Cats comes to mind. Great scenery is not a strike against a well-written play, but should the audience really notice the scenery? How much character arc can a curtain go through during a performance? I think My Fair Lady probes the human psyche more than Phantom, while not needing the support of spectacular visual aids.

In mysteries, the reader comes with an agenda. He or she will solve the problem. Setting and milieu may contribute but it is the humans - the characters - that run the show. The reader gets involved finding clues and making conclusions, as if he or she were turning the sides of a Rubik’s cube to align them. Psychology, motive, emotions are inspected and probed to learn about human nature, and in so doing, solve the crime. The emotions are not on display, but felt by the reader, if the author is talented. 
The journey offers an education in a way that literary fiction could never do. The reader does not sit back and imagine the green velvet of the trees’ leaves swaying in the breeze, over the placid azure lake while Heathcliff rows his paramour to an islet off shore. And he certainly does not wait four pages to see if they might argue or kiss. The reader in a mystery wonders, what does this action mean? Does he really want to kiss her? Get her alone? Why? What will he do?   

In crime fiction, the reader competes to solve the mystery before the detective. The difference in expectations of the literary reader from the noir mystery fan is the difference between watching Pilates and getting out of breath, or doing Peloton and sweating from the workout competing against the unseen people peddling just as hard on their bike. The high from strong exercise, in my opinion, beats the spectator's awe of watching others compete.    

I may be biased, but that is my take on the two genre, and if you want your mind to get fat by sitting inside a literary character body and watching the story happen, that’s find with me. I’ll be pedaling along on the dark road to the unlit house at the top of the hill in a thunderstorm, looking for ghosts and attempting to survive while finding the next clue.

Oh wait, did I just become literary? 

I’ll sit in the corner for ten minutes until this mood passes. I'll be back.   

L.A. Preschel   

Writer explains what is Noir - Oh Really?

A friend and writer I know, Wallace Stroby had a book launching earlier this week. I was lucky enough to attend it. It was held at the Mysterious Bookshop in lower Manhattan. Everyone likes reading a good mystery, so if you get a chance, you should visit the New York City icon that is the Mysterious Bookshop. While you are there, buy Wallace's newest book: Some Die Nameless. Wallace writes noir female protagonists and Wallace writes well. Yay.

At the launch, an off-hand question was inadvertently raised. As I mentioned in a previous post, many successful and educated writers do so by instinct. The have a distorted or poor understanding of how they reach their audience. Their success is inherent to their essence, which is why they cannot teach it to someone else. It comes naturally. However, they succeed very well and very often when they write. We call those types of people "gifted," and they are.

In discussing Wallace's plot, it was posed that a small crime that the non-detective protagonist tries to solve morphs into a crime on a much larger scale. That idea reminded me of those nested Russian dolls. The off-hand question was how does having a small mystery initiate the protagonist's investigation into a contiguous or related crime that is much larger in scope ala Chinatown, the movie.

An author I respect and who has an MFA from a major university answered, "That is what noir is. A small crime that is in some way related to a crime of a major scale, and the detective is draw into solving the larger crime while attempting to solve the lesser one. The protagonists are ordinary people who get in over their heads." While this is an erudite answer, and is partially true - true in the way that all turtles are amphibians, but not all amphibians are turtles. - it is not a definition of noir.

However, defining noir mystery is not an easy task. Most people know it when they see it, but ... oh that is another literary subject.
Here are a few definitions with the link to the source from which they were harvested.

1. From: besthorrornovels.com/noir 
Noir is horror's hardboiled cousin. Noir, meaning black in French, is a subgenre of mystery that explores gritty, urban landscapes with a cynical detective who uncovers dastardly deeds. The darkness of noir is what lends it so perfectly to the horror genre. Both face dark truths that lie under the guise of normalcy. Both deal with outsiders who see the world as it truly is, be that outsider a hardboiled gumshoe or Frankenstein's monster. When Frankenstein's monster becomes the sardonic investigator, noir horror is born. Of course, that's a pretty simplistic view of the genre.

Noir, as a subgenre, did come from the hardboiled detective novels of the 1940's, but an important distinction between the two is that the protagonist does not need to be a detective or investigator. The protagonist can, in fact, be anyone so long as their attitudes match the gritty setting. Noir horror protagonists are notably outsiders who see the ugly truth of the world they live in. The are generally cynical in nature, and have the potential to be destructive either to themselves or others. Frankenstein's monster, without being a hardboiled gumshoe, is a great example of a horror noir protagonist in that he sees the world as evil and heartless and eventually changes to fit this mold. 

