Author2Author: Colleen Curran & Martha O'Connor (Bonus Round)

Colleen Curran: As a fellow first novelist, do you read your reviews? I'm finding this such a strange part of the process. I told my publicist, only send me the good ones, I don't need to read the bad ones. And I like that so far. Luckily, the reviews have been really good. But I still don't really find it a pleasant experience. And then there's Amazon, B&N, etc. I think I've got some religious nuts on my tail or something on Amazon, so I've been avoiding reading that as much as possible. But my coworkers like to tease me with stuff they get off Amazon. Like yesterday at a board meeting, my boss, also a writer, was chanting, "Sinful thoughts! You write sinful thoughts!" I hit him and then we went for a beer. What's your experience been like?

Martha O'Connor: I don't read reviews, other than the quotes my publicist sends me for my site. I decided not to read them a long time ago, after I read the New York Times assessment of one of my favorite novels, Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita: "There are two equally serious reasons why it isn't worth any adult reader's attention. The first is that it is dull, dull, dull in a pretentious, florid and archly fatuous fashion. The second is that it is repulsive." To me, Lolita is one of the most brilliant novels ever written. It showed me what a novel could be. Of course, that review is not about Lolita, but about how much it upset the reviewer. Recently Claire Tristram, author of the penetrating, beautiful and provocative novel After, said something really interesting to me: "Any time you write about sex and violence in any context beyond the set-in-stone genre boundaries, you're going to get weird reactions from people, and those reactions always have far more to do with them than with your book."

My job's to write. So other than the reviews that get passed to me for use on the website, or ones that come my way by mistake, I don't read them and am keeping my nose in my own new book. One thing's for sure... I'm getting a lot more work done that way!

Did you write your novel in chronological order from start to finish, or did you write pieces of it and shuffle them together later? What are the benefits to using this approach?

Colleen Curran: I've been writing short stories since I was fifteen and always wanted to write a novel, but the task seemed so huge and overwhelming, I had no idea how to start. I'd also been submitting short stories for publication ever since I was fifteen, but with no luck. I got rejected everywhere. Ten years later, I was ready to throw in the towel. I had a series of dead-end day jobs, but finally landed a good job where I was an online journalist. I was ready to quit fiction writing altogether and just write nonfiction. But I still kept sending out my short stories. In the first month at my new job, one of my stories got picked by Jane for their fiction fontest. Then, the same editor recommended me for a literary anthology, The Dictionary of Failed Relationships, where I was included with some of my favorite writers, like Susan Minot and Pam Houston. I finally felt like I had a fighting chance. After years of feeling completely outside of the publishing world, with no connections, no positive feedback from anyone, maybe I finally, finally had a chance.

I was devastated. I knew I needed to revise, but I had no idea how. I sat down and cut out 100 pages. I wrote 150 more. Any scene that didn't move the plot forward? I cut it. Any scene that didn't change or illuminate character? Reworked or rewritten. I changed characters, I changed the climax, I rewrote the ending seven times. I revised for six months, the hardest thing I'd ever done. I was miserable and stuck one minute, then elated and joyful when I'd make a breakthrough. Finally, I sent it back to the dream agent, prayed and crossed my fingers. He called, took the book and sold it in a week.