For six days last week, people crowded into the cabaret of Hugo House to watch writers in the process of writing. This had a certain kind of naughty fun to it: A writer onstage, squirming and stressing and dragging the private process into the public sphere, is not a natural thing. But now the “finished product,” which is to say the first draft of a novel whose 35 chapters were written by 36 different authors, is online at www.thenovellive.org/novel, and you can see what all that fussing was about. The Novel: Live! proves nothing so much as the value of a careful and thorough rewriting process to a coherent and enjoyable reading experience. Unfortunately, it proves that importance by exclusion.
It is at least a fast read, but it is by no measure a good one. Perhaps the best one could hope for from TN:L! would be a linked anthology of some of the finest writing talent in Seattle today. Unfortunately, the plot, which has something to do with a 14-year-old girl named Alexis who is trying to save a Seattle-area hotel full of eccentric characters including a pirate, creepy twins, and an old hippie, is so full of weird twists and turns—including terrorism, a wealthy uncle who may or may not be the villain of the piece, and several pointless chase scenes—that it precludes almost any interesting writing from happening.
There are bursts of magic: Ed Skoog can’t help but allow a little poetry to sneak into his passage, where Alexis visits Freeway Park and finds it to be
a dead afterthought, an abandoned idea… [with] nothing below it, nothing to hold it steady. What had seemed novel and unconventional now looked like a bad joke. It was the bottom of the world.
(This and other ideas are more than enough to forgive Skoog’s reference to Alexis’s “lamé shirt… glittering righteously” in the light of the fireplace at the Sorrento Hotel.)
Other standouts include portions of chapters by Erik Larson and Maria Dahvana Headley. But for every interesting passage, there are four or five bad ones. Stephanie Kallos writes from the perspective of a wise and observant crow; Garth Stein’s chapter is awful, but at least he ventures away from the plot to take an editorial stance against the proposed Chihuly museum at Seattle Center. A hidden polemic is perhaps the best one can hope for in the middle of a speed-written novel.
The Novel: Live! will soon be available for sale in e-book form; I urge you, out of respect for the tremendous talent who undertook this interesting and noble failure, to skip buying the book. Donate the money directly to the charities TN:L! is benefiting—Writers in the Schools and 826 Seattle are great causes—and check out the other, real books written (and, more importantly, rewritten) by these authors instead. 
The novel exists as an egoistic exercise in the “I want me some too” material culture. It’s been a long time since any novel was more than a distraction.
Perhaps you missed the point: It was a fundraiser. For fun, for literacy, for the experience. I don’t believe anyone on the stage was aiming for fine literary art.
Well, the deal is, first drafts always suck! Every writer knows that. This book will be edited by each of the writers and by an editor at the publishing house. Please, readers. Don’t judge a book by its first draft. You’d never read anything if you did!
By exposing the process of writers drafting, our goal was to encourage all writers at all levels to revel in the shittiness that is the first draft. Yes! it’s disjointed and corny and overwrought and all of the things Mr. Constant complains of! Exactly! Exactamundo! Nail on the (rather obvious) head!
If we’d been going for “good literature” we’d never have approached it this way. Not sure why anyone would thing such a thing, but there you go. Take a good-hearted and fun thing and snark it into the ugly place that makes certain people feel better about their own chances at publication, I guess.
We raised over $10,000 for literacy. We gathered Northwest writers together and had a huge online audience enjoying the process. I think The Novel: Live succeeded well beyond our wildest dreams, and those involved are happy souls.
Jennie Shortridge
Seattle7Writers
Yo, dude, could you be any more jealous that they didn’t ask you?
How about waiting for the final, edited version before critiquing the content? At this stage in the project, the only thing you can really review is the idea and its success as a fundraising event. If TN:L! goes through the editing wringer and still comes out lacking, then a negative review will be in order. Until then … shut it.
Way to Go Jennie!
“The first draft of anything is shit.” –
Ernest Hemingway
It’s not brilliant, no, but it was definitely fun to watch it come together and it was an interesting literary exercise (both for the writers and for those of us watching, I’d say).
As for the final product, of course it’s going to suck — each writer had two hours, a word count goal, and only a vague outline to work by, and no time to revise what they’d written as they went along (not to mention later).
Anyone who’s ever done NaNoWriMo knows that kind of set-up is a recipe for a supremely shitty novel. But in both cases, it’s not the outcome that is the goal; it’s the process.
