Don’t Use Exclamation Points, Ethyl Cried!

We all talk. Some of us too much, but good writers understand cadence and pacing in dialogue and you can tell because the conversation is smooth and familiar. I’ve judged a number of contests over the years, and below you’ll find a couple of my pet peeves. One pet peeve I have is the idiom, pet peeve, so let’s move on.

“Jack, I think we need to take over this train! The engineer’s dead! If you don’t, we’ll crash into the some stalled train in front of us, or maybe the end of the line where there’s a lot of concrete and maybe a big steel thingy that will crush this tin can!”

“What makes you think I can stop this train, Ethyl?”

“I don’t know, Jack, but you’re a man and all men think they can fly airplanes, so why not a train!!!???”

“Of course I can, but Ethyl, why don’t you do it?” Jack asked without shouting like his partner.

Ethyl exclaimed. “Oh, Jack! My role is to stand aside while you fight the Bad Guys and look frightened! Maybe I can cover my mouth with one hand, too, while you decide between blue and red wires.”

“Good lord! Pay attention, Ethyl. Wires are only an issue when a bomb is about to go off,” he hissed.

“This train is a rolling bomb!”she shouted, fearfully, “but I’m beginning to think you’re a dud. Pretty soon people are going to think we hijacked this train –––.”

“Hi yourself, Ethyl, but this isn’t the time for pleasantries. As we race down this track they’ll soon call some alphabet group to stop us.”

“I’m confused, Jack.

“So am I, Ethyl, but at least we know who’s talking!”

I distilled this from an entry and changed enough of the story for you to get the idea. Writers should imitate the way people speak in real life.

For one thing, we don’t use a person’s name in every sentence when we’re talking. I think the original author watches too many movies or sitcoms, where scriptwriters repeat names to excess in order for the audience to keep up. It doesn’t work in print.

At the same time, , we don’t need tags and attributions like “hissed” in this sentence, because are no sibilants, and for crying out loud, avoid exclamation marks! And if you do use one, there’s no reason to explain that he or she exclaimed or shouted!!!

“One should never use exclamation points in writing. It is like laughing at your own joke.” Either Mark Twain or F. Scott Fitzgerald said that, and there’s some question about which one, but it’s a true statement.

That’s something I’ve seen when I judged humor writing in newspapers many years ago. The exclamation point comes up way too often in the punch line, or as emphasis at the end of a story. One example is so bad it makes my teeth ache, but it was the last line in what I figured was supposed to be a joke…I think.

“And I looked up that day as the storm approached and saw a squirrel laying flat and holding onto the tree limb. I kept going, but gave him a word of advice. ‘Hold on tight, Mr. Bushytail, it’s a good thing you’re in a pecan tree, because this is gonna be nuts!’”

Maybe he read too much Swiss Family Robinson (1812) when he was younger! It looks like he caught some of Johann Wyss’ bad habits! This except from Wyss is a good bad example of what to avoid.

The setup. A ship sinks, the family survives and winds up on a beach to salvage what they could.

“Well done, Franz!” I cried; “these fishhooks, which you, the youngest, have found, may contribute more than anything else in the ship to save our lives by procuring food for us.”

“All these things are excellent indeed,” said I; “but my friend Jack here has presented me with a couple of huge, hungry, useless dogs who will eat more than any of us.”

“Oh, papa! They will be of use! Why, they will help us to hunt when we get on shore! (No tag here for some reason.)

“No doubt they will, if ever we do get on shore, Jack; but I must say I don’t know how it is to be done.”

Oh, look here, father!” cried Jack, drawing a little spyglass joyfully out of his pocket.

All right. I know this was written two hundred years ago, and the issues I’ve highlighted are more for tongue-in-cheek fun than anything else, but I’ve seen examples that are just as bad in contest entries, and the sad part is they’ve been published.

You can dissect and rewrite the scene above in a million different ways, but avoiding all those literary death traps of attributions, the overuse of the exclamation point, and for the love of god…semicolons, is step one.

So let’s review.

Don’t overuse names in dialogue.

Write dialogue as real people would speak.

No exclamation points!

Fewer tags (and I know this steps on toes). Instead, give your character something to do.

Cut as many adverbs as possible.

Learn to drive trains and diffuse bombs, just in case.

 

Reader Friday-Fun With Words

Let’s face it, words are fun. Readers and writers alike love the sound and feel of words. Words are to readers and writers as paint is to a painter, or metal is to a fabricator.

Speaking of, I ran across (not literally, of course!) a website that I’ve been playing with. Maybe you’ve heard of it, maybe not.

It’s called Random Ready. You’ll find lots and lots of word fun there, along with other categories of randomness for your word pleasure.

Click on “Words” at the top of the Home Page and you’ll be able to find synonyms, funny words, weird words, words to use when playing Charades, and on and on and on.

Who knew there were so many synonyms for mustache?

There’s even a tab called Fake Words! Here are the first fake words I saw:

Specons, Disatilingers, Preoriandy, Onoutpout, Outweing, Hypoplate, Memodecruit, Elocratonics, Bergeagers, Scologicts

Wild, huh? I dare you to go to Random Ready and have a bit of fun. And don’t forget to let us know what tickled your fancy!

 

The Two Types of Status

When you’re developing a character, how much thought do you put into their status? If you’re like me, probably not a lot of concentrated effort. I have a good handle on their personality, looks, motives, dreams, fears, desires, insecurities, strengths, quirks, and smarts or stupids, but I don’t flesh out their status—at least not consciously. I tend to let that evolve or stand on its own.

I follow Sahil Bloom, a thought leader and motivator, who has significantly grown his audience in the past year. Sahil hosts a site called The Curiosity Chronicle and has a twice-weekly newsletter with some great content. On Tuesday, his subject was How to Play the Right Status Games citing the difference between “bought status” and “earned status”.

