Flying off in Weird Directions

Man, last week's post was weird and this week's post is even weirder. It's basically what I learned from cats, dogs and other animals. Because it relates to writing, or maybe it shows how truly twisted I really am.

I got the idea because I was sitting at my computer when my dog snarled. He caught sight of one of the cats who had crept up, wanting to jump into my lap. The dog, although not sitting my lap (because he's *way* too big) objected to the cat doing so.

However, the cat, being the unfazed male that he is, jumped up anyway. On the same theory, one supposes, as those little guys you see in bars who always seem to get drunk, get in a fight, and get the holy heck beaten out of them.

Because you see, after I thought about this incident, I figured out why it seems like woman often have cats for pets and men often have dogs. Because cats exhibit many of the same traits as men and dogs exhibit many of the same traits as women.

And a lot of men like women; and a lot of women like men.

So--back to the guy in the bar.
That guy--he's sort of like my orange cat, Psycho, who completely ignored the dog's growl and did what he wanted to do, anyway. But then, that's why we called him Psycho--he has no sense of self preservation--or any sense, for that matter.

So here are a few generalities. Like any good generalities, exceptions prove the rules.

How Are Cats Like Men?

• They are frequently aloof and patronizing. They show few emotions and often prefer just to be left alone to sit in their chair at night, watching tv and drinking a beer
• They rarely come when called (just where *is* your husband, anyway, when you try to call him for dinner?)
• They're independent and do what they want, when they want to do it (Honey, can you fix the back door? I'll get to it, dear...)
• They moan and whine for food but when you've got dinner ready on the table, it's not exactly what they want and they just pick at it
• They want affection when they want affection and it's basically a rub here, a rub there, and then they're gone
• They're up all night wandering around and howling while they expect you to be right there at home when they manage to drag their sorry behinds back to the house
• No matter what they look like, they think they're the best looking thing in existance and everyone really wants them
• They occassionally bring home the odd present, thinking it makes everything okay and proves they're wonderful, big, strong providers

How Are Dogs Like Women?

• They're always happy to get any attention at all
• They want to be with you
• They greet you at the door when you get home from work and they're eager to go out (particularly out for dinner!)
• They love rides in the car
• They'll eat anything
• They're affectionate
• They come when called
• They'll do their best to get you out of a jamb or protect you from the big bad police that just arrested you for drunk & disorderly
• If they get something nice, they'll bury it to save it for the future
• They can be very chatty
• They're eager to please and sociable. They're often the peacemaker in the family and are often the ones who find and attract new friends when you go out to places like the park
• They like to run around in pairs or packs, particularly when going to the bathroom
• The longer you rub them, the more they like it

Now that you realize how totally true this is, you can use it to your advantage in your writing, the next time you're trying to develop a character.

I mean, when I need to write about some cool hero, I'll just use Psycho, our little orange cat, as the model. We never wanted Psycho. We didn't go out looking for a cat. We just heard a lot of barking one day and found this little orange nutjob--er--male cat sitting in our dog wood tree, observing the dogs going insane because this cat had had the nerve to walk into the yard with 3 strange dogs and eat their food. And then, he had the balls to blithely come down out of the tree and glom on to us humans, not showing the least concern that the dogs totally hated his guts. He could not have cared less. Sort of like that little guy in the bar who is always getting beaten up and can't figure out why.

And this darn Psycho refuses to leave.

He also refuses to listen to anything anyone says or does. If he wants to sit in a lap, he sits in a lap and doesn't care if that lap is busy at the time or if other animals in the vicinity wanted to sit in the lap or are mad that he is sitting in the lap.

He's also toothless, has a split-scared lower lip, and has the worst breath on the planet. His tongue hangs out of his mouth like some kind of drooling, inbred, Deliverance cat. He's ugly, too, no way around that one. But does he realize it? No. He thinks he's the best looking cat around.

Sound familiar? Like that pot-bellied, 60 year old guy with a bad toupee riding around in a red ragtop thinking all the 20 year old babes are just dying to go for a ride with him? Oh, yeah, baby. Psycho.

Circadian Rhythms

You know, I'm not a touchy-feely, New-Age kind of person, but there is one thing I firmly believe: you have to listen to your gut. Sadly, by the time a kid learns to talk, s/he has generally started to learn not to listen for whatever reason. We're taught to ignore our cravings and our feelings. Too bad.

How Not to Get Fat
Eat what your body wants. That's right, just eat when you're hungry and stop when you're full. Eat what your body wants. If you ignore your cravings, you will end up eating more of what your body doesn't want because you keep trying to assuage that craving, but it won't work.

When I was a kid, whenever I started feeling a little sniffly, I had sudden, almost overwhelming craving for grapefruit (I know--the image of a 4 year old kid wanting grapefruit is weird, but true). Who knew that years later, doctors would discover that vitamin C is good for colds and that my craving for citrus fruit probably prevented most of the colds I "almost got."

For years I was also thin, until I "learned" to ignore cravings and eat what I was supposed to eat, when I was supposed to eat it. Mistake. Now I'm trying to unlearn bad habits and go back to eating what I want (really want) when I want it. If I want to just eat yogurt, then why shouldn't I just eat yogurt? If I want a steak, why shouldn't I eat a steak, particularly when I'm feeling run-down (well, duh, iron!)?

If you just listen to what your body wants instead of listening to what your head says you want, we might see less obesity. Or not. Let's not forget that you also have to exercise. The human body was not built for sitting around all day long.

How to Maximize Your Writing
Naturally, this ends up coming back to writing, although this advice will actually be true of any endeavor you wish to pursue. Write when you want to write. Pursue your activities when you want to pursue them.

Now, I'm not saying to just be a lazy bum and never write, or skip work to go fishing. We all have to earn a living.

However, I am suggesting that you look at the rhythms of your life. Is there a time when you are burning to write? Certain seasons of the year or times of the day? Then work out a way to write as much as you can during that period. During "off times," switch over to other writing-related activites. When you are in the writing doldrums, do your editing, judge writing contests, send out queries, plan out future novels, whatever.

For a long time, I struggled against the flow but after a couple of years, I've realized: I have a sudden surge of energy and desire to write in the fall. I can write perhaps two or maybe even three rough drafts during the fall. Then, as the weather turns warm in the spring, I struggle to write even a sentence. That is when I switch over to editing what I wrote in the fall, or even, the previous fall. I judge writing contests during the summer, as well, and attend writers' workshops. I take care of the business side of things.

True, I can do this because I'm still awaiting my first publishing contract from Cerridwen Press (my agent is reviewing it right now) and I don't have anyone breathing down my neck to meet deadlines, but here's the thing: I know my rhythm. So, I can write ahead. During the fall and winter, I can frantically write as many manuscripts as possible, knowing that I will then have something to edit and submit when requested. I can build up my "stock" of manuscripts. By doing that, I'm hoping to stay ahead of the game so that I can work in harmony with my cycles.

Ultimately, it is less stressful and more productive. I don't feel like I'm struggling for each word.

This takes some thought and trial-and-error to figure out. You have to relearn things that you may have repressed for years, but if it helps you, perhaps it is worth it.

Creating Sympathetic Characters

The ability to create sympathetic characters is a real talent, and one which I'm afraid I'm not so good at. Maybe because what other people consider sympathetic, I consider pathetic and manipulative. Unfortunately, it is the heroine and hero of your book who will ultimately sell it for you, and that is the difficulty.

Because I tend to ramble and know I will ramble, I'll let you in on another secret, right up front. In addition to the fact that selling your book depends upon how well you bring your characters to life (and not on the plot--believe it or not--unless your plot is something like the DaVinci Code), here is another consideration: the reader doesn't necessarily have to like your characters as long as they understand them.

The key is giving your readers enough of a glimpse inside the head of your characters to make them sink into the character, whether they ultimately like them or not.

I've been accused many times of creating unsympathetic characters and after careful analysis, I've realized that that phrase is not really what everyone means. What editors, agents and critique partners mean when they complain about unsympathetic characters is that you have not provided them with enough information to understand the character's emotional state and situation. They can't bond with the characters.

You can have a character who is really, really a terrible person, but you can get away with it as long as:

• You reveal the character's motivation
• The character's actions or dialogue are consistent with their personality
• The character's situation is portrayed well enough for readers to understand why the character is reacting in the way you describe

Within the first chapter of your book, and preferably within the first paragraph, you need to tell your readers who your main character is, what their immediate situation is, what their desires are, and what is stopping them from attaining their desired goal. Sure, that's a lot, but without it, you are risking manuscript rejections adorned with the phrase, "ultimately, I did not sympathize with your characters."

When I first got a rejection with the phrase "I did not sympathize with your characters" I was completely stunned. I ran to my local writing group and asked for help. They suggested showing the "good side" of the character by giving them a pet cat or some such thing. Have them caring for younger siblings or an ancient grandmother. Have the heroine be a victim of child abuse in her youth (apparently a much-loved tactic that Dean Koontz uses frequently).

Not a good suggestion.

