I’ve reached the point in writing my latest book where I have to make a decision: do I kill a character or not? He’s not a particularly nice person, really a kind of a dick, and there may be a point where people would probably cheer if he finally gets his due. But if I leave him in, he really won’t have much to do in the subsequent books I plan on writing after this, as he’s pretty much served his purpose. I could probably just write him out of the action instead of offing him, but that would leave open whether he’d return or not, but I really don’t like that. (See, I’m old enough to still be kind of jaded by Bobby walking out of the shower.) So I’ve been thinking about what to do for a couple days now, and I’d really like to move forward. So after a hard think I believe I’ve made my decision. I’m gonna whack the guy. Now I just have to figure out how to do it, which presents a whole other set of issues.
The first one being, how to do it? Which of the characters has a big enough beef with him that may want to accomplish the job for me. He is a bad guy, so will another bad guy do it? Will he get in a struggle and a gun goes off? Maybe someone runs him over with a car? With murder being so messy, my perhaps it’s better I let the guy off himself. Would that fit into the plot? Is there reason enough for him to do it? I think so. He really is at the end of his rope. So with that decision behind me, then how to accomplish it? There’s all kinds of ways to do it–gun, overdose, train tracks, drowning–you name it, the possibilities are endless. But again, you also have to consider the plot and characters. Is this a well-thought out action? An act of desperation? Would he be suicidal? Is he truly at the end of his rope? Would it be a spur of the moment action? Would he resist all attempts to save him? Would it be believable that he’d attempt it at all? And people as not as fragile as they appear sometimes, so would the attempt at offing himself actually work? That’s when the research come in.
When you’ve been writing for awhile, you tend to accumulate experts who you can tap for information, and they become invaluable. The internet is a handy go-to, but if you’re serious about your craft, to need to find primary sources, real live human beings that can give you first hand information. I’ve gotten to know a former homicide detective and a forensic chemists who’ve I’ve sourced now and then. And when I have, I’ve researched my questions, taken notes, and asked them for the best places to go if I need to know more. These people are invaluable, as they lend a realism to your writing that’s unmatched by a Google search. Only after I’m certain will I proceed, as trust me, there’s always someone out there who will challenge you on what you write, always someone who thinks they know more, and you want to be read for them.
As I think I am now. Welp, Mr. Man, it looks like your days are numbered. Enjoy all that sliminess while you can.
In light of the pipe bomb that was sent to CNN today, for all the attacks on journalists, for all the disparaging of Freedom of Speech, and for all the purveyors of creative thought and opinion, this lawsuit is especially timely to whoever uses the pen to fight the sword. This is for writers everywhere.
NEW YORK, October 16, 2018—PEN America, the leading national organization representing writers and literary professionals and defending free expression, filed a lawsuit today against President Donald J. Trump for using the powers of the federal government to retaliate against journalists and media outlets he finds objectionable, in violation of the First Amendment. PEN America is represented in the case by the nonpartisan nonprofit Protect Democracy and the Yale Law School Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic.
The filing asserts that, while President Trump is free to express his own views critical of journalists and media outlets, his use of the regulatory and enforcement powers of government to punish the press for criticism of him is unconstitutional. The complaint, filed in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, asks the court to enter a declaratory judgment that the President’s retaliatory actions violate the First Amendment and enjoin the President from directing any employee or agency of the federal government to take any action against the press in retaliation for coverage the President views as hostile.
The complaint makes reference to incidents that it argues were intended to make clear to writers, reporters, and commentators that if they criticize the President, they or the media entities they represent could face reprisals by the government. These incidents include:
- The Department of Justice’s antitrust enforcement action against the merger of CNN’s parent company, Time Warner, with AT&T, coming in the wake of credible threats by the President to retaliate against CNN’s coverage of him and his Administration;
- The President’s Executive Order to the U.S. Postal Service to examine raising postal rates on Amazon, founded and run by Jeff Bezos, following the President’s threats to retaliate against coverage that the President disapproved of by the Washington Post, which Jeff Bezos owns. A retaliatory action that led, on October 11, 2018, to the U.S. Postal Service announcing proposed rate increases, including a proposed 12-percent increase for the Parcel Select service used by Amazon;
- The President’s threats to revoke White House press credentials, which were followed by directing the removal of a White House correspondent from a press event covering the President, in retaliation for editorial decisions that reporter had made; and
- The President’s threats to revoke broadcast licenses of television stations whose coverage he disapproves of.
