An Ode to A&E's The Glades

Another one of my favorite TV shows has ended. It joins the ranks of Firefly, Numb3rs, GCB and Murder, She Wrote. Of course there are more I could name, but fewer people may even remember them.

And I realize that a TV series can entail horrific hours. That Murder, She Wrote lasted twelve seasons with its middle-aged main characters was a wonderful tribute to our Baby Boomer generation. And while I loved the glitz and glamour of Jessica in her New York surroundings in the later seasons, my favorites remain those with Dr. Hazlitt and the other Cabot Cove residents.

But back to my current loss.

I love all the main characters. Director Manus, Carlos, Jeff, Daniel and Ray are truly so wonderful. Even Ray's mom and Jim's parents are home runs. Callie is such an animated actress, I could watch her alone. But put her together with Jim (what's not to love there?) and they electrify any scene.

I even loved to hate all the pretty girls trying to woo Jim away from Callie. Like Matt Passmore's real girlfriend at the time of Season One, Rachael Carpani, who plays Heather Thompson.

I must admit I still look at her and am reminded of her character, Jodi, from McLeod's Daughters. Once they killed off Claire in Season Three, I quit watching that show, back when I still had cable. But I dig out the DVDs and rewatch the earlier seasons every now and then.

As a mostly pantster author who is character-oriented, I found so much to learn from and admire within The Glades. Here are a few tips I garnered from this fabulous show. I'm dealing mostly with Season One here as those are the episodes I've almost memorized as I've watched them that often.

• I liked the contrast-and-compare thread going on throughout Season One when it came to "destroying a man's family" (as Jim and Callie dance around that issue) which is found in many of the episodes, like "Marriage Is Murder" (murder of divorce attorney) and "Cassadaga" (the community of psychics).
• Another continuity thread that was used well dealt with Jim's wanting to break eighty, which was there from the beginning, in the pilot. Remember his voice mail message about not being able to answer the phone because he's either trying to pursue justice or break eighty? It's in the opening spot for the series, repeated in each episode. It showed up throughout Season One as Jim carried around a putter everywhere he went. I think in "Exposed" we see a close-up of Jim's "candy" dish on his desk at work. Instead of filled with candy, it has golf balls and tees in it. Kudos to The Glades's prop manager/set designer and its writers/directors.
• I don't think Ray shot Jim; I think Ray's mom did. Remember when Jeff turns thirteen and she offers to take him shooting, stating she's a pretty good shot? Granted I'm not up-to-date on all of Season Four as I'm watching via Hulu and Netflix. But this reminds us authors to have multiple possibilities available to our readers.
• As much as I hate the fact that A&E canceled this show, there is a certain irony that the pilot intro'd us to Jim as the man shot in the butt for not sleeping with his boss's wife and in the final episode he is shot because he did sleep with another man's wife. This is called bookending for us authors.
• And Ray. I love Ray. Now on paper, his police record, I don't. But in person? Who would not love to listen to Ray's crooning voice that reminds me of Elvis Presley? And the way he treats Callie is so sweet, both in prison and out. Once he's free and she wants a divorce and he's living in the halfway house, he's being the ultimate in patient. He doesn't seem to ever get angry or mad or impatient. He's thoughtful, considerate, seems to truly love Callie and Jeff. Yet there he sits in prison. For armed robbery. Armed. That makes him pretty dangerous. I just wonder if he ever shot anyone, if he ever used that gun. Still it is pretty scary that Callie, just by signing her joint tax return with Ray, could be found legally criminal as well. Ray is a complex character, like real-life people. We may love him but hate what he does. Such a great conflict to dump into a marriage. On paper that is. Not in actuality.
• But then I get mad at Ray for what he leaves Callie with to handle on her own: Just getting together the money to pay the three years' worth of unpaid house taxes or risk losing her home is irritating enough. Add to that the rat fink agent that wants to trade sex with Callie for not reporting her as a co-criminal involved in Ray's madness. Plus raising Jeff alone. Trying to cover for Ray and not tell their son what Ray really did. Not to mention her efforts to be a doctor. That alone is stress-worthy. Like the speech Callie gives Jim in the "Booty" episode (recovering the finds of the Magdalena), a spouse should make married life easier, not harder.
• As an author, I noted that the Florida Glades serves as a very interesting character in this series. Granted some books I've read use a cheesy travelogue approach to writing. That is not what was done with The Glades series. I felt like I was being introduced to a new friend and finding out more and more intriguing elements to that person. Like the shipwreck treasure hunters, the Seminole Indian element (reflected in a lot of the names for towns in Florida), the alligators, the hurricanes, the muck, the sugar cane fields and all that their harvest entails, plus Cassadaga aka The Psychic Capital of the World really exists. But since I'm a Louisiana gal originally, I gravitate to areas with moss on the trees and swamps. It's wired into my DNA.

