Re: evil penguin
Evil penguin. Ho-hum, another good-guy versus bad-guy story, where everything is black and white?
Evil penguin. Ho-hum, another good-guy versus bad-guy story, where everything is black and white?
- Status
wait a sec
speaking on behalf of all evil penguins everywhere, i would like to know how the guys in "white hats" get away with feeding us poisoned fish. if that's not moral ambiguity, i don't know what is.
quack.
oh, by the way, i thought of an interesting outlines story that i think you'll appreciate, jim, while i was out "hunting rabbits" with my dog. not to rub it in or anything, ray, but wait a week or so on that.
speaking on behalf of all evil penguins everywhere, i would like to know how the guys in "white hats" get away with feeding us poisoned fish. if that's not moral ambiguity, i don't know what is.
quack.
oh, by the way, i thought of an interesting outlines story that i think you'll appreciate, jim, while i was out "hunting rabbits" with my dog. not to rub it in or anything, ray, but wait a week or so on that.
Question
All right, so I meant to ask this question for quite some time and now I can't hold it any longer. :huh Uncle Jim, in the thread about PA you say:
If you have written a book that a lot of people want to read, a legitimate press will buy it.
If you have written a book that no one wants to read, putting it out through a vanity press won't magically make readers appear.
Uncle Jim, I would think you really must know a lot about this problem, considering the amount of first-timers' works that went through your hands. So I've got a related question (or rather, two questions -- and they won't let me sleep just lately):
1. So what is it -- a book that people will want to read? Identification with the characters, yes, I understand that. Appealing to basic universal emotions, I understand this one too. Entertaining, yes. But isn't there something else as well, some element most beginning writers don't take into consideration?
2. From your experience, what are the most common mistakes the beginners make? What makes their books rejectable? Most everyone these days can write in smooth, complex sentences, so it can hardly be a question of style (although "smooth, complex sentences" aren't my idea of style). What is it, then? What makes so many first-time writers fail?
Thank you very much!
All right, so I meant to ask this question for quite some time and now I can't hold it any longer. :huh Uncle Jim, in the thread about PA you say:
If you have written a book that a lot of people want to read, a legitimate press will buy it.
If you have written a book that no one wants to read, putting it out through a vanity press won't magically make readers appear.
Uncle Jim, I would think you really must know a lot about this problem, considering the amount of first-timers' works that went through your hands. So I've got a related question (or rather, two questions -- and they won't let me sleep just lately):
1. So what is it -- a book that people will want to read? Identification with the characters, yes, I understand that. Appealing to basic universal emotions, I understand this one too. Entertaining, yes. But isn't there something else as well, some element most beginning writers don't take into consideration?
2. From your experience, what are the most common mistakes the beginners make? What makes their books rejectable? Most everyone these days can write in smooth, complex sentences, so it can hardly be a question of style (although "smooth, complex sentences" aren't my idea of style). What is it, then? What makes so many first-time writers fail?
Thank you very much!
Re: Question
You might think that most writers can handle the noun-verb part of writing and reliably produce grammatically solid prose. You'd be wrong. I see tons of stuff that is only written in English by the most generous standards.
You know how I keep saying that if you can produce two consecutive pages of grammatically-correct English with standard spelling that you're already in the top ten percent of the slush pile? Believe it.
The second thing is this: Newer writers have a hard time figuring out what is part of the story and what isn't. They haven't yet figured out how to cut away the non-essential. My harping on how anything that doesn't add to the story detracts from it is also quite true.
The last thing is this: The writer needs to get past the trite stories. The inconsequential stories. The ones where the reader says "Oh, yes -- been there, done that." The ones where the reader says, "So what?"
I've recommended Brust's The Sun, the Moon, and the Stars. That novel speaks directly to the sudden "ah-ha!" moment when you're no longer just putting down words but are suddenly writing.
The way to reach that "ah-ha!" moment is practice. Become fluid, become proficient. Work on more than one level at once.
You might think that most writers can handle the noun-verb part of writing and reliably produce grammatically solid prose. You'd be wrong. I see tons of stuff that is only written in English by the most generous standards.
You know how I keep saying that if you can produce two consecutive pages of grammatically-correct English with standard spelling that you're already in the top ten percent of the slush pile? Believe it.
The second thing is this: Newer writers have a hard time figuring out what is part of the story and what isn't. They haven't yet figured out how to cut away the non-essential. My harping on how anything that doesn't add to the story detracts from it is also quite true.