This was terribly misguided advice on a number of levels, but unfortunately, I think others have gotten this advice because I see similarly manipulative "add-ons" in other stories. When you do something like this, instead of creating a sympathetic character, your reader just feels, well, manipulated. Lately, if I read a book where the heroine is just a drip and she's forced into a stupid situation with the hero because she's trying to take care of dear old grandma and 3 younger siblings, or she has some kind of a pet which doesn't really have any function in the story, then I feel like the author is just trying to manipulate my emotions and s/he thought I was stupid enough to fall for it.

Me--I ain't that stupid.

This method creates what I call false sympathy. It doesn't actually cause the reader to become one with the character, it just makes them feel sort of sorry for the character.

Our goal is to make the reader become one with the character. We need this, because in the course of our story, our character may say or do things which are not unsympathetic, because we all do things that show our flaws. It makes us, and our characters, human. So we can't just make our hero and heroine into "all things good and sweet" unless you want them all to be drips. We need them to do the occassional stupid/bad/not-politically-correct/flawed thing, but while they are doing it, we want the reader to submerge into the character because they understand the hero/heroine and understand why the character is acting in such a way.

You cannot accomplish this by blatant manipulation.

You can only accomplish this by letting the reader into the character's head. I have a very good friend, Charlotte Featherstone, who has totally mastered this. At the beginning of her novels, her characters are really, really flawed. I mean, they have terrible problems, including things like substance abuse which is normally something I would never sympathcize with. And yet, I love her characters, I feel so close to them and understand completely what is driving them.

She accomplishes this by sinking deeply into the heads of the hero and heroine within the first page or pages, explaining their situation, their goals, and exactly how they feel about it. She lets us into their feelings, all their frustrations, fears, hopes and dreams. Once you understand what drives them emotionally, it becomes impossible not to want to know what happens to them and how they find their heart's desire.

That's the secret. Not a pet cat or orphaned sister.

For me, because I tend to write mysteries and love characters who are more cerebral, it has been very difficult for me to portray these deep feelings, because the characters are actively trying to suppress them. I also tend to like and write characters who are not politically correct and who like to say things that could get misinterpreted. That's where it is even more important to give your reader the information they need to understand the character's situation and feelings. Particularly what is driving them.

One flaw I feel victim to when writing mysteries, is the notion that I wanted to hold back information about the characters situations and feelings to let them be gradually revealed and surprise the reader. The surprise was that the reader never got far enough into the book to care if I revealed the hero's motivation and background on page 87.

You can't do a background dump on page one, but you have to establish who the characters are, what they are feeling and why they are feeling it. If there is some tragedy in their past, you have to describe it in some form or fashion that will form a plausible basis for how the character is acting now. You don't have to reveal everything, but you do have to reveal enough to establish the situation.

Back to unsympathetic characters and not revealing enough about their emotional state.

I had one character, John Archer, who would say things to his grown nieces such as, "Don't be absurd, you silly child." This was meant in a gently mocking, teasing, kidding sort of way. In fact, a lot of my own relatives say things like that to each other (and worse) and it gives me warm fuzzies when they do. It makes me laugh. I love it when people do that mock insulting thing, because it means they are comfortable enough with you to know: you can take it, you can dish it out, and you aren't going to burst into tears. Let's face it, you're only completely polite to people you hate. So, I know they aren't really mad and don't really think I'm either immature, absurd, or silly--or maybe I have actually done or said something that is, but I know they are just teasing me about it. If they were seriously angry with me or trying to really ridicule me, the entire tone would change, and so would the wording.

Sidebar: I guess it's not politically correct to tease anyone any more, which makes me very sad. I keep having this pointed out to me as a terrible flaw in me and my characters. :-(

Anyway, tone is really hard to write. So although I wrote John saying that phrase, almost all the people who read it thought he was this terribly mean person and why would he suddenly say such a terrible thing to his niece to whom he has previously been so nice. They totally did NOT get this. So you either have to hit the reader over the head with it by saying something such as:

"Don't be absurd, you silly child," John said in a teasing voice.

Or risk having 90% of your readers sit back, aghast, at how your previously nice character suddenly turned mean to his nieces. The key is to let your reader know how the character means it. One would hope you would not have to hit them over the head with a sledgehammer to make them understand, but perhaps you do. Perhaps I think readers are smarter than that and perhaps they are not.

Still, I'd like to think a few out there get it and aren't insulted by it when they do get it.

Whatever.

So think about it when you write your characters. Don't make them perfect, just make them understandable.

Judging Writing Contests

This topic is near and dear to my heart for a number of reasons. Good or bad, writing contests are opportunities for both the writers who submit contest entries and those who judge. Of course, one must never judge a contest category one has entered--at least if both activities occur within the same contest, but this goes without saying.

Anyway, I'm a contest slut. That's right, I'll go with any contest who'll have me, although my sluttiness is about to be cut short if-and-when I finally get my contract from Cerridwen Press. But I'm actually entering contests right up until the time I sign that contract. And I'm judging contests, other contests (not the ones I'm entering).

Why Judge a Writing Contest?
Because you will learn more about what works and what doesn't work by judging other writers' work, than you ever will just staring at your own work (or work already published). We can never recognize our own faults, but it is sure easy to recognize other folks' faults. And once you realize what doesn't work elsewhere, you have to go back and be brutally honest with your own writing and see if you are doing the same thing.

Caveat: If you feel your writing is so good that you just don't have any of the flaws you see in other people's writing, then don't even bother to be a judge. You won't be a good judge and you won't benefit from judging. Good judges always learn from the experience, just like good teachers learn as much from their students as their students learn from them. The very act of teaching forces you to learn just like the very act of judging forces you to learn. Take advantage of it.

Here are the steps to getting the most out of judging and coincidentally being a good judge.

• You can't take points off if you cannot articulate what the problem is. Nope, sorry, I don't care if the story was the worst thing you've ever read in your life. You can't take points off if you can't say why it was the worst thing you ever read. And I mean specifics. Is the character flat? Why? Not enough description? Too much description? Did the dialog not go with the character as described? What was wrong? This will help you, as a writer, identify problems well enough to be able to find and correct them in your own work, and it will help the contest entry writer to fix what is wrong. They paid good money for the contest in the hopes they could fast track to some editor or agent who is judging the contest finalists, but if they don't get to the final round, they deserve to know exactly why.
• Give them a solution to the problem(s). You can, of course, offer nothing but criticism, but you are shortchanging both the writer and yourself. While it is highly doubtful that the writer will implement any solution you recommend, it may spark an "A-HA!" moment for them, or at the very least serve as a starting gun to get them moving. For you as a judge, this is an opportunity for you to think of ways to fix a flaw. Sooner or later, you're going to be on the receiving end of a revision letter, so the more your flex your revision muscles, the stronger they will be when you have to row the same leaky boat. It may also help to make your criticism seem less negative and harsh, and more inspirational. Well, maybe not - I don't know of any criticisms that don't seem negative and harsh, but at least you will have tried and the writer will know you have tried.
• You'll realize why editors and agents only have to read the first few lines. This isn't really so helpful for the recipient of your criticism, but after judging a few contests, you will begin to realize why agents and editors can tell so quickly if a specific manuscript is going to be worth their time or not. I know this sounds discouraging, but it is so true. It is also a mostly qualitative property that is excrutiatingly hard to identify. Mostly, I think of it in terms of writing maturity. Works that are published, and manuscripts which are publishable seem...mature. The writing is more polished, the characters seem more real, the descriptions mesh well with the story and the dialogue is true. It's smooth. You actually have a hard time pulling yourself far enough out of the story to actually DO any criticism. Each time you read a word, a phrase, a sentence, you sink back into the characters and situation and become unaware of the writing. Unfortunately, 90% of what you see in contests just isn't mature. It doesn't pull you into the story. You are always aware of the writing as opposed to sinking into the story. The characters seem silly and childish, like plastic Barbie and Ken dolls, and the writing constantly jars you out of the story. The hard part is, once you begin to recognize this, you get really, really paranoid about your own work and your ability to write smoothly and NOT lose your reader at the first sentence. There's nothing I can do about paranoia, I'm afraid.
• Don't take off points for problems with facts. Point them out to the writer, but be aware that you may be the one who is wrong--not the writer. Or you may both be wrong. Most writers do at least some research. If you think the facts are wrong, just make note of it on the entry and indicate you think it is wrong, and leave it at that. Most contests do not even give points for factual exactitude--this is fiction, after all, so for God's sake, don't take off points in some random place just because it makes you feel vindicated. Some historical categories do have maybe one judging area for historical accuracy, and this is where you can, maybe take off 1 or 2 points, but as I said, you'd better be absolutely, positively sure. I've seen judges indicate that the War of 1812 never happened and that the writer shouldn't "make up wars like this". I've had judges tell me Apollo was the Greek Sun God, when in actual fact it was Helios (and Apollo just got mixed up with Helios later). So like I said, you might indicate you think something is wrong, but I, personally, wouldn't take off points unless it is something like a story taking place in 1804 and the characters are constantly saying things like: "Okay, dude, catch you later!" or "Can you just fast-forward that and get to the relevant point?"

