I am writing a mystery where the sleuth has a Doberman Pinscher as a
guard dog and companion. See this newsgroup's thread "What dog breed
would be good for a fictional sleuth" if you're wondering why I picked
a Dobe and/or, late in that thread, about the naming of it. Anyway,
in talking over the novel series concept with another writer, he
recommended that I make my sleuth a "gentleman" breeder of Dobermans
to add more depth and layers to the character. A second hobby of his
with online poker tournaments being the other. I have since raised
the idea with the members of my little think tank who helps me with
stories and they think it would be a good thing for the character as
well.

At his residence, the sleuth would employ a full-time canine
geneticist / breeder to run his kennel and breeding program. The
sleuth provides the direction and financing. His initial intent was
to breed a really good guard dog Doberman for just his own use but he
has since gotten the breeding bug and is breeding Dobes for
militaries, private security firms, and so forth. He doesn't sell the
Dobes but simply lends them to these other organizations. When they
want to retire the dog, he takes it back and gives it a home for its
old age. He's doing the take-back partly to see how long the dogs
live because one of his goals is to breed Dobermans with longer lives,
especially longer prime adult lives. The sleuth makes no money from
his breeding program and thus why I call him a gentleman breeder.

The sleuth as a dog breeder is mainly just for background color and
this aspect of himself will very likely not be the primary focus any
future stories in the novel series. It won't be in the one I'm
currently working on.

Presently, I am waiting for my library to get me, by way of inter-
library loan, Richard Herbert's "Dog Breeding for Professionals", but
would appreciate other recommendations of really good breeder books.

Thanks in advance!

Scott

In article ,
STJensen wrote:
Anyway,
in talking over the novel series concept with another writer, he
recommended that I make my sleuth a "gentleman" breeder of Dobermans
to add more depth and layers to the character.

When I read books discussing stuff in which the author
hasn't got expertise, I find it affects "suspension of
disbelief" a heck of a lot more than naming a dog Spenser.
It tends to land somewhere between awkward and just plain
wrong. Find something you know and are comfortable with and
write about that.

The whole thing is starting to sound pretty derivative. But
anyway, when I write technical papers I always acknowledge
people who've taken the time to help me out with early
review, suggestions, and whatnot. I really am grateful for
their expertise and efforts, and it's the least I can do.
Given the extent to which you're relying on other people for
major ideas for your book, on the off chance you find a
publisher you might consider paying royalties to some of the
people here who've helped you out.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

In article 2008021114151175249-montana@wildhackcominvalid,
montana wildhack wrote:
sarcasmOh, but how would fiction be written if this were such a good
idea?/sarcasm

I don't like her books that much, but at a reading I went to
Barbara Wilson said one of the smartest things about writing
mysteries I've heard. She said that she's interested in
politics and social issues and that a great thing about
writing mysteries is that you've always got at least one
character who's running around and asking questions, and you
can do a lot with that if you use it well. But the truth is
that there really aren't very many mystery writers who do
that, which I think is a shame. Reginald Hill does it, sort
of, although his questions/situations are literary and punny
rather than political, which is fine, too. But I can't
think of too many others.

How about Dobe rescue?

That's an outstanding idea.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

@panix.com (Melinda Shore) wrote:
STJensen wrote:
Anyway,
in talking over the novel series concept with another writer, he
recommended that I make my sleuth a "gentleman" breeder of
Dobermans to add more depth and layers to the character.

When I read books discussing stuff in which the author
hasn't got expertise, I find it affects "suspension of
disbelief" a heck of a lot more than naming a dog Spenser.

Agreed, but it also depends on how much focus is done on a topic. It
is like Nero Wolfe's breeding of orchids. Rex Stout (creator of Nero
Wolfe mysteries) wasn't an orchid expert or even grew them. He did
read up enough about them so what he did say in his stories was
accurate. And he had Nero grow orchids because Rex felt it was what
that character would do and would be another way to show the different
dimensions of that character.

And the vast VAST majority of mystery writers are not homicide
detectives. None of the greats were. Not Edgar Allen Poe, Sir Arthur
Canon Doyle, Agatha Christies, or Rex Stout. But readers of mysteries
know this. If they wanted real life, there is a whole genre called
"True Crime" that can give them that. Mysteries are works of fiction
that entertain.

