Category Archives: #amwriting

Subjectivity of Art

Posted on by

So we all know how subjective an assessment of any novel can be – we see it  all the time in conflicting book reviews, Amazon and Goodreads ratings, or, as demonstrated in every book group I’ve ever attend, the amazing array of reader reactions possible to the exact same book… Instinctively, I think we all know that our work cannot please everyone all the time. How then does a new writer know if the work he or she is producing is going to be of a standard that will attract an agent or editor’s interest? How (at the most basic level) do you know if you’ve written something that’s actually ‘good enough’ for publication?

Most writers I know suffer from a fair measure of self-doubt as well as ambition, and many, by their own account, are never totally sure when they complete a new draft whether others are actually  going to like it. That’s where beta readers, critique groups and manuscript/first page critique sessions come in –  these all provide writers with some initial feedback on their work. This is also where the thorn in every writer’s side comes in – subjectivity. We’ve all heard stories of agents and editors who didn’t like the next book a writer they previously loved  produced, or books rejected dozens of times only to be picked up by that one elusive editor and nurtured to success. Remember how many times the first Harry Potter book was rejected only to then go on to be  bestseller…well, many writers cling to that hope – but how to know when that hope is possibly true or, sadly, unfounded? Art by its very nature is subjective…so how is a new writer to gauge the success of their current WIP without being driven crazy by the spectre of ‘subjectivity’ ?

I admit I am just as plagued by self-doubt as the next writer and even when I think something I’ve written is pretty good I’m never sure anyone else is going to think the same…so when working with my own beta readers/critique partners I adopt the following approach in order to keep my sanity:

  • I ask for both an overall assessment as well as specific feedback on elements in the story that are critical ( e.g. POV, narrative flow and character) or areas where I know I am weakest (hello, plot and structure!). This enables my readers to pinpoint some elements that may not work as well as others (and hopefully avoid the vague “I’m not sure why I didn’t like that bit…” kind of response).
  • I look for consistency of the same feedback. If everyone feels like the POV isn’t as strong as could be, then there’s probably merit in considering reworking it. If only one person doesn’t like a particular element, I may be less sure…and I may need to probe their response a little deeper.
  • I accept the likes and dislikes of my beta readers. All of mine love historical fiction but some have a preference for lighter or darker mysteries, while others aren’t really into speculative or fantasy elements…and so I tailor my feedback requests to take this into account.
  • I reach out to new beta readers/critique partners that represent the readers I am targeting in my current WIP. If it’s a children’s book for example, I think children should give their feedback, not just adults.
  • I realize the limitations of any feedback and try to critically reappraise my own work as well. Just after I’ve finished a draft I’m usually too close to the material to take a step back and process its overall merits. I need to give myself time and space so I can re-evaluate my work – because often your own gut feel is just as important.
  • I try to accept that failure is the only means to achieving ultimate success. No matter the blow to one’s ego, sometimes we have to admit it that something doesn’t work and move on. I strongly believe that each ‘failure’ is an important learning step on the path to success (even if it does suck sometimes!)

What about you? How do you deal with the thorny ‘subjectivity’ issue when it comes to feedback for your own work? What process do you use to gain the confidence that your work really is ready…in terms of being ‘good’,  ‘marketable’ or ‘publication ready’?

 

 

My Rolling Edit Process

Posted on by

800px-Reader48

Jordan Dane
@JordanDane

I expect to get a few push backs on this post. Many writers use the “draft” process of editing their book after they get it written. They push to get a first draft done before they edit in several more drafts, but for me, I’ve never been able to do this. There’s a compulsive part of my nature that can’t let my own imperfections remain on the page until the end. If I know my book is riddled with my idiosyncrasies, it would haunt me too much, but that’s just me.

I do what I call “rolling edits” because I want to stay close to the action and character motivation at hand. I still get my daily word count in, but I read and reread my daily new material until I have nothing more to edit. In other words, if I write a chapter on one day, I edit it as I continue to move forward until I consider moving on.

