What’s so important about search engines? Think about how you use them. When you’re looking for a new chicken casserole recipe, you might type in the search bar, “chicken casserole” and you’ll get more variation of the same dish than you’ll know what to do with.
If someone tries to find you, your book, your series, or anything else you’ve written, the most obvious initial search will be by your name. The number of posts you’ve published, how often your name is mentioned anywhere on the Internet will determine which page your name will first show up on the search engines and how many more pages will follow. Just out of curiosity I Googled my name. The first link was to my website http://www.martastephens-author.com/ . The next listing under my name was to this blog and the list of posts, reviews, interviews, excerpts, etc., continued for over 27 page.
So what are the key elements to getting a good position on the search engines?
Blog at least three-four times a week. The more you post, the better your chances will be of positioning yourself/your blog on the search engines.
When you start a new blog, aside from writing to everyone on your list of contacts (which is good), make sure your blog or website link is on your signature line of your e-mails and every post you writer other than on your own blog.
Another easy ways to draw traffic is to exchange links with other bloggers. In Blogger, you have two choices: A link list which is just that, a list of links to your favorite websites or a blog roll. The blog roll gives the link and a snippet of the latest post on that blog. I can't tell you how many Google Alerts I get every day because my blog has shown up on someone's website as a blog roll and someone has followed the link to my blog.
Whenever possible, provide links within your articles to websites, articles, interviews, etc. Here’s why. Most writers I know have set up a Google Alert for their name, each book title, the name of their series, the name of their blog, etc., every time his/her name shows up on a search engine, he/she will get a Google Alert. If they’re like me, they’ll follow it back to your blog and bam! You have a new visitor.
Here’s a Google Alert I received today for “Marta Stephens Author.”
http://letstalkvirtualbooktours.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/virtual-blog-tour-crime-mystery-suspense-novelist-marta-stephens-visits-fiction-scribe-and-joylene-nowell-butler
This was from a virtual book tour I did in December 2008 to promote the release of “The Devil Can Wait.” By the way, all the links to that tour are listed in my December 2008 archives here on this blog. The funny thing is, I’d never seen this site before which leads me to my next point.
Whatever you post, make sure it’s something that you won’t mind reading 10-20 years later, because once it’s “out there,” it’s there forever.
Thursday, February 04, 2010
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
2010 - Day 34 E-Book Wars: The First Major Battle
The following article was written by S. W. Vaughn, posted on Murder By 4 on 2/2/10 and reprinted here with her permission. Please go to MB4 to read additional comments.
One major concern publishers have latched onto regarding e-books is the belief that a low price point will devalue hardcovers, and by extension, their authors' work. Amazon, being a retailer permitted to set their own prices, has consistently refused to set e-book prices higher than $9.99.
On Thursday, the Macmillan president met with Amazon executives to discuss their new policy, effective in March, concurrent with the deal they've already signed with Apple for their new iPad device. Macmillan proposed to set e-book prices for new releases at $12.99 to $14.99, with the caveat that they'll lower the prices over time, and have e-books available at mass market paperback prices when the MMP versions are released. Amazon disagreed.
On Friday, Amazon removed the Buy buttons from all Macmillan titles on their site - including hardcover and paperback versions. There are reports that Amazon also deleted sales information and sample chapters of all Macmillan titles that were downloaded by customers onto Kindle devices.
What does this mean for the future of e-rights? The only thing that's clear at this point: no one really knows.
Here's agent Nathan Bransford's take on the issue.
Pro e-book author J. A. Konrath weighs in here.
And from a reader's perspective: Jane at Dear Author.
My take? I'm confused. Mightily. There's no question that things are going to change, but at this point there are too many possibilities to call the direction. Will the iPad, a device that has most tech-savvy e-book consumers feeling "underwhelmed" (as Sarah at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books spells out here), prove to be true competition for the Kindle? Will the rest of the Big 6 publishers follow Macmillan's lead, and either force Amazon to raise prices or pull their titles from the world's biggest online bookseller?
The only opinion I've truly formed so far is this: I don't believe a lower price point for e-books is going to destroy hardcover sales. I have several reasons for believing this. One: A good portion of hardcover sales are to libraries - and libraries are not going to replace hardcovers with e-versions. Two: Readers who make hardcover purchases do so because they like hardcovers. They want the durability, and even the prestige, of owning a "better" version of a book by their favorite authors.
And three: Those who read a lot of e-books, or almost exclusively e-books, do not buy and have rarely bought hardcovers in the past, and will not start purchasing hardcovers if e-book versions are not available. If you own an e-reader, chances are good that you read a LOT of books. That means you don't habitually spend $15 to $25 per title. Before e-books, you purchased mass market paperbacks. You were never part of the hardcover equation.
So, listen here, New York publishing and Amazon: STOP PANICKING. There's enough ice cream - er, slices of the e-book pie - for everyone here. It's time to embrace the future. Can't we all just get along?
***
So this weekend, two huge businesses in the publishing world launched the first offensive in the war that's been simmering over e-book rights, pricing and other e-issues ever since big publishers realized there might be something to this e-book thing. The combatants? Macmillan, one of the Big 6 in New York, and retail giant Amazon, unarguably the largest online bookseller. The issue? Pricing.One major concern publishers have latched onto regarding e-books is the belief that a low price point will devalue hardcovers, and by extension, their authors' work. Amazon, being a retailer permitted to set their own prices, has consistently refused to set e-book prices higher than $9.99.
On Thursday, the Macmillan president met with Amazon executives to discuss their new policy, effective in March, concurrent with the deal they've already signed with Apple for their new iPad device. Macmillan proposed to set e-book prices for new releases at $12.99 to $14.99, with the caveat that they'll lower the prices over time, and have e-books available at mass market paperback prices when the MMP versions are released. Amazon disagreed.
