Widower Wednesday: Lying Widowers

One of the first dates I went out on after my late wife died was with a gorgeous redhead I met via an online dating site. We had exchanged maybe a dozen emails before deciding to meet and go out. Though she was aware of my widower status, it wasn’t something we had discussed in much detail.

We met at a local restaurant and for the first 20 minutes or so things were going okay. However, I noticed there were times it looked like she was trying to get the courage to say something or ask me a question. Since I was new to the dating thing, I wasn’t sure how to handle it. Instead of giving her some time to ask it or asking her what was on her mind, I kept asking her questions about herself or make small talk. Instead of helping, it just seemed to make her more uncomfortable.

Finally, near the end of the meal, she blurted out “How long have you been a widower?”

The question she had wanted to ask all night was finally out in the open. And, to be honest, it was the one question I didn’t want to answer—at least not on our first date.

I looked down and waited a moment before telling her. I wasn’t counting how long it had been since Krista died. I didn’t have to. Instead, I was trying to guess how she’d react when I told her that my late wife had only been dead five months.  It seemed whenever women found out how soon I was dating a brief look of panic crossed their face and I could see them wondering how on earth a man could be dating so soon. (I didn’t blame them for feeling this way. I spent a lot of time wondering why I was dating so soon too.)

As much as I wanted to tell her that my wife had been dead a long, long time so she would feel I had adequate time to grieve, I knew that I couldn’t lie to her. If the relationship was to have any chance at turning into something serious, I’d have to tell her the truth.

I answered my date’s question honestly and from the way her eyes popped out of her head, I knew there wasn’t going to be a second date. We ended the evening with a handshake and I never heard from the redhead again.

I share this story because I had two emails this week that dealt with widowers either lying about their marital status or lying about how long their late wife had been dead. One woman who emailed me asked if she should be worried that the widower has represented himself as divorced instead of a widower. The second woman wanted to know if it was a red flag that the widower said his late wife had been dead a year when the truth was she had been dead two months. In both cases, the women had entered somewhat serious relationships with widower before the truth finally emerged. I suggested both women immediately end the relationship.

Successful relationships can’t be built upon lies—small or big. The truth always comes out eventually. While it’s possible these widowers were worried the truth about their marital status would ruin any chance at a future relationship, my gut says that wasn’t the case since they seemed content to continue living a lie until they were finally confronted with the truth.

If a widower can’t be honest about  his marital status, there are probably a lot of other things he’s lying about too. While some widower infractions may warrant a second chance, widowers who build relationships on a foundation of deceit don’t deserve one more second of your time. It’s better to get out of these kinds of relationships as soon as possible instead of having to untangle yourself from a bigger web of lies down the road.

Dating a Widower Book Update

To keep me honest about the creative writing goals I made at the beginning of this year, I thought I’d update you on the status of the Dating a Widower book. I’ve got good news and good/bad news—depending on how you look at it.

First, the good news. Based on the feedback I received from beta readers last year, I rewrote the entire book last month. The book is now in the hands of a competent editor who’s going to make some final suggestions. I should have her feedback by Friday. I’ll review her changes this weekend and should have a polished manuscript ready to go by Sunday.

Now the good/bad news. My plan was to have the book ready and available by the end of February. However, under the terms of my current book contract, my publisher has the right to review the next book I write. So last week I shot their acquisitions editor off an email telling her about the book. Because the book is for such a niche market, I didn’t think it was something they’d want to look it. Much to my surprise the acquisitions editor said she wanted to review it once I had a final copy. So after I finalize the manuscript, I’ll shoot it off to the publisher to review. Having worked with them over the last several years I’m looking at about 4-6 weeks until I know whether or not they’re interested.

So when is Dating a Widower coming out? Well, if the publisher turns down the manuscript I’ll get the book on Amazon and other places in March or April—depending on how soon they get back to me. If the publisher accepts the manuscript and I choose to sign a contract, it will probably come out by the end of the year.

Again, nothing is set in stone at this point other than there’s going to be a small delay in getting it out to all of you. I’ll update you once I hear back from the publisher. 

Widower Wednesday: Widowers Wearing Wedding Rings

First, if you’ve emailed me in the last week with a widower question and haven’t received a response, please be patient. I’m in the middle of proofing the galleysfor The Third. It’s a very slow and time intensive process and I’ve had to put all email replies to the backburner for the rest of the week. I’ll be catching up on emails next week.

Now on to today’s Widower Wednesday topic.

