An Aha Moment

You Are Here

I didn’t die nor did my laptop, in case you’re wondering why this blog hasn’t been updated. It’s the same-old, same-old around here. I’ve been caught up in writing so much that I called the Little Dude by a character’s name. I guess it’s fair because he now has make-believe “bad guys” and “good guys” who get into all kinds of scrapes. (My husband and I are not excluded from these rip, roaring yarns.) Now that the Little Dude can talk, Ryan and I can’t think of whom he gets his imagination from … it must be something in our water.

Anyway, I’m studying TV writing and came across this passage from Crafty TV Writing: Thinking Inside the Box by Alex Epstein. He’s talking about telling a story out loud before writing it, and reading it again after you’ve written it. But this part really got me … can’t you tell, since I haven’t posted a blog since Mary Talbot Fee, whose CD is FABULOUS!!!

Whether you are writing a TV episode, a screenplay, a novel, an essay, a presentation, or a speech, there is nothing as effective in streamlining, enriching and generally beating a story into shape as winging the whole thing front to back off the top of your head.

After all, what you do have to lose? You’re not driving a car. You can’t hurt anyone. If you wrap your story around a tree, you can always untangle it and get it back on the road again with a few leaps of imagination.

This technique worked very well for In Between Men, especially since there were so many different POVs. All I did was read ten-page sections into a tape recorder and then played it back while reading along with the manuscript. It’s really not that painful. Trust me.

But I’ve never tried telling the story out loud before I’ve written it. I think I’ll give it a try with the new material I’m planning to work on over the next couple of weeks. I’ll let you know how it works.

Why I Love the 70’s

I love the 1970’s not just because was I born in the era of disco, Nixon and bell bottoms. I love the opulence of the decade. The giant gas-guzzling land yachts known as cars. Wonder Woman, Charlie’s Angels and Bionic Woman were prime-time TV and I had this thing for the Roll-O and Calgon commercials. The 70’s was the decade when my parents fell in love and my mom carried daisies in her wedding bouquet.

So while I was supposed to be working, I found this video on YouTube and it just inspired why I love that decade. When I see Linda Ronstadt singing – yes, they actually sang on live, national television back then – and her back-up singer in a yellow jump suit, I just think that they were much more real than we are now. Music is prepackaged, manufactured and lipsynched. Back then, it was a girl with a voice, not much fashion sense and a tambourine at her hip.

Also, this is the song that I play whenever I sit down to work on Aracely Calderon.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haZPPBJC8Ic&hl=en&fs=1]

Just wondering…


It’s not like I don’t have other things to do but these questions have been bumping around in my head. Hopefully by letting them go, I can get on with life … and be free of another excuse to procrastinate.

  1. Why are books titled, “The So-And-So’s Daughter” or “The Such-and-Such’s Wife”? Have you noticed there is a plethora of titles like these? Is it a new genre in which women are defined by the men they’re related to? I tried reading “Ahab’s Wife” and at about page five, I was thinking more about how to perfect my red beans and rice recipe as opposed to uh, Ahab’s wife. So I hope that if the title, “The Ballad of Aracely Calderon,” doesn’t fly, my editor won’t change it to: “The Mariachi’s Daughter.” I better knock on wood just in case!
  2. When a book is described as “a celebration of love and friendship” or something vaguely positive and uplifting, does that mean no one knows what the heck the book is about? Does it mean the heroine will learn she has cancer in the third act and die? And if so, why would I spent money on a book like that in this economy?
  3. And finally, what’s the appeal of galoshes on book covers? To me they symbolize the inconvenience of exchanging your cute footwear for clumsy, sweaty, icky rubbers, as our British friends call them. To my friend, Margo Candela: I’m not bagging on your galoshes. You’re taller than me. You can pull them off whereas galoshes on me would look like wading pants. However if they came in a wedge heel, I might reconsider my opinion.

Okay so there you have it. This is what happens in my head when I’m not writing, cooking, gardening or taking care of the Little Dude.

Literary Orange 2009

Literary Orange comes to UCI for the first time on Saturday, April 4, 8-5 pm, at the UCI Student Center. Presented by the UCI Libraries and the OC Public Libraries, Literary Orange is an exciting day for writers and book lovers. Attendees have the opportunity to hear from an array of authors, have their books signed, ask questions, and learn about the writing process.

The event features keynote speakers Stephen Cannell, best-selling author and TV producer; Ron Carlson, award-winning author and UCI fiction program director; and Sandra Tsing Loh, writer, performer and radio commentator. Over 40 authors will participate on panels covering fiction, non-fiction, journalism, mystery, poetry, science fiction, romance, children’s books, horror, food, graphic novels, memoir, and young adult.

