On another level, there’d been the altercation between himself, Augustine, and Benbow this morning. Koesler had expected some leftover bad feeling from that. Seemingly there was none. At least Koesler could not detect any, and he was not only on the lookout for a sign of ill will, he was expecting it.
Since his brief conversation with Augustine after Mass, much of the anger he had felt was dissipated. Perhaps a similar type of meeting had diffused the hostility between Augustine and Benbow. . though Koesler would have found it more difficult to forgive and forget had someone called him a heretic.
While Marie, Benbow, and Winer evidenced some tension-at least to the eye of one who was on the lookout for it-Krieg seemed untroubled and at ease. Well, thought Koesler, why not? Up to this point, Krieg had been in the driver’s seat. So far, this had been Krieg’s show. The feeling Koesler got, from the nuances that he was picking up from the victims of last night’s charade, was that the tide was about to turn. Unless he was mistaken there were vibrations of a determination to exact some measure of revenge.
Rabbi Winer, the last of the faculty to deliver a prepared talk, was nearing the conclusion of his allocution.
Koesler dismissed further thought of the dynamics going on between those on the dais and began studying the students. One quick and easy conclusion he reached involved the predominant gender and median age of the group: decidedly female and, he guessed, in the forty-to-fifty age group.
It figured. Most men and women employed outside the home could not get away for a full work week and probably would be unwilling to invest a vacation week on a writers’ workshop. Though there were a few who looked as if they might have made this sacrifice.
Most of the students were women with gray hair and, judging from their bobbing heads, were wearing bifocals, maybe trifocals. There was also a sprinkling of young people, perhaps Marygrove students.
The group’s reactions to the talks were interesting. Since Koesler did not recognize anyone in the crowd, his only means of deducing their purpose in attending was to note the manner in which they responded to the presentations. Still it was little more than a wild guess.
Some, perhaps the majority, seemed intent, eagerly sopping up the words, encouragement, explanations of the faculty. Koesler assumed these were novice writers, unpublished or insufficiently published. He could picture them at home, borrowing time from their daily chores to grind out the pages of their work in progress. He could visualize them sending in their manuscripts and anxiously awaiting each day’s mail until the manuscript was returned with no more than a form letter rejection. If his scenario was correct, the major virtue of these people was perseverance. Disappointed but undaunted, they continued to mail in their submissions while hopefully learning more and continuing to write.
That’s why they were at this conference: to learn. And that’s what they were doing now: learning from some who lived the dream of earning a decent, if not substantial, income from writing.
It was unlikely that all these intent and intense students wrote mystery stories, let alone religious mysteries. That would have to be a rather narrow field. It was not that important what the faculty had written. What was of vital importance was that the faculty was published.
And, while he was ascribing motives to the students, Koesler reminded himself not to overlook the one member of the faculty who did not need to be published. He was a publisher. The horse’s mouth, as it were.
If only they could put it all together. To pick up tips and learn that elusive secret of how to prepare a manuscript for publication and then to understand what it was publishers were looking for in submitted work. The magic formula. Put it all together and one day maybe the students would be faculty at one of these affairs.
There was another, much smaller, group in the audience; those Koesler assumed, were simply fans of one or more of the authors, and/or the publisher. Instead of wearing the earnest, eager expressions of the writers, these simply smiled. They took no notes; just smiled. They seemed determined to enjoy these five days and so, by God, they would.
That pretty well took care of the students, with the exception of a very few who remained hard to pin down. Koesler put them on the back burner of his scrutiny. Because he could not figure them out, they piqued his interest.
Winer was finished and the formal presentations were concluded.
Sister Janet thanked the faculty and opened the floor to questions. At the outset, nothing was forthcoming. This did not surprise Koesler. It was a common reaction. Not that people didn’t have questions. Many of them were embarrassed to volunteer a question, fearing that the others would think it stupid or inane.
Slowly, hesitantly at first, the questions began, until, encouraged that no one was going to pose the “definitive” question, hands were raised throughout the audience. In Koesler’s experience, this was the classic way question-and-answer sessions developed. He began testing his theories on who was who by the nature of the question.
A smiling lady-no notepad at hand-directed a question to Sister Marie. How, the lady wanted to know, could Sister find time to write a book with all she had to do in Florida? (Very familiar with Sister’s book. A fan, Koesler guessed.)
Marie’s response was that writing full-time was, by far, the ideal way to do it. But that was a literary “Catch 22.” One has to be successful at writing before one can afford to treat oneself to writing full-time. While pursuing that goal, there are few alternatives to working at a full-time paying job and writing concurrently.
Others on the panel contributed illustrations of how they managed their time. Coincidentally, each of the writers held active religious vocations that made primary demands on their lives. Benbow attested that afternoons afforded the best opportunity to write. Marie traveled frequently; minutes squeezed out on trains, planes, and buses were most accessible for her writing. Winer’s best times were early mornings and Sundays. The other three expressed doubts: Sundays were the busiest days for Christian ministers, priests, and in this case, a nun in charge of education that was emphasized on Sundays.
Good-naturedly, the three Christian authors chided Winer for working on Sunday. Just as affably, he reminded them that he was the only one among them observing the Sabbath-literally the seventh day of the week, Saturday.
Sister Janet appeared inclined to let the questions roll on. On most occasions such as this, there was a time limit for Q and A. But there was nothing more on the schedule until dinner. The arrangement was fine as far as Koesler was concerned. He had found the question period to almost always be the most lively and scintillating segment of this sort of program.
Without raising her hand, a youngish dark-haired woman shot a challenge at Winer. Didn’t he think, she asked, that a rabbi’s involvement with the world was too confined to make him the central character in a mystery novel?
In response, the smiling Winer explained some of the responsibilities and talents required of the average rabbi.
But, she persisted, what of the tendency of Jews to ghettoize themselves, to form their own tight-knit communities and become isolated from outsiders? What, she concluded, made Winer think the community at large would be interested in what this tiny handful of people did or thought?
Winer, holding himself under tight control, gave a brief synopsis of some of the major accomplishments of Jews through history, as well as a short review of Jews being driven by Gentiles into ghettos rather than choosing to isolate themselves. But Winer’s presentation was strictly academic, almost devoid of passion or argumentation. The rabbi seemed convinced that there was no way he could enter this woman’s closed mind, let alone change it.