This is by far a truncated list of what I've loved about and learned from this fantastic series. There may be more posts on this to come. But for now I need to get to paying work.

Fellow mourners over the demise of The Glades are welcome to share their delights and insights regarding this show and its characters via comments below.

Sigh.
 

Denise Barker, author + blogger + copy editor

amazon.com/author/denisebarker

http://bit.ly/DeniseBarkerBlog

http://bit.ly/AMAZONDeniseBarkerEbooks

http://bit.ly/BNDeniseBarkerEBooks

http://bit.ly/SMASHWORDSDeniseBarkerEBooks

http://bit.ly/KOBODeniseBarkerEBooks

Plots, Shlots

For pantsters everywhere, you will rejoice.

For you plotters, you can carry on, just with a different focus. Or not.

This post is borne out of a recent discussion in one of my CP groups. Hope it helps you as it freed me.

Here are a few foundational elements to my theory I'm about to propose:

1. I'm a character-driven author and reader. If you give me an interesting character, I'll follow them just about anywhere. Examples from books: Eve and Roarke from J.D. Robb's In Death series; Stephanie Plum from Janet Evanovich's bounty hunter series. Examples from TV: Jessica Fletcher (from Murder, She Wrote); Alan, Charlie and Don Eppes (from Numb3rs) and all the Gallaghers from Showtime's Shameless.
2. People are basically curious. We want to know what the Joneses next door are doing in their lives. What makes them happy, successful. Individually and in marriage. We want to know what Brad and Angelina are up to. What exciting and interesting things they have done. What (remote, unfamiliar?) places they have traveled to now. What else explains the sales of the gossipy magazines at the checkout lane in the grocery store, even while most consider them to be filled with invalid info? Other than possibly living vicariously through the people made the subject matter therein.
3. Those different sections in a (physical) bookstore are about the emotions they evoke: horror, love, mystery, wonder, humor, adventure, suspense/intrigue. This is often espoused by fantasy author Dave Farland.

So, if readers want emotions and interesting characters, we should focus on that, right?

And this therefore is my theory: It's not about plot. It's about the character arc. So while you may continue to create your requisite plot points, just think of them as hanging off the ultimate bell curve: your character arc.

In Robert McKee's Story, on pages 319–331 in the hardcover edition, he gives examples of his Principle of Antagonism, which deals with themes and emotions. I agree. Add communicating it well, being at least as smart as your sophisticated reader of today so there are no flimsy, faulty holes in your reasonings as to cause and effect, or human nature, etc., and you are set.

So, to put my theorem in a more usable format, here's the new revised "fought points" that I'm working from, at this point forward, to keep me focused on the correct nexus (repurposed from Campbell's original Hero's Journey):

• Ordinary World. Our hero/heroine (H/H) with their individual secrets, their individual fears and, whether they know it yet or not, how that may conflict with each other's set of secrets/fears, or circumstances or internal compass; H/H are familiar with this stage, representing the known, the stilled waters; whereas the unknown evokes more fears and could involve change(s) which may be unpleasant to go through.
• Inciting Incident. Thrown into the stirred waters, our H/H's secrets are threatened, or their fears are put to the test, either by circumstances or the other main characters' actions or internal guilt, regrets, depression, whatever you can imagine to put them through.
• (At least) Three Try/Fail Attempts. This represents our H/H's experiments to get out of the bad place they find themselves and back to the old one, until they grow enough to envision a better one.
• Climax. The "light bulb" moment where the H/H figure it out; their character has been changed, self-growth achieved.
• Denouement. Resolution, tying up all the loose ends of minor character arcs, or any remaining questions revolving around the main character arc and—taking this next part from most of the beloved long-term TV shows—ending on a relaxing, regrouping moment of personal reflection or introspection into their new, improved self and resultant life. And successes, hopefully.

As with any theory, this is a work-in-progress, subject to subsequent experiments and failures and more tweaking. I've always considered myself plot-impaired and now I see why. My focus was off.

Anyway, if this resonates with you, give it a try.

If this is not for you, disregard my abstraction and continue carrying on. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Denise Barker, author + blogger + copy editor

http://bit.ly/DeniseBarkerBlog

http://bit.ly/AMAZONDeniseBarkerEbooks

http://bit.ly/BNDeniseBarkerEBooks

http://bit.ly/SMASHWORDSDeniseBarkerEBooks

http://bit.ly/KOBODeniseBarkerEBooks

 

Good Ole Boys' Characters Visualized

With my new addiction to Pinterest, and my Dream House topic maybe, kinda, sorta, almost covered, I was going to start working on more author-related boards:  pictures of faces of (nameless?) men and women who are just yelling at me to write a book about them, plus the fancy destinations where their particular story will play out and all those interesting careers they can don and I can experience vicariously through them.

