J David Bethel, Novelist-Session-2-Episode #394

The novelist, John David Bethel, is appearing for the second time on StoryBeat. David’s the author of award-winning political and psychological thrillers, including Mapping the Night and Holding Back the Dark. His short fiction has been published in popular consumer magazines, and his essays and opinion editorials have been published in respected political journals.  

 David spent 35 years in politics and government. He served in the Federal Senior Executive Service as Senior Adviser/Director of Speechwriting for the Secretaries of Transportation, Commerce, and Education; Editorial Director for the U.S. Small Business Administration; and Assistant Administrator for the U.S. General Services Administration’s Office of Communications and Citizen Services. David also worked as a press secretary/speechwriter to Members of Congress. 

During our first conversation, we discussed Mapping Night. Recently, I read 2 of David’s newest books, Squinting at Shadows and Thy Brother’s Keeper, both of which are in the thriller mold of David’s earlier novels They are intense, page-turning mysteries that kept me wondering what would happen next.  If you like reading thrillers, I highly urge you to check out David’s books.

Episode Transcript

Steve Cu (00:00):
On today's Story Beat.

(00:02):
Someone once gave me this advice and they said, ifyou're a writer, you write. Now what that means is
that you don't write because you have this idealthat you're going to write the great American
novel. Uh, just go ahead and write because youlike to write. Because chances are you're not
going to write the great American novel. You'll belucky to get a book published if it gets
published, you'll be lucky if 10 people read it.

(00:24):
So make sure that you know what you're doing andyou're getting into writing for the right reasons.
And that is because you enjoy writing.
This is Story Beat with Steve Cuden, a podcast forthe creative mind. Story Beat explores how masters
of creativity develop and produce brilliant worksthat people everywhere love and admire. So join us

(00:48):
as we discover how talented creators find successin the worlds of imagination and entertainment.
Here now is your host, Steve Cuden.
Thanks for joining us on Story Beat. We're comingto you from the Steel City, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania. My guest today, the novelist JohnDavid Bethel is appearing for the second time on

(01:13):
Story Beat. David's the author of award winningpolitical and psychological thrillers including
Mapping the Night and Holding Back the Dark. Hisshort fiction has been published in popular
consumer magazines and his essays and opinioneditorials have been published in respected
political journals. David spent 35 years inpolitics and government. He served in the federal

(01:35):
Senior Executive Service as Senior Advisor,Director of Speechwriting for the Secretaries of
Transportation, Commerce and Education, Editorialdirector for the U.S. small Business
Administration, and assistant administrator forthe U.S. general Services Administration's Office
of Communications and Citizen Services. David alsoworked as a press Secretary speechwriter to

(01:59):
members of Congress. During the first conversationthat we had, we discussed Mapping the Night.
Recently, I read two of David's newest books,Squinting at Shadows and Thy Brother's Keeper,
both of which are in the thriller mold of David'searlier novels. They are intense page turning
mysteries that kept me wondering what would happennext. If you like reading thrillers, I highly urge

(02:22):
you to check out David's books. So for all thosereasons and many more, it's a terrific pleasure
for me to welcome back to Story Beat the excellentwriter John David Bethel. David, thanks so much
for joining me again.
Well, thank you for having me.
Well, it's a great pleasure to see you again. Solet's go and chat about back in time a little bit.
Something we didn't talk about last time. I knowyou had to have been a reader as a boy, is that

(02:47):
correct?
Oh, yeah, definitely. That's what got me intowriting, as a matter of fact. My dad was in the
foreign service, and we spent most of my life, myearly life, first 13 years, as a matter of fact,
overseas. I didn't live in the United States forthose first 13 years. Um, and during that time, I
went to, like, eight different schools. We wereout of these. I missed large swaths of education.

(03:12):
And the way I filled in was my parents would giveme books, uh, to read and anything else they could
get their hands on. And. And that's what got meinto it. I got excited about reading and writing.
Were you reading mysteries and thrillers back inthat time?
No, not really. I, uh, was reading mostly. My dadwas a big fan of Ernest Hemingway.

(03:32):
Well, we talked about Ernest Hemingway on the lastshow and that you met him down in Cuba. We talked
about that, which I find fascinating, but. So whendid you start to get interested in thrillers and
mysteries?
Well, that happened while I was writing a book.
Book. Uh, I was collaborating with a privateinvestigator who was involved in a very strange

(03:52):
case in Miami. And, uh, he had read one of mybooks. He called me up, he said, look, I. I've got
an interesting case here. I want you to, uh, towrite about it. It was about a man that was. He
was kidnapped by a group of thugs. And he was amultimillionaire, had a lot of business interests,
was, uh, kept in a warehouse for 30 days. Uh,they. And this is before, you know, all these

(04:13):
gadgets that we have now. He actually had to writechecks out and things like that, and give them the
deed to his house and. Awful story. And theyalmost. They almost killed him. Uh, he got away by
some fluke of fate. And, uh, he called my friend,who turned out to be my friend, the private
investigator. And, um, he got me involved in that,in writing about that. And while he was doing

(04:37):
that, he gave me a whole pile of files. In thatfile was one on the Key west serial killer, who,
uh. Who he was, uh, working with the Key west, uh,police force to try and find. And that's how I got
into it. I read this file combined with the, uh.
With the. With the thing he was currently involvedin and that file. And reading that file, I got

(04:59):
fascinated by the whole mindset of these people.
Interesting. So do you read other mystery writersnow?
Sometimes, yes, I. I mean, I do. I read lots ofstuff. I read lots of different stuff in that
stuff. Yes, I will read. Uh, I can't give you thenames of the authors now so much because I just
read so Much. And then I throw the book away. Uh,but yes. Short answer to your question is yes, I

(05:23):
do, occasionally.
Well, I guess what I'm leading to is where did youlearn to write mysteries, which are a specific
genre? Obviously it didn't come from voluminousreading of mystery writers. Where did it come
from?
I guess I just have an ability to think in the waythat thriller writers do. I didn't know I had that
ability. I was writing mostly political thrillers,which is a totally different genre than the

(05:49):
psychological thriller.
I have to assume, and you'll correct me if I'mwrong, that your many years in Washington, where
there's always a sense of intrigue going on behindthe scenes, that. That had to have fed into it
somewhat, probably.
I mean, I can remember being on the Hill orworking in these office and doing the what if, you

(06:09):
know, what if this. If I had this situation? Whatif someone was corrupt? Where would it go? You
know, I'm playing it over in my mind. My veryfirst book that I wrote was. Was very much of
that. It was a senator's wife was. Was killed. AndI always wondered, well, what happened? Who takes
over? If. If this would. Something like this wouldhappen. Would it be the FBI? Would it be the
Capitol Hill police? How would they go about it?

