Rafael's Blog, page 2
March 31, 2017
Life and The Novel
I am a suspense writer. The novels I write all contain the requisite hired killers and assassins, bloody and violent clashes, good guys with bad streaks, bad guys with good intentions, and enough interesting minor characters to keep the story moving when the protagonist is off camera.
But as the narrative unfolds, the reader becomes aware of a parallel plot line. One which has cataclysmic, history-changing, earth-ending implications. My first novel is of the people and events surrounding the announcement of genetic immortality's discovery.
As an aside, an editor I met at a party, asked me what the premise was and in classic, unfazed New York cynicism remarked, "So what? You call a press conference and make the announcement. Big deal." When my response made it clear I was two step ahead of her, she volunteered to edit it at no cost just to read it.
The second is of an imperiled human race. For the first time in natural history, the remnants of a species marked for extinction comes face to face with its replacement. The third tells of a united Africa, having achieved the mantle of the world's preeminent superpower, is confronted by a desperate, last gasp America fielding Earth's first, autonomous, robotic army. Four of them. I've even written the unlikely novel of an American president unleashing a killer virus to make himself dictator. Recent events have Democrats believing I'm prescient. Anyway, you get the point.
Nine months ago, I thought myself within weeks of finishing my sixth novel. This blog exists because of it, as I thought I could use it to share the obstacles and heartbreaks of finding an agent and a publisher. Then disaster struck.
Because of my penchant for writing history-shattering events, I realized the main plot line used to set it up, would never meet the other in a coherent, credible way. I faced the awful, dreadful reality of having to erase 60% of the story. To start all over. It took a month for my obstinate side to accept I had no alternative. What took the rewrite so long?
Seraphim is the story of a Catholic infant orphaned in the remote mountains of western China and who comes to learn the Buddhist monks raising him are deadly assassins allied to the Vatican. The rewrite would allow me to seamlessly merge that plot line with the catastrophic event the reader remains unaware of until more than halfway through the book. It is the mother of all calamities and what justified the rewrite: Judgment Day.
That alone presented great technical difficulties. Every major religion has an End Time mythos. None can guarantee it won't happen tomorrow. Except Buddhism. The Buddha believed it would occur 5,000 years after his death. In Seraphim, the world learns it is forty days away. Which one would play out? How would humans and religious institutions react? What would it do to faith?
And in a story filled with priests, imams, and rabbis how to keep it impartial, respectful, yet pull no punches? Most important, otherwise it would be a complete cop out, what would be the Entity's reality and motive, and what would come after? I also felt a need to not waste the opportunity holding a mirror to humanity's conceits and failings provided. All the while never becoming preachy, never taking sides.
I am now writing of that Day sentence by sentence. Her words have to have meaning and impact. It's a remarkable thing being a novelist. For days now, I've been living inside the head of a god. I shake my head. And of course, all the while my protagonist, Trajan Wolfe, is closing on the antagonist. Justice cannot be halted. Even for Judgment Day.
Speaking of sentence by sentence, my difficulties revealed a mechanism I think you may all find useful. I often wasted time trying to figure out whole scenarios before sitting down to write them. Impatience became a great source of frustration. Seraphim's rewrite forced me to simplify things because life's other demands clamored for time. Each day's goal was to write one sentence. Accomplishing that was easy and imbued great satisfaction. It also never ended with just one.
Four chapters remain to write The End. Please pray for me.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S. How long is one billion seconds? 31.7 years. It is tempting to waste a few.
P.P.S. Thank you, EG. Your admonition to "just write the thing" (lol) saw me through my darkest days.
But as the narrative unfolds, the reader becomes aware of a parallel plot line. One which has cataclysmic, history-changing, earth-ending implications. My first novel is of the people and events surrounding the announcement of genetic immortality's discovery.
As an aside, an editor I met at a party, asked me what the premise was and in classic, unfazed New York cynicism remarked, "So what? You call a press conference and make the announcement. Big deal." When my response made it clear I was two step ahead of her, she volunteered to edit it at no cost just to read it.
The second is of an imperiled human race. For the first time in natural history, the remnants of a species marked for extinction comes face to face with its replacement. The third tells of a united Africa, having achieved the mantle of the world's preeminent superpower, is confronted by a desperate, last gasp America fielding Earth's first, autonomous, robotic army. Four of them. I've even written the unlikely novel of an American president unleashing a killer virus to make himself dictator. Recent events have Democrats believing I'm prescient. Anyway, you get the point.
Nine months ago, I thought myself within weeks of finishing my sixth novel. This blog exists because of it, as I thought I could use it to share the obstacles and heartbreaks of finding an agent and a publisher. Then disaster struck.
Because of my penchant for writing history-shattering events, I realized the main plot line used to set it up, would never meet the other in a coherent, credible way. I faced the awful, dreadful reality of having to erase 60% of the story. To start all over. It took a month for my obstinate side to accept I had no alternative. What took the rewrite so long?
Seraphim is the story of a Catholic infant orphaned in the remote mountains of western China and who comes to learn the Buddhist monks raising him are deadly assassins allied to the Vatican. The rewrite would allow me to seamlessly merge that plot line with the catastrophic event the reader remains unaware of until more than halfway through the book. It is the mother of all calamities and what justified the rewrite: Judgment Day.
That alone presented great technical difficulties. Every major religion has an End Time mythos. None can guarantee it won't happen tomorrow. Except Buddhism. The Buddha believed it would occur 5,000 years after his death. In Seraphim, the world learns it is forty days away. Which one would play out? How would humans and religious institutions react? What would it do to faith?
And in a story filled with priests, imams, and rabbis how to keep it impartial, respectful, yet pull no punches? Most important, otherwise it would be a complete cop out, what would be the Entity's reality and motive, and what would come after? I also felt a need to not waste the opportunity holding a mirror to humanity's conceits and failings provided. All the while never becoming preachy, never taking sides.
I am now writing of that Day sentence by sentence. Her words have to have meaning and impact. It's a remarkable thing being a novelist. For days now, I've been living inside the head of a god. I shake my head. And of course, all the while my protagonist, Trajan Wolfe, is closing on the antagonist. Justice cannot be halted. Even for Judgment Day.
Speaking of sentence by sentence, my difficulties revealed a mechanism I think you may all find useful. I often wasted time trying to figure out whole scenarios before sitting down to write them. Impatience became a great source of frustration. Seraphim's rewrite forced me to simplify things because life's other demands clamored for time. Each day's goal was to write one sentence. Accomplishing that was easy and imbued great satisfaction. It also never ended with just one.
Four chapters remain to write The End. Please pray for me.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S. How long is one billion seconds? 31.7 years. It is tempting to waste a few.
P.P.S. Thank you, EG. Your admonition to "just write the thing" (lol) saw me through my darkest days.
March 24, 2017
Plot, Narrative, and Voice
Earlier this week, I leaned back to review three just completed paragraphs. Some experts frown on this suggesting it is best to continue writing and not interrupt the creative flow. I tried that with an earlier novel and the huge editing job it left me became a nightmare. By the time I finished, I was ready to commit ritual harakiri before reading it again.
As I studied them, a veil of confusion descended over elements I thought I understood well. What is plot, what is narrative, what is voice? Where does one end and the other begin? The internet can be a dangerous place to answer such questions. Its nooks and crannies can lead to intellectual swamps and dark forests prowled by scholarly demons.
If, like me, you write in the third person, try this response when at a tea party where everyone has stiffened pinkies poking the air. "Do you write in the third person?"
"Why, yes. I consider myself a heterodiegetic novelist."
Let me share the following. Otherwise, no one would believe such things exist. Since I intend no embarrassment, I'll refrain from identifying the author.
"A novel in which no simple rules restrict the transition between different focalizations could be said to be unfocalized, but specific relationships between basic types of focalization constitute more complex focalization strategies ; for example, a novel could provide external focalization alternating with internal focalizations through three different characters, where the second character is never focalized except after the first, and three other characters are never focalized at all."
This is why I despair of ever reaching the lofty heights literary professors occupy. I remain singularly incapable of discerning meaning out of gobbledygook.
So why have a clear understanding of plot, narrative, and voice? Distinctions between them identify what each requires and frame the questions needed for proper answers. That will produce a crisp, well-paced novel that people will enjoy reading. But since I'm not a literary professor, I'll rely on a quote by a long-forgotten American politico. "I may not be able to define pornography, but I know it when I see it."
I'll begin with a simple plot: 'A man awakens to brush his teeth and makes a discovery'. As John Gregory Dunne, novelist and screenwriter, observed, "Plot is not narrative." A narrative encompasses many sentences. If the plot cannot be stated in one, succinct sentence, an unfocused novel may be in the offing. On a beautiful spring day, sitting on the veranda after eating a meal that included my favorite dessert (crumb apple pie and Hagen-Daz vanilla ice cream), I might allow for two. Simplicity is what will keep the story centered when overlaid with a complex narrative. As an aside, I left out the experts who make distinctions between story and plot. I found the definitions unpersuasive. But please, feel free.
Narrative is the arrangement, sequencing, the 'how' of the plot.
'Fernando, annoyed by the alarm, stumbles to the bathroom. Eyes half-closed, he squeezes the tube for one last nub and begins brushing.'
Quite a few literary types define plot as the sequence of events from start to finish and thus closely related to the narrative. We writers, on the other hand, have to actually write novels, a complex enough process. Keep the plot to one sentence and make everything else narrative. It greatly simplifies things.
Note that each of the sequential points in our one-scene narrative are subjective. Fernando could awaken before the alarm, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. The tube might be full or completely empty. Back stories and flash forwards might apply. The combinations and coordination create narrative. Again, identifying properly what is narrative allows for analysis uncomplicated by questions of style, tense, grammar, clauses, punctuation, etc.
Similarly, once we make our narrative decisions, the decks are clear for overlaying style, i.e., 'voice'. Voice also includes decisions about 'whose voice', but matters of first or third person are issues of choice not debate. For brevity and convenience, I've selected third person. The door remains open, however, for those of you who would like to contribute to our simple plot with something in the first person.
'Fernando twisted around, punching the pillow for a deeper fluff. Buzzing? How had bees gotten into the room? He sat up, rising dread confirming what he already knew. Third alarm. 7:30am. Late again. He sprang from the bed, banging his toe against the door. Deep inhales wasted precious minutes before throbbing nerves eased.
He hopped to the bathroom, twisting faucets while grabbing toothpaste and brush. Damn! Damn! He'd forgotten to buy toothpaste. He squeezed and squeezed, bent and twisted, pressed and pressured. Come on, come on. A tiny nub poked its head out. Don't drop it, Fernando.
He brushed, forearm piston-like. Three on each side, front, top, bottom, cheeks, tongue. Rinse, spit, rinse spit. Habit straightened him before the mirror, mouth open for inspection.
He froze. Ice slid into his groin and down both legs. Nerveless fingers dropped the brush. His toe denied he still slept. Fangs filled his mouth.'
Alternatively, let's juggle the narrative a bit, but stay focused on the same plot.
