Momentum is a wonderful thing. It can take a while to build up, but once you really have it, it carries you.
And as I thought, throwing myself into my critique group has given me the momentum I need. Quite a lot of it. I have no idea how many words I wrote today, but it was a couple thousand.
I did do my one critique, and but I didn't get Chapter 12 ready yet. (I've set a deadline for myself of midnight tomorrow.) I've tried to do an assessment of how long it's going to take to do the rest, but I can't tell. Since I am revamping a lot of the middle, I do have a lot of work to do. But it's all fun stuff and should go well.
Tomorrow we go to see a morning matinee of Bela Lugosi's Dracula, and then to dim sum. Then just writing for the rest of the day.
I do hope I can catch up on sleep, though. The problem with momentum is it tends to pick up just as you are trying to go to bed.
Daring to live life as a full time writer, with or without success.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Crit Dare Day 8 - Too Busy Writing!
I was too busy writing to remember to post! (Yay!)
I did do my critique for the day, and I submitted Chapter 11 to the group, which should get me moving on making Chapter 12 presentable.
I've had a couple more nice reviews for Have Gun, Will Play this week, and people asking about the sequel. So I guess I'd better get this book done so I can get cracking on Old Paint: Dead Or Alive.
I did do my critique for the day, and I submitted Chapter 11 to the group, which should get me moving on making Chapter 12 presentable.
I've had a couple more nice reviews for Have Gun, Will Play this week, and people asking about the sequel. So I guess I'd better get this book done so I can get cracking on Old Paint: Dead Or Alive.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Crit Dare Day 7 - Should You Write Two Books At Once?
Two more chapters critiqued. And more writing on multiple scenes both from the WIP, and a little work on The Serial. Wrote maybe 1500 words.
Which brings me to a question someone asked on Kindleboards this week - should people work on more than one story at a time?
For me the answer is a resounding yes, but it is a sticky topic. If we go back to Heinlein's Rule #2 (You Must Finish What You Start): the number one reason that rule is necessary is because shiny new ideas are more fun than the hard work of finishing an old idea.
After all, odds are that you wrote the easy stuff early on, and by the time you are getting close to the finish, it's all the tricky and hard parts that you have left. (Not shiny at all!) Giving in to the lure of a new idea is the downfall of many a writer.
However, there are a couple of reasons you might want to work on more than one project at a time:
1.) When a shiny new idea comes to you, you don't want to lose it. You want to at least take notes. If you don't, the new idea has a way of taking up a bit of your brain so you won't forget it. Get it out of your head and onto the page. Take the notes, and set them aside so you can get back to the work at hand with a clear conscience.
2.) Many ideas need a lot of "simmering" time. They need development, research, or just plain time to mature. If you get these stories going a few months (or even years) before you actually start working on them, they will be the better for it. But if you only work on one story at a time, you won't be very productive during those months or years. IMHO, you should put the pot on to boil before you're done with the previous story.
3.) The human brain was not intended for long drawn out concentration on a single thing. We all vary here, but we do tend to need breaks. A pause to work on somehting else can be exactly the mental break you need - and it is still productive work time.
The key to working on more than one project at a time, though, is to have one project that is the prime work-in-progress. That has priority. You must always go back to it. Give yourself rules - perhaps to start and end every work session with that story. Or to work on it every day.
Which brings me to a question someone asked on Kindleboards this week - should people work on more than one story at a time?
For me the answer is a resounding yes, but it is a sticky topic. If we go back to Heinlein's Rule #2 (You Must Finish What You Start): the number one reason that rule is necessary is because shiny new ideas are more fun than the hard work of finishing an old idea.
After all, odds are that you wrote the easy stuff early on, and by the time you are getting close to the finish, it's all the tricky and hard parts that you have left. (Not shiny at all!) Giving in to the lure of a new idea is the downfall of many a writer.
However, there are a couple of reasons you might want to work on more than one project at a time:
1.) When a shiny new idea comes to you, you don't want to lose it. You want to at least take notes. If you don't, the new idea has a way of taking up a bit of your brain so you won't forget it. Get it out of your head and onto the page. Take the notes, and set them aside so you can get back to the work at hand with a clear conscience.
2.) Many ideas need a lot of "simmering" time. They need development, research, or just plain time to mature. If you get these stories going a few months (or even years) before you actually start working on them, they will be the better for it. But if you only work on one story at a time, you won't be very productive during those months or years. IMHO, you should put the pot on to boil before you're done with the previous story.
3.) The human brain was not intended for long drawn out concentration on a single thing. We all vary here, but we do tend to need breaks. A pause to work on somehting else can be exactly the mental break you need - and it is still productive work time.
The key to working on more than one project at a time, though, is to have one project that is the prime work-in-progress. That has priority. You must always go back to it. Give yourself rules - perhaps to start and end every work session with that story. Or to work on it every day.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Crit Dare Day 6 - Actual Writing!
After today my schedule just might go back to something approaching normal. We have finally achieved full staffing. All the new student aides are trained. The tutors seem to be working out well. (On going home crisis is continuing for the foreseeable future, though.)
I am ahead on posting critiques, so today I just read a couple of new chapters. Two very different books.