But . . . the only downside to Pinterest--from an author's point of view--is the total emphasis on pictures and not words.

So this post is to picture-fy my cast from my debut novel, Good Ole Boys, using only text.

If I can narrow down my cast of characters to one actor for each, I may be able to create a Pinterest board, as well.

This idea may or may not be a good thing.  I know I've read many a book with my visualizations of the characters anchored in my mind only to go to a movie based on the novel and wonder why the director or casting agent chose those people to play those parts.

Yes, we all have our own takes on those nebulous folks that inhabit our favorite readings.  Like Eve and Roarke in J.D. Robb's In Death series--with movie deals bought and paid for, but none in production (that I know of).  I have a dead-certain image of both and will likely be disappointed by the two chosen to play the roles.  However, if the physical fails to align with my vision, hopefully the inner character of both resolves that.

Now, on with my particular persuasion as to my main couple in Good Ole Boys.

For Holt Seville, he is described to look like Sawyer from Lost.  However, I hope he reads and acts like a gentleman rogue--think Cary Grant in Charade or Keith Michell or more probably Len Cariou (right side of the law, mostly) both of Murder, She Wrote. 

For Geneva "Neva" Tate, she's exotic looking but the hard-working American entrepreneur.  With looks and smarts, but hardly cognizant of her beauty and diligently using those brains of hers.  A Megan Fox or Olivia Wilde stop-traffic face and build, with a serious and subdued underbelly, like Jordana Brewster.  In fact, Jordana--or Ashley Greene--would serve well on all accounts if induced to wear vivid blue contacts.

For the others, Pops and Diana and several minor characters, I'd need study time to contemplate who best embodies these individuals.  Pops would be the hardest because I have very distinct renderings of him personality-wise and not so much physically.  Will think on that.

Anyway, I almost did a roster of my characters matched up with the actor most attuned to my imagination and put the cross-reference in the front matter of my debut novel, Good Ole Boys.  Then I nixed the idea.  As a reader myself, I like conjuring up my own version of the people I am reading about.  And thought my own readership might want first crack at it, too.

With this post, I can indulge my whims and sally forth with my idea.  Add the words here where Pinterest prefers pixels.

I love it!  I can do both . . . .

P.S.  Ooh, I just thought of Claire Forlani, which her exotic looks and blue eyes, would work perfectly for Neva.

Oh, The Freedoms Writing as a Career Brings

Aside from the total creative free reign of being an Indie e-pubbed author, there are other elements to be grateful for.  Such as, all I need is a pen and a notebook to manifest my imaginings.  That was a supreme shock when I was doing a goal-setting projection many many years ago and thinking that I would have to invest in a desktop computer and a home version of word processing software and a printer and a mouse and a scanner and . . . then it hit me.  All I need is a plain old No. 2 pencil and some paper—even scrap paper would do.  Which I had both.  Plus I already owned an electric typewriter (that’s how long ago this was, and yet, not so long ago).  I could type up my handwritten notes.  After all, that’s what Jessica Fletcher does in Murder, She Wrote, right?

Major moment that was.  Money was not stopping me from living my dream of being an author.  Back then, I was blaming my lack of funds for not catapulting me into the career of my choice.  Of course, now, I have that desktop and various bells and whistles of a small home office.  But if the electricity goes out, I can still create.  I can even edit if I have a hard copy of my latest work to review.

And locations.  I am not locked into my home office.  Which does not just mean I can take my laptop and work in the kitchen too.  No, it means I could be anywhere in the world and writing a new novel with paper and pen—on a beach, on a mountain, in a cave with torchlight as my only illumination, in a tent, in a villa, in a shack, in Africa, in a limo (as long as I’m not the one driving—ha!), camping along the Nile, in Egypt staring at the pyramids . . . you get my point.

Aside from the immense freedom of just being my own boss, there is freedom of movement, of locale.  If I want to work outside in the sunshine on my patio, I can.  If I am meeting my author group, I can work in a café, sipping coffee and inspired by the collective energy of such a creative eclectic group of folks I am proud to call friends.

Everything I need to create is within me.  Another light-bulb moment for me, as well.  To document those quickly evaporating ideas into words, I can use old-fashioned means or newfangled trends.  I can grab my purse and go, writing-ready, or add my laptop carrier and use voice-recognition software to type in my own words for me.  It’s my choice.

And I am SO loving the freedom.