Specific Question About My Novel

[Celia Cyanide]

The novel I am working on is about a woman who once wanted to be a novelist when she was younger, but gave up because she has a chip on her shoulder about the publishing industry. She then gets kidnapped by a woman she went to college with, who has become a publisher, and who forces her to write a novel.

I am in NO way trying to write a satire about the publishing industry. The protagonist is not supposed to represent all publishers. She is simply an insane person who happens to BE a publisher. The protagonist's problem is her own. She just chooses to blame it on the publishing industry, and she got the idea because of her experience with this woman she went to college with.

My question is...would a publisher potentially be bothered by this? Just the idea that the antagonist is an evil publisher, and the protagonist dislikes publishers. And advice, or warnings? Or any, "Celia, you're worrying too much again?"

[Hang of Thursdays]

You'll forgive me, I hope, but I think you might need to worry more about the Mary Sue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue_fanfiction) aspect of the story than the "will publishers hate it because it demonizes them?" aspect.

[Celia Cyanide]

No, I don't want to be a publisher, evil or otherwise. And I don't have a problem with the industry. Apart from that, I think I'll let someone who actually knows me worry about that aspect.

[Hang of Thursdays]

Apart from that, I think I'll let someone who actually knows me worry about that aspect.

Fair enough.

[Dru]

Regardless of your actual intentions, just beware that this kind of plot could be risky to pull off in a sales/agent pitch. It has been done before, there are certainly plenty of published authors who have MC who are in publishing or journalists and such, Misery comes to mind as well.

This might set of different people's radar, and not in a positive vein.

If you can handle the storyline in a professional manner, great. There still may be a decent number of people who read such a synopsis and discard it as cathartic writing or Mary Sueism. You might not have issues with the industry, but a three-line summary like that does kind of read like you do.

Finish the story and then make sure that any summary work or synopsis writing is vetted prior to release?

[Celia Cyanide]

If you can handle the storyline in a professional manner, great. There still may be a decent number of people who read such a synopsis and discard it as cathartic writing or Mary Sueism. You might not have issues with the industry, but a three-line summary like that does kind of read like you do.

Finish the story and then make sure that any summary work or synopsis writing is vetted prior to release?

I'm confused now...I thought Mary Suism was for people who write crappy fan fiction? And the idea was to make the character better than yourself, not worse?

If it helps, the stuff about the characters' issues with the industry would not really be important enough to go into a plot synopsis. The issue is that the character is no longer writing, and this is the explanation she gives when someone asks her why.

[inanna]

I'm confused now...I thought Mary Suism was for people who write crappy fan fiction? And the idea was to make the character better than yourself, not worse?

I think the advice you've been given is wise, given what little we know about your novel. I'm sure it's more complex than what you're able to summarize here, but just like Dru said, the reaction to a query might be a little knee-jerkish (for lack of a better term at the moment :)).

Hey...is this going to turn into a Mary Sue thread? 'Cause I will definitely stick around for that. I got all kinds of issues with Mary Sue stuff.

[Valona]

Personally, I wouldn't be so worried about your sounding as if you are down on the publishing industry. Writers can use any avenue they want when creating a compelling story. What concerns me is your plot plausibility and target audience. I'm not sure anyone would want to read a book about an ex-writer who is being forced to write by a mad person. To me, it sounds boring. Maybe if I knew more about your book I could feel better about it, but your three-line intro didn't catch my interest.

[Celia Cyanide]

To me, it sounds boring. Maybe if I knew more about your book I could feel better about it, but your three-line intro didn't catch my interest.

That's fine, you don't have to read it. I don't read books that sound boring to me, either. Thanks for responding to my original question.

[Hang of Thursdays]

I'm not sure anyone would want to read a book about an ex-writer who is being forced to write by a mad person. To me, it sounds boring.

Tell that to Stephen King. (shrugs)

</obligatory Misery reference>

The problem with writers writing about writers is that they tend to be great avenues for Mary Sues -- which I define as characters with hopes and dreams and fears that mirror too much, and to too great an extreme, the hopes and dreams and fears of the author. An author has writer's block, so he writes about a writer who has writer's block. An author is spurned by the publishing industry, and writes about a writer spurned by the publishing industry.