'Fernando paced. An hour already. A dull, deep fear burned a heart that jammed his throat. Nothing made sense. And no way could he go to work. Not like this. For the thousandth time, he retraced the morning. The alarm had sounded. He got up, stumbled to the bathroom, and began brushing his teeth. He rinsed and opened his mouth. The world changed.
He marched back to the bathroom, needing to be sure. His reflection looked normal. Hesitation washed over him. Fear swelled in its wake. He opened his mouth. Fangs. Sharp, glistening fangs.
His gaze shifted. Behind him, a woman slid into the entrance. He'd forgotten about her; couldn't remember her name. She leaned against the frame, her proud, nude body needed no clothing. Penetrating eyes locked onto his. A half-smile creased her lips. "Good morning."'
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S. I enjoy reading the reviews posted by fellow writers to the Review Group. A frequent criticism is of writers who confuse the narrative by head-hopping. Though mindful and respectful of the admonition, as a 3rd person writer I chafe at the restriction. Scenes with multiple characters allow me to present the reader with the conflicting tensions that drive drama. Made all the more so by dynamic, fluid POV shifts.
I came across this definition by Mark Nichol, blogger for Daily Writing Tips: "Narrative point of view can vary within the same story, either by section or chapter or even within the same passage (emphasis mine). "Ahh. A writer after my own heart. (-:
As I studied them, a veil of confusion descended over elements I thought I understood well. What is plot, what is narrative, what is voice? Where does one end and the other begin? The internet can be a dangerous place to answer such questions. Its nooks and crannies can lead to intellectual swamps and dark forests prowled by scholarly demons.
If, like me, you write in the third person, try this response when at a tea party where everyone has stiffened pinkies poking the air. "Do you write in the third person?"
"Why, yes. I consider myself a heterodiegetic novelist."
Let me share the following. Otherwise, no one would believe such things exist. Since I intend no embarrassment, I'll refrain from identifying the author.
"A novel in which no simple rules restrict the transition between different focalizations could be said to be unfocalized, but specific relationships between basic types of focalization constitute more complex focalization strategies ; for example, a novel could provide external focalization alternating with internal focalizations through three different characters, where the second character is never focalized except after the first, and three other characters are never focalized at all."
This is why I despair of ever reaching the lofty heights literary professors occupy. I remain singularly incapable of discerning meaning out of gobbledygook.
So why have a clear understanding of plot, narrative, and voice? Distinctions between them identify what each requires and frame the questions needed for proper answers. That will produce a crisp, well-paced novel that people will enjoy reading. But since I'm not a literary professor, I'll rely on a quote by a long-forgotten American politico. "I may not be able to define pornography, but I know it when I see it."
I'll begin with a simple plot: 'A man awakens to brush his teeth and makes a discovery'. As John Gregory Dunne, novelist and screenwriter, observed, "Plot is not narrative." A narrative encompasses many sentences. If the plot cannot be stated in one, succinct sentence, an unfocused novel may be in the offing. On a beautiful spring day, sitting on the veranda after eating a meal that included my favorite dessert (crumb apple pie and Hagen-Daz vanilla ice cream), I might allow for two. Simplicity is what will keep the story centered when overlaid with a complex narrative. As an aside, I left out the experts who make distinctions between story and plot. I found the definitions unpersuasive. But please, feel free.
Narrative is the arrangement, sequencing, the 'how' of the plot.
'Fernando, annoyed by the alarm, stumbles to the bathroom. Eyes half-closed, he squeezes the tube for one last nub and begins brushing.'
Quite a few literary types define plot as the sequence of events from start to finish and thus closely related to the narrative. We writers, on the other hand, have to actually write novels, a complex enough process. Keep the plot to one sentence and make everything else narrative. It greatly simplifies things.
Note that each of the sequential points in our one-scene narrative are subjective. Fernando could awaken before the alarm, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. The tube might be full or completely empty. Back stories and flash forwards might apply. The combinations and coordination create narrative. Again, identifying properly what is narrative allows for analysis uncomplicated by questions of style, tense, grammar, clauses, punctuation, etc.
Similarly, once we make our narrative decisions, the decks are clear for overlaying style, i.e., 'voice'. Voice also includes decisions about 'whose voice', but matters of first or third person are issues of choice not debate. For brevity and convenience, I've selected third person. The door remains open, however, for those of you who would like to contribute to our simple plot with something in the first person.
'Fernando twisted around, punching the pillow for a deeper fluff. Buzzing? How had bees gotten into the room? He sat up, rising dread confirming what he already knew. Third alarm. 7:30am. Late again. He sprang from the bed, banging his toe against the door. Deep inhales wasted precious minutes before throbbing nerves eased.
He hopped to the bathroom, twisting faucets while grabbing toothpaste and brush. Damn! Damn! He'd forgotten to buy toothpaste. He squeezed and squeezed, bent and twisted, pressed and pressured. Come on, come on. A tiny nub poked its head out. Don't drop it, Fernando.
He brushed, forearm piston-like. Three on each side, front, top, bottom, cheeks, tongue. Rinse, spit, rinse spit. Habit straightened him before the mirror, mouth open for inspection.
He froze. Ice slid into his groin and down both legs. Nerveless fingers dropped the brush. His toe denied he still slept. Fangs filled his mouth.'
Alternatively, let's juggle the narrative a bit, but stay focused on the same plot.
'Fernando paced. An hour already. A dull, deep fear burned a heart that jammed his throat. Nothing made sense. And no way could he go to work. Not like this. For the thousandth time, he retraced the morning. The alarm had sounded. He got up, stumbled to the bathroom, and began brushing his teeth. He rinsed and opened his mouth. The world changed.
He marched back to the bathroom, needing to be sure. His reflection looked normal. Hesitation washed over him. Fear swelled in its wake. He opened his mouth. Fangs. Sharp, glistening fangs.
His gaze shifted. Behind him, a woman slid into the entrance. He'd forgotten about her; couldn't remember her name. She leaned against the frame, her proud, nude body needed no clothing. Penetrating eyes locked onto his. A half-smile creased her lips. "Good morning."'
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S. I enjoy reading the reviews posted by fellow writers to the Review Group. A frequent criticism is of writers who confuse the narrative by head-hopping. Though mindful and respectful of the admonition, as a 3rd person writer I chafe at the restriction. Scenes with multiple characters allow me to present the reader with the conflicting tensions that drive drama. Made all the more so by dynamic, fluid POV shifts.
I came across this definition by Mark Nichol, blogger for Daily Writing Tips: "Narrative point of view can vary within the same story, either by section or chapter or even within the same passage (emphasis mine). "Ahh. A writer after my own heart. (-:
March 17, 2017
Book Covers
We all hear the constant refrain of how important it is to get a professional book cover. I don’t want to reject that advice but a little context is in order, because the immediate question that comes to mind is, what does a professional book cover mean?
Below, I’ve listed some random covers I picked out from Amazon’s near endless listings and kept them at the viewing size and resolution used by potential readers when browsing. This is an important point. Handsome fonts with gorgeous textures, characters with movie star looks and physiques, rich, deep colors, and sweeping vistas, that you will be charged for, are lost when displayed by Amazon.
For discussion purposes, I used the more liberal rule of thumb that reviews are 5% of sales and included individual statistics at the post’s end.
Cover 1:
Cover 2:
Cover 3:
Cover 4:
Cover 5:
Cover 6:
Cover 7:
Cover 8:
Cover 9:
Which cover is best? An impossible question. Ask ten people, you’ll get no consensus. Okay, which cover is professional? If you can’t distinguish, that is telling because the disparity in reviews is tremendous. Which then brings us to the question, which one has the most reviews? Which one has no reviews?
Look closely at the cover for #6, “You Are a Badass”. Can you get more cheesy than that? It’s text on a yellow background! How much effort did that take? And it’s a NY Times bestseller!
So, did you pick #3 as the most professional? Why not? It had 11,514 reviews ($230,280/£189,221/€215,830). Did you pick #4 as the least professional? It had zero reviews. Is it so much worse than #8 which had 7,589 reviews? Or how about #9? It had one review.
And why isn’t #3 a NY Times best seller when #6 made it with only 2,113 reviews? It only takes about 10,000 sales to make the list. How do I know that when the formula for inclusion is a trade secret? Well, documented stories abound of marketing companies and individual authors making the list by buying 10,000 copies of their own book!
Anyway, the point is the impact book covers have on sales is marginal at best. But wait, you say. Surely an attractive cover attracts readers. Perhaps. But as my Blog Post
Book Reviews: A Discussion
details, only 3% of Amazon sales are the result of book browsing. More importantly, however, and as the above images indicate, what happens when they’re ALL attractive?
Nonetheless, my point is not to say an attractive book cover is not important but to lay the foundation for a better question. Given that in all likelihood, a given cover will not be that much better than any other, how much should one pay for a book cover?
I say one that is at least as good as the above, and in many instances much better, should cost between $100 and $200 (£80 - £160) with the sweet spot being $130 to $170. Prices of $6, $7, $800 are paid by the art departments of big publishing firms. While the covers are nice, they are NOT $4 or $500 better. The reason the publishers pay those prices is that when they send reports back to their NY Times best selling clients, they want to show they contracted the “best”.
Now, I am no Luddite. I build websites, program in three languages, and used to build back office database systems for corporate clients. But in our headlong rush to a future of wondrous technology, let us not leave behind the wisdom of the ages. Never judge a book by its cover.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S.
Cover 1: 1,309 reviews
Cover 2: 214 reviews
Cover 3: 11,514 reviews
Cover 4: 0 reviews
Cover 5: 146 reviews
Cover 6: 2,113 reviews
Cover 7: 2,348 reviews
Cover 8: 7,589 reviews
Cover 9: 1 review
Below, I’ve listed some random covers I picked out from Amazon’s near endless listings and kept them at the viewing size and resolution used by potential readers when browsing. This is an important point. Handsome fonts with gorgeous textures, characters with movie star looks and physiques, rich, deep colors, and sweeping vistas, that you will be charged for, are lost when displayed by Amazon.
For discussion purposes, I used the more liberal rule of thumb that reviews are 5% of sales and included individual statistics at the post’s end.
Cover 1:
Cover 2:
Cover 3:
Cover 4:
Cover 5:
Cover 6:
Cover 7:
Cover 8:
Cover 9:
Which cover is best? An impossible question. Ask ten people, you’ll get no consensus. Okay, which cover is professional? If you can’t distinguish, that is telling because the disparity in reviews is tremendous. Which then brings us to the question, which one has the most reviews? Which one has no reviews?
Look closely at the cover for #6, “You Are a Badass”. Can you get more cheesy than that? It’s text on a yellow background! How much effort did that take? And it’s a NY Times bestseller!
So, did you pick #3 as the most professional? Why not? It had 11,514 reviews ($230,280/£189,221/€215,830). Did you pick #4 as the least professional? It had zero reviews. Is it so much worse than #8 which had 7,589 reviews? Or how about #9? It had one review.
And why isn’t #3 a NY Times best seller when #6 made it with only 2,113 reviews? It only takes about 10,000 sales to make the list. How do I know that when the formula for inclusion is a trade secret? Well, documented stories abound of marketing companies and individual authors making the list by buying 10,000 copies of their own book!
