.JPG)
We writers think, oh, boy, there's another creative sentence that shows up in our mind. It fits the story, the narrator's voice, the characters jargon. It's perfect. It's something more, and it's good so we put it in.
Watch that tendency to think every "good" thought that's relevant belongs in your current project. Very often it's a mistake, and too many of these wrong choices will prevent you story from getting published and/or read.
What does your brilliant new idea do for the story? To the pace of the story? Does it slow things down? Does it read too long with your brain child entered. Look at it three days later. Now, does it read long, seem clumsier than you thought, putting a goddam speed-bump in the pacing? We all hate speed-bumps. You can bet the reader hates them too. Even though the idea, sitting alone, is a brilliant idea, brilliantly stated. It's almost great, showing off, even, but heavens to Betsy, you really do like that line.
Put the brakes on. One of the talents of a superior writer is knowing when not to put the good writing in the story. Unpublished writers have a very hard time always recognizing this in practice. My guess is every single page of your project has at least one or two sentences that aren't essential to the story, to the character building, to the suspense and conflict you are trying to get across to King Reader.
With all my railing against redundancy, I'm sure I understand this and know tons of examples in my own work. But I continue to catch myself putting all my good thoughts into the story.
Tip: Most of the time, leave it out. That goes double if it comes to you during a rewriting session. You should be striving to dump 50% of your words, not the other way around.
Less is more. Remember it, and live it! Your readers will love your writing for it. They'll be turning pages like crazy.
Showing posts with label novel writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label novel writing. Show all posts
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Friday, December 24, 2010
Creating: The Villain Next Door
This “guest post” is by one of the authors of Writing Fiction for Dummies, Randy Ingermanson, one of my heroes for creating publish-quality stories. He personally invited me to steal this article from his E-zine that I subscribe to. There are some good pointers. If you’re resistant to these particular points, at least hopefully I’ve made you think a little.
Extracted from “Advanced Fiction Writing E-zine,” received Dec 20, 2010
By Randy Ingermanson
Creating: The Villain Next Door
One of the most common types of characters in a novel is the villain--a person directly opposing the protagonist.
Writing villains is hard. The reason is that you, the author, are likely to dislike your villain. You probably find it hard to relate to your villain. You don't understand what makes him tick. Therefore, it's all too tempting to make him a two-dimensional character whose sole purpose is to be bad.
The problem with that is that villains don't believe they're bad. Villains generally believe they're the good guys. Villains believe that the story is their story.
I've been reading a book lately titled THE SOCIOPATH NEXT DOOR, by Martha Stout, Ph.D., and I think it's valuable to any novelist who wants to write a real, live, breathing, three-dimensional villain.
We'll define a sociopath, as Dr. Stout does, this way:
A sociopath is a person who lacks a conscience. A sociopath feels free to do anything without any sense of shame, guilt, or remorse.
You might imagine that people like that are pretty rare. One in a million, maybe. Or one in ten thousand.
According to Dr. Stout, those estimates are way low.
According to her, about 4 in every 100 people is a sociopath.
That's pretty shocking. Scary even. It doesn't mean that 4% of all people are psychopathic murderers. Those are pretty rare. It means that 4% of all people match the standard psychiatric definition of "antisocial personality disorder."
The sociopath category is pretty broad. A rare few sociopaths become serial killers. Most of them do their best to fit in with a world of people they can't relate to at all -- people hobbled with consciences.
There are plenty of places to fit in.
An extremely intelligent sociopath can do well in business or politics or the military, where ruthless domination of others might actually be rewarded.
(Obviously not every businessman or politician or military professional is a sociopath.)
Less gifted sociopaths may find a niche in some job where they exercise authority over a few others and enjoy making life miserable for them.
Sociopaths with average talents are often full-time moochers, living off somebody else by arousing pity.
Plenty of sociopaths gravitate to crime. Surprisingly, the majority of criminals are NOT sociopaths. Studies show that only about 20% of prison inmates are sociopaths. But that 20% account for more than half of the most serious crimes.
If you decide that the villain in your novel should be a sociopath, what features should your character have?
To get the fully detailed answer, I recommend that you read THE SOCIOPATH NEXT DOOR or some similar book.
