Category Archives: writing craft

Dialogue That Kills It: Crafting Conversations Full of Suspense

Posted on by

By Jennifer Graeser Dornbush

_______________________

Hello all!  Before you dive into this blog I want to thank the Killzone for inviting me into the fold as a blogger. After such a warm reception last month, I am so honored and excited to be here and to get to know you all. Thanks for welcoming me!

____________________

Dialogue is where intention and motivation live.

Not in the gunshot.
Not in the dark alley.
Not even in the twist you’ve been saving for three chapters.

Suspense begins long before violence arrives — often in the quiet exchange of words between two people who desperately want to say what they mean, but don’t. Or can’t. Or shouldn’t.

In real life, we rarely say what we mean — especially when the stakes involve guilt, fear, shame, death, or discovery. We hesitate. We deflect. We contradict ourselves. We say nothing at all.

Your characters should do the same.

In suspense fiction, dialogue is where motive leaks, where truth fractures, and where readers begin to feel that something is very wrong — even before they understand why.

Let’s look at how dialogue works as a weapon, using examples from three of my novels, What Darkness Does and Frozen Lives and Last One Alive.

Dialogue as Combat — Not Conversation

New writers often treat dialogue as functional: delivering information, explaining a plot point, moving the story along.

But in suspense fiction, dialogue should never be neutral.

Every conversation is a contest.

In What Darkness Does, Emily Hartford’s conversations are rarely about what they appear to be on the surface. Early in the novel, when Nick reappears after being presumed dead, their exchanges sound restrained — almost polite — but the real conflict is boiling underneath.

“You don’t have to be here,” Nick said.

Emily crossed her arms. “You showed up. That doesn’t mean you get to stay.”

“I’m not asking for forgiveness.”

“Good,” she said. “Because I don’t have it to give.”

Nick wants permission.
Emily wants accountability.

No one explains the past.
No one names the trauma.

That emotional collision — not exposition — is where the tension lives.

The rule:
Two people enter the scene wanting different things.

Information.
Truth.
A lie.
Protection.
Dominance.
Approval.
Escape.

The dialogue isn’t about saying those wants out loud — it’s about defending them, disguising them, or attacking the other person’s position.

If no one is fighting for something in the exchange, the scene goes flat.

Subtext: The Engine of Suspense

The most dangerous dialogue isn’t what’s spoken.

It’s what’s avoided.

Subtext is the truth beneath the line — the thing the character cannot afford to say.

In Frozen Lives, one of the most chilling conversations involves a mother, Jo, carefully choosing her words in front of the man who has kidnapped them. On the surface, the exchange is domestic and calm, but underneath Jo needs her son’s obedience so they can survive.

“Sit down, Jeremiah,” she said evenly.

“I’m fine.”

She smiled. “I know. But I need you where I can see you.”

He hesitated — then sat.

Nothing overtly threatening is said.
No violence is named.

But control is absolute.

The smile contradicts the command.
The hesitation exposes fear.
Compliance seals the power dynamic.

That’s subtext.

In real forensic interviews, suspects rarely communicate cleanly. They answer the wrong question. They stall. They rush. They talk too much — or not enough. That same behavior should appear on the page.

To write strong subtext, ask yourself:

What would destroy this character if spoken aloud?
What truth are they circling but refusing to touch?
What are they protecting — themselves, someone else, or a secret?

Subtext isn’t cleverness.
Subtext is survival.

Power Struggles: Who Controls the Conversation?

Every suspenseful conversation is a negotiation of power.

Who’s leading?
Who’s resisting?
Who’s withholding?
Who’s pretending everything is normal?

In Frozen Lives, power shifts constantly in conversations between Emily Hartford and law enforcement. The badge carries authority — but Emily counters with medical expertise and evidence.

“You’re speculating,” he said.

Emily didn’t raise her voice. “I’m interpreting evidence.”

“That’s not your call.”

“It is when the body contradicts your theory.”

No raised voices.
No melodrama.

Just control — line by line.

Elsewhere in the novel, a predator maintains dominance not by yelling, but by setting rules, assigning seats, and speaking calmly while making consequences clear. The dialogue is polite. Controlled. Domestic.

That contrast — civility layered over threat — creates unbearable tension.

Common power moves in dialogue include:

• refusing to answer
• changing the subject
• overexplaining
• clipped replies
• strategic silence
• redirecting blame
• making someone else emotionally responsible

Dialogue becomes a tug-of-war — and the reader feels every pull.

Silence as a Blade

One of the most underused tools in dialogue is silence.

A pause.
A refusal to answer.
A single sentence — followed by nothing.

In What Darkness Does, I built an emotionally devastating moment by having characters reveal inner feelings with reactions, not words.

“We found her,” Emily said.

He stared at her.

“She didn’t suffer.”

He nodded once.

And said nothing.

Silence forces the reader to lean in.
It gives weight to what can’t be explained, justified, or undone.

Use silence at moments of revelation, moral conflict, or emotional rupture. Sometimes the most honest response is no response at all.

Let Characters Talk Like Humans — Not Narrators

If your dialogue feels too neat, too helpful, or too polished, you’re probably writing in author-voice.

Real people under stress:

ramble
contradict themselves
misremember
avoid specifics
go off on irrelevant tangents
blurt details accidentally
freeze

In Frozen Lives, locals give conflicting accounts — not because they’re lying outright, but because trauma, loyalty, and fear shape how they remember events.

“I mean, maybe it was him. Or someone like him. I didn’t really see his face — it was dark. But I felt like I knew him.”

Emily waited.

“You know how it is around here,” he added quickly.

The vagueness is the clue.
The emotional justification gives him away.

Let people be messy.
Let them be evasive.
Let them sound human.

Dialogue That Answers — Then Unsettles

Great suspense dialogue gives answers — and then disputes them.

In What Darkness Does, witnesses describe the same person in incompatible ways.

“He was polite,” one woman said.

“He scared the hell out of me,” another insisted.

“No,” a third said quietly. “He wanted us calm.”

Each account feels sincere.
Each is incomplete.

The truth becomes scattered across perspectives, forcing the reader to assemble meaning from contradiction.

When dialogue ends, the reader should feel less certain — not more.

Dialogue as Psychological Fingerprinting

Every character has a linguistic signature:

  • vocabulary
  • rhythm
  • emotional control
  • education
  • trauma response

Emily Hartford speaks with clinical precision — even when emotionally compromised. Grieving families speak in fragments. Rural characters protect themselves with understatement. Antagonists shift tone depending on who they’re speaking to — a tell in itself.

When Emily delivers information connected to a death investigation, her language tightens instinctively:

“We found her,” Emily said.

He stared at her.

“She didn’t suffer.”

He nodded once.

And said nothing.

There’s no elaboration.
 No emotional framing.
 No softening.

In other investigative moments, Emily’s speech remains just as contained — precise, bounded by what can be proven:

“There are no defensive wounds.”

“The injuries occurred around the time of death.”

“Cause of death is consistent with blunt force trauma.”

She names facts.
 She separates what happened from how it’s interpreted.
 She anchors herself to evidence.

Contrast that with the people receiving the truth:

“She didn’t—”

“Are you saying she was alone?”

“I just want to understand.”

Their dialogue fractures. Emily’s does not.

That contrast is the fingerprint.

People reveal themselves through how they speak — especially when they’re trying not to.

Put Characters Under Pressure — Then Make Them Talk

Dialogue is deadliest when someone is cornered.

