Criticism

Doubt

Posted by

0

My wife and I watched the film Doubt last night.  We wanted to watch it for several reasons: it stars Meryl Streep and Philip Seymour Hoffman, both of whom we think are excellent actors.  It also involves a dilemma in the Catholic church; we are Catholic.

The film was made in 2008 and is based on the Pulitzer prize-winning stage play, Doubt: a Parable.  In the film, Hoffman plays kindly a parish priest, and Streep plays the ultra strict and conservative principal of the school which is attached to the church.  Hoffman befriends the only black boy in the school, who is lonely, insecure and abused by his father.  Streep, a very un-trusting nun, suspects that Hoffman has formed an improper relationship with the boy, though she has no real evidence of this.  She confronts Hoffman, who denies any wrong doing; she tells Hoffman that she has spoken to a nun in his previous parish who told her that Hoffman had behaved improperly there.  Hoffman resigns from his current parish and he is immediately appointed by the Bishop to a larger, more important parish.  It turns out that Streep had not actually called his previous parish, and made up the story of improper behaviour.  She takes the position, however, that since he resigned, her allegation must be true.  At the end of the film, Streep confesses to a young nun that, “I have doubts . . . I have such doubts”.

The acting in the film by both Hoffman and Streep is excellent.  In fact, Streep is so cynical and so certain of her position that it is hard to believe that she has any of the doubts she finally expresses.  And Hoffman is so sincere in his denials that it is hard to understand his resignation except as a means to get away from Streep, but there is no hint of this.

Through much of the film, my wife and I were shaking our heads: we had doubts about the credibility of the story line.  We weren’t convinced that this could be a real situation: it seemed too forced.  I realise that it is difficult to create a situation where the audience (or the reader) has doubts about what actually happened, and what it might (or might not) mean.  But this is the essence of the film, and I think that rather than focus on the unique characters of the principal and the priest, it would have been more useful to present more ambiguous evidence of guilt or innocence that the characters can argue over.  As they argue over the evidence, their characters will be revealed, and the dilemma comes alive.  As it is, the only evidence we have is the priest’s friendliness to the boy, the fact that the boy was disciplined for drinking communion wine, and the fact that the priest placed a white shirt in his locker.

As a writer, I consider it absolutely necessary to pause and check the credibility of any twists in the plot, particularly twists which are essential to the central outcomes or messages.   For example, I am working on a novel which includes a sudden, catastrophic disaster which has terrible consequences for the main character.  To make that disaster more plausible and real, earlier in the book, I have the characters talk about minor versions of the disaster.  And, later, before the big disaster, I have the characters actually experience a real, but limited disaster.

One of my concerns in writing Efraim’s Eye was whether the reader would believe that the London Eye is actually vulnerable to attack.  Early in the novel, Efraim plans his attack in detail; there is no room for doubt.

Reviews: The Iranian Scorpion

Posted by

0

On this page I’ll post all reviews of The Iranian Scorpion:

Anyone familiar with the novels of William Peace will not be surprised that “The Iranian Scorpion” involves international intrigue while exploring deep personal questions and beliefs. In this case, we are once again in what we Americans lump together as the Middle East. Our protagonist, Robert Dawson, is an agent of the Drug Enforcement Agency who, having spent too much of his young life on the Texas/Mexico border, opts to use his expertise to explore and expose the trafficking of heroin from Afghanistan through Iran to the US.

Robert Dawson is a capable, likable, thoughtful person. He not only has the remarkable capacity to pick up languages and dialects easily (alas, for the rest of us who cannot even carry a tune), he seems to have an innate empathy for different cultures and creeds. There are of course the usual bad guys, those people in power who merely wish to exploit others and enrich themselves, and there is all the tension and terror of dealing with such people and their torturous methods. But Peace has never been one dimensional in his treatment of his characters, Western or Eastern. Robert’s true foil is a man named David Dawson, his father, as cold and closed a human being as Robert is warm and open. But here again, the author allows the man to develop on his own terms

Although an American living in England, Peace seems perfectly comfortable writing about both the land and the people of Afghanistan and Iran. He obviously likes these people and you will, too. And he is always interesting and often fascinating, whether he is blithely taking us through the steps in refining heroin from opium, following the trail of drug smugglers, or enriching U-235 on the way to a bomb.