I loved this idea, found it interesting to watch it come together, and am impressed at how much money it’s already earned for charity. Good job!
(p.s. VERY much relieved to hear it will be edited before it’s published.)
I think what Paul Constant is trying to say (using a lot of words) is that that he just doesn’t get it.
This gives me an idea for a character: A guy who feels insecure and unhappy with his own accomplishments is driven to undermine the efforts and joy of others. Let’s see… what type of car would this character drive? A Maserati. Yep.
I think what Paul Constant is trying to say (using a lot of words) is that that he just doesn’t get it.
This gives me an idea for a character: A guy who feels insecure and unhappy with his own accomplishments is driven to undermine the efforts and joy of others. Let’s see… what type of car would this character drive? A Maserati. Yep.
Typical Seattle response.Does that make you feel good Paul? Take something good that an amazing group of people did, and put your negative shallow minded spin on it.
So typical Seattle….
And, by the way, Paul Constant is a nice guy. We’re honored that he wrote about the event twice, and that he attended both the kick-off party and our Industry Night party. I’d assumed he read the press releases we sent about our goals, editing, and publication, but perhaps not. I’m sure a lot of releases cross his path. Personally, I do think it’s mean to single out certain authors who were there to support our goals (and one, frankly, who worked his ass off to make it all happen, and who is still working his ass off to raise more money). But, hey, it’s America! You get to say and write what you want to. Including shitty first drafts and snarky reviews.
Well, in my opinion, “The Novel” is one of the weirdest books I have ever read; ignoring the poor spelling, grammar, and syntax, and the odd malaprop, all of which I assume will be corrected in the editing process, it is full of inconsistent characters and uneven plot pace, too many narrative voices (and I don’t mean the different authors’ styles, but the ‘ghost’ voice, the bird voice, etc etc), not to mention the cartoon sequence which was just trippy and so ludicrous as to be hilarious, and the plot seemed to have a bad case of identity crisis – and yet, despite all that, it made quite compelling reading. I think that must be a tribute to the quality of authors. There were three or four of them who, I thought, were really quite outstanding. I have never read anything by any of the authors bar one, so I came to the story completely unbiased.
There are loose ends littering the story, which probably wouldn’t be there if the authors had had an extra few minutes to tie them up (and a few less distractions). Yet, in a way, these almost make the story more interesting, because the compulsion to keep reading to see if any are tied in later is quite strong.
I was informed by one of the writers that the whole thing is going to get a once-over from an editor. I’m inclined to think that even a thrice-over from an editor would not be sufficient to entice me to part with my money, but it was undeniably an interesting process to watch – once! PLEASE do not think this concept will work more than that. This one had novelty value (if not novel value), but subsequent attempts will not.
Well, in my opinion, “The Novel” is one of the weirdest books I have ever read; ignoring the poor spelling, grammar, and syntax, and the odd malaprop, all of which I assume will be corrected in the editing process, it is full of inconsistent characters and uneven plot pace, too many narrative voices (and I don’t mean the different authors’ styles, but the ‘ghost’ voice, the bird voice, etc etc), not to mention the cartoon sequence which was just trippy and so ludicrous as to be hilarious, and the plot seemed to have a bad case of identity crisis – and yet, despite all that, it made quite compelling reading. I think that must be a tribute to the quality of authors. There were three or four of them who, I thought, were really quite outstanding. I have never read anything by any of the authors bar one, so I came to the story completely unbiased.
There are loose ends littering the story, which probably wouldn’t be there if the authors had had an extra few minutes to tie them up (and a few less distractions). Yet, in a way, these almost make the story more interesting, because the compulsion to keep reading to see if any are tied in later is quite strong.
I was informed by one of the writers that the whole thing is going to get a once-over from an editor. I’m inclined to think that even a thrice-over from an editor would not be sufficient to entice me to part with my money, but it was undeniably an interesting process to watch – once! PLEASE do not think this concept will work more than that. This one had novelty value (if not novel value), but subsequent attempts will not.
True story, I once saw Paul Constant walking east up John St while I was waiting for the 8 between 11th and 12th. I remember getting very flushed thinking of what I should say. “Hello there Paul Constant, I really enjoy reading your takes on Seattle authors and writing in general. And thanks for all the good book suggestions!” something like that. I didn’t, but I know how I felt. I felt like a fan.