Here’s my edit process:

1.) DELETE WITH A VENGEANCE – My first pass is always to delete and tighten each sentence. To help this process, I usually read aloud. Anything I stumble over gets a redo. I have a tendency to use compound sentences, so I make sure not to have dangling participles or long sentences that are hard to follow. I have a two comma rule. Any sentence that needs more than two commas, should probably be broken apart.

2.) LOOK FOR REPETITION (MORE DELETES) – I look for overused words, redundant wording, repeated phrases or “crutch” words that I fall back on too often. This can change from book to book and each author will have their own verbal handicaps.

3.) ADD EMOTIONAL LAYERING – Every scene has an emotional component to it. I push to add more emotion, even if it seems over the top. In fiction, this works because stories are about triggering emotions that the reader can relate to. If the scene is action packed, I’m looking for those delectable word choices to support the action or short viscerally descriptive sentences that will make the thrill palpable to the reader.

4.) REVISE THE DIALOGUE – I read the scene dialogue (without the narratives) to see if I can imagine the characters in my head and hear their voices. If there is humor in the scene, I work to punch it up or improve the timing (usually by deleting). If there is menace in the exchange, I ramp up the threat.

5.) EDIT THE BODY LANGUAGE – I often add body language in each scene as if I am watching a movie, but books aren’t that visual and I can sometimes overdo certain “crutch” reactions, like too many shrugs or nods. Again this is another opportunity to delete usually and it’s worth having a step to look for this.

6.) SPOT CHECK CHARACTER MOTIVATION – Do the characters’ reactions ring true? What if one of them reacted differently, how would that change my scene. I test my character motivation while I am “in” the scene to make sure it feels authentic. As I go through the book and stay close to each character’s story arc, I want the ability to “feel” a different outcome or twist as it is occurring, rather than waiting until the end to realize I like a different turn to happen and have to rewrite major sections.

7.) LAYER IN SETTING – I like to make sure my setting enhances each scene to infuse the action with a setting that is almost like another character. I love writing stories with a strong sense of world building, to make the reader feel as if they can walk the same streets that my characters do, with all their senses.

8.) REMEMBER THE INTIMACY – If my characters have a spark of attraction (that can have it’s own story arc), there is nothing more titillating than mounting intimacy. A glance, a first touch, can be drawn out so the reader feels everything. This can be construed as #3 (adding emotional layering), but for me, a growing romance should carry its own importance. If you can strip out the romance of a story, and the book no longer makes sense, then you have the right balance. This means that the romance is integral. The lovers are “punished” for wanting to be together and they get into more trouble because of it.

ROLLING PROCESS:
As I’ve mentioned, I keep writing my daily word goals, but continue to edit prior scenes (usually a chapter or two previously written) until I’m content to move on. Because I’m old school, I kill a lot of trees by printing out my edit pages and making notes in the margins. Every night I read what I’ve written before I go to bed. My reward is to get my own work done first before I treat myself to reading someone else’s book. The next morning, I make the changes.

By the time I get to the end, my novel is fully edited by me. I usually make one or two more passes through, to read it as a reader might. But most of the major edits are done. When I’m done, I’m done.

I set my daily word count, depending on the contractual due date. The usual range can be 2500-5000 words per day. My advice to other writers, on setting word count goals, is to take into account your priorities and set realistic goals. Even if you can only squeeze in a page a day, that is still progress and you will eventually get done.

DISCUSSION:
1.) How many of you do something similar? Anything you would add to my list?

2.) If you edit in drafts, what tips do you have to make this draft process more effective?

Series vs. Standalone

Posted on by

By Joe Moore
@JoeMoore_writer

My wife and I watched the first episode of TRUE DETECTIVE the other night (HBO original). The new series stars Colin Farrell and Vince Vaughn. We were captivated with last year’s show by the same name, the one starring Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson. It was unique, moody and unnerving. We looked forward to every installment of the back-bayou, gritty Louisiana crime story. Great writing, acting, photography and setting. I haven’t formed a solid opinion of the new one yet, but I can tell you one thing: it is TOTALLY different from season one. I mean, other than the title, there is no resemblance to the first TRUE DETECTIVE. In fact, you could change the title to ANYTHING else and it would make no difference.