I also did some good new writing. The new material from Chapter 12 gave me a chance to write a much better follow up at the end. I think, though, that I need to identify and play up the best red herring from the Chapter 11-12 sequence, and use it to make a trail to the conclusion too.
I am ahead on posting critiques, so today I just read a couple of new chapters. Two very different books.
I also did some good new writing. The new material from Chapter 12 gave me a chance to write a much better follow up at the end. I think, though, that I need to identify and play up the best red herring from the Chapter 11-12 sequence, and use it to make a trail to the conclusion too.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Crit Dare Day 5 - Stuck Inside of Row K With The Can't See Blues Again
I did three crits today to finish up what I have of this book. She keeps telling me that there are only 30 some pages left, but I haven't seen them yet. As we are now at the suspenseful denouement, I am waiting rather anxiously.
I didn't write any more today, nor did I write a splendid blog post for here. I had a couple of topics in mind, partly inspired by the fact that we were going to see Dylan tonight - but the concert turned out to be a disaster, as everyone in the first few rows decided to stand throughout the entire concert (and this was not a stadium or hall - this was a small old-fashioned theater) entirely blocking the view of the row of handicappers and companions behind them - and a good portion of the audience behind them.
The management got tons of complaints from all over throughout the entire concert, but they didn't care. They wouldn't even approach audience members to ask. Dylan's roadies were hostile to the handicapper issue, too, and appeared to block the ushers from doing anything anyway. (However, they had no problem ordering the ushers to go into the same part of the crowd to enforce the no-camera rules.) Even when audience members tried to get the others to sit down, the guys in front were rude enough to tell handicappers to their face that they weren't going to sit down period.
So instead of being a great concert it turned out like being stuck at a really bad party - you know, a bunch of obnoxious people crowded shoulder to shoulder in the dark while the excellent sound system plays loudly enough so nobody can talk. (Except everyone is shouting and trying to be heard by the ushers and roadies all through the thing.)
Not happy.
I didn't write any more today, nor did I write a splendid blog post for here. I had a couple of topics in mind, partly inspired by the fact that we were going to see Dylan tonight - but the concert turned out to be a disaster, as everyone in the first few rows decided to stand throughout the entire concert (and this was not a stadium or hall - this was a small old-fashioned theater) entirely blocking the view of the row of handicappers and companions behind them - and a good portion of the audience behind them.
The management got tons of complaints from all over throughout the entire concert, but they didn't care. They wouldn't even approach audience members to ask. Dylan's roadies were hostile to the handicapper issue, too, and appeared to block the ushers from doing anything anyway. (However, they had no problem ordering the ushers to go into the same part of the crowd to enforce the no-camera rules.) Even when audience members tried to get the others to sit down, the guys in front were rude enough to tell handicappers to their face that they weren't going to sit down period.
So instead of being a great concert it turned out like being stuck at a really bad party - you know, a bunch of obnoxious people crowded shoulder to shoulder in the dark while the excellent sound system plays loudly enough so nobody can talk. (Except everyone is shouting and trying to be heard by the ushers and roadies all through the thing.)
Not happy.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Guest Post - What Makes a Character a Hero?
I'd like to welcome Chris Kelly, blogger at Dun Scaith, who is currently on a blog tour for his new book, Matilda Raleigh: Invictus. He's currently hosting a series of guest posts on his own blog, while he's out visiting this month.
The subject of this post is heroes - which is an important one not only to the more heroic steampunk genre, but also to mystery, I think. You could say that mystery began with the intellectual hero of Victorian fiction - often a person not only of greater skills, but of stronger character than those around him.
What Makes a Character a Hero?
People quite often call protagonists heroes, and yet it is often not true. Whilst a hero can be a protagonist, a protagonist doesn’t have to be a hero. This gets muddied further when anti-hero’s are included. A protagonist can be a hero, anti-hero, or just a protagonist.
A protagonist is someone who moves the action forward, and an antagonist is someone who holds the action back. In a lot of fantasies it quite often seems to start out with the mentor as the protagonist and the hero as the antagonist.
An example of when a main character is neither hero nor anti-hero would be Adrian Mole. Adrian Mole is the protagonist of Sue Townsend’s Diaries of Adrian Mole series. If you’ve ever read the series, you will know what I mean. If you haven’t, they’re very good.
The difference between an anti-hero and a hero is, at best, a motivational one. Issues of attitude can also be included. Heroes are motivated out of an altruistic desire to help others – as in Spider-man’s “With great power comes great responsibility.” Anti-heroes have a more personally validated motivation – keeping with the comic theme, the Punisher seeks vengeance for the murder of his family. On an attitude note, heroes tend to be happier, more well-adjusted people than anti-heroes.
Interestingly, anti-heroes often end the story happier, as if the events of the story were a form of therapy. Heroes often become darker as the story progresses, quite often needing therapy by the conclusion of the climax. They almost seem to meet in the middle.
But what makes a hero stays the same no matter what the characters motivation, and has no bearing on their attitude. It doesn’t matter if they are reluctant, or eager. It doesn’t matter if they are jealous, angry, and bitter, or so happy they seem to have smile-scars.
A hero makes the hard choices.
