About 25 years ago (and at least that many books ago), I was in Hollywood at the Warner Brothers lot, writing a script for a film called Young Men And Fire, which I foolishly thought would be an adaptation of the wonderful Norman McLean book of the same name, but turned out to be something different.
My boss at the time was Len Amato, then a producer for Baltimore/Spring Creek Pictures, and more recently president of HBO Films. Len was a great guy to work for–very patient and a solid mentor to young and inexperienced screenwriters. I remember turning in a scene I’d written in the script that had some really cool, innovative stuff going on. If I recall properly, it was about secondary characters doing the cool stuff to rescue the lead character, who would be listed as the “star” of the picture. Len read it, said some complimentary things, then smacked me with one of the great lightbulb moments of my writing career:
“John, remember that the star gets to do all the cool stuff.”
Extrapolating out, this means that the star (main character) should own every scene in which he or she is present. Because they’re the ones driving the story, they should also be the ones driving their scenes.
I was reminded of Len Amato’s mentorship a week or so ago, when my editor at Kensington, the wonderful Michaela Hamilton, sent me her editorial letter on the manuscript for Scorched Earth, the next Jonathan Grave thriller, due out next spring. In it, I presented scenes where the bad guys were setting up their bad guy stuff in active ways, while Jonathan and his team spent most of the first third of the book researching databases and connecting dots. They really don’t do much of anything. If Scorched Earth were a mystery, then the quiet sleuthing would be fine.
But my fans are not looking for a mystery from me. They’re looking for a thriller, and in thrillers, the main character (the star) makes things happen. Plots points are revealed kinetically, the results of the star’s actions.
I’d forgotten Len Amato’s Dictum.
And heres’ the thing: While I was and still am very proud of the story, I knew something was wrong with it. I told my wife that the story’s heartbeat didn’t seem quite right. For the life of me, though, I couldn’t see what was wrong.
But Michaela Hamilton did. This is the wonder of a long relationship with a fantastic editor. Once she showed my how in the first act, Jonathan processes and acts on information that is provided to him, rather than hunting down and finding the information himself.
Well, crap. I don’t mean to sound un-humble, but it’s been decades since I’ve been compelled to a massive rewrite of a manuscript because of editorial input. More than a few of my books have required no change at all beyond copy edits.
At their face, the changes I’m making affect only the first act. In reality, because my plots are tightly woven and fairly intricate, there’s no such thing as a first act change that doesn’t have impact on some scene or line of dialogue later in the book.
It’s my own fault. I’ve been wildly distracted by various life events in the past 12 months, and in retrospect, I tried to get away with a shortcut that didn’t work. I didn’t do it intentionally, but if I’d been 100% mentally in the game, I’d be on to my next project by now, not causing stress for myself and the entire production team by stopping forward progress and working backwards to fix a problem that never should have existed.
I think it’s important to understand that every observation made by my editor–and the changes they triggered–were all presented as merely suggestions. They were willing to publish the book exactly as I had written it, but “maybe it would be better if . . .”
There’s no maybe about it. I’ve given myself two weeks to make the changes.
Been there, John. Good luck with changing the action and the “ripple effects.”
A great editor (or beta reader) is pure gold, and tells you what you need to hear. I was fortunate to work with three superb editors early on.
This is hitting home for me today. I’ve been pondering my “slow start” with a plot thread that, while it’s important to the mystery, might not have my protagonist doing enough of the work. Then your words, “If it were a mystery, then the quiet sleuthing would be fine.”
Mine IS a mystery, but I’m still going to go back and see whether it needs a little patching or if I need to rip out chunks. Like you, if I change something in part A, the domino effect means changing a lot down the line.
Same thing happened with my ninth thriller. I was rushing to meet the self-imposed goal of a book a year and took shortcuts that I told myself would be okay. Beta readers gave their usual complimentary comments…except for one. She pulled me up short and said, “Deb, this isn’t as good as your other books. because…” She went on to diagnose what I’d known in my heart was missing but just didn’t want to accept.
So I ditched the self-imposed deadline and rewrote. Thing is, once she pointed out the problem, it wasn’t that hard to fix. As Terry says, the domino effect means catching all the details down the line that change, which is time-consuming. But once you have an accurate diagnosis, it’s easier to treat a problem.
John, knowing your work ethic, you’ll get it all done in two weeks with maybe a day or two to spare ;).
I can relate to this. My developmental editor Mary Rosenblum’s sharp insights on my novel Empowered: Agent insured that my hero, Mathilda Brandt, would be the star who does all the cool stuff, and does it with a strong voice and a fighter’s attitude. It took a very heavy rewrite of the entire novel, but it made all the difference.
I’ve had beta readers come to my rescue as well with insightful feedback. I always listen, and if it hits home, I act.
Great post, John, and you nailed one of my key points about AI. Vendors would love for us to buy into the hype that an AI-powered app will replace humans. However, I doubt technology would offer a reminder like you got from your experienced and skilled editor. Put the star first! Regardless of whether we serve as the writer or editor, the combination of lifelong learning and practice wins the race for our readers’ hearts, not AI.
Congratulations on having a great editor, John. My developmental editor is pure gold. She’s kept me from going off in the wrong direction in several books.
Reminds me of a verse in Proverbs 9 I read this morning:
“Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you;
reprove a wise man, and he will love you.”
…the story’s heartbeat didn’t seem quite right.
I like that summation of the problem, John. I have such admiration for authors like you and others here at TKZ who “tell it like it is”, so to speak. Meaning, even as successful as you are, you’re right down there in the trenches with the rest of us, and you’re not afraid to say so. Thank you…
I’ll be waiting for Scorpion’s next adventures…have a good two weeks, Sir! 🙂
Good luck with a smooth rewrite. When I was working through my premise for my romantic suspense GUARDIAN ANGEL, it looked good. Hero is hired by the heroine’s lawyer father to protect her against one of his many high-end criminal clients, and they are chased by henchmen through most of the novel. Strong characters with a perfect opportunity to fall in love while staying alive. Then I realized they were only reactive, not active, in the plot. I gave them the goal of finding her hiding father to figure out who the heck was paying the killer goons so they could stop him instead of running for the rest of their lives. A much stronger novel.
Interesting. One of my go-tos lies in having Our Heroes be in way over their heads and, as the song goes, get by with a little help from their friends. Bilbo doesn’t kill Smaug, Frodo doesn’t sweet-talk Theoden King or Treebeard into taking action, Luke Skywalker plays second fiddle to absolutely everyone until he’s pretty much the only pilot left with unfired proton torpedoes, and Mattie Ross shoots Tom Chaney—on two different occasions!—but it takes Rooster Cogburn to finish him off.
In my thrillers, I like my heroes to be active and punch well above their admittedly unspectacular weight class, but to also have a Gollum ready to take the fall for them.
Rule 1: Don’t bore the reader.
There is no Rule 2.
Your plots conform to Rule 1! Done.
This article was exactly what I needed to read today—thank you!
” “John, remember that the star gets to do all the cool stuff.”
Extrapolating out, this means that the star (main character) should own every scene in which he or she is present. Because they’re the ones driving the story, they should also be the ones driving their scenes.”
As several others have mentioned, this was exactly what I needed to read. And while I’m relatively inexperienced in the grand scheme of things, I think it’s an important consideration for mystery too. There have been times when I’ve second guessed myself on a WIP doubting that my protag was in the driver’s seat. But it can be hard when you’re trying to involve a cast of characters.
Gonna bookmark this post and pass it along. And I just want to express my gratitude to all the TKZ contributors. I never get tired of coming here to learn!