You're right, we can't know what the rest of your novel is about, and whether or not your antagonists' chosen profession is as truly incidental as you say it is (my thoughts on the matter: if it's so incidental, why not change the antagonist's profession? Make her a doctor or lawyer who can't understand why anyone would waste time writing, and who berated and criticized the protagonist.) Right now your protagonist sounds a bit ineffectual. Chips on the shoulder are fine, IMO, when they motivate a character towards action. But a chip on the shoulder that motivates someone to not do anything? That's a harder stretch in fiction, and I'd personally find it boring.

(Now's the time for someone to give a snarky response to me, noting that such and such an author actually pulled that gimmick off with astounding aplomb.)

[victoriastrauss]

The novel I am working on is about a woman who once wanted to be a novelist when she was younger, but gave up because she has a chip on her shoulder about the publishing industry. She then gets kidnapped by a woman she went to college with, who has become a publisher, and who forces her to write a novel.Isn't this publisher's slush pile big enough already?

Seriously, why does the publisher do this? There are easier ways to find a manuscript.

- Victoria

[Celia Cyanide]

The problem with writers writing about writers is that they tend to be great avenues for Mary Sues -- which I define as characters with hopes and dreams and fears that mirror too much, and to too great an extreme, the hopes and dreams and fears of the author. An author has writer's block, so he writes about a writer who has writer's block. An author is spurned by the publishing industry, and writes about a writer spurned by the publishing industry.

Thank you for clarifying that...by Mary Sue, I thought you meant, writing about yourself, because you want something exciting to happen to you, which is not what this is. I'm not going to explain all the ways in which this character is not me, because I'm not even concerned about that. I guess that makes sense, although the protagonist is more representative of all people who gave up on their dreams. She's not spurned by the publishing industry at all. She hasn't really even tried. That was just an excuse she made for not trying.

"You're right, we can't know what the rest of your novel is about, and whether or not your antagonists' chosen profession is as truly incidental as you say it is (my thoughts on the matter: if it's so incidental, why not change the antagonist's profession? Make her a doctor or lawyer who can't understand why anyone would waste time writing, and who berated and criticized the protagonist.)"

This is taking a lot more explanation that I thought it would...sorry. The antagonist's profession is not completely incidental to the story. It is, however, completely incidental to her being insane.

"Right now your protagonist sounds a bit ineffectual. Chips on the shoulder are fine, IMO, when they motivate a character towards action. But a chip on the shoulder that motivates someone to not do anything? That's a harder stretch in fiction, and I'd personally find it boring."

Okay, why do you say that? What, if anything, would be a good thing that would motivate a character not to do something? In real life, people do choose not to do things they once wanted to do. So why is this such a stretch, and what should be different about it?

[Celia Cyanide]

Isn't this publisher's slush pile big enough already?

Seriously, why does the publisher do this? There are easier ways to find a manuscript.

- Victoria

that part, I wasn't planning on going into...but since you asked...:)

It was because she knew her, and decided that she would not let her give up. She likes having power over other people, and believes she knows what is best for everyone, and if she has to push them a little too hard, so be it. They will thank her later, she believes.

[Hang of Thursdays]

Thank you for clarifying that...by Mary Sue, I thought you meant, writing about yourself, because you want something exciting to happen to you, which is not what this is.

That's the common definition of the Mary Sue, but I'll admit that you writing about a writer being forced at gunpoint to write a novel does not sound like something I, personally, would want to happen to me. I suspect the same is true of you. Sometimes it might be the best option for us, though (looks at open word doc. of WIP, and the blinking cursor.)

What I perceive -- and I'm just speaking about perception here, not reality -- from your brief snippet, that you might have it in for the publishing industry, and thus you want to have your antagonist be a publisher holding a gun at the author in a very literal sense to drive home the point of the metaphorical "bring me a ms. on time!" Getting too literary.)

In which case, if you planned on demonizing the publish industry in such a way, you'd definitely having a problem selling it.

I'm not going to explain all the ways in which this character is not me, because I'm not even concerned about that.

Right, and I don't expect you to. I didn't mean to put you in a position where that was an issue.