Anyway, the point is the impact book covers have on sales is marginal at best. But wait, you say. Surely an attractive cover attracts readers. Perhaps. But as my Blog Post
Book Reviews: A Discussion
details, only 3% of Amazon sales are the result of book browsing. More importantly, however, and as the above images indicate, what happens when they’re ALL attractive?
Nonetheless, my point is not to say an attractive book cover is not important but to lay the foundation for a better question. Given that in all likelihood, a given cover will not be that much better than any other, how much should one pay for a book cover?
I say one that is at least as good as the above, and in many instances much better, should cost between $100 and $200 (£80 - £160) with the sweet spot being $130 to $170. Prices of $6, $7, $800 are paid by the art departments of big publishing firms. While the covers are nice, they are NOT $4 or $500 better. The reason the publishers pay those prices is that when they send reports back to their NY Times best selling clients, they want to show they contracted the “best”.
Now, I am no Luddite. I build websites, program in three languages, and used to build back office database systems for corporate clients. But in our headlong rush to a future of wondrous technology, let us not leave behind the wisdom of the ages. Never judge a book by its cover.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S.
Cover 1: 1,309 reviews
Cover 2: 214 reviews
Cover 3: 11,514 reviews
Cover 4: 0 reviews
Cover 5: 146 reviews
Cover 6: 2,113 reviews
Cover 7: 2,348 reviews
Cover 8: 7,589 reviews
Cover 9: 1 review
March 4, 2017
Brits 2, Americans 0
I often find myself window shopping the Internet's less frequented alleyways looking for unpretentious viewpoints on writing's more complex topics. I had decided to once and for all gain a deeper understanding of narrative vs plot's subtleties when I fell upon a blogger named Caro Clarke.
As readers of Kindle by the Sell know, I've often cited blogger Emma Darwin in many posts because of her incisive insights. Though I give
This Itch of Writing my highest recommendation, she has a cerebral, more professorial style.
Caro, now the 2nd blogger I've bookmarked, is earthier, more direct, and quite witty. I include her post below titled "A Beginners' Four Faults" in order to facilitate a discussion. My commentary is contained within asterisks.
A Beginners' Four Faults
As an editor, I know when I am reading someone's first novel. I have nicknames for the four give-away faults beginners make:
(1) Walk and Chew Gum
(2) Furry Dice
(3) Tea, Vicar?
(4) Styrofoam.
I see at least one of these in every manuscript where the author has not mastered the craft of writing before submitting in his or her work. What are these four faults and, more importantly, how can you cure them?
(1) Walk and Chew Gum
The writer has not integrated action and dialogue, internal monologue and action, or internal monologue with dialogue. It is as if the characters can do only one thing at a time. An example:
"If you think you're going to town you'd better think again," said Ralph. He put down his can of beer.
"I'm not having any daughter of mine going to a Cantrell boy's party, and that's final!"
"Oh, Pa! How could you be so cruel!" JoBeth cried.
Then, hunting in her pockets for a tissue, she dried her eyes and stared at him defiantly. "If I want to go, how can you stop me?" she demanded.
Ralph knew this would happen. She had always been independent, like her mother. He half-lurched to his feet. "You little hussy!" he bellowed. Running up the stairs, JoBeth turned at the landing.
"I am going, do you hear? I am."
Not integrating action and dialogue makes for jerky, lifeless prose. Combine, combine, toujours combine:
"If you think you're going to town you'd better think again," Ralph snapped, putting down his can of beer. She was too damn much like her mother. "I'm not having any daughter of mine going to a Cantrell boy's party, and that's final!"
"Oh, Pa! How could you be so cruel!"
JoBeth hunted her pockets for a tissue, dried her eyes and stared at him defiantly. "If I want to go, how can you stop me?"
Ralph half-lurched to his feet, bellowing, "You little hussy!" But JoBeth was already upstairs.
"I am going, do you hear? I am."
This might not be award-winning prose, but it reflects the reality of the action and feelings better by having action, thought and dialogue knitted together.
** JoBeth? Pa? At this point I thought Caro must be American **
(2) Furry Dice
** Definitely American, I thought. Who else has furry dice? **
Adjectives, adverbs and prepositions are furry dice hanging from a car's mirror. They don't do anything for the car's performance, they simply clutter the place. I once stripped a fifth of a novel by removing words and phrases such as 'very' 'up' 'down' 'over' 'about' 'some' 'a little' 'a bit' 'somewhat' 'whole' 'just' and other modifiers. For instance:
She picked up the gun and aimed it straight at him. His smile disappeared as he lifted up his hands into the air. She waved him over to the wall, saying, "Spread 'em out, and no funny business, you hear?" She checked all of his pockets for the money, then stepped back. "Okay, I'm convinced. You haven't got it."
This would be better without the modifiers, and with the tighter language you'll have to write to replace them:
She snatched the gun and aimed. His smile disappeared as his hands climbed. She waved him to the wall, saying, "Spread 'em, and no funny business, you hear?" She checked his pockets for the money, then retreated. "Okay, I'm convinced. You don't have it."
59 words have become 44, and even then the passage could be trimmed. But the first, necessary action, before you seriously begin to rewrite, is to grab that swimming pool net and remove clogging, unnecessary modifiers that muddy the water. Hemingway didn't need them; you don't need them.
** Though referencing Hemingway confirms her divinity, I filter Ms. Clarke's edit. With great respect.
She snatched the gun and aimed. No longer smiling, his hands climbed (doubled pronoun). She waved him to the wall, "Spread 'em, and no funny business, you hear?" Searched pockets revealed no money. Cora retreated. "Okay, I'm convinced. You don't have it." **
(3) Tea, Vicar?
"More tea, Vicar?" Angela asked, taking his cup and placing it on the tray beside her.
"Don't mind if I do," said the Rev. Phelps.
"That was two sugars, wasn't it?" she asked, pouring the fragrant liquid from the heirloom pot into his cup and stirring in the milk. When he nodded, she dropped in two sugar lumps, stirred again, and handed him back the cup.
"Thank you, my dear," he said, accepting it with a smile.
How often have I read loving descriptions of cups of tea being poured, pots of coffee being made, even whole meals cooked and eaten? Or rooms cleaned or decorated, or journeys made? Too darn often. Writers get a high out of conjuring a tableau from thin air, and in the white heat of creation forget that tableaux of mundane details are not exciting. The reader will not share that euphoria.
Reading about a cup of tea being poured is about as exciting as watching paint dry. How does this scene help further the plot or character development? It doesn't. The writer simply got carried away with describing everything. Fiction is supposed to be like life, but with the dull bits removed, not spelled out in excruciating detail. Examine your work. Test every scene. Is there anything that you think of as 'setting the scene' or 'capturing the atmosphere'? If there is, cut it. Every scene needs conflict and movement to give it life, and tea for the Vicar has neither.
** Again, Ms. Clarke makes an excellent point. 'Scene writing' is the purview of literary fiction. As Elmore Leonard observed, "If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it."
However
The example cries out for far more nuance. Detail. Staid, banal detail can place a reader on a delicious edge of suspense. No action necessary. For discussion's sake, let's drop the word 'Vicar'. A chapter begins with the innocuous, "More tea?"
Alarm bells begin to sound. As the plot has previously revealed, the innocent question announces the killer.
"Two sugars is it?" Her guest nodded.
Alarm bells are now clamoring. Cyanide laces the lumps. Worse, the victim is identified only as 'guest'. Who is it? The plot has several possibilities. Now the writer, in a classic demonstration of the Iceberg Theory, can use the conversation to slowly reveal the identity of the guest. In excruciating detail.
Or how about this scenario? Let's replace 'Vicar' with 'James', our intrepid hero. The previous chapter ended with James returning home after another fruitless day spent hunting the killer. Under his door, he finds a note from his upstairs tenant, "Must speak with you." Weary and haggard, he climbs the stairs.
The next chapter begins, "More tea, James?" The reader is infused with the horror of learning the killer is the unassuming, always pleasant, upstairs tenant. James has stepped onto the spider's web. The author can now turn the conversation into tedious chit chat or better yet, sprinkle loose plot points in need of closing throughout the tedium that leave the reader with a sense of, "Oh, that's why." Meanwhile, she moves the sugar bowl closer... **
(4) Styrofoam
This is related to Tea, Vicar?, but it arises not from self-indulgence, but panic. Styrofoam is the padding novice writers stuff into their novels because they haven't enough story to tell (or think they don't) and need to create word count. Padding is distinguishable because suddenly the forward movement of the story stops dead. Nothing happens for a few pages. I read, I read, and at the end I've learned nothing about the characters I needed to know, nor have the characters done anything essential to the story. Every scene has to propel the plot to the crisis that will resolve the story. Styrofoam does neither.
If you fear you haven't enough narrative, add more conflict. Don't give me tours of the countryside, long rambling chats, the characters making travel arrangements, or any other lifeless block of prose. I want action. I want inexorable movement towards the crisis. I want to be gripped. So cut the padding. If that makes your novel too short, re-think your premise, your plot, your primary and secondary characters, and rewrite.
If you want to be published, you'll have to cure these faults yourself, because your editor won't do it for you. She'll just send it back.
** Agreed, but re-thinking your premise implies a re-write of the novel. Drastic. It might be necessary but only as a last resort. As I finish them, I maintain a table that lists the novel's chapter numbers, titles, and a brief summary. It helps when I need to identify who, what, and when of something that has already occurred. It also helps to identify plot points and characters I can expand if the word count is short of my genre class. Some of my best side stories have emerged from this process.
I give Caro Clarke my highest recommendation. She deserves to be bookmarked under 'Writer Resources'. Like Emma Darwin, since I'm not prone to fawning or hero worship (no jokes please!), she has no idea I exist. Some examples of her other posts.
To Plot or not to plot.
Margaret, Maggie, Marge, and Meg: problems with names and how to avoid them.
Transitions: getting your story through time and place.
Are you a writer? Take the quiz.
Caro Clarke Writer
Finally, I cleverly deduced she must be British when I read the following.
"...any dispute concerning use of this website will be determined exclusively by the English Courts."
I'm guessing she also voted for Brexit, a position this independent-minded American cheered. She could have said 'British Courts'. :-)
**
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
As readers of Kindle by the Sell know, I've often cited blogger Emma Darwin in many posts because of her incisive insights. Though I give
This Itch of Writing my highest recommendation, she has a cerebral, more professorial style.
Caro, now the 2nd blogger I've bookmarked, is earthier, more direct, and quite witty. I include her post below titled "A Beginners' Four Faults" in order to facilitate a discussion. My commentary is contained within asterisks.
A Beginners' Four Faults
As an editor, I know when I am reading someone's first novel. I have nicknames for the four give-away faults beginners make:
(1) Walk and Chew Gum
(2) Furry Dice
(3) Tea, Vicar?
(4) Styrofoam.
I see at least one of these in every manuscript where the author has not mastered the craft of writing before submitting in his or her work. What are these four faults and, more importantly, how can you cure them?
(1) Walk and Chew Gum
The writer has not integrated action and dialogue, internal monologue and action, or internal monologue with dialogue. It is as if the characters can do only one thing at a time. An example:
"If you think you're going to town you'd better think again," said Ralph. He put down his can of beer.
