Looking for Magic

Q: How do you know when your book is done and you can send it to the publishers?

A: I used to know how to answer this question, and I think that I actually did on an earlier blog--but since I just finished my latest novel, whose title changes each time the sun rises--I am going to tell you that writing gives me a high, maybe not as great as gambling, but pretty dang close. Here's what happened.

I finished the book a couple weeks ago and started reading it for magic--now magic is what happens when you start making connections between the parts of what you have written, seeing echoes and allusions and themes that you hadn't planned but that are much truer and more real than the ones you had planned.

When this happens, I sit there and think, "Is there someone up there writing this book for me? Leading me to these connections? What is going on here? The book seems to be writing itself. This new idea is soooooo good--how come I didn't PLAN for this in the first place?"

Then when I look at other books and stories that I have written, I do a quick survey of those magical things that happened without my planning for them to have happened. They are usually the BEST parts of the story. In fact, they are the things that people remember most--and I stumbled upon them last. Thank god.

Now I don't want to explain away the rainbow, but I think what happens in my case is that when my stories are finally written down in a completed form on the page, I can begin to read them critically and objectively, and so my mind is actively, though subconsciously, seeking theme and mystical coincidence.

Theme is what the story is (consistently) about--the deep meaning as your high school teachers used to say.

Mystical coincidences are the most fun. They are those moments that resonate with other parts of the story and make you say, "Wow, that is so true," or "He got just what he deserved," or "Thank god she came to his rescue--I was hoping and praying that she would." They are like punchlines to jokes that you didn't know you were even telling. You set them up in the reader's mind, but if you don't go back and become a reader yourself, you, the writer of the story and their creator, more often than not won't even realize that they are there.

Sometimes it's in a name--you notice all the villains' names begin with H, but one of them begins with an M--change it to an H or make it an M for a reason that echoes.

Sometimes it's a color--It happened to me in the story "Crip" with the main character who wore the mustard color suit--AFTER I had written the story I discovered a way to make the color mustard echo long after the story had ended.

Sometimes it's a missing scene--in my latest novel, I realized that the hero and the villain had so much in common except one thing--a chance for someone other than himself to tell his side--I went back and inserted that scene--it is now, probably, the most poignant scene in the book.

Sometimes it's an incomplete resolution--a minor character in my novel ALL OR NOTHING appeared twice--I brought him back because he was interesting and also in order that he would be able to complete the minor little sub-story that I didn't realize he was telling--this minor character was the protagonist's son, the lucky son, and his reappearance MADE the book what it was meant to be. It would be a completey different novel without his evolution, which came in one of the magical moments AFTER the book was supposedly completed.

There are lots of things like that--and you must take time to find them.

Finding magic like that is the best part of writing a book. Finding magic like that often MAKES the book.

When I stop finding magic like that, then I know that it is time to send it off to the publisher.

Thanks,

Preston

Thank You, Your Book and Your Blog Saved My Life

Q: I don't really have a question to ask or anything. I just wanted to let you know that your book and your website saved my life.

Last year I was in debt up to my ears due to my gambling. I was in the process of losing my house, my wife, and seriously thinking of suicide. The gambling was so bad that I had to borrow to pay bills and necessities, but then I would end up blowing that money at the casinos. I was at least three months behind on everything including my mortgage.

I joined GA and started working on getting my life back together. I found a copy of your book in the bathroom at GA and asked the guy whose house we were having the meeting at if it was his. He said no. I asked a few other people and they said no. I opened it up and started reading it. I was very depressed, but the book cracked me up. I read the whole thing that night when I got home. I laughed most of the night, but some parts of it I found embarrasing. My wife came over the next day. We were (still are) separated because of my problem and she came over to yell at me about some money I was supposed to send to our son in college, and she saw the book and started reading it. She still yelled at me. But then a few days later she came over and we talked. She was a changed woman after reading your book. She said that the ending of the book had really scared her. She asked me if, like P, I was serioulsy thinking of killing myself, because she wanted me to know that in spite of our problems, she still loved me and thought the kids really needed me as their father in their lives regardless of my gambling.

I admitted to her that I thought about suicide every single day of my life. I told her that's just how it is with gamblers like me. She said that she understood that better now that she had read your book. She became very sad and serious and promised that she would always be there for me to help me though the hard times.

After that, we fought less and she tried her best to understand me. We are still not together, and sadly I did finally lose our house and some other things we owned, but she kept her promise and stood by me through it all. I did not take my own life, and I am well on my way to putting my life together. Life is hard, but life is better.

