Final proofing a manuscript is like an eye exam...

Those of you who have sat through at least one session with an optometrist might understand that moment when he or she says: which is clearer: slide one; or two? One or two?

You're sitting there in the chair, trying not to squint (because you'll get told not to) and, for the life of you, the difference between slide one and two is... umm... Well, you pick one just to keep the doctor happy.

My editor has made a few changes in my manuscript which makes me feel like I'm in that chair again: is it better to say: he looked straight into the eyes of.... OR he found himself looking straight into the eyes of....?

I read these either or choices aloud to my husband. It is he who says it's as difficult as saying which is clearer - one or two. He's right of course and so the final decision rests with me. The editor has made the change because something jarred for her so I am back reading the entire manuscript out loud to ensure there is smoothness. In some parts, though, it's like trying to iron out the wrinkles in the cover-seal of one of my daughter's exercise books.

As I read, I see a word and it does the job but it's not EXACTLY what I mean. So, I go hunting in my thesaurus and can spend up to 30 mins trying to find the right word. Sometimes, I confess, it's too hard and I give up. I did this this morning with the word 'excitement'. I wanted/meant glee/delight/nasty joy but could not find the right one to fit with the sentence. I chose another word to excitement and, if it is not quite right, I'm certain no one will really notice.

And, to further muddy the metaphor waters, I will quote other experts who understood all too well the process we writers go through to get it just right for you, the reader:

Oscar Wilde: I have spent most of the day putting in a comma and the rest of the day taking it out. 

Charles Pierre Péguy: A word is not the same with one writer as with another. One tears it from his guts. The other pulls it out of his overcoat pocket.

Finally, I will leave you with a quote I've used before but it pretty much is how I feel about my own work:

Maurice Gee: I could go on tinkering with my books forever. When I reread them I’m constantly recognising lost fictional opportunities, ways I could have made someone do something more interesting. 

Perhaps this is why I don't like reading my books once they are published. I do love touching them and looking at their shiny covers and feeling the weight of them in my hands. To read them, however, is too terrifying - what if I remember that exact word I wanted when it is far too late?

interesting reasons for visitors to my blog

I have a programme which tells me where a visitor comes from and how they got to me, how long they stay, what pages they read and where they go to next.

I have to say, some of those 'how they got to me' are quite funny and I suspect come from students who have been given a homework assignment (because, as a teacher, they're the sorts of questions I might ask my students to think about).

Here is a recent selection:

what information and advice would banquo share to Fleance.

three adjectives that describe Fleance banqo's son

Describe Banquo from his son's point of view.

what Fleance and Banquo were talking about before Banquo got killed

A description of Macbeth from Banquo's son's point of view

These are simple thinking questions which a teacher is using to get his or her students unpacking the text.  What's sad is that students from all over the world are, rather than trusting in their own ideas, putting the question into a search engine and getting someone else to answer it for them.

'Why is Shakespeare so famous, Miss?'

As expected, this question was asked by a Year 10 (14yo) student on Friday after I had read the class 'My Mistress Eyes' and 'Shall I Compare thee to a summer's Day' and we've watched Dire Straits strut their stuff in an 80s music video 'A love struck Romeo sings a sweet song serenade...'

I answered as I promised I would in the last post (with a slightly amended language as per the reading experience of these particular kids). I'm not sure, really, if the question asker was entirely convinced with my response but, by the end of the year, if she hasn't understood the why of her question then I have failed her.

Last night, I had a few friends around for dinner - all well read. I was discussing my desire to provide Fleance with a clear way of rallying the troops for one last go despite the odds being against them and having suffered terrible losses.

Ah, I can hear the Shakespeare lovers out there beginning to quote Henry V. Exactly but I'd not read Henry the V nor did I know the story but one of my guests began to quote the St Crispen's Speech and then we watched Kenneth Branagh on YouTube and I knew I had what I needed.

Here's the part that I particularly love:

This story shall the good man teach his son;

And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,

From this day to the ending of the world,

But we in it shall be remembered-

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;

For he to-day that sheds his blood with me

Shall be my brother;

In reading the entire speech, I read it through the lens of my own story's arc. I don't know the play as I've said but that doesn't matter because I find a connection for my characters and their situation in the words Shakespeare has written.

Why?

Because his thoughts and understandings of the human condition, of our hopes and desires and dreams, is universal and timeless. How else could a man from the turn of the 17th Century be able to write a speech for an English king during a battle set in 1415 in such a way, with such turns of phrases that a 47 year old New Zealand writer connects with and uses for her own creation's speech set in 11th Century Scotland?

THAT'S why he's so famous, Miss.