Muse Harbor Publishing Launches Young Adult Magical Mystery Novel April, Maybe June on March 20

book6Muse Harbor Publishing Launches Young Adult Magical Mystery Novel “April, Maybe June” at Left Coast Crime 2014 – Monterey March 20

Popular Author Shalanna Collins Debuts “April, Maybe June” Novel as First Book in Bliss Sisters Magical Adventures Series.

Santa Barbara, CA (PRWEB) March 18, 2014

On March 20, 2014, Muse Harbor Publishing’s author of six published novels, Shalanna Collins, debuts her new Young Adult mystery with a magical twist, April, Maybe June to crime readers and writers during the sold-out Left Coast Crime Conference in Monterey, CA.

Collins, a seasoned past conference attendee, will be joined by her publisher, Muse Harbor’s Fiction Editor, Dave Workman, to meet new and veteran crime readers and writers, sign books and promote the launch of April, Maybe June.

Pamela Dean, Author of Tam Lin, and The Secret Country, says “April is the book’s delightful narrator, both witty and unintentionally funny, one of those kids people sometimes say were ‘born old,’ but young and earnest and energetic too. She is fiercely loyal to family and takes this to its logical conclusion in a twisty magical plot full of both humor and terror.”

Workman, crime noir author of On The Rocks, was recently coined by award-winning author Matthew J Pallamary as “The New Elmore Leonard.” Workman will be speaking on a Left Coast Crime Conference panel, promoting both his and Collin’s new crime novels, as well as looking for new authors to publish under Muse Harbor’s moniker.

Collin’s clever young adult novel April, Maybe June, finds home-schooled siblings April and June Bliss inadvertently sucked into their older cousin Arlene’s troubled life when the street-savvy 17-year-old disappears, then sends for their help via an inscrutable grimoire and a mesmerizing silver ring. When life turns supernaturally spooky, April and June must pull together to survive.

April, Maybe June is available on Amazon.com and Museharbor.com. For more of Collins’ writing, visit her blogs at shalanna.livejournal.com, shalannacollins.blogspot.com, deniseweeks.blogspot.com and Friend her on facebook.com/ShalannaCollinsBooks.

Collins graduated from Southern Methodist University with a BS in Computer Science and a BA in Mathematics and has published fiction in several genres, including mystery, fantasy, chick lit, and romantic suspense. She has also published books written as Denise Weeks. “April, Maybe June” is the first book in her Bliss Sisters Magical Adventures series. When she isn’t writing fiction, Collins tutors secondary school math, works as a literacy volunteer, does research on the Internet, and noodles on the piano. She and her husband live happily in a northern suburb of Dallas.

Based in Santa Barbara, CA, Muse Harbor Publishing was founded in 2011 as “writers helping writers, in service to our readers.”

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Active Language

.

Rules-headerA blog for fiction writers and impending writers. An editor’s perspective.

Next post • Previous post • Index


Active Writing (Part 2): Active Language (Grammar, sentence structure, linguistics)

To recap: I look for active writing—the life of a novel—on three distinct levels: 1. Voice, 2. Language and, 3. Plot.

I’ll keep this simple for both our sakes. If you need a grammar lesson, we’re both in the wrong place.

But, in the English language (as compared to, say, Kayabi, and whatever Yoda spoke), the simplest way to invoke energy and emotion into sentence structure is typically: Subject (S) + Verb (V) + Object (O). Thus: John (S) kissed (V) Mary (O). Or: Laura (S) + killed (V) + the snake (O).

As opposed to Mary was kissed by John. Or; The snake was killed by Laura. Or even more passive: It was the snake that was killed by Laura.

By rearranging the sentence structure to the less energetic Object + Verb + Subject (OVS), the writer’s placing the action’s instigator at the end of the sentence and slightly altering the emphasis. And in longer, more complex sentences, both nuance and structure can become uncomfortably apparent. You’re also clogging your story with extremely passive verbs; “was” and “were;” unnecessary prepositions, pronouns, articles and the so-called “little” phrases (e.g.; it would, that were, of the, by which). Such utterly unexciting placeholders act as a buffer between words and action.

For instance, a subtle but distinct difference exists between: Prince Clarion crushed the giant orc’s head and The head of the giant orc was crushed by Prince Clarion. While both structural formats can and will ultimately co-exist in your novel, play with the most active structure first. This is especially important in scenes of passion, action, high tension or terror.

