Five working days remain until graduation. Then it’s off to Cisco Bootcamp. Destination: a week of intensive network training. Learning opportunities and school go hand in hand, I think and besides the long, quiet, uninterrupted breaks — three and half months for summer, a month at Christmas — the greatest benefit of working for an educational institution.

About halfway through the revised outline and I now concur with Team Eagle Eye; I resisted initally. There is a way to amp up the middle, leave the first third and the last quarter intact, and take the story to the next level. Not only will Mike Brody look stronger, the modifications will add considerable tension.

The only downside that the end of year madness might defer the heavy lifting until June 10. Quite a distateful prospect.

After a review session with Team Eagle Eye, I decided to revisit the middle section of the book and consider possible enhancements to roughly 125 pages. This decision is not taken lightly and I approach the prospect with considerable trepidation. Obviously there is the risk of going overboard and writing a new draft. Out of the question.

For starters, the first 125 pages are tight and need very slight tweaks. The biggest problem: a few dropped words, the occasional awkward phrase. The last 75 pages are solid as well.

What’s lacking is sufficient connective tissue that makes sticking around a necessity. Basically the writing works given the content, but there could be more tension. To be blunt, the middle is weaker than what surrounds it.

So a revisit of the old index cards is in order. Break it out scene by scene, until a plan to even out the narrative foments.

Before I change a word, though, I’m going to see how the cards play. While it sounds like a big task, it might be a very minor amount of effort. I hope.

I had to see The Da Vinci Code earlier rather than later so I could draw my own conclusions, rather than allow the critics any sway. Film reviewers are nasty buggers sometimes. Also I was a bit stir crazy on Saturday and craved distraction.

The Da Vinci Code phenomena reveals just how clever Dan Brown is. Setting his tale in a medium that lends itself to endless discussion, conspiratorial posturing, and religious backlash, elevates the story far beyond his capabilities as a story teller. It’s more than a novel or movie; it’s an event. Thus, it’s not necessary for the execution to be amazing, provided the premise engages the audience and the ball never stops rolling. And at both it does well.

Overall the movie is a good adaptation of the novel, though it’s possible to enjoy the movie cold, without reading the book. The Wife confirmed that theory. And now the story…

A Harvard scholar finds himself the main suspect in a murder investigation where the victim left clues exposing a 2,000 year old conspiracy: did Jesus and Mary Magdalene marry? His odyssey takes him and a sidekick to important historical sites all over Europe decoding anagrams and symbols while chasing leads. Even briefer, this a why-they-done-it, rather than a who-done-it.

What works:
1) Content. The best plot points from the novel made it to the screen.
2) Pacing. As the novel, the story moves.
3) Casting. Looked and sounded about right.

What needs improvement:
1)Sophie – the most important character – is muted, and lacked the depth she had in the book. Partly the fault lies with the medium, films make characterization very difficult. But a weak Sophie makes a weaker story.
2)Dialog – not exactly Dan Brown’s strong point, what the mind tolerates on the written page is painful on the screen. Oh yes, there are howlers.
3)More narrative, less chatter. From the blueprint of the novel, the movie inherited quite a few points that might have been better shown, instead of told. What works on the page does not always work on screen. To the director’s credit, there are many moments where he accomplishes so much visually. So much so I believe he could have done it more consistently and frequently.
4)Ending. Lame. Like the book.

Verdict: Matinee so you can brag at the water cooler. DVD rental if you can bear the wait.

Four weeks have passed since the agent requested the manuscript and with no contact from their end, despite a nudge from mine, I must conclude a non-answer is their answer. The biggest problem with passive replies is knowing when to move on, since they lack a moment of definitive closure. Initially I planned to wait until Monday, but I’d rather use the weekend for writing queries. Thus I make my own closure.

I could micro analyze the outcome a thousand ways, but it boils down to this: an opportunity came my way; I tried; it worked out differently than desired. Next week is a new week.

