Second Book Curse

[Hedgetrimmer]

Here's something that's been on my mind, and maybe some of you guys can offer your own take on it. Let's say you've completed two novels targeting the same audience. The first book is good, even publishable, but the second book is better. A publisher is interested in both books. If you had any say in the matter, which would you prefer debut?

Release the weaker book and then the stronger book, thus showing an improvement in the writing but maybe risk losing some readers who didn't think the first book was good enough for them to come back for seconds?

Or release the stronger book, hoping to secure a nice audience and a better chance they'll come back for seconds, but then risk disappointing them because the second book may be viewed as a step backward?

I hope this doesn't sound too convoluted.

[Cliff Face]

Release the second book and then write a third.

[seun]

Are you asking because this is your situation? Do you have one book you think is stronger than the other? If you do, the best thing to do is get BOTH books as close to perfect as you can. It doesn't matter if one is weaker than the other. An agent or publisher won't reject it because of the comparison. They'll reject it based on its own.

[Hedgetrimmer]

Are you asking because this is your situation? Do you have one book you think is stronger than the other? If you do, the best thing to do is get BOTH books as close to perfect as you can. It doesn't matter if one is weaker than the other. An agent or publisher won't reject it because of the comparison. They'll reject it based on its own.

It's almost my situation. The first book landed me an agent and is currently under submission. I'm almost done with another book in the same genre, only a different style and vision, but in my opinion works on more levels and is simply a better book. Which I hope it would be, considering I expect my craft to improve. As much as I love the first book (my agent does too), I can't help but consider the above scenarios.

[Phaeal]

If your agent loves the book, and you trust your agent's opinion, I'd say let the first book go out first.

The first book still has to run the publisher gauntlet. If it's not good enough or not marketable enough at the moment or needs more work, my bet is the publishers will let you know.

[Hedgetrimmer]

If your agent loves the book, and you trust your agent's opinion, I'd say let the first book go out first.

The first book still has to run the publisher gauntlet. If it's not good enough or not marketable enough at the moment or needs more work, my bet is the publishers will let you know.

That's what I'm hoping. My agent has read the first chapter of my WIP but really doesn't know what it's about. He already has two of my books on submission, one MG and another YA. The WIP is another MG. Hopefully by the time it's complete, we will have heard back from editors and have a better idea where we stand.

[kellion92]

I'd publish the book that sells first! If you sell your two MGs in a two-book deal and they are both ready at the same time, Hedge, your publisher will decide which to put out first.

[Hedgetrimmer]

I'd publish the book that sells first! If you sell your two MGs in a two-book deal and they are both ready at the same time, Hedge, your publisher will decide which to put out first.

Yeah, that's what I figured, which is why as I near the completion of my WIP, I'm getting a little anxious about seeing what the first book does. I would love to go ahead and have my agent secure a deal on that book and then follow that up with something even better. But I certainly feel what you're saying. First order of business is to get somebody on board with book one.

[kaitie]

I'd without a doubt rather put out the weaker one first. I actually was telling someone this just the other day. If I had a choice (and it was considered publishable by oh...anyone), I'd much rather put out my last story than the one I'm currently writing. While there are some things about the last one that I think are better (the MC for one, and I do prefer the originality of the plot in the last one), but overall the current story is probably the better of the two. My reasoning is exactly what you mentioned. I don't want to put out the better one, then have people come back and read the second and be disappointed. You also always hear about how hard it is to get book deals for later books because you have to have sales to back them up, and in theory, the better book would have better sales, ne? Just my logic. I still have nothing to show either of the two are even any good yet, but if they were this would be my take.

[Hedgetrimmer]

Kaitie, that's my thinking exactly. I've always heard how the sophomore book is really the deal maker or breaker. The public wants to see if the success of the first book was simply a fluke. It's definitely something I'll discuss with my agent when I feel the time is right.

[MrWrite]

Hedge are the two books part of a series or completely separate stories?

[JackinElgin]

It's almost my situation. The first book landed me an agent and is currently under submission. I'm almost done with another book in the same genre, only a different style and vision, but in my opinion works on more levels and is simply a better book. Which I hope it would be, considering I expect my craft to improve. As much as I love the first book (my agent does too), I can't help but consider the above scenarios.


Maybe you're perspective is a little eschewed because you're just finishing up the second story. Of course you thinks its much much better than the first right now. Maybe you should shelf it for a week after you're done then judge he merits of the story in comparison to the first.