I receive two emails in my inbox about widowers wearing their wedding rings when they’re dating. One woman had just returned from a first date with a recent widower and noticed that he was still wearing his wedding ring on his left hand. The second was from a woman who’s been with a widower for several months. He’s been wearing ring on his right hand which hadn’t bothered the woman much until she learned it was the late wife’s wedding band. This made her feel very uncomfortable. Both women wanted to know if wearing the rings are a sign that these widowers aren’t ready to move on.

A ring is a symbol of his commitment to the late wife and their marriage. Once a widower has agreed to a serious, committed relationship with the new woman, the wedding ring should be removed from his finger put away. I would hope that most widowers would realize that wearing a wedding ring could cause a level of discomfort with the women they’re first dating and take it off beforehand. But not all widowers think of such things when the start dating again.

But is wearing a ring a sign the widower’s not ready to move on?

Well, it depends. I’m inclined to give the recent widower on the first date the benefit of the doubt. While I can see how that would make the woman he’s dating uncomfortable, I don’t necessarily see it as a sign that that he’s not ready to move on. The widower may not even give the ring on his finger a second thought. So, aside from the ring, if everything else went well, I don’t see a problem with going out again while keeping your eyes wide open for other signs he’s not moving on.

As to the second example, since the emailer made it sound like they’re in a committed relationship I think the ring should go. If the ring is the only red flags he exhibits, I’d be concerned but not too worried about it. I’d have a talk with him about the ring and let him know how it makes you feel. However, don’t ask him to take it off. That’s something he should want to do on his own. If he’s exhibiting other red flags in addition to the ring, I’d be more concerned.

As far as my experience goes, I never wore a wedding ring on my fingers when I started dating. Soon after my late wife died, I put it on a chain around my neck. I removed it once I realized it was coming between Marathon Girl and me. (Read Room for Two if you want the complete story.) I didn’t have a problem removing it and putting it in a box because I was ready to start a new life with Marathon Girl and couldn’t wait for the day I could wear a new ring that would symbolize our love and commitment to each other.

Widowers who are ready to start a new life shouldn’t have a problem removing it. While it’s just a public symbol, it is one that symbolizes a past life. Once they’ve started a committed relationship with someone else, it’s time to put the old ring away.

A Birthday Affirmation

Happy Birthday, Alice. ***

Affirmation

To grow old is to lose everything. Aging, everybody knows it. Even when we are young, we glimpse it sometimes, and nod our heads when a grandfather dies. Then we row for years on the midsummer pond, ignorant and content. But a marriage, that began without harm, scatters into debris on the shore, and a friend from school drops cold on a rocky strand. If a new love carries us past middle age, our wife will die at her strongest and most beautiful. New women come and go. All go. The pretty lover who announces that she is temporary is temporary. The bold woman, middle-aged against our old age, sinks under an anxiety she cannot withstand. Another friend of decades estranges himself in words that pollute thirty years. Let us stifle under mud at the pond's edge and affirm that it is fitting and delicious to lose everything.

-- Donald Hall

The Third Galleys

Staying up late going over the galleys for The Third. They're due next week. It's going to be a long, long night, but worth it.

The Third Book Cover

Each new birth is one step closer to the brink of destruction...

“The only way your kids are going to have any future is if we get this world back to a livable condition. The only way we‘re going to do that is with fewer people. People are the problem, not the solution.”

When Ransom Lawe, a recycler in the Pacific Northwest, finds out his wife is pregnant with their third—and therefore illegal—child, he’s forced to choose between the government who proclaims a desire to save the planet and his hope for a place where his family can live in freedom. But with the Census Bureau Sentinels closing in on his wife and unborn child, Ransom’s choice will either save his family or tear them apart forever.

Abel Keogh offers a stark and haunting look at a not-so-distant future in this chilling new novel. Crossing lines between good and evil, freedom and oppression, and political and environmental responsibility, The Third is a gut-wrenching tale of intense loyalty and unconditional love.

Read chapter 1

Widower Wednesday: Where to Bury the Second Wife?

An anonymous emailer writes:

Just a question about burial arrangements--where should the second wife be buried?  My husband was married for 12 years when his wife passed--he has a double place with double marker all filled in except his death with their children on the back.  We have been married over 34 years with 2 children together and can't come to a decision about what is "proper."

This is a good questions and one that I’ll admit I don’t have a solid answer, in part, because Marathon Girl and I have yet to resolve. (More on that in a minute.)

First, keep in mind that cemeteries and gave sites are for the living – not the dead. They’re places where friends and family can pay their respects and remember that person. The dead don’t care where you burry them. My guess is that they’ll have other things on their mind when they pass on to the next life.

That being said, my ideal solution is one where the widower dies and has a wife buried on either side of him—each with separate headstones. I lean this way solution partially because after the late wife died, I bought another plot next to hers and my family bought a couple plots in the same area. Putting me, Marathon Girl, and the late wife next to each other would be an easy, economical solution. (Side note: the cemetery where the late wife is buried doesn’t allow double headstones so that’s not an issue.)