Rule #6: The Jumping Cow Rule (Active vs. Passive Voice). I learned this tenet once upon a time in Eng. Lit. 101. These words have kept Prince Clarion blissfully crushing orcs’ heads ever since:

ActiveThe cow jumped over the moon.
PassiveThe moon was jumped over by the cow.
Bad passiveIt was the moon that was jumped over by the cow.*

* Exceptions always exist. You’ll eventually find this particular phraseology a perfect fit for your needs and, by all means, use it. However, if you find yourself using this grammatical gremlin as a basic structural pattern—then no, you’re not infusing sufficient excitement into your writing. You’re using passive language way too often. And no, Muse Harbor will probably not publish you.

And, no, simply because Hemingway frequently used passive voice, you may not. And, no, because David Foster Wallace did so in present tense—”I am this” and “I am that”—you may not. “It was…” is glaringly overused in modern fictive writing. More often than not, excessive passive voice is a sign of tired writing. Meaning your brain’s full. Put down your pencil. Take a walk. Take a nap. Clean the house. Because most “it” usage can transmogrify into far more descriptive prose. Occasionally, it fits such sentence structure may suffice your needs, but most often, it does not your words can be easily rearranged with far more passion and creativity.

While I doubt any author can (or should) write an entire novel strictly using SVO sentence structure, I suggest keeping this grammatical sequence as a staple tool for active writing. The volcano belched a cascade of hot lava. Rather than: Hot lava was belching from the volcano. Realize that by simply altering your subject (from OVS), you can maintain the SVO principle but also shift your reader’s attention, such as: Hot lava poured from the mountain’s ruptured peak. With nary a “was” or “were” in sight.

A good many novice writers (and even published pro’s) can occasionally slip into a steady flow of passivity. Be on the constant lookout for:

It was a dark and stormy night. Linda was sleeping. There was a noise that awakened her with a start. What was that? she wondered. Was somebody standing outside her door. Was it her husband, Teddy? It was because she didn’t know that she tiptoed to the door. There was only silence beyond the door. Linda was scared and we, dear reader, are ready to close this book forever.

So look closely for any steady stream of passive sentence structure beginning with tired phraseology: It was, They were, There was—and the dreaded It was because…. Each of these sentences can be actively rearranged (and the more you begin to do so, the easier such restructuring becomes).

I’ve occasionally come upon an interesting side-effect of passive language. If a writer twists and contorts various, meaningless phrases long and hard enough, the words sometimes almost sound correct. In fact, a writer may even convince himself that such lavish flow of language sounds positively Shakespearean. But this style of writing is roughly akin to spritzing a pig in expensive French perfume. He may smell nice for awhile, but you still won’t want to kiss him.

For example, this sentence still smells like a pig: “Of that substance to which Richard was most disinclined ever to confront, he promised himself never again to touch it to his lips.”

Keep your message simple. What’s the idea you’re trying to impart here? It’s: Richard hated chocolate, right?

So how might one say that creatively? How about: Richard couldn’t understand the world’s love affair with chocolate. On his tongue, the candy oozed like motor oil, and tasted, to his best perception, like dirty butter.

A simple thought, distinctly perceived, clearly transmitted. Active, not passive.
.


Next post • Previous post • Index

.

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Active Voice

.

Rules-headerA blog for fiction writers and impending writers. An editor’s perspective.

Next post • Previous post • Index


Active Writing (Part 1): Active Voice

When I’m editing a work of fiction, I look for active writing—the life of a novel—on three distinct levels: 1. Voice, 2. Language and, 3. Plot.

Active writing… the antithesis of passive writing. Friends who write and creative writing teachers, editors and agents, publishers and critics and helpful relatives at Thanksgiving dinner—they’re always imploring us to “Write active, not passive.” So what part of the creative writing process—voice, style or composition—should continually sparkle with activity?

The answer is:Yes, yes and yes. All of the above.

Remember Rule #8Keep your characters moving. Inhale or Exhale. A fiction writer constantly, continually pushes a character toward conflict, or pulls her away again. Active Writing breathes passionate resonance into your storytelling (and style, and voice) at the appropriate times. Anybody who’s ever read a great work of fiction can pretty much intuit an inhale from an exhale. (If you can’t, you’re probably in the wrong business. No offense.)