Tickets are $75; $35 for students with I.D. (walk-in registration $85/$45). Admission includes all keynote and panel sessions, book sales and signings; as well as a continental breakfast, sit-down lunch, and afternoon snacks. Limited seating; registration is first come, first served. Information and registration forms are available online at www.literaryorange.org, or at all UCI Libraries and OC Public Libraries. For further information, or to inquire about sponsorship opportunities, please call (949) 824.4651.

Line Up Ladies

Yesterday I turned in the micro-mini mystery short story to the editor of OC Noir. Its now in his hands and my heroine, Danielle, lingers in the back of mind, impatiently tapping her toe and wondering when the hell I’ll write her book. But first, I have a MAJOR revision to my mariachi book and then I head back to 1926 for the historical and then zip back to present day for the ghost story.

Don’t worry Danielle, a revision is inevitable so our time is not yet over. But then you’ll have to get in line with the other ladies.

Shifting gears from one story to another, for me, is a process. I want to jump right in and yet, I don’t want any of the stuff from the first project to bleed into the next. Also there’s the fear that the new project won’t come out the way I want it to. Invariably it never does but I still hang onto this fear because … well, I’m not sure why. But I’m working on it. Characters come to life, they whisper secrets in my ear or in my dreams. Or, they just take over the and tell me that’s how it’s gonna be.

Writers, you know what I’m talking about. Readers, you get to experience it on the other side when you suddenly lean in closer to the book and hold on with both hands to see what happens next.

I’ve been writing the mariachi story for oh, about three years now. Each revision is like peeling skin and then muscle and now bone. It’s the book that is challenging me; it looks down its nose at me and says, “Come Castillo. Show me what you got, b!%(#.” And I love it.

But first I step in. I review the notes I’ve collected over the past month while writing the mystery. I watch the mariachi documentaries I’ve collected from PBS (God bless them!), review my interview notes and then sit down with the manuscript without a pen or pencil and just let myself into the world. After a thorough read during which I make no marks but take notes in a separate notebook, I open up my working outline and then reread the manuscript with colored pencils and stickies. When that’s all done, I’m in.

So here I go!

Fight On

All you UCLA people should look the other way because this is a call to my fellow ‘SC Trojans!

In the upcoming issue of the USC Mexican American Alumni Association newsletter, I had the honor of interviewing Frank H. Cruz, USC Trustee and former Chairman for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (among other things, he also founded Telemundo and was one of the first Hispanic anchormen). USC MAAA will honor Mr. Cruz at the 35th Annual Scholarship Dinner on March 20th at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel.

Now more than ever we need real stories of men and women who scaled the barriers in their paths and lived to tell the tale. If you’d like to receive the USC MAAA’s newsletter, go here. And if you are a USC undergrad or graduate student, scholarship applications can be downloaded here.

Behind the Scenes: A Class Apart


Carlos Sandoval was riding the New York subway when he read an editorial in the New York Times commemorating the case, Hernández v. Texas. The case began in 1951 in the small town of Edna, where Pedro “Pete” Hernández murdered his boss in the parking lot of a cantina. At the behest of Hernández’s mother, San Antonio attorneys Gus Garcia and Carlos Cadena took the case. On January 11, 1954, they stood before the nine justices of the Supreme Court where they argued for the full protection of Mexican Americans under the 14th Amendment.

Award-winning producers, Carlos Sandoval and Peter Miller took a four-year journey into the past to make the documentary, A Class Apart which will air on PBS American Experience, Monday, February 23, 9 p.m. (Check PBS American Experience for local listings and Camino Bluff to organize your own viewing party the night of the show.)

Over the phone I talked with Carlos and Peter about going back in time to a place when Mexican Americans were categorized under “white”, and yet were not allowed to attend the same schools or serve on juries as their Anglo neighbors. They spoke about the challenges of telling the story of an invisible, yet courageous people and the full-circle journey of the case.

Chica Lit: When did you begin making A Class Apart?

Photo: Gustavo García, Pete Hernández and John J. Herrera at the Jackson County, Texas, Courthouse. Courtesy of Dr. Hector P. Garcia Papers/ Texas A&M University.

Sandoval: There are three parts to that question. The very first filming that I did was at a conference on the case at the University of Houston in November 2004. I hired a local crew and interviewed people, including James Miranda, the original lawyer on the case who died about a year and a half ago. I used some of those interviews to put together our sample reel to seek additional funds. In May 2006, we really began the bulk of filming in Edna and the question became how do we find the people who knew about the case and also come up with archival material to be able to tell the story? We were very lucky because we did get the nephew of Pete Hernández and Victor Rodriguez who knew Pete and was there when the murder took place. It was guerrilla research that went on there.