She's not spurned by the publishing industry at all.

Just an example on my part.

This is taking a lot more explanation that I thought it would...sorry. The antagonist's profession is not completely incidental to the story. It is, however, completely incidental to her being insane.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that.

What, if anything, would be a good thing that would motivate a character not to do something?

In my opinion, and it's just that, nothing would. Unless motivation was, you know, life and death: Don't move or the bomb will go off and blow up New York. That'd be a good motivation to just sit and hang out.

In real life, people do choose not to do things they once wanted to do.

But would you want to read about it?

[Celia Cyanide]

What I perceive -- and I'm just speaking about perception here, not reality -- from your brief snippet, that you might have it in for the publishing industry, and thus you want to have your antagonist be a publisher holding a gun at the author in a very literal sense to drive home the point of the metaphorical "bring me a ms. on time!" Getting too literary.)

In which case, if you planned on demonizing the publish industry in such a way, you'd definitely having a problem selling it.

Yeah, see, that's what I'm getting at. I do NOT want to do that. I want to try and present it in such a way that I indicate that this woman is not a typical publisher at all. My problem is that I don't have it in for the publishing industry, and I don't want it to sound that way. My manuscript, thus far, doesn't really read that way, but a plot synopsis might. It isn't really about the publishing industry, so much as it's about how a woman reacts to being forced to do something she probably wanted to do, but never tried. And the fact that it's still wrong to force her, even thought she wanted it. The antagonist also forces her to do something else she was afraid to do, but that's neither here, nor there.

But I do see what you're saying. About whole the Mary Sue thing. In my opinion, Misery reads like someone who's sick of someone standing over his shoulder, saying, "No, make this happen! Take that out, it's too weird! He didn't get out of the cockadoodie car!" And him saying to himself, "You're missing the dang point of the story!" Having said that, Misery is still a great story, and interesting to people who have never had an editor do that to them.

In answer to your question...would I want to read about someone who chose not to follow their dream? Well, no...if that were all it were about. My background is in film more than literature, so I'll make a comparison to one of my favorites, The Big Lebowski. The Dude is a slacker. He never really does anything, except at the prompting of others. He's just along for the ride. What is interesting about my protagonist (I hope) is not that she didn't follow her dreams, but because of what happens to her as a result of this decision. Her choice to get a job and give up writing is more of what makes her a human character that (again, I'm hoping) people can relate to. No matter who you are, you probably have something you always wanted to do, but never tried. As Lily Tomlin once said, what if we all became what we wanted to be when we grew up? Imagine, a world filled with cowboys, firemen, nurses and ballerinas!

[veinglory]

It would depend on how it was written but as it is specifically not commenting on publishing in general why not have the villain not be a publisher?

[Saanen]

My immediate thought was, "Oh no, not another book about a writer who can't/won't/feels she's lost her chance to/resents her lost chance to write." But the more I think about it, the more I think you might be able to pull this off and make it interesting--but only if you give your publisher character a powerful (and plausible) reason to do this. It's got to be something beyond the publisher being kind of crazy and knowing that the main character should have been a writer. I'm thinking more along the lines of the publisher being truly crazy and thinking the writer is, say, a reincarnated Shakespeare or Dickens. Or maybe the publisher is crazy and believes the writer is actually her younger self, who instead of pursuing her own writing went into publishing. Or perhaps the writer is actually a reincarnated Shakespeare or Dickens and the only one who knows is the publisher, who has tried unsuccessfully to get the writer to stop denying her impulses to write. Or what if the writer character actually has no wish to be a writer--she got a taste of the publishing world by accident (wrote a tell-all that was unexpectedly successful, or something along those lines) and is only too happy to leave it behind, but the publisher for some compelling reason needs her to write a sequel/follow-up book?

I'm sure you can come up with much better ideas. But I'd suggest making the story hinge on the reason the publisher wants so badly for the writer to write, rather than focusing on the writer, the writing process, or the resulting book.

What if the writer's resulting book is truly, truly awful?