[backslashbaby]

Would it be absolutely crazy to use a pseudonym for the weaker book, and then pick which name to pursue based on sales or better quality of one name?

I would be afraid of tarnishing my debut with a book I didn't think was strong. But if people want it, I'll sell it, sure :D :D

[Hedgetrimmer]

Mrwrite -- The books are separate. The only similarities are the voice and the target audience.

Jack -- I never considered this. I plan to complete it next week and set it aside for a while, but I really can tell the difference. Still, like you say, others may disagree.

BSB -- Nayyy, the only reason I would consider a pen name is if I begin writing something completely different than my current work. As for my first book, I have no problem debuting with it. It's actually the book I'm most fond of. I'm just seeing a noticeable difference in my writing since having started and nearly completed book two.

[timewaster]

Here's something that's been on my mind, and maybe some of you guys can offer your own take on it. Let's say you've completed two novels targeting the same audience. The first book is good, even publishable, but the second book is better. A publisher is interested in both books. If you had any say in the matter, which would you prefer debut?

Release the weaker book and then the stronger book, thus showing an improvement in the writing but maybe risk losing some readers who didn't think the first book was good enough for them to come back for seconds?

Or release the stronger book, hoping to secure a nice audience and a better chance they'll come back for seconds, but then risk disappointing them because the second book may be viewed as a step backward?

I hope this doesn't sound too convoluted.


'Weaker' and 'Stronger' are very subjective. I think the writer is rarely the best judge, least of all when they are still writing. In this market sell whichever you can and remember that there will be plenty of time to sort out any flaws with both books when you work with an editor. If you have a buyer for the first one - great - don't turn down a sale and work on it to make it stronger. The elements that you value may not be the ones that have caught a publishers eye. You don't necessarily get 'better' with each book.

[blacbird]

All my books are cursed.

caw

[Hedgetrimmer]

'Weaker' and 'Stronger' are very subjective. I think the writer is rarely the best judge, least of all when they are still writing. In this market sell whichever you can and remember that there will be plenty of time to sort out any flaws with both books when you work with an editor. If you have a buyer for the first one - great - don't turn down a sale and work on it to make it stronger. The elements that you value may not be the ones that have caught a publishers eye. You don't necessarily get 'better' with each book.

I hear you. Good advice.

[shaldna]

I would rework the weaker book unti it was no longer weak.

Because even if it's published first or second, if it's weak it will always be weak,

[seun]

It's almost my situation. The first book landed me an agent and is currently under submission. I'm almost done with another book in the same genre, only a different style and vision, but in my opinion works on more levels and is simply a better book. Which I hope it would be, considering I expect my craft to improve. As much as I love the first book (my agent does too), I can't help but consider the above scenarios.

I'd keep your first book with your agent and see what they say about book 2 when the time comes. Sounds like you're in a good position as things are.

[Hedgetrimmer]

I would rework the weaker book unti it was no longer weak.

Because even if it's published first or second, if it's weak it will always be weak,

No one so far has said it's weak. My agent said it's "nearly flawless." I'm simply making the point that my work since then has improved considerably, so much so that it's raising questions in my head regarding the order and timing of possible releases.

[Hedgetrimmer]

I'd keep your first book with your agent and see what they say about book 2 when the time comes. Sounds like you're in a good position as things are.

Yeah, that's the course I've decided to take for now.

[happywritermom]

I think I know what you mean Hedgetrimmer. My first novel is out on submission and I'm about eight chapters in to my WIP. My first reaction would be to decribe my WIP as stronger, but, if I think about it, it's just more saleable. That doesn't make it any better than the first book as a piece of literature.

[lucidzfl]

Its interesting you bring this up. Its actually precisely the reason I plan on having 10 salable novels written before I start to submit.

[Hedgetrimmer]

HWM -- Good luck with your submission!

Lucid -- I'm curious. Why write so many? Ten novels are a lot to have sitting around. How will know they're publishable until you try to get them published?

[ClaudiaGray]

Talk to your agent. But keep in mind -- hopefully, your writing ability is going to continue to develop and grow. Which means if you keep waiting to publish the very best thing you could ever write, you could conceivably wait forever. If that first book is as good as it can be, and your agent likes it, I'd say trust it.

[Libbie]

If you're doing it right, every book you write will be better than the last. If you feel your first truly sucks, you could talk about withholding it. However, it landed you an agent -- presumably it's pretty good.

