A. Scott Berg's advice for biographers and all writers

The author, A. Scott Berg, of the Charles Lindberg biography, published in 1999, believes the biography is perhaps the most difficult form of writing. It took him 12 and a half years to write this one book.

He had mountains of notes. But after taking a year to sort through what he had amassed, he realized that most everything fit neatly into several slots and wasn’t as unmanageable as first thought.

Then, Berg said he began writing. And when he wrote his first rough draft he included everything. EVERYTHING. This, he referred to as the ‘clay’ with which he would mold the final book. But, note that he didn’t say this was anywhere near the finished product.

His first rough draft was the material from which he would eventually sculpt the biography that would appear on the New York Times bestseller list.

Berg takes his research seriously and doesn’t just look at his subject, but the world and times in which his subject lives. I think this is an important distinction between a best seller and a good book. This, in my mind, refers back to yesterday’s blog about ‘depth.’

When researching, he gets acquainted with the events and news of the day. “I think there’s so much to be learned for a biographer by reading the newspapers of the day. On each of my books I spend days, weeks at a time, reading old New York Times's, from the days things were going on. I mean obviously the day Charles Lindbergh landed in Paris and he filled the entire front section of The New York Times, there was a lot to be gained. But what about the days before that, and the days after that? What were the advertisements like? I read the real estate sections: what did an apartment, a penthouse in Manhattan cost then? What did it cost to buy a chicken for dinner? What were the other news stories going on? What was the world like in which my hero, my character walked? And I think that’s the most crucial thing we as biographers can do.”

Even if your novel is set in current times, a writer must know the landscape far beyond the little house in which her characters live. The author must understand the climate (not just the weather) and the events that shape attitudes and politics and economics and beliefs. “Just as important as getting the history right, is getting the drama right,” Berg said.

I particularly like this last bit of advice from Mr. Berg: “And I think it behooves the biographer to tell his tale as compellingly as the novelist does. Basically we are all storytellers, whether we are fiction writers or non-fiction writers or poets, we are there to tell a story. And I think that involves having prose that is highly readable and I think pulling the story along a lot of the time.”

And in case you aren't familiar with Mr. Berg, he wrote the biography of Kate Hepburn, simply titled "Kate Remembered." As for that Lindberg biography, titled what else "Lindberg." -- Berg won the 1999 Pulitzer Prize for a distinguished biography or autobiography by an American author. The award came with immeasurable acclaim as well as $5,000. 

Writing with Authority: Ashley Shelby

Depth.

I really appreciate depth and layers in a book. ANY book. I don't really miss it if the book has quirky characters or an original plot, or suspense or humor or great dialogue. But when I find a book with depth -- I realize then just how much I thirst for it.

No, I don't mean plodding, information-packed tombs with an attitude of "look at me, I really RESEARCHED' this book and I'm going to use every tidbit even if it kills both of us!"

I mean the books that speak with authority that I thoroughly trust and embrace and sink into with a resounding sigh. An author in whose hands I feel safe.

A couple of nights ago I finished reading Diana Gabaldon's latest book "Echo in the Bone." She's a research professor so research is her life and sadly she likes to make sure she uses every tidbit. I adore her series, her characters, and her writing style. But I don't quite trust her. She tends to sneaks unusual finding into her books -- a worm that crawls into a man's eye and swims from one to the other? True about the worm -- loa loa worms I believe. She worked them into the plot of one of her books. But it doesn't really move the story forward.

This most recent book is a bit ladened with her research. I found myself skimming through parts as if it were a text book. By the way this book seems like a tool to prepare readers for the NEXT book. So many unanswered questions here. And a real cliff hanger at the end. But I digress. I feel like Gabaldon's writing carries me along the edge of a precipice and she can't gurantee that she won't fall off and take me with her. Does that make sense? She's all over the place and although her writing is strong and steady for the most part, she isn't always consistent or trustworthy. OK, she beats up on the characters alot and that makes me nervous, too. But from one section to the next, I don't know if she'll give me what I want.

It wasn't until I picked up a new copy (to me at least) of Ashley Shelby's "Red River Rising" that I realized how much I've missed -- depth.

Here's just one example of what I am enjoying and mean by depth and authority. After a delightful paragraph about North Dakota Plains Weather, Shelby writes:

"The only thing more impressive than the weather is the good fight the people of North Dakota put up against it each year. In Grand Forks, when the Red River swells during spring thaw, people worry little and sandbag a lot. This is the way winter ends. Nature is not romantic here -- it is stark and present. Although North Dakota raises churches and monasteries in much the same way it raises Scotch Fife and Velvet Chaff wheat, even the monks know better than to ascribe the whims of nature to God. Nature is an independent force."