(06:30):
And, you know, from my imagination, I justdeveloped this whole story.
So as a writer of many different things inWashington for many years, did you have a sense,
as you were working in wherever you were assigned,did you have a sense that you were trying to
figure out what was going on, like a detectivemight?
Obviously, when you write a novel, there's a lotof drama that you add to situations that just

(06:56):
isn't there in real life, at least not as overtly,subtly in the background. Very subtly. You can
say, well, if, you know, if you just turn, uh, thefocus just a little bit this way and your
perspective a little bit that way, you can findall of these conspiratorial possibilities. But yes
and no. I mean, at the time when I'm sitting down,working in the office, grinding it out, you know,

(07:18):
eight hours a day, I'm not thinking that, but inthe background, I am sure that I stored up a lot
of this. What if. What if this happened and whatif that happened, which. Which then was
regurgitated as some of my novels.
Well, in the three books of yours that I've read,there's a lot of politics in them. That's
something that's part of and parcel, I guess, ofwhat we would call your thematic Work is that

(07:42):
there's politics involved.
Yeah, they say write what you know. And I guessthis proves that that's the case. But it's
difficult for me to not see politics as you justsaid, since I spent so many years in politics, to
not see politics as a possibility. In everythingthat I write, I can start writing about something

(08:03):
totally, you know, removed from politics and mymind, My mind goes there.
So, um, I'm going to dig in a little deeper. It'sinteresting to me. You could, if you chose to,
which obviously you have not. You could have beena historian, you could have written about
political figures and about their lives. Youdidn't. You chose to fictionalize stories and tell

(08:25):
stories like that as well as doing it in a mysterythat involves politics in some way. But your
stories are not about politics, politics. And soI'm curious, what is it about the mystery and the
thriller genre that speaks to you? Why did youwind up there? Do you have any idea?
Um, straight ahead. Political books bore, uh, me,as do true crime books. Um, and I think the reason

(08:53):
for that is just, uh, the facts, ma', am kind ofwriting doesn't do anything for me. I want to know
why. Why does this person think in this way? Howdid his background, nature or nurture or whatever
it was, push him into the, the dastardly deeds, ifyou will, that some of my characters are involved

(09:14):
with? How did they get there? And the only way Icould do that was by writing fiction and by, by
doing it, you know, writing a mystery. Becausethen I could figure it out. I could peel back the,
you know, the layers of the onion to get where I,where I thought things would go.
Mhm. Well, certainly your work is realistic. It'snot fant. Even though you're writing it in a

(09:35):
fictional sense, uh, it is gritty and realistic.
My assumption is that it's based on, in fact, Iknow that much m of your work is based on things
that have actually happened and that you then takethat and run with the ball. Taking the realistic
story and making it realistic fiction. That's whatfascinates you, has to be, what is it about that

(09:57):
particular tone appeals to you? Why that tone?
Well, I don't think I have a definitive answer forthat. But let's take squinting at shadows, which
is a kind of, is a fictionalization of, uh, themurder of Senator Percy's daughter back in the
late 60s when I went to the Hill. The first timewas then I was still in college and I did an

(10:22):
internship in uh, Washington with a senator anddid some writing for him. And while I was up
there, I found out about the situation withSenator Percy Mercy, where his daughter was
killed. I mean, it's just fascinating. They're inthis big, huge house. The whole family lives in
this house. This person sneaks in somehow. Therewas no evidence of anybody having broken in. He

(10:45):
seems to go to just one room. He doesn't wanderaround the house. And there's no evidence that
anything was stolen. He beats this poor girl todeath. Nobody, uh, hears anything. Uh, on his way
out, he did run into the mother who just thoughtshe heard something and got up and was. And was
wandering around the fourth floor where all thebedrooms were, and he ran over her to get out. But

(11:08):
that fascinated me. And then the fact that theycould never solve the crime. They never figured
out who killed her.
Even to this day, no, not even today.
They have no idea who did it. And he ran. He was avery well known political, uh, character in the
state of Illinois. He ran for governor. He was,uh, you know, CEO of Bell and Howell. So it's not

(11:30):
like a normal person. If I'm a robber or, youknow, or a thug, I'm not thinking, geez, that's an
ideal place to go. His Percy's. Percy's house. Andhe's in the middle of running for the Senate. So
that whole m. That whole, you know, ball of waxthere just fascinated me. And I decided to sit
down and where could this have gone? How can Ipull this apart and figure out what. What

(11:54):
happened? Obviously I fictionalized it, and itprobably went in a direction that nobody ever
thought of before. That's the kind of thing thatfascinates me. And that's where I get my stories
from. These little bits and pieces of reality thatdon't make any sense to me is that. Where do I go
with this?
Well, okay, so Senator Percy's story is reallyvery much reflected in squinting at shadows. And

(12:18):
it's set in Illinois, where he was from. Youdidn't choose to set it elsewhere. Um, and so it
kind of feels like it's that story, as you say,uh, evolved through your thinking into a fictional
story. Do you feel in any way, shape or form thatyou are, uh, treading on weird ground, that you're
actually making a fiction out of a real story andkept it sort of similar to what it was? You didn't

(12:42):
change it up that much.
I didn't change up the foundation for the storyitself. At the very beginning of the story,
there's the statement from the wife, uh, that Getsthe story started. And that statement is pretty
much, uh, with some changes, uh, what she. Youknow, what she said. So. So the ground is hard,
but I took it in a direction, and I don't want togive too much away. I want to spoil the story for

(13:04):
people, but I took it in a direction, uh, that.
That I think is realistic enough for someone tosay, well, that, you know, that could have
happened, but is far enough from the story thatI'm not. I'm not, uh, disgracing Percy's
reputation or anything. I don't think anybody'sgoing to think, well, this. This is. Is this

(13:24):
really what happened? My God, what a bastard heis.
And it's not journalism. You're not writing astory about an actual event. Uh, you're just
riffing off of that underlying, uh, concept ofthis is a murder that happened this way. I'm
fascinated always. I've been my whole life by, uh,titles. I think titles are extraordinarily

(13:45):
important. They help guide a reader, a moviegoer,a TV watcher, whatever, toward whether this works
for the story or whether it doesn't. Sometimes itsells everything. This is an interesting title.
You have Squinting at Shadows. Where does thatcome from?
Well, I think somewhere in the novel, uh, someonesays, uh, something about squinting at shadows.

