Lesson No. 4: Wrap-Up, Research, Submissions, Shout Outs and Kelly Link on Writing Collections and Writing for Theme Anthologies

Welcome back! This is our last week of the workshop. As I finish edits and feedback on your submissions, listen to Kelly Link’s words of wisdom on short story collections, writing on themes and writing about vampires. Also, read George Saunders “Brief and Frightening Tips.”


Some Brief and Frightening Tips from George Saunders

George On Approaching Writing

I don’t believe at all in the Deep Dark Secret theory of literature: this idea that there is a right or a wrong about a given story or a given approach.  My own pathetic output is proof that, at least in my case, Mastery is totally elusive.  For me, every story is a whole new set of problems, expressed in a whole new language, plus my glasses are out of prescription, and its raining.  So I am a very humble writer and a very humble reader, flinchy even.


George On Confronting the Real Story

We all try to skip around the heart of the story.  It is a form of avoidance that all of us do.  I don’t know quite why, but I see it all the time – in my work and in the work of my students.  It’s very odd, and very universal.  Maybe it’s scary to really confront the heart of the story, because some part of us knows that if we blow that, we’ve blown the whole deal.  It’s like having a huge crush on someone and never telling them because you’re afraid you’ll be rejected.  Something like that.


George on Building Tension

Think about how much tension is built up in a good play, where we basically get no access to interior monologues at all.  How is that tension built?  We are made privy to the character’s desires, mostly via the actions they perform, or attempt to perform.  They are like people sitting on a stove: they want to change things. 


George on the Interior Monologue

Now, in terms of interior monologue, and how to facilitate it, one technique that I learned while working on stories like “The Falls” and “The Barber’s Unhappiness” (not that these are any great examples, but they’re what I know) is to limit the character’s thoughts to 1) that which he could actually think in the time allotted between two framing actions and 2) that which he would naturally think, given the context.  

So say Irving is going to walk to the refrigerator, take out the milk, and accidentally spill the milk on the floor.  We have to pace the inner monologue to be appropriate to the action.  Can he remember his entire childhood, in thoughtful literary language, between the table and the refrigerator?  He can, but if that’s your aim, why frame it with action?  Just tell that story.  If, on the other hand, you want to represent thought mixed with action (and I do think that is your aim here, and an appropriate one) then your goal is to mimic his thoughts in those six steps between table and refrigerator.  Now, our minds are wild, and a lot can be thought in a short time – but not an infinite amount.  Irving’s thoughts might go, very rapidly: milk…cow…farm…that time on my grandpa’s farm…a certain kind of pie they ate that night…that horrific night on which, after the pie, he’d caught grandpa with that sheep.  And suddenly Irving has arrived at the fridge.  “Irving, trembling, opened the fridge, and took out the milk.  The milk, the milk, oh God, he remembered the milk jugs that lined the barn that night, as he suddenly saw grandpa drop to one knee and propose to the sheep.  The heavy carton slipped out of Irving’s hand, and spilled on the floor.”  Do you see what I mean? The framing actions give tension to the thoughts, and the thoughts affect the framing actions, and the whole thing moves along pretty quickly.  

It might be useful to think cinematically.  If we have a twenty-minute flashback framed by two banal actions – the natural thing might be to put the flashback in real time.  A woman remembers her wedding while making a sandwich.  Why do we need the sandwich?  

And then a secondary principle might be that, within each narrative section, there needs to be some larger dramatic shape – somebody decides something, or witnesses something, or is somehow changed or nudged towards the thing that will happen in the next section.  (In other words, this should be true of the framing sections – the sandwich making). 


George on Voice

This is perhaps a little trickier to discuss.  I guess the main question is: whose voice(s) are we hearing here?  Is the vocabulary, syntax, etc to be influenced by the character’s vocabulary and syntax?  There is no right or wrong answer – you the writer make the rules, then play within them.  And what gives us pleasure is 1) the extent to which we are clear on your rules, and 2) the fun you have playing within them.

I will here confess a preference: I like to see the character mimicked or reflected in the narrative voice.  I tried, in the two stories mentioned above, plus “Winky” – to have a 3rd person narrative voice that quickly – as quickly as I could manage it – gave way to a voice which, though still technically still 3rd person, was actually more of a 1st person  – a 3rd person that mimicked the character’s internalized voice – third-person ventriloquist, is how I thought of it.  Now this of course is not a universal – it’s just my preference.