The author gives me details that move the story forward. I learn that nature is heartless and the people of this region stoically stand firm against it, they are farmers and they are god fearing and understand that nature is not a sign that God hates them.  It is what it is. And this paragraph leads the reader toward the reason for the book -- the catastrophic flood of Grand Forks, ND, in the spring of 1997.

Now the author could have just rattled off what I wrote in the previous chapter, but she didn't. And for those who are purists about 'is' and 'was' not belonging in tightly written, quality prose -- I think Shelby shows there's a place for it. I also think that there is not one unnecessary word in that quote. Tight, informative, authoritative, beautifully crafted writing. Can you tell that it is nonfiction? She's using such great fiction techniques, but its true and she's done the research. But I don't get the feeling of 'research' but rather the assurance that she KNOWS. The author knows of what she writes.

That's what I want to do.

I'm seeing a pattern or maybe I just need new glasses

Fiction writing has not revealed itself to me as an easy gig.

I think it involves a great deal more of ME than any other form of writing. I not only craft the words, but I invest my feelings and thoughts and life into it. Woven in each bit of fiction is a piece of the author, or many pieces of the author. The cliche of opening a vein and bleeding onto the page is not unfounded. But that alone is not enough to sustain a piece of fiction no matter how short or long.

There is a factual side of fiction that people don't tell you about when spouting "Once upon a time in a little hamlet by the sea...." The author must know what a hamlet is, are they located by the sea, who lives in hamlets, what era do most hamlets reside in, and just what are the economics of such a place? Is it an impoverished fishing village or a lucrative touristy place or a bastion of old money or a health resort complete with mineral springs? And you as the author, do you have enough facts to convince the reader to suspend disbelief and follow you into your ummm hamlet?

If nothing else, a fiction writer must be knowledgeable. And it certainly doesn't hurt that they are adept at research.

Yesterday's post by Mr. Cooper gives me hope; but when I look at his bio, I get a little queasy. He's not just a writer, that is only his most current occupation. Before that he graduated from Harvard, became a doctor, ran a practice before getting into the business side of pharmaceuticals . He even majored in archaeology and went on digs.

Where I come from just accomplishing one of those things would be enough success for a lifetime. OK, where I come from a good price at the co-op on a corn and soy bean harvest is a rousing success. My point (and there is one!) is that he KNOWS things and he's trainable. Boy is he trainable. The same goes for my dear, dear Diana Gabaldon.

Before 'trying her hand' at fiction and writing the lucrative Outlander series, she was a college professor, research professor at that, had run a successful computer software business and wrote research papers, technical texts and yes even Disney comic books before bringing all of her knowledge to her fiction.

Although her books are fiction with a paranormal element, romance and history all woven into each oversized tomb, they ring with authority. She doesn't just have the main character, Claire, perform surgery to repair a hernia. She gives this hernia a medical name and then proceeds with such insightful detail that you know this author has done her homework and gotten it right. I question sometimes whether she also went to medical school. She doesn't just mention the bones of the hand she calls them by their proper medical names. And she is consistent throughout, offering not just the bare basics that everybody knows. No, she raises the content to a level where each chapter brings new opportunities to learn something. Being weak in science, I appreciate the way she uses natural laws and other scientific facts to make things real.

I will (hesitantly) admit to a background in romance reading and there is one thing that I and a whole community of readers want to take away from these reads. Yes of course we want a satisfying relationship story. And yes we like to escape. But we also want to LEARN something.

Facts, no matter what type of fiction rely heavily on getting the facts right. Great fiction teaches the reader something.

And that's the pattern I'm seeing. Fiction done right isn't about fantasy or make believe -- it is about an author sharing a truth that the reader needed to know -- whether she knew of that need or not. The more subtle the message, the better. Pound me over the head with the author's message and I'll slam the book shut. But show me the message through a character's life and you've succeeded.

Perhaps that was the appeal of Pilgrim's Progress back in the day. Or even Jonathan Swift's memorable essay "A Modest Proposal." Or even today's most read books, yes even Dan Brown. He may not have the most literary writing style, but he can tell a story, and he can throw facts into a story that sends people into a tizzy. One of the reasons I enjoy movies like "National Treasure" is because it is so strongly rooted in facts.

As a writer -- we gotta know the facts -- whether we write fiction or nonfiction. Research, knowledge, life experience are key to success. It isn't just write what you know -- it is know what you write. And give it to me in detail. Which brings another cliche to mind. But I don't think the 'devil' is in the details. I think the six figure advance is in the details.

Site of the Day: Intute helps find the best websites for study and research and much (if not all) are free.