Your book helped me because it not only was funny and true, but it helped a non-gambler like my wife to understand what kind of creature a gambler is. Like I said, things are not perfect between us, but it is getting better.

I loved your book. It is the truest stuff I have ever heard or seen spoken on the subject of gambling.

Every gambler or everyone who knows a gambler should read your book and your blog; I love the honest advice that you give to gamblers.

A: Brother, thanks for your email. I do not really know how to respond to it except to say that I am proud of you and that I am pulling for you. Your wife is a wonderful person and you should count yourself blessed to have her. Keep on fighting. You will beat this thing.

Thanks,

Preston

Sex

Q: In your personal sex life, are you like the characters in your stories? If so, which character are you most like?

A: I do not discuss sex, politics, or religion with strangers . . . but I will say that the inspiration for my sex scenes, though they are sometimes born in the mind, are often taken from real life experiences.

Or from real good porno that I have seen.

Thanks,

Preston

Nadine's Husband

Q: Dear Mr. Allen,
How are you? I hope all is well with you. I was wondering what ever happened in "Nadine's Husband." I read the follow ups in BROWN SUGAR 2,3,and 4, but I was wondering if you were going to write a book because i was hooked.

A: Thanks for this email. It made my day, especially after so many emails about political things.

Well, I'm looking for a publisher. That takes time--but I am working on it hard. I will keep you posted.

Thanks,

Preston

This Is Why I Do Not Get Political With Strangers

I fear the mob mentality.

I fear strongly held but poorly supported beliefs posing as fact.

I fear rumor and hearsay.

I don't like people shouting each other down.

I fear sound bites as a substitute for argument.

I don't like to fight; I like to argue.

The bible says, "He that argues with a fool is a fool himself"; and every member of a mob, who moves with the mob, whether it be for the right or for the wrong, is momentarily a fool, for he has surrendered though momentarily his ability to think for himself.

I don't like mobs, for one cannot argue with a mob; one can only fight a mob, and I do not like to fight. I like to argue. I do not argue with fools. When you argue politics publically, you almost always end up arguing with a fool and as it follows, behaving yourself as a fool.

That's one reason you couldn't pay me to watch the so-called debates, name-calling on national television so as to please your mob is not a debate. We black people have a name for it. It is called "signifying," "doing the dozen," or "ranking." "Yo mama so fat, she got her own zip code." Saying stuff like that to get your mob riled up at the other guy.

When I was a younger man, in grade school, I was chased home by a mob of schoolboys and schoolgirls, threatening to beat me up and yelling racial insults at me--they were black, as am I, so it was not a black/white thing. They thought I was Haitian, though to this day I do not understand what that had to do with it. I was the new kid from Boston, wherever that was, and I spoke English like Bostonians do rather than like Southern African-Americans do, and I was dark skinned (but so were most of the others--but since I was new, my dark skin made me a Haitain--are you following this?).

At any rate, it made me very sad to hear these kids, some of whom I thought I liked or could possibly like, saying these terrible things to me. I was on the verge of crying when I finally made it home.

The next day, and for several days more, I approached individually pretty much everybody who had joined in on the gang-up. And I talked to them, made jokes with them, made friends with them, and it worked with most of them. Things went fine after that. I became a very popular boy in the fourth grade, though new to that school and that city, Miami.

The mob scared me; and it still does. But I am unafraid to discuss ANYthing with ANYbody individually. Members of the mob are less the fool when they stand on their own two feet. There is safety in numbers, as well as insanity.

I am very saddened by the following article I found on AOL. If I could, I would speak to each and everybody who goes to these rallies and behaves in this insane (mobbish) manner.

Let me try to understand this . . . you are angry because a man is running for president whose views are slightly different from your own (In truth, Repubs and Dems are the same face on the same coin as far as I am concerned). If this angers you, then what, in your opinion, is democracy? These charges that you level at him--do you really believe them? Really? Do you know how many "suspected" terrorists are being held captive right now by the US? America takes terrorism seriously. Why is this man not being held? Come on, stop being silly. You're not in 4th grade anymore. Pose your arguments and force him to respond to them--he seems nice enough, and he seems like he knows how to argue. Argue with him. Argue with them. Do not yell and shout like . . . the uncivilized do.

And by the way, if you are certain that the man is a terrorist, then it is your duty as a citizen, or a senator, or a governor, to have him arrested immediately. If you don't do something to get a known terrorist arrested, then you need to be arrested yourself.