Don’t get me wrong. Farrell and Vaughn are great actors. In fact, they’re really movie stars that someone convinced to be on TV. And their acting is top drawer. I always enjoy it when a comic actor takes on a dramatic role and excels in it. Vince Vaughn does just that. And Colin Farrell has never let me down.

But watching the opening episode of TRUE DETECTIVE, season two got me thinking. As an author of thrillers, what’s the best choice for me—writing a series or a standalone? TRUE DETECTIVE is a series—that’s why there are two seasons with the same name. If it were the equivalent of a standalone, it would be called a movie. So as a writer, should I be writing a series or single novel? What are the pros and cons of series vs. standalone?

First let’s look at genre fiction (thriller, mystery, fantasy, supernatural, paranormal, police procedural, horror, romance, etc.). Genre fiction gives us both series and standalones. Which should I write?

tgcTruth is, I’ve done both. My first published novel was THE GRAIL CONSPIRACY (co-written with Lynn Sholes), the first of a 4-book series. Our fifth book was a standalone called THE PHOENIX APOSTLES. Both TGC and TPA went to #1 on the Amazon Kindle bestseller list. Now we’re finishing up THE TOMB, the last of a 3-book series. Next up will be a standalone. I believe both work for us.

But it’s important to see the pros and cons of the two. Feedback from our readers helped me put together these points.

phoenix-apostles-webProbably the single biggest advantage to a series, for the reader and writer, is that it’s comfort food for the imagination. Even though the story is a new one, it’s a chance to revisit an old friend(s)—the protagonist and repeat characters. For years, picking up a Clive Cussler or Terry Brooks novel always gave me a warm and fuzzy feeling that I was back with my buddies. I knew those guys, trusted them, and couldn’t wait to see what they had gotten into this time. It was like meeting up with an old friend I hadn’t seen in a year and catching up on the latest news.

Of course, every pro comes with a con. Writing a series means that every installment must be as good as or better than the last. No rehashing of a theme. No cookie cutter plots. No formulas. Readers must come away feeling their appetite for the the next adventure was satisfied, and they can’t wait for the next in the series.

Another con to writing a series is backstory. Can the reader pick up a book in the middle of the series and get enough backstory for it to make sense? Or do they have to start with book one? How much backstory does the author include in subsequent books without boring the dedicated series fan or confusing the mid-series pick-up reader?

Finally, what if a series goes too long? What if the protagonist keeps falling into the same old danger (formula) time after time? This can result in the B word: boring. You don’t want to go there.

The advantage of writing a standalone, especially if you are known as a series author, is it can bring on a breath of fresh air for you and the reader. You get to stretch your legs without the confines of your established characters, and your reader gets to see a new side of your talents. You get to try new bankid stuff, experiment with voice, tense, POV, etc. A standalone for a series author is an experimental science lab. Just don’t blow the place up and go too far over the line that your fans won’t even recognize you.

One interesting technique is to touch on something in your new book that appeared in a previous series. In THE SHIELD, book 2 of our Maxine Decker series, the OSI agent was interviewed by Cotten Stone, the heroine journalist from our first series. It can bring an unexpected smile to your reader’s face or produce enough intrigue that they will seek out the other books.

So whether you’re interested in writing a series or a standalone, think ahead to what might be the pros and cons once you’re done. And give the new season of TRUE DETECTIVE a try. It’s good if not different from its predecessor.

What do you think, Zoners? Do you prefer reading or writing a series or standalones?

What’s Your Writing Tic?

Posted on by

We all have them – those dreaded tics, quirks and habits that creep into our work, worm their way onto the page and serve to drive us (and beta readers) crazy during the editing process. I confess that each new manuscript I seem to manage to create a new set of ‘tics’ – involuntary mannerisms that I seem oblivious to until I start revising or (even worse) until one of my beta readers pick up on them.