You'll never write a perfect book. You'll always do better. Appreciate your relatively earlier efforts for what they are: the beginnings of your career. If they're publishable, publish them. Readers will enjoy them. Don't withhold happiness from the world just because you are capable of making greater happiness later on!

[lucidzfl]

HWM -- Good luck with your submission!

Lucid -- I'm curious. Why write so many? Ten novels are a lot to have sitting around. How will know they're publishable until you try to get them published?

Thanks for the direct question. Its an interesting one, and I am a psychotic bastard to be sure. The book I started in October of last year was my fifth novel. Over the course of the preceding nine years, I wrote four other books. None of them were particularly good. My first, I rewrote half a dozen times. Basically, every noob mistake you can think of I made. Editing after every chapter, not finishing, overthinking, etc.

It was after my wedding last year that I had an earnest discussion with my wife that I wanted to eschew the very profitable lifestyle I've carved out for myself to become a paid, full time, fiction writer.

I set out to write a book that I could finish, and that might be publishable, IE: did not languish about awaiting fifteen dozen edits, and rewrites. I wrote that book in three months. Since then, I decided to write book after book, in order to practice the craft. The same way people might train for a marathon, or do puzzles to strengthen their mind, I decided to write full books.

I have learned that with every sequential book, I have become better and better at the first draft. I've learned what works and what doesn't and I've learned how to finish things and not be afraid of the finishing. With each book, the stigma around "writing" disappears, and I find myself, just... Writing.

Ten is an arbitrary number I set for myself, just as thirty days per book is arbitrary. I'm lucky enough to have a wife that when I say "I have to write four thousand words tonight to meet my deadline" doesn't respond, "Its your deadline asshole, blow it off and spend time with me."

She knows what it means to me to set my goals and stick to them.

To whit: In the old days when I played video games, and you gained experience by fighting random monsters, I was always the kid who spent 3x as long fighting the lower level monsters and gaining levels so that when I finally fought the big boss, it was a piece of cake.

Lets consider the publication monster to be the big boss, and my writing this much to be the level grind :)

[Hedgetrimmer]

Thanks, Libbie. The thought that my words could make someone happy makes me feel all fuzzy inside. :)

Lucid, I get what you're saying. And lots of props to your wife. She sounds very supportive. I can imagine some wives, upon hearing you want to "eschew the very profitable lifestyle I've carved out for myself to become a paid, full time, fiction writer," would simply roll their eyes and tell you to take your ass back to work. Good luck getting to book 10.

[timewaster]

Can I just say that writers don't always get better, that writing more doesn't even necessarily mean writing better. I have written thirteen or so novels, published eight and the first novel I ever wrote remains many readers' favourite. I am struggling more with my current book than I did with my first. The last book was a breeze, but hasn't yet sold. This is not a simple business with a linear progression. Each story is different and requires a different approach - sometimes you meet the challenge other times you don't. I confess I can't see the point of writing practise novels and I never assume that as a writer I get better, merely more experienced.

[cwfgal]

Can I just say that writers don't always get better, that writing more doesn't even necessarily mean writing better. I have written thirteen or so novels, published eight and the first novel I ever wrote remains many readers' favourite. I am struggling more with my current book than I did with my first. The last book was a breeze, but hasn't yet sold. This is not a simple business with a linear progression. Each story is different and requires a different approach - sometimes you meet the challenge other times you don't. I confess I can't see the point of writing practise novels and I never assume that as a writer I get better, merely more experienced.

Yes!

Beth

[James D. Macdonald]

Writing a book teaches you how to write that book.

[C.J. Rockwell]

Hedge,

While I haven't gotten to the point your at now, I know how hard it is to go from one story to the next.

Also, while I get what timewaster and a couple others were saying, we have to remember that every writer is different.

Maybe they don't feel they improve with every book, but I honestly feel I do.

With each project, I make less of the really embarrassing mistakes I did in the beginning. My first drafts now aren't as rough as they were at the start. I looked back on my older work after putting it aside after years of editing didn't help much. I really see the difference.

I still rewrite a zillion times, but at least my technique and use of craft gets better with each story. One thing I'm learning is not being so adverse to taking risks. I've still got some considerable growing to do in this area, as I'm sure you know from the way I carry on here sometimes.

I can understand the frustration of wanting to put your best foot forward. That said, as selective as agents are now, your first book must have done something right.

Even if you can't get that particular novel sold right now, at least you found an agent you clicked with, who likes your writing, and is wiling to give you a chance. That alone is worth something.


As you know, I've had problems with my novel Gabriel finding placement, and while I may one day write stronger stuff, I still find Gabriel is an important story that I want to get out there.