The complaint argues that these and other similar actions intentionally place a sword of Damocles over the heads of all journalists and writers covering the President, including PEN America members.
“While PEN America members, and many media outlets and journalists, have been unflinching in their coverage of the Administration, the First Amendment protects the press from having to brave government retaliation and threats in order to do their work,” said PEN America CEO Suzanne Nossel. “We have grown sadly accustomed to near daily attacks by President Trump on the media, but when his speech crosses the line into retaliatory actions or credible threats of reprisal against critics, the President’s actions are not only egregious, but also unconstitutional. At a time when hostility toward the press has fostered a climate of threats and even violence, it is essential for courts to step in and affirm the role of the First Amendment and free press in our democracy. There is a natural tension between leaders and the press corps charged with holding him accountable, but here in the U.S. we have constitutional safeguards that prevent the use of the power of government to punish and intimidate the media.”
“As an organization of working writers united in defense of free expression, we are alarmed at the climate of hostility and threat in which those who offer political reportage and commentary must now operate,” said PEN America President, journalist, and Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist Jennifer Egan. “PEN America has long risen to the defense of writers around the world who face peril for expressing themselves. With journalism under unprecedented attack from the White House, we feel compelled to fight back.”
The complaint reaffirms that the First Amendment prohibits government actors from using their power in ways that punish the content of reporting or that are intended to stoke intimidation through threats of government action. It notes that individual writers, including freelancers and especially those who may be vulnerable for other reasons—by virtue of their immigration status, for example—may understandably think twice before publishing pieces or commentary that could put them in the White House’s crosshairs.
“The governing law is clear: President Trump has the right to express views about the press, loudly and often. He does not have the right to use the powers of his office to punish those who disagree with him and criticize him,” said David Schulz of the Yale Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic.
President Trump has already faced a number of First Amendment challenges. In one case, a federal district judge, presiding in the same district in which this case has been filed, declared that President Trump’s practice of blocking critics on his Twitter account violated the First Amendment. The remedy sought in PEN America’s complaint is similar. In another case, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an allegation from protesters who were roughed up during a campaign rally that then-candidate Trump’s calls from the podium incited a violent riot.
This suit comes at a worldwide moment of reckoning for the relationship between governments and the journalists who criticize them. As respect for the role of the press erodes, illustrated most egregiously in recent days with the crisis over the fate of Washington Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi, it is vital to underscore and enforce the First Amendment protections that have always set the U.S. apart as a standard bearer for press freedom. That’s what this suit aims to do.
“President Trump’s anti-press actions are taking place at a time when autocrats around the world, including in Hungary, Poland, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, have been ramping up their attacks on a free press,” said Kristy Parker, Counsel to Protect Democracy. “The difference between the United States and those countries is that the United States has a long-standing constitutional tradition that prevents such behavior and an independent court system designed to step in when violations occur.”
Protect Democracy has highlighted the myriad ways in which President Trump appears to be following a playbook used by other autocratic rulers around the world. While democracy was ascendant around the globe in the latter half of the twentieth century, that trend has come to an alarming halt. According to data from Freedom House, an independent watchdog that tracks free expression globally, the spread of democratic regimes peaked around 2005 and has been in retreat ever since. The new breed of autocratic-style leaders does not vanquish democracy overnight. Rather, modern autocrats pull at the threads of democracy incrementally, finding vulnerabilities in democratic systems that can be exploited. Using the power of the government to deliberately intimidate dissenting voices, including those of writers and journalists, is one such strategy. In some of the aforementioned countries, their leadership has succeeded in eroding democracy as the direct result of a lack of a truly independent judicial check. It is against this backdrop that today’s lawsuit has been filed.
Since the 2016 presidential campaign, PEN America has decried efforts to foment hostility and distrust toward the media. Through research reports, petitions, and campaigns, PEN America has mobilized to defend the role of the press as a cornerstone of our democracy. In 2018, PEN America initiated a national outreach effort to activate its members through public forums on media freedom, advocacy for local news outlets, and media literacy workshops. A cornerstone of this effort is the Press Freedom Incentive Fund, which supports initiatives that build new local constituencies ready to defend press freedom. PEN America has fought against encroachments on free speech by United States presidential administrations for decades, including through advocacy for whistleblowers and journalists targeted for their reporting. The organization also has a long history of litigation challenging government encroachments on freedom of expression, including the blocking of prominent writers and scholars from visiting the United States due to their critical speech pursuant to the USA PATRIOT Act, and the mass warrantless wiretapping of international electronic communications.