However, breathing life into a novel isn’t a singularity. It happens (subliminally or not) on multiple levels during the creation of a novel. I look for the life of a novel on three distinct levels: Voice, Language and Plot. But let’s look at voice, first.

Stop me if you’ve heard this one: Show, don’t tell. (And a bit more about the specifics here, but keep reading…!)

Show, don’t tell. Meaning… show the reader the gleam of the diamond, the glint of hard steel, the fragrance of new blossoms in the spring—and not simply tell the reader, it’s a rock, it’s a sword, it was warm.

When you tell a story in passive voice, you’re providing a bare-bones, superficial glimpse through a dispassionate, authorial (a.k.a.: omniscient) voice. For example:

John hated Mary.

The statement may be clear and simple—but it’s hardly exciting writing. When you allow us to glimpse morsels of your story by using active voice, you’re using interpretive sensory details far more illuminating, and pleasing—or horrifying, if that’s your intent—to the reader’s senses. You’re revealing hidden passions or characteristics or secrets that may not otherwise be revealed. You’re sifting through the layers of each character, seeking those few gleaming shards that best illustrates the fact that John does indeed hate Mary. You’re picking a single carrot out of the stew, and investigating that one morsel in breathtaking detail.

Mary recoiled at her husband’s touch. She found his breath cloying, his voice dripping with a sarcastic bitterness that betrayed his disgust with the woman who had once captured his soul.

Or ponder the efficient, yet detached: Joan loved Paul.

Now consider the alternate: She adored the way Paul reached for her hand when they walked together on the beach, or how he touched her face in the moonlight, and whispered her name.

Not once does a writer need to use the words “love” or “hate.” Instead, the reader intuits those vibes from the use of richer language. A single tear falling from an eye can be a far more poetic experience than Joan sobbed all day long.

So… Is  Showing, Not Telling a principle element of Simple, but Exciting? Or of Exciting, but Simple? It is, IMHO, the best of both worlds. Let’s backtrack a sec:

She adored the way Paul reached for her hand….

A pretty basic concept, no? A single, simple sentence evokes an emotion, a bond between Joan and Paul. A confident writer might intuit that no further character development is necessary yet, or else add a line or two more to impart other significant detail about their relationship at the moment. However, lavishing nuance after nuance into another dozen pages would, indeed, complicate the obvious. Once we intuit that Joan indeed loves Paul, it’s time to move on. Thus, a writer might begin to scene set, adding details about the endless, palm swept, black-sand beach. Or perhaps it’s time to infuse a plot element—introducing that unseen, 18-foot Great White swimming hungrily just beyond the breakers.

Rule #20: Don’t extend a scene past the “just enough” point. For instance, “too much” might look like:

She adored Paul because he’d once bought her flowers that had cost twenty dollars at the carnival in Rio, but back then Paul had a part-time job as an undertaker, so he didn’t mind spending so much, even though he could have bought roses cheaper down the road at a place called Pepe’s, where Paul had once dated a girl named Rita.

Unless any of the above rambling “summary” is later crucial to the plot (or a very specific style choice that’s leading somewhere), Paul’s former career, the existence of Pepe’s or Rita’s mention, that information does not belong in the book. And certainly none of it belongs on this beach. If any of the information is later crucial—introduce those elements at the appropriate time. In other words, if we don’t meet Rita again for 150 pages, don’t mention her in passing now. We certainly won’t recall her name! Nor should you expect a reader to carry that baggage for 150 pages. However, if Rita will develop later into a necessary character, give her ample stage-time (if only a few paragraphs), or some specific trait, sufficient for readers to remember her 150 pages hence.
.


Next post • Previous post • Index

.

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Using Hearts to Save the World

book6Rehabilitating the Divine Feminine with “Sacred Economics” Author Eileen Workman Wed Feb 19th 7 pm on BlogTalkRadio.com

Muse Harbor Publishing’s Eileen Workman, Economic Philosopher/Author of “Sacred Economics: The Currency of Life” and former Wall Street Economic Financier/Vice President, shares a hopeful vision for how to create an abundant, harmonious economy that eliminates indebtedness, exploitation and inequality. She will discuss how resurrecting the archetypal energies of The Divine Feminine can help us build a regenerative, sustainable and compassionate society on a global scale.