On Friday, Amazon removed the Buy buttons from all Macmillan titles on their site - including hardcover and paperback versions. There are reports that Amazon also deleted sales information and sample chapters of all Macmillan titles that were downloaded by customers onto Kindle devices.
What does this mean for the future of e-rights? The only thing that's clear at this point: no one really knows.
Here's agent Nathan Bransford's take on the issue.
Pro e-book author J. A. Konrath weighs in here.
And from a reader's perspective: Jane at Dear Author.
My take? I'm confused. Mightily. There's no question that things are going to change, but at this point there are too many possibilities to call the direction. Will the iPad, a device that has most tech-savvy e-book consumers feeling "underwhelmed" (as Sarah at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books spells out here), prove to be true competition for the Kindle? Will the rest of the Big 6 publishers follow Macmillan's lead, and either force Amazon to raise prices or pull their titles from the world's biggest online bookseller?
The only opinion I've truly formed so far is this: I don't believe a lower price point for e-books is going to destroy hardcover sales. I have several reasons for believing this. One: A good portion of hardcover sales are to libraries - and libraries are not going to replace hardcovers with e-versions. Two: Readers who make hardcover purchases do so because they like hardcovers. They want the durability, and even the prestige, of owning a "better" version of a book by their favorite authors.
And three: Those who read a lot of e-books, or almost exclusively e-books, do not buy and have rarely bought hardcovers in the past, and will not start purchasing hardcovers if e-book versions are not available. If you own an e-reader, chances are good that you read a LOT of books. That means you don't habitually spend $15 to $25 per title. Before e-books, you purchased mass market paperbacks. You were never part of the hardcover equation.
So, listen here, New York publishing and Amazon: STOP PANICKING. There's enough ice cream - er, slices of the e-book pie - for everyone here. It's time to embrace the future. Can't we all just get along?
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
2010: Day 33 - Research: How Much is Enough?
© Marta Stephens 2010 all rights reserved
Several years ago, while I sat in a college writing class, the professor instructed us to “write what you know.” What student/writer hasn’t heard those dreaded words? I remember thinking if that were the case, I would never write.
I have what most would consider a normal life; married, raised two great children, went to college, have hobbies, and have been gainfully employed all my adult life. But this could be anyone’s life. If I stuck to the “rule,” I’d have nothing to write about -- nothing anyone would want to read, that is. However, I do have a passion for a good suspenseful mystery, the page-turner that yanks you to the edge of your seat, grabs you by the throat, and leaves you breathlessly begging for more. “Write what you know.” The words popped into my head again as I typed the opening paragraph of SILENCED CRY.
The reality is, most fiction writers I know have never been involved in the type of situations they force their characters into (murder, theft, espionage, smuggling, kidnappings, imprisonment, etc.). So where does a writer start? Research. Simply put, he or she owes it to his or her readers to create a story that is absolutely believable.
The question is how much research is needed? The answer: As much as it takes to make the story plausible. The problem is that research is a two-sided sword. Not enough and the story will lack the essential truths needed to make it real. Too much and the story will sag with excess information.
A while back I read a book that held me until the last three chapters. After that, the bottom fell out of the plot when the suspended disbelief disintegrated into a convenient ending. The story wasn’t a police procedural, but a police investigation was implied. Yet critical evidence at the scene was overlooked which indicated to me the author had not thoroughly researched crime scene procedurals. Not that an entire chapter should have been dedicated to the investigation performed at the scene, but the oversight was glaring. A crucial piece of evidence that any crime scene investigator would have immediately bagged from a murder scene was never mentioned by the police. The omission felt like a ploy to fool the reader into thinking the guilty was innocent. It worked, but the tactic backfired because it also left this reader knowing the author hadn’t done his homework and rushed the ending. The real crime was that he told the reader who was guilty without giving the reader an opportunity to see the evidence mound and draw his or her own conclusions. Isn’t that what mysteries are all about? A gradual build up of suspense, peppered with clues and followed by a WOW ending?
This is an example where a bit more research, the addition of a few words could have changed the complexity of the entire novel and would have made me love the book.
Research doesn’t mean the writer must force or dump every bit of information he or she discovers into the story. Only a portion of the research, that which gives a scene meaning, should be used. This means that an author may read pages of text from several sources to ensure the accuracy of a single sentence to give the work a flavor of authenticity -- make it believable.
Several years ago, while I sat in a college writing class, the professor instructed us to “write what you know.” What student/writer hasn’t heard those dreaded words? I remember thinking if that were the case, I would never write.
I have what most would consider a normal life; married, raised two great children, went to college, have hobbies, and have been gainfully employed all my adult life. But this could be anyone’s life. If I stuck to the “rule,” I’d have nothing to write about -- nothing anyone would want to read, that is. However, I do have a passion for a good suspenseful mystery, the page-turner that yanks you to the edge of your seat, grabs you by the throat, and leaves you breathlessly begging for more. “Write what you know.” The words popped into my head again as I typed the opening paragraph of SILENCED CRY.
The reality is, most fiction writers I know have never been involved in the type of situations they force their characters into (murder, theft, espionage, smuggling, kidnappings, imprisonment, etc.). So where does a writer start? Research. Simply put, he or she owes it to his or her readers to create a story that is absolutely believable.
The question is how much research is needed? The answer: As much as it takes to make the story plausible. The problem is that research is a two-sided sword. Not enough and the story will lack the essential truths needed to make it real. Too much and the story will sag with excess information.