Please note that reading one book on sociopaths will not make either you or me an expert, but these are the high points that I picked up from the book:
* Sociopaths know the difference between right and wrong. There is nothing flawed in their understanding of basic morality. However, when they do wrong, they don't FEEL any sense of shame or guilt. Therefore, they can justify anything they do by blaming the victim or the economy or society or circumstances or Satan or the weather or whatever.
* Sociopaths often are extremely charming. They study normal humans and learn which buttons to push in order to get the responses they want. So the stereotype of the charming villain is based on reality. This skill is critical for sociopaths climbing the corporate ladder or making a career in politics or wangling into a romantic relationship.
* Sociopaths are extremely good at detecting potential victims. Whether they're looking for somebody to marry, somebody to mug, or somebody to mooch, they quickly home in on the one who'll give the biggest payoff.
* Sociopaths don't love anybody. They may say all the right words, but they never really mean them.
* Sociopaths crave pity. This may seem astonishing, but one of the most reliable indicators that somebody is a sociopath is their relentless attempts to arouse pity in the people they're victimizing. A typical sociopath can turn on the "crocodile tears" on command.
* Sociopaths are easily bored. So are children and young teens, of course, but normal people grow out of their boredom as they mature. Sociopaths don't. Because of that, they crave excitement, which causes them to take crazy risks which endanger themselves and other people. Those risks can lead to spectacular successes in business, politics, and war. They can also lead to spectacular failures.
* Sociopaths don't want to get better. They rarely try to get treatment unless forced to, because they think they're just fine the way they are -- it's the rest of the human race that's screwed up.
* Sociopaths sometimes "do the right thing" -- if it gains them something. That may be public approval or it may be a heightened self-image. But their reason for doing the right thing is always based on what they THINK, not on what they FEEL. Doing wrong doesn't make a sociopath feel bad and doing right doesn't make him feel good.
* For a sociopath, life is about winning. Other people are there to be controlled or to provide points in the game. Relationships with those pesky people have no value, unless the relationship contributes to winning.
In writing a character––any character––you must find a way to get inside that character's skin. You must think as they think and feel as they feel.
That doesn't mean that you have to become a sociopath in order to write a convincing villain. It means you need to be able to IMAGINE being a sociopath.
And that's not so hard. Novelists typically have extremely high empathic skills. A novelist is required to imagine that he or she is a person of a different gender, age, ethnic group, social stratum. Many novelists need to imagine that they live in a different time or a different place.
If you can imagine all that, then you can imagine that you have no conscience and don't want one. When you do that, you'll understand your villain in a whole new way.
Award-winning novelist Randy Ingermanson, "the
Snowflake Guy," publishes the Advanced Fiction Writing
E-zine, with more than 23,000 readers, every month. If
you want to learn the craft and marketing of fiction,
AND make your writing more valuable to editors, AND
have FUN doing it, visit
Download your free Special Report on Tiger Marketing
and get a free 5-Day Course in How To Publish a Novel.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Receiving Feedback
Receiving feedback on your novel writing--my novel writing, to more accurate--can be a trifle traumatic. Which may be the understatement of the century.
My critique group meetings, in all honesty, were sometimes stressful for me, especially when giving feedback that I knew the person didn't want to hear (but he needed to hear). Fist fights; thrown dishes; tears; blood. I'm kidding. C'mon. Thrown dishes? I don't think so.
Even helpful, right-on-the-money corrective analysis, from experts, and factoring in that all writing judgments are subjective. A little questioning by the receiver of the feedback is a valid activity. Still, this sought-after feedback can cut a writer to the quick.
I'm having my present novel in-progress, Sagebrush at Stony Creek, content-edited by a skilled editor. It seems there are five or so consistent, systematic show stoppers throughout the first half of the novel. The first half is all I could afford to have reviewed, but I get that there are issues that need improving, from her viewpoint.
Stepping back from the defensive emotions I had, I can see there is plenty that is substance in her commentary and so I'm setting out to correct them. But to show the point that it is emotional, I'll give you a peek at my first response letter back to her.
"Hi Xxxx,
"After picking up the pieces of my heart and gluing them back together, I will wait a few days, so as to let my high emotions die down. I was so glad to finish this thing, finally. I’d hope it wouldn’t be perceived as awful…but I did wonder. Thanks for an honest & expert appraisal...."