In my first book, my husband pointed out the number of times my main character shivered or drank a cup of tea (way too much…), while my agent highlighted that many of my secondary characters appeared to have similar sounding names to the nickname my main character had for her father’s Rolls Royce. Suddenly I found myself looking over my work and realizing that deep within I had developed some involuntary writing habits and quirks that I hadn’t even noticed. In my second manuscript I seemed to develop a weird tic for dropping prepositions – suddenly I kept forgetting ‘little words’ such as ‘at’ and ‘on’…and at the same time I developed a penchant for character names ending in ‘s’ which created a nightmare for editing. I guess at least poor old Ursula wasn’t shivering or drinking tea all the time.

For me, each new manuscript seems to create its own new set of unconscious writing tics: Whether it be eye rolling or darkness falling, characters whose names all begin with ‘M’, or the repetition of a word like ‘hesitantly’…each time I finish a new draft, I have a whole new set of peculiarities to watch out for in my writing. (I guess at least I should be thankful I catch most of them during the revision process!).  I spend at least one round of editing looking out for these ‘tics’  and trying to weed out whatever strange repetition my brain may have chosen to insert this time round.

What about you? Are you aware of any habits, mannerisms or ‘tics’ (as I like to call them) that tend to show up or infect your writing? How do you weed them out?

Plot vs Situation

Posted on by

Jordan Dane

@JordanDane

clip_image001.jpg

 

This week I’m moving and in the middle of a major renovation in my new home. Needless to say I’ve been distracted, but Stephen King got me thinking about plot. He suggests writers should forget about plot and give more importance to “situation.”

Wow, that knocked me into next week. Imagine contriving an amazing situation for your characters to react to. One that comes to mind is the plot of a horror movie where vampires invade a small coastal village near the Bering Sea on the nothern tip of Alaska, where in winter, the sun never comes up. Yikes. Or a Battlestar Gallactica premise where earth is destroyed and what’s left of the human race is forced into ships to launch into space with nowhere go. The “situation” has legs. It may take writerly experience to know how to focus the multiple stories that can spring from that incredible situation, but what a great problem to have if your story comes wrapped in a great situation package.

Doesn’t it make you want to take the time to develop a great “situation” or conflict, rather than focusing on the mainstays of plot?

What do you think of King’s assertion that plot is separate from “the situation” premise? Does it have to be separate? Can a great situation be enhanced by the structure of plot, ot would that inhibit the free flow of an author’s creativity to develop the situation organically, by feel using natural storytelling abilities?

King’s notion really inspired me to think out of the box on how I develop story ideas. How about you? Is there room for both plot and situation? Is one more effective than the other for you? Can an author get complacent in method if the focus is purely on plot?

Are you still looking for an agent?

Posted on by

Given the ever changing landscaping of the publishing industry, I thought it might be timely to take a measure of how authors are changing their strategies and plans in response. Are they still seeking agency representation or aiming (straight off the bat) to go the Indie route? In the first ‘flush’ of Amazon’s kindle program many previously traditionally published authors went the so-called indie route – but now, especially if they’re with one of the many Amazon imprints, I wonder how many of them have simply traded a traditional publishing house for just a different publishing house (albeit, I assume, with better royalty rates). Perhaps ‘going it alone’ isn’t quite as easy as many authors had first hoped, and we do hear (from some quarters) of the difficulties inherent in the indie route (many of which are similarly experienced by authors with traditional publishers) – namely how to break through the ‘noise’ of millions of ebooks being released and available via the internet and other distribution networks.

So I wanted to get your feedback on whether, over the last year or so, you have changed your strategy for getting your work published and whether you think you still need (and seek) agency representation. Are you writers still sending out query letters by email? Do you continue to see the value in seeking representation and attempting the traditional publishing route, or have you already decided to go the indie route? And if so, in what form?

In short, what approach and/or plans do you have for the current book and publishing market? Do you still think agents are relevant or are you solely focusing on the indie approach to releasing your work?

Enquiring minds want to know!