It tends to land somewhere between awkward and just plain
wrong. Find something you know and are comfortable with and
write about that.

And thus why I'm looking to read up on the topic and will eventually
be talking to local breeders.

The whole thing is starting to sound pretty derivative.

I'm not looking to create a completely new dog breed or the process of
breeding. That I don't want to be original but based in facts.

But
anyway, when I write technical papers I always acknowledge
people who've taken the time to help me out with early
review, suggestions, and whatnot. I really am grateful for
their expertise and efforts, and it's the least I can do.

Yes, that's what the acknowledgment section is for in books. I will
be doing so with mine and planning on doing so with this newsgroup
and, so far, two specific posters here.

Given the extent to which you're relying on other people for
major ideas for your book on the off chance you find a
publisher you might consider paying royalties to some of the
people here who've helped you out.

For what dog breed is his dog? Sorry, but that isn't a major idea but
a minor one. Major ideas are the plot, sleuth's character, the "who/
why/how/when" of the mystery, and a whole long list of things. But
even these do not deserve a royalty. They are easy to come by. Go
and attend any group of writers and you will see them tossing,
debating, and refining them for other authors and never would any of
them think of then asking for a cut of that author's royalties. What
earns authors their royalties is good writing as that's what will make
or break a novel. You cannot copyright ideas. Only how you precisely
wrote up those ideas.

I came here to get input. To have a discussion. I think the other
thread was a good fun one. It did help point me in the direction of
the dog breed I choose but so did the discussion over DogForum.com and
a lot of reading I did on each proposed breed. If you read through
that thread here and over at DogForum.com, you'll see the fruit of
that research labor through the quoted material I posted.

What I am trying to do is give an accurate picture of what I will be
writing in the story. For those here who would also like that picture
to be accurate as far as dog breeds and breeding goes, our goals are
the same. I appreciate the help.

Scott

In article ,
STJensen wrote:
I'm not looking to create a completely new dog breed or the process of
breeding. That I don't want to be original but based in facts.

No, I mean there are plenty of mystery writers out there
whose protagonists breed dogs. They also happen to know
something about their dogs, as well. Increasingly murder
mysteries are distinguished by some sort of niche
involvement/milieu, whether it's cooking or dogs or being
set in wilderness Alaska or wilderness Minnesota or
whatever. There aren't a lot mystery writers who rely on
being good writers, and in fact most of them are ghastly
writers.

So far you're relying on others for your plot and your
gimmicks and your writing here is pretty "meh," and you're
choosing a niche in which you've got so little expertise
that, left to your own devices, you can't even spell the
name of the dog your protagonist will be breeding. This all
strikes me as an impersonal and frankly uninteresting way to
go about telling a story, and the more you post about it the
less interested I become.

I've tried reading a couple of Dan Brown books but they take
forever because when he writes about computing I end up
flinging the book across the room and either I have to go
get it to continue reading or it just lies there for awhile
before I get back to it. You should be so lucky to have his
sales success, but here's hoping that you're not so inexpert
in your details that your book spends undue amounts of time
airborne. You must know something about something - write
about that. And failing that (!!), writing about someone
who's just a guy and has just an ordinary life can be much,
much more compelling than some clumsily-executed gimmick.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

(Melinda Shore) wrote:
STJensen wrote:
I'm not looking to create a completely new dog breed or the
process of breeding. That I don't want to be original but
based in facts.

No, I mean there are plenty of mystery writers out there
whose protagonists breed dogs.

Who and their book titles please. I would be interested in reading
their approach.

So far you're relying on others for your plot...

Where have I done that?! Do tell me what the plot of my story is. To
my knowledge, only three people know this. The couple that is my beta
readers and the one that's my logic reader.

...and your gimmicks...

Or this.

...and your writing here is pretty "meh,"

Your judging my fiction writing by my posting to newsgroups? *laugh*
If you're going to do that, head over to rec.arts.mystery newsgroup
and see how I post there. But even there you would be basing your
judgment on a different type of writing.