Peace has “balanced” some rather perfunctory sex in the book with a few somewhat pedantic scenes revolving around discussions of faith and religion. These latter themes, however, blend so effortlessly with our hero’s thoughtful nature and the everyday life of this Muslim world that we see in practice what we might object to in preach. And there is an intriguing lack of resolution in “The Iranian Scorpion,” just as there is in life. It sets one to thinking. But you’ll have to buy and read the book first, and bookreview.com highly recommends that you do just that.

Posted by BookReview.com

I very much enjoyed reading “The Iranian Scorpion” by William Peace. The story line was suspenseful and fast moving, with seamless plot lines that kept me guessing. Robert, a US government DEA agent, was stationed in Afghanistan to get a handle on and find a way to stop poppy growth and thereby limit the production of opium and heroin, to the dismay of the Scorpion, a heroin kingpin. His father, David, is also a government official. Their relationship goes through a transformation in the story and you will be on the edge of your seat as both their lives are jeopardized. Will they make it out alive? Which love interest will win each of their attention? You’ll have to read it to find out and you’ll gain a new appreciation for illegal border crossings in the bargain.

Just a few shocking bits but I still loved reading this story, and it was educational as well. It provides more than a little violence, a little raciness, neither unnecessarily graphic, but mostly intrigue and heart pounding excitement. Historical, governmental, and cultural details are featured in “The Iranian Scorpion”, giving me a new understanding of the countries of Afghanistan and Iran. Characters are likeable, complex, and believable in relation to one another. The interplay of Islam and Christianity in this novel provides a colorful tapestry for a backdrop as several characters’ stories are woven together. To top it off, lamb kebabs and flatbread are on the menu. I look forward to reading other books by William Peace.

Reviewed by Mary DeKok Blowers for Readers’ Favorite

Reviews: Efraim’s Eye

Posted by

0

On this page, I’ll post all reviews of Efraim’s Eye:

“Efraim’s Eye” by William Peace is a thriller in which a very capable and determined terrorist is pitted against a very capable and determined financial consultant. Doesn’t really sound fair, does it? Until, of course, you think of the last banker you worked with and who won.

Early in the book Peace gives us an example of Western duplicity when the consultant, Paul Winthorpe, is duped by a charming and sophisticated woman for–of all things–money. Nor is being a terrorist a piece of cake. Efraim Al-Rashid is betrayed by both Taliban and Russian arms dealers as he puts his plot into action. There is a major difference in the two agendas, however, that goes beyond greed. The terrorist has suffered great personal loss; as a result, revenge is the dominating tenet in his interpretation of the Muslim faith. “An eye for an eye” and, in this case, the EYE of London.

Winthorpe’s goals are the more prosaic ideals of helping companies run effectively. He takes on a pro-bono assignment to examine the management of a Moroccan affiliate of an international charity based in London. Assisted by a young, Arabic-speaking, Israeli woman, he soon realizes that the entire situation requires either abandonment or complete overhauling. Of course, outside consultants often irritate existing company structures, especially if the CEO–as in this case–is embezzling most of the funds for terrorist activities.

Peace really seems to know Marrakech, Tbilisi, and yes, account books like the back of his hand. There are lots of little throwaway sentences that bring the book to life and infuse it with authenticity. It is unfortunate, therefore, that in what is probably an attempt to give more literary depth to his novel, he interjects a May/December romance and numerous discursions into Christian, Jewish, and Muslim beliefs and practices. It is not that these digressions are exactly boring, but they might have found more resonance in another setting.

It should also be mentioned that the book is–fittingly–very well edited, with hardly a typo. Bookreview.com considers it an excellent thriller, but suggests that you read it after you’ve had a ride on the EYE.