And by the way part 2, this is not about Republicans. Democrats do it too.

We are a free society. We have freedom of speech. We also have freedom to listen. These two freedoms combined make us both free and civilized.

But we seem happier to argue from the safety of large numbers. Be warned that there is a danger in practicing such a weak form of argument in a democratic society.

A few years ago I found myself watching an episode of the Jerry Springer Show. The topic that day was Man-Boy Love, and the show featured a panel made up of men from an organization called the North American Man-Boy Love Association, or NAMBLA--these are men who advocate for the right of adult males (over the age of 18) to have consensual sex with non-adult males (under the age of 18) a practice that in most states would be categorized as statutory rape--sex between an adult and a minor.

The men of NAMBLA spoke first--they argued that it is unfair on at least three grounds for them to be forbidden from having sex with males under 18.

First, the law discriminates against them as homosexuals because in every state a parent of a child under the age of 18 (and over the age of 13) can sign for the child to have the right to marry and have legal sex with an adult--no such option is available for a child who wants to have legal sex with an adult of the same sex.

Second, a child who is an out homosexual, they argue, can benefit greatly from the sexual guidance provided by a mature homosexual, but he will fail to get this because of the law, and will procede to make many (and possibly) dangerous mistakes as he is finding his way on his own as a young homosexual.

Finally, they added, the young men (who already know that they are homosexual and are confident in their identity) are wasting many good years of sex because of laws that criminalize behaviours in homosexuals that are dismissed or winked at when they occur with heterosexuals.

Now, whether you agree with these arguments or not, you need to hear how Jerry Springer's studio audience responded to the words of the men from NAMBLA.

People jumped up yelling things like, "I feel like punching you in your mouth."

"If I caught you in my neighborhood, I would string you up by your toes."

"You ought to be shot."

"You are monsters! You need to be killed."

So went the argument of the mod. In fact, it was no argument at all. The mob on the Springer Show, as so often happens, used its large numbers to shout down an argument that it found distasteful.

Very entertaining, but perhaps not.

Shouldn't we, as a civilized people, if we dislike NAMBLA be able to beat its argument with a better argument? In fact, shouldn't it be a no-brainer to counter such a weak argument as theirs, if, in fact, it is so badly flawed? And it is badly flawed, right? That's why we all in this large group disagree with it? But can we articulate intelligently WHY we disagree with it?

More often than not, the answer is no, we cannot. And thus, we can beat their butts, but not their argument.

Perhaps we cannot beat their argument because we have spent too many years arguing from the safety of the mob. We have gotten soft where the ability to argue is concerned. If we outnumber them, we win by shouting them down or beating them up, not by having a better argument. We win because of the strength in our numbers.

It is easy but dangerous to depend on this method to win arguments. First of all, When you argue, you may not always be in a majority (or at a rally preaching to the choir--you might be standing before the Supreme Court in front of an impartial group of jurists).

Second, you never really have any way to be sure that you are right--because you never learned how to argue so as to reach "truth."

And when those impartial jurists come back and grant NAMBLA the right to have sexual relations with boys, you will have to admit that the ony reason they won was because younever learned how to argue, having always depended on the mob to win the day for you.

And there have been many decisions made over the years that members of various angry mobs reciting their group's message to themselves have disagreed with--Roe V Wade, Affirmitive Action, the various repeals of parts of Affirmitive Action nationwide, the War in Iraq, the Civil Rights Bill, the removal of prayer from school, the right to Display the Confederate flag in government buildings in the South, the right for the Confederate Flag to appear in one form or another in the modern flags of various states of the former Confederacy, women's suffrage, taxation without legislation, the Vietnam War, gay marriage, the draft, $700 Billion Dollar bailouts, One Nation Under God.

If the mobs had learned to argue, some of these things would never have been enacted into law. If they had learned to argue, they might have learned to think and would therfore understand why it was just and right that some of these things they initially disagreed with were enacted into law.

But of course, I'm wrong. Arguing is way too hard, even here in civilized, intelligent, democratic America.

It really is a whole lot easier just to call someone a terrorist in front of 10,000 people who already agree with you.


Thanks,

Preston

___________________

Found on Aol

(Oct. 10) - The unmistakable momentum behind Barack Obama's campaign, combined with worry that John McCain is not doing enough to stop it, is ratcheting up fears and frustrations among conservatives.

And nowhere is this emotion on plainer display than at Republican rallies, where voters this week have shouted out insults at the mention of Obama, pleaded with McCain to get more aggressive with the Democrat and generally demonstrated the sort of visceral anger and unease that reflects a party on the precipice of panic.