A while back I read a book that held me until the last three chapters. After that, the bottom fell out of the plot when the suspended disbelief disintegrated into a convenient ending. The story wasn’t a police procedural, but a police investigation was implied. Yet critical evidence at the scene was overlooked which indicated to me the author had not thoroughly researched crime scene procedurals. Not that an entire chapter should have been dedicated to the investigation performed at the scene, but the oversight was glaring. A crucial piece of evidence that any crime scene investigator would have immediately bagged from a murder scene was never mentioned by the police. The omission felt like a ploy to fool the reader into thinking the guilty was innocent. It worked, but the tactic backfired because it also left this reader knowing the author hadn’t done his homework and rushed the ending. The real crime was that he told the reader who was guilty without giving the reader an opportunity to see the evidence mound and draw his or her own conclusions. Isn’t that what mysteries are all about? A gradual build up of suspense, peppered with clues and followed by a WOW ending?
This is an example where a bit more research, the addition of a few words could have changed the complexity of the entire novel and would have made me love the book.
Research doesn’t mean the writer must force or dump every bit of information he or she discovers into the story. Only a portion of the research, that which gives a scene meaning, should be used. This means that an author may read pages of text from several sources to ensure the accuracy of a single sentence to give the work a flavor of authenticity -- make it believable.
Monday, February 01, 2010
2010: Day 32
February first. Can't believe how fast the weeks have flown by. In October, I told a friend of mine that I'd have "Shroud of Lies" edited and ready for her to give it a critique after the first of the year (meaning January). Little did I know the direction the story would take and how much would happen since that Saturday afternoon when I spoke with her. Edits, edits, and more edits. I'm nowhere near ready for anyone to read the manuscript yet. Just when I think I'm "done" I discover an interesting twist or find something else I need to add or change. Case in point, last week, I decided my opening line needed to be stronger so I changed it and asked my good friend Kim Smith to read it and see what she thought. "Not a hook," she said. And then she pointed out 12-14 insidences where I referred to the character's financial situation in the first nine pages of the manuscript. I can't remember the exact quote, but I believe she said something about beating the reader over the head with it. :)
My first thought was "Ugh" and to be honest, I was beginning to worry that I'd just muddied the waters with all of the changes, but I trust her judgement so I worked on the opening paragraph and the rest of the chapter several times throughout the course of as many days.
Eventually, I got it to work and for now, I'm happy. Is that the final edit for chapter 1? I doubt it, but I'm not concerned, upset, or stressed about any of this. I've continued to read through the remaining chapters and look for inconsistencies--so far, so good.
Writing is a process. I can't possibly know everything that's going to happen from beginning to end when I first outline a manuscript. I can't promise that my initial ideas for the plot will be good enough to continue throughout the book, nor can I predict how the characters will behave and change the course of events (only writers understand this). So, in order to maintain my sanity, all I can do is approach my writing with an open mind to change. Probably a good thing, because the one thing I can promise is that there will be many more before it's all over.
My first thought was "Ugh" and to be honest, I was beginning to worry that I'd just muddied the waters with all of the changes, but I trust her judgement so I worked on the opening paragraph and the rest of the chapter several times throughout the course of as many days.
Eventually, I got it to work and for now, I'm happy. Is that the final edit for chapter 1? I doubt it, but I'm not concerned, upset, or stressed about any of this. I've continued to read through the remaining chapters and look for inconsistencies--so far, so good.
Writing is a process. I can't possibly know everything that's going to happen from beginning to end when I first outline a manuscript. I can't promise that my initial ideas for the plot will be good enough to continue throughout the book, nor can I predict how the characters will behave and change the course of events (only writers understand this). So, in order to maintain my sanity, all I can do is approach my writing with an open mind to change. Probably a good thing, because the one thing I can promise is that there will be many more before it's all over.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
2010: Day 30 & 31 The Publishing Industry in 2010
What can writers expect from the publishing industry in 2010? I came across an article in Publishers Weekley titled "Better Luck Next Year" that looks at the top 10 publishing stories of 2009—and ahead to 2010.
http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6713316.html
http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6713316.html
Friday, January 29, 2010
2010: Day 29 Opening lines
That opening line has to immediately hook the reader. After spending several days reworking mine, I can assure you it's not as easy as these great ladies make it seem. Here's is a brief sampling.
"The Antietam Creek Project came to a rude halt when the blade of Billy Younger's backhoe unearthed the first skull." - Nora Roberts, "Birthright."
"She was apparently found in the linen cupboard, poor creature," Narraway replied, his lean face dour, his eys so dark they seemed black in the intgerior shadow of the hansom cab. - Anne Perry, "Buckingham Palace Gardens."
"I feel compelled to report that at the moment of death, my entire life did not pass before my eyes in a flash." - Sue Grafton, "I" is for Innocent
"The Antietam Creek Project came to a rude halt when the blade of Billy Younger's backhoe unearthed the first skull." - Nora Roberts, "Birthright."
***
"She was apparently found in the linen cupboard, poor creature," Narraway replied, his lean face dour, his eys so dark they seemed black in the intgerior shadow of the hansom cab. - Anne Perry, "Buckingham Palace Gardens."
***
"I feel compelled to report that at the moment of death, my entire life did not pass before my eyes in a flash." - Sue Grafton, "I" is for Innocent
Thursday, January 28, 2010
2010: Day 28 More Rewrites
I used to think the more experience I gained as a writer, the easier words would spill onto the "page." But during the last two days my edits have forced me to go back to chapter one to reworked my hook--the opening to the book (again).
I'll know when it's right, but right now it's far from where it should be. The problem is, that until I find a way of working out the recent issues I've created in this manuscript, I can't move forward to finish it.
As Scarlett would say ... "Tomorrow is another day."
I'll know when it's right, but right now it's far from where it should be. The problem is, that until I find a way of working out the recent issues I've created in this manuscript, I can't move forward to finish it.
As Scarlett would say ... "Tomorrow is another day."