My reply goes on from there to each point that "needs work" and defends the mistakes, explaining my silly thinking at the time, going into what I plan to do about them, but the real action will start after we talk on the phone and work out an efficient stategy for putting out a most-publishable version of my story. Is it that hard? Well, for some, they have their strengths and their publishers down, those like John Grisham and Steven King, maybe it comes a lot easier. They have written a lot more fiction than I've ever dreamed of writing, and they do it daily.
Perhaps, that's the most important thing about our differences in skill and publishability. I take heart in the fact I heard somewhere that Samuel Clemens took more than seven years to write his Adventures of Tom Sawyer!
And, in those days, they didn't put such an emphasis on brevity. Seems Clemens contained some 230,000 words in his "little" book about Tom, Becky, and Injun Joe. My much-too-long piece weighs in at 110,000 words.
My critique group meetings, in all honesty, were sometimes stressful for me, especially when giving feedback that I knew the person didn't want to hear (but he needed to hear). Fist fights; thrown dishes; tears; blood. I'm kidding. C'mon. Thrown dishes? I don't think so.
Even helpful, right-on-the-money corrective analysis, from experts, and factoring in that all writing judgments are subjective. A little questioning by the receiver of the feedback is a valid activity. Still, this sought-after feedback can cut a writer to the quick.
I'm having my present novel in-progress, Sagebrush at Stony Creek, content-edited by a skilled editor. It seems there are five or so consistent, systematic show stoppers throughout the first half of the novel. The first half is all I could afford to have reviewed, but I get that there are issues that need improving, from her viewpoint.
Stepping back from the defensive emotions I had, I can see there is plenty that is substance in her commentary and so I'm setting out to correct them. But to show the point that it is emotional, I'll give you a peek at my first response letter back to her.
"Hi Xxxx,
"After picking up the pieces of my heart and gluing them back together, I will wait a few days, so as to let my high emotions die down. I was so glad to finish this thing, finally. I’d hope it wouldn’t be perceived as awful…but I did wonder. Thanks for an honest & expert appraisal...."
My reply goes on from there to each point that "needs work" and defends the mistakes, explaining my silly thinking at the time, going into what I plan to do about them, but the real action will start after we talk on the phone and work out an efficient stategy for putting out a most-publishable version of my story. Is it that hard? Well, for some, they have their strengths and their publishers down, those like John Grisham and Steven King, maybe it comes a lot easier. They have written a lot more fiction than I've ever dreamed of writing, and they do it daily.
Perhaps, that's the most important thing about our differences in skill and publishability. I take heart in the fact I heard somewhere that Samuel Clemens took more than seven years to write his Adventures of Tom Sawyer!
And, in those days, they didn't put such an emphasis on brevity. Seems Clemens contained some 230,000 words in his "little" book about Tom, Becky, and Injun Joe. My much-too-long piece weighs in at 110,000 words.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Progress on Making Corrections
Do you remember, I received back the edits on my novel, 513 double-spaced pages of manuscript? Now I'm inserting the commas I should have known belong and changing my "Em-dashes"--there are quite a few of these critters for some God awful reason.
Maybe, you're thinking, "Well, good, he's about done."
T'ain't that easy. I have to find the place on the computer screen (my working [master] copy of my novel), then re-find the redmark (in the manuscript stack), then make sure I decide which I prefer--usually the editor's way, except sometimes I'm removing whole paragraphs and making minor repairs on either side of that. I find a few begin quotes and stuff that neither of us caught (I don't mind, because it means my editor got caught up in my story). After putting in the correction, I have to recheck that I took out the old incorrect thing. Say, there's about three markups per double spaced page (yes, I'm pretty error-prone; don't think it's that unusual), a couple chapters of that, and I'm bushed. I'm now on page 172 of M/S. That makes 172 x 3 = 516 corrections made (approximately, of course), not a small amount of work. And only about a third of the way on this--ha, ha--"final edit."
At chapter completions, I re-read the chapter aloud and fix things that still aren't fixed or that make my tongue stumble.