The calendar is closing and the polls, at least right now, are not.

With McCain passing up the opportunity to level any tough personal shots in his first two debates and the very real prospect of an Obama presidency setting in, the sort of hard-core partisan activists who turn out for campaign events are venting in unusually personal terms.

"Terrorist!” one man screamed Monday at a New Mexico rally after McCain voiced the campaign’s new rhetorical staple aimed at raising doubts about the Illinois senator: “Who is the real Barack Obama?”

"He's a damn liar!” yelled a woman Wednesday in Pennsylvania. "Get him. He's bad for our country."

At both stops, there were cries of, “Nobama,” picking up on a phrase that has appeared on yard signs, t-shirts and bumper stickers.

And Thursday, at a campaign town hall in Wisconsin, one Republican brought the crowd to their feet when he used his turn at the microphone to offer a soliloquy so impassioned it made the network news and earned extended play on Rush Limbaugh’s program.

“I’m mad, I’m really mad!” the voter bellowed. “And what’s going to surprise ya, is it’s not the economy – it’s the socialists taking over our country.”

After the crowd settled down he was back at it. “When you have an Obama, Pelosi and the rest of the hooligans up there gonna run this country, we gotta have our head examined!”

Such contempt for Democrats is, of course, nothing new from conservative activists. But in 2000 and 2004, the Republican rank-and-file was more apt to ridicule Gore as a stiff fabulist or Kerry as an effete weathervane of a politician.

“Flip-flop, flip-flop,” went the cry at Republican rallies four years ago, often with footwear to match the chant.

Now, though, the emotion on display is unadulterated anger rather than mocking.
Activists outside rallies openly talk about Obama as a terrorist, citing his name and purported ties to Islam in the fashion of the viral emails that have rocketed around the Internet for over a year now.

Some of this activity is finding its way into the events, too.

On Thursday, as one man in the audience asked a question about Obama’s associations, the crowd erupted in name-calling.

"Obama Osama!" one woman called out.

And twice this week, local officials have warmed up the crowd by railing against “Barack Hussein Obama.”

Both times, McCain’s campaign has issued statements disavowing the use of the Democrat’s full name.

A McCain aide said they tell individuals speaking before every event not to do so. “Sometimes people just do what they want,” explained the aide.

The raw emotions worry some in the party who believe the broader swath of swing voters are far more focused on their dwindling retirement accounts than on Obama’s background and associations and will be turned off by footage of the McCain events.

John Weaver, McCain’s former top strategist, said top Republicans have a responsibility to temper this behavior.

“People need to understand, for moral reasons and the protection of our civil society, the differences with Senator Obama are ideological, based on clear differences on policy and a lack of experience compared to Senator McCain,” Weaver said. “And from a purely practical political vantage point, please find me a swing voter, an undecided independent, or a torn female voter that finds an angry mob mentality attractive.”

“Senator Obama is a classic liberal with an outdated economic agenda. We should take that agenda on in a robust manner. As a party we should not and must not stand by as the small amount of haters in our society question whether he is as American as the rest of us. Shame on them and shame on us if we allow this to take hold.”

But, if it were up to them, such hard-edged tactics are clearly what many in the party base would like to use against Obama.

That McCain has so far seemed reluctant to do so has frustrated Republicans.

“It's time that you two are representing us, and we are mad,” reiterated the boisterous Republican at McCain’s town hall in Wisconsin Thursday. “So go get 'em!”

"I am begging you, sir, I am begging you -- take it to him," pleaded James T. Harris, a local talk radio host at the same event, earning an extended standing ovation.

“Yosemite Sam is having the law laid down to him today in Waukesha, Wisconsin,” quipped Limbaugh on his show Thursday, referring to the GOP nominee. “This guy, this audience member is exactly right,” the conservative talk show host said of the first individual.

Who IS Going to Be the Next President

Q: Who is going to be the next president, Obama or McCain?

A: Your mama.

Stop asking me political questions! I will not post them. Call me, if you want to discuss politics. I do not discuss sex, politics, or religion in public.

Thanks,

Preston

Black Jack

Q: Do you know anything about Black Jack? I noticed that there wasn't much about Black Jack in your novel ALL OR NOTHING. I have recently started playing and I was wondering if there is a reason the dealer wins so much. Have you noticed that she hits the great numbers 19, 20, 21 and beats you with them so often that it looks like she is cheating? Do you think they are cheating? I have lost about $2000 so far and I am thinking about giving up the game. I can't seem to win a hand, even the goood hands.