That's it for being a judge. I'd say to be nice about your criticism, but I'm assuming you're making an honest attempt to be a good judge and not just make snide remarks at the expense of the writer because it makes you feel good to show how much smarter you are and how irritated you are with stupid writers.

Why Enter A Writing Contest?

After reading the above, you are probably thinking contests are just way too hard on the ego and way too subjective to enter. Except they are learning opportunities. Or publishing opportunities.

• You may actually have a publishable entry. Yes, it does happen. In every category of a contest, SOMEONE (usually three someones) has an entry that finals. And some agent or editor will read it. And often, that agent or editor will request the full manuscript! I would note, however, that more often than not, requests for fulls seem to come from editors at the huge conglomerate known as Harlequin. Just a note.
• You may need help. Wouldn't you rather find out about your flaws BEFORE it goes to an agent or editor and gets rejected? Sometimes, even with critique partners, some flaws creep through. I can't tell you how many really stupid mistakes I've made that I didn't see until a judge pointed them out to me. (See the Apollo/Helios item above? Well, that came about because I stupidly put in that Mercury was the Sun God, which was NEVER the case but I had a brain fart and it slipped by BOTH me and my critique partner and it took a contest judge to point it out to me. And thank GOD they did before I sent the manuscript to anyone important and looked like a total idiot. Of course, the judge also got it wrong, but we were both wrong in this case.) I've also had cases where I thought it a scene or situation was perfectly reasonable and clear, only to find that anyone else reading it would think something entirely different. That happens to me a lot with characters I think are being funny and others think are just mean. I guess I'm weird.
• You will become the QUEEN (or KING) of Ruthlessness. If you enter enough contests, you will figure out that your entry must CONFORM. You will discover how to format it properly and make sure your hero and heroine meet within the first couple of chapters, preferrably as early as possible. Maybe even on page 1. You will cut chapters 1-3 just so they DO meet within the first few pages (and you'll find out that, hey, maybe that really is a better place to start). You will learn to create chemistry between your characters. This last point is a sore one with me because I prefer subtle/realistic chemistry, while most romance contests will require a somewhat over-the-top throbbing body parts kind of chemistry, but here's the thing... If your writing is mature enough, then they will forget they like "lurid" and they will think you are doing it beautifully even when it's really subtle. And that is all it takes. You need to be ruthless with your writing if you are ever going to publish. It is what will let you delete that wonderful, but utterly pointless scene/phrase/dialog that needs to be deleted even though you think it is the best piece of writing you have ever done. If it doesn't advance the plot, reveal the character, or otherwise work for the story, it has to go. If you pay attention and go through the rigors of contests, you will learn this (or just not final). It can be a hard and harsh lesson, but if you are determined to publish, this is one way to hone your skills. In fact, I was never very good at editing until I started really "polishing" stuff for contests and I wanted something which in the original draft was 75 pages fit the 50 page entry limit. You'd be amazed at how much crap can creep into your writing. Even good crap is still crap and it has to go. Hone your skills.

So, that is really the long and short of contests.

The Value of Software for Writers

I admit it, I'm a gadget-a-holic. Maybe it's because my day job deals with computers, or maybe my day job deals with computers because I like gadgets, but I do like gadgets. I like all the latest little cell phones, Ultra-Mobile PCs (UMPCs), handhelds, laptops, desktops, and so on. If I had an unlimited budget, I'd probably have to buy one of those steel buildings for all the gadgets.

And along with gadgets come...software. I love software. I buy all kinds of software which I ultimately don't use, but wanted to play with anyway, and that's what this article is about. Unless you are fabulously rich thanks to all those bestsellers you have published, I actually have one piece of advice: don't buy software for writers.

Sounds odd, doesn' it? Particularly since I just bought ANOTHER package today, and I quite like it. However, in point of fact, other than giving me another excuse to mess around with something and avoid editing the paranormal manuscript I have sitting here needing to be edited, most writing software really is just a waste of time and money.

Sort of.
But not really.
Well, no, really. Most writing software is just a way for you to give your money to someone else.

Here's the long and short of it: writing software just gives you a framework for you to fill in your story information. Sadly, you still have to write and edit your story. So you can save your money and create your own story framework with the questions you need for your story, in whatever word processor or other software you already have. You don't need the software to do that.

If that is the case, why do I continue to buy writing software? Oh, I don't know. Actually, I do know. It's because I keep hoping the software will be the magic bullet. If I fill out all the little blanks, the light will go on, the heavens will break open, angels will appear, I'll write a brilliant manuscript, and I will be published.

This will never happen.
If I manage to write a brilliant manuscript, it is because I put in the work and sweat to improve my skills and actually write a brilliant manuscript. Whether it gets published or not is an entirely different matter and in no way relates to the use or purchase of any software.

Software might help, however.
Oh, NO! Aren't I contradicting myself? Didn't I just laboriously go over in excrutiating detail how software will not create a brilliant manuscript for you? Yes, I did. However, there is always a flip side and this is why writing software continues to sell and continues to be written about in writing magazines (and blogs).

I doubt writing software will be of much use or relevance to authors who are already published. They know what they are doing, they are doing it, and they are doing it well (or at least well enough).

However, if you are just starting out and having problems, and you really, really like messing with software, you might think about writing software. I still think it may be a waste of time and you would be better of going to some classes and getting character/story grids such as those from the Creating Story Magic classes, however...

• So, you have some disposable income and you like software.
• You are writing, but unable to get anything published. You seem to be having problems with character developement, and getting all the story elements in place.
• You're not sure what the story elements are that you should be getting into place.
• You have problems organizing things and just need some kind of framework

Given those factors, you might consider writing software. You see writing software does offer a few advantages. If you use it, it will force you to learn all about those nasty little things such as: turning points, conflicts, who is in what scene and why, does the scene increase or resolve the conflict or is it useless? Things like that.

Those "things" can be pretty handy things to learn about. Software will force discipline into your story magic-making process and help you realize why you may have a sagging middle (the scenes don't increase/resolve any conflicts) or where you have gone astray. However, you will have to use the software in order to learn what it has to offer.

Then, once you learn it, you pretty much stop using the software because you don't need it anymore. Entering all the story details you have to enter gets to be a major pain in the patootie and after a few stories, I can almost gaurantee that you will stop using whatever software you are using and just do it with a simplier grid or two in your wordprocessor, and then go on and write your story. Or use index cards. Or a scroll (that's what I do). Or whatever.

Software can be a data entry nightmare, but it will teach you what the critical story elements are, how to identify them, and how to put them together. If you can stand it.

Software also has a very steep learning curve.

Now, since you've come this far, I have the following information for you. I've used the following software and here are my comments. Take them for what they are worth.

Power Structure
Very expensive and a very high learning curve. However, this is the product that will teach you (through blunt force trauma--or so it feels) how to avoid a sagging middle. It makes you enter WHY you have each scene and what it does for the story. You can plot the escalating tension and/or see if you don't have any escalating tension. It will teach you the elements of a story, broken down in three parts (3 acts). You can create plot points (even color coded) broken into chapters. You can document everything there is to know about your characters PLUS what their journey through your story is, where they start out and where they end up. What they learn along the way. The hero's journey as well as the traditional characters that help or impede the hero's progress.

Technical note: After using it for a while, it started locking up on me. Data entry also got to be a major pain in the patootie. It was hard to copy or include characters from one manuscript into another, and since I often have "continuing" characters, this was a problem for me.

Power Writer
This is the baby sister of Power Structure. It is easier to use with less of a learning curve, but what you will not get is the disciplined approach to "does this plot point/scene really add to the story and escalating tension or is it a waste of time" kind of help. It is less expensive. Because it is easier to use, you may use it longer than you would use Power STructure, but since all these products are crutches, eventually, you will probably find you don't use any of them because you have internalized what they have to offer.

Power Tracker
I bought this to track submissions because I didn't want to develop my own database.
This is really for screen writers. It has a database of contacts for movie producers and the like and it is IMPOSSIBLE to get rid of all this junk if you are not interested in writing screen plays. It was moderately expensive (under $100) but like Power Structure, after a while, it started locking up on me. I grew so annoyed with the built-in database of contacts I didn't care about that, I finally wrote my own database to track my submissions. Then I got an agent and I no longer worry about tracking submissions. She does that.

So, if you are not writing screen plays, I would not purchase this. Just track your submissions in a spreadsheet or document or database or whatever, but this is way overkill. Besides having pre-populated junk that you might not want. And it finally crashed on me and wouldn't come back up, so good riddance.

Anthemion's Writer's Cafe
Okay, this is sort of like a much cheaper and easier to use version of Power Structure. I just bought it today (I told you I have this addiction, didn't I?). It's under $50 U.S. It really is cute. It doesn't force you to learn all the elements of a story (3 Act structure, escalating tension, etc) the way Power Structure does, but it is very well organized so the learning curve isn't so steep. It's got places for a Journal, Notebook, Scraps and Storylines. You can even keep track of web sites and pictures. Within the Storyline part, you can create your character sketches and you enter your plotlines with little scenes/plot points for each plotline. This is similar to PowerStructure, but it does not force you to identify how this relates to the tension you are trying to create. This simplicity, then, is both good and bad. It is good because there is less data entry and it is quicker to just develop your story idea and go one.