Now, voice is very tricky.  These sorts of modulations can and do occur all the time.  Totally permissible.  In voice, anything is possible and permitted.  You have to go deeply into character’s heads.  What do they love?  What do they remember fondly?  Perhaps most importantly: How are their limitations mirrored in their voice

A character’s intelligence and experience and fears and beliefs are all indicated by what he or she thinks about, and how he or she thinks about it. 

For example, we can imagine the same scenario being narrated in two different ways, depending on what sort of person our character is:

Character 1:
Jack knew he was wrong.  He almost always was.  Even when he though he was right, no.  He was wrong.  Always he was wrong.  It sucked to always be wrong. Sometimes he felt like doing what he wanted even if it was wrong.  Like the time he smashed that window to get back at Jim.  He knew he was wrong to be mad at Jim.  And he knew smashing the window was wrong.  But he’d just done it, and it felt good.  That’s how he felt now.  He knew it was wrong to propose marriage to the sheep, but he was going to do it just the same.

Character 2:
Many might well ask, how could one, one such as himself – a man of taste, dignity, and exquisite good looks (God he loved the way his lower lip protruded)- lower himself to propose to a woman who – far from being beautiful, or sophisticated, or for that matter even human – was actually covered with coarse fur?  But those who might evince such a concern were at a distinct disadvantage relative to him, inasmuch as they were inferior to him, and could not see the situation in its entirety.  Her eyes, the grasslike smell of her breath, those soft, soft eyes – the heathens of the world could not be expected to understand.

The two characters – who want the same thing (the sheep) and are going to do the same thing (propose to it) are (clumsily) distinguished by diction, voice, degree of self-esteem, etc.

So my point is, stories can hinge on not only characters’ relationships- but also on characters being representatives of different human traits.  Or suites of different traits.  Voice is one way we might make this distinction.


Research and Submission Resources

Duotrope: Submissions Tracking (This resource is excellent for finding journals and anthologies interested in dark speculative narratives. Your particular voice will determine whether your narratives will be more suited toward literary journals open to character-based speculative or speculative journals open to narratives on a more diverse spectrum of genres and aesthetics. Before submitting to any publisher, make sure to read the journal first. Read several issues. Visit the site. Familiarize yourself thoroughly with the guidelines. Never submit to a journal or anthology edited by an editor you do not know or read. Submit to journals smartly, journals that reflect your aesthetics as they are, not what you want them to eventually be. If you have a favorite journal but aren’t sure if your aesthetic suits the journal yet, give your narrative time to grow and develop until it meets the standard of your reading. Then begin looking at the submission process.)

Publisher’s Marketplace: Publisher and Agent Research (Excellent for long work research and submission information–i.e. novels, novellas, collections, etc.)

If you’d like individualized help with preparing your novel, collection, memoir, etc. for sending to agents and editors, check out our Literary Matchmaking Workshop with Danielle Lanzet with Chris Calhoun Agency in NYC. Don’t forget your alumni discount code: alumnixo!


End of Course Questionnaire

Please complete the End of Course Questionnaire. We will use this information to understand what is working for you in the course; what can be improved; know what courses to add to our schedule; and understand how you came to find us. Thank you for sharing your words and talents with us this month. We hope you’ll join us again. Make sure to check out the upcoming course listings and let me know if you have any questions. I’ll be happy to make recommendations.


Free Alumni Promotions

As an Eckleburg Workshops Alumni, you now have free access to our listservs in quick and easy to complete forms with automatic distribution to students, alumni and faculty of The Eckleburg Workshops, readers at The Doctor T. J. Eckleburg Review, Eckleburg Facebook friends, Twitter followers and Tumblr followers. See below:

  • The Doctor T. J. Eckleburg Spotlight: In this spotlight you will not only speak about your workshop inspiration, but also about what the writing process means to you and your work. You will also let Eckleburg readers know about your current writing projects and focuses.
  • Tell Us About Your Eckleburg Works! This distribution is for works you wrote and/or critiqued here at The Eckleburg Workshops, either in part or whole.
  • Alumni Publications Shout Out! This distribution is for an alumni works published, whether they were workshopped at Eckleburg or not.
  • Recommended Reading: What veteran writers know, and new writers sometimes do not, is that the literary community and markets are not only about talent and craft but also about the karma. The generosity you show other talented writers who have inspired you will come back to you. Start the good karma on your upcoming publication by sharing with us a work that grips you. This distribution is to spread the word about works you are currently reading and feel others should be too. This can be a book, a short story, a poem, etc.