The world, or setting, of horror noir could almost be considered a character itself. Squalid, debauched, typically urban settings are common, brimming with forces that are hostile toward the protagonist. This can be anything from a dark, careless city, like Gotham in the Batman comics, brimming with violence and mayhem to supernatural and otherworldly forces that have no use for humanity. Most importantly, the setting should be just as depraved as the characters and the events that unfold around them.

Another important aspect of noir horror is the tone. As its name suggests, this subgenre is relentlessly dark. The tone of works of horror noir is one of despair and suspicion. Themes often center around greed, corruption, oppression, or revenge, and while happy endings in horror are rare, they are particularly hard to come by in the noir genre.

The above transfers to our genre - pure noir mysteries - quite well. 

Here's more.

2. From: merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noir   
Definition of noir: crime fiction featuring hard-boiled cynical characters and bleak sleazy settings an example of classic noir.

3. From: wikipedia.org/wiki/Noir_fiction 
Noir fiction (or roman noir) is a literary genre closely related to hardboiled genre,[1] with a distinction that the protagonist is not a detective, but instead either a victim, a suspect, or a perpetrator. Other common characteristics include a self-destructive protagonist.[2] A typical protagonist of noir fiction is dealing with the legal, political or other system, which is no less corrupt than the perpetrator, by whom the protagonist is either victimized and/or has to victimize others on a daily basis, leading to a lose-lose situation.

I am Back -- the Return of L.A. Preschel

I have been away for quite a while honing my craft - writing. Some might say you cannot teach an old dog new tricks, but I ain't no dog, just old. So here are some old tricks made new.

During my intermission from actual writing -  in the process of learning to write - some of the people I have worked with were very helpful. My present mystery critiquing group tops that list. I have learn significant lessons - not just punctuation or spelling - isn't that what Grammarly and Spell Check are for.  

I have also read a number of books on how to write. Most were written by people, MFA's aside, who prove the point: those who can't do teach. In literature, the corollary to that theory is those who can't write become literary agents. (For the benefit of all my future agents that was solely a cheap joke. Literary agents are chronic readers. We love ya.)

Many books are written about writing by successful writers who prove they have no concept as to why they are successful. Several of the books on writing were written by famous and/or successful authors who could communicate. In that group, the results of their theories and proposals vary from outstanding to awful or obvious. My meaning of awful, in this case, is not a work filling one with awe. Some, such as Sol Stein or Stephen King, actually understood the art of writing and how to communicate it to their reader. The greatest single précis on writing is Sol Stein's Ten Commandments of Writing. The true art in literature is communicating while holding your reader's interest.  

Two types of writing live in this world. One type is concerned with the writer showing how knowledgeable he or she is. These creatures write primarily in "literary novels." Many of these writers have perfected the information dump - similar in value to perfecting a slug dump. The EPA should burn their books, but instead, people crown them with honors. I don't get it.

These authors feel obligated to communicate their superiority to the reader. Plot, pacing, story, character arc, as well as human interest are all secondary to vocabulary and obtuse logic that even the Navajo Code breakers could not decipher. These books become eligible for prizes, including Nobles and such. Their snooty audience gets on a very high horse and declares any one who writes below this level is a hack or worse yet, a "genre" writer, as if that epithet was a pejorative. I would infer from their statements they have never read James Lee Burke who by the way is a college English professor as was Robert B. Parker. Both these genre authors have prose of the highest order, as do many other "genre writers."

I have been in several groups that follow the tenet literature must be exotic, otherwise it's not real writing. If you can understand the manuscript on the first read, it is not literature. They believe real authors write "Literary masterpieces," because that is the only real writing. They worship a false God.

When you write any manuscript, its utility is served by accessibly. It must communicate an idea or story to your reader. Readers want to journey to places that they do not inhabit in their life. They want to feel and know emotions that they cannot allow in their lives without becoming uncivil. They want to identify with a major character in the story, especially if that character is beyond their life's scope. They want to know what drives that character to perform those acts in that way at this time.

The SAT level of the words used to create that journey is as important to the reader as the vehicle a traveler rides in to get to their journey's end. Chevy versus Rolls Royce, who cares, as long as we reach our destination. From inside the vehicle, it is only important to the passenger that the vehicle move toward the goal. Uber, Lift, cab or private car if it gets there, the rider is happy.