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
2010: Day 27 Prose & Musings Got a Mr. Linky Award!!
I never thought of myself as such but I guess, like Kim I've fallen into this "prolific" category. With three blogs to maintain, (not to mention my pages in Facebook, Twitter, NING, and others) I post something somewhere every day.
I'm particularly proud of this blog because frankly, I didn't think I'd keep it up this long. Now that I'm into it, I find it motivates me to write, read, or research each day because ... I need something to blog about.
Here are the official award rules--do what you will with them (follow them to the letter, modify them, ignore them completely).
1. Pass this award to at least seven other deserving prolific bloggers.
2. Link to the blog from which you received the award.
3. Link back to this Prolific Blogger post, which explains the origins and motivation for the award.
4. Add your name to the Mr. Linky. (Will there ever be a "Ms. Linky"?!)
Here are my lucky recipients!
Joylene Nowell Butler http://cluculzwriter.blogspot.com/
Katheryn Magendie http://tendergraces.blogspot.com/
Joanna Campbell Slan http://joannaslan.blogspot.com/
Susan Whitfield http://www.susanwhitfield.blogspot.com/
Ellen Meister http://ellenmeister.blogspot.com/
A. F. Stewart http://afstewartblog.blogspot.com/
Where would I be without my friends?
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
2010: Day 26 - What's All the Hype About E-Books?
I'm not the expert, but here's someone who is. S. W. Vaughn wrote this for her Tuesday post on my other blog, Murder By 4. http://murderby4.blogspot.com/2010/01/e-books-whats-big-deal.html
Monday, January 25, 2010
2010: Day 25 - Going the Long Way Around the Barn For a Better Twist
To anyone following this blog, I apologize for sounding like a broken record but … I had another aha moment again today.
Here’s the deal, SHROUD OF LIES takes place in Los Angeles. Two of the main characters are protagonist, Rhonie Lude who is a PI and homicide detective, Joe Palermo. A body shows up dead and Joe is called to the scene. The victim is someone of interest to Lude—fine and dandy.
During the interrogation of a witness, I introduced a minor character (another police officer I’ll call Al) who for some reason I turned into a real creep in Lude’s opinion. I wasn’t sure if the scene would work, but I got a thumbs up from my crit partners because Lude’s interaction with Al (according to them) adds a great deal to her characterization. Unfortunately, that’s as far as I developed his character and Al never appeared in the book again. That bothered me—a lot.
After several days, I worked out a motive for Al’s existence and I was beginning to see ways that I could better merge him into the plot. Satisfied that the story was now going in the right direction, I moved on to the next few chapters which leads me to today and my new “aha moment”.
I feel as if I should say, “I was minding my own business when … “ I was working on a new opening paragraph for chapter 30. Lude uncovered a new development in the case and needed to go to Palermo’s office. I got it in my head that I needed to show her getting off the highway. Now, having lived in Los Angeles for a few years and having worked downtown, my memory of the area is still pretty clear. Still, I didn’t want to leave things to chance and decided to double check which off-ramp is the closest to the LAPD so I did a Google search of the area.
You know searches are. You go from one page to another to another and another. In the process I came across information that reminded me of the several police stations throughout the various parts of the city.
Aha! That was it!
That’s when it dawned on me how I could tighten the screws on this plot. I figured out that one of the missing bits of tension in this book was the history between Joe and Al. After writing a brief back story about these two men I discovered that at one time they used to work together until one of them was transferred to another station. But things weren't necessarily cordial between them. There were problems and issues of trust. Their conflict grew from disgust to hatred. One of them was ready to bring the other down until Rhonie Lude got in the way.
I know. The details are intentionally vague, but my point here is this: I’m in for more edits, but this bit of information just deepened the plot in a way I hadn’t imagined. No matter how well I'd outlined or planned out the chapters, I hadn't seen this one coming. And to think I wouldn’t have thought about it if I hadn’t been searching for the nearest off-ramp.
Here’s the deal, SHROUD OF LIES takes place in Los Angeles. Two of the main characters are protagonist, Rhonie Lude who is a PI and homicide detective, Joe Palermo. A body shows up dead and Joe is called to the scene. The victim is someone of interest to Lude—fine and dandy.
During the interrogation of a witness, I introduced a minor character (another police officer I’ll call Al) who for some reason I turned into a real creep in Lude’s opinion. I wasn’t sure if the scene would work, but I got a thumbs up from my crit partners because Lude’s interaction with Al (according to them) adds a great deal to her characterization. Unfortunately, that’s as far as I developed his character and Al never appeared in the book again. That bothered me—a lot.
After several days, I worked out a motive for Al’s existence and I was beginning to see ways that I could better merge him into the plot. Satisfied that the story was now going in the right direction, I moved on to the next few chapters which leads me to today and my new “aha moment”.
I feel as if I should say, “I was minding my own business when … “ I was working on a new opening paragraph for chapter 30. Lude uncovered a new development in the case and needed to go to Palermo’s office. I got it in my head that I needed to show her getting off the highway. Now, having lived in Los Angeles for a few years and having worked downtown, my memory of the area is still pretty clear. Still, I didn’t want to leave things to chance and decided to double check which off-ramp is the closest to the LAPD so I did a Google search of the area.
You know searches are. You go from one page to another to another and another. In the process I came across information that reminded me of the several police stations throughout the various parts of the city.
Aha! That was it!
That’s when it dawned on me how I could tighten the screws on this plot. I figured out that one of the missing bits of tension in this book was the history between Joe and Al. After writing a brief back story about these two men I discovered that at one time they used to work together until one of them was transferred to another station. But things weren't necessarily cordial between them. There were problems and issues of trust. Their conflict grew from disgust to hatred. One of them was ready to bring the other down until Rhonie Lude got in the way.
