Roberta Pearce's Blog - Posts Tagged "writing-craft"
. . . on writing
Since I have been working on a blog, I have no updates to offer on my novel-writing life, for the obvious reasons. However, my second novel A Bird Without Wings
made its first appearance on Listopia: Friends Said I Should Read in 2014. Thanks! Everybody go vote! LOL.
So the other half of my Blog Manifesto [any portmanteau suggestions? Blanifesto? Blonifesto? Blogesto? Or based on mission statement - Missment?] is the subject today. To wit:
My central idea is to distil [heavy stress on the distillation part] writing tips and techniques for myself and share them with the world at large . . . or as large a world this blog manages to occupy.
I know what you’re thinking. "But, Roberta, there are so many of those sorts of blogs!" You’re absolutely right! But daily reminders might help a writer – they certainly help me – and perhaps a writer about to throw in the towel [clichés will be discussed in a later post] on his/her work might be inspired by a daily kick. Or find out something previously unknown. Or phrased in a slightly different manner that might make it stick. Or suddenly applicable.
I participate in a couple of different groups that hash out the ways and means of writing effectively - in particular The Source. I assure you right now that we rarely have consensus! Because of all the rules of writing, the most important one is: There are no rules.
Now, that patently untrue. There are most definitely rules. But – like the story of the two-pack-a-day grandpa who lived to be a healthy 110 – they’re muddied with examples of how breaking the rules works. Maybe one guy smoked heavily and lived forever; maybe a writer never used a comma and was a huge success. It could happen!
Sure. But another rule – or perhaps axiom – is: before you break the rules, know them.
made its first appearance on Listopia: Friends Said I Should Read in 2014. Thanks! Everybody go vote! LOL.So the other half of my Blog Manifesto [any portmanteau suggestions? Blanifesto? Blonifesto? Blogesto? Or based on mission statement - Missment?] is the subject today. To wit:
My central idea is to distil [heavy stress on the distillation part] writing tips and techniques for myself and share them with the world at large . . . or as large a world this blog manages to occupy.
I know what you’re thinking. "But, Roberta, there are so many of those sorts of blogs!" You’re absolutely right! But daily reminders might help a writer – they certainly help me – and perhaps a writer about to throw in the towel [clichés will be discussed in a later post] on his/her work might be inspired by a daily kick. Or find out something previously unknown. Or phrased in a slightly different manner that might make it stick. Or suddenly applicable.
I participate in a couple of different groups that hash out the ways and means of writing effectively - in particular The Source. I assure you right now that we rarely have consensus! Because of all the rules of writing, the most important one is: There are no rules.
Now, that patently untrue. There are most definitely rules. But – like the story of the two-pack-a-day grandpa who lived to be a healthy 110 – they’re muddied with examples of how breaking the rules works. Maybe one guy smoked heavily and lived forever; maybe a writer never used a comma and was a huge success. It could happen!
Sure. But another rule – or perhaps axiom – is: before you break the rules, know them.
My Writing Process
I’ve been invited to answer a few questions about my writing process by the inimitable author/blogger Michaela Miles! This particular blog hop is all about authors offering others a glimpse into their work, their work schedules, and perhaps their innermost thoughts.
Click here to find out how she does it! And be sure to explore her blog for her many gems of observation, reviews, and more!
Q. What am I working on?
I’m still editing my latest novel The Value of Vulnerability, a purely character-driven work about how people deal with personal damage - and in the case of my H, rather harshly! So naturally he needs an h who shows him better ways to deal. I’m hoping to have this to beta readers in a couple of days.
I’ll be following that novel with Public Frenemy, a story of two people trying to learn how to love again without fear, ultimately determining that it takes courage and self-confidence. Slated for April 2014 release, it’s probably going to be May instead.
Q. How does my work differ from others of its genre?
My first novel, For Those Who Wait, is actually a nod to Harlequin Presents style - that genre that I love so well and inspired me to write romance in the first place. But within it, I broke some clichés, which was both hard and satisfying [That’s what she said!].
My second novel, A Bird Without Wings, is written around a h who is smarter than her H! Talk about breaking clichés! Considering the sophistication and education of the average romance reader, I thought it would be rewarding to read such a character. She’s complex and compelling. I love her. And so do the readers who’ve met her.
The upshot? I’m not out to reinvent the genre - it’s great as-is. But it’s fun for both me and the reader to invert tropes and dispense with stereotypes, so I do so as often as possible.