BookReview.com

I very happily rate Efraim’s Eye by Bill Peace a Great Read. The first book review had me a bit worried, but I did not find the spontaneous love affair that bloomed in Morocco a distraction. These people are very real and interesting. Nor did I find the explanations of the various religions involved a problem. I was deeply impressed by the author’s apparent first hand knowledge of places I will in likelihood never get to in this lifetime. Including Morocco and Afghanistan, Georgia, Pakistan etc. I also found in this book a rational and even handed construction of the Koran (I still balk at spelling it the new way).
This in not your ordinary page turner replete with endless chase scenes and terrifying moments piled up on top of each other. What makes you want to keep reading this book is the skillful characterization of ALL the protagonists. Efraim himself is a multi-faceted bad guy. I even found myself almost liking the poor guy when he was agonized by the problem of clean vs. unclean women and the enormous drive provided from his groin area.
I cannot think of a single character, down to the loyal driver, Mohammed, who is not dealt with in depth. The women who work in the Moroccan charity are both very much alive and sympathetic. The part-time, and very young assistant bookkeeper is superbly drawn and he’s only on scene for a few pages. Paul’s (the hero’s) family are a nice mix of fun and intelligence.
The mechanics of making a very complicated terrorist bomb (or rather, six of them) are sketched with what seems to be the product of deep and keen research–at least I am hoping this is not first hand knowledge.
I don’t want to get too much into this lovely read because I would encourage to get the book yourself. I read mine in the Kindle version and was amazed at the few typos–though there are a handful, and they do not disrupt the narrative.
Peter C Parsons
Some writers produce a great first book, but subsequent books are mediocre. Some sustain their proficiency from book to book. And some seem to get even better with each book written. Mr. Peace’s first two books were both good reads, but his third, Efraim’s Eye is his best so far. It is a fast paced page turner revolving around a terrorist plot to destroy the London Eye.
While doing pro-bono work for a London charity checking on one of its subsidiaries, Paul Winthrop along with Naomi, a consultant with the charity, discover a terrorist plot to destroy the London Eye. Each one of the characters is developed in depth and with a complexity that makes them believable. No cardboard cutouts here. We follow two storylines as the book develops. One is with the developing relationship between Paul, a widower but in a relationship back in London, and Naomi, a well traveled, intelligent and younger Israeli. The other deals with the organization of the plot from obtaining the necessary weapons and equipment to choosing the personnel to be involved.
As we follow the terrorist Yusef as he travels to several countries to complete the plans, one cannot help but be impressed with Mr. Peace’s attention to detail. Whether describing weapons or the intricacies of an audit or the geography of a city, his information is so well researched and written that one is reminded of Tom Clancy in his early books.
Mr. Peace appears to have an interest in religion and in the spiritual aspects that guide and motivate individuals. This was a thread in his previous book as he explored facets of Christianity. In this book, Mr. Peace is able to explore the beliefs of Islam and the teachings of the Koran. He is never judgmental and gives his reader much to ponder.
I look forward to the next book by this talented writer.
“Kitty” Book Lover
William, congratulations!  There is quite a difference between reading a manuscript and holding a book in one’s hand.
Efraim’s Eye is a first rate thriller. It will have a wide audience. It is tightly plotted – no loose ends – the sex is just right- in  other words, very believable, and the settings are interesting – even London – and the incompetence of the Police!!
They were warned beforehand, in detail, where the explosive charges were going to be placed – they had sharpshooters stationed, and they didn’t shoot the perp – it was the civilian, admittedly ex SAS, who foiled the villain!!!  Poor old Scotland Yard!  A good read and I am now going to bed, sad to have come to the end.  I am a good boy, like your  hero Paul, but that doesn’t prevent me from dreaming about Naomi.  Well done.
     Peter S.  (Peter S. is a retired recruitment executive.  He is quite direct; his comment on a different manuscript: “It’s boring”.)

“Efraim’s Eye” by William Peace is about two Iraqi half-brothers, Yusuf and Efraim, who are set to destroy the London Eye, an 800- passenger Ferris wheel, as a personal vendetta against the British. They plan to accomplish this by utilizing funds from the Morocco Chapter of the Global Youth Enterprise, GYE, a charity founded by the Duke of Suffolk which provides low cost loans to young entrepreneurs who have a great business idea but lack the financial requirements.

The story begins when Paul becomes a member of the charity in London and realizes that there are problems every time they send someone to Morocco to conduct an audit. At the same time, we learn that Yusuf is the CEO of the charity in Morocco as Efraim begins to plan the London Eye strike. As a financial consultant, Paul is sent to Morocco to investigate along with Naomi, a multilingual Israeli, who is the Director of Operations for GYE.  Upon the discovery of accounting irregularities with the management of the money, the chase for proof of corruption begins.