Marathon Girl wants to bury me and her elsewhere. She has her reasons for this and I completely understand why she feels that way. I’m not offended by this and don’t take her desire as a slight against me, the late wife, or my first marriage. When the topic does come up I joke that whoever dies last will get their way. And, to be honest, unless we can come up with a solution, that’s probably what’s going to happen. It’s not a perfect but it’s not one that we don’t feel is worth arguing about—at least not right now.

For the anonymous emailer, it’s obvious that you’ve talked about the subject. I’d be curious to know what you’d like to do, what your husband wants to do, and why you can’t reach a compromise. Death and burials can be an emotional topic so my suggestion, if you haven’t done so already, is to find the widower’s emotions behind what he wants to do and see if you can reach some kind of compromise based on that knowledge. Just keep in mind that this is a subject not worth arguing over if it’s going to drive a wedge between the two of you.

I wish I had a more concrete answer about what is “proper” for the emailer and everyone else. This is a subject that I’d love to hear what solutions or compromises readers of this blog have reached. Please post your comments and I’ll update this post with insightful comments.

Update: Some great comments on this thread. Annie, Elizabeth, Brenda, and Vickie (did I forget someone?) all suggested cremation as an alternative. This gives people the option of scattering the ashes in more than one location or somewhere far, far away from either spouse. It’s something I hadn’t thought of mostly because it’s frowned upon (but not forbidden) in my faith but I think it’s a good alternative to think about. I appreciate you guys bringing it up.

The other point that Carol brought up and something I didn’t think about was honoring the new marriage. Commitment to the first wife spouse ends at death and when widowers remarry, our obligations change. (Of course one could argue that once the second wife or the widower dies, then their obligations change again. J)

Again this is a personal decision that should be discussed by both parties but one that I would hope wouldn’t cause an irreconcilable difference between a couple. In the end it doesn’t matter where the person is buried. When someone dies, he or she will always live in the hearts and minds of those who knew him or her and they can be remembered and honored wherever the living reside.

Widower Wednesday: Second Chances

In the comment section (#25) of a recent Widower Wednesday post, Annabelle writes:

I have looked at this site a few times before deciding to go ahead and give things a go with the guy I have been dating for the past 3 months. After being convinced and seeing good signs he had moved on and wanted a new start I decided to give him a go.

But yesterday – like so many stories I have read – the same thing has happened to me like so many others and I really believed it would not…..

I have heard it all, I love you, I want to build a future with you, you are amazing and then yesterday – he feels a difference in how I feel for him and how he feels for me.

She goes on to describe the widowers actions and how she felt when the widower suddenly and unexpectedly ended the relationship. Then she asks the following question:

This is so confusing….. is it over or do you think I should just walk away and not even give him a second chance?

Whether or not to give a widower a second chance is a great question and, unfortunately, one that many women who date widowers have to answer.

There’s a part of me is sympathetic to the widowers who end relationships only to think they might have made mistakes.  I know what it’s like to want to date again and have a serious, committed relationship while still trying to sort out the internal feelings of grief and moving on. These feelings can lead to conflicting emotions and uncertainty about whether the relationship they’re in is the right one.

And I’ve personally benefited from second chances. Those who have read Room for Two or have been following this blog for awhile know that if it wasn’t for a second chance, my relationship with Marathon Girl would have ended after our first date. (Of course, my second chance involved a second date. I never got serious with Marathon Girl’s hopes only to abruptly end the relationship because I of mixed emotions.)

However, I also know what it’s like to start and continue a relationship just for the sake of having someone fill the hole in one’s the heart. I know what it’s like to tell someone you love them when deep down you know the relationship isn’t right just because you miss having someone special in your life and, later, to unceremoniously dump them. Personally, I think most widowers who ask for second chances fall into this category.

Widowers who tell their girlfriends they love them and want to spend their life with them only to dump them usually aren’t worthy of second chances. In my mind most widower come crawling back because they miss the company, companionship, sex, and other benefits of a relationship – not because they’re ready to move on. Widowers will pursue women they truly love. They won’t unexpectedly end the relationship or have doubts about moving on. They’ll figure out a way to check their emotions and make things work.

So, should you give your widower a second chance? Generally I advise against it. Most women who email me that have given their widower second, third, or even fourth chances generally end up getting their heart broken again and again. I think the saying “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me” applies to this situation.

