Being a Writer

An email out of the blue – a student at Greenwich University asks if I’d be happy for her to interview me regarding ‘My Hidden Mother’, the book I’ve written about Mum surviving the Holocaust. I’m happy to oblige, though I point out I’m a long way from Greenwich. She however is amenable to coming up to Darlington, so we arrange a date. She knows about the book from her grandparents. She gives me their name, but it means little to me, so I ring up Mum who tells me they’re a couple she regularly meets at the bus stop.

This is so random. I was expecting them to be people she’s known for decades.

So next weekend I’m going to be interviewed, and I’m going to have to sound as if I know what I’m talking about as regards writing. I’m going to have to sound like a proper writer. This student is studying creative writing – all I have is an O level in English Language. I wrote stories at school only if they were set by the teacher; never just for the sake of it. I then wrote nothing for decades, didn’t even consider writing until I was in my forties, and then it was purely by chance, and wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t fallen in with some poets in an internet chatroom. I’ve never written a diary and I didn’t spend my teens writing angst-filled poetry. I still don’t write a journal of any kind, which is why my blog entries are so few and far between. When I’m out, I don’t have a notebook with me to jot down ideas. I don’t have paper and pen by my bedside in case I happen to wake up in the middle of the night needing to write down something incredible because I know I’ll forget it by the morning. I was never one of those people who thought they had a novel in them and who were just waiting for the right moment.

The old msn chatrooms were much like facebook today – a right old load of tosh, but with the occasional brilliant conversation. I started jotting down ideas from these conversations, invented characters, threw difficulties at them to see what they would do, and they took off, they flew – and ended up as a novel. Having never written anything longer than three or four sheets of A4 at school, I soon had a manuscript of 96,000 words. In my naivety, I sent it to a few agents. When that got me nowhere, I published with a vanity press – cost me nothing, but I was bombarded with ‘special offers’ to buy my own book at an exorbitant cost, so I sold very few. That book is now thankfully out of print. First novels, eh? Absolute tripe if you don’t know what you’re doing, and I certainly didn’t.

The writing bug had taken hold, however, and within a few years I had learnt the craft properly and had a number of traditionally published books to my name – a poetry collection and three novels.

Did this make me a ‘proper’ writer?

No. When you’re starting out, publication feels like the ultimate goal. Then you realise all you have to do is write something and send it somewhere and someone will eventually publish it. On my website, I used to list all these publications, but I’ve now heavily culled the listings as I’ve realised too many of them are embarrassments. The poetry collection and novels are fine, as they’re out with Circaidy Gregory Press, a very decent indie-press, so I keep them on the list, along with Bridport listings, Pushcart Prize nominations, Butcher’s Dog, Frogmore Papers, etc – but I keep very quiet about some of the others from the distant past before I knew better.

Being published in the right places, however, still didn’t make me a writer, it simply mades me a person who happened to write and who sometimes managed a decent hit.

I mentioned my O level in English Language earlier on. That was slightly disingenuous of me, as it makes me sound as if I haven’t studied writing at all. I have, but I’ve used the internet. I soon realised the chatrooms where people said ‘thank you for sharring’ (sic) were to be avoided at all costs. I drifted instead towards the private, much tougher forums, one of which set me on the right track. I learnt a lot there, but it didn’t make me a writer.

A few years later, I discovered Alex Keegan’s online ‘Bootcamp’, and if you can’t learn how to be a writer there you’re really not trying. I’ve been a ‘bootcamper’ for three years now, and have learnt one hell of a lot – but none of the skills I’ve picked up there make me a writer in themselves.

What makes me a writer is the fact that I’m currently writing every day – averaging around 1000 words – and I’ve been doing this for months now, not even stopping for Christmas Day. When you’re primarily a poet, that’s pretty much impossible, so much of my output at the moment is short stories. They pour out, and they’re initially gibberish, so when they go through the bootcamp mill they’re eviscerated by myself as much as anyone. I fix them if they’re fixable, submit them if they have a chance in one of the better markets or competitions. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t – but the important thing is that I’m writing them, so the idea of a student from London coming up to interview me about my writing no longer seems such a weird idea. This is not a hobby. It’s what I do.

New publisher for SERPENTINE

My novel SERPENTINE is about to transfer to a new publisher. Circaidy Gregory Press are taking over the title and will produce it in all ebook formats shortly, with a paperback version to follow. Not only that, there will be a prequel in the new year. I love two book contracts!

I've spent the morning designing the new cover art, which will depict the Serpentine in Hyde Park, a key location for several scenes in the novel. I need to start thinking about the prequel's cover art too, and try to paint it in more or less the same style. I've a feeling it's going to feature the beach at Bamburgh, but I might change my mind about that. Could do Aydon Castle, or even Gibside Chapel. No rush at the moment.

The north-east launch of Serpentine will take place at Bishop Auckland Town Hall at 7:30pm on 11th July. This is a free event. All welcome. I'll be talking about the book, and the town hall staff will be handing out free wine. I kid you not. 