Under pressure, people:

●      lash out

●      repeat themselves

●      say too much

●      say nothing

●      let something slip they meant to bury

In Frozen Lives, as the truth surrounding the crime rises toward the surface, conversations sharpen. Politeness erodes. Even small lines carry threat because the cost of speaking wrong is so high.

In Last One Alive, pressure surfaces most clearly in intimate conversations — especially between Solange and her husband — where the stakes are personal long before they’re criminal.

When Solange pushes for answers, the dialogue doesn’t open up. It closes ranks.

“Why are you asking me that?”

“Because you didn’t answer the question.”

Deflection comes first.

Later, when the pressure tightens:

“I told you what happened.”

“You told me something,” she said. “Not everything.”

And when evasion no longer works, honesty arrives stripped of comfort:

“You wouldn’t understand.”

“Try me.”

No confession.
 No tidy explanation.
 Just resistance, reframing, and control.

The characters aren’t fighting over facts — they’re fighting over who gets to define reality. Under pressure, dialogue turns strategic. Words become shields. Or weapons.

If you want dialogue that kills, trap your character — then force the conversation.

Investigate Your Dialogue Like a Detective

Before finalizing a scene, ask:

Who held power?
Who gained information?
Who lost control?
Where did the truth leak?
Where did the lie begin?
What emotion slipped through?
What was avoided?
Who walked away winning?

If you can’t answer those questions, the dialogue needs another pass.

Your Deadly Dialogue Checklist

✔️ Do characters want different things?
 ✔️ Is subtext doing the heavy lifting?
 ✔️ Does power shift?
 ✔️ Is silence used deliberately?
 ✔️ Does the dialogue reveal psychology?
 ✔️ Does someone lie or tell a half-truth?
 ✔️ Does it feel messy and human?
 ✔️ Does it raise more questions than it answers?
 ✔️ Does it leave the reader unsettled?

If yes — your dialogue is alive, dangerous, and driving the story forward.

Dialogue is where tension lives.
 People lie.
 People protect themselves.
 People hide their wounds.
 People weaponize their words.

Let your characters spar — through what they say, what they don’t, and what they’re terrified will be discovered.

Jennifer Dornbush is an author, screenwriter, and forensic specialist who brings crime stories to life with authenticity and heart. With a background rooted in real-world forensics and a passion for crafting unforgettable mysteries, Jennifer offers readers and viewers a front-row seat to the intersection of science, justice, and human nature. Jennifer’s crime expertise has made her a sought-after speaker, consultant, and educator. Through her webinars and master courses, Jennifer guideswriters in melding suspenseful storytelling with forensic realism to the screen and page. Meet her at www.jenniferdornbush.com

Putting Writing First For a Few Days: Rainforest Writers Retreat

Posted on by

Lake Quinault

On the first Wednesday of this month I went to my annual writers retreat, held annually at Lake Quinault in Washington State’s magnificent Quinault Rainforest on the Olympic Peninsula. As usual, when I returned, I was bubbling with enthusiasm for writing (okay, even more enthusiasm than usual).

When I mentioned having gone in a comment here at TKZ, our own Debbie Burke asked if I would be sharing my experience in a post here. I’d written briefly about it three years ago in the intro to a Words of Wisdom post, but that didn’t do the experience justice.

Why attend a writing retreat? What might you get out of attending?

Writers retreats can give you the opportunity to truly put your writing first for a short period of time. I’m not talking about making your writing a priority, but rather going someplace—even if it’s with your writers group to a local coffee shop for an afternoon or a beach house for a long weekend—and immersing yourself in your writing and writing craft and letting go of day-to-day concerns.

Retreats can also be a powerful way to kickstart your writing, both for beginners starting out, or for an experienced writer looking to change up their writing, or return to it after an absence, long or short.

They can provide opportunities to learn writing craft, build community, and of course, time to focus on writing and provide a place to write, either alone or in a group setting, sometimes called parallel play and also known as body doubling where you leverage the presence of other writers engaged in the same activity. Rainforest writers has been called an “accelerant” because the retreat’s isolation, community and writing focus can accelerate your development as a writer.

***

Retreat organizer Patrick Swenson with Resort manager Ian Strait looking over his shoulder.

Rainforest Writers is run by my friend Patrick Swenson, himself an author as well as the publisher of Fairwood Press, who taught high school English classes for 39 years before retiring in 2024. Patrick has been putting on Rainforest since 2007, when it was a single five day session. Now there are four sessions, one after the other, beginning in late February and into mid-March. Each begins on a Wednesday afternoon and ends at noon on the following Sunday.

The retreat takes place at the Rainforest Resort Village, located on the south shore of Lake Quinault. Rooms are available at the Village inn, the Parkside suites, or the Fireplace cabins. There are no phones in any of the rooms, and cell service can be spotty. There is internet, which is a bit iffy in the Village inn, but quite accessible in the Salmon House restaurant and lounge, as well as the General Store.

The retreat fee is $200, which includes breakfast at the Salmon House Thursday through Sunday. Patrick provides sandwich fixings for lunch Thursday and Friday, while long-time attendees Deborah and Chuck put on a soup lunch on Saturday which nearly everyone attends. You’re “on your own” for dinner, which for me means the Salmon House, except for Thursday night when a group dinner is held in the restaurant, which is a wonderful opportunity to mingle with other writers over food.

Thirty plus writers attend each session, with many returning each year, often to the same session they attended in the past. I began going in 2019, Session 2, and did Session 2 every following year through 2025, except for the Pandemic year of 2021 when there was an online retreat instead. This year I decided to switch things up and attend Session 3, which was held from Wednesday March 4 through Sunday March 8.

Most of the attendees write science fiction, fantasy or horror, but there are a few crime dogs like myself, as well as paranormal romance writers, memoir writers and historical novelists. Writers range from novices to professional authors. Authors are a mix of traditionally published and self-published.

I’ve known writers to rent a cabin for their Rainforest session, and hole up and simply write as much as possible, which is a perfectly fine way to spend the retreat if you so choose.

However, for most of us, the writing retreat is also about community. Informal conversations about writing, the writing life and publishing, as well as writing alongside each other, at times in the Salmon House lounge, which has a lovely view of Lake Quinault and the forested hills beyond. The lake teems with water fowl—Canadian geese, loons, mergansers, ducks and more. Bald eagles also visit the lake. It’s an amazing backdrop which can provide a place to gaze between writing sprints.

***

Early bird writing in the lounge.

There are two organized group writing sessions in the lounge each day—the early bird writers from 6-9AM and the night owls from 9PM to after midnight, and then there’s informal sessions at the other times.

In previous years, like a crazy person, I burned the candle at both ends and was an early bird and a night owl. in both groups.

This year sanity prevailed  and I went with being an early bird, arriving just after the start at 6AM and writing until breakfast at 9AM each morning. The past three retreats I brought mystery novels to revise but this year I came with a new mystery novel I wanted to begin drafting, which is an entirely different energy. I also wrote some micro-fiction as a break from my frenzied novel drafting.

I also wrote in the afternoons following lunch, sometimes continuing in the lounge, other times back in my lakeview room at the Village inn, and often did a session in the early evening. Over the course of five days I wrote 19,339 words, which included 2100 words on the opening of a longer short story. The vast majority was on Last Seen Shelving, the fourth Meg Booker library cozy.