(14:08):
That's where it came from. But what I'm saying isI don't have a title for a novel. Going into the
novel, it always comes from. From the. From the,you know, the product itself. Uh, and I don't
know, I can't remember at the moment where. Whereit is that. That it made sense for someone to say,
well, if you squint at the, you know, shadows,you're going to find the truth. I do think that's.

(14:30):
That's the line that someone says. If you squintreal hard at the shadows, you're going to find the
truth. And I thought to myself at that point, oh,uh, there's a great title, Squinting at Shadows.
And that's how the titles of most of my novels go.
I think I know what that means. If you squint atshadows hard enough, you'll find the truth. I
think I know what that means. What does it mean toyou?
Well, it probably comes from my politicalbackground, because if you know nothing,

(14:51):
everything in politics is, um, kind of hazy.
Everything's very subtle. Nothing is right outthere on the table.
Well, sometimes it's right out there on the tableand you can't believe you're hearing.
Depends on your perspective. Yes, of course, ifyou, if you have. But that's the whole point. And
I learned this in speechwriting, I think you neversay something too terribly direct. I mean, you can

(15:18):
go ahead and write a policy speech and say exactlywhat the way things should be said and lay it out,
A, B, C and D. But you always leave something,sort of someone comes back and says, well, what
about D? And you can always say, well, thatdepends on C, B and A. So what I'm saying about
that is squinting at shadows is the same way inpolitics. If you squint real hard, you can see

(15:41):
around the words behind that and you can figure itout.
Because you're always with politicians trying toread between some line. Correct.
Exactly. They're always squinting at shadows.
They're the ultimate subtextualists. They neversay what they actually are meaning. There's always
some hidden meaning behind it. Two of the threebooks of yours that I've read feature two FBI

(16:04):
agents, uh, Eileen Prado and Ira Fisher. And Iknow that they appear or are featured in at least
one other book. Correct.
I'm trying to think. I think it's more like four,because the book I'm working on now, they're part
of that as well. So I'm trying to think here.
They're in at least four of them.
They're in at least four books. And is this onethat you're writing now, is that a fifth time

(16:27):
they'll appear, or is this the fourth time?

J Davi (16:29):
I think it's the fourth.
The fourth. Okay. So did you know when you'vecreated those characters, that they were likely to
be, for lack of a better word, serialized or theywere going to be featured in numerous books? Did
you know?
No, I didn't. You know, it's like with most of mybooks, and we've discussed this before, until I

(16:49):
sit down and start writing, I never know where I'mgoing, uh, other than having the kernel of the
idea that then takes me wherever. You know,wherever it ends up to give you an idea. The
current book I'm writing did not start. There wasnowhere necessarily that I was going to put those
two characters. Then there was a point when. Whensome people were talking to each other and one man

(17:09):
says to the other, um, uh, before you know it,we'll have someone in here talking about Ted
Bundy. And at that point it occurred to me, oh,okay. Well, Ira Fisher's kind of a wise guy. From
the background behind the police chief is talkingto these people in the background. You hear. You
hear somebody say Ted Bundy. And the guy turnsaround and it's those two. It just worked its way

(17:33):
into the, you know, into the conversation. Andonce I had them, once I had Ira Fisher there, of
course I had to bring Eileen Prado into.
Most novelist or TV series writers most of thetime when they have characters that repeat and
come back and back and back, it becomes a thing.
And um, I'm going to guess you're going to tell methis is not intended to be a thing, is that right?

(17:54):
It's not intended to be a thing. It became athing. It wasn't intended to become a thing.
Are you planning, in your mind's eye, do you thinkyou're going to continue to use them?

J David Bethel (18:04):
I have no idea.
I find your process on this very, very interestingbecause it's so diametrically opposed to my
process. That's why I find it interesting. Andclearly it works. It works for you because you
keep producing product that's out there in theworld. Do you know if uh, there's something about
them that keeps attracting you back to them? Isthere some quality about them?

(18:25):
I think so. I think that they, first of all theyplay well against each other. Prada's more
businesslike and Ira Fisher's a little bit morewild card. As FBI agents. I always bring them, I
have been bringing them into situations in ametropolitan police force where they add an
element of professionalism. I would say that's.

(18:46):
And I'm not, I'm not saying that the, that thepolice, metropolitan, uh, police aren't
professional, but they are super professionalbecause they're FBI. I mean that's what they do,
that's what they focus on. And the fact that they,we in most of my novels there is a psychological
uh, edge to it. And they both have worked withthese kind of serial offenders before. So you

(19:06):
know, the recipe is there and I just put them intothe recipe.
Well, obviously they uh, appeal to you in some waythat you go back to them. They do work off of one
another very well. I will say this. I don't findthem to be the typical button down FBI agents that
we're used to seeing in movies and tv. They're alittle looser. Uh, there's a little bit more

(19:31):
character to them in the sense that they're notquite as straight laced as you would think of as
your typical FBI agents. And I'm gonna guessthat's probably part of what appeals to, to you
about them.
Uh, yes, yeah, that, that, yes it does.
And so was the jumping off point on this book foryou Was it in fact the, the Charles Percy, uh,

(19:53):
murder case? Is that what was the literal I've gotto write about this or was there something else
that got you to that?
No, it was, it was the Charles Percy, uh, youknow, the unsolved, the unsolved mystery that I've
been, I've been mulling this over for. Ever sinceI was, you know, as this intern on the Hill. The
idea of this, this happening was just so foreignto me that something like this could happen. And I

(20:17):
mean they had just thousands and thousands ofhours investigation, uh, tens of thousands of
people that they talked to and, and so forth andso on. And just the idea, as I've said, the whole
scenario of someone getting in. By the way, theother, the other element of this is that the, the
girl, the daughter that was killed had had a twinand they always slept together in one bedroom.

(20:38):
That particular particular night the twin was notthere. She was office with some friends. So how
did this person know this? Did he know this? Washe planning on going up there and killing the two
of them? So you know, that whole thing was just soamazing to me that I had to do something with it.
Did you ever know or meet Senator Percy or wasthat before your time?
Yes, I did, yeah, a couple of times when I wasthere as an intern, I met him. He came and spoke

(21:04):
to the group of interns, number one. And anothertime I was at a reception, uh, and I ran into him
and, and obviously I didn't talk about that, butuh, but yes, I did know him. He seemed like, you
know, he did run for president. He was a very wellrespected member of, of the Senate. So yeah, yeah,
I did meet him. I wasn't good buddies or anything,but I did meet him on a couple of occasions.