[Hang of Thursdays]

Okay. Good points, all. I'd ask you, though, just how important the antagonist's profession is to her actions. If it's absolutely essential, you risk turning off some people -- publishers included -- simply because it *sounds bad*. You mentioned that the antagonist is doing this to the protagonist "for her own good" (or what the antag. sees as being in the protag.'s best interest). If they're friends, or used to be, anyway, then the job seems less and less an issue, perhaps even nonessential, and if you CAN get rid of it, and replace it with something else, then do.

I take your point about the Dude, though I think the key to that was that he was so willing to do what they asked him just so he could get back to slacking. If that's where you're going with your novel, I think that'd probably work.

I realize I spoke too soon about the chip on the shoulder motivating someone to do nothing. Just don't have them doing NOTHING throughout the entire book. In fact, I'm not really sure where I was going with that. So ignore it.

[reph]

But a chip on the shoulder that motivates someone to not do anything? That's a harder stretch in fiction, and I'd personally find it boring.
It happens in real life.

Celia, the publisher as you describe her could be an interesting antagonist. She's quite a control freak; that's part of her craziness. (Poorly differentiated; she doesn't respect the protagonist's boundaries.) I don't see, though, why she has to be a publisher. She could be someone who wants the protag to ghostwrite something for her or collaborate with her on a book – a random example.

[Celia Cyanide]

Saanen, very interesting comments...

It's got to be something beyond the publisher being kind of crazy and knowing that the main character should have been a writer...
I'm sure you can come up with much better ideas. But I'd suggest making the story hinge on the reason the publisher wants so badly for the writer to write, rather than focusing on the writer, the writing process, or the resulting book.


Yes, that is kind of what I'm going for...I have a lot in mind for what I want to do with that character. Because the main character is perfectly comfortable with her life, but there are reasons why the antagonist would not allow it. I'm not going to go into it here, because it wouldn't be very helpful, and at this point, totally uninteresting to anyone but me. But that is helpful feedback, thank you. Actually, the crazier she is, the less likely she will be seen as a representative of the publishing industry.

What if the writer's resulting book is truly, truly awful?

This is probably not that relevent, either, but I'm thinking the resulting book is truly, truly bizarre, the result of the main character being locked up for so long. It's not going to be the main focus of the story, but it's in there, and the publisher probably thinks it's genius. She's got her reasons.

vainglory...I had actually thought of that. But I can't really think of any other profession someone would be into who would do something like this. Can you? I mean, I know what you're thinking. "Gee, Celia, I don't know anyone, anywhere who would do something like this." But seriously, it would have to be someone else who was interested in literature, but rich enough to pull it off. Who else? A successful writer?

[carley]

My immediate thought was, "Oh no, not another book about a writer who can't/won't/feels she's lost her chance to/resents her lost chance to write." But the more I think about it, the more I think you might be able to pull this off and make it interesting--but only if you give your publisher character a powerful (and plausible) reason to do this. It's got to be something beyond the publisher being kind of crazy and knowing that the main character should have been a writer. I'm thinking more along the lines of the publisher being truly crazy and thinking the writer is, say, a reincarnated Shakespeare or Dickens. Or maybe the publisher is crazy and believes the writer is actually her younger self, who instead of pursuing her own writing went into publishing. Or perhaps the writer is actually a reincarnated Shakespeare or Dickens and the only one who knows is the publisher, who has tried unsuccessfully to get the writer to stop denying her impulses to write. Or what if the writer character actually has no wish to be a writer--she got a taste of the publishing world by accident (wrote a tell-all that was unexpectedly successful, or something along those lines) and is only too happy to leave it behind, but the publisher for some compelling reason needs her to write a sequel/follow-up book?

I'm sure you can come up with much better ideas. But I'd suggest making the story hinge on the reason the publisher wants so badly for the writer to write, rather than focusing on the writer, the writing process, or the resulting book.

What if the writer's resulting book is truly, truly awful?


I have a feeling that this is what Celia is going for, at least something along these lines anyway. Somebody said something about the publisher holding a gun to the writer's head and forcing her to write and I couldn't find anything in Celia's posts suggesting such a thing.

I'm a bit disappointed by some of these posts on this thread. It's seems to be a slam fest (except the above quoted post). Celia asked a question and everybody jumped in and bashed her idea and it's disheartening. She believes in her idea and I for one support her in it. How would you all felt if people jumped all over you and told you that your ideas were dumb or boring or whatever?