Two new reviews for 'Small Poisons'

Here are two fabulous reviews of 'Small Poisons' from a couple of writers for whom I have the deepest respect: novelist Rosalie Warren and poet John Irvine.

*****

Review by novelist Rosalie Warren

Joe is a long-stay patient in a psychiatric ward – unvisited, it appears, by family or friends. 'Small Poisons' is primarily, for me, the story of his illness and recovery, though it is many other things too, and this is as far from a conventional novel as a meadow of wild flowers is from a formal garden.

After a brief introduction to Joe’s hospital ward, where he is reading Kafka in the early hours, we are led into his world – his home, his garden, his family. The veil dividing reality from dream and delusion is semi-transparent and flimsy, constantly shifted by the breeze. We do not know whether Joe’s family are really as he sees them (for his sake and theirs, we may hope not). Some of Joe’s visions are beyond belief – talking beetles, sentient sausages and philosophising caterpillars (there is plenty of humour here, too).

Yet as we follow Catherine Edmunds down her garden path, the impossibilities soon cease to matter and we become entranced, like children listening to a fairy tale. (On first reading Small Poisons I was reminded of long-ago sensations as I read, at the age of seven, Lewis Carroll’s 'Alice in Wonderland' and 'Through the Looking Glass' – that never-to-be forgotten combination of shock, suspense, fright, intrigue and finally mild addiction to this illogical but strangely familiar world.)

We meet Cicindela the beetle and her alarming friend, the fairy demon, who seduces and exploits her with his charm. Is he altogether evil? We are never sure. We experience the garden from the point of view of its inhabitants – plants, insects, spiders, the family cat… and we are gently reminded that there are vast ‘alternative’ realities, close to home, from which as humans we are almost wholly excluded. It’s a humbling message, reminding us in a refreshingly subtle and understated way of our responsibility to the natural world. At the same time, we laugh at green-minded Joe insisting that his son dig sandcastles with a useless wooden spade (plastic is bad) and filling his tank with cooking oil that gives off fumes like frying chips.

The human characters are, to put it mildly, disturbing. I’m reminded of one of my favourite authors, Hilary Mantel, as Edmunds provides an unflinching examination of the nastier bits of the human psyche (and also of Mantel’s treacly inseparable mixtures of real and imagined worlds). Joe’s wife Phoebe and the elder son Steven are particularly unpleasant (seen from Joe’s present mental state, at least). I will let you discover them for yourself. Ben, the younger boy, is a more sympathetic character and would evoke enormous compassion if this story were read ‘straight’. It’s difficult, however, not to see these folk as characters in a fairy tale – the wicked mother, the ‘ugly brother’, the neglected younger child who is fed and clothed but otherwise virtually ignored.

No-one appears at all concerned that Ben’s legs no longer work and that he has become confined to a wheelchair. His imaginary companion, Sally, is far from a typical, comforting childhood friend. She speaks in Ben’s (very precocious) voice, yet she is ‘other’ – a threat, capable of inspiring jealousy and fear. Ben misses his father but does not dare to ask where Joe went, after a night of violence and terror that Ben remembers all too well.

The fragile veil between real and imagined, truth and delusion, perception and hallucination, brings to mind Kazuo Ishiguro’s strange dream-like tale 'The Unconsoled' – another favourite of mine. I have already mentioned Hilary Mantel, and see 'Small Poisons' as continuing her tradition, especially in 'Fludd' and 'Beyond Black', of exploring the part of our minds that lurks below the surface, often coming into view only at times of distress, illness and, of course, in dreams. In a novel that also pushes against our tendency to see the human worldview as central, this is particularly powerful – we are led to question the whole nature of reality, interpretation and truth. And all in a superficially simple fairy tale – which is exactly how it should be.

Finally, of course, there are delightful connections here to 'A Midsummer Night’s Dream', with its mingling of human and fairy worlds, the ‘supernatural’ influences unsuspected by the ‘mortals’ – a whole additional reality out there of which they understand nothing. And any story whose heroine is a beetle must acknowledge Kafka, as indeed Joe does in the opening chapter.

Settle down with 'Small Poisons' and let Catherine Edmunds take you into a juicy, earthy and unforgettable world of beetles, fairy demons, ladybirds and dysfunctional families. Discover there that the mirror dividing this world from our own is only a minimally distorting one.

Highly recommended… captivating, funny, and completely, wonderfully new.


Rosalie Warren, 4/11/09


****


Review by John Irvine
Poet/writer/editor

Let me state right away that fantasy is not my preferred genre. Having attempted such fantasy gurus in the past as Anne McCaffrey (oh, you have to read this) without any success what-so-ever, I was not sure that I was the right person to be reviewing this novel, Small Poisons, by Cathy Edmunds. I mentioned my aversion to Cathy who immediately put me right: "this is NOT fantasy, John, there are no wizards or dragons. It is Magical Realism." So, having been suitably educated, I plunged into the peace and splendour of an average suburban garden.