Q. Why do I write what I do?
Hmm . . . I write contemporary romance because I find the entire question of what makes a relationship work [independent of the ultimate conclusion of an HEA!] endlessly intriguing. What makes two people want to permanently join forces through their lives? How can one person rely on another to that degree? Still single, you can see how that would fascinate me!
Q. How does your writing process work?
I see a scene in my head. I write dialogue in my head. I create a new Word doc and get down as much of it as I can - frequently naming the characters “H” and “h”. Then I ignore it for weeks - sometimes months. Eventually, I drag it out and start poking at it, see what I can make of it, keying in little ideas that occur about backstory, characterisation, and conflict.
I’m a pantser who thinks she’s a plotter. This time, I’m going to write an outline! Never happens. Sometimes to get things moving, I’ll write whole stream-of-consciousness passages to help me get where I want to go. The characters - if strong enough - will write their own story.
Oh, and I drink loads of coffee. Sometimes wine - but there’s a fine line in creativity with wine . . . one point five glasses is my cut off before I lose momentum and focus!
Who will we meet next week?
Check out these authors and their processes:
Renea Mason
Noelle Clark
Anne Lange
And Lan LLP will be posting her processes on blog soon.
Click here to find out how she does it! And be sure to explore her blog for her many gems of observation, reviews, and more!
Q. What am I working on?
I’m still editing my latest novel The Value of Vulnerability, a purely character-driven work about how people deal with personal damage - and in the case of my H, rather harshly! So naturally he needs an h who shows him better ways to deal. I’m hoping to have this to beta readers in a couple of days.
I’ll be following that novel with Public Frenemy, a story of two people trying to learn how to love again without fear, ultimately determining that it takes courage and self-confidence. Slated for April 2014 release, it’s probably going to be May instead.
Q. How does my work differ from others of its genre?
My first novel, For Those Who Wait, is actually a nod to Harlequin Presents style - that genre that I love so well and inspired me to write romance in the first place. But within it, I broke some clichés, which was both hard and satisfying [That’s what she said!].
My second novel, A Bird Without Wings, is written around a h who is smarter than her H! Talk about breaking clichés! Considering the sophistication and education of the average romance reader, I thought it would be rewarding to read such a character. She’s complex and compelling. I love her. And so do the readers who’ve met her.
The upshot? I’m not out to reinvent the genre - it’s great as-is. But it’s fun for both me and the reader to invert tropes and dispense with stereotypes, so I do so as often as possible.
Q. Why do I write what I do?
Hmm . . . I write contemporary romance because I find the entire question of what makes a relationship work [independent of the ultimate conclusion of an HEA!] endlessly intriguing. What makes two people want to permanently join forces through their lives? How can one person rely on another to that degree? Still single, you can see how that would fascinate me!
Q. How does your writing process work?
I see a scene in my head. I write dialogue in my head. I create a new Word doc and get down as much of it as I can - frequently naming the characters “H” and “h”. Then I ignore it for weeks - sometimes months. Eventually, I drag it out and start poking at it, see what I can make of it, keying in little ideas that occur about backstory, characterisation, and conflict.
I’m a pantser who thinks she’s a plotter. This time, I’m going to write an outline! Never happens. Sometimes to get things moving, I’ll write whole stream-of-consciousness passages to help me get where I want to go. The characters - if strong enough - will write their own story.
Oh, and I drink loads of coffee. Sometimes wine - but there’s a fine line in creativity with wine . . . one point five glasses is my cut off before I lose momentum and focus!
Who will we meet next week?
Check out these authors and their processes:
Renea Mason
Noelle Clark
Anne Lange
And Lan LLP will be posting her processes on blog soon.
Formal Style – Apostrophes
What is formal style? In an Internet search, it was “longer sentences” and “more complex vocabulary”. Well, it’s not. That’s style. Writing style, more specifically.
Formal style could be described as the equivalent of etiquette. But rather than what fork to use, it’s the correct use of punctuation and word case: title/sentence/camel case, how footnotes/endnotes are constructed, how dialogue tags are attached, the sort of dash used, how ellipses are inserted, where italics are used rather than quotes . . . ad nauseam. I am a stickler for formal style. That doesn’t mean I don’t make formal style errors [though I pretend I make none. Uh uh, no way, no how]. Ahem. Or should that be amen?
Maybe you’ll think: “Roberta, that is not about writing. That is not a writing tip.”
Ah, but it is.
In an earlier post, I wrote that there were no rules, and modified that with “of course, there are rules.” The goal of every author is to keep the reader turning pages. That’s how authors get loyal fans, get chatter about their books, get reviews written. So, based on that goal, here’s my:
Cardinal Rule #1 –
Anything that pulls a reader out of the story is a bad thing.
