Fifth week roundup

This post is a collection of all the blogs posts since our last roundup.

Starter House–A Ghost Story

Author Interview-Sonja Condit, author of Starter House

The Spice of Backstory in Condit’s Starter House

Cheesecloth Removal: The Poet’s Companion by Kim Addonizio and Dorianne Laux

You Live Where? Strange Settings in Judy Budnitz’s Nice Big American Baby

Lit Mag Roundup

Just Right Love Poem

Slaughter House Five–Not Just Another War Story

All That was Faked Turned Bad: Hemingway and the Gift of Unruly Prose

North of Hope–A Daughter’s Arctic Journey

The Gift of Focused Power in the First Person Point of View

Marking Time

Punctuate Bodies in Rebecca Thrill’s “Punctuation”

Literary Citizen and Why You Should Be One #litcitizen

What Led Zepplin Teaches Me About Writing

The Night Circus



The Spice of Backstory in Condit’s Starter House

by Rhonda Browning White

In order to move forward in a story, we must sometimes look backward. Readers need a certain amount of information to understand why a character acts the way she does, why she feels the way she does, and what makes her want to overcome the obstacles in her way. The trouble with backstory (aside from the fact the MS Word doesn’t recognize it as a real word), is that it stops the forward motion of your story. And if you’re not moving forward, well . . . you’re backing up. Readers want forward motion. We want momentum. We want action.

Fortunately, Sonja Condit has mastered the art of cleverly sprinkling backstory through her first novel, Starter House. Like salt and pepper (and a healthy touch of cayenne), Condit seasons her story by parceling out crucial background information—revealing it in thought, in action, and in dialogue—throughout the novel in brief snippets that never stop the forward motion of the story. In fact, the addition of backstory in Starter House actually serves to build ever-increasing tension and move the plot forward.

Starter House tells the story of Lacey and Eric, who seek and purchase Lacey’s dream home, which turns out to be haunted by an ominous presence only Lacey can sense. Condit immediately anchors readers in time and place and lets us know what her main characters want (the perfect house), while simultaneously providing crucial backstory—on the first page.

“It was already June, and the Miszlaks still hadn’t found a house. Eric wanted guarantees: no lead, asbestos, mold, termites, crime, or trouble. Lacey wanted triangles. ‘Triangles,’ Eric said, as if he’d never heard of such a thing. . . he with his binder of fact sheets organized by street name, she with her sketchbook, outside of their one hundred and eighth house. . . . She wished she could say, This is the one, I love it, for Eric’s sake. . . . They’d had enough of square houses, bland rooms no better than the motel’s she’ grown up in and the apartments they’d lived in together, houses with memory. They couldn’t live that way anymore, with the baby coming. ‘Triangles,’ she said, shaping one in the air with her hands. ‘Gables. Dormer windows’” (pg. 1).

We’re moving forward. We’re house-hunting. We’re feeling frustrated. As readers, we’re caught up in the forward motion (the action), the emotion (the frustration of looking at our hundred and eighth house), and yet we’re learning about Lacey’s and Eric’s personalities (he’s detailed, she’s a dreamer) and their past, through delicately sprinkled backstory. And all this happens on the first page. We haven’t lost momentum, because Condit has effectively parceled out tidbits of our characters’ pasts; the past months of house-hunting, their early cohabitation, Lacey’s childhood, even her recent pregnancy. And not once does Condit use flashback.

Also important in revealing backstory is withholding background information. Yes, you can pull a reader deeper into a story by concealing the past, while providing hints or glimpses of its importance. Condit subtly utilizes this technique, building immediate tension in the story, when Realtor CarolAnna Grey hesitates to sell the house to the couple. “Is there something wrong with this house,” Eric said (pg 6). The Realtor changes the subject, continuing to steer the couple toward other housing options, even telling the seller, Harry Razocky, “Harry, they don’t want it. . . . It’s not right” (pg 7).

Why don’t they want it?—as readers, we already know Lacey loves it. What is the Realtor hiding from them? Will they buy it? And more importantly, how can you as a reader stop turning pages, when a skilled author like Condit provides (and hides) just the right amount of spicy backstory to keep you intrigued? Simple answer: you can’t. You’ll have to read the rest of this riveting story to discover the answers to these spellbinding questions. As writers, we can strive for nothing more important than to entertain our readers in such a compelling, page-turning manner.

Works Cited

Condit, Sonja. Starter House. HarperCollins, 2013. Print.

Interview: Sonja Condit, Author of Starter House

Starter HouseSonja is well known to Why The Writing Works–she’s a fellow graduate of Converse’s low-residency MFA program.

WTWW:  Starter House is a ghost story with a twist. Your short story “Medora” also deals with the supernatural. What draws you to this type of writing?

Sonja: I think we are all strongly influenced by whatever we read before we were twelve. I had a huge collection of books about folklore and mythology: Greek, Roman, and Norse myths and legends, a complete Grimm including some horrible stories you don’t usually see (like “The Jew Among Thorns” and “Mary’s Child” for example–both very nasty), and the Dover reprints of Andrew Lang’s Fairy Books. Lang’s collection came from all over the world, and it had beautiful illustrations. So I learned all these archetypes before I learned anything else.