In the spirit of both fun competition and group effort, Patrick puts up a white-board each session where writers can track their session word counts, and also any editing they do. The person with the largest word count at the end of each session wins a prize, as well as first pick in the raffle, while the second and third place finishers get to pick a prize ahead of the drawing. Patrick also tallies the total words written by all writers in a session, which gives a bit of a team effort feel to the word count.

This session I ended up in third place. My normal writing pace is 1000-1500 words a day, going over 2000 words later in the novel as the story careens toward climax. At Rainforest I averaged nearly 5000 words a day, keeping in mind that I only had two plus hours on Sunday. On Thursday and Friday I wrote around 6000 words each day. However, by Saturday afternoon I ran out of gas and had to take a long break.

I’m not a binge writer by nature, I’m only one when forced by a deadline. Instead, I normally work at a steady pace. I tend to binge write at Rainforest.

The last time I drafted fiction at Rainforest was in 2022, when I wrote over 15,000 words worth of short stories. This session reminded me I can extend myself but just like working out extra hard, I end up needing to recover. Since I’ve returned from Rainforest, my writing pace has been much slower, well under a thousand words each day as I recharge, but I haven’t missed a day. I went into Rainforest not having drafted regularly for a while, and came out of it with a building streak, and yes, I am still tracking my word count.

***

Another important aspect of Rainforest is in providing opportunities to learn about various aspects of writing and the writing life.

Each session has hour-long presentations at 11AM Thursday, Friday and Saturday. When I started there were also presentations at 3PM on Thursday and Friday, but Patrick felt that broke up the day too much and wanted to give writers a more unbroken stretch of time for writing, editing etc. between lunch and dinner.

In the past I’ve attended presentations on characters, sensory detail, pacing, POV, action scenes, writing in more than one genre among others. I usually make time to attend at least a couple of the presentations.

Last year I was a presenter, for the first time, giving a mini-workshop on self-publishing. My audience was engaged and asked some terrific questions.

This year I attended all three presentations.

Thursday, author Kate Ristau gave a talk on the classic idea of “throwing rocks at your characters,” which looked at what your character is trying to achieve, and what obstacles and complications arise as she struggles to reach her goal. Kate gave us an exercise that asked about how the objects in our story and how we might externalize our characters’ wants and needs in the form of the objects.

For instance, in my fourth mystery, the library itself represents a place of fulfillment for my hero and a place where she can make a difference, which is a need she has.

Friday’s presentation was “Project Management Tools for Sustainable Writing Habits” by J.B. Kish and Remy Nakamura and proved to be insightful and informative.

J.B. and Remy provided us with worksheets, first looking at our expectations about “our ideal writer selves,” such as how many words per day does my ideal writer self produce, how often, when, how easily do I enter a state of focus, how confident is my ideal self, how long does it take them to finish a novel draft.

They discussed “compassionate productivity, looking at sustainably being able to reach “real outcomes” vs the ideal ones, the importance of mindfulness when it comes to your own process, challenges and life situation, and the idea of incremental, forward progress.

Accountability can be very helpful, especially when there are consequences for doing the work—rewards if you achieved it, or withholding a reward if you do not, such as not opening a bottle of fine Scotch you’d purchased until you finish the project.

“Touch the work everyday,” even if it’s only to jot down a few words on the draft, write a note or spend a few moments considering what comes next.

Saturday Dean Wells presented “The Ending Was There All Along,” how to breakdown the decision tree of your ending. Dean began by stating that writer’s block is noise: your creative side is stymied by your critical side. His solution is “structured problem solving.” Drill down through the noise. It’s a back-to-basics approach. He counseled using your analytical side to engage in dialogue with your creative side. Ask your creative side questions about what you want as a writer in this story.

At essence, story is character + setting + problem. The character either succeeds or fails.

Which do you want as a storyteller?

He uses a logic tree. Identify the problem. Does it result in success or failure? If success it can be simply happily ever after or come at a cost. If the latter, that can range from the personal to collateral damage. What does this look like? Personal can be self, loved one, friend etc.

This leads us to before the ending and our hero’s fear—what is your character afraid of losing?

In order to overcome this the hero must be willing to sacrifice, which Dean feels is the single most important aspect of your hero. They take a little leap of faith in order to solve the problem.

He broke down Act III into Climax, Resolution and Denouement and noted its importance, the untying of the story not. For me as a cozy mystery writer, it’s the granting of the boon of justice which restores the integrity of the community where the story takes place.

He gave examples from films such as Star Wars: A New Hope and the 1972 western The Cowboys, starring John Wayne and Bruce Dern.

Part of Dean Well’s decision tree on endings.

***

The Cabin party is held Saturday night, in Cabin 6,  Patrick’s cabin, where you can drop by anytime during the day during your session for a snack or a beverage, and often an informal conversation about writing. Cabin parties are another opportunity to meet and talk with your fellow attendees.

Every session wraps up Sunday morning, at 11 in the lounge, where the Rainforest inspiration award. Every attendee votes for the attendee who proved most inspirational during their session.

In Session 3 this year, that was J.B. Kish, the co-presenter of project management for writers (his fellow presenter Remy Nakamura won the inspiration award a previous year). The inspiration award winner will have their name engraved and put on a retreat plaque commemorating all the winners.

After this, the session word count winners were announced, with me coming in at third behind Cyrus at second, with 23,000 plus words, and Rebekah at first with a staggering 32,000 words written. It was her first Rainforest and she was stunned to have won.

A raffle for donated prizes—everything from books and music to coffee and tea mugs to fine wine followed, and then we said our goodbyes and we began our drives back to our respective homes.

Another session had flown by, giving us a chance to put writing first for a few days, concentrate on a project, learn a few things, and perhaps make new friends as well as reconnect with old ones. I always return home with increased creativity and enthusiasm.

Crow at Lake Quinault playing the part of mystery’s iconic raven.

 

Resources:

Rainforest Writers: https://rainforestwriters.com/index.html

Making retreats part of your writing life: https://writershelpingwriters.net/2026/01/writing-retreats/

***

Have you attended a writing retreat, or would you like to? What do you get out of retreat, or what would you like to, if you’ve never been on one before?

Let’s Talk Turkey #WriteTip

Posted on by

I moved into my new place last week. Hence why you haven’t seen me in the comment section. It took two weeks to pack. I’m now unpacking. I found a cozy little abode on the New Hampshire seacoast, near the Massachusetts border. It’s the best of both worlds — two minutes from anything I might need, yet a quiet country setting with plenty of wildlife.

As I gazed out my kitchen window for the first time, five huge male turkeys stood sentinel in the yard. Soon, twenty-five more joined them to socialize, feast, and play. The original five Toms guard the property all day. There’s also an adorable opossum and three albino skunks — stunning all white fur — who come nightly to eat alongside the resident stray cat. All four share the same bowl.

Why can’t humans put aside their differences like animals can?

For my fellow crow lovers out there, a murder of crows arrived on day two. Or Poe and the gang followed me. Sure sounds like Poe’s voice, but I can’t be certain until I set up their feeding spot and take a closer look. My murder has white dots, each in different spots, which helps me tell them apart. Plus, Poe has one droopy wing.

As I watched the five Toms this morning, it reminded me of a post I’d written back in 2017 (time flies on TKZ, doesn’t it?). So, I thought I’d revamp that post a bit, and tweak for our pantser friends.

***

Clare’s recent post got me thinking about craft and how, as we write, the story inflates like a Tom turkey. If you think about it long enough and throw in a looming deadline, Tom Turkey and story structure have a lot in common.