The last thing is this: The writer needs to get past the trite stories. The inconsequential stories. The ones where the reader says "Oh, yes -- been there, done that." The ones where the reader says, "So what?"
I've recommended Brust's The Sun, the Moon, and the Stars. That novel speaks directly to the sudden "ah-ha!" moment when you're no longer just putting down words but are suddenly writing.
The way to reach that "ah-ha!" moment is practice. Become fluid, become proficient. Work on more than one level at once.
ah-ha
But isn't that the hardest part for a new writer? To know what is "original"? It's very subjective. What makes an "alien invasion" or "murder mystery" story fresh and exciting or "seen that show before" dull?
But isn't that the hardest part for a new writer? To know what is "original"? It's very subjective. What makes an "alien invasion" or "murder mystery" story fresh and exciting or "seen that show before" dull?
Re: ah-ha
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>But isn't that the hardest part for a new writer? To know what is "original"? It's very subjective. What makes an "alien invasion" or "murder mystery" story fresh and exciting or "seen that show before" dull?<hr></blockquote>
Yep, it's the hard part. But ... if you can do the Grammatical thing, and you can do the No Waste thing, you're in publishable terrritory already. If you can get the Original thing as well, now you're in Consistently Publishable land.
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>But isn't that the hardest part for a new writer? To know what is "original"? It's very subjective. What makes an "alien invasion" or "murder mystery" story fresh and exciting or "seen that show before" dull?<hr></blockquote>
Yep, it's the hard part. But ... if you can do the Grammatical thing, and you can do the No Waste thing, you're in publishable terrritory already. If you can get the Original thing as well, now you're in Consistently Publishable land.
penguins
Oh, no, Reph. You'd be surprised about the staggering amount of moral ambiguity that comes up when you discuss evil penguins.
Oh, no, Reph. You'd be surprised about the staggering amount of moral ambiguity that comes up when you discuss evil penguins.
evil penguins and jim
Jim. Would you or would you not agree that evil penguins and secret agent gerbils are Original things? Could I be headed top Consistently Publishable land?
Jim. Would you or would you not agree that evil penguins and secret agent gerbils are Original things? Could I be headed top Consistently Publishable land?
Re: ah-ha
Evil Penguins -- Batman Returns
Secret Agent Gerbils -- James Bond series
Now put them together, you may have something going there.
Evil Penguins -- Batman Returns
Secret Agent Gerbils -- James Bond series
Now put them together, you may have something going there.
Re: evil penguins and jim
You're mistaking surface appearance for originality.
Imagine chess sets. You know, you have your Staunton pattern chess sets. You have your Elves and Orcs chess sets. You have your Star Trek Enterprise and Klingons chess sets.
Those aren't the game.
The originality comes in the moves that those pieces make, not in what they're painted to resemble.
You're mistaking surface appearance for originality.
Imagine chess sets. You know, you have your Staunton pattern chess sets. You have your Elves and Orcs chess sets. You have your Star Trek Enterprise and Klingons chess sets.
Those aren't the game.
The originality comes in the moves that those pieces make, not in what they're painted to resemble.
surface details for originality
Ah, bless you for that, James. Just what I need (with your permission please?) whenever the question is asked by a group of writers. The more quotes I have from other writers on a topic the more the students take it on board.
Ah, bless you for that, James. Just what I need (with your permission please?) whenever the question is asked by a group of writers. The more quotes I have from other writers on a topic the more the students take it on board.
Yess!!
Newer writers have a hard time figuring out what is part of the story and what isn't. They haven't yet figured out how to cut away the non-essential. My harping on how anything that doesn't add to the story detracts from it is also quite true.
Yess! that's exactly what I sensed I needed to know, thanks a lot, Uncle Jim!! The No Waste thing. It really, really clicked. I did notice though that the more I write (even if total crap), the better I can see which bits belong to the story and which don't.
The chess example makes the originality thing so clear. It doesn't matter what kind of beasts your pieces are, what matters is the internal game they play with each other... oops... is it grammatically correct to say "each other", it isn't, is it? there're many of them, not just two... I don't know any more!!!:cry :rollin
Newer writers have a hard time figuring out what is part of the story and what isn't. They haven't yet figured out how to cut away the non-essential. My harping on how anything that doesn't add to the story detracts from it is also quite true.
Yess! that's exactly what I sensed I needed to know, thanks a lot, Uncle Jim!! The No Waste thing. It really, really clicked. I did notice though that the more I write (even if total crap), the better I can see which bits belong to the story and which don't.