...and you're choosing a niche in which you've got so little
expertise that, left to your own devices, you can't even spell the
name of the dog your protagonist will be breeding.

I'm impressed. I didn't know someone could be born with such
expertise as you have been. Myself, I was born a blank slate and have
to work to get such knowledge. For example, since picking Dobermans,
in addition to what books on various dog breeds have said about Dobes,
I have read three books devoted to just the breed and have two more
I'm about to read.

This all strikes me as an impersonal and frankly
uninteresting way to go about telling a story...

No, this is how you do research for a story. Writing the story is a
completely different thing.

...and the more you post about it the
less interested I become.

That's too bad.

Scott

In article ,
STJensen wrote:
Who and their book titles please. I would be interested in reading
their approach.

If you're not familiar with war horses (the books, not the
authors) like Virginia Lanier, Sue Henry, Susan Conant, and
a bunch of others, well, I don't know. Virginia Lanier and
Susan Conant breed and show and work dogs of the breeds they
write about. Sue Henry, not really being much of a dog
person, has gone as far as she can with it and has moved on
to having her protagonist driving around in an RV, which
presumably she does have some experience with, herself.

I'm impressed. I didn't know someone could be born with such
expertise as you have been. Myself, I was born a blank slate and have
to work to get such knowledge.

Good! Then there's probably something you know something
about. Write about that.

For example, since picking Dobermans,
in addition to what books on various dog breeds have said about Dobes,
I have read three books devoted to just the breed and have two more
I'm about to read.

Wow! You'll definitely be an expert after *reading* about
them!!

For those who did extensive breed research before getting a
puppy or dog of the breed you studied, raise your hand if
the experience of having the dog is much like what you
expected from reading about it. I'm keeping my hand down,
myself.

I'm interested that you were more worried about your
credibility if you named a dog "Spenser" than you are about
your credibility in writing about something you're going to
learn about from books but not experience. That's pretty
odd. I'm guessing your book, should it ever see
publication, will spend lots of time flying through the air.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

(Melinda Shore) wrote:
I'm guessing your book, should it ever see
publication, will spend lots of time flying through the air.

We'll see.

Scott

(Melinda Shore) wrote in news:foqik8$cfg$1
@panix3.panix.com:

For those who did extensive breed research before getting a
puppy or dog of the breed you studied, raise your hand if
the experience of having the dog is much like what you
expected from reading about it. I'm keeping my hand down,
myself.

I did more than just reading up on "my" breed. I spent extensive
time with several Boxers, both out and about and at their homes. I
borrowed them for walks. I talked to their owners. I talked to
folks here, and I did a lot of DejaGoogling of posts from Kassa and
other Boxer breeders and owners whose experties I respected.

And, as I've mentioned a time or twenty, none of that really prepared
me for living with a Boxer.

I'm a pretty voracious mystery reader, so I'd for sure pick up a book
with a Boxer in it, even if it played only a minor part. I'd like to
think that I know the breed well enough now that I'd be able to tell
if the author was faking it. If he was, the book would very quickly
become airborne.

--
Shelly
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

Shelly said in rec.pets.dogs.breeds:

I'm a pretty voracious mystery reader, so I'd for sure pick
up a book with a Boxer in it, even if it played only a
minor part.

I'm generally the opposite because I hate getting pissed off
at books because they are so bad at depicting dogs I
understand. Then there are the novels which completely
understand the dogs (like Donald McCaig's Nop books) - but to
point of being really niche.

Luckily, I use the library a lot and have no hestitation in
putting a book down (maybe a poor choice of words) if it
hasn't grabbed my interest in the first third or so.

To what someone said earlier about experts in certain fields:
I like James Rollins for good escapism adventure stuff. He
must take good drugs (though not as good as Gaiman) to come up
with some plot lines. But, like Dan Brown, when he goes off
his area of expertise, it's pretty blantant to those of us
with even a passing knowledge of the subject.

James Rollins is a vet, and made the comment in his Sahara
book (Sandstorm?) that mutts are generally healthier than
purebreds (I believe he actually mentioned hybrid vigor). I
still read his books, but with a healthier dose of skepticism
and no long enjoy them as much as I used to. I no longer buy
them.

--
--Matt. Rocky's a Dog.