Read quotes on today’s filing from experts here.
The full complaint can be read here.
More information about this case can be found at pen.org/pen-america-v-trump
With romance, the “rules” are definitely a bit stricter. There ALWAYS has to be a HEA – a “happily ever after,” or at least a HFN – a “happy for now” if you plan on sending them on some hijinks in the next book. And there are definite stages to their romance—when they first meet, when they first kiss, when they first make love, when they fall in love, when the fall OUT of love, when they face the Dark Moment, when they fall back in love, then when the commit to each other, then lastly, the HEA or HFN. All romances mostly follow the same progression, and romance fans look for and expect each stage. What keeps them interesting, and keeps the pages turning, is how the couple reaches each stage and goes beyond it. You see, the trick to writing a good romance is the couple is not supposed to fall in love—yet against all odds, they do. It’s this struggle romance fans look for. And as a Romance Writer, it’s up to your to deliver. When it’s too easy, it’s not a romance. When they meet, it’s fate. When they kiss for the first time, it’s mind-blowing. When they finally make love—it’s a nuclear meltdown. It’s that easy!
During this retreat like full day workshop authors have the opportunity to attend various Presentations, pitch Literary Agents and Editors (Optional), get a book signed by Bestselling Author Megan Erickson during our Mixer, get work critiqued by Agents and Editors (Optional), attend the Critical Mass: First Page Critique Literary Agent and Editor Panel, and Network with authors and industry professionals all day long and during a Networking Mixer after hours.
8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Saturday, October 13, at The Oyster Point Hotel, Bodman Place, Red Bank, NJ 07701.
Conveniently located about one hour from NY City.
Valet parking complimentary.
Train Station: Red Bank – North Jersey Coast line located just 5 minutes away.
For full info please visit the Corvisiero Agency Website!
I don’t know, maybe it’s because I’m drinking too much caffeine in the afternoon but I’ve been waking up way too early in the morning lately. Or maybe I’m just of that certain age, but I really don’t want to go there at the moment. In any event, I’ve been writing really, really early in the morning these past few weeks, and for me that means at my desk by six-thirty or seven. I write until around eight or eight-thirty, then it’s off to get ready for my first class at ten-thirty. I’ve been patting myself on the back for being so dedicated, then I heard about this group of people, and I have a whole new reason to feel inadequate. The 5 AM Writer’s Club according to their website, is “…a dedicated group of writers who cheer each other on when it’s needed, and pass donuts around when they’re hungry. (BTW Check the #5amWritersClub hashtag to find a fantastic group of people to follow on Twitter.)”
But what it means to me is a bunch of dedicated writers who actually find their muse up and awake before the crack of dawn. I find this completely admirable, as although I’ve been know to get up early, it’s usually not by choice, and I just take advantage of the situation. Still, what it says to me is if you want to write, if you need to write, you WILL find the time to do it. No excuses. Writers write. Ass in chair. And if you want some cheering on, well now you know where to go to find it.
Another school year, another entry from the MFA Pit. This time it’s all about process, about conjuring up your creative muse, about getting that perfect writing space, about finding the time to write. This semester MFA Candidate One is studying Aesthetic and Process, about why we write what we write, and how to go about bringing that process to fruition…
Poor Yorick: A Journal of Rediscovered Objects is an online literary publication of the MFA Program at Western Connecticut State University. The journal publishes poems, stories, essays, profiles, digital video shorts, photo essays, scholarly articles, and other innovative works about or inspired by rediscovered objects and/or images of material culture. In addition to unsolicited submissions, the journal’s editorial staff will occasionally identify a particular historical object, collection, exhibit, etc., and call for submissions inspired by the selected artifact. Poor Yorick also works in conjunction with museums both locally and nationally to identify and encourage innovative works focusing on lesser-known and overlooked objects and images.
For more information about submitting, please click here for their Submissions guidelines.
Hey! Are you an expert on something? A writer with plotting/characterization/genre tips up your sleeve? Have knowledge you’re just itching to disseminate? Then by ALL MEANS YOU NEED TO SUBMIT! Not to a publisher (not now anyway!) But to Liberty State Fiction Writers, a tri-state multi-genre fiction writers organization who’s looking for presenters for their 10th Annual Writers Conference in March 2019 in beautiful Iselin, New Jersey! Submit your Workshop proposals here, and spread the wealth–of knowledge, that is. (Though you can send me money anytime. I’m a starving artist, after all.)