"I'm not having any daughter of mine going to a Cantrell boy's party, and that's final!"
"Oh, Pa! How could you be so cruel!" JoBeth cried.
Then, hunting in her pockets for a tissue, she dried her eyes and stared at him defiantly. "If I want to go, how can you stop me?" she demanded.
Ralph knew this would happen. She had always been independent, like her mother. He half-lurched to his feet. "You little hussy!" he bellowed. Running up the stairs, JoBeth turned at the landing.
"I am going, do you hear? I am."
Not integrating action and dialogue makes for jerky, lifeless prose. Combine, combine, toujours combine:
"If you think you're going to town you'd better think again," Ralph snapped, putting down his can of beer. She was too damn much like her mother. "I'm not having any daughter of mine going to a Cantrell boy's party, and that's final!"
"Oh, Pa! How could you be so cruel!"
JoBeth hunted her pockets for a tissue, dried her eyes and stared at him defiantly. "If I want to go, how can you stop me?"
Ralph half-lurched to his feet, bellowing, "You little hussy!" But JoBeth was already upstairs.
"I am going, do you hear? I am."
This might not be award-winning prose, but it reflects the reality of the action and feelings better by having action, thought and dialogue knitted together.
** JoBeth? Pa? At this point I thought Caro must be American **
(2) Furry Dice
** Definitely American, I thought. Who else has furry dice? **
Adjectives, adverbs and prepositions are furry dice hanging from a car's mirror. They don't do anything for the car's performance, they simply clutter the place. I once stripped a fifth of a novel by removing words and phrases such as 'very' 'up' 'down' 'over' 'about' 'some' 'a little' 'a bit' 'somewhat' 'whole' 'just' and other modifiers. For instance:
She picked up the gun and aimed it straight at him. His smile disappeared as he lifted up his hands into the air. She waved him over to the wall, saying, "Spread 'em out, and no funny business, you hear?" She checked all of his pockets for the money, then stepped back. "Okay, I'm convinced. You haven't got it."
This would be better without the modifiers, and with the tighter language you'll have to write to replace them:
She snatched the gun and aimed. His smile disappeared as his hands climbed. She waved him to the wall, saying, "Spread 'em, and no funny business, you hear?" She checked his pockets for the money, then retreated. "Okay, I'm convinced. You don't have it."
59 words have become 44, and even then the passage could be trimmed. But the first, necessary action, before you seriously begin to rewrite, is to grab that swimming pool net and remove clogging, unnecessary modifiers that muddy the water. Hemingway didn't need them; you don't need them.
** Though referencing Hemingway confirms her divinity, I filter Ms. Clarke's edit. With great respect.
She snatched the gun and aimed. No longer smiling, his hands climbed (doubled pronoun). She waved him to the wall, "Spread 'em, and no funny business, you hear?" Searched pockets revealed no money. Cora retreated. "Okay, I'm convinced. You don't have it." **
(3) Tea, Vicar?
"More tea, Vicar?" Angela asked, taking his cup and placing it on the tray beside her.
"Don't mind if I do," said the Rev. Phelps.
"That was two sugars, wasn't it?" she asked, pouring the fragrant liquid from the heirloom pot into his cup and stirring in the milk. When he nodded, she dropped in two sugar lumps, stirred again, and handed him back the cup.
"Thank you, my dear," he said, accepting it with a smile.
How often have I read loving descriptions of cups of tea being poured, pots of coffee being made, even whole meals cooked and eaten? Or rooms cleaned or decorated, or journeys made? Too darn often. Writers get a high out of conjuring a tableau from thin air, and in the white heat of creation forget that tableaux of mundane details are not exciting. The reader will not share that euphoria.
Reading about a cup of tea being poured is about as exciting as watching paint dry. How does this scene help further the plot or character development? It doesn't. The writer simply got carried away with describing everything. Fiction is supposed to be like life, but with the dull bits removed, not spelled out in excruciating detail. Examine your work. Test every scene. Is there anything that you think of as 'setting the scene' or 'capturing the atmosphere'? If there is, cut it. Every scene needs conflict and movement to give it life, and tea for the Vicar has neither.
** Again, Ms. Clarke makes an excellent point. 'Scene writing' is the purview of literary fiction. As Elmore Leonard observed, "If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it."
However
The example cries out for far more nuance. Detail. Staid, banal detail can place a reader on a delicious edge of suspense. No action necessary. For discussion's sake, let's drop the word 'Vicar'. A chapter begins with the innocuous, "More tea?"
Alarm bells begin to sound. As the plot has previously revealed, the innocent question announces the killer.
"Two sugars is it?" Her guest nodded.
Alarm bells are now clamoring. Cyanide laces the lumps. Worse, the victim is identified only as 'guest'. Who is it? The plot has several possibilities. Now the writer, in a classic demonstration of the Iceberg Theory, can use the conversation to slowly reveal the identity of the guest. In excruciating detail.
Or how about this scenario? Let's replace 'Vicar' with 'James', our intrepid hero. The previous chapter ended with James returning home after another fruitless day spent hunting the killer. Under his door, he finds a note from his upstairs tenant, "Must speak with you." Weary and haggard, he climbs the stairs.
The next chapter begins, "More tea, James?" The reader is infused with the horror of learning the killer is the unassuming, always pleasant, upstairs tenant. James has stepped onto the spider's web. The author can now turn the conversation into tedious chit chat or better yet, sprinkle loose plot points in need of closing throughout the tedium that leave the reader with a sense of, "Oh, that's why." Meanwhile, she moves the sugar bowl closer... **
(4) Styrofoam
This is related to Tea, Vicar?, but it arises not from self-indulgence, but panic. Styrofoam is the padding novice writers stuff into their novels because they haven't enough story to tell (or think they don't) and need to create word count. Padding is distinguishable because suddenly the forward movement of the story stops dead. Nothing happens for a few pages. I read, I read, and at the end I've learned nothing about the characters I needed to know, nor have the characters done anything essential to the story. Every scene has to propel the plot to the crisis that will resolve the story. Styrofoam does neither.
If you fear you haven't enough narrative, add more conflict. Don't give me tours of the countryside, long rambling chats, the characters making travel arrangements, or any other lifeless block of prose. I want action. I want inexorable movement towards the crisis. I want to be gripped. So cut the padding. If that makes your novel too short, re-think your premise, your plot, your primary and secondary characters, and rewrite.
If you want to be published, you'll have to cure these faults yourself, because your editor won't do it for you. She'll just send it back.
** Agreed, but re-thinking your premise implies a re-write of the novel. Drastic. It might be necessary but only as a last resort. As I finish them, I maintain a table that lists the novel's chapter numbers, titles, and a brief summary. It helps when I need to identify who, what, and when of something that has already occurred. It also helps to identify plot points and characters I can expand if the word count is short of my genre class. Some of my best side stories have emerged from this process.
I give Caro Clarke my highest recommendation. She deserves to be bookmarked under 'Writer Resources'. Like Emma Darwin, since I'm not prone to fawning or hero worship (no jokes please!), she has no idea I exist. Some examples of her other posts.
To Plot or not to plot.
Margaret, Maggie, Marge, and Meg: problems with names and how to avoid them.
Transitions: getting your story through time and place.
Are you a writer? Take the quiz.
Caro Clarke Writer
Finally, I cleverly deduced she must be British when I read the following.
"...any dispute concerning use of this website will be determined exclusively by the English Courts."
I'm guessing she also voted for Brexit, a position this independent-minded American cheered. She could have said 'British Courts'. :-)
**
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
February 24, 2017
Organizing Research
We writers understand the difficulty communicating via the written word alone presents. Without facial expressions, body language, or voice tone, it's an uphill struggle. Hence, emoticons and the constant refrain to show and not tell.
I use blog posts to inform and strive to do so in an interesting manner. Its very nature, however, lends itself to sometimes appearing dogmatic and authoritative. No two words could be farther from my personality. Unless, of course, the subject is adverbs. Then I, ahem, wholeheartedly
embrace it.
So the methods I will outline here are meant to present alternatives, options, and perhaps spur your imagination to initiate your own techniques in the nuts and bolts of organizing one's research. Do share yours. Writers are always on the lookout for better mousetraps.
No doubt about it. If you aspire to more than 3-star reviews, research is essential and we are more than fortunate to live in the age we do. Obviously, our predecessors did but can any of us imagine writing without a word processor? Modern information systems have freed us from the restrictions of writing what we know. Search engines permit limitless imaginations.
But how to research is not the subject of this post. All I will affirm here is, 1, my conviction the Internet has everything, needing only the properly phrased search query. And 2, about eight to ten pages of research produces one paragraph of plot. So, where to store it all?
Having it scattered across your hard drive in documents, post-its, notes, and folders soon gets old. It's what I used to do and requires mental effort to track it all. Instead, research is tailor-made for a database. Wait! Stop that eye-rolling!
I use Microsoft Office. It comes with one built-in that requires NO programming - OneNote. But
you're not limited to that. Google 'electronic assistant', 'personal organizer', 'information
manager', and you'll get pages of suggestions. The Personal Organizers actually look like those
bulky things we once opened at meetings to appear important when asked what our schedule
looked like. But since Office is ubiquitous, I'll use it to frame the discussion.
Its interface could not be simpler or more intuitive. It's based on, and looks like, the note books
used in school that we divided by colored tabs and identified by subject. I've created one, repeat one, Note Book that contains multiple sections identified by novel title. Each section contains multiple pages on which I paste the researched data. And each page can be specifically named.
So if I click on a particular novel, it lists the following pages: Factoids, Protagonist, Antagonist,
Characters, Timeline (to track seasonal changes), Chapters (one-sentence summaries), and the universal 'Misc'.
You can search by page, novel, or the entire Note Book. One feature I find invaluable is the ability to paste images allowing the 'Factoid' page to contain maps of the places, regions, and cities the plot revolves around.
Incidentally, if any of you are also planning an assault on the Papal living quarters, the Vatican has an online map of it. Get it now. Once I release my new novel I suspect it will disappear.
OneNote automatically adds a live link that identifies the source when anything is pasted to it. If you use OneNote, then you probably use Windows and it can be configured to automatically paste stuff found on the Internet into OneNote's unassigned category. It's a timesaver that allows your research to continue until once logged off. You can then move the researched data into permanent locations at your leisure.
If you require further organization, OneNote allows the creation on any page of multi-column tables you can add rows to as the data grows. Text formatting options are a click away and since it is 2017, OneNote is cloud-ready allowing safe, off site backup of all your work.
But what about that catch-all, junk drawer? You know what I'm talking about. Where you throw stuff in that doesn't belong anywhere else. Separated by a blank page, mine is at the bottom of my active manuscript. It's crammed full of, you know, stuff. Writer stuff. Like this.
- an em dash (I can never remember the keyboard shortcut or menu location)
* * * chapter break (otherwise Word starts a bullet list)
Dates, notes to self, foreign words (Chuanggua - Shaolin long robe)
Unused names: Jacek Kominski, Bernardino Farnese
Extra (real) titles in case I need them: President of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City
State, Chief Curator of the Louvre
And lots more but brevity obtains. None of it is organized. It's a junk drawer. If you have categories and methodologies I haven't thought of, please do share.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S.