San Francisco, CA (PRWEB) February 14, 2014

On February 19th, 2014 at 7 PM PST, controversial political, socio-economic author/blogger Eileen Workman will discuss her book “Sacred Economics”and the rehabilitation of the Divine Feminine here on Voices of The Sacred Feminine Radio, hosted by Karen Tate. Please click on the link above to listen to the show.

Workman and Tate will be discussing the progressive ideas and practical life-tools used to manifest abundance from her book, “Sacred Economics: The Currency of Life” and the return of the Divine Feminine to promote new ways of thinking from the heart for world betterment.

The financial expert and noted economic visionary will provide simple, non-monetary steps that individuals, companies and local governments can take toward building sustainable communities, and peace of mind.

Workman will provide concrete examples of how real-life, self-sustainable, gift-based communities, modeled after natural ecosystems are being created and successfully implemented in cities around the world.

Showing how today’s greed has killed many industries, Workman predicts the death of the debt system and explains how these new, gift-based communities are not only here, they are thriving.

In her book, “Sacred Economics: The Currency of Life”, available from Amazon, Barnes & Noble, iTunes, and Muse Harbor Publishing, Workman offers a logical analysis of the problems that are undermining the global monetary system. She also maps out steps individuals and governments can take to move beyond our present economic gridlock to create a real sustainable and life-affirming economy.

Workman worked most recently as a First Vice President of Investments with a major international Wall Street firm and draws upon her work experience and extensive research, to present a powerful argument that the outmoded and corrupted vehicle of capitalism cannot sustain us for another generation.

 

Better to confront our fear, our unknown self, than to run because we’re too afraid to ask those questions we’ve been taught never to ask.

Eileen Workman,
author of Sacred Economics

Workman does not blame capitalism for the problems we face. Instead, she questions why society continues to worship the aggressive growth engine that drives our global economy.

Why is debt necessary? How can society overcome greed? Why does poverty exist? Is a moneyless society possible? By carefully deconstructing our shared, often unexamined beliefs around “making the grade” in modern society, Sacred Economics points to an evolutionary opportunity.

Sacred Economics’ inspired perspective explains why humans are drawn to the innovation of creative exchange, and how—in the interest of becoming the best we can collectively be—society might direct their attention toward the purposeful design of a more compassionate, cooperative and abundantly flowing economic system.

Workman says, “Better to confront our fear, our unknown self, than to run because we’re too afraid to ask those questions we’ve been taught never to ask. Those questions: Who am I? Why am I here? What is my life purpose? What am I capable of doing? Does God exist, and what is my relationship to this world?”

Ms. Workman, an engaging speaker, financial expert and global economic visionary, can be reached for further Radio, TV, Print and Online interviews or event speaking engagements, by contacting Margaux(at)museharbor(dot)com. Friend Eileen on Facebook to join her blog and conversations on innovative solutions and political/economic philosophies targeting a wide array of current events.

Muse Harbor Publishing was founded in 2011 as an organization of “writers helping writers, in service to our readers.”

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Exciting, But Simple

.

Rules-headerA blog for fiction writers and impending writers. An editor’s perspective.

Next post • Previous post • Index


Exciting, But Simple.

I’m not sure if there’s a sage in the world who can teach the secrets of exciting writing. If they can’t, I certainly can’t either.

I happen to believe that writers, like ball players, concert cellists and chess masters, are born into this world fully equipped with the ability to succeed. Some will never have the chance or the perseverance to fully explore or hone our true talents. Others will spill blood, sweat and tears, but never catch that lucky break. (Sorry, yeah, it’s about luck, too.) Sometimes, good writers simply encounter bad timing. Or the wrong agent, or editor, or the wrong publisher. And don’t think I haven’t lost a sleepless night or two fretting about that last quandary. I have.

And sometimes, the most diligent of souls, the sweetest of people, simply aren’t good enough. Almost, but not quite. The world is filled with manuscripts, piled high in milk crates crammed into back corners of countless closets. As my grandmother used to say, “You can’t make a Ferrari out of a Studebaker.”