The chess example makes the originality thing so clear. It doesn't matter what kind of beasts your pieces are, what matters is the internal game they play with each other... oops... is it grammatically correct to say "each other", it isn't, is it? there're many of them, not just two... I don't know any more!!!:cry :rollin
Re: ah-ha
"With each other" sounds fine to me. It might not be accurate to the level a mathematician would demand of such a statement, but it'll do for the rest of us
"With each other" sounds fine to me. It might not be accurate to the level a mathematician would demand of such a statement, but it'll do for the rest of us
No Waste
I'm rather sure I know the answer to my own question, but does the 'no waste' need to be conscious to the reader? Obviously, the reader is not conscious of every intention of the author, though it seems to me like a lot of novels have quite a bit of 'waste', such as scenery and mannerims and history, etc. Is this just part of a engrossing/familiarity-building factor (is that a legitimate reason to have certain material, in your eyes, Jim?) that the author uses to make the story more real, or are these novels anomalies? It seems to me like the 'no waste' novels are more of an anomaly than those that waste in Consistently Published Land.
Thanks,
Cyyschn
I'm rather sure I know the answer to my own question, but does the 'no waste' need to be conscious to the reader? Obviously, the reader is not conscious of every intention of the author, though it seems to me like a lot of novels have quite a bit of 'waste', such as scenery and mannerims and history, etc. Is this just part of a engrossing/familiarity-building factor (is that a legitimate reason to have certain material, in your eyes, Jim?) that the author uses to make the story more real, or are these novels anomalies? It seems to me like the 'no waste' novels are more of an anomaly than those that waste in Consistently Published Land.
Thanks,
Cyyschn
Re: No Waste
One of the many things I've learned from being here is that you should try to make everything count. For example, you need to have details that will give the reader a sense of place, but they don't have to do just that. I think the key is to always try to look at the surroundings in your story through the eye of the POV character.
Lets say you have a scene where the sky is overcast. You could say it like that, but it's flat, emotionless. However, if your POV is mean or in a bad mood, you could describe the sky as gloomy and depressing. Conversely, if your POV has an upbeat outlook, the cloudy sky could be just one of the many faces the sky presents to us.
One of the many things I've learned from being here is that you should try to make everything count. For example, you need to have details that will give the reader a sense of place, but they don't have to do just that. I think the key is to always try to look at the surroundings in your story through the eye of the POV character.
Lets say you have a scene where the sky is overcast. You could say it like that, but it's flat, emotionless. However, if your POV is mean or in a bad mood, you could describe the sky as gloomy and depressing. Conversely, if your POV has an upbeat outlook, the cloudy sky could be just one of the many faces the sky presents to us.
Re: Yess!!
You will learn, as you mature as a novelist, what is "waste" and what is really supporting material. Everything, down to settings or poetic proses, etc. must serve a purpose: advance the plot; develop characters; and add to the themes.
If you find yourself going in circles describing something that is just repetition, then cut it. Settings may very well be the usual suspects. When you find yourself writing pages after pages of settings, thinking that they enhance the mood and feel of the story, you should step back and see if they really do. I have cut out or pared down many passages during the rewrite/edit stage because I realized they were "waste" -- author's indulgence.
One thing to do is to just "cut" it -- using your word processor -- then read it again and see if you actually miss anything (apart from the feeling like you just cut off your limp). If nothing is lost as far as story/character/theme is concerned, then delete it. Otherwise, paste it back and perhaps try to pare it down. Cut out words. Again, see if after the cuts it still works.
Trim the fat without sacrificing the taste.
You will learn, as you mature as a novelist, what is "waste" and what is really supporting material. Everything, down to settings or poetic proses, etc. must serve a purpose: advance the plot; develop characters; and add to the themes.
If you find yourself going in circles describing something that is just repetition, then cut it. Settings may very well be the usual suspects. When you find yourself writing pages after pages of settings, thinking that they enhance the mood and feel of the story, you should step back and see if they really do. I have cut out or pared down many passages during the rewrite/edit stage because I realized they were "waste" -- author's indulgence.
One thing to do is to just "cut" it -- using your word processor -- then read it again and see if you actually miss anything (apart from the feeling like you just cut off your limp). If nothing is lost as far as story/character/theme is concerned, then delete it. Otherwise, paste it back and perhaps try to pare it down. Cut out words. Again, see if after the cuts it still works.