That’s it. That’s all they have to do to be a hero. In real life or fiction. Not a lot, and yet not easy. In fact, the difficulty in making the hard choices is what makes a hero so rare. Think you could do it?
A fire-man enters a burning building. He goes so far. From training and experience, he sees the danger. He has a minute until the entire building collapses. It will take him fifty seconds to get out from here. He has barely enough time to save himself. Up ahead, somewhere, a child cries...
There’s a reason not everyone is a hero. Most people just can’t make those choices.
In my novel, Matilda Raleigh: Invictus, Matilda, an old-style hero (hero through motivation and attitude) is forced to make a choice between the deaths of 1500 innocents or letting the villain win, which would lead to the deaths of countless more. She can’t just invent a third option, she has to choose one; either way it’s a hard choice, and I think that’s what being a hero truly comes down to. What do you think?
Chris Kelly is the author of the steampunk/ sword and sorcery extravaganza Matilda Raleigh: Invictus. Whilst not a hero, he understands them, and writes them convincingly: to sample or buy his novel, click on this link: Invictus.
If you read this blog, and find it useful or entertaining, buy a book once in a while, or make a donation.
Here's a link to a list of my books. And ... hey, look at that! There's a donation link right below this sentence. (Donations via Paypal)
The subject of this post is heroes - which is an important one not only to the more heroic steampunk genre, but also to mystery, I think. You could say that mystery began with the intellectual hero of Victorian fiction - often a person not only of greater skills, but of stronger character than those around him.
What Makes a Character a Hero?
People quite often call protagonists heroes, and yet it is often not true. Whilst a hero can be a protagonist, a protagonist doesn’t have to be a hero. This gets muddied further when anti-hero’s are included. A protagonist can be a hero, anti-hero, or just a protagonist.
A protagonist is someone who moves the action forward, and an antagonist is someone who holds the action back. In a lot of fantasies it quite often seems to start out with the mentor as the protagonist and the hero as the antagonist.
An example of when a main character is neither hero nor anti-hero would be Adrian Mole. Adrian Mole is the protagonist of Sue Townsend’s Diaries of Adrian Mole series. If you’ve ever read the series, you will know what I mean. If you haven’t, they’re very good.
The difference between an anti-hero and a hero is, at best, a motivational one. Issues of attitude can also be included. Heroes are motivated out of an altruistic desire to help others – as in Spider-man’s “With great power comes great responsibility.” Anti-heroes have a more personally validated motivation – keeping with the comic theme, the Punisher seeks vengeance for the murder of his family. On an attitude note, heroes tend to be happier, more well-adjusted people than anti-heroes.
Interestingly, anti-heroes often end the story happier, as if the events of the story were a form of therapy. Heroes often become darker as the story progresses, quite often needing therapy by the conclusion of the climax. They almost seem to meet in the middle.
But what makes a hero stays the same no matter what the characters motivation, and has no bearing on their attitude. It doesn’t matter if they are reluctant, or eager. It doesn’t matter if they are jealous, angry, and bitter, or so happy they seem to have smile-scars.
A hero makes the hard choices.
That’s it. That’s all they have to do to be a hero. In real life or fiction. Not a lot, and yet not easy. In fact, the difficulty in making the hard choices is what makes a hero so rare. Think you could do it?
A fire-man enters a burning building. He goes so far. From training and experience, he sees the danger. He has a minute until the entire building collapses. It will take him fifty seconds to get out from here. He has barely enough time to save himself. Up ahead, somewhere, a child cries...
There’s a reason not everyone is a hero. Most people just can’t make those choices.
In my novel, Matilda Raleigh: Invictus, Matilda, an old-style hero (hero through motivation and attitude) is forced to make a choice between the deaths of 1500 innocents or letting the villain win, which would lead to the deaths of countless more. She can’t just invent a third option, she has to choose one; either way it’s a hard choice, and I think that’s what being a hero truly comes down to. What do you think?
Chris Kelly is the author of the steampunk/ sword and sorcery extravaganza Matilda Raleigh: Invictus. Whilst not a hero, he understands them, and writes them convincingly: to sample or buy his novel, click on this link: Invictus.
If you read this blog, and find it useful or entertaining, buy a book once in a while, or make a donation.
Here's a link to a list of my books. And ... hey, look at that! There's a donation link right below this sentence. (Donations via Paypal)
Crit Dare Day 4 - Progress!
Critique does do good things to clear the head sometimes. One of my critique group commented on an odd reaction of Gwen - wondering if it meant something I didn't intend it to mean - not overtly anyway. However, she had spotted some subtext, and discussing that put me in the right frame of mind to finally approach the most important scene in Chapter 12.
I need a title for that chapter, though. I've got a few in mind, but I haven't found the perfect one. I am using chapter titles in this book the way I used them in Have Gun, Will Play - as teasers. Which means, if possible, they have to suggest the feel and direction of the chapter, without actually being a plot spoiler. Since we can only post one chapter at a time in this group, I like to end each submission with a "next up" and the title of the next chapter.
So anyway, I got a couple more critiques done, but since today was long and mildly grueling at work, I didn't get as much done as I'd like. (No new work on The Serial.) But I am content.