She’s right. But the biggest tragedy is never knowing. Never trying. The world may indeed be overladen with Studebakers pretending to be Ferraris, but I suspect the world has its fair share of idling Ferraris, glumly assuming they’re Studebakers. These are the writers who’ll never allow themselves the chance to experience themselves flying balls out down that literary speedway of life. And that’s a shame.

As hopeful authors, most of us are capable of crafting and honing our mechanical abilities—we can read creative writing books, we can study language and craft and attend workshops—we’re able to eventually intuit a noun from a verb. Because a writer can learn the simple stuff. But you can’t learn what can’t be taught. You can’t learn writing excitement.

When I talk about excitement, I’m talking about a writer’s individual style, that unique blend of panache and enthusiasm and articulation. Style can’t be bought or taught or handed down, generation to generation. Nobody taught Picasso Cubism. Nobody taught Babe Ruth to hit homers. Nobody taught Einstein to think. They each had it in ’em, all along.

If you have it—and Tom Wolff would call it the right stuff—good for you. Aim for the center field bleachers. If you don’t have it, you’ll discover that soon enough and move on. Ninety-five percent of wannabe fiction writers move on, and often to even greater endeavors. Ain’t no shame in crossing off write a novel from your bucket list, before skiing the Alps or designing a home or discovering cold fusion.

So… do I have advice for those of you attempting to determine your own stylistic prowess? (Does a goose have paté?) I can offer a few suggestions to flint that spark, to perhaps ignite something inside that might never extinguish.

Suggestion #1. New to fiction writing? Overwhelmed by the concept of writing 350 pages end-to-end? Unsure of your own abilities or talent or stamina? Start with smaller bites. Write a short story. Write an idea. Write a slice of life—a simple scene, a simple page with no beginning or no end—with no other agenda than pure enjoyment. Write for yourself. Make yourself smile. If that works… write another page. If you find yourself pouring out your soul, or simply amusing yourself with your own creative genius, perhaps you’re onto something. But writing a novel is kinda like giving birth. Give it time. Give it room. If you start pushing too hard at three months you’ll only hurt yourself, and the kid’ll be thinking WTF, mom?

So…. Rule #3. Always write for yourself. If you find yourself writing for an audience, you’ll eventually lose yourself in the crowd. Even if you’re successful, sooner or later you’ll probably sell your soul. So write to please yourself, first and foremost.

Suggestion #2. Chances are, if you’re a writer, you’re also a reader. As a reader, what excites you? When I write, I keep a favorite novel on my desk and, most mornings before I begin working, I pick a random page and begin to read. Sometimes I read a few paragraphs, sometimes a few pages. I read until I’m filled with awe and appreciation and amazement that, yeah, that’s great stuff. And I can do it too.

By reading snippets, I’m not attempting emulate a writer’s style or content—I’m not plagiarizing substance or verbiage—I’m simply trying to jump start my own creative juices by absorbing another writer’s creative juices. It’s the literary equivalent of a Vulcan Mind-Meld.

Suggestion #3. Concentrate on dialogue. The eyes may be the portal to the soul (as the poets like to say), but in fiction, dialog is the portal to a character’s soul. I believe dialog to be the single most important asset to a unique voice. Try writing a few pages of dialog; two people simply talking to each other. No other modifiers (i.e.; he said sweetly, or she chuckled insanely.) Simply two voices. Don’t think about it—just begin a dialog. You might be amazed at how spontaneous (again, as in don’t think about it) you’ll find a situation (no matter how irrelevant) developing:
.

S’up?”
“Nada.”
“Haven’t seen you in a while.”
“Been busy.”
“That your elephant?”
“Nah. My mom’s.”
“He gotta name?”
“Buster.”
“Buster?”
“He don’t come when you call him, though.”
“No, I don’t think he’d give a shit.”
“Unless maybe you have ice cream.”
“Peanut butter?”
“Strawberry.”
“Man, you’d think peanut butter, huh?”
“Seriously, yeah.

…or some sort of totally random, unrehearsed, out-of-nowhere stuff. Try to create characters by voice alone, and see where that leads you. Maybe nowhere. Maybe a character sketch. Maybe a story. Maybe a novel. (Stranger things have happened.) And more about dialog later…

Suggestion #4. Keep your voice active. Not passive.
.


Next post • Previous post • Index

.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather