Study Guide For Your Book

You may not be a fan of detective stuff on tv and in movies and books, but you may become a fan of my method of questioning I was told is highly effective in real life.

I'll say things or ask questions just to get a response out of others. I may say something I know they'll object to or refute, or state a point of view that I know will bring me information I may not have thought to ask for.

I'm using this method to work on a useful what-if: what if my book is published and it breaks huge and it becomes a topic of discussion in schools and reading groups? What questions can I anticipate, and can I answer them now? If so, I may see the structure of my book in a brighter light, and see ways to improve it, or develop subsequent books.

A few examples:

I didn't introduce my m.c. immediately and broke a rule. I had a reason for that: I needed to set up a feel for the mindset of the world as it now is, now that the mysterious vigilantes did so well to clean up most of the violent people from the streets. I wanted to show up-front that it's okay for the innocent to defend themselves, and possibly in a way that will stop the violent and save other innocents. I had to show that this defense may not be considered excessive, no matter what the outcome. I also had to show some remorse on the part of the defendant. I had to show that--according to the prevailing wisdom--there should be minimal--if any--ongoing cost to innocent lives except for the memory and the attitude towards the act of defense. The burden should all be on the violent--but there should be some consideration for the humanity of the violent.

I could call that the ongoing theme, or the thread that ties it all together, or possibly the m.c., in a sense.

I also needed to have something immediate that a reader could hook onto and relate to and understand, something unusual but by no means strange. I had to get the reader thinking about their own feelings right from paragraph one.

I couldn't do it with much description, either. It's the amateur novels that open with a description of the scene. I had to show, not tell, and show feelings and moods and thoughts, and break up moments of description with  stretches of dialogue.

My main question is, did I manage to sustain the right mechanics, the right moods and interest, to keep a reader reading, even past what I could call quiet moments (some would say slow) that I hope would show their reason for being later in the book?

I tried to maintain interest by recalling several earlier elements, not saying, "remember?" but mentioning those elements a second time, showing how they may later have meaning that didn't appear there earlier. In comedy this is called a callback, but I'm not sure if literature has a name for it. And some of it was not funny at all.

I also needed better closure than just to defeat four different deadly threats. That's lame, and I suppose I could have had my m.c. just go into an antique store and buy the Stone Of Infinity or the Sword of Omigod, and just zap her foes. but what I wanted to do was create an entirely plausible universe, one that readers could relate to in a variety of ways, one that may seem mundane, but possibly familiar and accessible.

I love the fantasy/adventure stuff; don't get that wrong. At least once I left the movie theater, feeling as if  I'm flying James Bond's rocket-laden gyrocopter or Luke Skywalker's X-wing fighter. Stopping my 2006 Subaru Outback wagon at a  red light is a real mood-killer, however. I always hope, after that happens, that I could find a story that could possibly feel real for days after, and maybe make a positive difference in my life and that of others.

Or write one.

One beta reader regarded this vigilante-type of justice as an "interesting concept". I know that those who hook onto that may find it controversial. That's sort of the idea. I wanted to write something that had a "big idea" but not necessarily a high-concept thing, something that most anyone could express an opinion about. I may get some angry reaction, and I understand.

Those readers need to understand two things, however:

1. If you love the form of vigilante justice, or if you're fiercely against it, then mission accomplished.

2. It's only a story.

******************

I expanded on this and realized I could compose the equivalent of a study guide, running maybe three pages, maybe a dozen or more, answering questions and stating reasons for my structure, word choices, reasons for characterization and plot twists, and explaining what my thought process was at various stages.

Whether I actually compose it or not is moot. It could prove useful to me to understand exactly what I wrote, and for readers to understand. It could lead to refinements in word choice and structure, and it's somewhat along the lines of an expanded outline or synopsis that could be used on subsequent books.

I don't know of other authors who do such a thing, but, gee, maybe it's worth really doing.

Excuse me if you please... I have another job to do.

Love Note To Caylee

You're in heaven, and not with those you loved here on Earth, we know.

There is good news coming, Caylee: Your killer will be leaving this Earth, too.

We don't know when, but it'll happen. Justice will be done.

Finally.

Your killer did not go to jail, and that angers some. Jail means getting a place to stay, however miserable, and food and clothing provided. Resources would have gone to your killer to maintain some sort of life, and that would have been unfair to those outside who really need those things. Innocent people who need and more deserve those things.