(21:27):
Mhm. But you spoke his language, didn't you?
I think so. I mean he was a more libertarian, uh,kind of conservative Republican as opposed to a,
uh, I don't know what the word I'm looking for. Hewasn't hard. Right. He wasn't a Goldwater
Republican. And so that, so yes, I had, I guessthere was that appeal.
Well, I guess when I say you spoke his language,you worked on the Hill, that's where you worked.

J (21:50):
Oh yes, yes, of course, yes.
So you understood that speak of what I think of aspolitical speak that's different from the average
everyday Joe's speak.
Well, yeah, and you have to, I think you have tohave worked in politics to some degree. Although,
although I know one of the great politicalthriller writers, David Baldacci never worked on
the Hill, but he's managed to, uh, do that. Uh,but yes, I mean, I think it would be very

(22:16):
difficult for someone to write in that genrewithout having spent some time on Capitol Hill.
Well, you can tell when you read your books, andthis is true for all three of them. There are
passages, you have action, you have things thathappen between the characters, and so on. But
inevitably at some point, if not multiple pointsin a book, you will get off into a, uh, corner

(22:36):
where the, the politicians are having a politicalconversation of some kind. And it, it gets deeply,
I wouldn't say deeply into the weeds, but deepenough it gets into the weeds of politics that one
can tell that you know what you're talking about.
Well, yeah, I do mind my experience to be able todo that. And I think that, that I hope that I

(22:58):
don't write it so in such, in a jargon way thatpeople can't understand. I want, I, I want them to
understand what's going on, but I also want themto say, well, that's interesting. I didn. That
does bring the story and the conversation to life.
Mhm, for sure. Do you think as you were writingthis book, and we're going to get to your next one
in a second, but did you think as you were writingthis book that you were going to wind up at the

(23:23):
conclusion or did you not know your conclusionuntil you got there?
No, I did not know where I was going with it untilI got there.
That's amazing. That boggles my mind, to beperfectly blunt. It just does. Um, how long did it
take to write this book?
Squinting at shadows came rather easily. I thinkprobably four or five months total.

Steve Cude (23:42):
Four or five months?

J David Bethel (23:43):
Yeah.
That's very fast. And you do this with no outline,so you're really. There's no developmental
process, you're just writing it?
Well, I mean, yes and no. There's no developmentprocess in the sense of, uh, maybe what you're
thinking about an outline of characters,backgrounds and all that sort of thing. But there
is, I did a lot of research. I read a couple ofbooks on it. I made sure that I had the details of

(24:06):
the, the crime Right. And I read some books that,about the case itself. So that's not including in
the. Four or five months, maybe six months, if youput, if you put all that together.
Okay, so I'm trying to grasp how this works.
You're, if you don't know what the story is, theresearch you're doing is sort of the general, uh,

(24:27):
background or the general gist of it, that's whatyou're researching? Not anything specific in
detail in the storytelling?
No, I just want to know the general background ofthe crime and uh, that's basically it. I don't
read it for any other reason than that.
So as you're writing, do you have a tendency tothink more about the characters and what they're

(24:47):
thinking, or do you have more of a tendency tothink about where you're going next in the plot?
Uh, it depends, I suppose, on the book itself.
Some are more character driven, some are more plotdriven. Most of my books I think are plot driven.
Uh, but at the same time, uh, if the process islending itself to some greater character
development, then I'll go and go in thatdirection.

(25:10):
Mhm. Yeah, for sure. I think most mysteries needto be plot driven because that's what makes them a
mystery. You're trying to unpeel, as you say, theonion one layer at a time to get to the ultimate
answer in the story. Um, were you, had you spenttime in Illinois, Were you already familiar with
the locations?
I haven't spent time in Illinois. I've been toIllinois, but I haven't spent a lot of time there.

(25:33):
I spent some time in Chicago years back doing somespeech writing for some, for, for some people, but
that, that was it.
So then how do you know what you're talking aboutin terms of locations? Because they're vivid.
Okay, well, what I'll do is I know that Kenilworthwas where the crime was. Was committed. I will
then do some research on Kenilworth, specificallythe area where the crime was, uh, where the crime

(25:55):
was committed. If I can find a video, uh, on, on,uh, you know, sometimes for instance, um, there's,
there's a, there's a visit that they take to thecountry of Suriname. In the, in the novel itself.
What I did was I found a whole bunch of videos ofuh, of Suriname.
So you didn't go there and spend time there?
No, I did not. I did not. I just got a hold ofthese videos and made and then double checked it

(26:20):
with some folks that I know who had been toSuriname to make sure I was doing the right thing.
It's one of the more unique places that I canthink of to write about because you don't see the
name Suriname pop up too often in any kind ofbooks or novels.
Where that came from was, I was, I was watching a,ah, travel video about Suriname and that's what

(26:41):
popped. That's why I got interested in that.
So when you saw this travel video, you went, wow,that's an interesting, intriguing name and place,
I assume.
Yes. Plus the fact that Suriname now has, uh, someentree into the world of, uh, OPEC world because
they're discovering oil there. So it made itdoubly interesting to me.
The other thing that's a hallmark of your booksthat I've read is that you almost always, if not

(27:06):
always, have some thoughts, conversation aboutmorality or moral elements that seems to be within
your genre. What you're writing about, where doesthat come from? Where does your moral thinking
come from so that you can insert it into thesecharacters and what they're going through.
To take one, one element, maybe where I writeabout or have written about these serial

(27:31):
offenders, these, these people who are justhorrible people. And my interest is, and it's,
it's really a, uh, it's really frustrating becausewhen you try and figure out how they ended up,
where they ended up, you really can't, I mean, youcan't think like them. I think somewhere in one of

(27:52):
my novels I put one of the all time hallowedprofile or said, if you start thinking you can
figure them out or you think you figured them out,you've got a problem, you need to go see someone.
Because no one can think like these people.
Well, I was going to say, let's explore that amoment. I think that as you go through life, uh,
even people that have been married for 50 plusyears still don't really know what their spouse is

(28:18):
thinking or what's really in their mind's eye. Weas humans don't really have the ability, I don't
think, to get truly inside somebody's head all theway.
Exactly. But I think all of us realize there arelimits, there are barriers that you do not cross
as a civilized human person, as a moral, ethicalperson. These people that some of these people are

(28:41):
right about don't have that. They have no limitsat all. How does that happen? And if you ask that
question, you have to ask, well, if they're bad,there has to be. Be good in order to, you know,
you can't have evil without having, uh, you know,good. Good as well. So those two things, when
you're writing about, when you're writing aboutone or the other, either, either ethics, moral or

(29:02):
evil, you have to, you have to explore both sidesof the issue.
So not to get too personal, but where does yourscome from? From your parents, from your
upbringing? Where does your own set of moralitycome from? And I don't need to know too Deeply
about it. I'm just curious how you have arrived atsome of the thinking that you have that's in the
books.
I mentioned that my dad was a foreign servant.

