Learn Writing with Uncle Jim, Volume 1

James D. Macdonald said:

Beware pique. It doesn't have a place in this business.

And yes, when you get an offer, then a telephone call is appropriate.

Start with the best on your list, even if they already told you "not interested." You've just gone into a new inning.

Click to expand...

Yeah. I guess you're right. Nuts!

Thanks for the insight.

Artistry

Hi everyone, Ben here - long time lurker, first time poster. I started reading the thread when it was on the old site, got to about page 30, then realised that there were a million more, and skipped to the end. Hope I didn't miss anything...

Anyway, I wanted to ask a question regarding artistry within writing. I've seen Jim say something about how every word should either reveal character, enforce a theme, or further the plot. Is this rule rigid? It's just that I can't help but slip in a paragraph of seemingly (in your eyes) unnecessary description every now and then. Sometimes it would be to slow down the mood and let the reader recover from a fast action scene - sometimes to suck them in further - other times to just give them something really juicy to look at. Being a first-time author, would this annoy publishers who want to keep the words to a minimum? How pent up are they about keeping things concise?

Cheers

My opinion: if you can do that to "enforce the theme" it would be very nice... sometimes narrative is used to set up the mood -- in a sense the descriptions do move the plot. I think setting is part of plot. Now if you just stop and wax poetic about a beautiful sunset with no rhyme and reason with regard to the plot, the characters or the theme, then I'd say you're wasting words. But that, my pal, is just my opinion.

loquax said:

It's just that I can't help but slip in a paragraph of seemingly (in your eyes) unnecessary description every now and then.

Click to expand...

Are the readers likely to skim it?

On a related note (and after discussion with my writing group)...

I tend to "underwrite" as opposed to "overwrite." Often I find myself having to go back and insert/expand/explain things that are perfectly clear in my head but have somehow failed to transpire on the page. Most often, my readers will tell me "I am holding back" or "something is not clear to me" or "this is a little too short -- you skimmed over this."

How do you get over that? Do I just write anything that comes to mind, even if my internal editor says, "that's just obvious, on the nose -- do you really have to say that?" I know: "if the marble is not there, you can't chisel it away..."

The thing is, I can approach this either way: underwrite, then fill in the blanks/expand later. Or overwrite, then cut and prune later. Is one better than the other? Or as the old adage dictates: Do what works [for me]?

Maestro--I write thin myself and I'm at 93,000 right now. I skimp on deep background characterization and environmental description, so I know I'm going back in there to puff up. 60--70 percent is action and dialogue.

Tri

Maestro, I've seen and read enough of what you post to know that you of all people should understand that you will probably do BOTH. You will add here and remove there. I believe I've read somewhere that UJ says to write it until it ends.

You are very talented. I would not have taken you for a second guesser. Of course, having a writing group helps with the critiques.

edfrzr said:

Maestro, I've seen and read enough of what you post to know that you of all people should understand that you will probably do BOTH. You will add here and remove there. I believe I've read somewhere that UJ says to write it until it ends.

Click to expand...

You're right, I do both. And that's fine. What I was concerned, though, is the things I truly do not elaborate enough, or think I do but in fact don't. Even beta readers can be misleading (some people get it and think less is more, but some people need more information/explanation and think I "hold back" too much) so sometimes I don't know if I should keep certain things "thin" or try to expand on them...

It's late (or early, depending on your viewpoint) and I am not thinking straight...

SeanDSchaffer said:

Well, I'll be a son-of-a-gun! I thought for sure I was the only writer in the world who 'writes thin.' I'm glad to know that's not true.

Click to expand...

I 'write thin' too. I'm just not an excessively word person when I write or speak. My complete manuscript came in at 90,000 words.

James D. Macdonald said:

Are the readers likely to skim it?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't have thought so. My favourite books are the Gormenghast trilogy by Peake, and I think he writes at his best when he writes about nothing imparticular - when he slips into witty, poetical musings that are enjoyable to read, if nothing else.

And talking of word-counts, should anyone worry about it? At the moment I'm at 50,000 and just over a third of the way through... is it healthy to aspire to a set word-count?

The consensus is to stay within the general confines (word length) of a first novel 80,000--100,00 words. Now this is not a "golden rule" with all publishers, since genre has a lot to do with it. It is a standard observation set forth by many publishers for a ball park target length. But for cryin' out loud don't let that impede or direct your progress. Go for the ending and not the word count. I only have a problem because I'm an under-writer and my count is high with no end in sight yet. But that's what first-draft editing is for--this is where major changes happen.

Tri

I'm not one of the old pros, so take this with the proverbial grain of salt. I try to be aware of word count, but the number of words won't dictate how I tell the story unless I'm writing for a target with a specified limit. Otherwise, I'll just write the story and worry about the length, later. Things like word count can be the source of additonal worry and procrastination, and eventually, interfere with the storytelling.

edfrzr said:

Maestro, I've seen and read enough of what you post to know that you of all people should understand that you will probably do BOTH. You will add here and remove there. I believe I've read somewhere that UJ says to write it until it ends.