Then it [became] about trying to find a partner on project.

Miller: It was at a party of filmmakers where I met [Sandoval]. He was telling me about this project and that he was looking to work with this with people who’ve done this before and I said, ‘How about me?’

I know a lot about history but never heard about the early Mexican American civil rights history and I thought, I should know about this. My passion and interest are in stories of people whose stories have been marginalized, or not been told. The telling of history is critically important in questions of justice. If the history of a people is legitimized, if it is told, it is an important part of achieving rights and standing in society.

The Hernández case has no transcript at the Supreme Court … nothing was written down on what was said on the day of the argument, no tape recording. There were no photos taken of lawyers in Washington; there were very few photos of anyone involved in the case. We had to piece together what happened in the Supreme Court that day with little scraps of information of what was an incredibly dramatic event that happened. At base of our story is invisibility; a community that’s invisible in eyes of Americans.

Chica Lit: Could you give us some historical background of the case?

Sandoval: [Pete Hernández] is no Rosa Parks. It’s not an easy civil rights case. This is a person who did in fact kill another man and there were consequences to that. The lawyers [Garcia and Cadena] were brilliant in realizing [the case] presented an opportunity despite the nature of the case to try to move forward on the constitutional rights of Mexican Americans. School segregation was on the way out; Mendez v. Westminster provided a precedent to desegregate schools in Texas. They were able to take out housing segregation.

But jury discrimination in Texas remained. At the that time, the Supreme Court already declared that you couldn’t discriminate jury selections with African Americans. The way Texas got away with it was that Texas said Mexican Americans were white, as long as there were whites on a jury you are tried by a jury of your peers. We were white when it was convenient for the state of Texas and that’s where the lawyers were very clever. [They argued] we may be white within the category of white but we’re treated as a class apart. That’s the argument that won the Supreme Court.

Chica Lit: What surprises did you find along the way?

Sandoval: The moment for me was when we were in Edna and we were told about a segregated cemetery. It remained on a de facto basis segregated. When we went to film, I was walking down a gully that divided the Latino community from the Anglo community. That for me was the most visible remaining symbol of the Jim Crow-like segregation that took place at that time and realizing that my parents or grandparents could’ve faced it, or I could’ve faced it.

Miller: We were having breakfast at this diner and talking to a waitress there about the case and the film. She said, ‘oh that’s really interesting’ and started telling us that there were still problems with the police and discrimination getting jobs. We asked, ‘Can we talk to you’ and she said said, ‘I couldn’t do that. I couldn’t live in this town if I talked about those things.’

Fifty years [after the case], we’re talking to people in the same town who don’t want to talk about discrimination around them because they’re afraid of the repercussions.

Paulina Rosa testified in the trail to establish the pattern of discrimination in order to prove jury discrimination. [Her child, who was an American citizen, could not attend the white public school.] To me, making these movies is about meeting the folks who dealt with that stuff. It’s one thing to talk to the leaders or great orators who argued before the Supreme Court. But to talk to the mother who lived in a tiny town where they’d kill you at night if you’re out – for [Rosa] to get up and do that – meeting people like her makes this work worthwhile.

Chica Lit: How have audiences reacted to A Class Apart?

Sandoval: I’ve been touring with the movie in Texas for about a week. The response has been overwhelming. It’s almost, with some of these screenings and Q&A’s, a revival meeting because people are bearing witness to the discrimination they personally experienced. Or we hear, ‘my abuelo or abuelita told me about this and I didn’t realize this existed or how bad it was.’

Last week, the Texas state legislature read a proclamation about the film. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied [Hernandez] the 14th Amendment. That court is in the same building where the proclamation was read.

A Class Apart will air Monday, February 23rd at 9 p.m. on PBS. Check your local listings at www.pbs.org/americanexperience, and then plan a viewing party with your friends, classmates and family at Camino Bluff Productions.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-H4qhahKFKU&hl=en&fs=1]

Sign of the Times

My Pretty

If you came here looking for the entry I posted earlier this week about a certain blogger who attacked another author, I have taken it down. She removed the attack from her blog and out of respect for that gesture, I’m doing the same.

Thank you for your comments, although I disagree with those which cut down her work. She is a truly gifted author, one whom I admire and respect. Her quotes are on my book covers and I’m honored by her generosity and support. But real friends speak up when they see the other standing at the edge, or doing something that is ultimately self destructive.

The conversation is now over and its time for us to get back to doing good work. The day after I posted my response to the attack, I found this quote while having lunch with my husband. I’d like to share it with you:

“Keep in mind that our community is not composed of those who are already saints, but of those who are trying to become saints. Therefore let us be extremely patient with each other’s faults and failures.” – Mother Teresa