To Plot or Not by Roseanne Dowell

That is the question.
Or is it?
I've been asked many times if I plot my books. The answer is a resounding NO! It doesn't work for me. I'm not saying it's wrong. Many writers and hat works for them. Just like everything else in writing, there's no hard and fast rule. Many authors can't write if they don't plot. 

At one of our local chapter meetings of RWA, the speaker talked about plotting  and even writing a synopsis before the book was written. That concept never entered my mind. How can you write a synopsis before the book is written? She suggested if we'd never done that to try it. I figured what the heck,  why not give it a try.

So I did.

I had an idea for a story taking shape in my mind. As usual, I knew the beginning and end. What happened in the middle? I didn't have a clue. Oh, I had a few ideas. I knew there was a secret about my heroine’s birth, and that she’d find a dead body But I had no idea who he was (yes, I knew

it was a male) or why he was killed. 
So I tried plotting. I came up with a few ideas about his identity and even about who murdered him and even why.

I started to outline , and I came up with a pretty good story line. Then, I started writing. For a while, it flowed pretty well. Once my heroine discovered the body, I was stuck. Something didn't feel right. I wasn't sure what it was, but  I couldn't move on. My heroine wouldn't let me. No matter how I tried to write the next conflict, the words wouldn't come.

I was totally blocked. The story sat for the better part of the year without me adding even one word. Every time I opened it, I read it, made a few changes like I always did when opening my story,  and then I came to the part where I was stumped.

I stared at the computer, sometimes for hours, trying to come up with something, anything –even if it was garbage – just to get me past that hump. Nothing worked. 

So I’d move on to something else. I revised several other stories that I’d written a long time ago, then I’d go back to it. The problem was –I was locked into the outline, I didn't know how to make the transition to the next thing. It didn't feel right, wouldn't flow.                                                                 

It wasn't until I was emailing my writing buddy about my dilemma. I needed help and any suggestions she could offer would be most welcome. I told her what I had so far, and where I wanted the story to go. For some reason, in that email, I started to ask what if, which is how I usually write. I threw out a couple of ideas to her and answered them myself. Finally, I was unblocked. I even created a new character and another conflict. I ignored the plot outline and went a completely different way.

That's how I write. I'm what they call a panster (I write by the seat of my pants) I don't plot, I don't outline. At least not on paper. (computer). I write as I go along asking what if, and coming up with new ideas. For me, plotting and outlining doesn't work. I’ll never do it again. I know you're not locked into your outline, but for me, I couldn't get past it. XY and Z had to happen. I was wrong, of course, but by plotting and outlining, my subconscious mind wouldn't let me get past it. At least not until I went back to asking what if in the middle of the story like I usually did.  I had trouble deviating from the outline.  It blocked my creativity. Yes, I should have ignored it long before, but it was too fresh in my mind. It took a year and then some to forget what was on that outline so I could move on.

I guess my whole point is – write the way it’s comfortable for you. For the authors who plot and outline - that works and good for them. 

There is no right or wrong way, there’s only your way. Develop your own style, your own voice, and your own rules. Some authors get up in the morning and sit down to write. Some write later in the day, and still others write in the middle of the night. Again, whatever works best for you. The important thing is to write.

 Check out my books at: 

My current novels are available from Amazon at: http://amzn.to/tnqgR2  

Visit me at my website www.roseannedowell.com or my blog http://roseannedowellauthor.blogspot.com/

The "nerve" of the English Domestic Servant, by Diane Scott Lewis

While we think of servants of the past being much abused (and many were) I found out different in my on-going research. In the eighteenth century, a time when domestic service was seen as easier than toiling in a shop or factory, a poor farmer’s sons and daughters would go happily into this type of work. Even a parson’s family did not look down on the occupation. However, the English domestics thought of themselves as a cut above.

The English servant was quite independent and rarely satisfied with low wages. Instead of being content in the early part of the century with £2 a year, they were demanding as much as £6 and £8. Writer Daniel Defoe wanted to see wages fixed at no more than £5, or soon this rabble would insist on as much as £20.

Lord Fermanagh, when writing to a friend about his butler, who had the audacity to ask for £10, said: "I would have a sightly fellow and one that has had the smallpox, and an honest man, for he is entrusted with store of plate, and can shave, but I will give no such wages as this."

The English servant stood up for himself, giving notice or running away if ill-treated. One servant, after being struck by his master, turned on the man and killed him with a pitchfork.

Foreigners were amazed—since they treated their servants like slaves—to see a nobleman like Lord Ferrers hanged in 1760 for the murder of his steward.

In the earlier part of the century there was a scarcity of women servants, but later, after years of bad harvests, starvation sent many girls into service.

One lady, upon advertising for another housemaid, had over 200 applicants.