In my post of January13th, The Case For and Against Adverbs, I mentioned an editor who alerted me to the redundancies the preposition 'of' sometimes creates. I read the following in the, umm, august, New York Times.
"These new Earth-size planets orbit a dwarf star named Trappist-1 about 40 light-years from Earth. Some of them could have water on their surfaces."
Appalling.
I use blog posts to inform and strive to do so in an interesting manner. Its very nature, however, lends itself to sometimes appearing dogmatic and authoritative. No two words could be farther from my personality. Unless, of course, the subject is adverbs. Then I, ahem, wholeheartedly
embrace it.
So the methods I will outline here are meant to present alternatives, options, and perhaps spur your imagination to initiate your own techniques in the nuts and bolts of organizing one's research. Do share yours. Writers are always on the lookout for better mousetraps.
No doubt about it. If you aspire to more than 3-star reviews, research is essential and we are more than fortunate to live in the age we do. Obviously, our predecessors did but can any of us imagine writing without a word processor? Modern information systems have freed us from the restrictions of writing what we know. Search engines permit limitless imaginations.
But how to research is not the subject of this post. All I will affirm here is, 1, my conviction the Internet has everything, needing only the properly phrased search query. And 2, about eight to ten pages of research produces one paragraph of plot. So, where to store it all?
Having it scattered across your hard drive in documents, post-its, notes, and folders soon gets old. It's what I used to do and requires mental effort to track it all. Instead, research is tailor-made for a database. Wait! Stop that eye-rolling!
I use Microsoft Office. It comes with one built-in that requires NO programming - OneNote. But
you're not limited to that. Google 'electronic assistant', 'personal organizer', 'information
manager', and you'll get pages of suggestions. The Personal Organizers actually look like those
bulky things we once opened at meetings to appear important when asked what our schedule
looked like. But since Office is ubiquitous, I'll use it to frame the discussion.
Its interface could not be simpler or more intuitive. It's based on, and looks like, the note books
used in school that we divided by colored tabs and identified by subject. I've created one, repeat one, Note Book that contains multiple sections identified by novel title. Each section contains multiple pages on which I paste the researched data. And each page can be specifically named.
So if I click on a particular novel, it lists the following pages: Factoids, Protagonist, Antagonist,
Characters, Timeline (to track seasonal changes), Chapters (one-sentence summaries), and the universal 'Misc'.
You can search by page, novel, or the entire Note Book. One feature I find invaluable is the ability to paste images allowing the 'Factoid' page to contain maps of the places, regions, and cities the plot revolves around.
Incidentally, if any of you are also planning an assault on the Papal living quarters, the Vatican has an online map of it. Get it now. Once I release my new novel I suspect it will disappear.
OneNote automatically adds a live link that identifies the source when anything is pasted to it. If you use OneNote, then you probably use Windows and it can be configured to automatically paste stuff found on the Internet into OneNote's unassigned category. It's a timesaver that allows your research to continue until once logged off. You can then move the researched data into permanent locations at your leisure.
If you require further organization, OneNote allows the creation on any page of multi-column tables you can add rows to as the data grows. Text formatting options are a click away and since it is 2017, OneNote is cloud-ready allowing safe, off site backup of all your work.
But what about that catch-all, junk drawer? You know what I'm talking about. Where you throw stuff in that doesn't belong anywhere else. Separated by a blank page, mine is at the bottom of my active manuscript. It's crammed full of, you know, stuff. Writer stuff. Like this.
- an em dash (I can never remember the keyboard shortcut or menu location)
* * * chapter break (otherwise Word starts a bullet list)
Dates, notes to self, foreign words (Chuanggua - Shaolin long robe)
Unused names: Jacek Kominski, Bernardino Farnese
Extra (real) titles in case I need them: President of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City
State, Chief Curator of the Louvre
And lots more but brevity obtains. None of it is organized. It's a junk drawer. If you have categories and methodologies I haven't thought of, please do share.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S.
In my post of January13th, The Case For and Against Adverbs, I mentioned an editor who alerted me to the redundancies the preposition 'of' sometimes creates. I read the following in the, umm, august, New York Times.
"These new Earth-size planets orbit a dwarf star named Trappist-1 about 40 light-years from Earth. Some of them could have water on their surfaces."
Appalling.
February 17, 2017
Writers on Writing
I'm not a hoarder. My apartment is a case study in minimalism. But I hate throwing something out. Invariably, I need it the next day.
Here is a collection of writer advice that over time has gathered dust in the nooks and crannies of my hard drive. Some have my comments added but most require no further elaboration. I even suspect a few are masters of the Iceberg Theory.
I'll delete them after this post. Perhaps.
Jonathan Franzen
1. Fiction that isn't an author's personal adventure into the frightening or the unknown isn't worth writing for anything but money.
2. Never use the word 'then' as a conjunction - we have 'and' for this purpose. Substituting 'then' is the lazy or tone-deaf writer's non-solution to the problem of too many 'ands' on the page.
** Darn. Outed as lazy. But tone-deaf? 'Then' does sound better. **
3. Write in the third person unless a really distinctive first-person voice offers itself irresistibly.
4. You see more sitting still than chasing after.
5. Interesting verbs are seldom very interesting.
** Duh! Apples and oranges. Very interesting verbs are always very interesting. **
6. You have to love before you can be relentless.
PD James
1. Read widely and with discrimination. Bad writing is contagious.
2. Don't just plan to write - write. It is only by writing, not dreaming about it, that we develop our own style.
3. Write what you need to write, not what is currently popular or what you think will sell.
4. Open your mind to new experiences, particularly to the study of people. Nothing that happens to a writer - however happy, however tragic - is ever wasted.
Anne Enright.
1. The first 12 years are the worst.
2. The way to write a book is to actually write a book. A pen is useful, typing is also good. Keep putting words on the page.
3. Only bad writers think their work is really good.
4. Description is hard. Remember that all description is an opinion about the world. Find a place to stand.
5. Try to be accurate about stuff.
Elmore Leonard
1. Never open a book with weather. If it's only to create atmosphere and not a character's reaction to weather, you don't want to go on too long. The reader is apt to leaf ahead looking for people.
2. Avoid prologues: they can be annoying, especially a prologue following an introduction, that comes after a foreword. A prologue in a novel is backstory, and you can drop it in anywhere you want.
** I love prologues. They're excellent introductions to an author's writing, style, voice, and storytelling. Mr. Leonard's backstory point is valid. But a prologue is essential when its subject occurs centuries or millennia before the plot. Two of my six novels have them. **
3. Keep your exclamation points under control. You are allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose. If you have the knack of playing with exclaimers the way Tom Wolfe does, you can throw them in by the handful.
4. Never use the words 'suddenly' or 'all hell broke loose'. I have noticed that writers who use 'suddenly' tend to exercise less control in the application of exclamation points.
5. Don't go into great detail describing places and things, unless you're Margaret Atwood and can paint scenes with language. You don't want descriptions that bring the action, the flow of the story, to a standstill.
** Amen. I call it 'scene writing' and unless it has a very specific point, avoid it like the plague. Living room is sufficient. No one cares what it looks like. **
6. Try to leave out the parts that readers tend to skip. Think of what you skip when reading a novel: thick paragraphs of prose you can see have too many words in them.
7. If it sounds like writing, I re-write it.
Diana Athill
1. Cut (perhaps that should be CUT): only by having NO inessential words can every essential word be made to count.
2. Read it aloud to yourself because that's the only way to be sure the rhythms of the sentences are okay (prose rhythms are too complex and subtle to be thought out - they can be got right only by ear.
Margaret Atwood
1. You most likely need a thesaurus, a rudimentary grammar book, and a grip on reality. This latter means: there's no free lunch. Writing is work. Other people can help you a bit, but essentially you're on your own. Nobody is making you do this: you chose it, so don't whine.
** Golly. Who said women aren't tough? **
2. Prayer might work. Or reading something else. Or a constant visualization of the holy grail that is the finished, published version of your resplendent book.
3. Hold the readers attention. This is likely to work better if you can hold your own.
Roddy Doyle.
1. Do not place a picture of your favorite author on your desk, especially if the author is one of the famous ones who committed suicide.
2. Do keep a thesaurus, but in the shed, at the back of the garden or behind the fridge, somewhere that demands travel or effort. Chances are the words that come into your head will do fine, eg, 'horse', 'ran', 'said'.
** Boy. I have two thesauri. Installed on my hard drive. I use them to replace 4-syllable words with 3-syllable and 3-syllable words with 2-syllable. **
3. Do change your mind. Good ideas are often murdered by better ones. I was working on a book about a band called the Partitions. Then I decided to call them the Commitments.
4. Do not search amazon.co.uk for the book you haven't written yet.
5. Do spend a few minutes a day working on your cover biography - 'He divides his time between Kabul and Tierra del Fuego'. But then get back to work.
6. Fill pages as quickly as possible. Until you get to page 50. Then calm down and start worrying about the quality. Do feel anxiety - it's the job.
Geoff Dyer
1. Don't be one of those writers who spends a lifetime sucking up to Nabokov.
2. Have regrets. They are fuel. On the page they flare into desire.
3. Beware of cliches. Not just the cliches that Martin Amis is at war with. There are cliches of response as well as expression. There are cliches of observation and of thought - even of conception. Many novels, even quite a few adequately written ones, are cliches of form which conform to cliches of expectation.
** Huh ?? **
David Hare
1. Write only when you have something to say.
2. Style is the art of getting yourself out of the way, not putting yourself in it.
3. The two most depressing words in the English language are 'literary fiction'.
Al Kennedy
1. Write. No amount of self-inflicted misery, altered states, black pullovers, or being publicly obnoxious will ever add up to you being a writer. Writers write. On you go.
2. Read. As much as you can. As deeply and widely and nourishingly and irritatingly as you can. And the good things will make you remember them so you won't need to take notes.
Helen Dunmore
1. Finish the day's writing when you still want to continue.
2. Reread, rewrite, reread, rewrite. If it still doesn't work, throw it away. It's a nice feeling and you don't want to be cluttered with the corpses of poems and stories which have everything in them except the life they need.
*****
Coincidentally, the writer Geoff Dyer refers to, Martin Amis, Elmore Leonard also had an opinion on. "Martin Amis has always been kind about my work, but I haven't read that much of his. For me, he's hard to read because there's no storyline you can easily follow."
After reading this I felt much better about having no clue what Geoff Dyer was talking about. He and Mr. Amis must be on their own cosmological plane.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
Here is a collection of writer advice that over time has gathered dust in the nooks and crannies of my hard drive. Some have my comments added but most require no further elaboration. I even suspect a few are masters of the Iceberg Theory.
I'll delete them after this post. Perhaps.
Jonathan Franzen
1. Fiction that isn't an author's personal adventure into the frightening or the unknown isn't worth writing for anything but money.
2. Never use the word 'then' as a conjunction - we have 'and' for this purpose. Substituting 'then' is the lazy or tone-deaf writer's non-solution to the problem of too many 'ands' on the page.