The biggest hurdle I see now for me is finding agents, and later editors, who aren't adverse to the subject matter of most of my stories.

Also, many writers I respect and I know are good, be they published or not (Yet) had to go through many projects before they sold.

As Toothpaste told me once, be kind yourself.

Even though the learning never stops in this business, there has to come a point where something pays off. I really think it's happening for you, little by little. Not to denounce your concern, but enjoy what you've currently achieved for all of us who're still fighting to break through.

C.J.

[C.J. Rockwell]

Writing a book teaches you how to write that book.

That's true to a point, but some things do carry over. At least for me.

[Hedgetrimmer]

I appreciate the thought, CJ. And I understand how you feel about Gabriel. Some books just mean more to us for various reasons. Even if Sweetness doesn't end up being the first book published, I promised my MC I wouldn't stop trying until her tale was told. My agent and I received our first rejection a couple of weeks ago. But he told me not to worry. Seven other houses are still looking at it, and he said he expects a sale. That certainly doesn't guarantee a sale, but it sure feels good knowing he's just as passionate about the book as I am.

[lucidzfl]

Writing a book teaches you how to write that book.

That may be true. Even if it doesn't actually help me to "practice" at least I get my stories out. For me thats all its about, getting the stories out. If I write fast, so be it.

[timewaster]

That may be true. Even if it doesn't actually help me to "practice" at least I get my stories out. For me thats all its about, getting the stories out. If I write fast, so be it.

It's none of my business but if you are working towards publication writing a lot of stuff quickly isn't necessarily the best route to improvement.

If you are good at reflecting on what you've done and reworking it to eliminate flaws then it might help, but unless your critical facility is growing with each effort, it can be quite difficult to see what might need improving.
I have heard much talk over the years about having to write a million words of crap or something like that and I don't believe it, at least not in the sense that after writing a million words of rubbish you will suddenly start writing good stuff - you might, but then again you might not. You have to develop a feel for what is good and what isn't and I don't think you can do that just by writing lots of first drafts.
You can't be a writer without writing but most of the writers I know also think a lot and read and poke away at their work.
Each to his own of course and your way might work for you, but it is an unusual approach.

[timewaster]

[QUOTE=C.J. Rockwell;4799602]Hedge,

While I haven't gotten to the point your at now, I know how hard it is to go from one story to the next.

Also, while I get what timewaster and a couple others were saying, we have to remember that every writer is different.

Maybe they don't feel they improve with every book, but I honestly feel I do.

It is each to his own but I am very suspicious of the view that everyone always gets better.
In the arts even the very best writers produce work of variable quality and the best is rarely left till last. Once you are competent as a writer then every new book, if it is not a rehash of earlier stories, creates new problems which you solve as well as you can. Some of the solutions are better than others, some of the stories are more compelling than others. If you think about the work of your favourite writer your favourite book is as likely to be his/her first as his tenth.
Writing books is not like a computer game where you advance up different levels it is much more like snakes and ladders : )

[Raphee]

Assuming I had a choice, I'd go with the stronger book. Reason: start off on your best foot.

[James D. Macdonald]

The way I look at the "million words of crap" is this: You write, and you do the best you can, and at the time you think it's brilliant ... but, in retrospect, it turns out it's crap.

(Incidentally, the usual second book curse is, "Darn it! I have to write another book!")

[James D. Macdonald]

The way I look at the "million words of crap" is this: You write, and you do the best you can, and at the time you think it's brilliant ... but, in retrospect, it turns out it's crap.

(Incidentally, the usual second book curse is, "Darn it! I have to write another book!")

[timewaster]

The way I look at the "million words of crap" is this: You write, and you do the best you can, and at the time you think it's brilliant ... but, in retrospect, it turns out it's crap.

(Incidentally, the usual second book curse is, "Darn it! I have to write another book!")

I don't know. People tend to take it to mean you have to write a lot of fiction before you can publish fiction and I don't think that is true. I know many people who sold their first novels or who wrote very little before being published. I think you probably have to have clocked up some writing hours -at school or wherever but I don't think it is necessary to write 'practise' novels though it might help to tell yourself that's what you are doing : )

[James D. Macdonald]

People tend to take it to mean you have to write a lot of fiction before you can publish fiction and I don't think that is true.

You're right, you don't have to. But the way it works out, most folks do.