Just my two cents and sorry if it's offensive. Maybe I'm reading these posts wrong or just not getting the responses from the some of the posters, but it seems a little nasty in here.

[veinglory]

A person who wanted to write but finally realised she couldn't--abducts the woman to write for her and plans to kill her at the end and pass the manuscript off as he own? Sort of the literary version of that woman who abducted a pregnant lady to cut out her baby.

[emeraldcite]

Keep in mind to play nice in the sandbox. Everyone here is trying to help each other...

Another Public Service Announcement Paid for by EmeraldciteCorp.

PS. This is my friendly warning... :box:


__________________________________________________ ____________
Please support EmeraldciteCorp's new organization Make Room For Me, a conglomerate of concerned citizens lobbying for global deforestation.

Send tax-deductaible donations to the following PayPal Account...

[Jamesaritchie]

I have a feeling that this is what Celia is going for, at least something along these lines anyway. Somebody said something about the publisher holding a gun to the writer's head and forcing her to write and I couldn't find anything in Celia's posts suggesting such a thing..

Well, she did say the writer was kidnapped by the publisher and was then forced to write a book. If not a literal gun, then certainly a figurative one.

How would you all felt if people jumped all over you and told you that your ideas were dumb or boring or whatever?

.

Like I was reading the reviews of my novels all over again.

Anyway, I think people are just trying to help, mostly by brainstorming on the idea, looking for motivation or a better angle. And giving honest opinions concerning the validity of the idea. People should say what they think. Celia can accept or ignore according to what she thinks.

[Celia Cyanide]

Anyway, I think people are just trying to help, mostly by brainstorming on the idea, looking for motivation or a better angle. And giving honest opinions concerning the validity of the idea. People should say what they think. Celia can accept or ignore according to what she thinks.

I can appreciate this, but I do understand what Carley meant. I was a little disheartened at first, because it wasn't what I wanted to hear. I don't mean to say that I only wanted to hear, "That's the most brilliant idea I've ever heard!" But because, in my original post, I never asked, "Is this boring/interesting? Would you read it?" I wanted to know if a publisher would be bothered about the antagonist being a publisher. I didn't really explain everything about the idea because my question was about only a specific aspect of it. So when people were replying by saying, "Don't worry about offending publishers, worry about the fact that it's boring!" I was a little frustrated, because that didn't really answer my question. When I send it in to a publisher, I expect to get a letter back saying, "Nobody wants your book!" Not, "This book is the least of your problems! You're ugly, too!" :)

The irony was that I was forced (ha!) to elaborate more on what I was doing with it, which resulted in some great feedback on other aspects of the story I hadn't planned on. I have no hard feelings toward anyone here. But I think Carley was just noticing that, at first, people were giving negative opinions, rather than just answering my question. Thanks, everyone, for your input.

[Hang of Thursdays]

It happens in real life.

Sure it happens in real life. But why should a reader be bored with it in fiction?

[AdamH]

I so wanted to comment on this earlier but I was at work (shakes fist menacingly at "The Man") and didn't have time.

I get what you're trying to do now with your story, Celia. I think it could work. :)
On the first post though, it caused this knee-jerk reaction (me included) as if you were barrelling towards a brick wall at lightspeed and everyone is waving their hands telling you to stop but you weren't looking. Meanwhile, you knew exactly what you were doing but we didn't know, we just were looking out for one of our own.
But to answer your question at the beginning of the thread: A publisher could be bothered by this if they hadn't read the story. I'd probably rewrite the synopsis to expand on the details of the protag/antag relationship to be clear that the story isn't just about a publisher forcing a writer to write or else. As it was written above, I wouldn't be surprised for you to get the same type of knee-jerk reaction from a publisher.
But I guess that's why you posted the thread: to get feedback on if it would or not. :)

[Sage]

Sure it happens in real life. But why should a reader be bored with it in fiction?

But we read a novel to see a character get over a conflict they are having. This character's conflict or flaw seems to be that she is too stubborn (chip on shoulder) or unmotivated to write. During the course of the story, she will overcome that flaw, & it's the journey of getting there that will make it interesting.