However, if your gut (not your heart) tells you he’s worthy of a second chance, draw a line in the sand and take control of the relationship. Let the widower know how you expect to be treated and that if you have the feeling he’s not ready to move on or is serious about the relationship, you’ll end the relationship. Keep your eyes wide open for any red flags. And it he steps out of line, don’t hesitate to end things.

Guess what I’m doing this weekend?

The edits for the first half of The Third are in. Time to hunker down and get to work. Update 1/16: Edits are complete and on their way back to the editor. Hoping to have the other half wrapped up this week!

Update 1/17: Received the second half of edits from the editor. Getting back to work.

Worst Book Ever

Note: Be sure to read the Update/Correction below.

Most of my published author friends have a book or two that’s saved on their hard drive that will never see the light of day. They’re usually books that the author wrote early in their careers—usually before they had any kind of publishing contract. They could never find a publisher for the novel (or didn’t try) and moved on to other projects. Though the books were never published, they served as good learning experiences for the authors on what to do (or what not to do) when writing fiction.

I have one of these “learning” books on my hard drive. Between Room for Two and The Third, I wrote a novel titled Angel of Light. It was my first real attempt to write a novel and I’ll flat out admit that it sucks. However, writing Angel of Light was a good learning experience for me. It taught me that I write better with an outline, that I need to work on my dialogue, and that I do a decent job hooking the reader at the end of every chapter. Without putting effort into writing that book, odds are The Third would have never been good enough to find a publisher.

One of the lessons most these author friends have continually taught is not to be tempted to rewrite these books or resubmit them for publication no matter how much the author is in love with them. Why? Because making these books public generally drags down an author’s career not only in terms of sales but loyal readers. Once an author puts crap out there, he or she risks that it will be the first book a reader picks up. And if the book is awful, odds are they’re never going to touch another one of your books again. That’s why, aside from Marathon Girl, no one will ever read Angel of Light. I will never rewrite it or even attempt to have it published. It will remain on my computer until they pry it from my cold, dead fingers. (Even then I hope to have the presence of mind to nuke that part of the hard drive before I pass on.)

So it’s sad when a talented author like Harlan Coben makes this mistake with his novel Play Dead. I like Coben’s novels and have been reading them voraciously since I discovered his books last year. But Play Dead is a torture to read. The characters have no depth and the reader hardly cares about them. The dialogue sucks. The plot had enough big holes that a three 747s could easily fly through them. The only reason I kept reading the book was because I thought there was no way the book could get any worse.

I was wrong. It got worse. Way worse. When I done reading it, I felt like I had been forced to watch Glitter and Gigli at the same time! As a result there are hours of my life and a million brains cells that I’ll never get back.

Granted, Coben warns the reader at the beginning of the book that he hasn’t “read Play Dead in at least twenty years” and that “it’s exact book I wrote when I was in my early twenties, just a naive lad working in the travel industry….”He also accurately compares the book to “that essay you wrote when you were in school, the one that got you an A-plus on, the one your teacher called “inspired”—and one day you’re going through your drawer and you find it and you read it and your heart sinks and you say, ‘Man, what was I thinking?’”

My question to Coben is this: since you knew this book sucked, what were you thinking by publishing it? Play Dead reads just like one of those novels that never should have been published—EVER. Even you seem to know this but pushed it through anyway? Are you short on cash? Is someone blackmailng you?

I only wish I had read the warning before I started reading chapter 1 because I never would have read it otherwise.

For readers, unless you’re looking for 101 class on how not to write a novel, avoid even touching Play Dead. Your brain cells will thank you for it.

Update/Correction: Harlan Coben came across this review and emailed me a correction that I’ll pass on. Apparently Play Dead was Coben’s first novel and was published back in 1990. The version I was reading is a 2010 reprint. It’s NOT a book that he pulled out of the drawer after 20 years and decided to push through the publishing mill.

This error was my mistake. After I finished reading Play Dead and seeing how it wasn’t even close to the quality of other Coben novels I’ve read, I flipped to the beginning of the novel where I read his author’s note. After reading that and seeing the 2010 copyright date, I wrongly assumed it was something he decided to publish after he had become a successful writer.

So, I apologize for the misunderstanding, Mr. Coben. I appreciate you taking the time to email me and offer the correction. So you know, I’ve enjoyed every other book of yours thus far and am looking forward to reading Live Wire when it’s released in March. Had I known this was your first novel when I was reading it, I would have been a bit more understanding as a reader. You’re a talented writer and have come a long way since Play Dead.

For readers, I retract the reasons behind the publication of Play Dead but stand by my review of the book. It isn’t Coben’s finest work.If you’re interested in reading his novels, I suggest starting with some of his standalone novels like Just One Look or Hold Tight. If you enjoy those, then check out his Myron Bolitar novels staring with Deal Breaker.