WTWW:  For Starter House, the trigger for the novel was, as stated in this interview, a rental house you knew of that seemed to frequently change renters. Where else do you find triggers for stories, and do you keep a list or journal of your ideas?

Sonja: Every now and then, which means once a year for the last four years, I do a thirty-day project. That means I have to write down the idea for a story every day for thirty days. There are so many ideas in my thirty-day files, I could never write them all in a hundred years! And I have another one scheduled for March. Also, when I’m in the middle of a project, related ideas pop into my head all the time, most often when I’m doing something else. Just after an orchestra rehearsal is a great time for ideas.

WTWW:  “Medora” is a fantastic short story. What was the trigger for this tale of an old woman and her dealings with Death?

Sonja: Medora’s life is, to a surprising extent, nonfiction. It’s based on some incidents from the lives of my great-grandmother’s sisters, mostly the youngest sister, Maude, who really was named by the census taker because her family had run out of names. That’s what happens when you have a Texas family with far too many daughters, two or three names per daughter. The two sisters before Maude were Johnnie and Tommie. And she and her first husband really did conceal all their assets from unsavory debt collectors by selling everything and buying diamonds; I inherited one of the rings, a small one, Art Deco platinum with tiny stones. The rest of the set is lost, sadly. Then the idea of Death as a human-like character, a person you can bargain with, goes right back to some stories in Grimm.

WTWW:  What does a typical writing day look like for you?

 Sonja: A good writing day would be one in which I have six hours of uninterrupted time, plenty of coffee, and somebody else cleans my house. That never happens. A typical writing day is, I plan out the day and write down my goal, and at the end of the day I look back and have accomplished about half what I intended. The goals are big, though, so it works out. I’m near the end of a second draft and today my goal is twenty pages.

Read Sonja’s short story Medora here

Another article here:


Read several chapters here

Sonja’s website

Starter House-A Ghost Story

Starter House

“He rode his bike along the sidewalk to the edge of Eric and Lacey’s new property, still marked with a row of orange survey flags—he rang the bike’s round bell once, ting, and then turned and rode to the to the row of flags on the other border. He braked by jamming his heels into the sidewalk and rang the bell again. Ting.” (14).

The detail in this paragraph shows a normal little boy, riding his bike along the sidewalk in front of Lacey Mislak’s new home. He’s being a pest, riding along the sidewalk while Lacey and her husband Eric are trying to move in. Nothing out of the ordinary here—the details show a scene that wouldn’t be out of place in any suburb in the country in August.  But at the end of the chapter, another scene. Eric and Lacey have had an argument, and Eric has driven off. The little boy is still riding his bike up and down the sidewalk, turning around each time he reaches the property line in a routine that never varies. Lacey, lying down underneath a shade tree, is struck how the routine never varies: “How did he do it exactly the same every time? More and more Lacey felt she was listening to a recording, and not a real event. If she opened her eyes—which she would not do, nothing could make her look—she would see the sidewalk empty except or a boom box playing a CD on infinite repeat: Ting. Ting.” (16)

Is the little boy real or not? If not, why does he cause her to drop the box of dishes she’s carrying, shattering almost everything inside? If so, why doesn’t Eric reprimand him for being in the way instead of snapping at Lacey?

This isn’t the first time in the story Lacey has seen children that weren’t there. When they were first looking at the house—which was in a state of renovation—“Lacey could see her someday children there. They would sit on that round step in the sunshine. She saw a boy folding paper airplanes, which he meant to throw from a bedroom window. She saw a girl leaning against the post with her head bent over a book. The girl tucked a lock of hair behind her ear…Someday, here. They had chosen their home in this house.” (5)

Using solid details, Condit creates a strong story in which the unseen is as real as the seen. Starter House is a ghost story, but one anchored in reality because of Condit’s use of detail (as well as a solid, scary story) that leaves no doubt in a reader’s mind Lacey is experiencing two different worlds—and one of those worlds has a troubled little boy, capable of causing terrible things.

Condit’s use of detail continues to draw the reader deeper into this ghost story, turning up the tension through the use of details—“She could feel it already, a sense of gathering in, of presence, the feeling her senses had interpreted as darkness when she first entered the house. It wasn’t darkness, though she couldn’t see through it. It was more like pressure, breathlessness, as if the air had curdled into some denser substance. Like souring milk, or scabbing blood. Drew was watching.” (120).

Contrast Drew riding his bike in front of the house to the Drew drawn into the kitchen by the smell of baking cookies.  The contrast between the two is accomplished by using detail that hooks the senses.

Starter House is a ghost story that is also a suspense novel, with a surprising plot twist. What drew me into the novel, and kept me there, (it kept me up until 2am finishing it) was Condit’s use of detail that anchored me in the novel , causing me to care about what happened to the characters.

Read more here.