Every couple hours, even very dedicated writers need to get up and take a walk around the block, lift some weights, do some chores, get their feet up, watching TV. Well, I do anyway, to keep my blood circulating and bones right. I know a few others like Rita St. Claire, a romance writer, who completely agree with me, and some who agree, but don't do the exercise breaks nearly enough. Anyway, do watch your ergonomics. Your writing will be and stay better if your healthy.
Back to editing: I found a number of words I may use too often as I once again see my work both through my eyes and through my editor's eyes. (There's a lot of brain work going on in this process, though not much typing per se.) I'm making a list of these overused words and will do a Search-Find in MSWord to count them and see if I can think of better replacement or if I can delete the whole sentence without screwing up the story. Here's my list so far (I'm sure it will get longer as I go):
damn
darn
dang (want to make sure these are attached to different characters as their unique dialog pattern)
f*** (yes, I have some of those. Sorry, Aunt Tilly.)
f***er
sh**
you know
tears
also
I guess [this is how I speak; well, all my characters shouldn't talk like I do)
nodded
eyebrows
raised eyebrows
Jeez
smirk; smirked
smile; smiled; smiling
Every authors "word-abuse" list is different, I'd guess.
It's not so much that they really are overused. I just want to check them. Seems like they come up a lot, especially in dialog, and I use a lot of dialog.
I've already learned to try to not use weak verbs like forms of "to be" and "have". Some of my sentences are much too involved for todays dumbed-down public, and they need to get broken-up into shorter sentences.
I miss putting in a lot of "?".
I'm still spelling the last name, "Charlie" as "Charley" once in a while. I can't believe it.
Time to get up and stretch. Take care, all.
PS: Some of the writing in my story is pretty darn thrilling.
Maybe, you're thinking, "Well, good, he's about done."
T'ain't that easy. I have to find the place on the computer screen (my working [master] copy of my novel), then re-find the redmark (in the manuscript stack), then make sure I decide which I prefer--usually the editor's way, except sometimes I'm removing whole paragraphs and making minor repairs on either side of that. I find a few begin quotes and stuff that neither of us caught (I don't mind, because it means my editor got caught up in my story). After putting in the correction, I have to recheck that I took out the old incorrect thing. Say, there's about three markups per double spaced page (yes, I'm pretty error-prone; don't think it's that unusual), a couple chapters of that, and I'm bushed. I'm now on page 172 of M/S. That makes 172 x 3 = 516 corrections made (approximately, of course), not a small amount of work. And only about a third of the way on this--ha, ha--"final edit."
At chapter completions, I re-read the chapter aloud and fix things that still aren't fixed or that make my tongue stumble.
Every couple hours, even very dedicated writers need to get up and take a walk around the block, lift some weights, do some chores, get their feet up, watching TV. Well, I do anyway, to keep my blood circulating and bones right. I know a few others like Rita St. Claire, a romance writer, who completely agree with me, and some who agree, but don't do the exercise breaks nearly enough. Anyway, do watch your ergonomics. Your writing will be and stay better if your healthy.
Back to editing: I found a number of words I may use too often as I once again see my work both through my eyes and through my editor's eyes. (There's a lot of brain work going on in this process, though not much typing per se.) I'm making a list of these overused words and will do a Search-Find in MSWord to count them and see if I can think of better replacement or if I can delete the whole sentence without screwing up the story. Here's my list so far (I'm sure it will get longer as I go):
damn
darn
dang (want to make sure these are attached to different characters as their unique dialog pattern)
f*** (yes, I have some of those. Sorry, Aunt Tilly.)
f***er
sh**
you know
tears
also
I guess [this is how I speak; well, all my characters shouldn't talk like I do)
nodded
eyebrows
raised eyebrows
Jeez
smirk; smirked
smile; smiled; smiling
Every authors "word-abuse" list is different, I'd guess.
It's not so much that they really are overused. I just want to check them. Seems like they come up a lot, especially in dialog, and I use a lot of dialog.
I've already learned to try to not use weak verbs like forms of "to be" and "have". Some of my sentences are much too involved for todays dumbed-down public, and they need to get broken-up into shorter sentences.
I miss putting in a lot of "?".
I'm still spelling the last name, "Charlie" as "Charley" once in a while. I can't believe it.