[lucidzfl]

I'm not just shitting out first drafts and thinking "Yay, I wrote something so I must be better." My books go through two sets of revisions. I just write the first draft very quickly. Its not because I'm trying to write shit. I just type at 140 words per minute, and I write at around 57 words per minute. It only takes me 21 hours of typing to write a manuscript. I typically spend about an hour each night, before I write, planning out what I'm going to write that night. Then just one hour a night or so in actual writing. (Minimum of an hour)

I am not shooting for that "million words" thing before I assume I'll be publishable. Honestly, what I'm doing is not about the wordcounts etc. I'm trying different techniques. Third person limited, first person, futuristic, horror, etc. I'm just writing whatever sounds fun at the time.

Some people play video games, some people watch TV. I spend two hours a night creating characters and worlds. And yeah, I finish a first draft in around a month. I'm surprised that seems to annoy some people. Its probably a 6 month turn around from first draft before its ready to be read by anyone...

ETA: I am not buying into the "million words of crap" thing WHAT SO EVER. I am writing these books to improve my methodology for writing, not to write crap.

[lucidzfl]

[QUOTE=C.J. Rockwell;4799602]Hedge,

While I haven't gotten to the point your at now, I know how hard it is to go from one story to the next.

Also, while I get what timewaster and a couple others were saying, we have to remember that every writer is different.

Maybe they don't feel they improve with every book, but I honestly feel I do.

It is each to his own but I am very suspicious of the view that everyone always gets better.
In the arts even the very best writers produce work of variable quality and the best is rarely left till last. Once you are competent as a writer then every new book, if it is not a rehash of earlier stories, creates new problems which you solve as well as you can. Some of the solutions are better than others, some of the stories are more compelling than others. If you think about the work of your favourite writer your favourite book is as likely to be his/her first as his tenth.
Writing books is not like a computer game where you advance up different levels it is much more like snakes and ladders : )

I don't necessarily think of these as practice novels. If I ever wrote practice novels, its my trunked trilogy, and my clone war book. Those will never see the light of day.

The thing is, I have some pitfalls in my writing that I've identified. Writing another book, allows me to tweak my method. Where do I get stuck and why? How can I avoid it next time. What method is going to result in me making the cleanest, best first draft. Things can be fixed in editing, but every book I write allows me to get better and better at structuring the story and avoiding the problems I identified the time before.

The book before this one, I threw away 40,000 words. In this book, I threw away 5,000. That's just an example. There are a lot of other things that have improved as well. I don't expect that my "writing" is one of them, though.

[Nateskate]

Submit your strongest book. You only get one "first chance" to impress the agent, the publisher, the general public.

Then while you work on your third book, go back and revise the first book until it is stronger than your second book.

Your writing skills are better. And you wouldn't be satisfied with that book now, so why give something you know is weak to the publisher, and risk losing the publisher or the readers?

If you're wanting a writing career, you're in for a fight. Look at all the people here who've struggled to even get a second chance once a career stalls. Do only strong books and your chances for success will multiply.

[Libbie]

I write quickly, too, Lucid. Fast doesn't mean crap. I started my novel in June '09 (the version I ended up using, anyway -- I wrote a couple of earlier versions that had the same characters but totally different plots and very different styles.) I finished and revised it in September '09. I don't think it's crap, because I used it to get an agent at a well-respected agency, and she likes it enough to be submitting it now to really good editors at excellent historical fiction imprints at the big five.

This was my first novel, too, since the crappy one I wrote in eighth grade. (I'm thirty, to give you some idea of how much time has gone by since my first attempt at writing a novel.) Since 2007, I wrote a handful of short stories, two of which were published. Other than that, I hadn't written anything but blog posts from high school until my late twenties. So yeah, a lot of people (most) take more time, and complete a few "starter" novels before they feel ready to publish. That is just fine. Others just move quicker. That's just fine, too, and it doesn't mean the faster movers are producing crap just because they're fast.

The book isn't sold yet, to be sure, so who knows whether I've really written a bunch of crap. But I think it has a pretty good chance.

I am hard at work on my second novel, and I can already tell it's stronger and better than my first. My first book is imperfect, and there will probably always be things I want to change about it. But it's still enjoyable for readers, and I am happy to provide future readers with an entertaining Egyptian soap opera. Even though my second book is better already than the first, I haven't considered withdrawing the first from submission. Hopefully my next book will always be better than the one I've just finished and sent out to meet the world. :D

As long as readers have a good time with my work, I'll be happy. And I think that's the right attitude to have. It's hard to avoid being a perfectionist. I think most people who are attracted to writing are perfectionists to some degree. But you've got to learn to let that go, at least a little bit. Nothing you write will be *perfect.* Is it enjoyable? Is it the best you were capable of producing at the time you made it? If so, send it out there. Like I said upthread, it will bring joy to somebody. :) Let them have fun with your early stuff, and be amazed at how you develop when they read your later stuff.

