I had a lightbulb moment with regard to the characters in the new book, as I lay in bed the other night. Was just mulling the theme, and what connects them (and also where they conflict), and had that "Aha!" moment where I totally got the thread that ties everything together.

At least, I hope it does.

My sister!

You know what's nuts-making? When you have an entire scene in your head, all there, how it works, the why, the language, the voice in place, it's a huge crashing major moment in the book....

And it's for two books up the line from the one you're working on.

GAH.

And it's for two books up the line from the one you're working on.

See, with me, it's for books I don't have a contract for. Yes, I'm supposed to be writing them first, and yes, I did start the first one, but in my head, all the really good stuff is brewing for the Epic book, and the chick lit book, and this YA book I've had on a back burner for about four years now.

Which probably means those are the books I *should* be writing, but I've got to take my money where I can, you know?

See, with me, it's for books I don't have a contract for.

I did that with Cruel Sister. I feel your pain.

Actually, right now, I've got NOTHING under contract. So on the one hand, I can write what wants out, but on the other?

Come, onnnnnnnnnnnnn, Jenn....

Organisation is mainly cosmetic. Were there suggestions about arranging it?

Yes, the macro organzation is fine. It is the medium organization that is bad.

OK this is book making a long and fairly controversial argument step by step.

So think about it this way:

To Prove: X

To prove X you need to prove A,B,C,D,...

For Each A, B,C,D, etc. you need to prove 1,2,3 etc.

OK so my approach was

Make clear what X was

Chapter A State 1, evidence for 1, ojections to 1, rebuttal of objections, 2

It was pointed out to me that the reader is going to get lost.

What I need to do is Outline X, and state that to prove X I have to prove A, B, C etc in the INTRODUCTION. In others lay out the whole chain of logic in the introduction.

Then in chapter A, say oK I need to prove 1,2,3 ect. to prove A. Only after outlining the whole chain of logic for chapter A do I provide the evidence, then deal with objections and rebutals to objections. So that by the time someone lookes at an empirical fact they know exactly what is for, and how it relates to other facts. Otherwise it just looks like constant digression and digression from the digressison. I think he is dead on about the problem. The solution certainly is one way to tackle, probably the best way. I've already had to reorganize a few times, so I''m letting it digest before setting proceding. I think what I'll do is create a new outline before I start actually moving material around. But before I do that I'm letting the material cool off over the weekend - talking about it ,but not reading or touching, so that it is a bit fresher to me when I start the new outline.

It was pointed out to me that the reader is going to get lost.

Yes. And yes, also, on the letting it settle and taking a breather so that it isn't completely as-is front and centre in your frontal lobes.

Have you considered working with someone in the field on this? Another writer on the subject, or an academic?

A co-author would have been/would be great. But most of them have really heavy stuff already on their plates. I've asked; I have had feeback and help from a number of heavyweights, a lot of encouragement to keep working on it.

Oy. I suck at organisation, TB, but I'll be here cheering you on.

OK. On "Lost in Translation". This isn't a drabble.

Lost Between the Ear and the Heart

"Damn, that's pretty."

It starts out low on the piano's range, deep-voiced, mournful. Something about it is faraway, remote. It's as if he can't connect with it. I can; I'm just not sure I want to. Something about the piece is cutting at me.

"You like it, then? Good. You should."

It moves up into the midrange, a bit of dissonance, a lot of consonance. My stomach is tight, my eyes weighted with held-back tears.

"It's beautiful. Painful, though. What do you mean, I should like it?"

He looks up at me over the mile-long expanse of piano lid. Hands moving up the keys, taking it higher, sex and joy but it never hits the highest notes, the tiara tinkle as he calls it. Always, somehow, there's darkness, and love, and loss to come.

"I wrote it for you, lady."

It will be years before I can let myself believe him, years before I can listen to it again, years before I understand that he must have known what I couldn't know.

Deb, that's gorgeous, and very painful. Still amazes how you find the language to write about music so well -- it's one thing I can *never* translate very well.

Insent, deb and Amy!

Happy to, if you want to send it to my profile address. What's this one about?

The book is about spending my formative years in retail, lessons learned behind the cash register.

This essay is supposed to be about figuring out that there's such a thing as a decent and kind pervert.

Allyson, backsent, bebe. My feeling is that you need the connection right upfront. Open with it. The awkward bits, such as they are, are right there near the beginning. If you have the theme right there at the start, the first half becomes history rather than exposition.

Still amazes how you find the language to write about music so well

Amy, there are days when I wish I could just shut the fuck up about it, already. Not likely to happen anytime soon, though. (edit: and if I did shut up, I wouldn't be writing Kinkaid. Meh.)

We're off to Napa for wine and olive oil and stuff. I'm-a take a break and start chapter eight tomorrow.