Time to get up and stretch. Take care, all.
PS: Some of the writing in my story is pretty darn thrilling.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Agent Pet Peeves
Here's a "good advice" for fiction writers I just discovered, or I may have rediscovered it:
http://www.guidetoliteraryagents.com/blog/Agent+Advice+Cherry+Weiner+Of+The+Cherry+Weiner+Literary+Agency.aspx
Try it, especially if you are as yet unpublished, would like to know something more about what your receiver thinks of your work. -rb
I went to Niagara Falls recently,
which was an exciting day for my cousins, my friend, and I. Someone mentioned that I probably came back with a few good new poems (or a short story). "Well, no," was my answer. Now I wonder why not. :^\
http://www.guidetoliteraryagents.com/blog/Agent+Advice+Cherry+Weiner+Of+The+Cherry+Weiner+Literary+Agency.aspx
Try it, especially if you are as yet unpublished, would like to know something more about what your receiver thinks of your work. -rb
I went to Niagara Falls recently,
Sunday, May 2, 2010
A Writing Instructor Extraordinaire
I think I've mentioned him before, Randy Ingermanson. He cranks out a good newsletter, has good websites (see http://www.advancedfictionwriting.com/). My days are busy, but I must look more at his techniques and suggestions. He also speaks/instructs/mentors at conferences ... for a price, of course. See the same link.
A just finished reading The Shipping News by Annie Proulx. What an inspiration that is for her assured, daring style, and fascinating content, goings-on in and around a small fishing town in Newfoundland. Her characters even tell great stories. Now I got to chase out and see the movie on DVD.
Sheesh, and more! I took an 8-week internet novel writing course (March-April) from Random House Struik (in South Africa), a class of the highest quality they term GetSmarter, with plenty of expert support from teacher/editor/agent, Ron Irwin, a strong leader and critiquer. We endured and tried our hands at student critiquing and other challenges. I shared excerpts from of my novel, Sagebrush at Stony Creek, for critiquing. A few poems; Thanks Kim and Kris and other new South African fans for their encouragement. 80 students with quite a spread of ages and subjects; genres. Some of my critiques were seen as overly harsh and condescending, but I defend it, as I am focusing on improving the work, and of course, the receiver has the option to consider my thoughts and immediately dismiss them. Thick skin does come with this profession, novel writing, unless you're a Grisham or Brown or Stephen King. Hey, they probably have thick skin, too.
In the middle of the Random House Struik course, I took three day writer's "Retreat" at the PEMA OSEL LING Retreat Center outside of Watsonville, CA sponsored by the Norcal Group of branches of California Writers Club. Learned a great deal about sliding down hills in Santa Cruz Hills mud. Nora Profit ( http://www.thewritingloft.com/ ) taught two of the classes on writing with emotion. A couple other classes were given by Luisah Teish on shifting the paradigm, spreading the mythos of conservation and caring for the fragile Earth in all one's writings ( http://www.luisahteish.com/ ).
I must get back to my short story and publish the ending here for all you fans who are waiting. If you're holding your breath, you must have keeled over by now. I want to send it in to GlimmerTrain by May 25. -rb
A just finished reading The Shipping News by Annie Proulx. What an inspiration that is for her assured, daring style, and fascinating content, goings-on in and around a small fishing town in Newfoundland. Her characters even tell great stories. Now I got to chase out and see the movie on DVD.
Sheesh, and more! I took an 8-week internet novel writing course (March-April) from Random House Struik (in South Africa), a class of the highest quality they term GetSmarter, with plenty of expert support from teacher/editor/agent, Ron Irwin, a strong leader and critiquer. We endured and tried our hands at student critiquing and other challenges. I shared excerpts from of my novel, Sagebrush at Stony Creek, for critiquing. A few poems; Thanks Kim and Kris and other new South African fans for their encouragement. 80 students with quite a spread of ages and subjects; genres. Some of my critiques were seen as overly harsh and condescending, but I defend it, as I am focusing on improving the work, and of course, the receiver has the option to consider my thoughts and immediately dismiss them. Thick skin does come with this profession, novel writing, unless you're a Grisham or Brown or Stephen King. Hey, they probably have thick skin, too.