(29:24):
Officer. Foreign service officer. And we spentmost of my youth overseas. Well, I was very young,
but I, uh, was born in 47. So we went over toEurope in the 1950s, and then I went on to Japan
and Cuba. What I'm getting at here is that I metlots of different kind of people. We were in all
kinds of different circumstances. Japan, uh, afterthe war was a mess. People were poor. There was. I

(29:47):
mean, it was just. It was just atrocious, as wasGermany at the time. You develop a certain empathy
for the people. I mean, these things. When you'rethat young and you see these things, you develop
a, uh. Uh. I don't know exactly what. I guess amorality. I mean, if things are awful, you have
to. You have to ask yourself, why are thingsawful? What's going on here? What these poor

(30:07):
people are suffering. So I think a lot of that,plus my parents discussing. Because I had a lot of
questions. My parents would answer my questionsand we discussed it. I guess that's where it came
from.
You have empathy for these people. And that'swhere I'm guessing that you saw the way that they
were dealing with their struggles. And youyourself started to think about how that could be

(30:30):
resolved or how you would deal with it, et cetera,et cetera.
You're right. Exactly. And of course, I did havethe background of knowing that. That, you know,
they were. They were on the other side of the, uh.
Of the divide, you know, during the war. So, uh,you also start to think, well, did they put
themselves in this position or yet? Yeah. And sowhat I'm looking around, uh, at. Around me is all

(30:51):
this destruction. Well, did they bring this onthemselves? I mean, there's. There's so many
facets of all of that that when you're exposed toit as a youngster, that's where it comes from, I
think, for me, anyway.
And one of the things that you've had throughoutyour entire life, throughout your whole career,
throughout your youth and upbringing, is you'veprobably met many thousands of people in your

(31:14):
life. Would that be accurate?
Yeah, you know, yes, if you're. Obviously, we weretalking about politics too. You meet people who
are constantly talking about these issues now,whether they act the way you want them to act or
not. But that. That is all. You know, that's allpart of the, uh. The whole brew. When you're in
politics. Which side of the line are you on?

(31:34):
Uh, as a writer, you have been exposed to so manyhumans, probably more than the average person has.
You be just being on the hill for that many years,you met so many people, so you got to see
characters, you got to see the way differentpeople fought or projected. And that, to me, is
probably one of the most useful things you have inyour toolkit as a writer.

(31:59):
Yeah. And one of the things I think maybe wediscussed, I did meet some, quite, quite a number
of people. On the plus side, we had someone likeJackie Robinson, who I had the privilege of
meeting when I was a young boy. Uh, twice,actually. Um, once in Japan when the Dodgers came
over after winning the World Series and they didhis tour of the, of the country and, and I had an

(32:21):
opportunity to sit and talk to Jackie Robinson. Hewas my boyhood hero. And this was just, you know,
if I died and went to heaven the next day, thatwould have been amazing. And I, I knew about his
struggles, clearly. I wasn't. I wasn't justtalking to a baseball player. I was talking to a
man with, with all kinds of, uh, uh, you know,morals and characters. And then on the other side

(32:41):
of the, of the divide, I happened to have anopportunity to meet Fidel Castro. And I went with
my. I know we discussed this before. I went withmy child.
I don't think so. Fidel Castro. That'sfascinating.
Yeah. My dad was, uh, as I mentioned, he wasforeign service officer. He was in the press, and
he put together Castro's first press conference inCuba. And he had him in a room, green, uh, room.

(33:04):
Um, and he took me down to bring Castro up to thepress conference. And so I had an opportunity to
meet. To meet, actually, and to sit and talk toCastro. So, yeah, I mean, you know, when you start
talking about that kind of stuff, it was a verygolden childhood that I had. I was very fortunate,
fortunate, very lucky. You mentioned before, Ihappened to meet. Meet Hemingway. So that was

(33:26):
wonderful. And Errol Flynn. I met Errol Flynn.
What a character he was. So, yes, to answer yourquestion in the long winded way, yes, I have met a
lot of people.
Yeah. Uh, that is my point, is that your exposureto huge numbers of people, uh, I think if one
decides to become a writer of fiction or, um,nonfiction, I think that that's a big advantage.

(33:48):
I'm saying that for the listeners to understand,if you're someone who sits around the house a lot
or you don't get out a lot, get out because youneed to meet people and be exposed to them so that
you can absorb all these different cultures andthoughts and way, uh, people act and so on. And
you are. I know you're a people watcher. We talkedabout that the last show. And that's what this is.

(34:10):
You've. You've observed tons of people in yourlife.
Exactly. And I think all writers are probablypeople watchers. I'm of the mind that most
writers, other than these flamboyant characterslike Hemingway and Mailer and Breslin and people
like that, uh, Erika Jeong, most of us areprobably the kind that sit in a room and are quiet

(34:31):
and that, that all. That all makes it, uh, givesyou enough of a character to. To be able to bring
things in, rather than. As my dad used to say, younever learn anything with your mouth open. So.

St (34:44):
What a, What a great phrase.
Yeah, you just sit. You sit and you learn bykeeping your mouth shut and just watching.
Well, let's switch gears a little bit and talkabout Thy Brother's Keeper. Tell the listeners
what that book is about. Which, by the way, doesnot have Prado and Fisher in it. No, but tell the
listeners what that book is about.
Well, it's about two sets of brothers. Each of themembers of those sets are taken in different

(35:09):
directions for. For various reasons. It's how theycome back together, uh, at points in the novel.
And two of, uh, one set is, I don't know if you'dsay better than the other set, but they, they
definitely have a, uh, definite, A, uh, differentview of life and how things go than the other set.
Now, interestingly enough, this is. Was writtentotally in a totally different way than, Than, uh,

(35:36):
squinting at shadows. Thy Brother's Keeper camefrom two short stories that I had written, uh,
years ago. And people would read the short storiesand they'd say, well, what happened to those
people? And that's what I did. I took the shortstories and combined them and made a novel out of
it.
And so this was something that had been gestating,um, in your mind's eye for quite some time then.

(35:59):
Yeah. And it's total fiction. Usually I have some.
Well, there is a small element of truth to it, butI usually have a foundation of truth to build on.
In this particular instance, it was just. It'stotal fiction.
And now that you've done that, do you have apreference between writing based on something that
actually happened as opposed to making it all up?

