Editorial Advice

Writing a book is hard, and it's not really something you can do in complete isolation. At some point someone is going to have to read it and if you're wise you'll look for objective and experienced advice to point you in the right direction.

But where to find it? Your first port of call for free advice is a peer review site. There are many and they are as good or bad as their members so you have to suck it and see which one is best for you. Any site that allows anyone to join will have the widest range of ability, and therefore the strike rate for good crits is going to be lower. Having said that, you can usually glean something helpful from any crit. Even a non-writer will have a gut reaction to your story that's useful to know. With a little time and effort you can build up a picture of how your book is being received.

And the great thing about peer review is you learn an awful lot about what works by reviewing other people's work. The problem with your own manuscript is you're too heavily involved with it and therefore can't see the faults. That isn't a problem with somebody else's baby. The flaws are much easier to spot, and reading critically teaches you to read your own with a dispassionate eye.

But peer review has limitations, and sooner or later you may want to find professional advice to help you reach the next stage. I've never paid for editorial advice, and I would guard against throwing your money at just anyone. With the cuts in publishing there are more freelance editorial advisors around than ever, and some are better qualified than others. Personally I wouldn't take advice from anyone who hadn't reached a significantly higher level in the publishing business than myself. Another wannabe, however perceptive and well intentioned, and cheap, is probably not good enough. So if you are tempted down this road, make sure you go for someone with a proven track record either as an author or an editor of published books.

Draft 3

I started this week feeling depressed. Not only did I have a pair of decorators crawling all over my house with ladders and jet sprays and scrapers, but I realised that my rolodex of excuses for not starting my third redraft of WIP had run out. So amid all the banging and spraying and scraping outside I had to open up my WIP and face the type face armed only with a dried up pool of enthusiasm.

But, an odd thing happened. I recently did a few crits - yes, I know I complained about crit sites in a recent post, but that just proves what a hypocrite I am - and found the experience oddly rewarding. Starting to work on Chapter 1 of WIP I began to relive that rush of excitement I remember of old. That feeling of power and control. Now, two chapters in, I'm getting drunk on it.

It's so long since I did any serious editing I'd really forgotten how much I enjoy it. At this stage anything can be changed. The drudgery of churning out X many words a day is past - now it's about the bigger picture. Does this work? Should this go here, or there? Chopping, changing, deleting, rewriting. Crafting. I LOVE it.

Mind you, I'm only two chapters in. Watch this space.

Crit Groups

So you write a book and you edit it to within an inch of its life. You get so sick of looking at it and thinking about it you want to toss it in the trash, but something holds you back. No - better keep it on the hard drive, just in case. A few months later you stumble across it and start reading. Wow! Not bad! Maybe I should get a second opinion on this.

So you join a critique group. Lots of clever writers to tell you what's wrong and how to fix it. Just the ticket.

So you post your chapters and await their responses with baited breath. Some may be complimentary, which gives you a boost. Some may miss the point entirely which makes you feel frustrated and upset. Occasionally someone is perceptive enough to see what you're trying to do and offers some solid gold advice on how to improve your work. But that's rare. The fact is, the crit shoot is a long shot at best.

I think the problem with crit groups is:

They are populated with a wide range of people - wide ranging in taste as well as ability.

They exist to find fault with a piece so people don't read something to appreciate its merits, ie the way a reader would read. If you study the first chapter of any novel you will find faults of some sort. It's inevitable. A reader reads to be transported but that won't happen in 'edit' mode.

Unless you beta read the whole thing, there is no way of gauging the whole story. Early chapters can only tell a very limited amount about the writer's ability.

Critters can become full of their own importance, in the way a lot of critics think their critique is more important than the art they are describing. Opinions can become entrenched, rules written in stone. Show don't Tell is one of the favourites, despite the fact many novels are chock full of tell. And bad advice from inappropriately applied 'rules' undermines a writer's confidence.