In many ways, Writer's Cafe and Power Writer are very similar products.

However, since you don't really need software specifically to write up character bios and an outline of your plot, well... That's the problem. PowerStructure is triple the price and harder to use, but it will force you to identify all the necessary and critical story elements so that you will learn where you may be going wrong. You will learn discipline. You will not be so disciplined with Writer's Cafe, nor will you learn anything about the 3-act structure, escalating tensions, hero's journey, and so on. But it's more fun and easier to use. It's more likely that you will continue to use it. We'll see if I have the same kinds of technical problems when I've plotted out a couple of manuscripts in it.

So.
So, those are the products I have played with.

So, my final conclusion is that most software for writers is just a way to give your money to someone else. None of them do things you couldn't do yourself, fairly easily with a few wordprocessing documents and a regular folder structure on your computer. I have a master folder for a project and then within that I have subfolders for:

• Communications (e.g. letters to agents, etc)
• Contests (if I submit it to any contests)
• Critiques, with subfolders for source chapters and assimilated critiques
• Reference material
• Synopses
• Background (character sketches, etc)

I save off web pages and any information I scan or use in my book in the reference material folder. The other folders are self-explanatory (I hope). All of these folders contain what these software products try to make you enter in them.

I'm seeing if I find any lasting value in Writer's Cafe. I actually bought it because I do the National Novel Writing Month challenge each year, to write a 50,000 word novel in one month, and I find that I can only write 50,000 words in a month if I have the manuscript plotted out, first. So, I'm thinking this software may be a conveniant way to do that.

However, you should see from that, that I am no longer looking for software to "improve my writing." PowerStructure taught me the elements I needed to know, as well as teaching me that software cannot write a novel for you. It was an expensive lesson.

These days, I'm just looking for organization. Of any kind.

And of course, to feed my software addiction.

Who me? Artistic Integrity?

You know, I never figured I actually had any artistic integrity, because I figured I would do whatever it took to publish my manuscripts, but I'm finding out this isn't exactly true. I'm still waiting for a contract from Cerridwen Press, who I hope will publish my first Regency romance, so I'm making a lot of assumptions such as thinking they might also publish some of my other manuscripts.

However, during the last few days I've realized that even if they don't, I will get my manuscripts published, one way or the other. Not the horrible first ones I wrote, but the ones which are good.

And you know what? I don't care if they aren't published by a big publishing house, or if they never come out in paperback or hardcover. I don't care if I can't talk about my published work in our Christmas letter this year or any other year. Somehow, I've discovered I actually have artistic integrity. I'm not willing to write purple prose to get published. While it may be true that my writing isn't great or maybe even good, I refuse to write the kind of schlock I despise, just because it is what seems to get published.

That is another interesting conclusion I've come to over the last few days. I've been scanning other blogs by romance writers and reading their articles about adding sensual elements and writing love scenes, and I'm combing through their examples and what do I find? That the examples I like are the ones which these countless other authors use as the "bad" writing lacking in sensual elements. I've discovered I like a lean style without a lot of throbbing members and heaving breasts and flashing green eyes. I don't like the flowery, sensual love scenes. They annoy the heck out of me. Maybe if they were a little more sweaty and realistic they wouldn't be so bad--in fact I've read a few which aren't so bad--except all the other romance authors use THOSE as examples of what to avoid doing.

Anyway, this has all rather been a shock to me because I've been trying to write romance novels. I've been a member of the Romance Writers of America since its inception over 20 years ago. I like happy endings where the hero and heroine are together and there is the hope (fantasy though it may be) of a bright future together. But I don't like the style of writing most associated with this genre. I like styles more associated with science fiction and mysteries, which has lead me down some very tortuous paths of late.

All the advice to "write the novel of your heart" makes me gag (do I have a heart?) but much as I hate to admit it, I think this is sage advice. Maybe not "of your heart" but a story that you would like to read. Unfortunately, that is where artistic integrity comes into play, because you may find that the novel of your heart does not fit within the current marketing schemes of the big houses.

Or you could be lucky and your work may fit just fine and you'll be published, in which case, get the hell out of here and leave me alone. Sorry. I digress.

You know what? When I finally faced this fact, and found an e-publisher who might be interested in publishing what I write, just the way I write it, I discovered that I no longer cared if I couldn't play in the same field as the big boys. Yes, e-publishers are not the same as traditional publishers. Yes, they do not have the best of reputations. Yes, a lot of what they publish is pretty awful and it's pretty obvious why a "real publisher" did not elect to publish the manuscript. Yes, they do not pay beans and you're lucky if you make $300. Yes, you may not be "qualified" in some writers organizations to be listed as a published author. Yes, you probably aren't really a published author, because you're more like a self-published author who managed to get someone else to add his or her manuscript to their webpage and charge people for downloading it.

Yes, yes, yes. Yes, I know I somehow didn't measure up.

So what.
Because what I've realized is that a tremendous weight has been lifted from my soul when I decided to stop trying to write things the traditional publishers might want. For the first time, I'm thinking I'm going to write things I WANT to write. I'm going to write all those stories burning in the back of my mind that I had put off because I knew the traditional publishers wouldn't be interested in them. If I can't even get an e-publisher interested, that's fine, too. I can publish them myself through my website. Pretty much anyone can get a copyright and be their own e-publisher if they want to badly enough.

I want to write romantic mysteries set during the Regency period. I want to develop my Regency world around the Second Sons Inquiry Agency (Discreet Inquiries) and let the Archer family go as nuts as they want. I want my stories to be funny and twisted, and I want the romance to develop naturally without a lot of heaving bosoms and stiff man-roots. I really don't care if the Regency Historical has turned into a genre that spends more time on getting characters into bed than on the story--I don't want to read that, and I'm not going to write it. I stopped reading Regencies after gothics, Heyer, Coffman, and the traditional Regencies bit the dust.

My manuscripts are going to have (and do have) sudden twists, even improbable escapades, because I want them to be amusing, fresh and fun. Some may even be sad or touch on difficult subjects, such as The Left-Handed Wife, which involves the sad death of a gay man trying to disguise his sexual orientation during the Regency period through a very public involvement with a young woman, who is unjustly accused of his murder.

Scary though it may be, I've discovered I do have artistic integrity, after all.
Perish the thought.

Snakes on a Plane: Don't be Daft

Writers really have to be careful in developing their stories. I'm going to give some fine examples. Really fine.

First...Snakes on a Plane.
What?
Doesn't anyone remember basic biology?
Samuel L. Jackson is one of my very favorite actors, but this latest fiasco in filmmaking has me a little perturbed due to a severly flawed premise. How could he participate in such an abomination?

No author is perfect and none of our artistic efforts are perfect, but writers owe it to their audiences to at least give it the old college try.

So...Snakes on a Plane. Sadly, this premise is flawed from the get-go. The problem can't actually be a problem, unless you're like...daft.

Humans are warmblooded.
Reptiles, which includes snakes, are coldblooded.
It's cold at 33,000 feet.

Ergo, turn off the heat in the plane for a few minutes.
Problem solved.
Humans, being warmblooded, will whine and shiver, but remain active when the temperature drops. Snakes, being coldblooded, will become inactive. Planes shunt engine heat into the cabin because it's darn cold in the air, particularly at 33,000 feet. If you turn off the heat, you can then stroll through the plane at your leisure, picking up limp, rubbery, semi-comatose snakes and do whatever it is you want to do with them. Then, when you're done, turn the heat back on.

You're done.
There's no actual story here, other than the fact that everyone involved with this movie appears to be suffering from some kind of serious brain damage because no one appears to know what it means to be coldblooded versus warmblooded. They don't know what snakes are.

The writers appear to be cheerfully clueless.

This movie illustrates a bad premise.
This is just one problem a writer must contend with. Another is character incoherance. Not incoherant dialogue, but character actions, traits, dialogue or other characteristics that don't make sense for the type of character you are creating.

I ran into this recently in a book that I really wanted to love. It is a major bestseller and has a thrilling premise. Besides, I know and like the author. The problem is, the heroine's character is hopelessly incoherant in the first chapter. The behavior of the character is so flawed that it shattered my ability to like her at all. In fact, my only hope is that she "buys the farm" later in the book. I know she won't, but I'm hoping at least for serious injury.

This heroine is an ex-FBI agent and has been around guns most of her life. If this was a coherently drawn character, she would have her gun safety rules so ingrained in her psyche that she would do things like unload and break open a gun before handing it to someone. She would never in a million years point a loaded weapon at anyone. (I'm around law enforcement people all the time, as well as having my own concealed carry permit, and I've noticed how people, even "civilians" in even a casual situation such as looking over unloaded guns in a pawn shop handle the weapons. They hand them to each other broken open and never point them at anyone.)

You don't point a weapon, loaded or not, at anyone unless you mean to use it.

So, in the first chapter of this book, a friend of the heroine's has hired a bodyguard for the heroine. When the bodyguard arrives, the heroine is in her den. The bodyguard, the friend, and the bodyguard's assistant walk down the hallway to the den, knock, and open the door.