Peace did an excellent job alternating between Efraim’s whereabouts and actions and Paul and Naomi’s investigation and romance.  He was able to portray them simultaneously while developing and maintaining a flow that was easy to follow. His characters were real and interesting to the point that the suspense was built in his character development with action following towards the end. My favorite part was Paul and Naomi’s relationship and interaction, as he paired a conservative and well set in his ways 60-year-old man with a free spirited younger woman. Their fun interaction woven in the midst of the suspense made this a fun read.

Definitely a page turner, I found “Efraim’ Eye” by William Peace very difficult to put down. I recommend this book to all who love International, terrorism thrillers. “Efraim’s Eye” is a fascinating, and entertaining thriller!

Reader’s Views (Shortlisted for the prize in general fiction)

Criticism

Posted by

0

In The Daily Telegraph of 9 October, there was an article in which Sir Peter Stothard argues that discerning readers should pay attention to established critics rather than comments posted on the internet by amateurs.  He went on to say, “There is a general trend – and it’s certainly very prevalent online – for replacing argued literary criticism that allows you to compare books, to put them in context, to analyse how they work.  That kind of traditional criticism is very easily replaced by unargued opinion.  Storytelling is fine but it doesn’t require Man Booker judges to decide what people are going to enjoy taking on holiday and reading on the beach.  What the Man Booker judges can do is apply traditional literary criticism and try to identify what people will still want to read in 20 years’ time.  That was the aim of the prize and it’s important to hold on to it.”

Sir Peter is the editor of The Times Literary Supplement and chairman of this years’ Man Booker Prize judges.

While I would certainly agree that one should respect the opinions of recognised literary critics, Sir Peter’s argument strikes me as somewhat self-serving.  Is he saying that “we recognised literary critics are members of an elite guild, and you readers should pay no attention to anyone who is not a member of the guild”?  I hope not.

Sir Peter told Radio Times that the Man Booker Prize judges were increasingly required to identify books that were mot immediately easy to read because they were the ones that would eventually reward readers most.  Why the correlation between being difficult to read and being ‘eventually most rewarding’?  I think that most of us who have read Ulysses would agree that it is difficult to read, but is it more rewarding for being difficult?  I  think not.  It is a landmark piece of literature, and for that reason it  is interesting, but in what sense is it rewarding?

It seems to me that the guild of recognised literary critics is encouraging the creation of obscure, difficult literature.  But why does a novel have to be obscure and difficult to be valuable?  I would argue that the hallmarks of a really good novel are that it captures both the emotions and the intellect of the reader in a unique and memorable way.

What about ‘argued criticism’ vs. ‘unargued opinion’?  Taking the adjectives first, ‘argue’ – according to my dictionary – means ‘to discuss with reason’.  The implication seems to be that the recognised literary critic gives reasons for his/her views while the internet blogger simply expresses an opinion without reasons.  This is clearly not universally true.  Turning to the nouns, criticism is defined as ‘the art of judging, especially literature and the arts’.  But since criticism is an ‘art’ not a science, in what sense is it different than expressing an opinion?

My question, therefore, is what does it take to become a member of the guild?  Does one have to have the title of ‘Editor’?  What if one had the title of ‘Author’?  “No! No!”  I can hear the members to the guild protesting, “an Author is biased toward his/her style of writing and cannot be an independent judge.”  But if s/he, the Author, is well educated and has read widely, might not s/he be able to appreciate the styles of others?  Besides, the Author, particularly if s/he has enjoyed some success in writing, knows something about the craft of writing, and may be a better judge in some respects than the unpublished, appointed Editor.   

The day after Sir Peter’s views were published, The Daily Telegraph ran a column by Jon Stock entitled “How I survived an online literary mauling” and “Far from throttling serious criticism, internet reviews can be helpful to authors”.  Mr. Stock has written a series of spy thrillers, and one review of his work began, “Stock: misogynist and serial killer”.  He went on to say that he tracked down the reviewer and found that she is a professor of English at the State University of New York.  The professors’ principal objection was to the deaths of three women in four of his novels.  He agreed that perhaps this was a bit lopsided and she mentioned much else that she liked in his writing.