Stay with me. I promise it’ll make sense, but I will ask you to take one small leap of faith — I need you to picture Tom Turkey as the sum of his parts, constructed by craft. And yes, this light bulb blazed on over the Thanksgiving holiday. We are now having spiral ham for Christmas dinner.

But I digress.

Story beats build Tom’s spine. Think of each milestone as vertebrae. Pantsers, let the story unfold as it flows. You can always check the beat placement after the drafting stage.

The ribs that extend from Tom’s spine liken to the equal parts that expand our beats and tell us how our characters should react before, during, and after the quest.

Broken into four equal parts, 25% percent each, this is the dramatic arc. It’s a natural progression that many writers do instinctually. If you want to check your work after the drafting stage, pantsers, the dramatic arc should look like this…

  • Setup (Page 1 – 25% mark): Introduce protagonist, hook the reader, setup First Plot Point through foreshadowing, stakes, and establish empathy (not necessarily likability) for the MC.
  • Response (25% – 50% mark): The MC’s reaction to the new goal/stakes/obstacles revealed by the First Plot Point. MC doesn’t need to be heroic yet. They retreat, regroup, and have doomed attempts at reaching their goal. Also include a reminder of antagonistic forces at work.
  • Attack (50% – 75% mark): Midpoint information/awareness causes the MC to change course in how to approach the obstacles; the hero is now empowered with information on how to proceed, not merely reacting anymore.
  • Resolution (75% – The End): MC summons the courage, inner strength, and growth to find a solution to overcome inner obstacles and conquer the antagonistic force. All new information must have been referenced, foreshadowed, or already in play by 2nd Plot Point or we’re guilty of deus ex machina.

Tom Turkey is beginning to take shape.

Characterization adds meat to his bones, and conflict-driven sub-plots supply tendons and ligaments. When we layer in dramatic tension in the form of a need, goal, quest, and challenges to overcome, Tom’s skin forms and thickens.

With obstacle after obstacle, and inner and outer conflict, Tom strengthens enough to sprout feathers. At the micro-level, MRUs (Motivation-Reaction-Units) — for every action there’s a reaction — establish our story rhythm and pace. They also help heighten and maintain suspense. If you remember every action has a reaction, MRUs come naturally to many writers. Still good to check on the first read through.

MRUs fluff Tom Turkey’s feathers. He even grew a beak!

Providing a vicarious experience, our emotions splashed across the page, makes Tom fan his tail-feathers. The rising stakes add to Tom’s glee (he’s a sadist), and he prances for a potential mate. He believes he’s ready to score with the ladies. Tom may actually get lucky this year.

Then again, we know better. Don’t we, dear writers? Poor Tom is still missing a few crucial elements to close the deal.

By structuring our scenes — don’t groan, pantsers! — Tom grew an impressive snood. See it dangling over his beak? The wattle under his chin needs help, though. Hens are shallow creatures. 😉 Quick! We need a narrative structure.

Narrative structure refers to the way in which a story is organized and presented to the reader. It includes the plot, subplot, characters, setting, and theme, as well as techniques and devices used by the author to convey these elements.

Now, Tom looks sharp. What an impressive bird. Watch him prance, full and fluffy, head held high, tail feathers fanned in perfect formation.

Uh-oh. Joe Hunter sets Tom in his rifle scope. We can’t let him die before he finds a mate! But how can we save him? We’ve already given him all the tools he needs, right?

Well, not quite.

Did we choose the right point of view to tell our story? If we didn’t, Tom could wind up on a holiday table surrounded by drooling humans in bibs. We can’t let that happen! Nor can we afford to lose the reader before we get a chance to dazzle ’em.

Tom needs extra oomph — aka Voice. Without it, Joe Hunter will murder poor Tom.

Voice is an elusive beast for new writers because it develops over time. To quote JSB:

It comes from knowing each character intimately and writing with the “voice” that is a combo of character and author and craft on the page.

That added oomph makes your story special. No one can write like you. No one. Remember that when self-doubt or imposter syndrome creeps in.

If Tom hopes to escape Joe Hunter’s bullet, he needs wings in the form of context. Did we veer outside readers’ expectations for the genre we’re writing in? Did we give Tom a heart and soul by subtly infusing theme? Can we boil down the plot to its core story, Tom’s innards? What about dialogue? Does Tom gobble or quack?

Have we shown the three dimensions of character to add oxygen to Tom’s lungs? You wouldn’t want to be responsible for suffocating Tom to death, would you?

  • 1st Dimension of Character: The best version of who they are; the face the character shows to the world
  • 2nd Dimension of Character:  The person a character shows to friends and family
  • 3rd Dimension of Character:  The character’s true character. If a fire breaks out in a crowded theater, will they help others or elbow their way to the exit?

Lastly, Tom needs a way to wow the ladies. Better make sure our prose sings. If we don’t, Tom might die of loneliness. Do we really want to be responsible for that? To be safe, let’s review our word choices, sentence variations, paragraphing, white space, grammar, and how we string words together to ensure Tom lives a full and fruitful life.

Don’t forget to rewrite and edit. If readers love Tom, he and his new mate may bring chicks (sequels or prequels) into the world, and we, as Tom’s creator, have the honor of helping them flourish into full-fledged turkeys.

Aww… Tom’s story has a happy ending now. Good job, writers!

For fun, choose a name for Tom’s mate. Winner gets bragging rights.

How to Learn to Write Novels That Sell

Posted on by

by James Scott Bell
@jamesscottbell

I love the writing craft. I love it the way Adrian Newey loves race car engines. I love popping the hood, breaking out the tools, getting greasy, figuring out ways to build better fiction.

Maybe that’s because in the early years I had to work hard to make sense of it. I was not one of these happy geniuses that has the knack from the get-go. When I made my decision to be a writer, I found instant joy in setting words on the page. The only thing was, those words were not connecting with readers. People who looked at my stuff would say things like, “It’s just not working for me.” Or, “There’s something missing.”

So I doubled down on my study of the craft. I went to my favorite used bookstore and bought an armload of Grisham, Koontz, and King, and didn’t just read them; I studied them. I marked up the pages and made notes in the margins.

Ah, I see what he’s doing here!

This makes me want to turn the page!

I really like this character.

I bought books every month from the Writer’s Digest Book Club. One was Jack Bickham’s Writing Novels That Sell. The chapter on scene and sequel set off Roman candles in my head—an epiphany that I knew would change forever how I approached fiction.

I gave the next thing I wrote to one of my friendly readers, and this time he said, “Now you’ve got it.”

I felt like Orville Wright gliding over the sandy flatlands of Kitty Hawk as brother Wilbur waved his arms, shouting, “It works! It works!”

So if someone asks me what the best way is to learn how to write novels that sell, I’d put it this way:

Write a novel

I’m not being coy here. Write it the best way you know how. Don’t stop for any critiques, self or group. Finish the dang thing.

Then put it aside for three weeks. Print out a hard copy read it as if you were a busy Manhattan acquisitions editor looking at a manuscript on the subway. Have this question in the back of your mind: When am I tempted to stop reading? Mark those spots. But don’t do any editing.

