First Principles

We all know about Climate Change. Believing it is one thing, doing something about it is another. Then there are prominent related issues like Biodiversity and Plastics in the Oceans. The situation is pretty much overwhelming. It's hard to believe that any individual can make a difference.

We're constantly being fed conflicting information. This is designed to confuse and frustrate our good intentions. If there's a report on how a plant-based diet is not only good for our health but of enormous benefit to the planet, the media will respond with 'research' based evidence that meat is good for us and that vegan families are risking the health of their children by such faddism.

Let me try to help by explaining my approach. When I was studying Chemistry I found that provided I understood the first principles I could avoid having to remember huge amounts of information. So it is with the environment. None of us can know and understand every consequence of every action. Life and our relationship with the planet is much too complex for that.

I'll give you an example to begin with.

Fracking. Why do we oppose fracking?

Proponents of fracking will argue that we need gas, that there is no risk, that the earthquakes are small and that opponents should back off.

The anti-fracking brigade cite horror stories about contaminated water supplies, the loss of value of homes adjacent to fracking sites, flammable gases coming through domestic water taps and lots more.

My advice is to forget all that. Risk assessment is subjective. Go back to first principles which is that fossil fuels have to be left in the ground if we are to mitigate climate change and avoid extinction. Extracting gas puts the carbon it contains into the atmosphere. Simply put, fracking will make climate change worse. That's enough for me.

The country, and some councils, have declared a climate emergency without doing anything except shout about it. We need to dramatically reduce our use of gas. There will be no market for fracked gas if we do that and the frackers will give up because they're only in it for the money.

The Committee on Climate Change has advised Government that 800,000 households a year need to be converted to sustainable fuel from here on in if we are to reach our carbon reduction targets. Yet almost all new houses are being fitted with gas boilers. This is wrong. Councils can and must stop this. There are alternatives and these are much cheaper if installed at the building stage rather than having to retrofit.

So that's the first principle:
Anything that will make Climate Change worse has to be avoided.

Precious Words

People ask me how many words they have to write before they have a novel. It's an interesting question. Writers like me can be a bit obsessive when it comes to word count. I use it as a measure of progress. I like to write at least a thousand words every day. My problem is letting some of them go into the trash but I'll come to that later.

I'm reminded of the story about the budding author who approaches a publisher at a party. 'What's the least number of pages you'd publish as a novel?' she asked. 'Three hundred,' he answered. The writer threw up her hands in joy and went running excitedly around the room shouting 'It's finished!'

The conventional answer to the question is seventy to ninety thousand words though some genres like fantasy can be much longer. I would add a few words of caution, though. The important thing is to tell the story in a compelling way. That may take more words or, preferably, fewer. Vonnegut urged us to 'start as close to the end as possible'.

Which brings me back to the unpalatable truth that not every word I write is either necessary or appropriate for the story I'm telling. Accepting this isn't easy. Those words were painstakingly and often painfully extracted. Losing them into the oblivion of the trash bin can hurt.
There are times when I read through the previous day's output and am tempted to trash the lot. This is normal but ill-advised. I have learned to leave everything exactly as it was written until I've finished the story. Then, after a period of reflection, revision can take place.
Working with an editor has taught me that I am not a good judge of my own work.

The initial casualties of the editing tend to be the first few chapters. Often these can be completely removed with great benefit to the whole piece. Why is that? The way I've come to think about this is to consider the opening exchanges of a difficult conversation. Imagine having to persuade someone to do something you know they won't like. How would you start the conversation? I'd certainly not go straight to the point. I'd ask them how they were and try to get an idea of how they were feeling. See if there was some angle I could use to soften the impact of the harsh words to follow. So it is with my characters. They are inevitably in for a hard time. I'm about to throw all kinds of trials and tribulations their way. Before I do, though, I spend a bit of time getting to know them a bit better.
The reader doesn't have to see this process.

My first Jenny Parker novel originally began with a long detailed scene with Jenny sitting on a toilet. I resisted its deletion with all my might but eventually conceded that this piece of information might have been essential for me but it was something my readers should be spared.
Incidentally, six years after its first publication, a new edition of Due Diligence has been released. The toilet scene is still missing.