A: Yes, Texas Hold'em is very dear to the protagonist's heart in my novel, but Black Jack, if you recall, is the downfall of his girlfriend C.L. That is the game she cheats at to get thrown out of Las Vegas.

I am no expert on Black Jack, but I have played it enough to know what you are talking about--the dealer's uncanny ability to draw 19, 20, and 21--just when you get a really good hand like a 19 or 20 or 21, creating an unsatisfying "push" or worse yet, a loss, or your part.

But actually, there is a mathematical reason for this tendency to hit great hands on the dealer's part.

What a lot of newcomers to the Black Jack game do not immediately realize is that the Black Jack deck is over-stacked with 10s. Ten is the most commmon card in the deck. In the deck there are more 10s than any other card. What am I talking about?

Take 6, for example. There are 4 sixes per deck: six of diamonds, six of clubs, six of hearts, six of spades. Therefore if the dealer needs a six to beat you, she is unlikely to get it because sixes are rare; or, looked at this way, she only has a one in 52 chance, roughly, of getting it because there are only four of them in the deck.

How many 10s are there in the deck? Answer: 16!

Yes, 16.

See, there are four 10s, four Jacks (counted as 10 points), four queens (counted as 10 points), and four kings counted as 10 points).

So there are 16 chances out of 52 for the dealer who needs a ten to get it.

This also means that when the dealer is showing an ACE, that there is about a little over 30% chance (one in three) that her other card is a ten, a black jack, perfect 21, and that she will beat you.

It follows then, that the dealer showing a 10, likely has another 10 hidden and she may beat you with 20.

And the dealer showing a 9, likely has a hidden 10, which will be a great hand with 19.

And the dealer showing an 8, likely has a hidden 10, which will be an 18.

And so on.

Black Jack is a great game, the only game in the casino that gives the player a slight edge over the house. But if you play it, expect your GOOD hand to be beaten time and again (at least 1 out of 3 times) by the dealer's GREAT hand.

Getting beat like that is just part of the game.

Thanks,

Preston

I May Have to Return to the Casinos

Okay, this precognition thing is getting worse. Or better. I am now beginning to see a way that I can control it. Maybe. I still have no way to figure out what my dreams mean, but the other powers are becoming more manageable.

This morning I went to court--but first I went to the school to drop off materials for the person who would be subbing my class. My court appointment was at a courthouse downtown, so I thought it might be wise to stop off at an ATM and get some cash for parking. Across from the school there was a Walgreens--with an ATM!--but something told me, a voice in my head, don't worry about taking out money--leave it in the bank.

In fact, traffic would not let me get into the lane to get to the Walgreen's. I was forced by the traffic to go through the light and then make a U-turn to get to Walgreen's. Then when I got there, the ATM machine was broken. Okay, so I would buy a pack of gum and ask for $20 back in cash. This plan had problems, too. The woman working the register was new and inexperienced and kept voiding out the transaction. Finally, she got it right and I had my $20 in cash.

I got into my car, running late now because of the delays at the Walgreen's, and realized that the address of the courthouse (though I did not know exactly where it was) was near the downtown campus of my college; in other words, parking for me was free--all I had to do was park in a faculty slot at the college and ride the free people mover over to the courthouse. Duh.

So I parked in a faculty slot and got out of my car--forgetting my cell phone in the car. I was running late, but I never go anywhere without my cellphone. As I ran back to get it, a voice popped into my head again--it said, "Just leave your cellphone in the car. It's not like they're going to let you use it in court. You're going to have to turn it off anyway."

I said to myself, "Yeah, that's true, but I might need it afterwards."

So I got on the elevator to take me back upstairs to the faculty parking, but the elevator went down instead of up. So I had to wait for it to go all the way to the bottom floor before going back up to where my car was parked. More delays. Running late. It was close to 10:00. My court time was 10:00.

Finally, phone in hand, I ran to the people mover, got off at Government Center, entered the courthouse and dropped my keys, belt, and cellphone into the metal detector, picked them up on the other side, got on the elevator, rode it up to the 14th floor, got to another metal detector outside the courtroom and was told by the marshall guarding the door: "No, you can't bring that cellphone in here. No--abosultely, no--electronic devices are allowed in the courtroom."

Crap! I should have listened to that voice in my head. So now what was I going to do? I had 5 minutes before my court appointment. Crap!