I should have known better, of course, having read a lot of Cathy’s mind-bending, off-the-wall poetry. This ‘average’ garden is anything but average. Think on this: first you toss talking beetles, worms and flowers and a rhymester flower fairy/demon into a pot. OK? Then you add a dash of loony dad, a pinch of self-proclaimed goddess mum (into whose knickers the demon fairy bloke is dead keen to get) with her green beetle acolyte, a grossly fat obsequious son who gets booted about (literally) by his mum all the time, and his crippled younger brother (who has a girl called Sally in his head): well, with those ingredients, you can’t help but get a rich and spicy feed. Oh and there’s also Bobby the cat who spends the entire book murdering a family of sparrows.

The book is certainly that. Rich and spicy. Pungent.

Once immersed in the daily deliberations and mental manipulations of the above menagerie, I had difficulty putting the book down. The plot is not obviously complicated, and can be read seriously as a metaphor for our own daily grind, but it is very, very devious indeed. There is love, tragedy, lust, hope, despair, greed, manipulation, stupidity, remorse, arrogance, death, gluttony, avarice, jealousy, hate, forgiveness and quite a bit of violence in this belly-busting casserole. Have I left anything out?

Everyone in the story wants a piece of the action, and loyalties fluctuate. This one wants that one but can’t have, because that one already is trying for the other one who isn’t interested. Everyone cares about what’s happening to the others except that no-one cares a rotten fig about the cripple. Nice touch that, I thought.

The whole thing is an absolutely wonderful cross-species romp, with some of the most bizarre yet believable characters in any book I’ve ever read. In fact, I’ve never read anything quite like it, ever, and this is because Cathy Edmunds doesn’t take herself seriously (well, not all the time). She’s too smart for that.

This intricately-woven story is saturated with her peculiar brand of decidedly bent humour: very dry and whimsical. She tells a tale with humour that has sober undertones, a story to be read on at least two levels. And it’s challenging. That’s what won me over to her book. The humour, yes, and the challenge to let my mind rampage. There was hardly a moment when I wasn’t smiling or grinning or wincing, urging on this beetle or that fruitcake. It is difficult in the extreme, I can tell you, to be wicked, bent, serious, charming, clever and witty all at the same time. Cathy succeeds in spades. The fact that the woman is artistic, erudite and intelligent helps a lot, I guess.

It is an indication of the author’s thought processes that among this collection of incredible lunatics the only one sane and sensible character she offers us is a ladybird who dispenses non-stop wisdom and pragmatic advice to her friend the shiny green beetle. Ladybird is the thread binding all the other loonies together, albeit tenuously.

After feeding the reader a diet of amazing descriptive images throughout the book, Cathy wraps the whole shebang up with a terrific ending, one I didn’t see coming. I couldn’t imagine along the willowy winding way how she would be able to draw all the many raggedy strings together and leave the reader wanting more. There are so many complex characters and manoeuvres and machinations to bring to a climax, so many sub-plots and sub-texts to coagulate. I was darned sorry when the book came to an end, and that doesn’t happen very often for me

What I really liked so much about the ending was how Cathy....

Hah! You go buy the book and find out for yourself. I thoroughly recommend this novel to anyone who is prepared to suspend conventional thinking for a couple of days, who enjoys the bizarre laced with whimsy, and who revels in amusing madness and mirthful mayhem. And let’s not forget that this talented lady was the cover artist also.

I promise you, you will never look at your garden the same way again...

This book gets my 2009 Mega-Supreme Spotted Dick Pudding with Steaming Compost Award with Bar and five Beetles.

PS: Make no mistake. In spite of my somewhat flippant review, this is a cleverly and skilfully written body of work, filled with rich, iridescent language and chock-a-block with carefully-drawn characters. The sub-plot(s) is rather serious, although one can still enjoy the book without delving between the lines and interpreting the metaphors. The entire storyline has been well thought out and developed ruthlessly to its satisfying conclusion. Of course, there has to be a sequel, right, Ms Edmunds? Cathy?

John Irvine
Colville
New Zealand

The Final Proofread

… is done. Ah, the relief! The discussions over how far to bend the rules regarding commas are over. The trouble with commas is that if you go absolutely by the book, you don’t necessarily convey the intended meaning, and you certainly can’t go entirely by the book in direct speech, or everything sounds far too formal. If you decide to trust your word processor’s grammar-checker, you end up inserting semi-colons unnecessarily all over the place, so you change half of them to dashes, and then think – hang on a minute. This is stupid. What’s wrong with a comma? And then you count twenty commas in one sentence and take half of them out, and your proof-reader tells you you’re breaking grammatical rules and tries to re-instate them. You’re so busy counting commas that you nearly miss the fact that half your name is missing from the biography page, and a line that should be straight on the cover has a small kink in it.

Too late to change things now. ‘Small Poisons’ is winging its way over to the printers even as I type these words. I will have the first copies in my hands in a fortnight or so. That’s the point at which I’ll notice that Esmerelda’s name changes to Albertine halfway through, and Edgar’s eyes change from blue to brown depending on whether he’s appearing in odd or even numbered chapters.

Luckily none of these characters appear in the book.