The status subject hit home to me about a recent decision. It was time to buy a replacement vehicle for our old Suzuki hatchback. I hinted to my wife, Rita, that we should splurge and finance a new Range Rover. That didn’t go over well.

“That is nothing but a status symbol. It’s like those leased Beamer SUVs Karens drive,” Rita said. “They’re for people who want to be seen. What? Do you want to start hanging around Starbucks, too?”

Rita made a point. We cash-purchased a low mileage, Kia four-door sedan and grabbed a McDonalds coffee for the ride home.

I flashed back to that Rover moment when I read Sahil’s column and felt it was worth a share on the Kill Zone. So, I sent him an email to which he quickly responded. With full attribution to Sahil Bloom and his kind republishing permission, here’s the piece.

How to Play the Right Status Games by Sahil Bloom

There are two types of status:

Bought Status is the improved social positioning garnered through acquired status symbols:

·         The expensive car, watch, handbag, or jewelry acquired for the sole purpose of showing others your financial wealth

·         The club membership that makes you a part of the scene

·         The private plane flight or boat trip taken more for the Instagram photo than for the utility

Bought Status is fleeting. It may improve your relative position, but only until the next level is unlocked and you’re right back at the bottom. It will keep you trying to enter what author C.S. Lewis famously referred to as the inner ring:

“As long as you are governed by that desire you will never get what you want. You are trying to peel an onion; if you succeed there will be nothing left.”

Earned Status, however, is the real respect, admiration, and trust received through hard-won treasures:

·         The freedom to choose how to spend your time (and whom to spend it with)

·         The healthy, loving relationships made possible by years of present energy

·         The purpose-imbued work and mastery within a domain, built through years of effort

·         The wisdom accumulated through decades of lived experience

·         The adaptable mind shaped through a steady mindfulness practice and thoughtful introspection

·         The strong, fit physique built through hours of movement and disciplined eating

·         The professional promotion or company sale achieved after an extended period of hard work in the dark

Earned Status is lasting.

It will elicit the durable respect, admiration, and trust that you seek from the people who matter to you, those whose opinions you value and cherish.

Earned Status is what we should all be after.

The Status Game Tests

Here are two simple tests you can use to assess the games you are playing:

The Bought-Status Test

Would I buy this thing if I could not show it to anyone or tell anyone about it?

If the answer to this question is NO, you’re playing a Bought Status Game.

Asking this question cuts through the noise to determine if the item itself provides happiness or utility, or if its sole purpose is to signal your success or achievement to others.

The Earned-Status Test

Could the richest person in the world acquire the thing I want by tomorrow?

If the answer to this question is NO, you’re playing an Earned Status Game.

The world’s richest people cannot build a loving relationship any faster than you. They cannot forge a healthy mind and body any faster than you. None of them can buy their way to expertise, wisdom, or purpose.

Playing the Right Games

Status games are a part of life.

They are critical for establishing your position in the relative hierarchies that govern your personal and professional worlds.

You will never escape them—you simply need to play the right ones.

Remember: In your work, relationships, and life, focus on what must be earned, not what can be bought.

*   *   *

Thanks to Sahil Bloom at The Curiosity Chronicle whose new book The Five Types of Wealth is about to be released.

Kill Zoners — How much attention do you pay to developing your characters’ status?

Good Book Followup and Writing News

Good Book Followup and Writing News
Terry Odell

Last time, I talked about a book I read because it was a book club choice, and gave my reasons for not liking it despite all the accolades it had received. Last week, our book club met. (Note, the club’s name is Wine, Women and Words. Needless to say, we enjoyed our libations as we discussed the book. And there’s food, too.)

There were eleven of us present. Most of us are well beyond our 50s. I may have mentioned previously that one of the reasons (beyond the wine) that I enjoy our meetings is because it’s a good look at how “readers” read, which is very different from the way authors read.

Our discussion was lively, and opinions were widespread. Some loved character X (I think there were 7 POV characters, all female), others disliked her, and often for totally different reasons. Some liked the way the timelines bounced around from decade to decade, others complained that a character’s thread was abandoned until much later in the book. At the end of our discussion, which went on much longer than usual, everyone scores the book from 1 (terrible) to 10 (loved it) and gives reasons, which in this case ranged from “I was a camp counselor, so I could relate to that part of the book,” to “I thought the ending was totally unrealistic,” to “I didn’t like the time jumps,” to “Why didn’t any of the POV characters stand up for themselves?” The last one led to more discussion, because she eventually did stand up for herself, but then did something everyone thought was totally stupid at the end of the book.

The book’s average score was 6.5, with nothing higher than a 7, which is unusual for our group. Usually there are 8s, and often a few 9s. I don’t recall ever seeing someone rank it a 10 or a 1, but I haven’t been a member as long as many in the group, and my memory isn’t that great these days.

Does not liking a book make it a ‘bad’ book? Does liking it make it ‘good?’ I confess I was surprised to see that this book is a finalist for a major mystery award. Given the judges are all authors made it all the more surprising to me, but apparently they’re seeing things differently. And isn’t that what it’s all about?

Now, a little on the writing front.

I have a title! For me, that’s one of the last things I manage to come up with. Danger Abroad.

And a tag line: When breaking family ties is the only option.

I sent my cover designer potential backgrounds for the book from the pictures I took in the Faroes. I might share the process in a later post, once everything is finalized. For now, this is the image she’s working with, and she’ll apply her artistic talents to making it appropriate for a book cover.

Picture of the Vagar Waterfall, blowing from the wind.