In the next hour or so, I shall post Tuesday's guest post from Chris Kelly of Dun Scaith - all about how a protagonist is not necessarily a hero.
I need a title for that chapter, though. I've got a few in mind, but I haven't found the perfect one. I am using chapter titles in this book the way I used them in Have Gun, Will Play - as teasers. Which means, if possible, they have to suggest the feel and direction of the chapter, without actually being a plot spoiler. Since we can only post one chapter at a time in this group, I like to end each submission with a "next up" and the title of the next chapter.
So anyway, I got a couple more critiques done, but since today was long and mildly grueling at work, I didn't get as much done as I'd like. (No new work on The Serial.) But I am content.
In the next hour or so, I shall post Tuesday's guest post from Chris Kelly of Dun Scaith - all about how a protagonist is not necessarily a hero.
Crit Dare Day 3 - Small Progress on All Fronts
I posted two more critiques tonight. I want to get ahead because I have three evenings of work in a row this week. (Well, one isn't work - Dylan is coming to town, and we've got tickets.)
I also continued to make progress on the WIP (on the difficult Chapter 12, no less) and to play more with "The Untitled Story I Call The Serial." Everything seems to catch fire as the weekend comes to an end - isn't that the way it goes?
In the meantime: Chris Kelly of the Dun Scaith blog will be doing a guest post on Tuesday on the nature of heroes "in the old sense of the word" he says. He's currently promoting his steampunk novel Matilda Raleigh: Invictus. (I'm interested in this one because it pushes the envelope of the steampunk era to 1912, the edge of my own favorite times - the silent movie era.)
I also continued to make progress on the WIP (on the difficult Chapter 12, no less) and to play more with "The Untitled Story I Call The Serial." Everything seems to catch fire as the weekend comes to an end - isn't that the way it goes?
In the meantime: Chris Kelly of the Dun Scaith blog will be doing a guest post on Tuesday on the nature of heroes "in the old sense of the word" he says. He's currently promoting his steampunk novel Matilda Raleigh: Invictus. (I'm interested in this one because it pushes the envelope of the steampunk era to 1912, the edge of my own favorite times - the silent movie era.)
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Crit Dare Day 2 - Juggling
Too much going on for things to have gone as well as I'd hoped, but I actually got a lot done.
First, I decided to let my brain run free for a bit to get the kinks out. I worked a bit on the ideas and outline for the future novel series I call "The Serial" because it's inspired by silent era serial adventure. (For new readers, here is a post about it's first bit of character generation, and here is on on the unorthodox world-building I'd like to do with it.) The story is still evolving, and I will probably have a lot to say about that process later on.
Then I wrote and posted three critiques, and then went ahead and read through Chapter 9 and posted that for critique. I'd forgotten how much fun Chapter 9 was. It's where Karla meets Gwen. I hope that Gwen is not too annoying. We'll see what the crit group says....
First, I decided to let my brain run free for a bit to get the kinks out. I worked a bit on the ideas and outline for the future novel series I call "The Serial" because it's inspired by silent era serial adventure. (For new readers, here is a post about it's first bit of character generation, and here is on on the unorthodox world-building I'd like to do with it.) The story is still evolving, and I will probably have a lot to say about that process later on.
Then I wrote and posted three critiques, and then went ahead and read through Chapter 9 and posted that for critique. I'd forgotten how much fun Chapter 9 was. It's where Karla meets Gwen. I hope that Gwen is not too annoying. We'll see what the crit group says....
Saturday, October 23, 2010
The Critique Dare - 9 Chapters Read
The challenge until November 30 (or as I call it "NaNoWrongMo") is to critique a chapter a day. My critique group's rule is that you post a chapter for every three you read. If this doesn't get the darned book done, I don't know what will.
I will stop here to define what I consider "finished" for a first draft.
I tend to jump around when I write, developing the story in pieces and rewriting as I go. By the time the book is whole, most of it has been revised several times. Since I've already written the last chapter, how I do I know whether it's done or not?
My own rule is that the first draft is done when it is actually readable without inserted explanations. There may be rough patches and sketchy scenes, but it all makes sense. There comes a point when it's maybe three quarters done that the beginning is all filled in, and I may let my crit group see those early chapters before it's done, but otherwise I don't usually let people see it until the whole story is there.
What this means is that the story doesn't usually need much if any structural work by the time anyone sees it. The "re-vision" stage is usually done - but that's okay because I find that critique at that level just tends to interfere with the process. Structural critique is better to help you with the next story. If you get it too soon on this story you could end up in a muddle as you try to encompass outside and inside forces. Nail your own concept down to the best of your ability. If you are already in a muddle, talk it out with somebody. Save the critique for later.
The advantage of using critique late in the process is that people can better see what you're going for, and help you edit and polish your way into that direction. If your beginning didn't set it up right, then they can see that later on - but if they try to critique your beginning before they see where you're going, they may not even know it's not working.
So anyway....
Tonight I read nine chapters of a single book - which is rising to an exciting climax. This story is really hitting its stride, with lots of fun twists, and I'm glad I saved those nine chapters in a row, because the truth is, it would be hard to see the pacing if I had read them one at a time, separated by a week or two.