Anger towards your murderer is the wrong emotion. Love for you and the needs of innocents is the more noble one, the best one.

Your killer is outside, among millions, many who remember, many who will watch, many who will think about this, and at least one who will plan. And act.

All it will take will be one. And your killer will be as dead as you.

Life outside is scary and upsetting and torturous for your killer, thanks to the mystery of who will administer justice, and how, and when, and where. There's some noble and fitting justice. Your killer is not at all free.

So how will your killer's final moments be? Will they involve pain and torture? Will your killer's life fade towards nothing while knowing that death is taking over? We don't know. No one does. But that may be the purest form of justice for you.

Maybe this will give more juries an idea: The worst punishment could be a "not guilty" verdict. After all, you see the resources and imperfect justice administered by imprisonment. Done well, it won't be punishment, so much as appropriate. No more, no better, than your killer gave you. And no less. The least that's deserved. Exactly what is earned.

The free world would be a far worse prison. And it is, for your killer.

After the event, your killer's body may show evidence of agony and resistance, and then the news will spread to others who may consider killing. And those killers-to-be may think enough of the consequences about to be laid upon them by persons unknown, and they will not kill. The killer's end will be public, and for those who understand, and accept, and approve of justice in its purest form, this will be fitting.

For those who will kill anyway, why should we waste time and resources valuable to the innocent to imprison them according to rules and regulations and habits and politics of the so-called justice system? Where is the hope for correction? There is none. So why attempt it? Why maintain a life that no longer needs to continue? That should not continue?

Swift and certain delivery of justice has gone on since the birth of civilization, but it's been little-spoken and rarely discussed. Which is too bad. And unfair to every innocent being.

That kind of justice respects and demonstrates love for the innocent, for the victims. Our legal ways, our legal structures, fail to address that. Isn't that the most important part of working to keep the peace? Isn't that the most civilized, and heartfelt way to handle murder of innocents?

Thousands of innocents are murdered each year. Why are thousands of murderers not disposed of? Where is the respect for the life of innocents? Where is the respect for civilization? Why the delay, the avoidance, of the kind of justice that should be applied, out of fairness to the victims?

What is right and proper, what is the noblest act, is to dispose of those who have exercised the ultimate violence upon the innocent. No anger shown, no punishment meant. Just an even and certain delivery of death to the killer, a chore that is distasteful yet necessary, with no bureaucratic delay.

Some approve of the system as it is. But, it's odd how there is regret on some side of the issue, no matter how justice acts. There is no real end to the wheezing, puffing machine operation of the system as it now works; only when the killer dies, likely of a natural cause, many years in the future. As long as there is no end of the murderer, there is much picking at the scab, there is much high-minded yet misplaced unfeeling chanting of concepts such as, "we are not that way", or "we value life in all forms". Where is the teardrop for victims such as you? Is your life valued equally, or less, than that of your killer?

Imagine a quick finality, an ending of the warped story.

No cyclone of police and investigators and lawyers and judges and clucking bystanders and witnesses and cable TV and social buzz clogged with scandal and drama, as they did with your death.

Sounds a lot like many people want to get in on the pornographic self-pleasure of a murder story, doesn't it? Well, they did.

How low. How shameful. How pitifully wrong.

Don't they understand, don't they accept, it's about the victim, not self-pleasure of outsiders? Justice should minimize that, not fertilize it. Justice should take away the violent in quiet, in the shadows, wasting no time, using few people and human materials and processes and little exposure.

Done.

Gone.

And mortal life can continue, lived free, by those who survive. By the billions who have a necessary job to perform, then go on with their own lives, little-threatened by those who would harm.

Every time justice is served as it will be to your killer, justice and peace will be all the more pure.

It won't do you any good, true, but maybe the world will be happier and safer and more secure for other children like you were.

That's the best we remaining mortals can do.

If we so decide.

And it appears we will.

At least in your memory.

Out of love and respect for your innocent life.

There will be a book, called OTHERS, that will show a world of peace, and how it may not be as beautiful and perfect as everyone would like it. OTHERS will not be a textbook, a cookbook, a how-to manual of bringing a better peace to the mortal world.

What it will do, Caylee, is at least make people think, and consider perhaps a more loving and respectful kind of justice.

For those remaining.

For others.

Others who most deserve love and respect.