I’ve gone through my manuscript from my printout, run it through SmartEdit, and it’s almost ready to send. I have a tendency to start sentences with But, I overuse back and there are a lot of unnecessary thats. In the adverb department, only was another culprit. My critique partners are just past the halfway point, and despite all my efforts, they’re finding little glitches. If the manuscript was perfect, I wouldn’t need an editor, right?

I’ve started bits and pieces of the dreaded marketing process. As I read through the manuscript, I made notes of potential quotes to use in promotion. Then, using Canva, I can turn them into little promo images, such as this one.

quote from Danger Abroad by Terry Odell

Another source I use is Mockup Shots, which will create images using your book cover. Although they have ways to manipulate the images, I’ve found I’m more comfortable taking them over to Canva, since I’ve been using it longer and am familiar with its menus.

I also have to come up with the description for the distribution sites.

Somehow, writing the book is easier for me than distilling it down to its essence. As an indie author, I am glad I no longer have to deal with query letters and synopses, although the book description is similar. The big difference, for me, is that the description doesn’t have to cover the whole book. I prefer not to mention anything that shows up after the fifth chapter, and usually try to have it not go beyond chapter three.

This is what I have so far. (It’s a romantic suspense.)

Madison Westfield has information that could short-circuit her politician father’s campaign for governor. But he’s family. Although he was a father more in word than deed, she changes her identity and leaves the country rather than blow the whistle. All seems fine until her father hires Blackthorne, Inc. to find her. All they have to go on is that her passport was used at the airport in Copenhagen.

Logan Bolt is happiest when he’s designing security systems for Blackthorne’s wealthy clients. When the latest installation in Copenhagen keeps him from receiving the last text his sister would ever send, he uses his vacation time to find out more about her death. Because he’s already there, Blackthorne taps him to track down Madison. When he finds her in the Faroe Islands, her story doesn’t match the one her father told Blackthorne. The investigation assignment quickly switches to personal protection for Madison.

Madison’s not convinced she needs protection, but learning her father wants her found has her reluctantly accepting Logan’s bodyguard duty. She thinks of herself as being Logan’s ball and chain, but they slowly learn that working together benefits both of them. Soon, they’re involved with a drug ring and a kidnapping attempt. Will working together spark a relationship?

Comments welcome on any aspect of this post.


New! Find me at Substack with Writings and Wanderings

Double Intrigue
When your dream assignment turns into more than you bargained for
Cover of Double Intrigue, an International Romantic Suspense by Terry Odell Shalah Kennedy has dreams of becoming a senior travel advisor—one who actually gets to travel. Her big break comes when the agency’s “Golden Girl” is hospitalized and Shalah is sent on a Danube River cruise in her place. She’s the only advisor in the agency with a knowledge of photography, and she’s determined to get stunning images for the agency’s website.
Aleksy Jakes wants out. He’s been working for an unscrupulous taskmaster in Prague, and he’s had enough. When he spots one of his coworkers in a Prague hotel restaurant, he’s shocked to discover she’s not who he thought she was.
As Shalah and Aleksy cruise along the Danube, the simple excursion soon becomes an adventure neither of them imagined.

Like bang for your buck? I have a new Mapleton Bundle. Books 4, 5, and 6 for one low price.


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

The Comic Villain

Photo credit – Pexels, cottonbro studio

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

 

Why do we love comic villains?

In a real world full of genuinely evil villains, comic villains are a welcome relief because they make us laugh.

Humor is their superpower. They literally and figuratively DIS-ARM us. As reprehensible as their actions are, we can’t be all that angry with them because we’re laughing too hard.

Comic villains are like the bratty little kid caught stealing sweets. They are more often impish than truly malicious.

Readers and movie viewers typically don’t take comic villains seriously because they’re often lousy criminals. They’re buffoons whose sloppy schemes go awry. Their supposedly clever strategies explode in their faces. Their mistakes get them knocked on their butts.

The crime they set out to accomplish rarely succeeds. When they’re caught, they try to explain their way out with silly rationalizations and hilarious justifications.

Because comic villains are so unskillful at their profession, they reassure us that bad guys will be caught and held accountable for their crimes. Yet, because they’re entertaining, we don’t wish harsh punishment on them.

American author O. Henry (1862-1910) created a pair of memorable comic villains in “The Ransom of Red Chief,” a short story first published in 1907 in the Saturday Evening Post. I wrote about it here.

Bill and Sam are two smalltime criminals who concoct a ransom scheme to earn quick, easy money. They kidnap the 10-year-old son (nicknamed “Red Chief”) of a wealthy businessman and hold the kid for $2000 ransom. But Red Chief proves to be a “forty-pound chunk of freckled wildcat” who torments his captors so viciously that they soon reduce the ransom amount.

Turns out Red Chief’s father doesn’t particularly want his son back and makes a counteroffer. Ultimately, instead of getting rich quick, Bill and Sam pay the father $250 to take the brat off their hands.

Danny_DeVito_by_Gage_Skidmore cc by sa3.0

Kidnapping plots gone awry became popular films, including Ruthless People (1986), starring Danny DeVito and Bette Midler; Raising Arizona (1987) with Nicholas Cage and Holly Hunter; and Dog Eat Dog (2016), Cage again and Willem Dafoe.

Film is a natural medium to showcase comic villains because humor depends a lot on timing, facial expressions, and gestures. But skilled authors can do that on the page.

Have you ever sat next to a reader on a plane who chuckled throughout the flight? They might be reading Janet Evanovich, Carl Hiaasen, the late Tim Dorsey, or other authors who carved out niches with funny crime novels. Some of the most enjoyable book recommendations I’ve received came from seatmates.

Past and present Kill Zone contributors deliver laughs from Michelle Gagnon (what’s funnier than being the target of a serial killer?) and Elaine Viets (after working at a bridal salon, she wonders why there aren’t more murders).