** Darn. Outed as lazy. But tone-deaf? 'Then' does sound better. **
3. Write in the third person unless a really distinctive first-person voice offers itself irresistibly.
4. You see more sitting still than chasing after.
5. Interesting verbs are seldom very interesting.
** Duh! Apples and oranges. Very interesting verbs are always very interesting. **
6. You have to love before you can be relentless.
PD James
1. Read widely and with discrimination. Bad writing is contagious.
2. Don't just plan to write - write. It is only by writing, not dreaming about it, that we develop our own style.
3. Write what you need to write, not what is currently popular or what you think will sell.
4. Open your mind to new experiences, particularly to the study of people. Nothing that happens to a writer - however happy, however tragic - is ever wasted.
Anne Enright.
1. The first 12 years are the worst.
2. The way to write a book is to actually write a book. A pen is useful, typing is also good. Keep putting words on the page.
3. Only bad writers think their work is really good.
4. Description is hard. Remember that all description is an opinion about the world. Find a place to stand.
5. Try to be accurate about stuff.
Elmore Leonard
1. Never open a book with weather. If it's only to create atmosphere and not a character's reaction to weather, you don't want to go on too long. The reader is apt to leaf ahead looking for people.
2. Avoid prologues: they can be annoying, especially a prologue following an introduction, that comes after a foreword. A prologue in a novel is backstory, and you can drop it in anywhere you want.
** I love prologues. They're excellent introductions to an author's writing, style, voice, and storytelling. Mr. Leonard's backstory point is valid. But a prologue is essential when its subject occurs centuries or millennia before the plot. Two of my six novels have them. **
3. Keep your exclamation points under control. You are allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose. If you have the knack of playing with exclaimers the way Tom Wolfe does, you can throw them in by the handful.
4. Never use the words 'suddenly' or 'all hell broke loose'. I have noticed that writers who use 'suddenly' tend to exercise less control in the application of exclamation points.
5. Don't go into great detail describing places and things, unless you're Margaret Atwood and can paint scenes with language. You don't want descriptions that bring the action, the flow of the story, to a standstill.
** Amen. I call it 'scene writing' and unless it has a very specific point, avoid it like the plague. Living room is sufficient. No one cares what it looks like. **
6. Try to leave out the parts that readers tend to skip. Think of what you skip when reading a novel: thick paragraphs of prose you can see have too many words in them.
7. If it sounds like writing, I re-write it.
Diana Athill
1. Cut (perhaps that should be CUT): only by having NO inessential words can every essential word be made to count.
2. Read it aloud to yourself because that's the only way to be sure the rhythms of the sentences are okay (prose rhythms are too complex and subtle to be thought out - they can be got right only by ear.
Margaret Atwood
1. You most likely need a thesaurus, a rudimentary grammar book, and a grip on reality. This latter means: there's no free lunch. Writing is work. Other people can help you a bit, but essentially you're on your own. Nobody is making you do this: you chose it, so don't whine.
** Golly. Who said women aren't tough? **
2. Prayer might work. Or reading something else. Or a constant visualization of the holy grail that is the finished, published version of your resplendent book.
3. Hold the readers attention. This is likely to work better if you can hold your own.
Roddy Doyle.
1. Do not place a picture of your favorite author on your desk, especially if the author is one of the famous ones who committed suicide.
2. Do keep a thesaurus, but in the shed, at the back of the garden or behind the fridge, somewhere that demands travel or effort. Chances are the words that come into your head will do fine, eg, 'horse', 'ran', 'said'.
** Boy. I have two thesauri. Installed on my hard drive. I use them to replace 4-syllable words with 3-syllable and 3-syllable words with 2-syllable. **
3. Do change your mind. Good ideas are often murdered by better ones. I was working on a book about a band called the Partitions. Then I decided to call them the Commitments.
4. Do not search amazon.co.uk for the book you haven't written yet.
5. Do spend a few minutes a day working on your cover biography - 'He divides his time between Kabul and Tierra del Fuego'. But then get back to work.
6. Fill pages as quickly as possible. Until you get to page 50. Then calm down and start worrying about the quality. Do feel anxiety - it's the job.
Geoff Dyer
1. Don't be one of those writers who spends a lifetime sucking up to Nabokov.
2. Have regrets. They are fuel. On the page they flare into desire.
3. Beware of cliches. Not just the cliches that Martin Amis is at war with. There are cliches of response as well as expression. There are cliches of observation and of thought - even of conception. Many novels, even quite a few adequately written ones, are cliches of form which conform to cliches of expectation.
** Huh ?? **
David Hare
1. Write only when you have something to say.
2. Style is the art of getting yourself out of the way, not putting yourself in it.
3. The two most depressing words in the English language are 'literary fiction'.
Al Kennedy
1. Write. No amount of self-inflicted misery, altered states, black pullovers, or being publicly obnoxious will ever add up to you being a writer. Writers write. On you go.
2. Read. As much as you can. As deeply and widely and nourishingly and irritatingly as you can. And the good things will make you remember them so you won't need to take notes.
Helen Dunmore
1. Finish the day's writing when you still want to continue.
2. Reread, rewrite, reread, rewrite. If it still doesn't work, throw it away. It's a nice feeling and you don't want to be cluttered with the corpses of poems and stories which have everything in them except the life they need.
*****
Coincidentally, the writer Geoff Dyer refers to, Martin Amis, Elmore Leonard also had an opinion on. "Martin Amis has always been kind about my work, but I haven't read that much of his. For me, he's hard to read because there's no storyline you can easily follow."
After reading this I felt much better about having no clue what Geoff Dyer was talking about. He and Mr. Amis must be on their own cosmological plane.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
February 10, 2017
Guys. What Is She Wearing?
Google thinks I'm a woman. I'll expand on that point but first a little context. This post is for men but stick around ladies. My blog is nothing if not transparent.
Survey after survey consistently show adult women form the numerically largest group among readers. I don't write stories targeted toward women. If a concept/premise appeals to me, I'll write it and hope that both women and men find it entertaining.
However, I take great effort in making the characters and the world's they inhabit credible. It is my observational experience that women note what other women wear. Indeed, clothing themselves are activities not taken casually. Especially when attending a public event of more than passing importance. Even their escorts, er husbands, have to undergo sartorial scrutiny before stepping out. I find the occasions great fun, as unlike the other males present, I am very much attuned to the room's undertones. "Linda, that dress still looks lovely on you."
In any event, I do make the effort, if the scene warrants it, to accurately describe what my female characters are wearing. I've had to learn the difference between an asymmetrical and a draped skirt or between a pencil and a layered. Note that for the sake of brevity, I've left out at least 25 others.
Sweetheart or high neck blouse? Peasant or tailored button-down? Sheer sleeves or spaghetti straps? And yes, guys, your female readers will raise eyebrows if you've mentioned the cold and your protagonist is wearing linen. If it's hot, forget too predictable cotton. Show your panache by dressing her in chambray.
In every story there comes a plot point where a female character has to step out. Don't forget the Law of Cause and Effect. A reader can first find her before a mirror. As she moves through foundation, blush or rouge, eyeliner and lipstick (glossy?), it makes a great opportunity for back story, musings, psychological or emotional state.
When she does step out, give her something to step into. Kitten heels or classic pumps? Ankle strap or wedge? Cone, sling back? Sandals? No, they're not like the things you wear. And if she really needs to get her killer on, stilettos are the weapon of choice.
Don't forget color.
I used to spend hours browsing to get my female lead ready for her big night. Now, I just breeze through keeping up to date on fabrics and materials. In fact, I make it a point to have plans on bi-monthly weekends. Flush with payday cash and wanting male opinion, my female friends scheme to take me shopping with them.
Don't forget color.
So, come on guys. Liberate your inner cross dresser! Give your female leads/protagonists the wardrobe they deserve. You can't, of course, take pages to do it. But that's where you come in. Challenge your writing skills. You have three, at most five paragraphs to do it, and five is really stretching. Adjectives and verbs definitely count here to prevent tedium.
Is there a downside? Yup. Google thinks I'm a woman. Versace, Chanel, Max-Factor, Manolo Blahnik, Gucci, Prada, Hermès, have me listed on their tax returns for all the emails they put in my inbox. The upside is I no longer have to search for them.
And since right now I'm constantly on the internet and Google Maps planning an attack on the Vatican with the purpose of taking out the Pope and a slew of cardinals, I jump every time my doorbell rings. It might just be a couple guys in dark suits and glasses thrusting CIA badges at me. "Hi guys. I've been expecting you."
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S. We are all witness to the explosion of technology happening before our eyes. A terabyte is 1,000 times larger than a gigabyte. A petabyte is 1,000 times larger than a terabyte. An exabyte is 1,000 times larger than a petabyte.
Still, we humans are not chopped liver. A gram of our DNA holds 490EB of data.
Survey after survey consistently show adult women form the numerically largest group among readers. I don't write stories targeted toward women. If a concept/premise appeals to me, I'll write it and hope that both women and men find it entertaining.
However, I take great effort in making the characters and the world's they inhabit credible. It is my observational experience that women note what other women wear. Indeed, clothing themselves are activities not taken casually. Especially when attending a public event of more than passing importance. Even their escorts, er husbands, have to undergo sartorial scrutiny before stepping out. I find the occasions great fun, as unlike the other males present, I am very much attuned to the room's undertones. "Linda, that dress still looks lovely on you."
In any event, I do make the effort, if the scene warrants it, to accurately describe what my female characters are wearing. I've had to learn the difference between an asymmetrical and a draped skirt or between a pencil and a layered. Note that for the sake of brevity, I've left out at least 25 others.
Sweetheart or high neck blouse? Peasant or tailored button-down? Sheer sleeves or spaghetti straps? And yes, guys, your female readers will raise eyebrows if you've mentioned the cold and your protagonist is wearing linen. If it's hot, forget too predictable cotton. Show your panache by dressing her in chambray.
In every story there comes a plot point where a female character has to step out. Don't forget the Law of Cause and Effect. A reader can first find her before a mirror. As she moves through foundation, blush or rouge, eyeliner and lipstick (glossy?), it makes a great opportunity for back story, musings, psychological or emotional state.
When she does step out, give her something to step into. Kitten heels or classic pumps? Ankle strap or wedge? Cone, sling back? Sandals? No, they're not like the things you wear. And if she really needs to get her killer on, stilettos are the weapon of choice.
Don't forget color.
I used to spend hours browsing to get my female lead ready for her big night. Now, I just breeze through keeping up to date on fabrics and materials. In fact, I make it a point to have plans on bi-monthly weekends. Flush with payday cash and wanting male opinion, my female friends scheme to take me shopping with them.
Don't forget color.
So, come on guys. Liberate your inner cross dresser! Give your female leads/protagonists the wardrobe they deserve. You can't, of course, take pages to do it. But that's where you come in. Challenge your writing skills. You have three, at most five paragraphs to do it, and five is really stretching. Adjectives and verbs definitely count here to prevent tedium.