Characters don't always start with horribly interesting lives, but instead are put into interesting situations, which is why we read the book. Sure, I don't want to read a book about why she's unmotivated or she got this chip on her shoulder, but if there's an interesting situation that causes her to get past that character conflict, the book would be worth reading. And I would hope there'd be a bit of explanation on how she got that way in the first place, if only for background's sake.

[Hang of Thursdays]

But we read a novel to see a character get over a conflict they are having. This character's conflict or flaw seems to be that she is too stubborn (chip on shoulder) or unmotivated to write. During the course of the story, she will overcome that flaw, & it's the journey of getting there that will make it interesting.

But that's not the character having a chip on her shoulder and doing nothing, like I advised against (and which, incidentally, is not Celia's problem, I don't think.) That's the character having a chip on her shoulder and being motivated (through force, if necessary) to remove it, even if she doesn't want to.

Like the Dude, being forced to run errands for rich people just so he can get back to Slacking. If the Dude was just slacking around the whole movie, it might be amusing, but it'd quickly get boring.

[emeraldcite]

Think of it this way: when you go to sell this, you will have to condense the story into a few short sentences to pitch it to an agent or editor. If those few sentences don't sound interesting, it will be tough to sell it at all. This isn't fair of course, because the proof is in the pudding, not the description on the package, but then again, if someone browsing a book store looking for their next buy picks up your novel, reads the back, and is instantly turned off, then everyone loses money whether you write like Nabokov or not...

So, many of the quick reactions here to the short description of your plot might be a bellwether for agent and editor reactions when you try to sell it. Trust me, take all the feedback you can get, especially from here. This board is an unparallel source of knowledge...

Ultimately, your question concerned whether or not a publisher would be turned off by your premise and I think most of what was said here really applies to that question, albeit indirectly at times. Take what you need from this discussion, leave the rest for someone else…but in the end, you’ll be better off with the honest reactions.

[Jamesaritchie]

It happens in real life.


True, but as they say, real life doesn't have to be believable. Fiction does.

[reph]

Sure it happens in real life. But why should a reader be bored with it in fiction?
You wouldn't just show the character doing nothing. That would be boring. You'd show the character **D-O-I-N-G** **N-O-T-H-I-N-G** and make it interesting.

[FolkloreFanatic]

I agree with Maddwriter and emeraldcite. I didn't really get the impression that people were bashing on an idea so much as trying to gauge whether the antagonist needed to be a publisher or not.

I have similar problems when I try to talk about my thesis: I cannot sell it in one sentence. Or three. Or five. It doesn't matter that when I explain it, everyone thinks it's a fascinating thesis topic. I cannot condense, therefore my net is too broad for my profs to accept it. It's not the same issue here, but I think it does mean that you haven't yet found the perfect words to sum up the plot yet, CC. That's all. :)

My personal opinion? I don't know how to be anything but frank at 2 am, so here's hoping that none of this sounds pretentious or insulting, because it certainly isn't meant to be that way.

Yes, I think it would bother a publisher. I think it would bother an agent, as well, but since I'm neither of those, this is pure speculation on my part.

As an unpublished novelist (I've been published, but not in this way) trying to break into the business, I think of the effort/process in which I'm engaged as a blind entry a high school student would make into the Cornell Essay Contest. They give you lots of choices of quotes to start off your piece, and from there, the possibilities are endless.

There are two things you *can* do but probably SHOULDN'T do if you want to win (and make no mistake, the object here is to win or at least place as a finalist). One of them is Picking The Yoda Quote. Yes, Yoda's famous line from Star Wars is an option ("Do or do not. There is no try."), or at least it was back in my day. You can write a phenomenal essay based on this advice, but no judge is ever going to choose it to go down on the record as a winner. My teacher also advised against the Indiana Jones quote.

The other one is to write a personal nonfiction piece about how exhilarated you or your best friend felt when you humiliated your really obnoxious middle school teacher. Considering that all of the judges are teachers, something that even remotely resembles Killing Mr. Griffin is going to set off alarm bells. It doesn't matter if you're Poe reincarnated; you're marking yourself.

I'm not saying don't write it. I'm saying that if I were you, I would do everything in my creative power to avoid making a publisher the antagonist, or I would save it for my second manuscript.