I know. The details are intentionally vague, but my point here is this: I’m in for more edits, but this bit of information just deepened the plot in a way I hadn’t imagined. No matter how well I'd outlined or planned out the chapters, I hadn't seen this one coming. And to think I wouldn’t have thought about it if I hadn’t been searching for the nearest off-ramp.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
2010: Day 24 - Quit Counting & Start Writing
One of the most often asked question I read from new writers is on the subject of word count.
The key is to not fall in love with your words. Doing so can stifle improvement.
How many words to a page? How many words should each chapter include? How many pages in a chapter? How many chapters in a novel?Don't worry about counting words or pages or trying to figure out how many chapters your novel should have before you finish the first scene in the manuscript. All of this will come in good time. For now, just sit down and write your story one sentence at a time. Before you're done, you'll cut more words from your manuscript than you think will be possible.
The key is to not fall in love with your words. Doing so can stifle improvement.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
2010: Day 23 - Today's Word Is "Blogging"
We all do it, some more than others. This Prose & Musing blog was the first one I developed, but to be honest, four-five years ago, I didn't know what to blog about and the big question was, did I have anything to say worth anyone's time.
Guess that's still the question today.
Guess that's still the question today.
2010: Day 22 Sifting the Junk Out of the Manuscript
Yesterday was an interesting writing day. My genre is crime fiction, my plots tend to be a bit complicated, but so is life. Can't remember at the moment, but isn't the ratio that one in ten people know each other? That's the base of my novels, that there are connections between characters--often times those relationships are unexpected and inconvenient for my protagonist. In the end, everything and every character mentioned in the manuscript has to have a purpose so by the time I get to the last third of the book, things had better come together or meet with the ax. To do this I keep a list of my chapters, give a brief description of what happens in each and the key points, clues, questions that come up. At times, I think of possible clues and slip them into the early chapters, but if something mentioned in chapter 12 isn't resolved or mentioned again 200 pages later, it's time to rethink my strategy.
Writing and editing for me is something like sifting the debris out of sand. Take a bucket to the beach and scoop up everything that fits into it; sand, rocks, sea shells, cigarette butts, candy wrappers. There are obviously things there that you don’t want in your bucket of sand, so you methodically pick the large pieces of junk and toss them out.
Now, empty the remaining seemingly clean buck of sand into a colander. Several more pieces of rubbish will be left behind while the smaller particles filter down through the holes. Toss that collection of junk and pour the remaining sand through a fine mesh sieve. This will leave you with exactly what you want, a product that is significantly cleaner than that first bucket of junk.
Writing and editing for me is something like sifting the debris out of sand. Take a bucket to the beach and scoop up everything that fits into it; sand, rocks, sea shells, cigarette butts, candy wrappers. There are obviously things there that you don’t want in your bucket of sand, so you methodically pick the large pieces of junk and toss them out.
Now, empty the remaining seemingly clean buck of sand into a colander. Several more pieces of rubbish will be left behind while the smaller particles filter down through the holes. Toss that collection of junk and pour the remaining sand through a fine mesh sieve. This will leave you with exactly what you want, a product that is significantly cleaner than that first bucket of junk.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
2010: Day 20 - Self-Editing
By now you've probably noticed I missed a couple of days and doubled up. That's because life happens. Sometimes between work--the full time kind that pays the bills, home, family, and keeping up with my other blogs--Murder By 4 and Novel Works, I barely manage to turn on my computer at night, get done the things I need to do that have deadlines, and check my e-mails. I wish I could write on a full-time basis, but that's not happening now nor will it any time soon so ...
By the way, stop by Novel Works today to read the interview with author John J. LeBeau.
To make up for yesterday's goof, here's a bit I wrote a couple of years ago on self-editing. Let's pray I get some time to do some of that today!
Since the release of my first novel in 2007, I continue to feel somewhat frustrated whenever I'm asked why I don’t give a complete description of my characters for the reader. Actually, I do, not in the form of a full narrative describing hair/eye color, height, weight, age, etc., but they are slipped in from the other characters’ POV; traits are also given via the character’s actions.
To make this point, authors Renni Browne and Dave King give the following explanation in a chapter titled Characterization and Exposition in their book, SELF-EDITING FOR FICTION WRITERS by (second edition). In it the authors wrote:
What this says to me is that my writing may be based and influenced by my life experiences (likes/dislikes etc,), but the reader will bring into the mix the experiences that have shaped his/her life (likes/dislikes, turn-ons/offs etc.). I wanted Harper to come across as a strong-willed determined character and thus focus on his actions, internal dialogue, his doubts and convictions, his emotions, reactions, etc., even his sense of humor. But his physical descriptions come from the other characters and ... and here's where it gets really interesting. Harper's love interest sees and describes him in a completely different way than does his work partner. Now we're getting into window characters.
So, even though I have a very clear image of what Sam Harper looks like, I’m okay with the reader imagining him looking like Sean Connery or whoever else they like, so long as it keeps them reading!
By the way, stop by Novel Works today to read the interview with author John J. LeBeau.
To make up for yesterday's goof, here's a bit I wrote a couple of years ago on self-editing. Let's pray I get some time to do some of that today!
***
Since the release of my first novel in 2007, I continue to feel somewhat frustrated whenever I'm asked why I don’t give a complete description of my characters for the reader. Actually, I do, not in the form of a full narrative describing hair/eye color, height, weight, age, etc., but they are slipped in from the other characters’ POV; traits are also given via the character’s actions.
To make this point, authors Renni Browne and Dave King give the following explanation in a chapter titled Characterization and Exposition in their book, SELF-EDITING FOR FICTION WRITERS by (second edition). In it the authors wrote:
“It’s often a good idea to introduce a new character with enough physical description for your readers to picture him or her. As with describing your settings, all you need are a few concrete, idiomatic details to jump-start your readers’ imagination. ... when it comes to characters’ personalities, it’s much more engaging to have these emerge from character action, reaction, interior monologue, and dialogue than from description.”And this:
“When you define your character the minute you introduce them, you may be setting boundary lines that your readers will use to interpret your characters’ actions through the rest of the book. But if you allow your readers to get to them in his or her own way, thus getting a deeper sense of who your characters are than you could ever convey in a summary.”When I developed the character of Sam Harper, I envisioned him as a man in his early to mid 30’s, slender, medium height, blond or light brown hair, definitely blue eyes. As noted, I don’t force feed the reader with a full-blown description in chapter one, paragraph one, so it was interesting when I started to get feedback from some of my friends about the character. The women who were in their 20’s to early 40’s pictured him as I did, however, those in their later years, had very different ideas of "the perfect looking man." One friend of mine who is in her late 60’s imagined him as a dashing Sean Connery in his days as 007. Interesting, huh? BTW who doesn't think Sean is to die for?
What this says to me is that my writing may be based and influenced by my life experiences (likes/dislikes etc,), but the reader will bring into the mix the experiences that have shaped his/her life (likes/dislikes, turn-ons/offs etc.). I wanted Harper to come across as a strong-willed determined character and thus focus on his actions, internal dialogue, his doubts and convictions, his emotions, reactions, etc., even his sense of humor. But his physical descriptions come from the other characters and ... and here's where it gets really interesting. Harper's love interest sees and describes him in a completely different way than does his work partner. Now we're getting into window characters.
So, even though I have a very clear image of what Sam Harper looks like, I’m okay with the reader imagining him looking like Sean Connery or whoever else they like, so long as it keeps them reading!
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
2010: Day 19 - A Sad Day For Mystery Fans
January 19, 2010
9:34 am
Robert Parker, 77, the author of the popular "Spenser" novels about a hard-nosed Boston private investigator, has died in Cambridge, Mass.
A spokeswoman for the Cambridge Police Department says an ambulance was sent to Parker's home Monday morning after reports of a sudden death. The spokeswoman, Alexa Manocchio, says the death was of "natural causes" and is not considered suspicious.
A publicist for Parker's publisher confirmed the death but had no further details.
Parker wrote more than 50 novels, including 37 featuring Spenser. The character was the basis for the 1980s TV series "Spenser: For Hire," starring Robert Urich.
A full obituary will follow at www.latimes.com/obits.
-- Associated Press
There are several sites blogging about him today. Here's one: http://mysteryreadersinc.blogspot.com/2010/01/robert-b-parker-rip.html
How sad to think that there won't be any new Jessie Stone or Spenser mysteries.
Monday, January 18, 2010
2010: Day 18 - Self-editing
I was off work today, so it turned into a quick-get-everything-done-before-you-have-to-go-back-to-work day. Needless to say very little writing got done, so I thought I'd post something I wrote a while back on self-editing. Here goes.
Nothing done to excess is good. We can't take all the "had," "that," and "ing" words out of our writing and expect it to make sense or flow well. Certain words should and can be avoided, but to arbitrarily cut all of the “no-no” words is just as bad as their over-use. The same goes for long stretches of narration or dialogue. If you over-do either of these, you’ll either exhaust your reader or put them to sleep.
Pace: Dialogue speeds the action, narration slows it. Tense scenes call for short/abrupt, snappy dialogue. After such a scene, give the reader a breather by slowing things down with some brief narration.
Passive: the subject of the sentence is acted upon by something else. “The bread was made by the baker.”
Active revision: “The baker made the bread.”
Past tense: when an action or occurrence happened in the past. “He went to the store three hours ago.”
“Rule” on using “had.” After reading up on the subject and talking to several informed sources (including English professors) I’ve concluded that, aside from the grammatical use of “had/has” in perfect past tense, my ear must judge how often to use “had” in a sentence before switching to an active past tense.
Example #1: "When Tom was young, he had overheard unsettling talk of the war. His father had served, but he had never admitted or denied killing another."
Granted, this is exaggerated, but technically there's nothing wrong with this sentence. All the events mentioned took place in the past. It is, however, cumbersome and all the "hads" make it redundant.
Revised Example #1: "When Tom was young, he overheard unsettling talk of the war. His father had served, but he never admitted or denied killing another."
So here's the unspoken “had” rule:
1. If the sentence makes it clear that the event happened in the past without using the word “had,” remove it.
2. Leave “had” in if its removal changes the meaning of the sentence.
Example #2: She reached for the small clay bowl from the kitchen table containing a mix of local herbs and other untold ingredients she had crushed into a near-powder consistency.
In this sentence, “she had” indicates an action taken by the character.
Edited Example #2: She reached for the small clay bowl from the kitchen table containing a mix of local herbs and other untold ingredients crushed into a near-powder consistency.
To remove “she had” from the sentences makes it clear the herbs were crushed, but it doesn’t show who crushed them. Since the character isn’t involved in the action, the reader would have to assume the herbs and other untold ingredients were 1) previously crusted by someone, or 2) purchased in the crushed form.
Both examples #2s are technically correct. However, this sentence is from my work in progress and the woman is a healer and engages in voodoo. For the sake of the scene, it's critical for the reader to understand that she is the one who made the concoction. In this case, #1 is the better choice.
Here’s a good explanation for the use of lie, lay, laid, lain (this I have to look up every time).
Lie = the present-tense act of reclining. We lie together and watch the full moon.
Lay = the present-tense act of putting something down. The stranger watches while we lay our blankets near the fire.
Laid = the past-tense act of putting something down (or slang for getting screwed in the past tense). For pillows, we laid our saddles at the head of our make-shift beds.