I did not write the critique for tonight because I read the extra chapters instead. I'll probably post more than two tomorrow.
I will stop here to define what I consider "finished" for a first draft.
I tend to jump around when I write, developing the story in pieces and rewriting as I go. By the time the book is whole, most of it has been revised several times. Since I've already written the last chapter, how I do I know whether it's done or not?
My own rule is that the first draft is done when it is actually readable without inserted explanations. There may be rough patches and sketchy scenes, but it all makes sense. There comes a point when it's maybe three quarters done that the beginning is all filled in, and I may let my crit group see those early chapters before it's done, but otherwise I don't usually let people see it until the whole story is there.
What this means is that the story doesn't usually need much if any structural work by the time anyone sees it. The "re-vision" stage is usually done - but that's okay because I find that critique at that level just tends to interfere with the process. Structural critique is better to help you with the next story. If you get it too soon on this story you could end up in a muddle as you try to encompass outside and inside forces. Nail your own concept down to the best of your ability. If you are already in a muddle, talk it out with somebody. Save the critique for later.
The advantage of using critique late in the process is that people can better see what you're going for, and help you edit and polish your way into that direction. If your beginning didn't set it up right, then they can see that later on - but if they try to critique your beginning before they see where you're going, they may not even know it's not working.
So anyway....
Tonight I read nine chapters of a single book - which is rising to an exciting climax. This story is really hitting its stride, with lots of fun twists, and I'm glad I saved those nine chapters in a row, because the truth is, it would be hard to see the pacing if I had read them one at a time, separated by a week or two.
I did not write the critique for tonight because I read the extra chapters instead. I'll probably post more than two tomorrow.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Que Sera Sera (Or Don't Chase Markets)
I went to see The Man Who Knew Too Much (1955 version) in a real theater today. I really wanted to have my current work-in-progress (The Man Who DID Too Much) done by this time, I meant to have it done in March, actually.
But I got derailed.
What happened this spring was this: I set aside Man Who to chase the market.
Chasing the market is always a sucker's game, but it's partly built into the mindset for traditional publishing, because the process takes so much time. There's so much downtime, and all you can do is strategize on how to use it well. Make sure that you're ready with the right thing if the editor expresses an interest! Make sure you're ready if they don't!
But indie publishing isn't like that. It's fast and direct and organic. You actually have to build your own stalling mechanisms into it just to make sure you give the story proper time to mellow.
So when I started my ebook publishing experiment this spring, it made complete sense at the time (using my traditional publishing mindset) to pull out the drafts and outlines of the sequels to those older stories, and polish or finish them up right now. I knew that Man Who would require a lot of drawer time for the rewrite, plus I figured I shouldn't put yet another series out before I had any sequels ready, right?
Take advantage of my marketing momentum. Follow up! You must finish what you start!
But that killed me. I had writing momentum on Man Who. All those other books have been sitting in a drawer for so long, I had no momentum at all on them. The stories were cold, and required just as much dreamtime to get up to speed as a new story might. More, because I had to recover thoughts and threads I had long ago forgotten.
And I finally realized that I was doing to Man Who exactly what I'd done to those stories. I was setting it aside while it was hot, and chasing something else that was cold, and spinning my wheels excessively in the process.
So like the doctor in the joke says: "If it hurts when you do that, stop doing that!"
From now on I need to take advantage of writing momentum when I have it, and allow the time to build it when I don't. (And let the marketing momentum take care of itself.)
I have two weeks - and if life doesn't interfere, two long weekends - before NaNoWriMo starts. I don't expect to have a solid draft of The Man Who Did Too Much. I have been debating putting together at least a full but sketchy draft so that I could feel I've accomplished something by the end of the month. Then I could set it aside and do NaNoWrongMo* with some sense of satisfaction.
But I've changed my mind. "NEVER GIVE IN!" says Uncle Winston - and I will begin the second year of my ongoing novel dare of a blog by not giving in.
I think I'll make NaNo into a critique challenge instead. Because, see, every time I critique three chapters for my group, I can post a chapter. But to post a chapter, I need to have it done and polished too. So it starts here, and starts now. I critique a chapter every night - October 22 through November 30 - and that should give me sufficient focus and motivation to keep her going.
And then in December, maybe I'll do the article writing I was planning to do for NaNo.
*********
*NaNoWrongMo is what I call it when you don't actually set the goals you're supposed to set for NaNoWriMo. Their rules are just not conducive to good productivity, so I never actually sign up, but like all writers, I love the concept.
But I got derailed.
What happened this spring was this: I set aside Man Who to chase the market.
Chasing the market is always a sucker's game, but it's partly built into the mindset for traditional publishing, because the process takes so much time. There's so much downtime, and all you can do is strategize on how to use it well. Make sure that you're ready with the right thing if the editor expresses an interest! Make sure you're ready if they don't!
But indie publishing isn't like that. It's fast and direct and organic. You actually have to build your own stalling mechanisms into it just to make sure you give the story proper time to mellow.