(36:20):
Not really. Um, I will take whatever muse I have,whatever's stuck in my head. And I need to get
out. I will take it in the direction that it goes.
Um, I think perhaps having a foundation of truewhatever reality based is easier because you have

(36:40):
a vase to work with when you are sitting down andusing your total imagination. That's a little more
challenging.
Yeah, I would say it's actually a lot morechallenging. I've always found it a little easier
when you have something you're adapting thatalready exists or you're actually taking a real
story and making it come to life. I think that'swhat you're talking about. It's much harder to

(37:04):
come up with something out of nothing. Uh, and youuh, know. Good on you for doing that. What was the
inspiration to get you to write this story?
Well, in one instance you'll recall that theyounger brother is sitting, waiting for his older
brother to come through town. He's beingtransported through town by some uh, police

(37:25):
because he's being transported to jail through thetown that he grew up in. And the younger brother
is waiting for him to come through and the storyis set to. You don't really know how the younger
brother is going to react. You know, what he'sgoing to do. Um, and that is just something again,
I think I must have either read something or thestory just popped in my mind. You have this small

(37:50):
town. What would happen if, if we had thissituation. It was actually when I first started
thinking about was a Native American story of aNative American boy, uh, who thinks that his
brother was, was uh, unfairly judged. And they,and is he, and he's been brought through town and

(38:13):
is he going to do something with his friends tofree his brother to get, get to get his. That,
that just seemed too, too complicated. Too manypeople going to get hurt. It'd be impossible to do
so. So I came, I wrote the story in another wayand that is this young brother who is his is not
happy with his brother because his brother haskilled his parents. And that's the whole basis for

(38:36):
that particular element of the story of that.
And we learned that right at the top. So you'renot really giving anything away.
Yeah, no, I don't think it's giving anything. It.
I think the real gestation of the story is in howthey come back together.
Mhm. Oh that for sure. That's the big part of thestory is how they come back together.
Yeah. And then the other part of it was I had thisstory that I had in my mind forever about young

(38:58):
two, two brothers, uh, meandering around in a, ina In a forest, in a area near their house that,
that, that is, that is forested. Uh, and they comeupon, as you remember from the book, they come
upon a hut. They come upon an old guy that livesthere. And it's how they, how they interact. It's
kind of a coming of age story. And that combined,because there are two brothers in both of those

(39:24):
stories, that's what I, that's what I, you know,jumped. That was the jumping off point for my
novel, for my.
That particular novel and certainly, uh, focusedon, uh, troubled, difficult, uh, children, uh, who
grow up into very, very interesting and differentadults. Uh, and I think that that's fascinating,
um, to watch what happens to them, at least theway that you lay it out. Now, you set this book in

(39:49):
Owen, Oklahoma. Why Owen Oklahoma, of all places?
Had you been there? Is it something you'refamiliar with?
My wife and I traveled through Oklahoma a coupleof years ago. Uh, it's an interesting state. There
is no Owen, Oklahoma. That's a fictional town. Um,but I also have a very good friend of mine who I
worked with in Washington who was from Oklahomaand used to tell me stories about the Okies. He

(40:14):
grew up very, very poor. And he used to tell mestories about the Okies and his growing up, his
background and how he grew up, which is reflectedin the set of brothers that begin the novel. Um,
and that's where that came from.
The notion of Oklahoma came from the. This friendin Washington. And so Owen is a fictional town,

(40:38):
but is it based on a real place?
Uh, well, this friend of mine was from a smalltown in Oklahoma that again, that he told me a lot
about. So I suppose it's based on that. I don'tthink. I didn't sit down with that in my mind to
do it that way. But, you know, when you look backand answer questions like yours, it brings up to

(40:59):
mind that, yeah, that was probably, that wasprobably why it became Owen, Oklahoma.
So a famous author who people almost never talkabout anymore. James Michener was, um, famous for
writing big epic stories. Uh, whether during warsor during a hurricane in Hawaii, is a famous story
of his. He, uh, was very well known for going andliving in a place for a very long period of time,

(41:25):
a year or more, in order to absorb the culture andthe people and the locations. This is not your,
uh, uh, way to operate at all, is it?
No. And I suppose it's cheating a little bitbecause I do, uh, you know, I do probably add
elements or don't have the elements in there thatmake it truly real. Uh, but I don't think you

(41:48):
necessarily need to because these are storiesabout people and you find these people and their
stories anywhere. You wouldn't necessarilynecessarily have to go live in Oklahoma to tell
this story, in my view anyway.
So. Does anybody ever bust you on that? Doesanybody ever say, you know, I'm, I'm from there,
and you've got that all wrong?
No, exactly the opposite. I've gotten. People, uh,from Oklahoma have said, oh my God, how did you

(42:14):
capture that? Did you spend time in Oklahoma? Sono is the answer, and it's just the opposite.
For whatever reason, I think I'm going to guessagain that your youth of traveling around as much
as you did gave you a sense of being able toquickly absorb a different culture.
Probably because as I mentioned just at thebeginning of this session here, I went to eight

(42:38):
schools in eight years. And you learn to adapt.
You learn to pick up elements. Uh, in order to getalong, you have to go along. So you have to, as a
kid especially, you have to, you know, what'simportant here. And uh, how do these people work
and, and you know, how do I, how do I make sure Idon't get beat up every day in school? So, yeah,

(42:59):
there's, there's, there's. That's probably has alot to do with it.
And going back to the idea, uh, of brothers sortof in conflict or trying to figure one another
out. It's one of the oldest stories we have. It'sa biblical story. It's Cain and Abel. And uh, this
has been around for, obviously for centuries. Thequestion that I have is why do you think that? Is

(43:20):
that stories like brothers at odds with oneanother. We had brothers against one another in
the Civil War. And that within a family that youcan get stories of people who are at these
terrible loggerheads and have to figure out how tolive together anyway. Where does this come from in
our world, do you think?