Lain = the past-tense act of reclining. Before leaving camp, we removed all evidence of where we'd lain the night before.
“The” in front of a noun: Eliminate “the” when it precedes a noun that could stand alone. Example: “The beams of portable spotlights shone like beacons on the beach below.” Can be changed to: “Beams of portable spotlights shone like beacons on the beach below.”
Tags & Beats
Tags: Stick to “said” and always place the tag after the noun or pronoun. To use anything other than “said” distracts the reader (“said” is invisible). Words such as growled, barked, scoffed tell the reader how the character spoke rather than show it through the dialogue and action.
Example #1: “What difference does it make that she’s gone?” John growled.
Example #2: “What difference does it make that she’s gone?” John said as he slammed the door.
Beats: Beats are a great alternative to tags. They show action and emotion. Here’s the same sentence using a beat instead of a tag.
Example: “What difference does it make that she’s gone?” John yanked open Jane's closet door, grabbed her clothes, and threw them out the window.
When you explain how a character said something, you draw the reader's attention away from the dialogue.
In "Self-Editing for Fiction Writers" by Renni Browne and David King (second edition) the authors have this to say about it:
Happy editing!
Nothing done to excess is good. We can't take all the "had," "that," and "ing" words out of our writing and expect it to make sense or flow well. Certain words should and can be avoided, but to arbitrarily cut all of the “no-no” words is just as bad as their over-use. The same goes for long stretches of narration or dialogue. If you over-do either of these, you’ll either exhaust your reader or put them to sleep.
Pace: Dialogue speeds the action, narration slows it. Tense scenes call for short/abrupt, snappy dialogue. After such a scene, give the reader a breather by slowing things down with some brief narration.
Passive: the subject of the sentence is acted upon by something else. “The bread was made by the baker.”
Active revision: “The baker made the bread.”
Past tense: when an action or occurrence happened in the past. “He went to the store three hours ago.”
“Rule” on using “had.” After reading up on the subject and talking to several informed sources (including English professors) I’ve concluded that, aside from the grammatical use of “had/has” in perfect past tense, my ear must judge how often to use “had” in a sentence before switching to an active past tense.
Example #1: "When Tom was young, he had overheard unsettling talk of the war. His father had served, but he had never admitted or denied killing another."
Granted, this is exaggerated, but technically there's nothing wrong with this sentence. All the events mentioned took place in the past. It is, however, cumbersome and all the "hads" make it redundant.
Revised Example #1: "When Tom was young, he overheard unsettling talk of the war. His father had served, but he never admitted or denied killing another."
So here's the unspoken “had” rule:
1. If the sentence makes it clear that the event happened in the past without using the word “had,” remove it.
2. Leave “had” in if its removal changes the meaning of the sentence.
Example #2: She reached for the small clay bowl from the kitchen table containing a mix of local herbs and other untold ingredients she had crushed into a near-powder consistency.
In this sentence, “she had” indicates an action taken by the character.
Edited Example #2: She reached for the small clay bowl from the kitchen table containing a mix of local herbs and other untold ingredients crushed into a near-powder consistency.
To remove “she had” from the sentences makes it clear the herbs were crushed, but it doesn’t show who crushed them. Since the character isn’t involved in the action, the reader would have to assume the herbs and other untold ingredients were 1) previously crusted by someone, or 2) purchased in the crushed form.
Both examples #2s are technically correct. However, this sentence is from my work in progress and the woman is a healer and engages in voodoo. For the sake of the scene, it's critical for the reader to understand that she is the one who made the concoction. In this case, #1 is the better choice.
Here’s a good explanation for the use of lie, lay, laid, lain (this I have to look up every time).
Lie = the present-tense act of reclining. We lie together and watch the full moon.
Lay = the present-tense act of putting something down. The stranger watches while we lay our blankets near the fire.
Laid = the past-tense act of putting something down (or slang for getting screwed in the past tense). For pillows, we laid our saddles at the head of our make-shift beds.
Lain = the past-tense act of reclining. Before leaving camp, we removed all evidence of where we'd lain the night before.
“The” in front of a noun: Eliminate “the” when it precedes a noun that could stand alone. Example: “The beams of portable spotlights shone like beacons on the beach below.” Can be changed to: “Beams of portable spotlights shone like beacons on the beach below.”
Tags & Beats
Tags: Stick to “said” and always place the tag after the noun or pronoun. To use anything other than “said” distracts the reader (“said” is invisible). Words such as growled, barked, scoffed tell the reader how the character spoke rather than show it through the dialogue and action.
Example #1: “What difference does it make that she’s gone?” John growled.
Example #2: “What difference does it make that she’s gone?” John said as he slammed the door.
Beats: Beats are a great alternative to tags. They show action and emotion. Here’s the same sentence using a beat instead of a tag.
Example: “What difference does it make that she’s gone?” John yanked open Jane's closet door, grabbed her clothes, and threw them out the window.
When you explain how a character said something, you draw the reader's attention away from the dialogue.
In "Self-Editing for Fiction Writers" by Renni Browne and David King (second edition) the authors have this to say about it:
Example 1:
"You can't be serious," she said in astonishment.
Explanation: "If you're like most beginning novelist or short-story writers you write sentences like these almost without thinking . What could be easier than simply to tell your reader how a character feels? ... It's also lazy writing. If you tell your readers she is astonished when her dialogue doesn't show astonishment, then you've created an uncomfortable tension between your dialogue and your explanation."
Example 2:
"Give it to me," she demanded.
"Here it is," he offered.
"I hate to admit that," he grimaced.
"Come closer," she smiled.
Explanation:
"To use verbs like these for speaker attributions is to brand yourself as an amateur--and to stick your character with an action that is physically impossible. No one outside hack fiction has ever been able to grimace or smile or chuckle a sentence.