So when I started my ebook publishing experiment this spring, it made complete sense at the time (using my traditional publishing mindset) to pull out the drafts and outlines of the sequels to those older stories, and polish or finish them up right now. I knew that Man Who would require a lot of drawer time for the rewrite, plus I figured I shouldn't put yet another series out before I had any sequels ready, right?
Take advantage of my marketing momentum. Follow up! You must finish what you start!
But that killed me. I had writing momentum on Man Who. All those other books have been sitting in a drawer for so long, I had no momentum at all on them. The stories were cold, and required just as much dreamtime to get up to speed as a new story might. More, because I had to recover thoughts and threads I had long ago forgotten.
And I finally realized that I was doing to Man Who exactly what I'd done to those stories. I was setting it aside while it was hot, and chasing something else that was cold, and spinning my wheels excessively in the process.
So like the doctor in the joke says: "If it hurts when you do that, stop doing that!"
From now on I need to take advantage of writing momentum when I have it, and allow the time to build it when I don't. (And let the marketing momentum take care of itself.)
I have two weeks - and if life doesn't interfere, two long weekends - before NaNoWriMo starts. I don't expect to have a solid draft of The Man Who Did Too Much. I have been debating putting together at least a full but sketchy draft so that I could feel I've accomplished something by the end of the month. Then I could set it aside and do NaNoWrongMo* with some sense of satisfaction.
But I've changed my mind. "NEVER GIVE IN!" says Uncle Winston - and I will begin the second year of my ongoing novel dare of a blog by not giving in.
I think I'll make NaNo into a critique challenge instead. Because, see, every time I critique three chapters for my group, I can post a chapter. But to post a chapter, I need to have it done and polished too. So it starts here, and starts now. I critique a chapter every night - October 22 through November 30 - and that should give me sufficient focus and motivation to keep her going.
And then in December, maybe I'll do the article writing I was planning to do for NaNo.
*********
*NaNoWrongMo is what I call it when you don't actually set the goals you're supposed to set for NaNoWriMo. Their rules are just not conducive to good productivity, so I never actually sign up, but like all writers, I love the concept.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Heinlein's Rule Number 5 - You Must Keep It On The Market Until Sold
And on the one year anniversary of this blog, we finish up the series on Heinlein's Rules of Writing.
"You must keep it on the market until sold."
This one seems to apply only to writers going for traditional publication, but I think it applies equally to self-published and indie writers.
Sure indies don't have that single magic moment where you can say "I sold a story." Sales happen over time: a trickle, and then less, and then a little more, and then a little less.... Are you ever going to get anywhere? How do you know when to give up?
I'll let Winston Churchill say it:
"Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."
You can define "sold" any way you want - but you must keep it on the market until you have achieved it.
And one last caveat: Seth Godin put it well when he said, "Persistence isn't doing the same thing over and over - that's just annoying. Persistence is having the same goal over and over."
Never give in, but do learn from your efforts! (And now, of course, get back to Rule 1 - Write!)
And this brings to a conclusion the first year of this blog. Tomorrow we look forward into the next phase of this ongoing dare, explore what is undone, and set some new goals.
"You must keep it on the market until sold."
This one seems to apply only to writers going for traditional publication, but I think it applies equally to self-published and indie writers.
Sure indies don't have that single magic moment where you can say "I sold a story." Sales happen over time: a trickle, and then less, and then a little more, and then a little less.... Are you ever going to get anywhere? How do you know when to give up?
I'll let Winston Churchill say it:
"Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."
You can define "sold" any way you want - but you must keep it on the market until you have achieved it.
And one last caveat: Seth Godin put it well when he said, "Persistence isn't doing the same thing over and over - that's just annoying. Persistence is having the same goal over and over."
Never give in, but do learn from your efforts! (And now, of course, get back to Rule 1 - Write!)
And this brings to a conclusion the first year of this blog. Tomorrow we look forward into the next phase of this ongoing dare, explore what is undone, and set some new goals.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Heinlein's Rule Number 4 - You Must Put It On The Market
(This is a series on Heinlein's Rules of Writing - Start with the introduction here.)
One of my favorite movies about writing isn't actually about writing. It's a strange Australian comedy about ballroom dancing, called Strictly Ballroom. It's about a brilliant young dancer who wants to dance his own steps - steps which are not "strictly" ballroom steps - and the forces of conformity (in the form of the Australian Dancing Federation) which are desperate to stop him.
Daring as the hero might seem, the real lesson of this story is carried by the heroine. She's a shy, awkward beginner who dares to approach a Pan-Pacific Open Champion and ask to dance with him. She's one the who teaches him her Spanish Gypsy motto: "A life lived in fear is only half a life." Everyone else in the story lives in fear of failure - even the hero at one point. But she is not afraid to fail. She's willing to fail over and over again.
And that is the lesson of the story. It isn't about daring to dance your own steps, it's about dancing your own steps in competition. It's about risking failure.
I mentioned that writing dream stories in your journal isn't enough if you want to be a storyteller. So, if being a writer (and not just a dreamer) is your nature, then you need to get the darn stuff out there to readers.
You've got to get published.
You have to risk failure.
Don't be shy. Don't be a coward. Don't leave it in a drawer. Get out there and dance your steps in competition! (That links to the end scene of Strictly Ballroom, so if you don't want spoilers, go out and rent it.)