Good times! Good times!

[Hedgetrimmer]

Submit your strongest book. You only get one "first chance" to impress the agent, the publisher, the general public.

Then while you work on your third book, go back and revise the first book until it is stronger than your second book.

Your writing skills are better. And you wouldn't be satisfied with that book now, so why give something you know is weak to the publisher, and risk losing the publisher or the readers?

If you're wanting a writing career, you're in for a fight. Look at all the people here who've struggled to even get a second chance once a career stalls. Do only strong books and your chances for success will multiply.

Yeah, that's a nice way of looking at the bigger picture. Thanks.

Libbie -- You're dead right about the perfectionist thing. I've published stuff in the past that I can't even read, as I know I'll see the parts that could've been better. And I imagine if I continue growing as a writer, it will always be that way. Otherwise, I'm just spinning wheels.

[lucidzfl]

I write quickly, too, Lucid. Fast doesn't mean crap. I started my novel in June '09 (the version I ended up using, anyway -- I wrote a couple of earlier versions that had the same characters but totally different plots and very different styles.) I finished and revised it in September '09. I don't think it's crap, because I used it to get an agent at a well-respected agency, and she likes it enough to be submitting it now to really good editors at excellent historical fiction imprints at the big five.

This was my first novel, too, since the crappy one I wrote in eighth grade. (I'm thirty, to give you some idea of how much time has gone by since my first attempt at writing a novel.) Since 2007, I wrote a handful of short stories, two of which were published. Other than that, I hadn't written anything but blog posts from high school until my late twenties. So yeah, a lot of people (most) take more time, and complete a few "starter" novels before they feel ready to publish. That is just fine. Others just move quicker. That's just fine, too, and it doesn't mean the faster movers are producing crap just because they're fast.

The book isn't sold yet, to be sure, so who knows whether I've really written a bunch of crap. But I think it has a pretty good chance.

I am hard at work on my second novel, and I can already tell it's stronger and better than my first. My first book is imperfect, and there will probably always be things I want to change about it. But it's still enjoyable for readers, and I am happy to provide future readers with an entertaining Egyptian soap opera. Even though my second book is better already than the first, I haven't considered withdrawing the first from submission. Hopefully my next book will always be better than the one I've just finished and sent out to meet the world. :D

As long as readers have a good time with my work, I'll be happy. And I think that's the right attitude to have. It's hard to avoid being a perfectionist. I think most people who are attracted to writing are perfectionists to some degree. But you've got to learn to let that go, at least a little bit. Nothing you write will be *perfect.* Is it enjoyable? Is it the best you were capable of producing at the time you made it? If so, send it out there. Like I said upthread, it will bring joy to somebody. :) Let them have fun with your early stuff, and be amazed at how you develop when they read your later stuff.

Good times! Good times!

I'm convinced that story is more important than good prose. Having the ability to sit down and have a story thought up and in mind when I write is important. I don't outline really, but writing this fast allows me to have a clear image of what mistakes I made in story in the previous book and fix it in the current one. bad writing, bad grammar, bad prose, can ALL be fixed in the editing process. Bad story? Eh. That's not so much editable. That's called rewriting. And I really don't want to rewrite.

[timewaster]

[QUOTE=lucidzfl;4803945][QUOTE=timewaster;4800201]

I don't necessarily think of these as practice novels. If I ever wrote practice novels, its my trunked trilogy, and my clone war book. Those will never see the light of day.

You'll have to excuse me. I don't really get what it is that you are doing. You say you want a career in writing -but you are not submitting until you have written 10 novels? I may have got the wrong end of the stick but this seems quite bizarre to me. If they are not practise novels why aren't you submitting them?
I'm not intending to be critical I just don't understand your approach.
I usually write quite quickly too - except when I don't so I don't have problems understanding that. I just don't get the ten novel thing.

[lucidzfl]

[QUOTE=lucidzfl;4803945][QUOTE=timewaster;4800201]

I don't necessarily think of these as practice novels. If I ever wrote practice novels, its my trunked trilogy, and my clone war book. Those will never see the light of day.