 

Crime isn’t funny, especially if you’ve been a victim. But laughter in the face of danger is an effective defense mechanism that makes the trials of life more bearable.

~~~

This post is a chapter excerpted from my upcoming writing craft book, The Villain’s Journey-How to Create Memorable Villains Readers Love to Hate. Publication Summer 2025. Please sign up at my website for news and updates on The Villain’s Journey.

~~~

TKZers: who’s your favorite comic villain in film or books? Why do they make you laugh? Please share in the comments.

 

The Art of Misdirection

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” — Soren Kierkegaard

* * *

One of the most interesting aspects of mystery novels for me is the author’s ability to construct a story that leads the reader “down the garden path.” Then when the truth is revealed, the reader smacks him/herself on the side of the head in recognition that they picked the wrong person as the villain. They should have seen it coming.

When I told a friend of mine about my interest in constructing novels that use this technique of misdirection, she was astonished. “It sounds like you’re deliberately manipulating what the reader is thinking.”

“Right,” I said. “That’s the point. If the author can present information to the reader so they react to the scenes in the story in a predictable way, it will produce an entertaining and satisfying experience for the reader.”

My friend said she didn’t like the idea of being fooled, but I think she’s fooling herself.

At its heart, a mystery novel is a game, a challenge to the reader to see if they can put the puzzle together correctly. The reader has all the necessary information, but the author uses several devices to misguide the reader into putting their trust in the wrong characters or the wrong clues.

Foreshadowing, Clues, and Red Herrings

In his article in Writer’s Digest,  Robert McCaw put it well:

“Misdirection also requires subtlety. The reader will feel crassly manipulated if the surprise ending arrives without sufficient hints or foreshadowing. Ideally, good misdirection makes the reader look back at various telltale clues peppered throughout the story, hopefully leading them to admire the author’s skill in setting up and obscuring the ultimate surprise.”

Perhaps the cleverest red herring of all time was created by Agatha Christie in her novel And Then There Were None, in which ten people on a remote island are being killed off one by one in a way that mirrors the nursery rhyme Ten Soldier Boys. When they get down to three people left alive, one of them (Vera) says

“You’ve forgotten the nursery rhyme. Don’t you see there’s a clue there?” She recited in a meaning voice: “Four little Indian boys going out to sea; A red herring swallowed one and then there were three.” She went on: “A red herring—that’s the vital clue. Armstrong’s not dead… He took away the china Indian to make you think he was. You may say what you like—Armstrong’s on the island still. His disappearance is just a red herring across the track…”

A clue that references the very words “red herring” is clever. But it turns out the clue itself was a red herring. Now that was really clever.

The Unreliable Narrator

In a novelsuspects.com article, Emily Watson writes

The term “unreliable narrator” was introduced in 1961 by Wayne C. Booth in his book The Rhetoric of Fiction. Typically, for a narrator to be unreliable, the story needs to be presented by a first-person narrator. And since first-person accounts of stories and events are often flawed and biased, you could argue that all first-person narrators are by nature unreliable. But Booth explains that for a narrator to be unreliable, they must either misreport, misinterpret, misevaluate, underreport, under-interpret, or under-evaluate.

Once again Agatha Christie claims preeminence in misdirection with the unreliable narrator Dr. Sheppard in The Murder of Roger Ackroyd.

The False Ending

Robert McCaw also addressed the topic of false endings in his article in Writer’s Digest.

“Another of my favorite techniques is the false or penultimate ending. In this case, the narrative comes to a neat close. The protagonist solves the mysteries and identifies the culprit. There are no loose strings. The story is over, except it’s not. Instead, another chapter surprises the reader with a new and different take on the ending, often creating the opportunity to begin a new story, perhaps in another book.”

An example of this is the French film He Loves Me… He Loves Me Not directed by Laetitia Colombani. While not exactly a mystery, the movie’s unusual structure is a good example of misdirection, unreliable narration, and a false ending.

The movie was released in 2002 and starred Audrey Tautou, the actress who had previously been best known for her performance as the main character in the movie Amelie. Casting Tautou as Angelique in He Loves Me was a brilliant way to manipulate the viewers into immediately trusting the adorable girl.

In this movie, Angelique is an accomplished young artist in love with a married man, Dr. Loic Le Garrec (Samuel Le Bihan). The movie begins in a flower shop where Angelique is sending a pink rose to Le Garrec on his birthday, and it tracks the plot through scenes where Angelique appears to get closer and closer to her goal of breaking up Le Garrec’s marriage so the two of them can go off together.

Then something goes awry. Angelique realizes her plan has failed, and she decides to commit suicide. It seems this will be the sad end to a young woman’s life, but that’s the false ending. The movie is only at the halfway point.

As Angelique lies down on the floor in front of a gas stove, everything changes. It looks like the movie is rewinding in Fast Backward mode, and suddenly we’re all the way back to the beginning at the flower shop.

But this time, the movie presents the actual events, not just Angelique’s fantasy, and the viewer comes to understand Angelique was suffering from a mental illness called “erotomania.” The first half of the movie showed only a partial truth, but one that convinced the viewer of a lie.

In the actual ending, Angelique has survived her suicide attempt and is incarcerated in a mental institution. The final end of the movie is yet another false ending that I won’t spoil for you.

* * *

So, there you have it. Red herrings, unreliable narrators, and false endings. All devices to trick the reader into enjoying a wonderful story.

“Seldom, very seldom, does complete truth belong to any human disclosure; seldom can it happen that something is not a little disguised or a little mistaken.”
― Jane Austen, Emma

* * *

So TKZers: There are many ways to lead the reader astray. Have you been fooled by misdirection? Have you used misdirection in your books? What books or movies would you recommend that gleefully mislead the audience?

* * *

Was it a clue to murder? Or just a small child’s fanciful note? Private pilot Cassie Deakin must find her way through the labyrinth to solve the puzzle.