Next time - You must keep it on the market until sold!
One of my favorite movies about writing isn't actually about writing. It's a strange Australian comedy about ballroom dancing, called Strictly Ballroom. It's about a brilliant young dancer who wants to dance his own steps - steps which are not "strictly" ballroom steps - and the forces of conformity (in the form of the Australian Dancing Federation) which are desperate to stop him.
Daring as the hero might seem, the real lesson of this story is carried by the heroine. She's a shy, awkward beginner who dares to approach a Pan-Pacific Open Champion and ask to dance with him. She's one the who teaches him her Spanish Gypsy motto: "A life lived in fear is only half a life." Everyone else in the story lives in fear of failure - even the hero at one point. But she is not afraid to fail. She's willing to fail over and over again.
And that is the lesson of the story. It isn't about daring to dance your own steps, it's about dancing your own steps in competition. It's about risking failure.
I mentioned that writing dream stories in your journal isn't enough if you want to be a storyteller. So, if being a writer (and not just a dreamer) is your nature, then you need to get the darn stuff out there to readers.
You've got to get published.
You have to risk failure.
Don't be shy. Don't be a coward. Don't leave it in a drawer. Get out there and dance your steps in competition! (That links to the end scene of Strictly Ballroom, so if you don't want spoilers, go out and rent it.)
Next time - You must keep it on the market until sold!
Monday, October 18, 2010
Heinlein's Rule Number 3 - You Must Refrain From Rewriting Except to Editorial Order
(NOTE: The Insane Marathon that is my "real" life has continued to have an impact. After a big family crisis today, I have no mindspace for anything - not writing, not editing, maybe drooling. I had this post written already, so I simply refrained from rewriting it. Seems appropriate somehow.... Oh, and you can find the beginning of the series on Heinlein's Rules of Writing here.)
Yes, Heinlein's third rule tells you not to rewrite.
This rule really bothers most writers - and it especially bothers editors and writing teachers. I hear a lot of people to go elaborate lengths to explain how he didn't really mean it, or he was talking about some other thing. I can't say that I myself completely agree with it, but....
I think he meant exactly what he said.
So (at the risk of turning this into another apology for this rule) let's take a look at the context in which he said it:
Heinlein wrote during the pulp era. It was a time when there was a lot of fiction being published, and the range of quality was very wide. Very wide. An awful lot of writers learned by simple trial and error - by writing all night every night for penny a word. And an awful lot of writing was simply awful, too. Even the stuff that got published.
(Which sounds a little like today, actually, with this new wave of indie publishing. Learning on the job, as it were.)
The difference is that today we have writing schools and classes and clubs and all sorts of ways to learn your craft. But the great ones - Heinlein, Westlake, Stout, Asimov, Ellison, Dahl and many others - learned by writing. A lot. Endlessly. Writing terribly and wonderfully and crazily and rationally.
They figured out pretty quickly that rewriting was a waste of time, unless it really was requested by an editor with money in hand. If a story didn't sell, pay attention to why (if a reason is given) and write something NEW to suit the editor's needs. Learn from your mistakes not by fussing over an imperfect story, but rather by writing something else even better.
And these guys learned to write brilliantly, so don't tell me this isn't a good way to learn your craft. For one thing, if you keep working on old stories, you will be stuck with a few immature ideas. If you have to keep coming up with new ideas all the time - rather than rewrite the old - you force yourself to become original and fresh.
Writing forward is a part of writing more. It's one of the best things you can do for yourself.
That said, I think in the modern publishing climate, you can't afford to learn on the job the way the pulp writers did. Even with pulp fiction, there were still rejection slips. They had editors. With self-publishing, you need to be the editor. Be the person who slows you down and makes sure the work is good. Rewriting is not going to kill you.
But I think we still have a lesson to learn from this. We need to write forward, keep going, get better at not just writing, but also at finishing. And when we rewrite, we need to have a purpose. We need to give ourselves those "editorial orders," and then carry them out.
But if there isn't a specific purpose, we need to keep going, push that envelope and become more brilliant and less perfectly ordinary.
Set to writing with more knowledge and skills in the first place, and you won't need to do as much rewriting anyway. But just be prepared that it will take a lot of writing to get those skills - so maybe do some rewriting in the meantime. But not too much.
Next we deal with Rule Four - You must put it on the market!
Yes, Heinlein's third rule tells you not to rewrite.
This rule really bothers most writers - and it especially bothers editors and writing teachers. I hear a lot of people to go elaborate lengths to explain how he didn't really mean it, or he was talking about some other thing. I can't say that I myself completely agree with it, but....
I think he meant exactly what he said.
So (at the risk of turning this into another apology for this rule) let's take a look at the context in which he said it:
Heinlein wrote during the pulp era. It was a time when there was a lot of fiction being published, and the range of quality was very wide. Very wide. An awful lot of writers learned by simple trial and error - by writing all night every night for penny a word. And an awful lot of writing was simply awful, too. Even the stuff that got published.
(Which sounds a little like today, actually, with this new wave of indie publishing. Learning on the job, as it were.)
The difference is that today we have writing schools and classes and clubs and all sorts of ways to learn your craft. But the great ones - Heinlein, Westlake, Stout, Asimov, Ellison, Dahl and many others - learned by writing. A lot. Endlessly. Writing terribly and wonderfully and crazily and rationally.
They figured out pretty quickly that rewriting was a waste of time, unless it really was requested by an editor with money in hand. If a story didn't sell, pay attention to why (if a reason is given) and write something NEW to suit the editor's needs. Learn from your mistakes not by fussing over an imperfect story, but rather by writing something else even better.
And these guys learned to write brilliantly, so don't tell me this isn't a good way to learn your craft. For one thing, if you keep working on old stories, you will be stuck with a few immature ideas. If you have to keep coming up with new ideas all the time - rather than rewrite the old - you force yourself to become original and fresh.
Writing forward is a part of writing more. It's one of the best things you can do for yourself.
That said, I think in the modern publishing climate, you can't afford to learn on the job the way the pulp writers did. Even with pulp fiction, there were still rejection slips. They had editors. With self-publishing, you need to be the editor. Be the person who slows you down and makes sure the work is good. Rewriting is not going to kill you.
But I think we still have a lesson to learn from this. We need to write forward, keep going, get better at not just writing, but also at finishing. And when we rewrite, we need to have a purpose. We need to give ourselves those "editorial orders," and then carry them out.
But if there isn't a specific purpose, we need to keep going, push that envelope and become more brilliant and less perfectly ordinary.
Set to writing with more knowledge and skills in the first place, and you won't need to do as much rewriting anyway. But just be prepared that it will take a lot of writing to get those skills - so maybe do some rewriting in the meantime. But not too much.
Next we deal with Rule Four - You must put it on the market!
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Heinlein's Rule Number 2 - You Must Finish What You Start
This is a series on Heinlein's rules of writing (Intro here, Rule 1 here).
Finishing is a skill.
Seriously. Most writers don't seem to realize that you actually have to practice finishing a story before you get good at it.
I used to tell student writers that they had to finish ten stories before they were ready to start submitting. There would always be one student who would say "Well, one novel is more than enough to equal ten short stories, right? So I don't have to write ten...."
I would break it to them as gently as I could: it isn't the word count that gives you the experience. It's the completion. Anybody can blather out decent random scenes. It takes skill to pull them together into a cohesive whole. So if you don't want to write short stories or novellas, you will need to finish lots of novels to gain the same experience.
Furthermore, as writers we find it easy to scatter our attention. Shiny new ideas are much more fun than old ones. And yes, sometimes we need to jump around to set our creativity loose, but it doesn't count until you've turned it into a story. And it's not a story until you've finished it.
Otherwise you're just daydreaming with notes, as mentioned in yesterday's post.
So if you look at your body of work, and it's shorter than your list of things you haven't finished... get cracking.
If your list is long, you may have trouble making up your mind about which idea to tackle. So here are some tips toward finishing some stories on your to do list:
Tomorrow we take on Heinlein's most controversial rules: to refrain from rewriting except to editorial order.
Finishing is a skill.
Seriously. Most writers don't seem to realize that you actually have to practice finishing a story before you get good at it.
I used to tell student writers that they had to finish ten stories before they were ready to start submitting. There would always be one student who would say "Well, one novel is more than enough to equal ten short stories, right? So I don't have to write ten...."
I would break it to them as gently as I could: it isn't the word count that gives you the experience. It's the completion. Anybody can blather out decent random scenes. It takes skill to pull them together into a cohesive whole. So if you don't want to write short stories or novellas, you will need to finish lots of novels to gain the same experience.
Furthermore, as writers we find it easy to scatter our attention. Shiny new ideas are much more fun than old ones. And yes, sometimes we need to jump around to set our creativity loose, but it doesn't count until you've turned it into a story. And it's not a story until you've finished it.
Otherwise you're just daydreaming with notes, as mentioned in yesterday's post.
So if you look at your body of work, and it's shorter than your list of things you haven't finished... get cracking.
If your list is long, you may have trouble making up your mind about which idea to tackle. So here are some tips toward finishing some stories on your to do list:
1.) Let your creative self dither a bit, and then pick one at random. Draw lots. Use a computerized random choice generator. Flip a coin. Let your cat choose. But pick ONE.
2.) If the idea of finishing a story overwhelms you - if it's something that you're blocked on and you get performance anxiety - set a timer for a moderate period of time. Maybe fifteen or twenty minutes. Concentrate on that story completely for just that amount of time, and see what you can get done.
3.) If you MUST dither among several projects, set a timer for each project, and you must think only of the story at hand for that period. Come on, it's a short session. You can behave for that long. Do this a lot and you'll get stuff done.
4.) Give yourself a break with a brainstorming session. If a story is utterly blocked, then go to a coffee house or MacDonald's or the park - some place airy and relaxed - and sit with a notepad and write down all the questions you need to answer to move forward with the story. And then start listing possible answers.
5.) If nothing else, write some freaking haiku! Write a dozen of them. Remind yourself of the good feeling you get from having accomplished something, and train your brain to focus.
Tomorrow we take on Heinlein's most controversial rules: to refrain from rewriting except to editorial order.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)