You'll have to excuse me. I don't really get what it is that you are doing. You say you want a career in writing -but you are not submitting until you have written 10 novels? I may have got the wrong end of the stick but this seems quite bizarre to me. If they are not practise novels why aren't you submitting them?
I'm not intending to be critical I just don't understand your approach.
I usually write quite quickly too - except when I don't so I don't have problems understanding that. I just don't get the ten novel thing.

Feel free to ask as much as you want. I'm not worried about it :)

Quite honestly, the putting off of the submission for publication is about procrastination due to fear :)

At 10, I'm going to force myself to submit no matter what. Its not because I think that at 10 novels, vs 9 novels I'll be any better hehe.

I'm nervous as hell about approaching the process, so setting a drop dead deadline is just a way to make myself adhere to it. I'm a bizarre dude, I know.

[timewaster]

[QUOTE=lucidzfl;4805673][QUOTE=timewaster;4805502][QUOTE=lucidzfl;4803945]

Feel free to ask as much as you want. I'm not worried about it :)

Quite honestly, the putting off of the submission for publication is about procrastination due to fear :)


Ah procrastinatin I get, avioiding submission through fear I don't get - not really. The worst they can say is 'no' and everyone has to get used to hearing that from time to time. Being a writer requres a high tolerance of rejection and criticism : ) Now dealing with that probably is worth practising.

[lucidzfl]

[QUOTE=lucidzfl;4805673][QUOTE=timewaster;4805502][QUOTE=lucidzfl;4803945]

Feel free to ask as much as you want. I'm not worried about it :)

Quite honestly, the putting off of the submission for publication is about procrastination due to fear :)


Ah procrastinatin I get, avioiding submission through fear I don't get - not really. The worst they can say is 'no' and everyone has to get used to hearing that from time to time. Being a writer requres a high tolerance of rejection and criticism : ) Now dealing with that probably is worth practising.

All I can say is, to each their own. I plan to submit. I plan to publish. I have my plan to do so.

Now, at this moment, it is 7:56, and I've written 3700 words so far tonight. I need to write 6500 words or so more tonight, and the second book of the year will be finished :)

I'm going to go get back to that.

[juniper]

As long as readers have a good time with my work, I'll be happy. And I think that's the right attitude to have. It's hard to avoid being a perfectionist. I think most people who are attracted to writing are perfectionists to some degree. But you've got to learn to let that go, at least a little bit. Nothing you write will be *perfect.* Is it enjoyable? Is it the best you were capable of producing at the time you made it? If so, send it out there. Like I said upthread, it will bring joy to somebody. :) Let them have fun with your early stuff, and be amazed at how you develop when they read your later stuff.

Good times! Good times!

I need to read this every day. Thank you.

[Hedgetrimmer]

[QUOTE=timewaster;4805732][QUOTE=lucidzfl;4805673][QUOTE=timewaster;4805502]

All I can say is, to each their own. I plan to submit. I plan to publish. I have my plan to do so.

Now, at this moment, it is 7:56, and I've written 3700 words so far tonight. I need to write 6500 words or so more tonight, and the second book of the year will be finished :)

I'm going to go get back to that.

Damn, man. You're like a machine. Yesterday I had a wonderful day of writing. I must've gotten in a good 4 or 5 hours. It felt like I'd created a ton of work, but when I went back and checked the word count, it was only 1800. Yeah, I write slow, spending nearly as much time reading through parts of the manuscript as I do putting down new words.

[Cliff Face]

I crank out 1k in differing bursts. Sometimes, especially during the NaNo word-wars, it would take about half an hour, other times it takes an hour. Last night, starting Script Frenzy at midnight, I was constantly tabbing out of the window to see the formatting rules, and I still managed 1300 words in an hour.

So I guess I'm fast, but not super fast. It's the dedication that makes me faster - writing for several hours every day. I can't always do that though, and I work better when I have external pressures, such as the deadline of NaNo.

/ramble

[Hedgetrimmer]

I crank out 1k in differing bursts. Sometimes, especially during the NaNo word-wars, it would take about half an hour, other times it takes an hour. Last night, starting Script Frenzy at midnight, I was constantly tabbing out of the window to see the formatting rules, and I still managed 1300 words in an hour.

So I guess I'm fast, but not super fast. It's the dedication that makes me faster - writing for several hours every day. I can't always do that though, and I work better when I have external pressures, such as the deadline of NaNo.