When you’ve finished, make notes to yourself about the seven critical success factors of fiction as they show in your book: plot, structure, characters, scenes, dialogue, voice, meaning. How are you in those areas? Be ruthlessly objective. A good beta reader can help. If you want to appeal to actual readers someday and convince them to part with their discretionary income, you need to know if there’s anything disrupting the fictive dream. Quite often you’re too close to the book to see it. Maybe even a lot of it. But don’t despair, because you can…

…Get better at writing novels

I got good at plot, structure and dialogue (because I’d spent a couple of years working hard to figure those areas out). I got published. Then I got a multi-book contract and had the good fortune to work with a truly great fiction editor. In his first editorial letter to me he told me what I needed to hear, not what I wanted to hear. I groused for an hour, then resolved not to have a chip on my shoulder. I followed his advice and lo and behold my books started to pop up on bestseller lists.

So, new writer, get yourself rolling on two tracks—writing and study.

It’s NaNoWriMo month, and all over the globe writers are aiming to produce a 50k novel in 30 days. That’s pressure, especially with Thanksgiving in there. The main benefit of this exercise is seeing how many words you can write if you set your mind to it.

So figure out how many words you can comfortably write in a week, considering your life situation. Up that figure by 10% and make that your weekly goal.

That’s the writing part.

Add to that a systematic study the craft. There are craft books and courses (I modestly mention). Just as you write to a quota, study to a quota. In 35 years of wanting to do this, not a week has gone by when I haven’t thought about, read about, or made notes about the craft of writing.

Does this sound like too much work?

Does a wannabe golfer just go out and start hacking away (also known as killing gophers)? Or does he get some basic instruction and put in hours of practice?

There’s an old story about a golfer approaching a hole with a big water hazard. He wonders if he should tee up a brand new ball and risk losing it, or use one of his old balls just in case. So he tees up the old one.

A voice from the sky thunders, “Use the new ball!”

Whoa. Obediently, he tees up the new one.

The voice says, “Take a practice swing!”

He steps back and takes a practice swing.

The voice says, “Use the old ball!”

You have to practice a proper and repeatable swing, friends, otherwise you just ingrain bad habits.

Readers don’t spend money to read your bad habits.

So:

Write a novel.

Remove all shoulder chips.

Learn.

Write another novel.

Keep learning.

Write like you’re in love.

Edit like you’re in charge.

Keep writing.

Anything you want to add?

The Secret Brew of Page-Turning Fiction

Posted on by

by James Scott Bell
@jamesscottbell

In my Super Structure system, I have a signpost scene called “Trouble Brewing.” As I explain in the book:

Somewhere around the middle of Act I is a scene where we get a whiff of big trouble to come. It’s not the major confrontation, because we’re not yet in Act II. But we can sense that it’s out there, brewing.

It’s a portent.

But it’s not only here that trouble should brew. It really needs to be bubbling throughout the book.

We all know that conflict is the lifeblood of plot. Without conflict, there is no testing of character, and it’s the test that reveals true the essence behind the mask. We wouldn’t give two rips about that whiny Scarlett if she didn’t get hit with the Civil War. Dorothy would still be down on the farm if it weren’t for the twister dumping her in a land of witches, Munchkins, a talking scarecrow, and trees that throw apples.

The testing should be ongoing, and each major scene should be a boat over troubled waters.

Back at the beginning of my serious pursuit of writing, I went to my favorite used bookstore and stocked up on paperbacks by King, Koontz, and Grisham. I started reading with a pencil in my hand, marking up places where I observed the craft at work.

One thing I noticed is how they would end chapters or scenes in a way that made me want to turn the page. I marked these places with the notation ROP (for Read-On Prompt).

Thus, you can end a scene with trouble happening (a guy with a gun comes through the door) or about to happen (the doorknob is turning). But it can also be reflected in the character’s thoughts.

In Kiss Me, Deadly, when Mike Hammer returns to his apartment after being sapped, questioned by the Feds, and told to lay off trying to figure out who killed the girl that was in his car, he sees his place has been searched. He figures it’s by the Feds, but also somebody else. The scene ends with a trouble-brewing ROP:

The smoke that was trouble started to boil up around me again. You couldn’t see it and you couldn’t smell it, but it was there. I started whistling again and picked up the .45.

Trouble as metaphorical smoke shows up at the end of a scene from Lawrence Block’s A Ticket to the Boneyard. Scudder is protecting Elaine, a prostitute who is the target of a serial killer. Turns out Scudder is also a target. The killer has left a message on Elaine’s machine:

“I was thinking of you earlier. But it’s not your turn yet. You have to wait your turn, you know. I’m saving you for last.” A pause, but a brief one. “I mean second-last. He’ll be the last.”

That was all he had to say, but the tape ran another twenty or thirty seconds before he broke the connection. Then the answering machine clicked and whirred and readied itself to handle incoming calls again, and we sat there in a silence that hung in the air like smoke.

In The Big Kill, Hammer sees a man in a bar with a bundle (that turns out to be a baby), crying. He hates to see a guy cry like that. Suddenly, the guy kisses the baby and races outside, leaving the baby behind. Mike follows and sees the guy down the street, just as gunshots from a car mow him down.

Why? Hammer, as always, has to find the answer (especially as he’s now the de facto guardian of the baby).

Later, he’s going over the facts of the case with his friend, police captain Pat Chambers. Chambers reels off his theory, and it makes sense on the surface. But Mike has doubts. The scene ends:

“You’re a crazy bastard,” Pat said.

“So I’ve been told. Does the D.A. want to see me?”

“No, you were lucky it broke so fast.”

“See you around then, Pat. I’ll keep in touch with you.”

“Do that,” he said. I think he was laughing at me inside. I wasn’t laughing though. There wasn’t a damn thing to laugh about when you saw a guy cry, kiss his kid, then go out and make him an orphan.

Like I said, the whole thing stunk.

To high heaven.

We want to know why it stinks, too. So we read on.

Try this: look at all your scene endings. See if you can add some form of trouble—brewing or happening. I’ve also found a ROP can be produced when you cut the last line or two of the ending. It leaves a sense that something is not quite resolved.

Which is what you want, right up to the page-turning end.

Three Things That Can Sink Your Novel

Posted on by

by James Scott Bell
@jamesscottbell

We had quite a deluge recently in L.A. The good news is we’re out of drought conditions. The bad news is that mudslides and traffic accidents had their predictable increases. Also, a 40-foot sinkhole on a major street opened like the jaws of a subterranean monster, swallowing two vehicles. As reported on local news Channel 5:

A mother and her teen daughter had to be rescued and taken to the hospital Monday night after their Nissan, along with a pickup truck, fell inside the sinkhole.

The passengers in the pickup were able to escape their vehicle uninjured, but the truck landed on top of the Nissan, trapping the woman and the teen.

It took first responders with the Los Angeles Fire Department, Los Angeles County Fire and Ventura Fire about an hour to pull the mother and daughter from the sinkhole in a dangerous rescue operation.

“It was a dynamic rescue,” LAFD Cpt. Erik Scott said. “The cars were shifting, moving. Firefighters did an outstanding job with the calculated rescue. We lowered ladders and ultimately did what we call a high angle rope rescue where we had our big aerial ladder truck, lower a firefighter on a rope, secure a harness, lift those people to safety.”

Here’s what that looked like (click to enlarge):

Thank God no one was seriously injured. And since I can’t turn off my metaphor machine, I found myself thinking about another kind of sinkhole—fiction blunders that can bring the reading experience to a dead stop. Such as:

The Tiresome Lead

A quirky, even interesting, Lead character can quickly wear out his welcome if he goes unchallenged by a little thing I like to call plot. Unless that character faces some trouble, and soon, I’m not likely to wait around. (Sorry fans of A Confederacy of Dunces, but I tried three times to get into this book, and the over-quirked and obnoxious Lead who just roams around whining and jabbering sank me every time.)