You are very talented. I would not have taken you for a second guesser. Of course, having a writing group helps with the critiques.

Click to expand...

I do both too. Since I write SF and fantasy, I tend to overwrite explanations of how the world (technology or magic) works. But I underwrite things like description of characters and settings. My beta readers are saints for putting up with my faults, but I listen when they tell me that things are slow here or they don't "see" the setting there.

Up-thread aways, I mentioned my system of writing: Storyboard, Rough, and Draft versions of my story. Storyboard is an outline in present tense. Rough is past tense where I add action and dialog. And Draft is where I add description. In this last stage, I deliberately try to flush out the description that I see so clearly in my head.

I've tried, but I can't find the overwritten sections myself. I'm too close to it and every word is a pearl of great price. I just have to rely on my beta readers.

Ray, I feel your pain. The first rewrite of the current WIP (the one that has The End already), I came across a place where a whole scene was missing. I added it... it wound up being ten extra pages.

Now that I'm on the next rewrite, I've deleted a bunch of stuff, mostly -ly adverbs and the ever popular -ing's and As's, but I've added too... especially where I've come across things that sounded so concise the last read through, but now sound like telling. So out they go, and dialouge or a scene go in. Makes it read better, but expands the word count. <shrug> Do you want a short book or a good book? LOL

You da man.

As I comb through my novel trying to find excess adverbs and overuse of -ing or as, I can't help but think of one highly successful novelist, Robin Hobb, whose first novel, Assassin's Apprentice, is filled with said bookisms, adverbs, was/were ---ing, Telling, etc. It's just another example of excellent story-telling vastly overshadowing writing "errors." I don't think I could find a single 'said' that wasn't modified with an adverb, and while it annoys me when I read as a writer, I completely forget about it when I just sit back and enjoy the story. I must conclude that's not the lack of writing sins that make it a good book, and newbies can get published in spite of them. (of course, she's no newbie anymore, but she was when she wrote it)

Story is a force of nature. It trumps everything.

azbikergirl said:

(of course, she's no newbie anymore, but she was when she wrote it)

Click to expand...

"Robin Hobb" is a pseudonym for "Megan Lindholm" (which is actually a pseudonym as well). Assassin's Apprentice was not her first book, or even close.

Ohhhhhh. No wonder. Thanks for the clarification.

U.J.: "Story trumps everything," but I've been unable to pinpoint what makes Assassin's Apprentice so good. For a long time, I thought conflict was at the heart of a good story, but the conflict throughout A.A. is so subtle, one barely notices it. Am I missing something?

I tend to "underwrite" as opposed to "overwrite." Often I find myself having to go back and insert/expand/explain things that are perfectly clear in my head but have somehow failed to transpire on the page. Most often, my readers will tell me "I am holding back" or "something is not clear to me" or "this is a little too short -- you skimmed over this."

Click to expand...

Woot! Me, too, Maestro---let's form a club!

Sailor Kenshin said:

Woot! Me, too, Maestro---let's form a club!

Click to expand...

Yup, me too.

That didn't help...

azbikergirl said:

Ohhhhhh. No wonder. Thanks for the clarification.

U.J.: "Story trumps everything," but I've been unable to pinpoint what makes Assassin's Apprentice so good. For a long time, I thought conflict was at the heart of a good story, but the conflict throughout A.A. is so subtle, one barely notices it. Am I missing something?

Click to expand...

Conflict and tension are funny words, because people mistake them for things like head to head arguments, or watching the time bomb tick away while the Protagonist is totally oblivious. There are smaller conflicts and tensions; doing something you know is forbidden creates tension and causes conflict even when nobdy else knows about it yet, finding friends and making family include all kinds of little conflicts.

I haven't read Assassin's Apprentice, but I've read a fair number of other Robin Hobb/Megan Lindholm books (Including the trilogy that's technically a sequel to the Farseer trilogy), and I've noticed that no matter how Big and potentially violent / earth-shaking the main plot and the story blurb appears to be (royal coups, revenge stories, dragons and countries at war...), the focus is always on the small, family and friends level. The key points in the book never involve the battles; they involve the turning points in relationships. Which are fraught with tensions and conflicts, just not with massive battling dragons.

SF writer Elizabeth Bear says, it's not the number of things you avoid doing poorly; it's the number of things that you do astoundingly well. There's lots of "meh" and "not bad, but what's the point?" in the slushpile--and I'd rather read something that blows me away in a few spots and annoys me in a few others.

What struck me about Assassin's Apprentice was the density of the worldbuilding and the richness of Fitz's character and social world. It trumps a few unnecessary adverbs.