Available at  AmazonBarnes & NobleKoboGoogle Play, or Apple Books.

Staying Afloat in the Roiling Sea of Books

by James Scott Bell
@jamesscottbell

Blue-footed booby

I had another post I was working on, but life got in the way. So I thought I’d rerun a column on discoverability. It seems apt in this age of AI. Has anything changed? Where we go:

Discoverability is becoming as rare as the blue-footed booby.

According to Bowker, the outfit that registers ISBN numbers, over a million self-published books were issued ISBNs last year.

That’s a one with six zeros after it.

And understand, this does not include traditionally-published books, nor all the ebook-only titles without ISBNs.

Which means there’s a whole lotta books out there, and more added every year. (Most of which are bad. See Sturgeon’s Law.)

Industry observer Mike Shatzkin added this:

I had reason to learn recently that Ingram has 16 million individual titles loaded in their Lightning Source database ready to be delivered as a bound book to you within 24 hours, if not sooner. So every book coming into the world today is competing against 16 million other books that you might buy.

That number — the number of individual book titles available to any consumer, bookstore, or library — has exploded in my working lifetime. As recently as 25 years ago, the potential titles available — in print and on a warehouse shelf ready to be ordered, or even to be backordered until a next printing — was numbered in the hundreds of thousands. So it has grown by 20 or 30 or 40 times. That’s between 2000 percent and 4000 percent in the last quarter century.

Of discoverability, agent Rachelle Gardner recently observed:

How can any single book stand out in that large of a field? It’s very difficult. The problem is known as discoverability and it means the odds are stacked against us when we want to bring readers’ attention to our books.

This is why the publisher needs your help—it’s important to find your audience, that specific group of people who will like your book. They need you engaging with your audience, connecting with them, doing your part to make them aware of you.

Even with all this work, it’s still hard to make your book discoverable. It’s not anyone’s fault. Publishers are not conspiring to make life difficult for you. They’re not being unreasonable by requiring authors to participate in marketing. It’s simply the situation we find ourselves in—there are too many books, so we all have to work so much harder to each one stand out to its unique audience.

One line that jumped out at me is: the publisher needs your help. It used to be the other way around. A writer needed a traditional publisher to get into bookstores. If there were some marketing dollars in the budget, the publisher might arrange to have the book placed on the New Release table at the front of the store.

But now, with bookstore space shrinking, and marketing push going almost exclusively to the A list, authors writing inside the walls of the Forbidden City are expected to do audience building themselves (which has some authors wondering why the publishing houses still take the same royalty split as when they did all the heavy lifting. But I digress).

So how do you build an audience these days? The old-fashioned way. You earn it. (Hat tip to John Houseman).

Book after book. And more than one or two titles. You don’t hit a stride until you have several books out there to go with a steady pace of future production.

Another agent, Steve Laube, also reflected on the Bowker publishing numbers, and offered this advice:

  1. Write the very best book you can.
  2. Build an audience who will support your work (i.e. platform).
  3. Decide whether to self-publish (but only do it the right way) or go the traditional route (get an agent).
  4. Figure out how to launch a book.

The fundamentals don’t change, do they? That’s why they’re called fundamentals. I’d modify the list a bit this way:

  1. Write the very best books (plural) you can, at least one per year.
  2. Keep learning and growing in the craft.
  3. Decide what kind of writer you want to be. If self-publishing is on your mind, consider:
    1. Can you be sufficiently productive?
    2. Do you have the discipline to learn basic business practices?
    3. Are you willing to invest between $500 and $2,000 for cover design, editing, and proofreading for each book?
  1. If traditional publishing is your goal, ask:
    1. Am I patient enough to wait up to 18 months for my book to come out?
    2. Will my agent fight for more author-friendly non-compete and reversion-of-rights clauses?
    3. Am I ready with a plan should my publisher drop me?

One word I do wish we’d get rid of is platform. For non-fiction a platform is desirable because there’s a built-in audience for a subject. But agents and publishers push this amorphous concept on unpublished fiction authors, which only adds to their stress and detracts from their writing time.

The best time for a fiction writer to build a platform is 2003. That’s when we weren’t so blog saturated that a new author might actually gain a following. That’s when we weren’t tossing away good writing time on Twitter and Facebook and Instagram (and, worse, thinking that the latter venues are good places to sell books!)

As I argued a couple of years ago, we need to get out of “discoverability thinking” and into “trustability thinking.”

You should be thinking that each new offering is an opportunity to prove to readers that you deliver the goods. As you do this, time after time, trust in you grows. Consumers buy more from businesses they trust. Readers are consumers and you are a business.

This applies whether you are traditional or indie, commercial or literary, tall or short.

Or have blue feet.

So … are you about to dive into the cold Atlantic of content, knowing full well how vast and choppy it is out there? Have you taken swimming lessons (studied craft and market)?  

Or are you already swimming?

How’s the water?

Editor and Editing Words of Wisdom

Last week I finished the draft of my latest 1980s library cozy, Fine Me Deadly, which clocked in at 72,389 words. The drafting process was longer than I’d bargained for—chalk that up to a complicated situation and plot and my own doubts about being able to pull it off, as well as perfectionism in the first draft, something I normally do better in ignoring.

My usual procedure after finishing a novel draft is to immediately dive back in and begin revising, but this time, I decided to put the book in a virtual drawer for a while and work on something else, to give myself some distance so when I return to Fine Me Deadly, I can hopefully look at it with fresh eyes. This is a technique a number of TKZers use and it is high time I give it a try.

Today’s Words of Wisdom is a grab-bag of editor/editing insights. Joe Hartlaub looks at putting the editor out of your mind when drafting, while James Scott Bell takes advice from an editor to help your book develop into the best it can be, and Terry Odell gives us five tips to help with the final edit. There’s much food for thought here and, as always, I hope you’ll weigh in with your own thoughts.

I believe it is a given that those of us who aspire to write are also vociferous readers. A reader is a wonderful thing to be; however, I have come to the conclusion that sometimes this state of mind and being can be an impediment to an author aborning.  Reading a novel by James Lee Burke or Karin Slaughter or John Connolly or Chelsea Cain can inspire a reader to think, “I want to do that.”  Yet it can also be discouraging; one reads BLACK CHERRY BLUES by Burke and thinks, “I can never be that good; why bother?”  The fleeting dream is set aside, sometimes permanently. Part of the reason for this state of affairs is that in the case of a book (or a film, or a painting, or a music project) we rarely see what came before, the early stages that led to the final result.

Such does not hold true with respect to a construction project, to name but one example. We recently had the opportunity to watch an all but vacant shopping center in our area be transformed over a period of several months into a wholly done, over, remodeled, commercially successful unit. It was fun to watch. Readers generally do not get to watch the process by which their favorite author transforms a few hundred blank pages into a cohesive, occasionally unforgettable, experience. So it is that the novel, upon publication, seems to have sprung from whole cloth, seemingly effortlessly. We know better, of course. But it is difficult sometimes to fully appreciate it without seeing the ultrasound ourselves.

I hit an emotional low point this past week for a number or reasons that aren’t really important to this discussion; what is important is what brought me out of it, at least so far as creativity is concerned. I happened across an article in Slate entitled “Cormac McCarthy Cuts to the Bone.”  You can find the article here. It is an extremely interesting piece which, among other things, reveals that McCarthy’s classic novel BLOOD MERIDIAN was a far different book at publication than it was at conception. What really attracted me to the article, however, was the reproduction of two pages from McCarthy’s original draft.  They are instructive, even if you have never read a word that Mr. McCarthy has written or alternatively would not reflexively grab your copy of BLOOD MERIDIAN or THE ORCHARD  KEEPER if confronted with a fire and the resultant dilemma of what to save.  BLOOD MERIDIAN did not flow out of McCarthy’s mind without deep and dark consideration. If you’re having trouble getting your words out of you and onto the page, don’t let it be because you in your own mind aren’t “good enough” or “as good” as your favorite author. When your favorite author started writing, they weren’t good enough either. It takes several drafts, several cement pourings, if you will, before things solidify and become right. Don’t put your handprints and your initials into your work and ruin it before it is dry. Purge yourself of what playwright John Guare so brilliantly called “tiny obnoxious editor living in your head,” the one who tells you that you will never be as good as Stephen King or Elmore Leonard or whoever. Then let the construction begin.

Joe Hartlaub—November 9, 2013

 

Some time ago veteran editor Alan Rinzler posted on Writer Unboxed about “issues” writers today are facing. While the post itself was solid, I was more intrigued by one of his comments. Rinzler was asked a question in the combox by none other than super agent Donald Maass. Don wanted to know what the #1 shortcoming Rinzler, as a developmental editor, saw in manuscripts. Rinzler’s answer was:

I see disorganized stories of excessive complexity… intrusive narrative voices that come between the reader and the story by inserting ongoing commentary, explanation, and interpretation…a failure to research and do the homework necessary to come up with something truly original and not reinvent the wheel… two-dimensional stereotype characterization…dialogue that all sounds like the same person.

I like this list. Let’s take a look at each item:

  1. Disorganized stories of excessive complexity

I once picked up a bit of screenwriting wisdom that applies here. The best movies (and novels) consist of simple plots about complex characters. That is, while the plot may contain mystery and twists (and should), it is, at its core, a basic story with understandable motives. The real meat and originality comes from putting truly complex characters into those stories. The secret to originality can be found in the limitless interior landscape of human beings.

  1. Intrusive narrative voices

Learning how to handle exposition, especially when to leave it out entirely, is one of the most important and early craft challenges. So get to it. Revision & Self-Editing for Publication has a whole section on this, but here’s one tip: place exposition seamlessly into confrontational dialogue. Instead of: Frank never wanted to have a baby. Not until he was a success as a writer. But Marilyn thought his quest was foolish. After all, it had been five years since he left his job at AIG. Marilyn dearly wanted him to try to get his job back.

“You never wanted a baby, Frank.”

“Shut up about that.”

“All because of your stupid writing obsession!”

“I’m not obsessed!”

“Oh really? What do you call five years of typing and no money to show for it?”

“Practice!”

“Well, practice time is over. Tomorrow you’re going to beg AIG to take you back.”

  1. A failure to research  . . . to come up with something truly original

Rinzler is talking about the concept stage here, which is foundational. Hard work on fresh concepts will pay off. And remember, freshness isn’t just a matter of something “unfamiliar.” All plot situations have been done. It’s how you dress them up and freshen them that makes the difference. Remember Die Hard? After it became a hit, we had Die Hard on a ship (Under Siege) and on a mountain (Cliffhanger)and so on. Take a standard rom-com about a writer struggling with writer’s block and set it in Elizabethan England and you get Shakespeare in Love. Heck, take an old dystopian cult plot like Deathrace 2000 and put it among kids and bingo, you’ve got The Hunger Games.

  1. Two-dimensional characters 

We all know that flat characters are a drag on an otherwise nice plot idea. Such a waste! As Lajos Egri put it in his classic, Creative Writing: “Living, vibrating human beings are still the secret and magic formula of great and enduring writing.”

My favorite book on characterization is Dynamic Characters by my former colleague at Writer’s Digest, Nancy Kress.