Think about another annoying Lead—Scarlett O’Hara. When we first meet her, she’s sitting on her porch flirting with the Tarleton twins. A couple pages of this and we’re almost ready to move on, until…a disturbance. The first sign of trouble for Scarlett—Ashley is going to marry Melanie! That leads to her plan to corner Ashley at the barbecue at Twelve Oaks, which becomes an argument, which leads Ashley storming out, thence to Scarlett throwing a china bowl at the fireplace…at which the voice of Rhett Butler comes from the sofa, “This is too much.”

Three pages later, Charles Hamilton tells her the war has started, and in his clumsy way asks her to marry him. To spite Ashley, she says yes. Hoo boy, is she ever going to have trouble now.

JSB Sinkhole Avoidance Technique #1: Give a disturbance on the opening page, even a subtle one, to shake the Lead out of her placid existence. Then start to pile on the troubles.

The Distant Doorway

It is not until the Lead is forced into the confrontation of Act 2 that full engagement is realized and the main plot begins. Dorothy has immediate trouble with Miss Gulch, who takes Toto away. But it’s not until the twister dumps her in Oz that the story proper begins.

JSB Sinkhole Avoidance Technique #2: Push your Lead through the Doorway of No Return (what some call Plot Point 1) no later than 1/5 into the book (the 1/4 mark is more applicable to screenplays). In GWTW the war breaks out at the 20% mark. (I’m amused at how Margaret Mitchell keeps things moving. The first chapter after passing through the Doorway of No Return begins: Within two weeks Scarlett had become a wife, and within two months more she was a widow. So much for Charles! Let’s move on to Rhett.)

Stakes Less Than Death

I’ve written here before about death stakes. Unless the conflict is a life-and-death struggle, the plot will not engage as it should.

Now, there are three kinds of death. Physical (an obvious one for thrillers), professional, and psychological. Your novel needs one of these as primary. The others can be added below the surface.

For example, Harry Bosch faces all three at one time or another in the Michael Connelly series. I would argue that the primary in most of the books is psychological. For Bosch, his employment as a cop is often on the line (professional) but he is obsessed with cold cases and seemingly “unimportant” victims. “Everybody counts or nobody counts,” he tells a police psychologist in The Last Coyote. “That’s it. It means I bust my ass to make a case whether it’s a prostitute or the mayor’s wife. That’s my rule.” Why? Because his mother, a prostitute, was murdered when he was eleven, and the case went unsolved. To keep from dying inside (psychological death) Bosch gives his all to the forgotten victims.

JSB Sinkhole Avoidance Technique #3: Brainstorm all three types of death for your Lead. Not all may apply, but it’s a good exercise. For example, in a cozy mystery professional (or vocational) death for the sleuth is usually the primary. Miss Marple is faced with a seemingly intractable mystery. Usually there’s not someone out trying to kill her (though maybe that was in a book or two, I don’t know). You, perhaps, might find it a nice way to up the stakes in your cozy.

Avoiding speed bumps, potholes, and sinkholes is part of our craft. And if I may offer a commercial to help in this regard, consider 27 Fiction Writing Blunders – And How Not To Make Them and Plotman to the Rescue: A Troubleshooting Guide to Fixing Your Toughest Plot Problems. I’m here to help.

Any other sinkholes you spot in fiction?

And please drive safe, especially in the rain.

Those Pesky Pronouns

Posted on by

Those Pesky Pronouns
Terry Odell

PronounsHappy New Year everyone! Wishing you all a year that’s better than its recent predecessors.

Given it’s been a long, long time since I’ve been part of the “typical” workforce, a recent email signature had me scratching my head. Under the senders name was the line (he/him/his). I asked my daughter about this, since she’s more tuned into business communication, and she gave me the Mom, what rock did you just climb out from under look.

Now, I’m not totally oblivious to the change in gender pronouns. Anyone who’s had to fill out a form has seen the choices under ‘gender’ multiply. But I’d never seen it in an email signature. The rationale, I’ve been told, is that if everyone does it, those who are uncomfortable about declaring their pronouns will feel less conspicuous when they do. Am I going to add it to my email signature? I’m not sure. Most of my correspondence isn’t of the formal business variety. And, once you become aware of something you start to see it in many other places. (There’s a name for this. Points if you know what it is.) I did notice the host of a recent Zoom meeting included she/her/hers underneath her name. And I’ve since seen it added to Twitter names.

I’ve been dealing with confusing gender since I was in junior high school. My mom had no idea that girls and boys had different spellings for Terry, and I saw no reason to change. First day of seventh grade, I was assigned to a shop class (exclusive to boys back then). My math teacher called out my name and another one—Robin—and asked us to stand. I wondered what trouble I could have gotten into the first ten minutes of class. We stood, identified ourselves, and she smiled and said, “I just wanted to know if you were girls or boys.” Our English teacher used the Mars/Venus symbols in his roll sheet. Summer before my first year of college, I was invited to pledge a fraternity.

What does this mean for our writing? I’m not sure. Old habits die hard. I’d written the following in the current manuscript:

Ranch work came first, Frank reminded himself, and if there’d been an intruder on the ranch, he needed to find him.

My editor came back and asked if “him” should be “them.” I told her I was following the rules of grammar as I learned them. “An intruder” was singular and would take a singular pronoun.

She came back with “Yes. Either “him” or “them” is fine here. I thought maybe “them” would be better since they aren’t sure if it’s a man or woman. Your call.”

For the record, I’ve left it as “him”—for now. The book won’t be released until February 2nd, so I can waffle back and forth a while longer.

Using “them” or “their” as singular has been acceptable for a long time (Shakespeare and Jane Austen, among others, used them), but I’ve always tried to avoid the construction. It simply sounds “off” to me. I would pause at a sentence like, “Terry did well on their exam; they received an A.”

According to Dictionary.com, “their” is defined as:

A form of the possessive case of plural they used as an attributive adjective, before a noun: their home; their rights as citizens; their departure for Rome.

A form of the possessive case of singular they used as an attributive adjective, before a noun:

  1. (used to refer to a generic or unspecified person previously mentioned, about to be mentioned, or present in the immediate context): Someone left their book on the table. A parent should read to their child.
  2. (used to refer to a specific or known person previously mentioned, about to be mentioned, or present in the immediate context): I’m glad my teacher last year had high expectations for their students.
  3. (used to refer to a nonbinary or gender-nonconforming person previously mentioned, about to be mentioned, or present in the immediate context): My cousin Sam is bad at math, but their other grades are good.

A quick trip through the Google Machine revealed even more choices beyond She/Her/Hers, He/Him/His, and They/Them/Theirs. I’d never heard of Xe/Xem/Xyrs, Ze/Hir/Hirs, Ze/Zir/Zirs, or E/Em/Eirs.

What confuses me is why people need all three. If I know someone is a “she” isn’t it automatic that Her and Hers would follow? Or is that to be parallel with the less usual pronouns of Xe, Ze, and E?

But a signature in a business letter isn’t the same as using pronouns in fiction. I had a trans character in Deadly Fun, but nobody realized she wasn’t a woman, so from the point of view of my protagonist, he’d be using she/her/hers when referring to her. The character had left the story by the time Gordon discovered her history, so I never dealt with non-binary pronouns—not that I was aware of them when I wrote that book.

OK, TKZers. Your thoughts? As I said at the beginning of this post, I’ve been going through life with blinders on.