In his conclusion, Mr. Stock says, “For me, the whole exercise was an example of  the internet working as it should, a place where people with wildly differing opinions, in this case about books, can engage in constructive dialogue.  The literary critic, as championed by Sir Peter Stothard, has its place, but so do online reviewers, even the hostile ones.”  I agree.

Anna Karenina: A Review

Posted by

0

My wife and I went to see the film Anna Karenina last night.  It occurred to me that producing and directing a film is, in some respects, like writing a book.

So, what did we think of the film?  First, what we liked.  It is quite a beautiful production: eye-catching costumes, wonderful sets, and some of the characters are handsome/lovely.  The story – as far as I remember – is quite close to Tolstoy, and I’ve had a long admiration for the classical Russian authors, my favourite being Mikhail Sholokhov (And Quiet Flows the Don).

Having said that, we found the film disappointing.  The Daily Telegraph gave it a three star rating.  I guess two stars would be pretty harsh and it certainly doesn’t deserve four stars.

  • Casting: Keira Knightley is lovely, but she seemed one-dimensional as a great aristocratic beauty.  She didn’t convey the powerful erotic lust which Anna felt for Count Vronsky, nor did she capture the emotional degradation of a fallen woman.  Aaron Taylor-Johnson was mis-cast as Count Vronsky: he seemed more like a sallow youth than a dashing, bold cavalry officer and womaniser.  To be fair, his costumes were, I think, poorly chosen: plain white tunics with brass buttons.  Jude Law was excellent as Alexei Karenin, Anna’s emotionally chilly and reserved husband.  Kitty, a pretty young thing who fancies Vronsky, and Levin a wealthy farmer who is crazy about Kitty and finally wins her seem  very real.   These are the same challenges that the writer faces with his characters: how to make them real, and interesting.  I’m afraid with Anna and Vronsky, the director, Joe Wright, didn’t quite make it.
  • The Set: Much of the film is set in a 19th century dilapidated theatre.  This was done to keep the production budget under control.  Fair enough.  But, some of  the scenes are shot in the real world, so there is a back-and-forth between the theatre and the real world.  These abrupt transitions are distracting, and seem to have been selected only because it was difficult to get the desired effect in a theatre setting.  To me this is a cop-out.  If you’re going to choose an unusual setting, stick with it!
  • The Love Scenes: The scenes of Anna and Vronsky making love didn’t work for me.  They were shot as blurry close ups, and they failed to convey the personal, emotional and erotic dimensions.  As the scenes of the ‘love making’ transitioned, I kept wondering, ‘is that an arm or a leg? his or hers?’  There are probably restrictions on what Ms. Knightley will do on film.  Fair enough.  But one doesn’t have so show her off-limits areas to convey the splendid lust that Anna and Vronsky were feeling.  It is difficult to write good sexual prose, and I admit to not having mastered the technique yet, but I’m going to keep trying, because I think sex is an important dimension of being human.
  • Too Many Characters; Too Long: When one is writing a novel, one doesn’t worry to much about too many characters, as long as they are necessary to the story, and eliminating them would seem to short-change the reader.  In a novel, it is easy to introduce new characters: their names and relationships are usually made clear.  In a film, it is much more difficult: the director doesn’t stop the film and announce, “Now this  is Harry’s Aunt Margaret.”  In Joe Wright’s version of Anna Karenina there are characters who just appear, and who say important things, but one doesn’t understand what their relationship to others might be until later the film.  This suggests that Wright expected his audience to read the novel before coming to the film.  I did, but it’s been so long that I didn’t remember the minor characters.  I think that many writers – myself probably included – go on telling the story too long.  At over 800 pages for Anna Karenina, Tolstoy himself may have been guilty of this.  (The novel includes extended descriptions of Levin’s agricultural processes.)  In a book, writers may be able to get away with this: the reader just skips ahead.  For a film (this one has 246 scenes), it’s impossible to fast forward – unless you’re watching it as a DVD.