  1. Dialogue that all sounds like the same person

Ah! One of my sweet spots. In my workshops I always say the fastest way to improve a manuscript is via dialogue. It’s also the fastest way to get an agent or editor to reject you, or readers to give you a yawn. When they see good, crisp dialogue, differentiated via character, it pops. It gives them confidence they’re dealing with someone who knows the craft.

The place to start, then, is by making sure every character in your cast is unique. I use a “voice journal” for each, a free-form document of the character just yakking at me, until I truly “hear” them in a singular fashion.

James Scott Bell—April 6, 2014

We want to submit the cleanest possible manuscript to our editors, agents, or wherever you’re submitting. By the time most of us hit “The End”, we’ve been staring at the manuscript on a computer screen for months. We probably know passages by heart, we know what it’s supposed to say, and it’s very easy to miss things.

What we need to do if fool our brain into thinking it’s never seen these words before.

Tip #1 – Print the manuscript. It’s amazing how much different it will look on paper.

Tip #2 – Use a different font. If you’ve been staring at TNR, choose a sans-serif font. In fact, this is a good time to use the much-maligned Comic Sans.

Tip #3 – Change the format. You want the lines to break in different places. I recommend printing it in 2 columns, or at least changing the margins. That will totally change the line scan, and it’s amazing how many repeated words show up when the words line up differently.

Tip #4 – Read away from your computer. Another room, or at least the other side of the room.

The above are all “Fool the Brain” tricks. Moving on to my basic process.

Tip #5 – Read from start to finish.

As I read, I have a notepad, highlighters, red pen, and a pad of sticky notes. This pass isn’t where I fix things; it’s where I make notes of things to fix. I don’t want to disrupt the flow of the read by stopping to check out if the character drove a red Toyota or a green Chevy. I have a foam core board by my chair, where I’ll post my sticky notes. Also, because it’s a hard copy, there’s not simple “Find” function.

When repeated words or phrases jump out, I note them on a sticky for a future search-and-destroy mission. I’ll circle or highlight words that could be stronger, or places where I might be able to come up with a metaphor that doesn’t sound writerly.

I’m also critical of “does this move the story?” as I’m reading. The beautiful prose might not be all that beautiful when reading it in the context of the entire novel. Don’t be afraid to use that red pen. On the flip side, you can also note where a scene needs more depth, or something needs foreshadowing. Are characters behaving consistently? Or do their personalities change because the author needs them to do something for the plot.

Another thing I look for is named characters. Naming a character tells the reader “this is an important person.” Do they play enough of a role in the story to earn a name? Can they be deleted, or referred to generically?

Once I’ve reached the end, I’ll go back to the computer and deal with the notes I’ve made.

Terry Odell—January 6, 2021

***

  1. What do you think about Joe’s point about keeping the editor away while drafting? For those of you who start your writing day by first editing what you wrote the day before, any tips on switching from editing mind to creative mind?
  2. What do you think of Jim’s list of editor insights? Any additions?
  3. Do you have any tips to add to Terry’s on getting yourself into the editing mindset?

Reader Friday-Goodbye To A Friend

I hope a little indulgence is in order on The Killzone today.

6/18/2014-1/14/2025 . . . Play hard, sweet Hoka

We lost a good friend on Tuesday, January 14th. Her name was Hoka, the smartest German shepherd in the universe. It happened quickly. The vet thinks it was a stroke. She would have been eleven in June, and we’d kept company with her for nine years and one month.

We’ve had other dogs, but none as human as Hoka.

A little history: She was rescued from the local shelter by our daughter, who was able to be her mom for three months. When she moved to San Diego, she couldn’t take Hoka with her. She was named after Jessica’s favorite running/hiking shoe, and was her companion on the trails.

Jessica brought her to us to get acquainted, and it was love at first sight. When she came to live with us she was about a year and a half old, give or take. It was like a toddler moving in with gramma and grampa.

Let the games begin!

She had two speeds . . . fast and stop. She liked to chase cars along our rural dirt road—from inside our fence line, of course. Our neighbor once clocked her at 32 mph.

She had a human vocabulary of about twenty or so words and phrases, she was scared of gunfire, loved harassing our neighbors’ cats and cows from across the fence, and was always ready to jump in the Jeep and go to town with us. And, believe it or not, she could tell time. She knew when it was bedtime, and she knew–at 7am every morning–it was time to trek over to the west side of our property to chase away any of the neighbor’s cats who dared stray over our fence.

We walk the orchards around us every day and she went with us. The last few days, I’ve even taken pictures of her paw prints around our property and out in the orchards.

And my Dad. We took her three times a week to see him, and he loved her as much as we do. Many of the other residents in his facility  insisted on petting her. She was everybody’s dog, and she knew it.

There’s not a square inch of our house and five acres that her paws did not touch. She watched out for us as much as we took care of her. Every part of our daily schedule–now ten days without her–included her.

First, we learned to navigate life with Hoka; now we must learn to steer ourselves without her.

It’s going to be a long journey before we can let her lie without tears, but I know she’s getting acquainted with the other three dogs we’ve buried.

Hoka, keep running. We’ll come and play with you some day.

 

* * *

 

Thank you, TKZers, for listening to me and understanding why I had to write this post. Many of you have shared your pets with us, so I know you “get it”.

 

Your comments and memories are most welcome.

 

 

First Page Critique – MURDER, MYSTERY AND MISDIRECTION

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

Today let’s welcome a Brave Author who submitted the first page of a humorous cozy mystery with fantasy elements including a talking cat.