In the Crosshairs by Terry OdellNow available for pre-order. In the Crosshairs, Book 4 in my Triple-D Romantic Suspense series.

Changing Your Life Won’t Make Things Easier
There’s more to ranch life than minding cattle. After his stint as an army Ranger, Frank Wembly loves the peaceful life as a cowboy. Financial advisor Kiera O’Leary sets off to pursue her dream of being a photographer until a car-meets-cow incident forces a shift in plans. Instead, she finds herself in the middle of a mystery, one with potentially deadly consequences.

Terry Odell is an award-winning author of Mystery and Romantic Suspense, although she prefers to think of them all as “Mysteries with Relationships.”

Weather … or Not?

Posted on by

Weather … or Not?
Terry Odell

Weather in Novels

Image by David Mark from Pixabay

Not long ago, James Scott Bell talked about using setting to create conflict, and I mentioned including weather as well.Weather can be used to set the mood, be a portent of things to come. We attribute human emotions and behavior to the weather with things like whispering winds and sullen clouds. (Points if you know the term for this.)

There are those who say opening a book with the weather violates one of Elmore Leonard’s “rules” but the rest of that rule is often omitted. It says (bold text is mine):

“Never open a book with weather. If it’s only to create atmosphere, and not a character’s reaction to the weather, you don’t want to go on too long. The reader is apt to leaf ahead looking for people.”

For me, the weather should be woven in with the story, not become a “Stop Everything! I need to describe the weather” moment. (Something that bugs me with character descriptions as well.)

It’s a matter of Show, Don’t Tell. I write in Deep POV, and everything needs to be filtered through the characters’ senses.

I grew up in Los Angeles, where we had earthquakes every now and then, and wildfires in the canyons where we lived, but no real “weather.” Winter rains, which created the mudslides from the wildfires was pretty much the extent of things. Seasons were marked by the calendar more than the weather.

Then I moved to south Florida, where there were two seasons: Summer and February 3rd. But there was weather. Hot, humid, and lots of afternoon thunderstorms. In Miami, the difference between daytime high and nighttime low temperatures was a few degrees. Orlando, our next home, was slightly more bearable with a greater difference between day and night.

Now, I live in the mountains of Colorado, where we get four seasons, sometimes irrespective of the calendar.

My point? If I’m reading a book where I’m familiar with the weather, I need to see characters dealing with it. If someone’s racing down the streets of Miami in August, I want to see them sweat. Heck, if they’re meandering down the streets of Miami in August, I want to see them sweat.

Since I started this post by mentioning showing rather than telling, and what my feelings are about using weather, I should show you some examples from my own work.

From Seeing Red, my collection of short stories set in central Florida: The protagonist is James Kirkland, a homicide detective.

Nobody in central Florida survived without some kind of air-conditioning, but Red’s old place had window units that should have been replaced a decade ago. Combined with the loose panes on his jalousie windows, he might as well be living outside. Another reason I didn’t visit often. And with today’s forecast calling for the 90s in both degrees and humidity, not a place I wanted to be.

…

We agreed to meet back at Central Ops after lunch and spend some quality time with the murder book and white board, thereby avoiding being caught in the daily afternoon thunderstorms. I changed from my department-mandated suit into attire more appropriate for tromping through the non-air conditioned woods, although I did pack the suit into my go bag, where I always kept a change of clothes.

Another approach, and one I feel can be significant, is to show weather that goes against type. Every now and then, it gets cold in central Florida, as in freeze warnings cold. How do your characters deal with that?

Here, Detective Kirkland shows up at a murder scene and is talking to the ME, who speaks first.

“I’d say he’s been dead two, maybe three days, given the cold snap, the open window, and no heat.”

Hardly anyone in central Florida used heat. We had maybe ten days a year where the temperatures dipped below forty. Our luck to be in the midst of three of them, complete with freeze warnings.

…

The wind chill kicked in and I crossed my arms trying to keep warm. I wore the same slacks and sport coat I’d put on this morning when it was sunny.

Or, from Danger in Deer Ridge, a book set in the Colorado mountains

A gust of wind swirled through the lot. Scattered raindrops painted dots on the asphalt, interspersed with bouncing hail. Elizabeth wrapped her arms around herself. “What happened to the sunshine?”

Grinch gazed at the rapidly darkening skies. “I guess the front got here sooner than expected. They’re talking snow flurries, but it was supposed to hit well after midnight.”

“Snow? It’s June,” Elizabeth said.

“Welcome to the Colorado mountains.” Grinch grinned, grabbed Dylan’s hand and jogged toward his truck. “Where you can get all four seasons in a day.”

From Deadly Puzzles, a Mapleton mystery set in Colorado in February

In the few minutes they’d been talking, the storm had turned violent, the wind and snow threatening to carry them down the hillside as if they were debris in an avalanche. Gordon grabbed for Wardell’s hand. “To my car,” Gordon shouted, his words barely audible above the howling wind. Ice pellets stung as they salted his face.

His Maglite was useless. He shoved it into his parka pocket. Grabbing tree trunks for support with one hand, dragging Wardell with the other, Gordon plodded ahead, one booted foot at a time. Next tree. Hang on. Find your balance.

“Can you see the road?” he shouted, inches from Wardell’s ear.

“No. Snow.”

Once they got closer to the road, his car’s flashers and the flares should guide them. No sense of direction. Only up. Up. Step. Grab. Balance. Breathe. Step. Up. Balance. Breathe. Up. Breathe. Up. Breathe. Up.

A glimmer of blinking red broke through the white curtain. Shifting his direction, Gordon resumed the climb. Why did a quarter of a mile going down turn into two miles going up?

All of these examples show the weather playing an antagonistic role. Why not people picnicking on a sunny day? Enjoying themselves at the beach?

Nothing says you can’t do that, but as our JSB says, we don’t want to see Happy People in Happy Land. There need to be some ants at that picnic, and sand fleas on the beach.

What’s your take on weather in novels? Share examples of what works for you. Or what doesn’t, and why.

Trusting Uncertainty by Terry OdellAvailable Now Trusting Uncertainty, Book 10 in the Blackthorne, Inc. series.
You can’t go back and fix the past. Moving on means moving forward.

Terry Odell is an award-winning author of Mystery and Romantic Suspense, although she prefers to think of them all as “Mysteries with Relationships.” Follow her on Facebook and Twitter.

Don’t Play Coy With Your Readers

Posted on by

Don’t Play Coy With Your Readers
Terry Odell

Don't Play Coy With Readers

Image by Tayeb MEZAHDIA from Pixabay

One of my first writing lessons was Point of View. I learned it was a good idea to stick to one character at a time (and ‘time’ means more than a paragraph or two).

As a reader, I discovered I connected more with characters if I was privy to their thoughts. There are no hard and fast rules about Point of View beyond it’s important that readers can keep track of whose head they’re in.

My preference is to use Deep Point of View, which is sometimes called Close or Intimate, and that’s the focus of today’s post. What you call it isn’t as important as making sure that your readers can’t know anything your POV character doesn’t know. Or see. Or feel. Or smell. Or hear. It’s very close to writing in first person.

POV is a powerful tool, because by controlling the POV character, you control what you reveal to the reader. As I said above, the reader is only privy to what the character knows. On the flip side of that coin, if the POV character sees, smells, feels, or hears something, the reader should, too.