The heroine points a loaded weapon at them.

Now, she knew who opened the door. She knew her friend was out there, along with this bodyguard and his assistant. The heroine had plenty of firearms training and yet she aimed a loaded weapon at an open doorway where she knows her friend and two innocent people are standing.

This character is seriously broken at this point. She's incoherant. She cannot be an ex-FBI agent and act like this--I just can't believe it would happen.

But wait! There's more!

I didn't tell you that before the bodyguard opens the door, they hear the heroine giggling to herself and loading her weapon.

Now, I ask you, does that sound like something a heroine--a character you are supposed to sympathize with--should do?

The only characters I know that laugh insanely to themselves, load weapons and point them at their friends are wacko nutjobs or people with a major substance abuse problem.

The best thing that could have happened at this point would have been if the writer had the hero--upon seeing the loaded weapon pointed at him--had whipped out his own gun and shot her right between the eyes. Then we could have gotten a new, and potentially more coherant, heroine. The hero could have claimed self-defense and given the insane laughter and loaded gun pointed at him, I'm sure any court in the land would have found him completely innocent.

This heroine needs to go. She makes me want to tear off her arm and beat her senseless with it.

Now, lest you think that I'm perfect, or think I'm perfect, that is not the case. My brain short-circuited the other day and I wrote that Mercury was the sun god. Clearly, this is not the case, and I knew this. However, for some reason, my brain didn't note the error and it kept slipping through my edits. Fortunately, I sent my manuscript in to a contest, and the judges astutely pointed out that Mercury is not the sun god, he's a messenger for the gods. The judges indicated that Apollo is the sun god, which in actual fact, is not precisely true, either. The actual, original Greek sun god was Helios, but somehow, over time, Apollo got mixed up with Helios and folks forgot that Apollo was actually the god of other things, but not the sun.

Anyway, that's just one mistake I've made. There are plenty of others and I'll make plenty of others in the future. That's why it is so critically important to have other people check out your work.

Errors stop a reader cold and they will rarely continue once stopped. They may also avoid your books in the future, figuring you're an idiot. Don't let this happen to you.

• Test your premise - is it sound or is it a "snake on the plane" premise? Run it by as many people as you can to check for logic and/or scientific flaws.
• Understand your characters - don't have them do things like point a loaded weapon at a friend when the character's background and training would preclude such a stupid action (even without a law enforcement background, I don't know any adults who would do this, either). Even a character mentally cracking up will deteriorate in ways that reflect their own peculiar habits, training and traits, so keep that in mind. Have others read your work and look for character inconsistencies.
• Check your facts - don't put in facts like Mercury is the sun god, thinking you will change them later, or because you're too lazy to check, or worse, because you think you need that "fact" for your story. If you need to distort the facts, see if you can't distort your story instead. Readers pick up on facts that are incorrect and it can destroy your work.
• Don't include extraneous research just to show off you've done it - oh, I forgot to give you an example of this. Another bestseller I read spent the initial chapter on extraneous details about the FBI training facility in Quantico, VA. Not only was it incredibly boring, it annoyed me because it's only the writer showing off, saying "hey, look at all this cool stuff I learned in my research!"

Here's the thing with the last point, it was boring and the author actually got some of the "facts" wrong. The more "facts" you include, the higher the probability that you are going to misinterpret your research and/or get something wrong. Only add those details that you need to have to create the atmosphere, setting and plot you are writing. Layering on more information, particularly background information (the building was built out of native limestone in 1920--blah, blah--who cares?) bores your reader and increases the probability of error.

You must do your research, but it's more important to understand the implications than to just include a bunch of facts.

The writers of the snake movie did not understand the implications of reptiles being coldblooded and the fact that high altitudes are cold. Another writer did not understand the implications of gun safety training and how it becomes a habit in those who regularly handle weapons. Another included piles of details from her research that were not only unnecessary to the plot but in actual fact exposed a few things she got wrong.

And of course I got my gods wrong.

At one time or another, I've made all the mistakes listed above, from stupid premises to misinterpreting researched facts, so...

Keep it accurate and keep it germane.

Get another pair of eyes to review your work just to make sure.

Optimism and Pessimism

At first blush, this topic doesn't seem entirely relevant to writers, but in point of fact, it is. But I'm going to take the long way around the barn.

Generally, I'm not what you would call an optimist. In fact, for the first twenty-odd years of my life, I cultivated pessimism because I found it more soothing and less distressing to have no expectation of great things happening. Not that I didn't always make my best darn effort to be the best at whatever I was doing. It's just that sometimes, even when I thought I did a fabulous job, things didn't turn out so good. Being a pessimist seemed to make this easier to take because it meant I could either be thrilled when something good did finally happen, or...not as crushed as I might have been.

After a while I realized that oddly enough, optimists seemed...happier. Not to mention that things went their way more often. They seemed very lucky. I was never able to determine if they were optimistic because they didn't have the bad experiences and awful luck I had (and continue to have) or if they had good experiences and good luck because they expected to do so. Sometimes, it seems, Fate has a way of meeting expectations.

There was really no way to scientifically determine this, though. However, I did realize one thing. Even if I couldn't really figure out this chicken or the egg thing to know if being an optimist made good things happen or if someone became an optimist because good things were always happening to them, it didn't matter. Because optimists were happier people than pessimists. They were also nicer to be around. Other people liked them better.

I wanted, and still want, to be happy. If there is one thing I have learned is that we are all responsible for our happiness. We can choose to be unhappy or we can choose to be happy. Sure there are people caught in desperate circumstances, like being an innocent civilian in a war zone, but in general, in ordinary circumstances, our decisions and the way we choose to look at things determines our happiness. We can simply decide to be happy.

So, I tried--am trying--my darndest to convert from my natural pessimism into an optimist. It's not easy, and here is where this topic is relevant to writers.

Writing isn't easy. You have to take a lot of rejection and keep trying. For those who read my blog, I wrote one a few weeks back about publishing the first manuscript you write, but I left out one of the qualities these amazing writers who accomplish this feat seem to have: they are almost universally optimistic and SURE, absolutely SURE, that the manuscript they write will be published.

One writer I know just got her first manuscript published and she insists that if you have the INTENTION, the serious intention and confidence in your work, then the forces in the universe will align and your intention will come to be reality. This is expressing this very badly - because it's not niave belief or wishing, and it's not just writing some terrible junk without expending any effort. It's the serious intention to accomplish something, putting all the sweat and tears into that effort that is necessary, that will cause you to succeed. If you have this INTENTION.

I'm not good with this sort of stuff--if I can't prove it from evidence and experience than I tend not to believe, and my own experiences trying to publish have not lead me to completely eliminate all doubt about this aerie-faerie concept, but ultimately, I think it may be better to believe this and act on it, than not. Because I have seen it work for other people, even if it seems not to work for me. I have a manuscript that I was convinced would be published and had the complete intent to get it published--and I've had some success with it--but so far, it has not found a home with a publisher. It is not my first manuscript, and is, in fact more like my 10th, but I was so SURE that this one was the one. It is very difficult to maintain that level of confidence when the months stretch into years.

However, that is why it is important for a writer not only to maintain an optimistic attitude that will keep them going in the face of rejections, but maintain a serious INTENT. Keep writing because during those months or even years, you will continue to develop your skills and you will eventually create the manuscript that some editor will love. Your intention to be a published writer will create that destiny for you.

You just have to keep going until it does and be happy during the journey.

CRAFT: Point of View and Genre

Point of View and Genre

Before you even set pen to paper, there is one major question the writer must consider. What point of view should you use? Should you use first person, I should have known better, or third person, She should have known better? A combination of both? Some weird point of view?

Perhaps I should first define point of view...
Point of view is perhaps easier to explain if you think of making a movie. You can think of point of view as the angle from which the camera is filming the movie.

First Person
In first person point of view, the camera is stuck in one character's head and you "film" the entire story through that character's eyes. This character is essentially the narrator and the entire story is colored by the narrator's perceptions.

Example:
I wouldn't have shot Harry last Thursday if I had known what a world of hurt this would bring down on me less than two days later...

Strengths and Weaknesses
First person is great for stories that mainly concern the journey of one person--the narrator character. They are often used in mysteries because you learn what is happening as the narrator, who is usually the detective, discovers it.

Unfortunately, it also prevents you from showing what the other characters are thinking or feeling, except as interpreted by the narrator. All the other characters are kept at a bit of a distance and the reader never really knows what they are thinking--they can only infer it from the characters' actions and speech. Even the narrator is controlling what they allow the reader to see, by what information they chose to "tell". However, this can be very useful in a mystery.

Egregious Mistakes
It's easier to avoid POV mistakes in first person, because you're stuck in first person, but you do want to avoid things like: I flung my long, flowing locks of blond hair over my shoulder. No one thinks of themselves--or their hair--that way, so the challenge is to give the reader a picture of the narrator character without looking into mirrors or talking about themselves in an abnormally narcissistic way.

