Being Too Quick to Judge

 

Some of my main characters spend a lot of time reading. Since I write historical novels for children, I believe that it’s important to have them reading books that were actually around then. I have a long list of children’s classics and always check the initial publication dates.

Unfortunately, I recently read a book that reminded me that not all authors do that. I didn’t consider it one of the most egregious instances that I have seen, but it still bothered me.

Then I read it again.

The book I was reading is A Girl’s Guide to Winning the War by Annie Lyons, which takes place during World War II. The story is written for adults and has an adult protagonist, but her young niece is a prominent character. At one point the main character is reading Little House on the Prairie to her niece while a friend listens. That part is fine since Little House on the Prairie was published in 1935 and may well have made its way across the ocean by the beginning of the war. But the book is new to the friend, and the protagonist asks, “Didn’t you read these books with your mother when you were little?” Since the friend would have been a teenager by the time Little House on the Prairie came out, I was disappointed that the author would think it had been around that long.

That was going to be the theme of this blog: emphasizing the importance of researching publication dates before mentioning a book in historical fiction. When I looked for the quote to include in this post, however, I discovered a very big mistake on my part. It wasn’t the protagonist who asked the question but her young niece, who obviously wouldn’t have had any clue that the series hadn’t been around that long.

So even though Annie Lyons isn’t likely to read this blog, I’m apologizing to her now.

More importantly, it goes to show how important it is to read or listen carefully before criticizing someone for what they say. Otherwise, it’s way too easy to get the meaning wrong. That’s how misunderstandings—and even wars—begin.

So don’t be too quick to judge.

Even the Kitchen Sink

 

Last week I mentioned that spelling was the only subject I ever got Ds in, “At least not until law school, and that’s another story.” Rather than leaving you hanging, this post tells that other story.

I attended law school at Chicago-Kent College of Law, which is a division of the Illinois Institute of Technology. Two of the reasons I decided to go there were 1) they had evening classes (and I needed to work during the day to afford it), and 2) they allowed students to start with the January semester. With a few exceptions, including the one I’m going to mention in this post, it was a great place to go and I got a good legal education there.

So when my first summer session rolled around, I had just one semester behind me. I wanted to take the only two classes that would fit into my schedule and didn’t have prerequisites I couldn’t meet. Actually, the Evidence professor tried to talk me out of taking his class because I didn’t have enough substantive background yet, but those classes weren’t actual prerequisites and I signed up anyway.

The other class was Criminal Procedure, which was supposed to be an easy A.

I should have known better. I had the same professor for Legal Ethics my first semester and ended up with a C. People who know me have a hard time believing I got a C in an ethics class, and I had a hard time believing it myself. Still, I was just finding my way in law school and didn’t ask the professor why he gave me that grade.

That was probably a mistake.

Law school classes weren’t like my undergraduate ones. Midterms were rare, as were quizzes. So in most cases I had no idea how I was doing until I took the final exam and got my semester grade. Still, I was fairly comfortable about how I was doing in Criminal Procedure.

When I received my final grades, I had one A and one D, and they weren't in the classes I expected.

This time I did make an appointment to talk to my Criminal Procedure professor. When I asked what I could have done differently, he literally told me that I should have given him “the kitchen sink.” And yes, he did use those three words. I don’t remember how I responded, but I’m sure I walked out of his office in shock.

In case any of you aren’t familiar with the phrase “everything but the kitchen sink,” it usually means someone has provided a lot more information (usually irrelevant) than necessary.

I believe in being efficient and providing only those arguments that a judge isn’t going to laugh at. So, although I probably didn’t say it at the time, I refuse to learn how to include the kitchen sink.

In the long run, that D in Criminal Procedure didn’t mean much. It wasn’t a failing grade, and a D was good enough to keep me from repeating the class. I did need a C average to graduate, but the D in Criminal Procedure was more than offset by the A in Evidence, and the rest of my law school grades were As and Bs with a sprinkling of Cs, so my GPA was never in danger.

It did teach me a valuable lesson, though. A good writer knows his or her audience, which I obviously didn’t. Still, it isn’t enough to satisfy the audience.

I also need to satisfy myself.

Vocabulary and Spelling

 

I just finished a book where a boy whips out his pocket dictionary every time he hears a word he doesn’t understand. I have a great vocabulary, so I don’t need a dictionary for that. And even if I have one, it doesn’t always help.

If a word is spelled phonetically, I can find it. But if it isn’t . . .

Spelling has always been my downfall, the only subject I ever got a D in. (At least not until law school, and that’s another story.) I can’t rely on artificial intelligence, either. The spell-check on Word usually works, but if my spelling is too far off, it doesn’t include the correct choice. Then I’m sunk.

That’s a problem with doing crosswords, too. If I know the answer but misspell it, it can throw everything off.

So here’s my advice to my younger readers: don't make my mistake.

Learn to spell.

Writing Parallel Series

 

I while ago I decided to write a series of middle-grade novels taking place during the California gold rush, and I have just started sending them to editors and agents. The series consists of a stand-alone story for each of the three most common routes to California: around Cape Horn, across the Isthmus of Panama, and over the plains. The first two books have female protagonists and the third has a male protagonist.