In my current WIP, my female lead knows why she quit her job, and is aware of some less-than-ethical behaviors of her boss. I’m eight chapters in, and she doesn’t want the male lead to know the details yet. But she can feed him bits and pieces as circumstances arise. The way I see it, it’s the author’s responsibility to find legitimate ways to withhold information from readers until it’s time to reveal it.

Which brings me to a couple of recent reads which had my hackles up. Both were written in first person POV. That puts the reader right into that character’s head, the same way Deep POV does.

In one book, the character read a letter; in the second she looked at a photograph. In both instances, the characters had strong emotional reactions to what they’d just seen. These books were both mysteries, and this “secret” information provided important clues.

But—and this is where I would have screamed out loud, had it not been late at night with someone sleeping nearby—both authors opted to hide this information from the reader. They simply avoided the reveal. The characters mulled it over, worried about it, wondered if they should tell another character, weighed the pros and cons. On and on. But never did they mention the name of the person in the photograph or the contents of the letter. The characters knew what they’d seen, so there was no reason the reader shouldn’t other than the author was doing what one of my first critique group leaders called “Playing Coy With the Reader.”

And for me, it’s not fair, not if you’re writing in first person or deep POV. It’s like when a television show character gets a letter, opens it, reads it, and then … cut to commercial without letting the viewer know what it said. If, when the commercial is over, the action picks up where it left off before the break and either shows the letter or the characters talking about it, I’ll accept it as being a way to make sure viewers “stay tuned.”

Now, if the author breaks to a different POV character, I might forgive them if, when we get back to the first character’s POV, we get the reveal. But to put a reader in a character’s head and then yank them out when something important happens is likely to aggravate them rather than heighten the suspense (which is what the author is going for.) To me, it’s a cheat.

In one of the books, the author never put the information out there. In the other, it took a while, but the reveal did come, so I grumbled and gave the author another chance.

And that’s what might happen. Play coy with the reader and you might lose them, not just for this book, but for future books they’ll never read.

In a more distant point of view, where the author is telling the story more than the character, it might not be such an issue, but then—I don’t like distancing points of view. Your mileage may vary.

All right, TKZers. What are your thoughts about authors withholding information a reader should have? Does it add a layer to the read for you, or frustrate you?

(I’m away from cyberspace this morning, but will be back later this afternoon to respond to comments.)

 
Trusting Uncertainty by Terry OdellNow available for Preorder. Trusting Uncertainty, Book 10 in the Blackthorne, Inc. series.
You can’t go back and fix the past. Moving on means moving forward.

Terry Odell is an award-winning author of Mystery and Romantic Suspense, although she prefers to think of them all as “Mysteries with Relationships.” Follow her on Facebook and Twitter.

When the Right Word is Wrong

Posted on by

When the Right Word is Wrong
Terry Odell

As writers, we deal in words. Thousands of words. And we’re always looking for the right word to use. But what happens when the right word is wrong?

For example, I was reading a draft chapter from one of my writing pals. She’d written something about a man pulling up the collar of his t-shirt to wipe sweat off his face. My comment to her was, “T-shirts don’t have collars.” Her reply was “Yes, that’s what I was taught when I took sewing classes.” I recalled that when I worked a temp job, our jackets were provided, but we were told to wear shirts with collars, and the accepted attire was either a blouse with a collar or a polo shirt, but absolutely no t-shirts. Being curious, I hit the search engines and looked up t-shirts.

Merriam-Webster said this: a collarless short-sleeved or sleeveless usually cotton undershirt; also :  an outer shirt of similar design

Wikipedia had this to say: a style of unisex fabric shirt, named after the T shape of the body and sleeves. It is normally associated with short sleeves, a round neckline, known as a crew neck, with no collar.

So, I was “right”—to a degree. Will readers stop reading to research words, especially ones they assume they know the meaning of? Not likely (as authors, we hate to pull anyone out of the read). However, some readers won’t notice it, because they consider the neckline of a t-shirt a collar. Others might hiccup, thinking the same way I did. Will it spoil the read? No.

Is there a solution? Maybe. When in doubt, I’d go with the dictionary definition. That way, if someone is puzzled enough to wonder, when they look it up, they’ll see the author was right.

Another example. My Triple-D Ranch series includes a character who runs a cooking school. I was writing a scene where she was teaching her students about the various pots and pans they’d be using. She was talking about the differences between frying pans and sauté pans (based on my trip through the Google Machine). I ran my draft by my (former) chef brother to see if I got things right. He came back and told me all my research was “wrong” because anyone trained in cooking wouldn’t use those terms, and proceeded (at some length) to set me straight. And therein lies the rub. He’s not my “target” reader, but he knows of what he speaks. Other readers might, too. And just as many would “know” that they’re right about the differences between sauté pans and frying pans. Either way, I’m right for some, and I’m wrong for some.

What did I end up writing? My instructor now says,

“Most cooking techniques and terminology we use comes from the French. However, a lot of names have been Americanized, and none of you will be ready for a fancy French restaurant simply by completing this course. You’ll be cooks, not chefs. So, I’m not going to dwell on terminology too much. As long as you can match the right tool with the right task, you’ll do fine.”

And then there’s the most important part about choosing the right word. POV.

Example 1

My characters were in a café, and it was one where customers place their orders at the counter, and the clerk hands them a metal stand with their order number on it to display on their table so the servers can find them.

First, I’d shown the heroine entering the café and placing her order.

She paid for her meal, accepted the metal holder with the number eighteen from the clerk, and found a small table in the back of the crowded café, inhaling the blend of aromas as she waited for her order to be ready.

In the next scene, the hero arrives and places his order.

At the counter, Bailey ordered a burger—a man had to eat, right?—and carried his stand with its number to Tyrone’s table.

My critique partner had trouble with the word “stand” in the second example, and asked what they were really called, and maybe I should use that definition instead.

So, I took a quick trip through Google and learned they’re called “Table Number Stands,” so my use of the term is correct.

Example 2

My character was at an event in a hotel, and she was going to leave, so she wanted to get rid of the half-empty glass she was carrying.

I’ve been to enough events at hotels or banquet halls, and I know the catering people normally have trays on stands set up at various places around the room where guests can deposit their used dishes. But I didn’t know what they were called.

But you know what? I forgot one crucial aspect. Would the character know?

What if my research showed the aforementioned table number stands were called Grabbendernummers. Then, I could have written, “Bailey carried his Grabbendernummer to the table.” But would he know that?

You see, it doesn’t really matter what you, the author knows or doesn’t know about something. It’s what the character knows. If my character with the half-empty glass were in the catering business, then yes, she’d refer to that tray by a proper name, if it had one. (And per my brother the chef and all the Googling I’d done, there isn’t a specific term for them.) So, my heroine, would simply see the tray on a stand. It might be black, or brown, or covered with linens, but she’s going to think of it as a tray.

Yes, do your research. But if you want to save a lot of time—especially if you’re easily sidetracked while looking something up—ask yourself if the character would know whatever you’re researching first. Just because the author knows (or looked up) what a particular object is called, in Deep POV, it’s the character who has to know it. The character is going to use whatever vocabulary exists in his head, not the author’s.

Are you a stickler for the correct word? Do your characters know them?

Trusting Uncertainty by Terry OdellNow available for Preorder. Trusting Uncertainty, Book 10 in the Blackthorne, Inc. series.
You can’t go back and fix the past. Moving on means moving forward.

Terry Odell is an award-winning author of Mystery and Romantic Suspense, although she prefers to think of them all as “Mysteries with Relationships.” Follow her on Facebook and Twitter.