On the plus side, the hang time allowed a great opportunity for reading — eight books completed since late April — well above my average intake. The last of Team Eagle Eye finished his review; we meet Monday night. Definitely the most analytical person I know, from our brief instant message conversations so far I heard several interesting ideas. Which dovetails with another coup, really, that I have a good team in place now for proofing manuscripts. I know who can deliver and in what capacity. I consider myself very lucky to have them in my corner.

I’ve also made another decision. From the beginning of this journey I rarely referred to myself as a writer. If people knew about the novel, it was because of The Wife, or they stumbled on the site. When people asked, I answered briefly, nodded, and redirected them to another subject. Among very close friends, there might have been a bit more discussion. But in daily life, I told essentially no one that wasn’t already in the know and heard it from someone else. The don’t ask, don’t tell policy is over, effective now. To the two friends that shouldered this burden for the past four years, my apologies. Thanks for putting up with me. So what’s changed? Well I’m no expert on what makes a writer, or if I qualify in the classic sense. I wrote a novel and I write nearly every day. Sounds like a writer to me. And I got wares to sell, so it’s pimping time.

And last, a substantial tax refund arrived on Wednesday. That’s always a good thing.

The best technical problems are solved by the simplest methods. For instance, my Internet connection stopped functioning sometime on Monday night. This was curious given the history of uptime. While constant outages and connection issues marred the first year of the DSL experience, for the last four years I’ve been connected almost continuously. At one point the modem needed replacement; that ate a few minutes. Otherwise it has been rock solid.

So the no Internet thing bothered me, especially since all configurations have been identical for the last year. And that was the problem: everything was the same. The exact same router has been running for nearly six years; it gave up the ghost on Monday. Which was perplexing, because even on close inspection it appeared operational. Once it quit talking to the modem correctly, the net result was no Internet for me.

Swapped out the old and busted for a new lovely and everything sang. Rack up one in the “buy to fix” column.

To celebrate my return to connected land, I emailed the agent for his thoughts on the novel…

Between a funeral and road trip, it’s been a very long, rough week. Until Friday, averaged five hours of sleep for too many nights in a row and logged three times more car miles than normal.

Thinking out loud about the agent situation – i.e. no news yet, twelve days left on the clock – with The Wife, she shared a very good analogy.

A man is lost at sea. Delirious, God appears in a vision, and promises a rescue if he trusts in signs.

Moments later, a small fishing boat appears and the owner tosses out a preserver; the man declines. This was not the sign he expected. Two hours later a barge approaches, the crew also offers assistance. Again the man refuses. Surely God intended something grander than a battered dinghy and a rusty barge.

A faithful man, he waits. Patiently he holds out for the “big one” and lets nothing distract him.

Eventually, he drowns. Meeting God, he asks why the sign never materialized. The response: “I sent you two boats. What more did you expect?”

When the wisdom of this sank in, I made a list of as many signs – some small, many inconsequential – that happened along the history of this manuscript. I’ve been a bit too fixated lately on a big sign, without recognizing the more subtle ones. Looking at them with different eyes, some are far from inconsequential.

A very small extract:

1)After months of frustration, spent 60 consecutive writing sessions in a row working on the same 50 pages. The only goal, write 50 pages that read like a book. Made a deal with myself. If I could write something that I truly felt was up to snuff, I would continue. If not, to quote Mark Twain, I’d go pound wood. Never tested my hammering skills.

2)Handed a draft over to The Eight. From that, gathered good feedback and discovered a great way for field testing writing projects. One of The Eight punted on their reading duties, and enrolled a SWAT guy who became one of the weapons and technical consultants.

3)First agent approached about the book agreed to review the entire manuscript, rather than dicker around with synopsis and twenty-five page extracts.

And there’s others.

On the passing of Geneiveve Busfield 1916-2006, it was the greatest pleasure to know you, to see you, to love you. The loss of your presence weighs heavy on my heart, but so many signs of you abound that I scarcely feel like you are gone.

For the best parts of you passed down through the generations: kindness, beauty, intelligence, reason and humor. Each time my wife smiles, I see a bit of you and remember.

Because you never left us. You just went home.