(43:40):
Every family that I've come in touch with seems tohave that sort of element in their family. There's
always the black sheep. Uh, I'm being very generalhere. I'm sure there are families where everybody
gets along famously and loves each other, but I'dbe hard pressed. Even my own family. There's
elements of that. I'm not saying that anyterrifying, anything terrible happened, but there

(44:04):
are just sibling rivalries. And if you're a writerand you take a sibling rivalry and you take it to
the extremes because that's the drama of the book,you're working in. But I think it's human. I don't
think it has so much to do with family. I thinkit's probably more, uh, noticeable. It's taken to

(44:25):
a greater level when it's within a family. But Ithink it's very human. You put people together in
a room, you're gonna, you might, you know, youmight have some conflicts, but I'm not sure it's
just because it's a family.
Well, it's also generational. Somebody's older,somebody's younger, so they're from slightly
different, you know, times their friends aredifferent and so on. It's all those things that

(44:47):
happen between humans. And so that's really what Ithink you're digging into there now. The two of
the brothers, Declan and Connor Ryan, uh, you atone point, you finally reveal. It takes a while to
get there, but you finally reveal Declan isdealing with his own sexuality and he's dealt with
it for his whole life, basically. And, and he's acop. So I assume that that's part of what keeps

(45:13):
him from, you know, outwardly dealing with his ownsexuality. But I'm wondering what caused you to
inject that into the story at the point that youwent, aha, there's something I want to make sure
we cover. What caused you to want to cover that atthat time?
Well, you know, I know this frustrates you as adifferent, uh, writer with a totally different
process, but I keep having to go back to it. Idon't.

Steve Cuden (45:36):
It just happens.
It just happens. I don't. I remember. The onlything I can say about that is that they were
talking about Connor's experiences in prison. Andit's quite possible.
Mhm.
That Declan just wanted to. At that point I said,you know, I've never told him. I have to tell him.
He's talking to me about some difficulties he hadin prison. It just made sense at that point. He's

(46:01):
probably been fighting with himself for notmentioning this to his brother for all these
years. Uh, that it was something maybe that causedhim problems when they were younger, because one
was probably their personalities clashed. So thisjust seemed like the point in the novel where it
made sense to bring it out now why I made him, whyI, uh, drew a gay character in the novel. It just

(46:26):
seemed like an element of his personality thatwould make him more interesting, especially being
a cop, as you mentioned.
So let's break this apart just a half a step. Onceyou have, uh, for lack of a better word, an
epiphany, you go Ah. Uh, we're going to go downthis road. And you had not thought of it before.
Obviously you're not planning it out. And now youhave a choice as the author. I have an idea. This

(46:50):
is something that's kind of interesting. You havea choice. You can go down that road or you cannot
go down that road. You can go down a differentroad, but you chose to go down that road. So
something appealed to you at that moment to say, Iwant to explore this notion of this character. Do
you have a recognition of that happening for you,or are you just plowing ahead?

(47:12):
Yes and no. I'm plowing ahead. But at the sametime, uh, Declan is, uh, in my view, is a very
moral, ethical person. He did not want to let thismoment go by without mentioning it to his brother.
I think he thought this would help us, you know,with the problems that we've had in the past. This
might bring us closer together. I'm trusting himwith this very sensitive information. But then in

(47:36):
a broader picture, it adds to his character. He'sa policeman, uh, but to him, his sexuality is very
incidental, and it's not something that's dwelledon in the novel other than to discuss it with his
brother. And you'll remember later on, one, uh, ofthe other brothers brings it up to him, saying

(47:57):
that, you know, I have a feeling that you're, youknow, that your sexuality, uh, is an issue here,
or I could make it an issue here. And. And Declandismisses him and says, you know, do what you
want. I don't care. You know, I've. He doesn'teven. He doesn't even admit this is. This is true.
He just says, you know, I'm just not going to dealwith it. And that's the kind of person he is.

(48:17):
That's who I am. Deal with it.
Once he has sort of revealed himself to, uh,Conor, I think that he then has a sense of freedom
about it because he'd been bottled it up for along time.
Right. And I think once he's had that conversationwith the. With the other politician who happens to
be the brother, he's. He's more or less dismissedit himself. I'm not going to go there. You can go

(48:39):
there if you want, but I'm not going to go there.
Uh, and I'm not going to. I'm not going tocompromise my own values for this situation.
Was. Did this book also take you roughly fourmonths to write?
This one took a little longer because, as I said,I didn't have the
foundation as an original story. Yeah.
Yeah. So. So probably. Well, not probably. It did.
It took. Took at least six months, maybe intoseven.

(49:02):
All right, so I know from our last conversationthat you talked about that you are a reviser, a
rewriter. It's not first draft, and that's it.
You're. There are multiple drafts and revisions.
Well, especially with the process that I. That Iuse. And, uh, you know, if you're just plowing
ahead and writing, writing, writing, you get tothe end, you realize, well, gee, all of these
things that I. That I got to. In the end, I've gotto go back and make sure that everything makes

(49:23):
sense. Because at the time that I'm writing at thebeginning, since I don't know what the end is, it
could conflict with what I'm doing at the end. Sothere's a lot of. There's a lot of rewriting.
One of the trainings that I got as a writer inschool was that, uh, you can purge a draft out and
then you are inevitably going to go back to thebeginning to make everything work as a unified

(49:46):
whole. Uh, I guess now what I am curious about ishow fast is your first draft versus how long do
you revise?
First draft usually comes fairly easily. Maybe amonth, six weeks, sometimes two months. Then the
rewrite takes at least as long, probably maybe amonth longer than the original.

(50:09):
I'm going to also, once again, uh, say that as alongtime professional writer of nonfiction,
although some people would say what comes out ofWashington is often fiction, but that's another
story. Uh, uh, as a longtime writer, you know howto crank words out. If that's not a foreign thing

(50:30):
to you.
No, no, it's just something that comes naturallybecause of who I am, I guess, in my experience.
Background.
Did it always come easily to you, even in thebeginning of your being a writer?
No, no. Um, you're talking about, like when I wasin college and when I was afterwards starting
speech writing and all that. No, I agonized overevery word, but I learned that that didn't help.

(50:51):
Um, that's where I think I learned my process,because I used to agonize over every word, and I
just didn't have time. When you're cranking outspeeches, you just cranked it out, and then you.
Whatever time was left, you went back and youcleaned things up.
Did. In doing that over time, uh, did anyone eversay to you, this is junk. Why are you writing
this? Or did you got so good at it that nobodyknew that you were just cranking it Out.

