TOP NOVELIST: Challenge #1: Final Edit
This week on TOP NOVELIST, the challenge was to select your favorite word, explain its significance to you, and use it in a piece of fiction. This challenge is to measure your vision for language, your economy with words, and apparently, your ability to follow guidelines and meet deadlines. Our judges, John Updike, Michiko Kakutani, and Dave Eggers, have all died in a catfight over what consitutes good literature, thus leaving the producers to judge the remainder of the contest.
This week, Phillip exercised his single "Writer's Block" lifeline (Hey, we steal from all kinds of shows) to sit out a week. Writers may use this Writer's Block excuse to get one free pass out of a week's contest. Use it wisely.
First of all, the following writers have remained in the pages of the contest:
Lucy, your prose was, well, overHEATed, but it was certainly competent, and spicy enough to keep the judges interested.
Julia, try to broaden your scope. While this was beautifully done, we worry about your ability to go beyond the confines of your own experience.
Perry, You have chosen a remarkably beautiful word, particularly given its disturbing use. We are looking forward to seeing more of your work.
Patricia, Your writing tends toward the sentimental and the cliched. Like Julia, you'll need to expand your scope or your best work will be the work you've done in your activism.
Suzanne, you know your genre well, but we fear your skill in this genre may be masking a deeper shallowness.
Our top three writers this week are Daniel, N., and Bill:
Daniel, you use your language beautifully, and your characters may be more mature than you are. Don't pat yourself on the back too much with those prizes though. Unless they're giving you a book deal, they don't mean a thing to us at TOP NOVELIST.
Bill, while your description was stronger than your actual fiction, both were full of pulsing energy. If you can sustain that drive in your writing, and that unflinching impulse to uncover mendacity, you will be a force to be reckoned with.
N., you met the challenge of economy by using a word that isn't even a word, but is in fact the absence of a word. So compelling, so provocative. Even though we all know you just wanted to drop the F-bomb twenty times, we found your entry playful and visionary.
The winner of this challenge is...Bill.
The remaining three contestant have things to worry about.
Sadie, you are clearly very smart, but we had no idea what you were talking about. Catachresis? WTF? Remember, Sadie, you have readers. This week, though, you're in.
Nels, we like your no-nonsense approach to language, but we wished we had seen it in your actual fiction. Like most academics, though, you will be forgiven for not quite following directions. You're in.
Devorah, this is TOP NOVELIST, not TOP PLAYWRIGHT, and even if it were, this would still suck. Not only is your language trite, but it doesn't even sound nice. Devorah, this is your rejection letter. Pack up your typewriter.
Contestants, please feel free to comment on the judges' feedback. You are encouraged to be bitchy.

Comments
While I wish the judges had an ounce of sense, of passion, of humanity, I can see that I don't belong here...I belong in the theatre, where people have SOULS.
Posted by: Devorah | March 23, 2006 9:21 PM
Well, I just wanted to thank the judges for recognizing the quality of my work. I'm hoping that they're not always going to be suckered by gimmicky writing like they were this week, though, because I interested in telling an honest story, not gimmicks. Overall, though, this felt like a good week to me, and I feel a lot more confident about my chances in TOP NOVELIST than I did when I first got here. A lot of these people are just genre writers, and I think that my experience at the Iowa Writer's Workshop is going to give me that extra edge.
Posted by: Daniel | March 23, 2006 9:26 PM
Just Genre Writers?!?!
Yes, chick lit is a genre, but it's a genre that goes back to JANE AUSTEN! I refuse to accept that some starving student writer thinks that he can outlast, outplay, and outwrite the rest of us just because he refuses to acknowledge his own generic constraints. As if he's not writing within a particular genre. Puh-lease.
And to the judges who think I'm shallow: I don't understand why people equate writing that is about love and heartache and a little binge eating with being shallow. This is what real girls in the city go through, and just because our esteemed judges don't live in that world, it doesn't make it shallow.
I would write more, but I've got a deadline for a story on the fact that the chandelier earring trend is o-v-e-r, and so I've got to dash! I look forward to next week's challenge!
Posted by: Suzanne | March 24, 2006 9:55 AM
Merci. I'll be sure to dumb it down next week.
Posted by: Sadie | March 24, 2006 10:10 AM
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. But if you must see something else, let us not at this time start speaking of authorial intention...
Often I find the reading says more of the reader than the author. Do you not agree?
Posted by: N. | March 24, 2006 5:31 PM