Is there a downside? Yup. Google thinks I'm a woman. Versace, Chanel, Max-Factor, Manolo Blahnik, Gucci, Prada, Hermès, have me listed on their tax returns for all the emails they put in my inbox. The upside is I no longer have to search for them.
And since right now I'm constantly on the internet and Google Maps planning an attack on the Vatican with the purpose of taking out the Pope and a slew of cardinals, I jump every time my doorbell rings. It might just be a couple guys in dark suits and glasses thrusting CIA badges at me. "Hi guys. I've been expecting you."
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S. We are all witness to the explosion of technology happening before our eyes. A terabyte is 1,000 times larger than a gigabyte. A petabyte is 1,000 times larger than a terabyte. An exabyte is 1,000 times larger than a petabyte.
Still, we humans are not chopped liver. A gram of our DNA holds 490EB of data.
February 3, 2017
Sex and the Novelist
I remember as a very young man lifting my head to peer over the sturdy ramparts of my fort, scanning the terrain for any sign of danger or imminent attack. There! Across the street from the empty lot my cardboard construction sat on. Girls!
They stared back, pointing and giggling. Chattering. What are they laughing at? Girls! They can't even build forts.
Time passed. They still laughed. Liked to. More at what came out of my mouth. Rarely at me. Mostly. And as I began the journey of self-discovery, I learned I could not do so without them. In the absence of female, no understanding of male is possible.
More time passed and the whole gender interaction thing became more complicated when men began making rather frank advances. I never took offense. Indeed, considering their many female characteristics, I found it flattering. There was even a brief period in which its frequency made me wonder if they saw something I didn't. But since my subconscious is unguarded when I'm dreaming, and I never dream of men, I concluded 'gaydar' is, if not unreliable, then somewhat finicky.
Fate now stepped in and arranged the circumstances of my life such that it became nomadic. It brought me in contact with a great and varied number of women but the intimate moments they privileged me provided no deeper understanding since, wisely, they had no inclination to attach themselves to hunter gatherers.
After seven years, the sojourn ended and my return home found me eager to reconnect with bygone friends and learn if they had taken advantage of being sedentary and gotten married. To my great shock, half were already divorced and the remainder were either headed there or reconciled to raising families in a comfortable alliance.
Long before, a Father O'Shaughnessy had disabused me of any desire to gamble. It made me even more leery of an institution that had only a 50% chance of success. I had also, because of my wanderlust, developed an ability to form close, fulfilling, monogamous friendships with women. The price however was that potential mates never quite believed my treasured friendships were all that monogamous.
And so I reached the moment stories began to bubble within, demanding to be let loose. When my first female character loomed, I froze. For three weeks. Writing in the third person omniscient required providing the reader a female's thoughts. What could I possibly know about their innermost ones?
My friends might help but I could not imagine sitting across from them and asking, "Tell me exactly what you're thinking, feeling, and experiencing when a man enters you." Especially given that many of them were/are quite attractive. It might open doors I did not want to.
I even remember feeling embarrassed at just the thought of writing about such intimate, intensely private moments. I felt nervous, anxious at the prospect, despite having no qualms whatsoever when speaking in public. No amount of telling myself they're just characters allowed me to escape feeling like a voyeur.
And if my worlds were to be realistic, should they not include homosexuals? What would I have to say about them? Unearned tolerance and inclusion are not high on my priority list but if I wanted to be a credible novelist, could I just leave them out? And what credibility did I have writing about homosexual sex? Not that there's anything wrong with it, but writer research was not going to extend that far.
I've made no definitive conclusions but a few closing observations.
For my male colleagues that find writing about sex embarrassing, take ten minutes to stroll down your local Amazon's BDSM aisles (Google it). Peek at their 'Look Inside'. Remember, these are women. You'll feel like a prude and lose your embarrassment. Most of it. If my story *NEEDS* it, I still take a deep breath and grit my teeth.
As of yet, I have not had to write about gay sex. My world's have homosexuals but in minor roles. The one exception, I refused to make stereotyped trope (is that redundant?). They were not going to be interior decorators, fashion designers, or florists. I made them a for-hire pair of assassins.
I still don't know if I can write about a woman's innermost thoughts. Not sure if I care. Their mystery is what makes them such marvelous, fabulous beings. I love and feel fortunate to exist in the world I do. It's filled with females. They have us to contend with.
Nonetheless, I can create thinking, living beings filled with individual personality and verve. Vive le différence, but we do share a common humanity. As human beings, I know them well.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S. My female friends love my stories and have even opened accounts just to leave embarrassing reviews. Not once have they EVER said a word about the sex scenes.
The one exception is a GR author and romance writer who provided invaluable insight and critique for which I will always be grateful. Thank you, EG.
They stared back, pointing and giggling. Chattering. What are they laughing at? Girls! They can't even build forts.
Time passed. They still laughed. Liked to. More at what came out of my mouth. Rarely at me. Mostly. And as I began the journey of self-discovery, I learned I could not do so without them. In the absence of female, no understanding of male is possible.
More time passed and the whole gender interaction thing became more complicated when men began making rather frank advances. I never took offense. Indeed, considering their many female characteristics, I found it flattering. There was even a brief period in which its frequency made me wonder if they saw something I didn't. But since my subconscious is unguarded when I'm dreaming, and I never dream of men, I concluded 'gaydar' is, if not unreliable, then somewhat finicky.
Fate now stepped in and arranged the circumstances of my life such that it became nomadic. It brought me in contact with a great and varied number of women but the intimate moments they privileged me provided no deeper understanding since, wisely, they had no inclination to attach themselves to hunter gatherers.
After seven years, the sojourn ended and my return home found me eager to reconnect with bygone friends and learn if they had taken advantage of being sedentary and gotten married. To my great shock, half were already divorced and the remainder were either headed there or reconciled to raising families in a comfortable alliance.
Long before, a Father O'Shaughnessy had disabused me of any desire to gamble. It made me even more leery of an institution that had only a 50% chance of success. I had also, because of my wanderlust, developed an ability to form close, fulfilling, monogamous friendships with women. The price however was that potential mates never quite believed my treasured friendships were all that monogamous.
And so I reached the moment stories began to bubble within, demanding to be let loose. When my first female character loomed, I froze. For three weeks. Writing in the third person omniscient required providing the reader a female's thoughts. What could I possibly know about their innermost ones?
My friends might help but I could not imagine sitting across from them and asking, "Tell me exactly what you're thinking, feeling, and experiencing when a man enters you." Especially given that many of them were/are quite attractive. It might open doors I did not want to.
I even remember feeling embarrassed at just the thought of writing about such intimate, intensely private moments. I felt nervous, anxious at the prospect, despite having no qualms whatsoever when speaking in public. No amount of telling myself they're just characters allowed me to escape feeling like a voyeur.
And if my worlds were to be realistic, should they not include homosexuals? What would I have to say about them? Unearned tolerance and inclusion are not high on my priority list but if I wanted to be a credible novelist, could I just leave them out? And what credibility did I have writing about homosexual sex? Not that there's anything wrong with it, but writer research was not going to extend that far.
I've made no definitive conclusions but a few closing observations.
For my male colleagues that find writing about sex embarrassing, take ten minutes to stroll down your local Amazon's BDSM aisles (Google it). Peek at their 'Look Inside'. Remember, these are women. You'll feel like a prude and lose your embarrassment. Most of it. If my story *NEEDS* it, I still take a deep breath and grit my teeth.
As of yet, I have not had to write about gay sex. My world's have homosexuals but in minor roles. The one exception, I refused to make stereotyped trope (is that redundant?). They were not going to be interior decorators, fashion designers, or florists. I made them a for-hire pair of assassins.
I still don't know if I can write about a woman's innermost thoughts. Not sure if I care. Their mystery is what makes them such marvelous, fabulous beings. I love and feel fortunate to exist in the world I do. It's filled with females. They have us to contend with.
Nonetheless, I can create thinking, living beings filled with individual personality and verve. Vive le différence, but we do share a common humanity. As human beings, I know them well.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
P.S. My female friends love my stories and have even opened accounts just to leave embarrassing reviews. Not once have they EVER said a word about the sex scenes.
The one exception is a GR author and romance writer who provided invaluable insight and critique for which I will always be grateful. Thank you, EG.
January 27, 2017
Is 'Show' Wordy?
Last week's post, Startup Novelists, detailing the landmines debut authors often step on, raised the interesting question asked by this week's title. The implication is that in trying to 'show' a story to a reader rather than tell it, we're novelists not reporters, the result will be, if not bloated, then perhaps an over-written story.
But what is 'wordy'? Consider the following two sentences. Which one is wordy? Yeah, it's a trick question.
Beyond the obvious skills needed to maneuver through ancient Rome's murderous political factions, the story of how Octavianus began his career endeared Janice to the man who had reigned over the Pax Romanus.
Needless to say, she died.
Ready? On the surface, both sentences are wordy. Removing their opening phrases does not blur their intent.
However, the first sentence is acceptable for two reasons. One, the opening clause conveys additional information that further justifies the sentence's intent. Two, sentence variation, in this case length, is essential to well-written creative fiction.
The second sentence opens with nonsensical jargon. If it's needless to say, don't say it. It represents the author's earnestness in inserting him or herself into the story in an attempt to effect a breezy, conversational style.
But
The second sentence could be in the 1st person in which case never mind about the jargon. It's still nonsensical, but the opening phrase might be consistent with the protagonist's personality and style. (Do 1st person stories exist from the antagonist's POV?).
In any event, though much subtlety and nuance surrounds the subject of 'show vs wordy', it has nothing to do with the actual number of words and everything to do with creative fiction's first rule: strip sentences of the nonessential.
In fact, the question, "Is 'show' Wordy?", doesn't really apply in the world of independent authors. Only traditional publishers concern themselves with word counts and then for economic reasons, not aesthetic ones. As a guideline, however, googling 'genre word count' will provide information on word count limits.
One other point. A third reason exists for justifying the first sentence's length. It has to do with sentence rhythm and musicality, what I refer to as 'deep writing'.
It is a very, very subjective topic that has no formula and cannot be taught. We've often encountered it when reading a well-written story and its passages begin to 'sing'. Achieving it often requires dispensing with creative fiction's rules, guidelines, and admonitions. Sentence rhythm even justifies the inclusion of, gasp, adverbs. No, J.K. Your sentences don't sing.
Googling 'sentence rhythm' will produce reams of articles on the subject. They go well with a good Italian red.
Finally, with tires squealing, I veer off the main road. As I am a suspense writer enamored with originality, I often despair when seeing what dramatic concepts others are capable of. Hitchcock's Notorious tells the story of a man who recruits a woman to infiltrate a Nazi ring. He falls in love with her then has to endure the agony of knowing he must encourage her to sleep with one of the Nazis in order to cement her cover. A premise beyond brilliant.
And speaking of originality, here is how a random GR reader I fell upon described herself:
" I am Times New Roman, striving to be Helvetica, with a streak of Comic Sans."
Regrettably, she was married.
As always, this Garamond Bold welcomes your thoughts and comments.
But what is 'wordy'? Consider the following two sentences. Which one is wordy? Yeah, it's a trick question.