If wages were low, servants in a large house could supplement their pay with vails (tips). One foreigner complained after dining with a friend at his home: "You’ll find all the servants drawn up in the passage like a file of musqueteers from the house steward, down to the lowest liveried servant, and each of them holds out his hand to you in as deliberate a manner as the servants in our inns on the like occasion."

One clergyman reported that when he dined with his Bishop, he spent more in vails than would have fed his family for a week.

At least the Duke of Ormonde, when inviting a poor relation to dine, always sent him a guinea ahead of time for the vails.

A movement, rumored to have started in Scotland, was put forth to abolish vails, but nothing came of it.

If servants believed themselves independent, striving for respect, their employers often demanded too much from them for little pay. Mrs. Purefoy advertised for a coachman, who can not only drive four horses, but must understand husbandry business and cattle, plus he’d also be expected to plough. She also required a footman who could "work in the garden, lay the cloth, wait at table, go to the cart with Thomas, and do any other business that he is ordered to do and not too large sized a man, that he may not be too great a load for the horse when he rides."

Servants were derided by their "betters" as being lazy and selfish, especially when they’d leave their positions for higher wages and vails.

Of course, many servants during the eighteenth century—especially in the larger towns and cities—were mistreated and far underpaid, if paid at all.

Still, some servants were honored and treated as members of the family, as shown by this epitaph on a coachman’s headstone: Coachman the foe to drink and heart sincere; Of manners gentle and of judgment clear; Safe through the chequered track of life he drove; And gained the treasure of his master’s love...


To learn more about my eighteenth-century novels, please visit my website:

http://www.dianescottlewis.org


Source: English Country Life in the Eighteenth Century, by Rosamond Bayne-Powell, 1937

The Book That Started It All by Victoria Chatham

I class a favorite book as one I will read and then re-read again and again. The book I have re-read the most is Georgette Heyer's Frederica and I still find it as fresh and as funny as the first time I read it.

Georgette Heyer, 1902 - 1974

Frederica Merriville has one burning desire and that is to see her beautiful younger sister, Charis, introduced to the London ton in order to achieve a suitable marriage. To this end she engages the assistance of a distant cousin, the Marquis of Alverstoke - rich, bored and cynical. Alverstoke gradually succumbs to Frederica's charms, charms of which she is totally unaware as her family has her total focus. Along with her sister, Frederica also oversees the antics of brothers Harry (sent down from Oxford University), Jessamy (determined to be a priest and constantly berating himself as he falls between boyish pranks and high virtue) and Felix (who has a passion for science).

Alverstoke has already been approached by one of his sisters to have a coming out ball for his niece, Jane, at Alverstoke House. On a whim, he agrees to this providing his sister, Louisa, introduces Charis into society. Louisa has no option but to agree but is nearly undone when she discovers that Charis's shining beauty puts her own daughter in the shade. Tender-hearted Charis gets into one love interest after another culminating in her elopement. Jessamy's love of horses interests the Marquis, and Felix's scientific endeavors intrigue him. Harry, being older but not necessarily wiser engages the Marquis in an entirely different way. 

This is one of the best of Heyer's Regency romances. Heyer exquisitely captures the rough and tumble of family life with the social mores of the era, and wraps it into an engaging story with a strong thread of real comedy. The dialogue sparkles as Alverstoke is a perfect foil for Frederica's wit. One family adventure after another captivates Alverstoke's lively mind and, when he finally wins Miss Frederica Merrivllle's hand, it is on the understanding that he accept Jessamy and Felix too.

Heyer wrote her first book The Black Moth in serial form for her brother Boris, a young man in ill health who frequently became bored. Her father, George Heyer, enjoyed the story so much he became instrumental in getting it published and it was released in 1921.  

For many years Heyer took responsibility for supporting her family, publishing two novels a year, one a Regency romance and the other a thriller. Her Regency books sold well, her thrillers less so and were once criticized for having unoriginal 'methods, motives and characters'.

That her Regencies were influenced by the work of Jane Austen there is no doubt.  Austen rarely refers to details such as dress and manners because her writing was contemporary. Heyer, in comparison, included rich detail about fabrics, styles, and décor for her readers to understand the times and settings in which she placed her characters.

Heyer wrote until her death in July, 1974 and at that time had 48 titles in print. She lived out of the public eye, stating that “My private life concerns no one but myself and my family.”

I have read all of her romances and most of the thrillers, but it is Frederica that draws me back every time. This book alone gripped me from start to finish and made me want to create enigmatic characters, sweeping settings and thoroughly satisfying happy-ever-afters. I’m still working at it.

For more information about Victoria Chatham and her books, visit:

www.bookswelove.com/chatham.php
www.victoriachatham.webs.com
www.facebook.com/AuthorVictoriaChatham