Pulled out of a story is being distracted. And distracting your reader is something to be avoided at all costs. A distracted reader is missing your clever words. Notices other bad things that they otherwise would have ignored. Gets annoyed at you, doesn’t finish the book, doesn’t write a review, and says only negative things.
In this age of instant gratification and the quick scan of opening-chapter sampling to assess and reject/accept a book under consideration for purchase, an author can’t afford a single error that distracts. That’s it. No excuses about how the writing/story/characters are really fantastic and readers should be looking beyond sloppy formal style for the heart of your work.
That’s not going to fly.
Readers deserve better. They’re putting out their money for your work, taking the time and energy to read your work, and you want them to work harder? Don’t think so.
Today’s observation on formal style is about apostrophes. Not “its” vs. “it’s” or “they’re, their, there” – that’s grammar. I’m writing about a particular pet peeve that will have many who read this crossing/rolling their eyes, saying: “Really, Roberta? This is an issue for you? Pedantic idiot.”
Maybe. But I’m a reader buying your books, so my opinion counts. And I hate to have to say it, but an open quote is not the same thing as an apostrophe, as much as a period is not the same thing as a comma, as italics are not the same thing as boldface, a cat is not a dog, a shoehorn is not a power drill, and the word “wrong” is in no way the word “right”.
So, my formal-style apostrophe issue: I often see abbreviated words [about vs. ’bout; them vs. ’em; nineteen-seventies vs. ’seventies] where the apostrophe is actually an open single quote: ‘bout; ‘em; ‘seventies.
Don’t see the difference? Hm. I do. And it drives me wild. Does it take effort while you’re keying your eternal novel into Word to make sure you have the right punctuation? A tiny bit; sure. Is it worth it? That’s up to you. And ultimately, your reader - a.k.a., your customer.
Formal style could be described as the equivalent of etiquette. But rather than what fork to use, it’s the correct use of punctuation and word case: title/sentence/camel case, how footnotes/endnotes are constructed, how dialogue tags are attached, the sort of dash used, how ellipses are inserted, where italics are used rather than quotes . . . ad nauseam. I am a stickler for formal style. That doesn’t mean I don’t make formal style errors [though I pretend I make none. Uh uh, no way, no how]. Ahem. Or should that be amen?
Maybe you’ll think: “Roberta, that is not about writing. That is not a writing tip.”
Ah, but it is.
In an earlier post, I wrote that there were no rules, and modified that with “of course, there are rules.” The goal of every author is to keep the reader turning pages. That’s how authors get loyal fans, get chatter about their books, get reviews written. So, based on that goal, here’s my:
Cardinal Rule #1 –
Anything that pulls a reader out of the story is a bad thing.
Pulled out of a story is being distracted. And distracting your reader is something to be avoided at all costs. A distracted reader is missing your clever words. Notices other bad things that they otherwise would have ignored. Gets annoyed at you, doesn’t finish the book, doesn’t write a review, and says only negative things.
In this age of instant gratification and the quick scan of opening-chapter sampling to assess and reject/accept a book under consideration for purchase, an author can’t afford a single error that distracts. That’s it. No excuses about how the writing/story/characters are really fantastic and readers should be looking beyond sloppy formal style for the heart of your work.
That’s not going to fly.
Readers deserve better. They’re putting out their money for your work, taking the time and energy to read your work, and you want them to work harder? Don’t think so.
Today’s observation on formal style is about apostrophes. Not “its” vs. “it’s” or “they’re, their, there” – that’s grammar. I’m writing about a particular pet peeve that will have many who read this crossing/rolling their eyes, saying: “Really, Roberta? This is an issue for you? Pedantic idiot.”
Maybe. But I’m a reader buying your books, so my opinion counts. And I hate to have to say it, but an open quote is not the same thing as an apostrophe, as much as a period is not the same thing as a comma, as italics are not the same thing as boldface, a cat is not a dog, a shoehorn is not a power drill, and the word “wrong” is in no way the word “right”.
So, my formal-style apostrophe issue: I often see abbreviated words [about vs. ’bout; them vs. ’em; nineteen-seventies vs. ’seventies] where the apostrophe is actually an open single quote: ‘bout; ‘em; ‘seventies.
Don’t see the difference? Hm. I do. And it drives me wild. Does it take effort while you’re keying your eternal novel into Word to make sure you have the right punctuation? A tiny bit; sure. Is it worth it? That’s up to you. And ultimately, your reader - a.k.a., your customer.