Third Person (Often called Limited Third Person)
This is the most common point of view used in the majority of fiction. In third person, the writer refers to all characters in third person, e.g. she done me wrong, or he done me wrong. The camera is external to all characters but rests on one character's shoulder, focused on the other characters as seen from the perspective of the point of view character. Usually, this perspective is maintained throughout a scene, with the perspective hopping over to other characters in other scenes (i.e. the camera is moved to rest on other characters' shoulders to film the scene from their view point).

Example:
She rested her head on her arm for a moment before turning back to Bill to complete the dismemberment process.

Deep Point of View
This is usually seen in third person and it is as if the camera moved inside the head of the point of view (POV) character--not to focus on the other characters--but to actually film what is going on inside the POV character's head. In this POV, you can take something like: Darn it--why couldn't she have arrived early for a change, he thought. And you make it as if you are inside the person, listening, so you don't have the "he thought" part, you just have: Darn it--why couldn't she have arrived early?

This helps the reader to feel and think what the POV character is feeling and thinking more intensely.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Third person is the most commonly used POV and you really can't go too wrong with it. It lets you show the actions, thoughts and emotions from any of your characters, and by using deep POV, you can even show what they are thinking.

However, you lose the immediacy and identification with the narrator that you have in first person, because third person POV puts all the characters at a slight distance, which is only partly remedied through the occassional use of deep POV.

Egregious Mistakes
Head hopping (see below), where you suddenly change your focus from one POV character to a different one can be a problem if done poorly. The most common mistake, however, is similar to the one listed for First Person POV. She tossed her blond, flowing locks over her shoulder. Again, no character (or person) thinks of their hair, or any other part of them, like this. You have to remember to stay in the POV you select.

Second Person
I'm debating even mentioning this POV because it is so incredibly annoying. It's the you did this POV, which is sort of the psychotic camera POV. It takes a lot of skill to write in second person and not just anger your readers, and mostly you would never see this except in literary fiction or highly experimental stuff. Definitely not something I would recommend unless you have a specific and very good reason.

Head Hopping
When you switch from one POV character's perspective to another, it's called head hopping. Most articles on writing recommend that you stick with one character's POV per scene, to avoid the unsettling shifts in perspective that can occur when you suddenly switch to another character's POV--sort of like the main POV character suddenly tossing the camera to another character. It can be done, but you need to be aware of the transition and write it smoothly. One way is to write enough description to make the scene seem as if the camera panned out to the broad scene before changing to focus tightly on a different character's POV.

When to Use What POV
A lot of the decision on what POV to use boils down to what sells in the genre you are writing, and what works best for the story you are telling. Some fiction lends itself more readily to one point of view over the other, and some genres pretty much insist on a specific point of view. The information below is not all-inclusive--I'm just trying to give you some general guidelines--so keep that in mind.

Romance
Third person is used for almost all categories of romance fiction. Some of the women's fiction, and modern, sassy contemporary fiction (e.g. Chick Lit, Mommy Lit, and all the other "Lits") is now being done in first person, because they are less concerned about the hero (or there may not even BE a hero). Third person is almost a requirement for romance fiction because it allows you to show both the heroine's and hero's perspectives and their emotional arcs as they grow to love one another.

Romance that has to be third person POV
Category Romances, e.g. Most Harlequin Lines
Historical Romances

Romances that are traditionally third person POV, but *might* possibly allow first person POV, although to be honest, they will probably make you change it to third person POV...
Romantic Suspense
Paranormals
Romantic Mysteries
Contemporary
Romantic Comedy

Romances that allow first person POV
Women's fiction

Smart/Sassy Contemporary (perhaps not specifically a romance, either) such as Chick Lit, Mommy Lit, Boy Lit, all the Lits and their currently morphing offspring

Gothics (many are now written in third person POV, but traditionally, many Gothics were written in first person)

Mystery and Suspense
Mystery and Suspense genres have many, many subgenres and break down very similar to the Romance field. There tends to be a little more latitude in these genres, however, because there is less pressure to show the emotional arcs of two people as you must in a romance--you usually just have one main character, an antagonist, and then the protagonist.

Third Person POV
Suspense (traditionally third person)
Contemporary and Historical Mysteries can vary between third and first person POV
Cozy Mysteries

First Person POV
Contemporary and Historical Mysteries, some Cozy Mysteries (see above)
Crime and "Neo Noir" or "Crime Noir", Florida Crime (which seems to be a genre in itself)

Science Fiction
Science Fiction is *mostly* written in third person POV. However, because it often embraces more experimental fiction, there is some small use of first person POV, but it is rare.

Fantasy
Third Person POV almost exclusively.

Literary Fiction
Anything goes in Literary Fiction.

That's about it for this blog! Let me know what POV you prefer...

How to Publish the First Book You Write...

How to Publish the First Book You Write...

What, are you crazy?
Against all odds, I know two people who have already published the first book they have ever written, or are on the cusp of doing so, and I don't know that many writers. I may even know more than two--actually, now that I think of it, I know three people who have done this. Three authors, maybe more.

How did they do it (when I'm still struggling...)?
They actually have quite a number of things in common. The problem for the rest of us is that it may not be so easy to imitate this success, but here is what I have identified as the primary traits or actions which have made these authors so amazingly successful in such a short time--generally within two years of first setting pen to paper.

1) Each of them knew exactly what they were going to write and in what genre. They knew the genre, read it, loved it, and understood it.

a) They didn't try to draw outside the lines of their chosen genre--the story fit squarely and completely within the norm for the genre. For example, one writer wrote a Regency Historical and after studying other Historicals, she saw that the majority had a small range of sensuality (sensual to HOT) and at least one love scene. She wrote hers to fit exactly in the middle of the range. She also did enough research to keep it true to the period, but did not include needless details.

b) The authors all had some small twist to make their story unique, such as a woman wanting to be a vet in Regency England, but in every other respect, the story fit the genre. They accomplished the "same but different" task the editors set out for new writers.

2) Each of them decided on a plan up front on how to get it published. In the cases I know about, they all decided to get an agent and let the agent market the book. None of them attempted a "mixed mode" where they tried to market the book themselves while also searching for an agent.

a) I also know some authors who marketed their book, themselves, but these generally went to specific publishers where having an agent is not an advantage initially. These are houses such as Avalon and Harlequin which use a boiler-plate contract and fixed advance, and the e-publishers.

b) If you want to get an agent, do so up front and don't try to market your book, yourself. If you market your book to most of the big publishers, such as Avon, Warners, NAL, etc, and then you do manage to get an agent, you've just compromised their ability to sell this particular manuscript because they now can't submit it to the "best" places. This may also make them less enthusiastic about working with you because you have cut away at their opportunities to make a big sale.

3) They wrote with intent. This is a hard one to explain because "intent" can seem an awful lot like "wishing" or even "planning", but here is what it means: Writing with intent means you are serious about this work and you are seriously writing up to published standards. But even more importantly, it means that you intend to have it published, even if it means going to a vanity publisher. You are not writing to have fun or because it's fun (although I hope it is).

a) Perhaps my own experience with this will help. When I started writing again a few years ago, I wanted to be published, but I had very vague ideas of this. I had no real publisher in mind, and no real specifics as far as identifying the boundaries of a specific and currently published genre. I was reading Barbara Michaels at the time and sort of thought I wanted to write something along the lines of some of her paranormal mysteries. I did no market research and basically, I wrote to please myself. I had fun. I goofed around with the story and with the language because it was fun.

It sort of stopped being fun when I realized no one was even interested in it. But, I chalked it up to experience and went on to the next one. I joined a critique group. I wrote and submitted another manuscript and got a little further with Harlequin, but again, I hadn't really read anything other than their guidelines, so I really hadn't done my research. It also didn't help when the line I wrote for ended.

Again, I stepped up my efforts and seriously wrote a Regency, a la Georgette Heyer, not realizing that the traditional Regency market was dying. This book got the attention of an agent, but did not get published as the traditional Regency market crashed and burned. (Although on a good note, this manuscript has finally found a home with Cerridwen, so all is not lost...)

So I decided to make my own genre of Regency Romance/Suspense. I got an agent. Then I got a different agent. We're still trying to get it published, but as you can see, it's not my first manuscript. The jury is still out on whether it ultimately gets a print contract or I try to place it with Cerridwen, as well.

Finally cognizant of the things I've been trying to relay to you here, I am now writing a contemporary paranormal. I've done the research into the genre. I'm trying to write within the lines. During the conference, I went to paranormal and "heightening the sensuality" sessions. I just hope I get the sensuality level up enough to fit it squarely into the genre, and that I have enough of a different twist to make some editor sit up and take notice. But I am serious about this one. Deadly serious.

b) An important factor in intent is writing seriously for publication. You can't just slip in some silliness because you like the words or it sounds smart. You can't leave that "umm, is this part really okay? Maybe no one will notice" in your manuscript, because everyone will notice and it won't be good. And, the worst fault: you can't get silly or slipshod toward the middle and end when the writing gets rough as you're trying to keep all the plot balls in the air. You've got to buckle down and write it/rewrite it until it is good all the way through. A lot of manuscripts fall apart in the middle and end. That's why so many editors want to see the first three chapters and the last, or take a synopsis so seriously. They want to see if you can carry the story through to a satisfying conclusion or if you're going to get tired and slip along the way. It's so easy after you've been struggling to finish your book to just rush toward the end, just to get the draft done. And then rush your edits towards the end because you're tired of editing. You can't be tired toward the end or it will show. You have to make sure the middle and end are as good or better than the beginning.