Trim the fat without sacrificing the taste.
A cholesterol guide to writing
Surely there are some stories that, like, say, a good Spanish sausage, cannot be enjoyed without the fat?! If you were to trim it away, it would just be a collection of rather unsavoury-looking lumps of meat and a washed pig intestine...
Surely there are some stories that, like, say, a good Spanish sausage, cannot be enjoyed without the fat?! If you were to trim it away, it would just be a collection of rather unsavoury-looking lumps of meat and a washed pig intestine...
Batter up! (Suitable heading considering my last post)
Ok, Jim,
I have payed my dues; the story has come into being, undergone various plastic surgery operations in which I have been following/ignoring the advice of several kind Betas (you know who you are!). After this, I placed the installments in my cellar together with the wine and cheese to - hopefully - mature from undigestible to spicy and delicious, but now I'm at a loss. The question is, would you like to try some? It will marry beautifully with your Saturday evening claret.... :b
Ok, Jim,
I have payed my dues; the story has come into being, undergone various plastic surgery operations in which I have been following/ignoring the advice of several kind Betas (you know who you are!). After this, I placed the installments in my cellar together with the wine and cheese to - hopefully - mature from undigestible to spicy and delicious, but now I'm at a loss. The question is, would you like to try some? It will marry beautifully with your Saturday evening claret.... :b
Re: Cholesterol
If you were to trim it away, it would just be a collection of rather unsavoury-looking lumps of meat and a washed pig intestine...
So that's what you think about Hemingway, then? That's one cholesterol-free writer :coffee
I find nineteen-century writing very fattening... just like their food. Little wonder many great writers of that time wrote cookbooks as well.
If you were to trim it away, it would just be a collection of rather unsavoury-looking lumps of meat and a washed pig intestine...
So that's what you think about Hemingway, then? That's one cholesterol-free writer :coffee
I find nineteen-century writing very fattening... just like their food. Little wonder many great writers of that time wrote cookbooks as well.
Re: Batter up! (Suitable heading considering my last post)
Chris -- you've gotten it to a stage where you would, possibly, send it to an editor?
You re-read it after it sat in your cellar, and you think it's Pretty Good?
Okay, tell you what: mail it to me. .RTF attachment.
[email protected]
No need to publish it to the net.
-- JDM
Chris -- you've gotten it to a stage where you would, possibly, send it to an editor?
You re-read it after it sat in your cellar, and you think it's Pretty Good?
Okay, tell you what: mail it to me. .RTF attachment.
[email protected]
No need to publish it to the net.
-- JDM
RTF
Hey Jim,
Just had to flaunt my complete ignorance of all things computer-related, did you? *grin*
What program would you want me to use (i.e. what is an rtf)? I take it a normal word file attachment is out of the wuestion?
As far as Pretty Good is concerned, I think I've done what I could given the circumstances. If it's good enough to publish, with or without editing, would be hybris for me to have an opinion on. I would value your opinion, though!
Cheers,
Chrisx
Hey Jim,
Just had to flaunt my complete ignorance of all things computer-related, did you? *grin*
What program would you want me to use (i.e. what is an rtf)? I take it a normal word file attachment is out of the wuestion?
As far as Pretty Good is concerned, I think I've done what I could given the circumstances. If it's good enough to publish, with or without editing, would be hybris for me to have an opinion on. I would value your opinion, though!
Cheers,
Chrisx
Re: Cholesterol
Hemingway. Write a normal story. Take off everything but the engine, tires, steering wheel, brakes. What you have to explain, don't show with a lot of little details, instead say in one sentence. Translate it into Spanish. Have someone else back into English.
Hemingway. Write a normal story. Take off everything but the engine, tires, steering wheel, brakes. What you have to explain, don't show with a lot of little details, instead say in one sentence. Translate it into Spanish. Have someone else back into English.
Re: Cholesterol
I love Hemingway, but he was a genius. Some people would argue that modern literature needs stimilus -- the more the better. All the writing books suggest "details" -- use all five senses, show don't tell, use complex sentences, etc. etc. Just like movies, I suppose. A movie like "Citizen Cane" may never be made now.
I love Hemingway, but he was a genius. Some people would argue that modern literature needs stimilus -- the more the better. All the writing books suggest "details" -- use all five senses, show don't tell, use complex sentences, etc. etc. Just like movies, I suppose. A movie like "Citizen Cane" may never be made now.
- Status