Reviews: Fishing in Foreign Seas

Posted by

0

The following reviews of Fishing in Foreign Seas have been posted on the Amazon sites:

by Kitty – ‘Book Lover’ (4 stars)

In his first novel Mr. Peace has spun a tale of the moral dilemmas confronting his protagonist both in his personal and professional life. Jamie Morrison, a likeable, intelligent, up and coming young executive with his company’s power generation group has the opportunity for the biggest sale deal of his career. The intricacies and machinations of closing the deal make for exciting and absorbing reading. Lots of tension there.

In the meantime his wife, who has played the corporate gypsy as he climbed the corporate ladder, finds herself living in a town where she feels she doesn’t fit in. Caterina is a stay at home mom with two young daughters and a Downs Syndrome little boy who keep her busy, but she knows something is missing. Tension at home, too.

As the business deal reaches its conclusion, Jamie discovers that it will only become reality if he does something unethical. Tempted by the attractiveness and sexiness of his personal assistant, he faces another dilemma, as he considers cheating on his wife.

In a delightful way, the chapters move back and forth from the present business dealings and home life to the story of their personal life. These chapters tell how he met his wife when he was a naval officer in port in Sicily. Seeing this beautiful woman at an opera, he manages to engage her in conversation and she later agrees to lunch with him. Her family owns a winery and he visits there. Their relationship develops into love. As her mother observes their obvious attraction and feelings and scared that they will marry and go to America, she warns her daughter about “fishing in foreign seas.” However, to no avail, as the young couple do marry. He leaves the navy, goes to work for a large manufacturing company, and they first settle in the Boston area. Other chapters detail their early married life, birth of children, and his progression in the company. As an aside, for those readers who only think Mafia when they hear the word Sicily, it should be noted that the chapters in Sicily provide wonderful insights into the history, culture and people of this island with which many readers might not be familiar.

Mr. Peace has created two very appealing characters in Jamie and Caterina. We are rooting for him to figure out how to “do the right thing” in business and for him and Caterina to solve this temporary glitch in their relationship.

At times it was difficult to keep all the business personages straight (perhaps too many?) and the footnotes were sometimes unnecessary and distracting, but all in all Mr. Peace has given us a good read.

by A S Burns (4 stars)

Mr Peace’s first novel interweaves two stories, the efforts of a large company (read Siemans) to win a huge contract for power generation equipment and the cross-cultural love story between a young naval officer and a Sicilian woman from a wine-raising family. The stories are interwoven in such a way that the past steadily creeps up on the present.

The contract acquisition story will be recognized as very close to reality by anyone with experience in this field of business, although it may challenge casual readers because of the large number of characters who make brief appearances and the footnotes needed to explain technical matters. The love story is followed from the first meeting of Jamie Morrison with Caterina Lo Gado at an opera performance in Sicily throughout the moves of the couple around the United States as Jamie pursues his career in sales. The descriptions of Sicilian life are enjoyable, and the undercurrent of sex present in the book is entertaining.

The conflict between a demanding business career and a fulfilling family life lies at the center of the work. Mr Peace dramatizes well the crucial choices that Jamie has to make when confronted with venality at work and temptation in his private life.

by E Consalvi (4 Stars)

This is a very interesting read, especially as it pursues two particular themes – a cross-cultural relationship, begun in the Mediterranean; and the workings of big business in America. Inevitably there are clashes between the values of a traditional society, and the very different values of the corporate culture. Tension, anxiety and self-doubt surface, and put strain on personal and business relationships. The passionate romance, which is central to the novel, is interwoven with the ruthlessness pervading the competition for sales and contracts. Very much recommended as a great read.

(For more information about my novels, see www.williampeace.net.  This novel is now available in e-book format for about $9.99.)

Reviews: Sin and Contrition

Posted by

0

The following reviews have been posted on Amazon.com of Sin & Contrition:

by Kittty “Book Lover” (5 stars)

What is sin and what is contrition? In exploring these issues, Bill Peace has written a page turner in his new novel Sin and Contrition, as he follows the lives of three males and three females from early adolescence through middle age. As with all of us, these characters confront life’s issues – schooling, relationships, families, faith, careers all requiring choices. An additional character in the form of the pastor of a local church injects questions humans deal with throughout their lives – is there a God, does He act in our lives, and for Christians, what is the meaning of Jesus? A most intriguing and unique device is the “epilogue” where Mr. Peace interviews each one of the characters and asks them to examine their consciences, so to speak. As they look back on their lives, do they have any regrets? What would they do differently? What would they say about some of the moral choices they made? The reader reacts to the justifications presented by the characters, but also considers the responses in terms of his/her own life choices. The book is compelling and thought provoking at the same time. I look forward to Mr. Peace’s next book.