All that is to say, for me – just another follower of Seattle writers, someone saying Mr. Constant’s write up was a plea on his part to yell, “Include me! I’m a writer too!” strikes me as hollow. If you have followed Seattle writers and writing for the last years you would know there is no bigger fan or proponent of Seattle writing than Paul Constant.
And to the organizers, what do you expect when you invite a book critic to your writing event other than book criticism? I understand that this was a fundraiser(that would have raised less money without his promotion) that was exempt from criticism? Is there a Seattle League of Writers and Paul is the secret public relations arm and he went rogue in this review? Was he supposed to say that all the writing was wonderful? And if did come out with that all encompassing positive review, wouldn’t it have, in turn, made all the writing mediocre?
So you made a novel with patches of bad writing, so what. It was a great cause. Just don’t get upset when the book critic you invited tells you things you don’t want to hear.
Hi Ms. Shortridge,
Here’s an excerpt from an interview with Garth Stein from two days before this column was published (emphasis mine):
That sounds a little different than your conclusions in these comments. I would urge you all to be really careful with your promotion of the finished novel as an e-book; if you put your name behind it and keep promoting it as an excellent product, as Mr. Stein has done and continues to do, you could conceivably turn people off from your other work.
And here’s the thing: You can’t write a novel in public—-fundraiser for great causes or not-—and not expect someone to read it and have opinions about it. I spent enough ink and pixels promoting this event that I couldn’t not say something about the event at its conclusion. In short, my column said the following: The events were fun and interesting, the writers are talented, and the finished product is not good at all. That’s as fair and honest as I can make it, without simply republishing a press release praising you for raising money and ignoring my experience with the book.
I’m sorry you don’t agree with my assessments, but I disagree with your assertion that I didn’t do my job.
Well, I’m no Garth Stein, who is delightfully optimistic, and I will make no claims as to the book’s literary achievements once it’s edited. My point is just that it’s unfair to critique writing that is not yet finished. We didn’t put it out there for review, just had it up on the websie so that people could follow along. Should you choose to read and review the ebook in May 2011, and you think it sucks, no problem! Give us hell. Even if it’s not a literary masterpiece, I think it will be fun for (some) people to read, and all proceeds will be donated to literacy.
And on a personal note, I didn’t say you don’t do your job well. Quite the opposite, I think we’re lucky to have you in our city, where there are so many writers and books, and so few reviewers. Your coverage is important and appreciated.
Thanks for the conversation.
I’d really rather not get involved in this, but I guess I have to say:
Mr. Constant, I did say “really good,” and not “excellent,” as you quoted, and I believe you know the difference.
Also, when one runs a marathon and crosses the finish line, after 26.2 miles, and someone offers a microphone and asks, “How did you do?”, very often, a competitor says, “I did great!” Which I did. Sorry.
Finally, I think we have to keep our eyes on the prize here, and we likely have a mutual prize in mind: we all would like to energize the readers and writers in our communities to promote reading and writing on all levels.
So we stuck our heads out. So we got whacked. Big whoop. Honestly, this is the first time The Stranger has ever reviewed me or any of my (3) books, so I’m a bit flattered over all the attention.
We energized readers. We energized writers. We had student field trips who loved the process. We wrote a book in six days that either sucked or was wonderful, depending on one’s opinion.
About all this other stuff? I say, Thank you, Paul Constant. (But please don’t review any of my books!) (Kidding!) (Not really!) (Oy….)
And I still say, Blow me, Dale Chihuly. Give us back our Fun Forest!
@17 and @18:
Thanks for coming on here and talking about it.
I’m glad you threw the party. It was a really good party.
And I will for sure read the edited e-book.
I’m a bit biased, since I am related to one of the famous authors, BUT, I think it was a wonderful event and did more for the promotion of young writers than just raising money. My students were enthralled watching the process and seeing that in the adult world, as in theirs, first drafts are not finished products and writing is an amazing process that can be shared. Wasn’t that the point? I will also share this discourse that has remained respectful, even while disagreeing. Thanks for at least one adult role model event!
Sheri Shortridge
I’m seeing now how the event is insulting. The Hugo House is trying to prove that the writers are so much better than all the rest of us that there they can shit out a first draft in a short amount of time in public, put it to an editor, and proclaim it to be a wonderful book. They must be geniuses. Who cares about work and time.