• A Continuing Montana Love Story
  • Montana Cowboys
  • Franklin Jarvis' hands
  • Hereford
  • Cowhorse
  • cowboys on round-up

Shootin’ the Breeze

The Escape Artist.

Anyone horsey knows the kind of trouble these smarty-tails are. Always padlock the grain room. 😀

A KickStart to Morning

Got a huge compliment this morning.  Gave my morning a kickstart.
“The opening is a white knuckle ride and I could feel myself anxiously sitting in the passenger seat next to Dree. As an author of sci-fi, my reading roots started in romance (A must for character relationship) and this read brought me back to that. If you are a writer, you might want to study the style of +DL Keur​, where you never remember reading about the character’s discription, but you know perfectly well what she looks and thinks like. Brilliant. ” From David Nadas on G+.

Interesting Feedback from Reader

ThruBetterWorse2_PreFinalFCTrimSzWeb To Have & To Hold, a Continuing Montana Love Story, Front Cover

Got interesting feedback from a new reader of, both, Through Better & Worse and To Have & To Hold. She read them back to back. She suggested I was more sympathetic to my male characters than to my female characters. I asked her why she thought that, and she told me: “…because you give them so many good scenes.”

I scratched my head on that one, a bit, then asked her if I didn’t give my females good scenes. She said, I did, but that she was more used to books where the female got most of the good, juicy scenes, and the men “not so much.”

Then she gave me a real grin, because she said: “I got more giggles and laughs from seeing how the men reacted. The books are great.”

Too bad she didn’t post reviews. Oh well. Most don’t.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B013AUZTCK Book 1, Through Better & Worse

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0181KADYI Book 2, To Have & To Hold

I Write What I Enjoy Reading

One of the really irritating things I find with a lot of “genre” works is the exact opposite thing I find irritating about a lot of “literary” works. I could boil it down to ‘lite’ versus ‘heavy’, genre writers manufacturing character and story straight out of superficial, even wishful, thinking while Lit writers purposely dig deep into their personal, often jaundiced and self-serving, study of human nature and experiences, writing from the pits of despair, bleeding angst into some cherished theme and motif.

Can we have some balance, please?

I’ve retaken to writing more ‘fits into a genre’ works, something I haven’t done for awhile. And, in reading quite a number of latest works of genres closest to what I’m writing, I find a distinctive lack of serious consideration for reader intelligence – a SERIOUS lack. …Either that, or the authors are, A, completely out-of-touch, and, worse, B, consider their readership stupid.

…At least that’s my first take. Here’s my second. It’s worse.

I got “whiffs” of some stinky stuff from a couple of editor/writers I keep tabs on:
“…Oh. I see. You’re trying to ed-ja-ma-cate your women readership into only accepting as valid men who fit the following behavior parameters! Gotit!” And the same scheming is true for the male editors/writers. They are trying to ed-ja-ma-cate their audience into their brand of acceptable behavior types – all very PC, mind…in a citified, sophisticated, even thoroughly post-modern version of projected appropriateness…which, many times, means edgy, even over-the-top, on one hand, while thoroughly, even disgustingly callow and even insipid on all three other appendages. (That would be on the other hand, plus on the two feet, for those unfamiliar with standard human anatomy.)

As to “Thoroughly Modern Lit” deserving some Ivory Tower Approved Prize, you can just about forget them all. It’s fiction that literally whines and sniffles, screams and points fingers at all those bad…. (Yes, I’m stopping right there. Fill in your own favorite cause. Meanwhile, I’ll just get back to writing something I myself enjoy reading.)

Scroll Up