by Book Review (5 stars):

In his novel Sin & Contrition, William Peace follows the lives of six Americans, three male and three female, from a small town near Pittsburgh. We meet them at age 14, when their concerns are still those of very early adolescence: popularity, pecking order, awakening sexuality and, perhaps surprisingly to most of us, right and wrong. As they develop through their teen years, young adulthood and middle age, we grow more and more involved with the sometimes predictable, sometimes very surprising but always plausible ways in which their lives progress.

There is a lot of sex in this book — and a lot of religion. It is up to the reader to decide how comfortable he is with either. Peace seems to be totally comfortable everywhere, whether he is writing about the Marine Corps., lingerie manufacturing in Taiwan, tax fraud, drug abuse or political maneuvering. And, of course, he has the luxury of six different lives — and many very valid and fascinating minor characters — to play with.

He has also mastered the secret of the docu-drama. We know we are reading fiction, but we totally believe in these characters to the degree that when he chooses to close his account as an author interviewing them, we shake our heads but buy it. Or, perhaps it’s the soap opera that Peace has mastered. In either case, we want to tune in again tomorrow.

(For more information about my novels, see www.williampeace.net.

Critics

Posted by

0

In my experience, capable, honest critics are hard to come by.  All writers need thoughtful criticism, but it’s not easy to find. 

My wife reads my material, and she often points out passages that could be improved.  Mostly, she’s right.  Occasionally, I’ll disagree with her, but her comments are always valuable.

One of my friends read the first few chapters of a novel I was writing with an existential theme.  He found it ‘boring’, so I have set it aside for now.  Interestingly, his wife was fascinated with my descriptions of college life at Notre Dame University.  She said, ‘but you went to Yale.  How do you know so much about Notre Dame?’  The answer to this question can be found in my post about Research.  (There is also a passage about Cornell University in Sin & Contrition.  My father went to Cornell and I have visited the campus several times as a child/teenager, but I had to research Cornell in depth to write that passage.)

Most friends who are asked to be critics, recognise that their feelings about a book are likely to be coloured by their preferences.  Some people like war stories: others enjoy love stories.  According to their preferences, they like a book or dislike it.  But this preference may not distinguish good writing from bad writing.

There are, of course, lots of professional critics out there.  They include literary agents and publishers.  Of necessity, their most important criterion is: will this sell?  Then they examine the quality of the writing.  The decision ‘will this sell?’ is not as straight forward as one might think.  We can all mention books that should never have been published, and some that were initially refused publication but which caught fire with the public when they appeared.

Similarly, a book reviewer has to consider what the subscribers to his/her newspaper like to read.

Perhaps academics have the least biased viewpoint.  No commercial considerations are present to colour their judgement, and they can focus on the quality of the writing.  But book publishing is a business, and, as a business, commercial decisions are essential.  Besides, for the author, seeing his/her ‘creation’ published represents an important recognition.

It is very easy for a writer to produce less than perfect quality material.  Before even considering ‘will this sell?’, there are many things that can go wrong:

  • grammar and syntax errors (a good editor should catch these)
  • spelling errors (ditto)
  • excessive wordiness
  • insufficient clarity
  • stereotyped characters
  • characters without credibility
  • excessively complex plot
  • plot is too simple to be interesting
  • dialogue is stilted
  • confusing sequence of events
  • use of confusing language
  • etc.
  • etc.

A well-known American author wrote about a female character: ‘her pussy was like a baseball glove’.  I thought ‘Whoa!  What does that mean?’  Then it occurred to me that the writer was trying to use unique language to differentiate himself from the hoi polloi of writers.  OK.  But, still, what does it mean?  Does it mean that the lady was leathery?  had a pocket? was worn? was used to play a game? or something else?  To me, ambiguous writing is not good writing, even if it is unique.

So, I seriously and sincerely invite the reader to comment on my blog and to criticise my novels.  Because I’m still learning, you may find that I agree with you.