/ramble

We all have different ways of writing. I've heard some writers say they won't even go back and read any text until they've reached the end of the book. I'm just the opposite, which is why I tend to produce fewer words during any given session. I'll type a half page or so, stop and think about where I'm going, go back and read what I just wrote, do a little editing and then continue writing. But by the time I'm done, my first drafts are polished enough that I would have no problem with a professional reading it. After letting it sit for a while, I'll go back through it, but at this stage I'm not encountering any major problems. I'm usually strengthening metaphors and rewording here and there. Editing I don't mind, yet rewriting is a real pain. Writing too fast would lead me to doing a ton of rewrites.

[shaldna]

Remember that quantiy =/= quality

And writing 10k a day is great, so long as it's a good 10k. We all know that, just stating it incase some newcomers are listening and panic.

[Cliff Face]

Personally the most I've ever done in one day was 7k. I normally aim for about 2-3k a day, if I'm not doing NaNo, and 5-6k a day if I AM doing NaNo.

It's the days I take off that kill my output...

[lucidzfl]

[QUOTE=lucidzfl;4805943][QUOTE=timewaster;4805732][QUOTE=lucidzfl;4805673]

Damn, man. You're like a machine. Yesterday I had a wonderful day of writing. I must've gotten in a good 4 or 5 hours. It felt like I'd created a ton of work, but when I went back and checked the word count, it was only 1800. Yeah, I write slow, spending nearly as much time reading through parts of the manuscript as I do putting down new words.

Man oh man. Ok. Last night I made it. I got through 10,000 words and completed the book. I never want to do that again after working for 9 hours at my "real job".

Oh well, now I get a steak dinner out as a reward! Go me! :)

[lucidzfl]

Remember that quantiy =/= quality

And writing 10k a day is great, so long as it's a good 10k. We all know that, just stating it incase some newcomers are listening and panic.

I thought everyone here knew I was a mutant. No one should ever do what I did last night. "I" don't want to do that again. But I'd set a deadline for myself of finishing by the 31st and I made it...

And I don't get the quantity isn't quality thing. Why would you write something that was complete shit just to increase the word count? I honestly can't even conceive of that. What would you even write, if it wasn't related to the book? I don't know how to write "bad".

(That is not to say that my writing is not bad, I just don't know how, conceptually, I could consciously sacrifice quality for quantity...)

[Nateskate]

Yeah, that's a nice way of looking at the bigger picture. Thanks.

Libbie -- You're dead right about the perfectionist thing. I've published stuff in the past that I can't even read, as I know I'll see the parts that could've been better. And I imagine if I continue growing as a writer, it will always be that way. Otherwise, I'm just spinning wheels.

I had to learn this for myself. Even in an Epic Fantasy, Tolkien tried to market "The Silmarillion" before "Lord of the Rings". It didn't work. And he was fortunate that Publishers rejected it, because there was a great chance that the public never would have gotten the Silmarillion, and then he would never have had a chance with Lord of the Rings.

Because he published Lord of the Rings first, he became so beloved that he could have published his wallpaper afterwards, and people would have bought copies.

Some parts of "The Lost Tales" are pretty terrible, but from a historical perspective they add to the whole, and people buy it. I bought it.

I was marketing the wrong books, and it was the advice of others that made me realize that I had to go with my strongest book first. The other books will be "prequels".

[Nateskate]

You're right, you don't have to. But the way it works out, most folks do.


That's the way it worked for me. I'm now embarrassed by the stuff I tried to get agents to look at. It makes me gag, and I'm thankful they didn't bite at first.

[Hedgetrimmer]

I had to learn this for myself. Even in an Epic Fantasy, Tolkien tried to market "The Silmarillion" before "Lord of the Rings". It didn't work. And he was fortunate that Publishers rejected it, because there was a great chance that the public never would have gotten the Silmarillion, and then he would never have had a chance with Lord of the Rings.

Because he published Lord of the Rings first, he became so beloved that he could have published his wallpaper afterwards, and people would have bought copies.

Some parts of "The Lost Tales" are pretty terrible, but from a historical perspective they add to the whole, and people buy it. I bought it.

I was marketing the wrong books, and it was the advice of others that made me realize that I had to go with my strongest book first. The other books will be "prequels".

I've been giving this an awful lot of thought lately. Just a couple of days ago I was telling another AWer that if the first book doesn't sell, I don't think I plan to send it back out. I'll talk to my agent and see how he feels, but I'm thinking, as you state above, that I may need to go with the second book and see if that gives me a better chance of finding my audience. Then, down the line, we can resubmit the first book, and maybe I would have figured out how to make it less "quiet."