(51:16):
I have to say, no one ever said you're justcranking out junk. So I guess what I was doing
made sense to everybody.
Well, I guess the reason why I even asked thequestion is because you just said you got to the
point where you realized agonizing over every wordwas pointless. That means that you were then
practicing the craft of writing as quickly as youcould. In my world, for me personally, I know that

(51:41):
the faster I write, I know the more mistakes I'mmaking. I just know that. And if I at least spend
the time coming back and if I'm not very carefulas I'm writing, I've got to spend a lot of time
revising. I'm a reviser too. So you spend moretime then really rewriting than you do writing. I
think that that's important for people tounderstand. Uh, you're very good at creating tone

(52:03):
in a story. We've already alluded to tone once inthis conversation. Do you have a sense of what it
is that allows you to capture tone of a story?
I think for me, what sets the tone is my dialogue.
And because a lot of my novels, I think are justalmost exclusively dialogue. Um, although I try to

(52:23):
set the scene in which the characters do theircon, do their, you know, have their conversations,
um, a few minutes ago, discussed it. I think it'sbecause I can sit back and I can listen to people
and pick up, I guess, the way they're talking, howthey're talking, what when, when their tone
changes. How different people again through a,through 35 years of meeting so many different

(52:49):
people and having to get along with people when Iwas younger just to survive. Um, I think all those
elements went into the fact that I can writedialogue and that for me helps set the tone of a
novel.
I think that that's a very, ah, good selfanalysis. I think that's exactly what it is, is
that you understand how people are and by beingable to do that, you inevitably get to the tone of

(53:14):
every scene as what it is and the tone of thewhole book because that's what it is. It's people
interacting with one another other. It's people inconflict with one another. That's what we're
interested in anyway. Well, I've been having justa fantastic second conversation with J. David
Bethel. We're going to wind the show down just alittle bit. As we've been saying, you've met and
dealt with huge numbers of people over your careerand your life. Uh, are you able to share with us a

(53:40):
story that's either weird, quirky, offbeat,strange, or just plain funny from all of your
experiences.
Well, uh, earlier in this conversation, we weretalking about some of the people I met, one of
them being Errol Flynn. And when we were living inCuba, uh, there was a restaurant, uh, bar, uh, in

(54:00):
Old Havana called Boda del Medio. Everybody wentthere. And my dad being in the press, part of the,
uh, of the operation of the United States Embassy,used to come in contact with people like Errol
Flynn all the time. Every time they came to town,they, they got in touch with him because he was
the one that. They came to town for a reason.
Well, most of the time for a reason. They were,they were there to promote a book. And he was at,

(54:23):
uh, at Bodeguita Del Medio when I was having my12th birthday. And he knew my father, and my
father knew him. And he came over to the table andhe was talking to us. And um, of course my sister
and I young 12 and she was 11. We thought of himand knew of him as Robin Hood, you know, and

(54:44):
movies like that, Captain Blood and all that sortof stuff. So as he was walking away from the
table, my sister looks over at my father. Shesays, boy, Robin Hood got fat. There's another
story about, about Errol, uh, Flynn. Uh, we got acall about 3 in the morning. I, I was waking up by

(55:07):
it. I didn't know what was going on, but it wasn'tunusual for these calls to come to the house
because of the reasons I mentioned what my fatherdid. And my father disappears and he's gone. He
comes back the next morning and he reached thebreakfast table with us and my mom's, you know,
what the hell happened? So my dad said, well,Errol called me and, uh, what happened was he was
in a hotel room there. And the police, he would, Iguess he was being loud, whatever, he was having a

(55:28):
party and they wrapped on his door. And uh, so hesaid, paul, you got to come downtown and get me
out of this. So my dad gets dressed, goesdowntown, goes to the hotel. He's walking up to
the, to the door of the hotel, and he sees ErrolFlynn in a bathrobe on his hands and knees rooting
through the grass of the hotel. He walks over, hesays, errol, what the hell are you doing? He says,

(55:51):
well, when the cops came, I had to throw all mydrugs out the window. So he says, I've got to find
them. I got to find my drugs. Oh my God. So thisis the kind of stuff I grew up with.
You were dealing with the real Errol Flynn, notthe fictional Errol Flynn, right?
Oh, no, the real Errol Flynn, the guy that'samazing.

(56:12):
And, you know, it's still true to this day. Moviestars, famous people, they're just people. They
have all their quirks and foibles that everyoneelse has. Uh, but they're famous, so they can't
get away with certain things easily.
No. And what. You know, and again, this is, uh,maybe I bring this perspective to my novels too.
You try and paint m people as people as opposedto, uh, uh, the ideals, uh, that you have in your

(56:38):
mind of these people.
Absolutely. Well, yeah, I think you're veryrealistic in your writing. Your people are very
well drawn. We talked about in the first, uh, showthat we did, uh, that you're very good at drawing
realistic people. And I think that holds true inthe two books that I've read recently. All right,
so last question for you today, David. Can youshare with us a piece of advice that you think,

(57:00):
uh, is useful or helpful for people who are justgetting into the business of being a novelist?
Someone once gave me this advice, and they said ifyou're a writer, you write. Um, now what that
means is that you don't write because you havethis ideal that you're going to write the great
American novel or that you're going to be on theNew York Times bestseller list. You're going to

(57:23):
sell your story to the movies or television andmake wads of money. Uh, just go ahead and write
because you like to write. Because chances areyou're not going to write the great American
novel. You'll be lucky to get a book published ifit gets published. You'll be lucky if 10 people
read it. So make sure that you know what you'redoing and you're getting into writing for the

(57:43):
right reasons. And that is because you enjoywriting.
I think that that's, um, about as good a piece ofadvice as you can give to people that are, that
want to be writers. Writers must write. It's justthat simple. You, no one can give it to you. You
have to do it yourself. And the only way to getgood at it is to just keep writing. Do you feel
like you have gotten stronger as a writer the moreyou've written?

(58:04):
Oh, absolutely, yeah. I mean, you know, I used toget to a point when I first started writing in a
novel and question, well, what comes next? How doI do this? Uh, you know, where do I go with this?
And, and now I, I don't even bother with that. Ijust keep going and keep, keep writing. You know,
I've learned not, as I said before, not to agonizeover every word. Just keep on going, keep on

(58:25):
typing.
You've learned to trust your own instincts quitewell.

J David Bethel (58:28):
I try to.
Well, evidently you must, because that's how youdo it, which I think is fantastic. Jay David
Bethel, thank you so much for being on the showwith me for the second time. And, uh, you know, if
anyone wants to check it out, check out, uh,Squinting a Chatter and Thy Neighbor's Brother and
all of J. David Bethel's books. Thank you so muchfor being on the show with me, David.

J David B (58:50):
Thanks for having me.
And so we've come to the end of today's StoryBeat. If you like this episode, won't you please
take a moment to give us a comment, rating, orreview on whatever app or platform you're
listening to? Your support helps us bring moregreat Story Beat episodes to you. Story Beat is
available on all major podcasts, apps andplatforms, including Apple Podcasts, YouTube,

(59:13):
Spotify, iHeartRadio, TuneIn, and many others.
Until next time, I'm Steve Cuden and may all yourstories be unforgettable.