Please enjoy the read then we’ll discuss on the flip side.

~~~

“Peekaboo!” I burst through the front door, Ryan in my wake. I stopped in the hallway and looked for any sign of the orange cat who was currently on my sugar (I don’t like to swear) list. It only took a moment before the little creature stepped primly into the hall.

“I was napping,” the grumpy feline said, shooting me a gold-eyed glare. She waited for me to continue.

“I acknowledged them,” I said, deadpan.

“Oh.” Peekaboo’s snooty manor fell away, and she lowered those gold eyes.

“That’s all you have to say?” I stood, arms crossed, my eyes shooting daggers. Ryan, my boyfriend, stood mutely watching. He couldn’t hear Peekaboo.

But I could. Oh, boy, could I. My sweet little inherited orange cat bestowed on me, by way of tripping me on my way down the front porch steps, the “gift” of being able to communicate with her. Oh, and see ghosts. To be fair, her motives were pure. She needed me to have a near-death experience so I’d wake up and be able to listen to her.

Maybe I should back up, so you know what I’m talking about.

I used to live in Los Angeles. When I was twenty-one, I broke up a mugging and saved a dear little old lady. She was so grateful that seven years later she left me her estate in her will.

In addition to a house, an SUV and a large amount of money, I inherited Peekaboo, the talking cat. Of course, I didn’t know she was a talking cat at the time. After glaring at me for a few days, she apparently thought I was hopeless and pushed me down the stairs. So, I woke up in the hospital and saw a doctor with a clipboard walk through a wall. But that’s really immaterial to my story. My neighbor, who found me splattered on the porch steps, had called 911. When I was released from the hospital, Elsie, the neighbor, told me I’d flatlined and it took ten minutes of the paddles to bring me back to life.

As I hobbled into my house after Elsie brought me home from the hospital and made sure I was alright to be left alone, subject cat started talking to me. I thought I must have a brain tumor…somebody get me back to the hospital! I grabbed the fireplace poker and used it to keep her at bay. I think she may have rolled her eyes at me.

Then, before I was comfortable that she was talking…and I could understand her…she trotted out the ghost of Alice, the sweet little old lady who’d left me her house. Apparently, this whole episode was so I could see Alice and solve her murder.

That little task resulted in me, and my best friend Susie, and my boyfriend Ryan, who wasn’t my boyfriend at the time…he was the homicide detective I had to convince to help me solve said murder…and DC, a PI that Peekaboo had led me to…I didn’t mention that she’s psychic, did I? That’s how she knew I wouldn’t die when she tripped me on the stairs. Oh, brother….

~~~

Let me confess upfront: fantasy is not a genre I’m very familiar with. I don’t know the tropes and conventions so I hope more knowledgeable readers will chime in about this piece.

What did strike me immediately was the voice. It was humorous and conversational, which I enjoy. It felt like a friend relating a story after a few drinks…quite a few drinks.

Jumping back and forth in time on the first page is risky. The reader is not yet grounded in the story and can easily be confused. Too many events told out of order with too many characters being introduced all at once may frustrate the reader.

But that herky-jerky conversational tone is important to the humor. So, it’s a tightrope walk between smiles and irritation.

What I do know about fantasy is that world building is an important element. The author introduces an unfamiliar universe governed by its own rules. Those rules are different from the reality most people know. Readers need certain information to understand the imaginary world they’re stepping into. However, not all those elements need to be presented at once. Allow them to unfold during the course of the story.

But this example feels more like being hit with a firehose—too much information too soon. I’d be more interested and engaged if I understood a few ground rules.

My suggestion is to quickly establish a world in which only the narrator can hear a talking cat. Something like:

Peekaboo is a sweet orange cat I inherited from a dear little old lady named Alice I had saved from being mugged when I was 21. Seven years later Alice died, and to my great surprise, she left me a large sum of money, an SUV, a house, and Peekaboo, the talking cat.

You’re probably saying “Oh brother!” and I don’t blame you. I’m the only one who can hear Peekaboo, making it hard to convince people I’m not crazy.

Did I forget to mention the cat is psychic? And she wants me to solve Alice’s murder?

Let me back up a bit to when Peekaboo pushed me down the stairs (on purpose—the little brat) and knocked me out, so you understand how all this happened.

 

Regarding craft and word usage details:

Manor should be manner. The preferred spelling for alright is all right. Otherwise the manuscript didn’t have spelling errors. Good job.

Nice, smooth way to establish the narrator’s age (21 plus seven years later makes her 28).

Splattered sounds like blood or brains, and is not accurate for the scene described.

“I acknowledged them,” I said, deadpan. I have no idea what this sentence means. It  has no relation to the sentences before or after it. Who or what doesthem refer to?

Run-on sentences are tricky. They can convey humor but can also be confusing.

That little task resulted in me, and my best friend Susie, and my boyfriend Ryan, who wasn’t my boyfriend at the time…he was the homicide detective I had to convince to help me solve said murder…and DC, a PI that Peekaboo had led me to…I didn’t mention that she’s psychic, did I?

In a 55-word-long sentence, the reader is introduced to three characters (Susie, Ryan, DC), two professions (homicide detective and PI), the history of the romance (at first Ryan wasn’t her boyfriend), a problem (how to convince the detective/boyfriend to help the narrator solve a murder), and Peekaboo’s psychic ability.

Please slow down, Brave Author. Introduce the characters and establish their relationships to each other. Layer in the problem of solving a murder. Then add the punchline that Peekaboo is psychic.

The narrator’s disjointed thoughts have a curious logic that’s all her own, rather like listening to someone with early dementia. Obviously, the intelligence is still present, but connections keep shorting out.

That wacky voice can endear her to the reader but becomes frustrating and annoying if overdone. Preserve the humor and delete the babbling. 

Brave Author, the concept of a talking, psychic cat is humorous, charming, and intriguing. If you don’t confuse the reader, you have the potential for a delightful mystery. Thanks for sharing this first page with us.

~~~

TKZers: What elements of this first page appealed to you? What turned you off and why?

If you read humorous-cozy-fantasy genre, please educate those of us who are not familiar with it. What are reader expectations? Does this story meet those?