So, when dabbling in crit groups have a care and always remember a crit is one person's opinion and nothing more.

Crit and Chat

Just a quick post to say me and some of my online writer buddies have started a new free-to-join writers' forum. Crit and Chat is for writers who enjoy the company of other writers to..well, crit and chat. More news about this soon.

Internet Slapstick

Why do we laugh when a man carrying a ladder turns suddenly and knocks some poor unsuspecting sod into a man hole? Or when the business man slips on a banana skin and lands ignominiously on his behind? Part of us loves to relish the humiliation of others. Of course it's not at all funny when it happens to us.

This week every writers' board I frequent has been buzzing with talk about the reaction of author Jacqueline Howett to a review of her book The Greek Seaman. I'm not going to post links because if you haven't already heard about this you must be living in a sensory deprivation chamber and if so you can easily Google her name to find it. To summarise, she was less than gracious that the reviewer pointed out spelling/grammar mistakes in her work and after an increasingly bitter row told him to F*ck Off.

Had that been the end of it nothing more need be said. But the ensuing reaction of the writing community was on a scale of Japan's recent tsunami. A flood of self-righteous condemnation, both on the blog and on writers' boards and Twitter, sent this story into the digital stratosphere. It's astonishing that one little book could create such a buzz, and for all the WRONG reasons. No doubt Ms Howett has sold a few more copies of her book as a result, but I'm not really interested in her per se. The reactions of others is far more interesting.

Why on earth were normal decent people mobbing a complete stranger like this? Does it really matter how good/bad/indifferent her book is? With the market awash with books who cares what a reviewer thinks of this one? No, this wasn't about the book. This was pure slapstick. This woman who had the temerity to put her work out there for review then reacted the way all of us would like to react to criticism and made a spectacle of herself. If we'd done it we'd be feeling awful, but this was someone else so it was alright to sneer and snigger. And all that sniggering added up to a tidal wave of indignation.

I can't help wondering how many of those doing the mobbing have even written a book, let alone published one.

Why Was I Rejected?

One topic that comes up a lot on writers' boards is what to do if your manuscript is rejected. Should you keep working on it and try again or give up and start something new?

I've been in this position myself so I know how frustrating it is to get form rejections. At first they might be worded so nicely you think they are saying something good about your writing, but in time you come to realise they don't mean anything much other than the fact that the agent/editor doesn't want your book. Agents/editors don't generally give feedback because it's too time consuming and often people react badly to criticism. So always assume it's a form rejection unless it mentions specific details about your book.

If you are blessed with a personal letter - and I use the word advisedly because you should always bear in mind that no one owes you anything at this point so they're doing you a huge favour by taking the trouble - it may address possible areas that need improvement. This kind of feedback is like gold dust. Professionals working in the industry know what a book needs to get accepted and published, so you should take their advice very seriously. Of course, you may not agree with it, that is your right. After all, it is your book and only you can decide how you want the finished product to look. But if you want to reach a wider audience than your family, friends and critique group you would be wise to at least consider their opinion.

But what if you get no advice? That's a tough one because there are so many possible reasons for a book to be rejected. Unless someone tells you specifically what the problem is you could be wasting your time and energy on rewrites. Here are some possibilities:

1. The writing isn't good enough
This is the main one. You need to ask yourself some tough questions. Why do you think you can write a novel? Have you ever had any acclaim or praise for your writing from anyone other than your mother? If you're writing in isolation and not showing your work to anyone you can easily fall into the trap of thinking it's great when it isn't. It is painful to face criticism but if you want to go the whole distance and see your work in a bookshop, you have to get used to others critiquing your work.

There are different approaches to this. Joining a writers' group is a good start. You will get free feedback from like minded authors as well as learning a lot about self-criticism by critiquing their work. I've been a member of a few online groups. They also help you network and learn about the industry and perfect your synopsis and query letter. You will make some good online friends that way, which gives you a shoulder to cry on in tough times.
You can also pay for a critique from an editorial consultancy. These don't come cheap so you need to do some research before forking out for one.

Learning to take criticism is basic to being a professional author. Even if every agent and editor loved your book you can bet there will be some armchair critic out there dying to give you a one star review on Amazon, and some of these reviews are eye-wateringly vicious.

If this is your first attempt at a novel the chances are it just isn't good enough. First novels rarely get published because they are the ones we make all our basic mistakes on in the process of learning the craft. Most published authors have a few duds under their mattress. So you need to ask yourself how attached you are to this particular book, whether you want to spend a year or more reworking it or whether you'd prefer to start on something new. Remember it's never a waste though. You have cut your author's teeth on that book and everything you write from now on will be that much better.

2. The Concept is not good enough
Is your story original? Different? Intriguing? Or is it a thinly veiled rehash of a Bonanza episode you once saw? Have you researched what is being published in your genre? Is your book sufficiently similar but with an unexpected twist to capture the reader's imagination?
One of the toughest lessons to learn is no one really cares how well you can write. If you can't hook them with a great story they'll buy something else that does.

3. You are writing the wrong genre
What do you love to read? If it's romance, then why are you trying to write children's fiction? You should be writing what you love to read. And don't fall into the trap of thinking anyone can write a children's book/Dan Brown-type thriller/blood-and-guts horror story. You must know your genre like the back of your hand and then you must write something even better than the ones you love to read. It's not enough to be 'as good as'. There is already a Stephen King in the world so why would anyone want another one?

When (and when not) to seek feedback

Saw an interesting post on a writers' forum lately. Author had posted first 76k of her novel for review on a peer review site and after getting some feedback was now completely blocked and unable to continue with the project. She was asking for advice on how to get her mojo back, now that well-meaning critters had told her the plot sucks, the characters are weak etc etc.

I read it with horror because I can't think of anything worse than showing a first draft to anyone. What can it achieve? It isn't your best work so the chances are it isn't going to impress anyone. And what's worse getting an adverse reaction will put the kibosh on your creative muse as effectively a bucket of cold water on a pair of rutting mutts.

I subscribe to the opinion that we have two sides to our character when it comes to creation. The elemental force that comes up with the initial ideas is unconscious, from our dreamy undisciplined mind. When you're banging out the first draft it's that side you're tapping into. It doesn't care about logic or form, it's just raw material. And at that stage you must let it flow, not interfering with the process. Cast a critical eye over its output and you'll send it running for cover never to return. At this point in the process you must believe totally in the world you are creating, in the characters as they appear in your imagination. Start fussing about the details and the river will dry up.

The editing or left-brain side of our nature doesn't come into play until after the first draft is done and put aside for a good few weeks to let the dust settle. This is the heartless bitch (see Edie Tor if you don't believe me) who ruthlessly savages our work. But by this point we have the whole story down so it's just a case of tweaking and reworking. Our creativity won't be stilted because it's done its job. Only after we've exercised our own stringent editor is the book ready to go out into the world to be brutalised by someone else.

So you can see how much damage is done by getting crits too soon. I hope the author learns from her error, assuming she ever gets back to where she was before.

Crits - good or bad?

There's been a fair bit of talk lately about critiques and how to deal with them. It's a double edged sword and no mistake. You want people to read your work or you wouldn't be doing it, but you also want them to like it - or better still LOVE it - and anything less is a disappointment. When you get your first critical response the temptation is to throttle the bastard and curse them and all like them. If you've any sense you'll resist this urge and you'll find the sting wears off in a few days (or months, depending on how bad the crit and how sensitive a soul you are). Around that time some of the distasteful criticisms may start to make sense. Actually, you may think, that camel isn't necessary to the plot and perhaps six pages is a little long for the hero's closing speech.

We do need crits but sometimes they will hurt. It's human nature. If you care about your work, and of course you do, you won't appreciate some smart ass pointing out its flaws. That's what really hurts, of course. Someone spotted it before you did.

But if you stick with it you'll get better at spotting the flaws, which is the whole point of the exercise. That's why I believe critiquing other people's work is even more use to you than getting crits. It teaches you to look critically at a piece of writing, and before long you'll be doing the same with your own work.

In the end you have to be your own best critic. The better you get at this writing lark, the harder it is to find useful honest criticism unless it comes from a professional. But before they'll bother with you, you have to make that first step yourself.

Anyway, here's a link to a blog post by the lovely Nathan Bransford on this very subject. And being a pro he says it so much better than me.

Reading other people's work

I'm posting this article because it made me laugh and highlights the pitfalls of being a successful writer when everyone thinks they can collar you for a free crit of their manuscript.

Critics

Anyone involved in creating anything has to live with criticism. It's a tough one to swallow but it's true. For every eager fan there will be an unimpressed critic only too willing to demolish your ego with the wrecking ball of their scathing remarks.

I've recently read a few best sellers and as always took a look at the reviews on Amazon to see what everyone else thinks about them. It never fails to amaze me how two people can view the same book so differently. What makes one ooze praise gets the other's goat. I often come away wondering whether they read the same book at all.

I've never felt annoyed enough by a book to post a bad review. That's not to say I haven't been disappointed by plenty and given up before reaching the end. I have given fullsome praise at the other end of the spectrum. Not sure why it's easier to say nice things; perhaps it's to do with not wanting to seem like a bitter old crone. Some negative reviews do seem fuelled by a vehemence borne of more than disappointment. I sometimes wonder how many bad reviews are the product of professional jealousy rather than critical insights.

One thing in favour of peer review sites is the process of being reviewed teaches you to be philosophical about the subjectivity of other people's opinions. You need to be more objective about criticism and not completely destroyed by it. Because criticism is the name of the game if it's your aim to be published. Agents and editors will want changes, inevitably. If you think your world has come to an end any time someone doesn't fall in love with your precious manuscript you're in for a rough ride.

Let's face it. No one likes criticism. But if you're wise you'll take from it what you can. It might be an opportunity to improve, disguised as a slap on the face. Resist the urge to throw a tantrum, mull it over and then decide whether you agree or not. Not all critics are right.

Here's a humourous take on it.

What are critiques for?

Following on from my earlier post about writers' groups, I got to thinking: what do we need crits for? OK, I know, I know. We need crits to find out if our story is any good. But do crits really tell us? All they tell us is what a handful of people think, after all.

I think critting is useful because it helps us to see our work more objectively. That's a hard thing to do when you're stuck in your little garret scribbling away without another soul for company. The story is part of you; you give birth to it and like your beloved offspring it is too close to your heart to see its faults.

But it's not just what others think of our work that teaches us objectivity. It's what we learn from critting other people's work. That is ultimately more valuable because spotting someone else's flaws is always easier and teaches us to better spot our own. And ultimately that is what we need to do to become professional writers. We need to see our own flaws and fix them.

To Peer Review or Not

When you've finished your story, how do you know if it's any good? Received wisdom suggests joining a writers' group to get impartial feedback from your peers. I've belonged to a couple of online ones and they can be very helpful up to a point.

But the problem is the whole business is so subjective. What I love could be dead boring to someone else, and vice versa. I once tried to review a sci-fi novel and couldn't make head nor tail of it, but then I don't usually read much sci-fi so is the fault mine, or theirs?

And these groups are peopled by a wide array of levels of expertise. From relative beginners to, if you're lucky, industry pros and published authors. Not all the advice on offer is worth the trouble. And who do you believe?

There are definitely some unreliable types to beware of. The embittered wannabe has been writing his whole life and never published a thing. He sees himself as the angry young man, although he's now well into middle age, and the publishing world as a greedy heartless machine intent on destroying his soul so he would rather starve than compromise with these monsters. The pseudo-intellectual who writes "literary fiction" that is so dense and pretentious nobody but him can make any sense of it. The perfectionist who never gets past chapter three before going back to rework the start. Criticism from these types can do more harm than good.