If you're already doing all of these things and have written a bunch of manuscripts and still aren't published, then don't despair. I firmly believe that all writing can be improved. It is an art and therefore talent is important, but an artist often has many half-completed drawings and paintings. They have to practice to get those great painting. We, as writers, must also practice until we get it right. When we do, our creations will find homes, and we can only hope this happens before anyone cuts their own ear off in despair.

It isn't hopeless, but writing with intent is most likely the best path to success.

Excitement and Depression Mounts

I'm getting ready to leave for the Romance Writers' Association (RWA) annual conference, this time held in Atlanta. This is always a difficult time for me as an unpublished writer--although I guess now that Cerridwen has indicated they want to send me a contract for A Smuggled Rose, I'm on the cusp of being technically published. I'm trying hard to convince myself that this is on par with having a book out by the big publishing houses in NY--but I can't wrap my head around that. Because much as I am pleased with Cerridwen and my editor there, it is significantly different being published by a small house than an big one and it all boils down to money. (Doesn't everything, eventually, boil down to money?)

The big boys in NY pay advances--sometimes, significant advances (okay, to me, a significant advance is anything in excess of $3,000--I have low expectations). It means the publishers believe they will sell enough books to get back that advance and then, hopefully, make a profit. Even at $3,000 for an advance, that's a significant amount of belief.

Smaller presses don't need to believe in you that much because they generally don't give you much of an--if any--advance. On the bright side, this means they are willing to take a chance on something different. On the dark side, this means some works are published which probably would not have gotten published except by a vanity publisher in the days before the Internet made e-books possible. This has lead to a situation where folks often pooh-pooh the quality of e-books because they think they are only written by people who didn't write well enough to make it in NY. I'm not sure what to say about this, because I have purchased some e-books which were not so good. But then again, there are others which are good. It's a very mixed bag out there.

Just like in the "regular" paperback or hardcover arena. Only I do think the bad e-books are maybe a little worse than the bad paperbacks I have read, but this is purely subjective. When it comes right down to it, bad is bad no matter what format it comes in. And there are e-books which contain stories you can no longer get in a bookstore, and that counts for something.

I'd like to believe the books I wrote and will be selling through Cerridwen could not get published because they fit in traditional Regency territory which the mainstream publishers say is no longer profitable and have declined to publish any longer. I also think what I write doesn't fit squarely "between the lines" because there are strong elements of mystery, suspense, and black humor. In my stories, I let the characters dictate what they will and won't do, and I don't attempt to twist the story or characters to shoe-horn in the apparently obligatory s-e-x scene. I'm not about to make them take a break and have s-e-x while the madman is standing outside the bedroom door with a hatchet. Embarrassing though it may be, in that situation, the madman comes on in and they either flee naked or get chopped to bits, depending upon the speed with which they can run. Needless to say, it has made my characters a little wary about dropping their drawers during any apparent lulls. Trust is a big issue for them. I don't know why.

This means my stuff is not hot, and apparently, not marketable. Don't get me wrong, I actually have a paranormal with a s-e-x scene that fit quite naturally (although it may not be hot enough!) and I have a couple of other manuscripts in the contemporary suspense arena which have s-e-x, and in fact, one of them which I have tentatively entitled Ride the Wave actually starts out with a s-e-x scene (and I'm thinking that this make actually make THIS manuscript unmarketable--go figure), so it's not like I won't write it. My problem is, I have to write the story my characters order me to write. It seems like when I read other HOT books, there is no story, or the characters and the story have been twisted to give room for what in my mind is a relatively trivial activity, to the point where the story is just a weak, trickling stream meandering around the large boulders of s-e-x, but...I'm drifting off into a rant here...

What I actually started to blog about was the RWA conference. Conferences generally leave me feeling completely depressed and despondent because I get to meet all these great writers who are actually published, and in the back of my mind, I'm thinking--these people are so far ahead of me, and so much better than me, that I'm crazy to think I'll ever publish anything. I'm the most unlucky person on the planet and most published writers will tell you: you have to have luck. And talent. What if you don't have either? What if you really are a hack? What if you just like to write? What if you just like to write a good story, but nobody wants a good story without certain elements in it, anymore?

Anyway, this year, I'm trying not to let the conference feed into my worries about being in the lowest caste of the publishing world by getting my Regencies e-published. Or this fantasy manuscript I'm also considering submitting to them for e-publishing, just because.

So...does that make me a hack writer?
No-strictly speaking--a hack writer would be one of those PUBLISHED writers who have s-e-x in every other scene because that is what is hot right now and it sells, regardless of the integrity of the story they are writing. They write to the market and basically don't concern themselves with artistic integrity.

Therefore, I'm using the wrong term, it's not hack, it's bad writer. Bad writer, bad, bad (get off that computer right now!)
(Am I a bad writer because I'm publishing through an e-publisher? I have a published friend, who sold the first book she ever wrote, as soon as she finished it, who firmly believes only bad writers are e-published. What do I say back to the Golden One who is young, beautiful, and published by a good, NY publisher? How do you explain to someone who published the first thing she ever wrote, how it feels to write story after story, many of which are requested and actually come back with happy-editor comments, but with "No, sorry, we don't publish traditional Regencies anymore" kinds of remarks?)

Now that I've dampened everyone's mood, back to the conference, and depression. For me, the worst feeling sets in when all the buzz and hype is about making your books hotter and more sensual--because I just want to write a good story and where are all the workshops and buzz about characterization, plotting, and grammar? Is it possible anymore to expect to write a book that doesn't go into laborious detail about every shining drop of sweat oozing from every pore as your two main characters roll around between the hot, wrinkled sheets? Am I crazy? Behind the times? Stupid? Frigid? All that between-the-sheets stuff fascinated me between the ages of about 12-21, but after I got a regular boyfriend, I didn't need to know all the gory details anymore. I liked the tension, but I preferred the door closed in a book because it left more room for the story to unfold--and it was the story that fascinated me. "It" wasn't the main thrust of the story (except when I read Anais Nin, maybe, or something specifically written for the purpose of titillation--where I had no expectation of a "story".) And that's the problem--it's a matter of expectation.

I think I'm crazy and stupid to refine on this, but I'm trying to psychologically prepare myself for the barrage when I go to the conference. The bad thing is that all the talk about it "puts my back up" to the point where I start refusing to put it into my stories even if the characters *want* to have it in there, just because it pisses me off that it is all anyone seems to talk about anymore. It really pisses me off that I start thinking editors won't even look at a book if it isn't hot. I'd like to think this isn't true, but...there is a lot of evidence to the contrary. Again, it's that darn expectation: their's and mine.

Does anyone else find that pretty abysmal and depressing?

Can't we talk about something else for a change? Really. I mean, what ever happened to the craft of writing?

Startled, but in a good way

Got an email today from a (my?) potential editor at Cerridwen Press, asking me if I had a timeline for when my revised manuscript would be winging its way back to them.  Thankfully, I had already finished the edits and squirted it off to my agent for submission to Cerridwen, so I was able to answer..."Pretty darn soon, Ms. Editor" with the appropriate cc: to my agent.  My agent extracted all the relevant information from me (that is, a copy of the revision letter) and now...we play the waiting game.

And I can't sleep.
Do I dare hope that this will finally get published?  Have I jinxed it by talking about it?  By searching for information on marketing?  By thinking about the next 4 manuscripts which I could send to them "pretty darn soon," and if I do, would they laugh in my face and say, "Yes, this first one was okay, but these others..." shiver delicately, "We don't think so."

Because I have a dirty little secret.  Yes, I write Regencies which could be construed as traditional Regencies, except, they are really more like Regency suspense.  And therein lies the rub.  Georgette Heyer got away with it in books like These Old Shades  but somehow, folks have forgotten that not all Regencies were sweet, drawing room confections when the genre first started out.  Many were actually action-adventure or Regency suspense.  It is my contention that the traditional Regency all but died out because the only thing editors bought were chock full of tooth-numbing sweetness without the bite of adventure and mystery which leavened so many of Heyer's works.  I believe if the genre is to make a comeback with Cerridwen, they must offer the entire, original toothsome array of taffy-sweet, to sweet-with-nuts, to those with the bittersweet bite of adventure and mystery subplots.

I sincerely hope Cerridwen plans on doing just that, and that I'm just needlessly worrying.
But I'm nervous and it's keeping me up at night. I want to believe I can start making plans - planning a marketing strategy - modifying my web site with cool information about the books coming out, but until I start signing contract(s) it seems premature.  Especially since I just don't know how they will react to the rest of my stuff.

My first manuscript which they are interested in has a wee bit of darkness (and in the revisions, I took out most of it).  The next ones have murder (occurs off-stage) and some fights.  Nothing you wouldn't find in a cozy mystery or one of Heyer's books.  And yet I'm afraid they are going to say, um, Ms. Author, these aren't sweet enough.