In the middle of the Random House Struik course, I took three day writer's "Retreat" at the PEMA OSEL LING Retreat Center outside of Watsonville, CA sponsored by the Norcal Group of branches of California Writers Club. Learned a great deal about sliding down hills in Santa Cruz Hills mud. Nora Profit ( http://www.thewritingloft.com/ ) taught two of the classes on writing with emotion. A couple other classes were given by Luisah Teish on shifting the paradigm, spreading the mythos of conservation and caring for the fragile Earth in all one's writings ( http://www.luisahteish.com/ ).
I must get back to my short story and publish the ending here for all you fans who are waiting. If you're holding your breath, you must have keeled over by now. I want to send it in to GlimmerTrain by May 25. -rb
Saturday, November 28, 2009
The Perfect Scene - A Link
I rediscovered an old link on my browser favorites list, it's by Randy Ingermanson, all about the function of a scene and the follow-up scene, which he calls the "sequel," the quasi-scene or narrative consolidating, cleaning up, and cogitating over what just happened in the "scene," and resting the reader a little in preparation for another high point, the next scene. It was an extremely useful article for me.
Judging from a lot of early drafts of good stories in critique groups that I've been involved with, understanding and applying this principle would be helpful for many B+ writers whose novels feel too monotone.
The story tension and stakes for the protagonist are akin to being on a roller coaster--this is my analogy, not Ingermanson's--where the scenes are the high points and the sequels are the necessary lower "valleys" to gather up steam again. But unlike a roller coaster, the general lay of the track tends, throughout the novel, to get higher and more precarious until the ridiculously high stakes and scariest conflict, the place on the track near the end of the ride that must be resolved via the climax. You (the reader following and rooting for the protagonist) have reached the awesome point where you see the whole city and you feel on the brink of plunging someplace you don't want to go or you feel like you're going to fall off, and then, the bottom falls out as you speed, out of control, downward.
Ingermanson says the scene ought to have a goal (for the protagonist), conflict, and disaster. The sequel should have reacton (to the disaster), a dilemma (makes the proagonist consider what to do next), and then a decision. Without the sequel, how is the character to grow? How will the protagonist ever reach her goal?
This decision (the decision to act, to actually physically do something) morphs into yor character requiring the goal for the next scene, a covenient way to make for action and an efficient, straight line story, instead of one, like some of mine, meandering from this place to that. Meandering is an unnecessary time-out from the story line, possibly fascinating stuff, but not the makings of a real page-turner, which is the bottom-line, elusive story characteristic publishers and readers are looking for these days.
Oh, I almost forgot, here's the link: http://www.advancedfictionwriting.com/art/scene.php
Judging from a lot of early drafts of good stories in critique groups that I've been involved with, understanding and applying this principle would be helpful for many B+ writers whose novels feel too monotone.
The story tension and stakes for the protagonist are akin to being on a roller coaster--this is my analogy, not Ingermanson's--where the scenes are the high points and the sequels are the necessary lower "valleys" to gather up steam again. But unlike a roller coaster, the general lay of the track tends, throughout the novel, to get higher and more precarious until the ridiculously high stakes and scariest conflict, the place on the track near the end of the ride that must be resolved via the climax. You (the reader following and rooting for the protagonist) have reached the awesome point where you see the whole city and you feel on the brink of plunging someplace you don't want to go or you feel like you're going to fall off, and then, the bottom falls out as you speed, out of control, downward.
Ingermanson says the scene ought to have a goal (for the protagonist), conflict, and disaster. The sequel should have reacton (to the disaster), a dilemma (makes the proagonist consider what to do next), and then a decision. Without the sequel, how is the character to grow? How will the protagonist ever reach her goal?
This decision (the decision to act, to actually physically do something) morphs into yor character requiring the goal for the next scene, a covenient way to make for action and an efficient, straight line story, instead of one, like some of mine, meandering from this place to that. Meandering is an unnecessary time-out from the story line, possibly fascinating stuff, but not the makings of a real page-turner, which is the bottom-line, elusive story characteristic publishers and readers are looking for these days.
Oh, I almost forgot, here's the link: http://www.advancedfictionwriting.com/art/scene.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)