I got on the elevator and rode it back to the first floor. I was frantic. I pleaded with the guards down there: "What am I going to do? I need to go to court, but I can't enter the courtroom with a cellphone. Do you guys have lockers or something where I can stash my phone for an hour or two?"

They shook their heads no, some of them cracking smiles. They had seen it all before.

There were two other guards there who were guarding the door to the outside: one was a friendly black man who had welcomed me in upon my arrival; the other was an elderly hispanic man, who spoke very little English--I had overheard him "trying" to direct an English-speaking woman to the restroom in broken English. His English was very poor.

But something told me to talk to him.

So I went to him instead of the friendly black man.

When I got up real close to him, I noticed he had a Honduran flag tattoed on his wrist. Interesting. I was born in Honduras, though I speak absolutely no Spanish. I come from the English-speaking side of the country--I'll explain more in a later blog.

So I went up to this guy and told him my problem.

He nodded his head and told me in broken English: "Go e-next door. Photo e-shop. A girl, a nice girl. Virginia. She will e-hold e-phone for you. Maybe give her some money."

Bingo!

I ran next door to the photo shop beside the courthouse, and the nice girl Virginia was not only nice enough to hold the phone for me, but she refused to take any money.

I ran back inside the courthouse and made it to my appointment, at most, 30 seconds late.

Afterwards, I got my phone from nice girl Virginia. Again I offered money, and again she refused.

I was going to get on the people mover to go retrieve my car, but a voice in my head said: "It is not too far. Walk."

So I walked back to the parking garage.

When I got there, there was a crowd waiting to get on at that end of the people mover. They were not happy. I over head them saying:

"It broke down again."

"This damn thing. I wish they would fix it."

"I need to get to court."

"Maybe we should walk to court. It's not too far."

"This damn machine. They should fix it."

Again, I had listened to the voice in my head and come out AHEAD.

Now if I can only figure out how to do that in the casino.



Thanks,

Preston

Don't Make It Political, Please

Q: I'm not asking you whether you support Obama or McCain, I'm just asking why you think that Clinton supporters, for a while there, were splitting off and going to McCain. Is it racially motivated?

A: I don't know. I cannot and will not speak for the motivations of other people, except for the characters in my novel, which is what you should be asking me questions about. I do, however, have my opinions and feelings on the subject. Meet me in private and we'll talk.

Or maybe, I'll just pose without answering it this question that has been running through my brain.

If I am a Democrat and a Clinton supporter, but Clinton loses to Obama, do I cease to support the ideals of the Democratic party and suddenly become a Republican? How do I all of a sudden become a Republican? Was I ever really a Democrat or was I just supporting a particular candidate?

Well, that's my question, and I do not need an answer to it. Just asking. That's all.

Like Leonard Cohen says, "I'm neither left nor right/ I'm just staying home tonight/ getting lost in this hopeless little screen."

No more politics. Time to pay your 700 billion dollar bar tab and head on home.

Thanks,

Preston

Now the Fun Begins

Here's a shout out to my old Professor John Dufresne for his great new book REQUIEM MASS.: A NOVEL, and for getting me started on a routine that is crucial to my career as a novelist. I get up every morning at 4 or 5 a.m. and write for one hour almost every day of the year.

Last week, I finished my prison novella FAMILY BLOOD--I'm still not comfortable with it, so I'm going to work on it a bit more before I shop it.

This morning I put the finishing touches on my collection, FACES IN THE WALL. I'm done with it. Finished. At last! Romance, philosophy, and serial killers. Yum!

In 4 (or 5) more days my novel FACE OF EVIL will be completed--so those of you who have been waiting almost ten years for the sequel to HOOCHIE MAMA, get ready to line up at your local bookstore. M Gantry is back and she is one baaaaaad muthaf--shut yo mouth--I'm talkin' bout M. Her crew is with her too, Sosa and Lambert (yes, I brought Michael Lambert back from the grave--he was too good to give up; actually this story takes place before the adventure in HOOCHIE MAMA, so it's actually a prequel).

One hour a day--it works, people. I highly recommend it.

Of course I don't always "write" every morning that I get up--sometimes I spend my hour proofreading, sometimes re-reading stuff I've written, sometimes reading someone else's work--the point is to spend at least one hour a day devoted to the craft.

For me, one hour a day produces about 3 pages a day; about 90 pages a month; about 1000 pages a year; about three book length works a year. As you can see, this year has been a good year. Two Face Books and a Blood.

Now the fun begins.

Thanks,

Preston