Beyond the obvious skills needed to maneuver through ancient Rome's murderous political factions, the story of how Octavianus began his career endeared Janice to the man who had reigned over the Pax Romanus.
Needless to say, she died.
Ready? On the surface, both sentences are wordy. Removing their opening phrases does not blur their intent.
However, the first sentence is acceptable for two reasons. One, the opening clause conveys additional information that further justifies the sentence's intent. Two, sentence variation, in this case length, is essential to well-written creative fiction.
The second sentence opens with nonsensical jargon. If it's needless to say, don't say it. It represents the author's earnestness in inserting him or herself into the story in an attempt to effect a breezy, conversational style.
But
The second sentence could be in the 1st person in which case never mind about the jargon. It's still nonsensical, but the opening phrase might be consistent with the protagonist's personality and style. (Do 1st person stories exist from the antagonist's POV?).
In any event, though much subtlety and nuance surrounds the subject of 'show vs wordy', it has nothing to do with the actual number of words and everything to do with creative fiction's first rule: strip sentences of the nonessential.
In fact, the question, "Is 'show' Wordy?", doesn't really apply in the world of independent authors. Only traditional publishers concern themselves with word counts and then for economic reasons, not aesthetic ones. As a guideline, however, googling 'genre word count' will provide information on word count limits.
One other point. A third reason exists for justifying the first sentence's length. It has to do with sentence rhythm and musicality, what I refer to as 'deep writing'.
It is a very, very subjective topic that has no formula and cannot be taught. We've often encountered it when reading a well-written story and its passages begin to 'sing'. Achieving it often requires dispensing with creative fiction's rules, guidelines, and admonitions. Sentence rhythm even justifies the inclusion of, gasp, adverbs. No, J.K. Your sentences don't sing.
Googling 'sentence rhythm' will produce reams of articles on the subject. They go well with a good Italian red.
Finally, with tires squealing, I veer off the main road. As I am a suspense writer enamored with originality, I often despair when seeing what dramatic concepts others are capable of. Hitchcock's Notorious tells the story of a man who recruits a woman to infiltrate a Nazi ring. He falls in love with her then has to endure the agony of knowing he must encourage her to sleep with one of the Nazis in order to cement her cover. A premise beyond brilliant.
And speaking of originality, here is how a random GR reader I fell upon described herself:
" I am Times New Roman, striving to be Helvetica, with a streak of Comic Sans."
Regrettably, she was married.
As always, this Garamond Bold welcomes your thoughts and comments.
January 20, 2017
Startup Novelists
My July 30th posting titled Query Letters and the Indie Author featured a discussion on 'filtering', a literary concept I learned from Emma Darwin, then one of my favorite bloggers.
She has since become my blogger of choice because I find the richness and depth of her posts have provided so much insight. Here I'd like to feature her 'The Ten Things Which Most Often Go Wrong With Beginners' Fiction' with my own take on the categories.
1. As you might expect, Show vs Tell leads the way. It's a subject that can fill a book let alone a blog post so I won't spend much time on it. Emma translates 'tell' as 'inform' and I would change 'show' to 'engage'.
But Show vs Tell is misleading. It should be, as every school child knows, Show and Tell. A good novel requires both. Knowing when to apply each is learnable but as a starting point, I would suggest telling/informing is the purview of backstory.
In last week's post my incisive and very independent GR friend, George Mazzeo, suggested the following sentence as an example of adverb utility.
"Is that a threat?", he asked amiably.
It is also a classic 'tell' which keeps the reader at distance without any engagement.
Arms akimbo, Janice snapped her head high. Eyes blazed determination but a ghost of a smile danced about her lips. "George Mazzeo, you will not step one foot from this house until you kiss me."
"Is that a threat?"
Lucky dog that George!
However, the example frames the subject for a future post: is 'show' wordy?
2. Under-Writing. This is a rare phenomenon where a novice writer presents everything as bare description and minimal dialogue. It often manifests as a writer for whom English is not their first language rather than a deranged modernist.
3. Over-Writing. Here is where novice writers display their earnestness. Beautiful, purple sentences overflow adjective laden banks with strings of fat, plump adverbs amid alienated pronouns disconnected from their proper antecedents. :-)
4. Good Writing but no Narrative Drive. Or more succinctly asked, "Where's the action?"
Here the beginner will put down large swaths of introspective reflection, determined to show the reader every emotional hinge on which to turn the character. Character development is a critical component of novel writing but not when it crosses into navel gazing. With characters, actions speak louder than words. Show and Tell, anybody?
5. Each Scene Works Out Just As We Expected It To From the Start. We might be tempted to describe this as a lack of originality. More often it is a consequence of a novel's greatest enemy: impatience. That clever twist may not come within five minutes of needing it. Find something else to do. Leave it for a day. Or a few. A refreshed mind produces cleverer twists.
6. Lots of Filtering. I refer those interested to my opening paragraph.
7. Getting From Scene To Scene Is Awkward. Trust the reader. It is not necessary to detail the steps walked, the doors opened, or the roads driven, if the next scene is in close proximity within time and/or space. Just go there. Readers are adept at filling in the blanks. When all else fails, chapter breaks (*** for example) save the day.
8. Psychic/Narrative Distance. This is a corollary to 'telling'. The author needs to take the reader back to when the great-great-grandmother placed her brooch in a soon-to-be-lost chest. Told in stark, emotionless, declarative statements just to get the backstory out of the way, the reader won't care if you don't. It's a great opportunity for the short/brief stories within a story that give a novel richness. Conjure up a moment in the great-grandmother's life when the brooch brought a moment of happiness.
9. Point of View Problems (Head Hopping). Often writers just starting out are unaware just how much movie/television visual techniques influence how they 'see' a novel. Fast moving camera walk-alongs, in and out zooms, and interspersed, sliced shots of differing characters cutting into the conversation do not translate well to a novel.
I hesitate, however, to make a blanket condemnation of their use. I often create scenes with multiple characters each having their own motivations. It makes for delicious interaction as the reader has the opportunity to see the contrasts between thoughts and speech. Just be aware of the pitfalls which can lead to a confused mess and/or excessive attribution.
10. It's Not Clear Who Will Enjoy This. My take here differs from Emma's as she is concerned more with who will buy the book.
My experience in reading through the blurbs of the books that daily pour into GR is that too many are an afterthought by an author overjoyed at having written 'The End'. I maintain the blurb is more important than reviews. A vague, generalized, clichéd blurb will not bring a reader to the reviews let alone to the 'Look Inside'. As a humble suggestion, if the blurb includes 'will stop at nothing' or 'do everything in his power', or ask 'will she find true love?', or worse, 'will she get past her faults to ignore his?', it needs a rethink and a rewrite. And yes. I left out the many punchlines the last question invites.
Interested writers should visit Emma's blog. Her version of this summary has many connected links to postings authors of all experience levels can benefit from. No signup required. And, BTW. I'm sure she has no idea I exist.
This Itch of Writing
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
She has since become my blogger of choice because I find the richness and depth of her posts have provided so much insight. Here I'd like to feature her 'The Ten Things Which Most Often Go Wrong With Beginners' Fiction' with my own take on the categories.
1. As you might expect, Show vs Tell leads the way. It's a subject that can fill a book let alone a blog post so I won't spend much time on it. Emma translates 'tell' as 'inform' and I would change 'show' to 'engage'.
But Show vs Tell is misleading. It should be, as every school child knows, Show and Tell. A good novel requires both. Knowing when to apply each is learnable but as a starting point, I would suggest telling/informing is the purview of backstory.
In last week's post my incisive and very independent GR friend, George Mazzeo, suggested the following sentence as an example of adverb utility.
"Is that a threat?", he asked amiably.
It is also a classic 'tell' which keeps the reader at distance without any engagement.
Arms akimbo, Janice snapped her head high. Eyes blazed determination but a ghost of a smile danced about her lips. "George Mazzeo, you will not step one foot from this house until you kiss me."
"Is that a threat?"
Lucky dog that George!
However, the example frames the subject for a future post: is 'show' wordy?
2. Under-Writing. This is a rare phenomenon where a novice writer presents everything as bare description and minimal dialogue. It often manifests as a writer for whom English is not their first language rather than a deranged modernist.
3. Over-Writing. Here is where novice writers display their earnestness. Beautiful, purple sentences overflow adjective laden banks with strings of fat, plump adverbs amid alienated pronouns disconnected from their proper antecedents. :-)
4. Good Writing but no Narrative Drive. Or more succinctly asked, "Where's the action?"
Here the beginner will put down large swaths of introspective reflection, determined to show the reader every emotional hinge on which to turn the character. Character development is a critical component of novel writing but not when it crosses into navel gazing. With characters, actions speak louder than words. Show and Tell, anybody?
5. Each Scene Works Out Just As We Expected It To From the Start. We might be tempted to describe this as a lack of originality. More often it is a consequence of a novel's greatest enemy: impatience. That clever twist may not come within five minutes of needing it. Find something else to do. Leave it for a day. Or a few. A refreshed mind produces cleverer twists.
6. Lots of Filtering. I refer those interested to my opening paragraph.
7. Getting From Scene To Scene Is Awkward. Trust the reader. It is not necessary to detail the steps walked, the doors opened, or the roads driven, if the next scene is in close proximity within time and/or space. Just go there. Readers are adept at filling in the blanks. When all else fails, chapter breaks (*** for example) save the day.
8. Psychic/Narrative Distance. This is a corollary to 'telling'. The author needs to take the reader back to when the great-great-grandmother placed her brooch in a soon-to-be-lost chest. Told in stark, emotionless, declarative statements just to get the backstory out of the way, the reader won't care if you don't. It's a great opportunity for the short/brief stories within a story that give a novel richness. Conjure up a moment in the great-grandmother's life when the brooch brought a moment of happiness.
9. Point of View Problems (Head Hopping). Often writers just starting out are unaware just how much movie/television visual techniques influence how they 'see' a novel. Fast moving camera walk-alongs, in and out zooms, and interspersed, sliced shots of differing characters cutting into the conversation do not translate well to a novel.
I hesitate, however, to make a blanket condemnation of their use. I often create scenes with multiple characters each having their own motivations. It makes for delicious interaction as the reader has the opportunity to see the contrasts between thoughts and speech. Just be aware of the pitfalls which can lead to a confused mess and/or excessive attribution.
10. It's Not Clear Who Will Enjoy This. My take here differs from Emma's as she is concerned more with who will buy the book.
My experience in reading through the blurbs of the books that daily pour into GR is that too many are an afterthought by an author overjoyed at having written 'The End'. I maintain the blurb is more important than reviews. A vague, generalized, clichéd blurb will not bring a reader to the reviews let alone to the 'Look Inside'. As a humble suggestion, if the blurb includes 'will stop at nothing' or 'do everything in his power', or ask 'will she find true love?', or worse, 'will she get past her faults to ignore his?', it needs a rethink and a rewrite. And yes. I left out the many punchlines the last question invites.
Interested writers should visit Emma's blog. Her version of this summary has many connected links to postings authors of all experience levels can benefit from. No signup required. And, BTW. I'm sure she has no idea I exist.
This Itch of Writing
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