[Flapdoodle]

The novel I am working on is about a woman who once wanted to be a novelist when she was younger, but gave up because she has a chip on her shoulder about the publishing industry. She then gets kidnapped by a woman she went to college with, who has become a publisher, and who forces her to write a novel.

I am in NO way trying to write a satire about the publishing industry. The protagonist is not supposed to represent all publishers. She is simply an insane person who happens to BE a publisher. The protagonist's problem is her own. She just chooses to blame it on the publishing industry, and she got the idea because of her experience with this woman she went to college with.

My question is...would a publisher potentially be bothered by this? Just the idea that the antagonist is an evil publisher, and the protagonist dislikes publishers. And advice, or warnings? Or any, "Celia, you're worrying too much again?"

Why not use a different "art" rather than writing?

I'd change the reason why the writer stopped writing (Just wasn't interested; bored with it. Realised that she was never going to make it.) and have the mad publisher revisiting her based around a college romance/crush - but being blinkered to think that this writer/artists was an unfound genius. Or something like that.

The chip on the shoulder thing doesn't ring true... Failure to succeed and realisation that she's not going to make it, and perhaps is successful elsewhere... and doesn't need to succeed at writing/art.

I think whatever you do, though, the conflict between the two - and their history - is hugely important.

?

[Celia Cyanide]

But that's not the character having a chip on her shoulder and doing nothing, like I advised against (and which, incidentally, is not Celia's problem, I don't think.) That's the character having a chip on her shoulder and being motivated (through force, if necessary) to remove it, even if she doesn't want to.

Yeah, that's not really my problem, and I think we're all on the same page now. She doesn't literally do nothing. She just doesn't write. She has a job, and she lives with her boyfriend. But neither one of those things is good enough for the antagonist. So she is motivated, by force, to change it.

As for the antagonist, she is rich and successful in her own right. And she wants the protagonist to write, because she thinks she has to. So she has to be someone who cares about writing, and values it as an important thing to do, but I don't think she would do it herself. She has a pretty strong personality, and she is usually able to get people to do what she wants. People still want her approval, even if she treats them badly, because people are somehow very impressed with her. She's gotten very far in life by selling things to people in many ways, whether it's material items, or her point of view. For this reason, I don't really see her as a writer or a creative type. I guess I see her as a publisher because she sees the protagonist as someone with hidden genius, not just someone who could have written a light, fun novel that people would enjoy. I think the antagonist would probably think that the resulting novel would be something that most people would not want to read, but it still must be written. I don't know what other people think about this, but for some reason, I can't see this character being so obsessed with making this woman write her novel if she doesn't also work in that field.

True, but as they say, real life doesn't have to be believable. Fiction does.

But that part of it is believable, because it is real life. Everyone has things they always dreamed of doing, but didn't, because they realized it wasn't really part of who they were, they got lazy, or they realized they wanted it for the wrong reasons. They never end up doing it, and the only way they ever would is if someone made them. That is the part that ain't exactly real life. But it's very believable that she wouldn't do it, in my opinion, anyway.

FolkloreFanatic, what is wrong with the Yoda quote??? :) This is totally off the subject, but you know what? I bet that if a kid nowadays picked the Yoda quote, they'd do well, because the judges grew up with Star Wars, and know that Yoda's wisdom is unparallelled!

[Jamesaritchie]

But that part of it is believable, because it is real life.

My point is that just because something is real life in no way makes it believable for fiction. One of the most common complaints editors hear from new writers when they ask for changes is "But that's the way it really happened." It doesn't matter.

When they say "Truth is stranger than fiction," they mean things happen in real life that no one will believe in fiction.

Some things are not believable in fiction, even though they do happen in real life. We aren't talking about real life, we're talking about the plot of a novel, and character motivation. We're not talking about what is or isn't real, but about what readers will believe is or isn't real, what sounds plausible, not what is plausible, and they're often two very different things.

Now, it may be true that anything can be made to work, but some things are a lot tougher to make work than others, and some things, real life or not, just aren't very convincing in fiction, no matter how well they're done.

[Celia Cyanide]

My point is that just because something is real life in no way makes it believable for fiction.