And because of this diversity flame wars can break out on these sites over crits. Some people cannot take criticism and react as if personally attacked. It can get bitter and nasty. Writing is such a personal thing, it's hard to take personality out of the equation altogether. (I'm more a sulker, really. Too much of a wimp to start an argument.)

There is often a trend towards conformity in these groups. Strong characters set the standard and everyone else falls into line. Before you know it your writing is being influenced by this trend and you're losing your individuality.

So, I would say join online peer review groups and take from them what you can, but beware of taking any critiques too seriously. Ultimately writing is a solitary activity.

Just a thought...

This month's target is to finish the mystery I've been working on for two years. This latest revision started out as a proofreading exercise and ended up with some major plot changes. I came unstuck last December trying to write the synopsis, I think realising that the middle section didn't have enough meat on it and more was needed. It's meant introducing two new characters so quite a major overhaul. But I'm starting to see the end, so it shouldn't be too long now.
I was intending to get cracking on the comic novel but I'm letting that cook a while longer, although I have some ideas. It might end up being a play, in fact. I haven't decided.
It's not that easy to divide your attention. For a while I was writing one book in the morning and revising another one in the afternoon but I don't know whether I'd try it again. It takes me a while to get into the mind set of a book, and switching between them is a bit of a stretch. I suppose if you're working to a deadline you have no choice.
One thing I'm planning to include in the new story is a peer review group, because I think there's lots of scope for comedy in these crits. Here is a sample:

Hi Wetwarbler, here are my thoughts about your piece. I loved it really, you have a marvellous talent although perhaps not for writing. But anyway please take or leave this crit as you see fit; it is only my opinion and I'm sure you'll find someone who'll enjoy it sooner or later.

I loved the opening sentence. I could just picture him on the chimney stack in his wife's underwear, but would it perhaps be better to make his sexuality less obvious? Keep the reader guessing? Just a thought. Your description of the bun fight was a bit long at seven pages, you could easily cut it down to a paragraph, or even a sentence, or even cut it altogether. Is it really necessary at all? Just a thought.
I got a bit confused in chapter two. I couldn't help wondering why Colonel Molotov kept asking Agnethe to dance. Is that feasible in a life raft? And didn't she die in chapter one? Or were there two Agnethes? Probably best not to have two or more characters with the same name. Just a thought.
I'm not sure most people would get the Chaucerian references in chapter three, and they do tend to confuse the issue in the rape scene. Out of interest, have you checked whether it is possible to get eight people into the boot of a mini metro?

When to stop flogging...?

There comes a point when every writer wonders why they've done all they can to make something work and it just won't.

You write a scene or chapter, you know it lacks something but you're not sure what. You show it to a few people, or post it for review on one of the many peer review sites available. You get some lukewarm responses, usually contradictory on the finer points, but agreeing that IT LACKS SOMETHING. One reviewer says the pace is too slow, another there is too much description, another the characters are one dimensional, another the situation is unconvincing.

After a lot of soul searching and gnashing of teeth you get to work slashing and burning your beautiful prose and rewrite. You post it again, and guess what. The reviewers, though contradictory on the finer points, agree IT LACKS SOMETHING.

So now you have a choice. You can continue this process until:

a. You get so sick of it you give up writing and become a Trappist.
b. You get so sick of it you become beligerent and eventually get thrown out of the group.
c. You go mad.
d. All of the above.

But don't despair. There is another option. Sometimes a scene/chapter will not work. There are many possible reasons for this; you might be approaching it from the wrong angle, you might be too close to the subject matter, your story may not be worth telling after all. Whatever the reason, you have the choice to just walk away. Stop flogging this dead horse and get on with something else. It's a very important lesson to learn, and you'll never make it as a writer without digesting the important fact that not all the outpourings from your pen are worth giving the time of day.