If the words are the vehicle, then the story and plot are the scenery. It is the scenery that interests the passenger on his or her journey. Fancy words and incomprehensible sentence structure are the mud on the windows of the vehicle/story. We can't see out the windows unless they are clear, allowing us accessibility to the scenery.

Reading should be an enjoyable avocation/trip to somewhere new. If you have to look up words constantly or imply their meaning from the context perpetually; if you are required to concentrate intensely to find the meaning; if theme is too arcane and occult, and beyond the concept of the reader, then the author has written a text book, not a novel or a story.

I write noir, hard-boiled feminist detective novels, unrepentant, and proud. I have created Samantha Cochran, a woman who left the NYPD as a gold-shield detective, because of a me-too-situation. She has become a female Sam-Spade-style private investigator. Hired as the in-house detective of Allyson Catherine Worthington, Esquire, (Thank you Rex Stout and Nero.) she fights dirty to reach a just end. I hope that really soon, you will have the opportunity to enjoy her first novel length mystery. Check back here to see where and when it is released.

At this time, the Central Jersey Chapter of Sisters in Crime's short story anthology 30 Shades of Dead, has a Sam Cochran/Catherine Worthington story called Thirty Years to Life. It is available through WC Publishing @ www.OnTargetWords.com/WCPublish.

I am L.A. Preschel and I authorized this message - sorry another bad joke.

Every day Feminist - becoming the Best you can be

There is no age limit to becoming the best you can be.

This is demonstrated by the person we recognize today, Shirley Ann Gordon. She was born in Charleston, South Carolina on March 3rd, 1942. She moved to Newark New Jersey in 1967. She passed recently, but I am sure, she is in a better place. And the super senior arrival in her new home, immediately means heaven is on the upgrade. She won't let it be any other way.

Shirley Ann Gordon was a woman of God, and a mother of 10 children. But she wanted to be more.

She became a licensed evangelist and tended to people's spiritual needs. She cared for other so much that she went back to college and received her degree in social work at the age of 66.

She retired from her work to offer aid and volunteered for a new job, supporting the spirits of others at the VA hospital. She was honored by the Mayor of Newark as a "Super Senior," and she certainly was. She was known in her community as "G. Ma."

Not only did she influence her family, the community's children admired her as well. And why not?

As a northern raised white male, I have no understanding of the courage and fortitude it must have taken for a black female in the south in the 1940's and 1950's to maintain any interest in advancement and education. Getting by, surviving was a daily gauntlet to run. Even in the 1960's in Newark, the atmosphere surely was not congenial for a black woman to better herself. Yet, here is the documentation that this spirit overcame the obstacles to achieve. She achieved, not for herself alone, but for the betterment of others.

That is an inspiration in itself. She was known for being outspoken and "telling it like it is." That is the drive that allows you to complete your degree no matter your age or other factors that work against your achievements. She received her college degree at 66 years of age. At that age many people are slowing down, but Shirley was getting revved up.

She is remembered for her love of God, her unique and graceful hats, that accompanied her superbly beautiful dresses. Her presence was felt by the mighty and the minions of America, as demonstrated by Michelle Obama mentioning her on her Twitter page.

In a time when we respect and admire the courage of the famous women celebrities who speak out against abuse, and chauvinistic practices. We should note that every woman can fight this battle in their way. Shirley found her voice in the battle against inequality and bias.  

I have been told by many of my female friends that there are few women over forty-five that have not been put in situations similar to the famous women who have spoken out. They receive inappropriate flirting or requests/demands that are gross, indecent, and illogical. Others were physically assaulted without their consent (rape in any court of law) in a variety of situations beyond their control.

Our culture needs readjustment. We need to respect others, male and female human beings, alike. No human is without merit and talents. No human is lesser than you or greater than you, if you understand God's laws. And I use the word God as all encompassing, because there is no religion in this world that sanctions rape, sodomy and defilement, unless you include Satanism - i.e. that is not a religion, but an anti-religion reactive creation.  

Ego-centric power plays must be made passé, while empowerment of individuals to reach their potential is glorified. The right of every individual to have the control over their person is the most basic of laws. It is inherent in the rights of all humans.

Shirley Ann Gordon is a role model for empowerment. She is an ordinary person who would not be stopped from reaching her goals and serving others. When the world said, you can't, she did.

We cannot praise such a person enough.

-- L.A. Preschel