I believe that. Most things that happen in my life would not be believable in fiction. My real personality would not make a good fictional character because there is no way anyone would ever believe I was real. Everybody who knows me says that.

However, I don't think that point really applies to this aspect of the story. I don't think anyone is going to say, "This character wanted to write a novel, but never did it? No WAY! Everybody always achieves all their goals!" This part of it isn't really implausible for truth or fiction. It happens in both, all the time, and people don't really question it. Hang of Thursdays, who brought it up, said that s/he (sorry, don't know your real name) probably didn't mean it wasn't believable for the character to not write. Just that if it the character never changed, it might not be interesting.

[Jamesaritchie]

"This character wanted to write a novel, but never did it? No WAY! Everybody always achieves all their goals!" This part of it isn't really implausible for truth or fiction. It happens in both, all the time, and people don't really question it. Hang of Thursdays, who brought it up, said that s/he (sorry, don't know your real name) probably didn't mean it wasn't believable for the character to not write. Just that if it the character never changed, it might not be interesting.

What I have trouble believing here is not that someone would want to write a novel and not do so, but the interaction between the two characters, publisher and writer.

For me, it isn't believable. It sounds too serious, too far-fetched. Which doesn't mean a thing, except that it isn't a story I could write. It might still be believable and wonderful to publishers, and to a million readers. We really do have to distinguish between an idea that's good and bad, and one that's simply good or bad for us.

If I were writing this story, I'd have to lighten the relationship, make the "kidnapping" a friendly one. I'd make the writer a person who has sold some very good short stories, but who has always been afraid to tackle a novel, maybe thinking she just doesn't have anything to say that would fill a novel. I'd make the publisher a close friend who really wants to see her succeed. I'd have the publisher lure her to a mountain cabin and then put her foot down, saying she's going back to the city for a month, and when she returns, the writer had darned well better be well into a novel, or she'll strand her there for another month.

Then I'd have the writer try to avoid writing, and I have her go wandering around looking for a way out, thinking along the lines of "She's really done it this time. I'll kill her. Just wait. And I am not going to write anything."

During this she has some wild adventure, which gives her both confidence and something to write about.

When her publisher friend returns at the end of the month, the adventure is over, the writer is sitting at the keyboard typing furiously, and tells the publisher friend to go away and leave here alone because she's writing.

Now this is probably no more believable than the other scenario, but it's more believable for me. And, of course, it wouldn't spook a publisher, either.

This may be a lousy way for anyone else to write it, but it's the way that works for me because what I find unconvincing is the way the publisher/writer relationship is done.

[FolkloreFanatic]

What about alternate motivations? *brainstorms*

Wanting someone to write and respecting writers doesn't mean she has to be a publisher. For instance, a rich philanthropist may think she has a brilliant idea or wants her memoirs recorded, and her former ghostwriter just died. Maybe her name is already successful in fiction but she never wrote the books (dictated them, etc), and HER public audience is eagerly awaiting the next installment of a series or the next big hit, and her reputation is on the line? She hears about this brilliant person who started but never finished a book, thinks she looks vulnerable, and blackmails her.

So what if it's similar to Misery (btw, I never finished the book so I have no idea if that's true or not)? Hell, now *I* want to write it...

o.O This is why I should never think about more plot ideas.

There are so many reasons people want to write books--as many as there are reasons to read them. There are very few plots that I can think of offhand that require one profession, and one profession only, for a character to pan out.

[Celia Cyanide]

What I have trouble believing here is not that someone would want to write a novel and not do so, but the interaction between the two characters, publisher and writer.

For me, it isn't believable. It sounds too serious, too far-fetched.

This may not be helpful, but the actual story is not really that serious. It's more of a farce.

I've been thinking on this, too, and the reason why your story wouldn't work for me is because I can't see that as a "friendly" thing to do. I don't feel that deciding what is best for someone else, and making them do it truly it is "for their own good," nor is it easily forgivable. I guess it's just a difference in the kind of story we want to tell. Yours would be about how she really could do it, all along, she just needed a push. Mine is about the fact that it doesn't matter how brilliant a writer she is, no one should tell her she has to do it.