Over the Plains is the second book I have written with a male protagonist, and it is the first that didn’t also include a female protagonist. Obviously, I have never been a boy, and that makes me hesitant to write from a male point-of-view. Still, many women write male POVs successfully, just as many men write female POVs successfully. And the boys I used as beta readers for Over the Plains didn’t question the accuracy of my male character’s thoughts and actions.

As I was searching for agents, one website said the agent is particularly interested in books that would encourage boys to read. Statistics say boys do not read as much as girls do, and they will rarely read a book with a female in the leading role. So I assume the agent is interested in books with a boy as the main character. I will certainly send him Over the Plains.

But maybe it’s time to step out of my comfort zone and write more books for boys. In fact, I think I can do it by splitting my completed series in two—or, rather, by creating two parallel series, one for girls and one for boys. This requires an additional three books, but I think they would be both challenging and fun.

The middle book in the series is about the trip across the Isthmus of Panama, and writing a version for the boys’ series should be relatively simple. My twelve-year-old female protagonist has a fifteen-year-old brother who plays a big part in the story. I’m envisioning a parallel book told from his point-of-view.

The other books will require more effort. I already have the first two books for girls, but if I move Over the Plains to the boys’ series, I will need a new book for the girls’ series to cover the overland trip to the gold fields. Except for one adult, there are no significant female characters in Over the Plains, so I will have to create an entirely new story line. I can, however, use the same setting and place the new story in the same wagon train. Obviously, there are some events that affect the entire train, and I will use them in both books. It’s a large enough train that the significant characters in the two books won’t have to interact, however, so I shouldn’t have to make any edits to Over the Plains.

I have a similar problem with the first book in the series when trying to adapt it for boys. There are no boys in that book who would make a good protagonist for the trip around Cape Horn. Again, however, I can create a new story about a boy on board the same ship on the same voyage. If I put him in the crew, he won’t have to associate with the passengers. I will use some of the events that affect everyone on board, but I won’t have to change the book I have already completed.

Sometimes my head pops with ideas and I get excited about the challenge, and this is one of those times. But there’s a problem. Although I have ideas for all three books, I can only write one at a time. And I’m currently working on a different book, so I’ll have to finish the current draft of that one first.

Still, I can’t wait to get started.

__________

Beginning at the upper left, the images in the photo are: “Clipper ship Sweepstakes,” lithographed by Fannier Palmer and published by Nathaniel Currier in 1853; “Der Isthmus von Panama auf der Höhe des Chargres River” (“The Isthmus of Panama at the Height of the Chargres River”), 1850 painting by Charles Christian Nahl; and 19^th century illustration of a westward wagon train, artist unattributed.

Responses from Readers

 

My denomination publishes a quarterly devotional magazine called Portals of Prayer. In every issue, three individuals each write a month’s worth of daily devotions.

Mine appeared in February.

I received a number of comments on the devotions. Only one was negative, but that one and one of the positive ones were unexpected.

Portals of Prayer includes a brief biography of each writer that includes the individual’s church but no other contact information. Although it also didn’t include my website, that is easy enough to find with an internet search and I received several comments through its contact page. That’s how I received the sole negative comment.

I had done several devotions on God’s command to obey governing authorities. I followed them up with one on obeying God rather than the governing authority when the governing authority asks us to do something contrary to God’s Law (Acts 5:29), and I used Hitler as an example.

Here is a quote from the email I received in response to that devotion.

You had to bring up Hitler, what an easy way to be brave! Sorry Miss, but you are either a coward, and/or a lazy researcher or a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Hitler actually was a devout Catholic, and during his era, thousands of new churches were actually built, and none were taken down.

I haven’t researched whether new churches were built during Hitler’s era, and that statement may be true. Hitler may also have claimed to be a devout Catholic, but his actions prove otherwise.

The email went on to say that the real villainy (my word, not his) occurred in the Soviet Union, where, according to the writer, Jews were behind Bolshevism and created it specifically to murder as many Christians as possible. Finally, the writer denied the existence of the Holocaust and ended by saying, “As Christians, we are not allowed to lie about other people or countries, simply because everyone believes it to be factual.”

In many ways, that was an easy comment to respond to. Although I consider research to be one of my strengths and calling me a lazy researcher would normally have upset me, the entire email made it clear that the writer was misguided. Arguing would accomplish nothing since the unknown author of the email is as unlikely to change his or her mind as I am to change mine. So I simply said, “Thank you for sharing your opinion with me,” and left it at that.

One of the positive responses to the devotions was harder to handle.

Several people contacted me through my church, and one note complimenting the devotions included a check for $125.

It wouldn’t be quite true to say I didn’t do it for the money. I consider myself a professional writer who is worthy of my hire, and I gladly accepted the stipend that Portals of Prayer paid me for my work. Still, my primary goal is to write to the glory of God, not for worldly reward. While I appreciate all the positive comments, I don’t feel right accepting money from a reader. So I voided the check and returned it with some suggestions for where they could donate the money if they so chose.

Writers never know what type of responses they will get from readers. Many times readers’ opinions are unexpressed, and the writer doesn’t know what they are. I can live with that.

But it’s always nice to hear from readers.

___________

The picture at the beginning of the post was painted in 1896 by Arthur Netherwood and is titled “Portrait of an Old Woman Reading the Bible by Candlelight.” It is in the public domain because of its age.