Said, on the other hand, isn't even read the way other verbs are read. It is, and should be, an almost purely mechanical device--more like a punctuation mark than a verb. It's absolutely transparent, which makes it graceful and elegant.
Don't use speaker attributions as a way of slipping in explanations of your dialogue ("he growled," "she snapped"). As with all other types of explanations, either they're unnecessary or they are necessary but shouldn't be. Your best bet is to use the verb said almost without exception. Even when you use them (explanations and adverbs) with said (we said sternly), they tend to entangle your readers in your technique rather than leaving them free to concentrate on your dialogue."
***
Happy editing!
2010: Day 17 - Oops!
I was making such great strides with the edits yesterday that I totally forgot to post. It's just as well because as I was watching one of those criminal investigation shows late last night when I stumbled across an answer I was looking for in one of the scenes in SHROUD OF LIES. Not the exact answer but it made me realize what I was missing.
Earlier in the day, I had been reworking the scene between the homicide detective Joe Palermo and Rhonie Lude. They're discussing the evidence in a recent murder when Lude studies the photographs taken at the scene and those of the autopsy:
Earlier in the day, I had been reworking the scene between the homicide detective Joe Palermo and Rhonie Lude. They're discussing the evidence in a recent murder when Lude studies the photographs taken at the scene and those of the autopsy:
The photographs didn’t reveal anything new, nothing we didn’t already know. One bullet entered the body at a 24 degree angle from beneath the right jaw toward the back of his head. I grabbed the photos taken at the scene and thumbed through several of them. Every detail was just as I remembered it. I was certain Palermo looked at these shots several times so I couldn’t get past his frown. “What is it?”So, the question for me was, what is in or missing from those photographs that has detective Palermo in a quandry? One possible answer came to me last night a one in the morning. I just never know what will spark the next thought.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
2010: Day 16 - An Otherwise Ordinary Day
It's 11 PM and outside it's so foggy I can't see much past a few yards. At least we missed the ice storm we were supposed to have gotten yesterday. Not much writing done today, but that's okay. There were plenty of other things that needed my attention today.
One of which was my office. I hadn't seen the top of my desk for days and knowing I'd never look through the stacks of papers on my desk as well as on the floor, I decided it was time get rid of them. It was time to put the half dozen books back on the shelves, and toss out those notes that didn't make any sense to me anymore. I don't know why I let things get piled up. I guess I just get in a hurry. I always think more clearly when my space--my house is clean and uncluttered--I mean, there's nothing worse than trying to work on a scene when that nagging little voice in my head keeps reminding me I have clothes that needs to be put in th washer or the furniture needs a good dusting. Well, it's done and tomorrow I'll be an excellent day to write. :)
One of which was my office. I hadn't seen the top of my desk for days and knowing I'd never look through the stacks of papers on my desk as well as on the floor, I decided it was time get rid of them. It was time to put the half dozen books back on the shelves, and toss out those notes that didn't make any sense to me anymore. I don't know why I let things get piled up. I guess I just get in a hurry. I always think more clearly when my space--my house is clean and uncluttered--I mean, there's nothing worse than trying to work on a scene when that nagging little voice in my head keeps reminding me I have clothes that needs to be put in th washer or the furniture needs a good dusting. Well, it's done and tomorrow I'll be an excellent day to write. :)
Friday, January 15, 2010
2010: Day 15 & Hanging In There
Today was a good day--making good progress on the edits.
The best surprise today came through a Google Alert that led me to my publisher's blog. There I found out that BeWrite Books (UK) entered negotiations with Chengdu Righthol Media Co Ltd in Sichuan, China this week for translation rights to several BB titles for the massive Chinese reading market. To keep an eye on this development, visit their blog at http://bewritebooks.blogspot.com/
This may be the year of change after all. At least for this small UK press. Right before Christmas, BeWrite announced they had converted over 50 of its authors' published books (including my Sam Harper novels) into the appropriate e-books format and are now available on Smashbook.
Write Books Technical Director, Tony Szmuk in Canada, said: “We always considered ourselves ahead of the game, having made those PDF files available for computer screen reading since our launch ten years ago – but the sudden explosion in the popularity of ebook reading on the new portable reading devices, mobile phones, iPods and what have you over the past few weeks woke us up to the fact that we were in danger of becoming dinosaurs in the new age."
These are both big steps for this small independent press and frankly, it may just be the publisher to watch in 2010. To read the full article about BeWrite and Smashbook go to: http://bewritebooks.blogspot.com/2010/01/bewrite-authors-are-revolting.html
The best surprise today came through a Google Alert that led me to my publisher's blog. There I found out that BeWrite Books (UK) entered negotiations with Chengdu Righthol Media Co Ltd in Sichuan, China this week for translation rights to several BB titles for the massive Chinese reading market. To keep an eye on this development, visit their blog at http://bewritebooks.blogspot.com/
This may be the year of change after all. At least for this small UK press. Right before Christmas, BeWrite announced they had converted over 50 of its authors' published books (including my Sam Harper novels) into the appropriate e-books format and are now available on Smashbook.
Write Books Technical Director, Tony Szmuk in Canada, said: “We always considered ourselves ahead of the game, having made those PDF files available for computer screen reading since our launch ten years ago – but the sudden explosion in the popularity of ebook reading on the new portable reading devices, mobile phones, iPods and what have you over the past few weeks woke us up to the fact that we were in danger of becoming dinosaurs in the new age."
These are both big steps for this small independent press and frankly, it may just be the publisher to watch in 2010. To read the full article about BeWrite and Smashbook go to: http://bewritebooks.blogspot.com/2010/01/bewrite-authors-are-revolting.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)