Faithfully Departing Posted at Notred Dame Magazine

Just a note to say that an essay very close to my heart has been posted at Notre Dame Magazine. It concerns a battle we're waging at our house against a horrific disease: Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). Some may know it as Lou Gehrig's Disease. I wrote it to promote awareness, to reach out to others with such battles to fight, and because I want to make this disease pay.

My husband's family is stricken with the inherited form of that disease. He's lost a younger brother to it, aunts, uncles, cousins of all ages and now he is in the battle for his life. He's weaponless -- no treatment, no cure, no research that can even define the cause of the disease. Lots of theories, but nothing substantial to pin our hopes to. He takes vitamins and uses whatever equipment he needs to compensate for muscle loss.

Several organizations give us support and help. We owe so much to the ALS Association, the researchers they support and Rhonda Rittenhouse who keeps the monthly support meetings going. This monthly support group has provided us with new friends, information, and even some equipment that will give Derrol better quality of life. We've received monetary help through the MDA, Muscular Dystrophy Association. They help pay for equipment as well as quarterly visits to the ALS Clinic held at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, FL.

We are so grateful to Dr. Boylan, clinical neurologist and friend, who runs the ALS Clinic and keeps giving us hope. Through him we attended an ALS Association conference for researchers in Tampa earlier this year. We were privy to the discussions concerning cutting edge research, most recent breakthroughs and best of all, we made friends with some lovely people from around the world. They are dedicating their lives to finding a cure for neuro-muscular diseases including ALS.

The first ALS Clinic Derrol attended caught both of us off guard. We sat speechless in a room at Mayo Clinic while specialists came to us. In one morning we saw more specialists than we had been able to see in the last seven years. They file in, do their tests, talk and ask questions, joke and smile and make us forget what horror has brought us there. He talked with physical therapists, speech therapists, occupational therapist, pulmonologist, well, the list continues. Whatever he needs to keep him functioning, they rush to help.

It has taken us a long time to 'admit' that we live with this disease. We'd like to just pretend it isn't here. But it just won't go away. So we acknowledge its existence and I'll be writing about it more in the future. You may already be familiar with the disease or a form of it if you read the book Tuesdays with Morrie by Mitch Albom or are familiar with baseball legend, Lou Gehrig's story.

The first question ALS victims ask each other is 'when were you diagnosed.' It is code for "How long do you have to live?" Most die within six years of diagnosis. Derrol, fortunately, has a slow-progressing form of the disease. He was diagnosed in 2005 and is just now getting to the point where he needs a wheelchair at least part of the time. Sadly we have watched other members of the support group decline from fairly independent to totally dependent with wheelchairs, feeding tubes and communication devices in mere months.

If any of you reading this are so inclined to help find a cure for this disease, please visit the ALS Association website and consider donating. By finding a cure for ALS, we quite possibly would also open the door to cures for Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson's Disease, Muscular Dystrophy and many other neurological diseases.

Uncommon connections

For the past three days I've been surrounded by the most amazing scientists and researchers who are dedicated to finding a cure for a variety of motor neuron diseases. I've heard about gene mutations, stem cell research, genetic studies, repositories, registries, rat studies, worm studies, flies and pigs studies -- separate not together. And zebra fish -- an excellent form to study because you can see right through them -- you can see the mutations.

It was that same transparency that our kids liked when we had a couple aquariums of tropical fish. We could raise guppies by the hundreds, it seemed. Couldn't keep a black molly alive to save us. And zebra fish -- we discovered angel fish love to eat them. But for the brief time we could watch them, we stared in fascination at their see-through bodies behind the stripes.

My husband's younger brother was equally fascinated with tropical fish and that's where our interest began, with Tommy's collection of salt water and fresh water fish.

The irony hit me as I sat in the lecture hall and listened to a discussion of familial ALS study using this species of fish that Tommy had at one time raised. Because, you see, Tommy was the first in the family to succumb to that very disease Familial Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis or the inherited form of Lou Gehrig's disease.

He enjoyed the fish and they may eventually provide a cure for the disease that took Tommy's life at age 18, just barely 18. It rather reinforces the patterns of our lives and how everything is connected. It also makes me wonder why we don't see those connections. Maybe we need to think with a different perspective. If Tommy could have just seen in 1970s that this fish might hold the secret to his cure -- we could have saved thirty years of deaths and dying, suffering and wasting that the disease brings.

If onlys don't get us very far and eat up hope along the way. So I stuff that back in the dark recesses of my brain and focus on the bright scientists who did see the value of these fish and I pray that they figure out the twisted origins of the dreaded disease before another family member dies.

The zebra fish, flies, pigs, even worm studies remind me that we don't know where in nature we might find the next cure. So maybe we should preserve the nature around us -- we never know when we'll need to unlock its secrets to save our lives.