Am I obsessive?

Two new versions of the first fifty pages of "Deadfall Ridge" in two days.

Uh, oh. I'm on one of my obsessive quests. (Actually, I also started a third version, but broke it off because I didn't like the tone.)

Both of the new versions are cleaner and clearer than the original, but I'm not sure which one is best. There is no one I can really ask. I mean, really, asking someone to read the same thing three times? I'm going to presume on my friendship with Dave, who's the only writer I know who is as obsessed with the process as I am. If he does it, I'm going to owe him bigtime.

I've decided to give myself a full month before I endeavor to rewrite "Takeover." Time and distance are valuable, and the more time and distance, the better. Two or three months might even be more beneficial, I suppose. That would really take some self-restraint.

I feel like I either need to step up my game, or settle into a comfortable process that creates books at about the quality I've done so far. It's a cost/reward ratio.

The biggest decision I ever made at the store was to choose enjoyment over money. Well, more to the point, I realized I was neither having fun nor making money, but I had some control of the former, not so much over the latter.

So I started getting rid of things that detracted from my enjoyment, even if they made money, as long as the store stayed above the bottomline survival.

It was a bold thing to do, but frankly I would have quit if not for changing my ways.

I'm totally convinced Pegasus Books has survived 35 years because I made that choice.

Well, I have to remember that I want to keep writing, that I want it to be fun, and when I spend too much time obsessing and rewriting and doubting and risking rejection and all that entails, the less I want to write.

Hasn't come to that yet. Working hard on "Snaked" just made it a better book, and that has it's own enjoyment.

But I have to be careful.

Crippling doubt doesn't make for better books, but constantly creating books might.