I've also realized in working through the revisions that what I thought of as writing "light and frothy Regency fun" is only fun in a Kill Bill sort of way.  I admit it, I think the movie Kill Bill is hilarious in a zany-sick, action-packed sort of way.  I realize now that my sense of humor is the Twilight Zone / Night Gallery / Dawn of the Dead kind of humor and it may not translate too well in the world of books.  It's black humor, dark humor, macabre & sarcastic humor, the "laugh in the face of death because you're not going to get another chance" humor.  It's a lying on the ground, bleeding to death, trying to hold your guts in while you ask, "Can I get a do-over?" humor.

Well, until I sell A Smuggled Rose and get that second sale, which I hope will be One Honest Man, I won't know how small Cerridwen's box is going to be.  I'm hoping it will be a large, roomy box.  If they take One Honest Man, they'll take I Bid One American and The Bricklayer's Helper because they are similar in terms of action/adventure/suspense elements.  And if they take those, I can finish Grave Mistakes and offer that to them.

Then, I just have the problem of the much more serious The Vital Principle and The Left-Handed Wife where the romance is the subplot and the mystery is the main plot, and they are not...well...very sweet.  There are a lot of elements which will make some people uncomfortable.  A few of the characters act in despicable and really not-very-nice ways.  A murder or two occur very much on-stage, although there is no blood spilled, per se.

Sometimes I think I am not a very nice person, myself.  But then again, I view my writing as a sort of therapy.  After talking to egregiously stupid people all day on my real job, I have to have some way to take out my frustration in a wholesome and even humorous way.  Okay, so I kill a few characters, sometimes in rather gruesome ways, and the other characters stand around and make jokes about it. 

Is that really so bad?

Be honest with your agent

I am walking on air.  Even if I ultimately don't sell "A Smuggled Rose" to Cerridwen, I am so relived because I finally have the right agent.  I have been terrified that she would sneer at me for submitting an old manuscript to an e-publisher.  Like Rodney Dangerfield, "they--e-publishers--don't get no respect" and I was afraid she would laugh at me.  She actually took it seriously that I had a traditional Regency manuscript that Cerridwen might want to publish, pending revisions, and she asked that I send it to her to submit to them.  Yippee!

I am so happy.  While I don't expect to make the "big bucks" I think it is a definite stepping stone, and it is a way for me to get stories published that don't quite fit the modern mold.  This whole Regency thing sort of knocked me for a loop because I remember reading Georgette Heyer, and the stories I loved most were her "Regency action/adventure stories".  I never anticipated that writing suspense/action/mystery stories set in the Regency would be such a hard sell.  This may be premature and Cerridwen may say they don't want my stories because of the suspense/action/murder aspects, but I am hoping that they realize that the traditional Regency is more than just a "sweet story".

For those of you who are writing things slightly different, buck up.  It may be hard to sell them, and it may take years (as it has taken me--and I still haven't actually SOLD anything yet) but I have learned that you can't make a story something it is not.

People had mistakenly assumed, because I write "sweet" Regencies (stories set in early 19th century without explicit s-e-x scenes) that I'm some sort of religious nut who is against sex.  Not so.  You see, for me, the deciding factor is whether the characters wish to have sex while not married, or wish to wait--at least until they are engaged.  So far, my characters have not been inclined to jump into bed with someone who they are not sure they actually trust.  As long as that conflict between them means something, the heroine's are not willing to risk it--not to mention they simply don't have the opportunity when people are kidnapping or otherwise mucking about with them.  I have written several contemporary things which actually start out with people jumping into bed with one another because that is true to the characters--they are risk-takers and in today's world, this is not going to ruin their lives. 

     Being true to the characters is also why revisions to make my Regencies into torrid, sensual love stories generally don't work.  The characters wouldn't normally do this, and anyone reading it picks up on that, unless they are not "getting" the characters, at all.

    So I am relieved to find an editor who actually just wants me to write stories with integrity and not add a lot of gratuitous junk that doesn't fit, just because it sells.

    The downside, of course, is that this may not sell.  We shall see.  If A Smuggled Rose sells, however, I plan to spend obscene amounts in marketing to make it as much of a success as possible.

     I'm hoping to hear word this week on whether Cerridwen likes the revisions, but it may take longer.  Who knows?  At least I have finally have some hope...

To Thine Own Story Be True

What a roller-coaster ride this writing shtick is.  No wonder my poor husband keeps quietly praying I will give it up and save him from all the emotional turmoil and bleed-over will-I-ever-publish angst into what used to be a relatively quiet, normal life.

Many of you who follow my blog--hmm, are there many who follow this blog?--maybe it should just be--the few (or one) of you who read my ramblings know that I've been struggling to get published through one of the big, NY houses.  I've had two agents--I'm still with my second agent and I hope to stay with her--and have gone through much turmoil trying to turn my dreck into gold. 

Anyway, in my last blog, I mentioned alternative publishers, such as e-publishers.  I have some manuscripts which are good--they are what initially snagged my first agent--but they are traditional Regency romance stories (or a few are horror-romances, go figure) and unfortunately, that is a genre which NY publishers have finally closed the book on.  Okay, sure, there is Avalon which produces hard cover books for the library trade, and Mills & Boon/Harlequin, which produces historicals (not really traditional Regency, though) but that's about it.

But I had these good manuscripts.  What to do, what to do.
My first agent (who shall remain nameless) had me "darken" and add sensual elements, including a love scene, to the best of my traditional Regencies, in hopes of selling it as a historical.  It didn't sell, and I gave up on that manuscript and got my second/current agent with a different Regency-set mystery/romance.  I love mysteries and feel this might still work out.  So does my current agent.  So far, not so good, but I still have hope...

Deep in my heart, however, I still loved this one story in particular--the one my previous agent had me bastardize by darkening it and adding sensual elements.  It never sold, although she submitted it, so I finally wrote it off and archived it.

In the meantime, one of the very reputable e-publishers is now opening up to mainstream titles AND traditional Regencies.  Well, I decided to submit this story to them, thinking it wouldn't necessarily fit in the traditional Regencies anymore, but they might take it as a historical, since they are producing mainstream titles in a lot of different genres.

Two months after I submitted it, I got a request for a full.  I sent it toward the end of the week and the very next week they said:  we would like this for our traditional Regency line but you would need to take out all the dark stuff and the sex scene.

My blog-readers will know how I have agonized in the past over revisions, but this is one time when "to thine own story be true" really does have meaning.  I was/am THRILLED to do these revisions.  I am ripping out all the stuff my first agent had me change/add, and going back to my original vision for the story.  I LOVE these revisions.  It is so easy and it makes me so happy to do them.  Yes, I'm a little sad that this manuscript will not make it into print--it will be e-published for downloading, but the most important thing to me has always been to tell a story to someone else and this allows me to do that.  And I love, love, love this editor.  She is so-ooo nice--I can't believe how gratifying it is to find someone who gets me and understands the story I was trying to write.  I mean she picked out things that had always bothered me but that I included in my efforts to satisfy my previous agent.  I am so happy to remove those elements--you really have no idea.

Of course, she's not my editor yet--I have to finish the revisions and send it back and hope she will like the changes and send a real contract--but I am so sure I can do this, because it is what the story was supposed to be.  It's what it was before I mucked about with it.

Mucking about wasn't so bad, though, because through that process, I improved the writing tremendously, so although I have to now cut out a lot (thankfully), what remains is MUCH better than my old, original first draft.

But this "mucking about business" is why you, as a writer, must decide what you can and cannot do with your story, because in my previous life with my previous agent, I was so desperate to publish that I was willing to make any changes necessary to accomplish that.  I didn't really care what the changes were.  If she had told me to add alien rabbits with green whiskers, I would have figured out a way to do it (I read a lot of science fiction so maybe that wasn't a good example, because I really could think of a way to include alien rabbits).  Unfortunately, you can't turn one sort of manuscript into another with a great deal of success, and that is the pain of writing stories--such as traditional Regency romances--which are simply not published any longer.

Full circle back to why I mentioned e-publishers last week.  They are a golden opportunity for writers--good writers, not schlock writers--to publish things which simply are no longer published in NY.  Or maybe were never published.  Old genres, such as traditional Regencies, may fall out of favor but I know there are still audiences for these stories.  Why else would Georgette Heyer's wonderful stories--which actually created the entire traditional Regency genre--still be sold?  Why would I hanker for a really good, eerie haunted house story, a la "The Haunting of Hill House," except with a happy ending and a romance (yet another genre which may not even exist, but should).  If I hanker for such a thing, surely others do, too...

So, I have had a small taste of almost-success and it has validated my belief that e-publishers fill a niche and can be an avenue for something different.  I hope I  can finish my revisions and send the manuscript back and this lovely lady likes it.  At least I know the story reached another human being, and she appreciated the things in in that were important to appreciate.  She got me. 

I'm not stupid, though.  I know my big, NY-published friend doesn't believe in e-publishers, and most NY-published writers firmly believe that e-published writers are e-published because their stories weren't good enough to receive the capital investment required to be NY-published, but...well...so what?  Fine.  Be that way.  The fact of the matter is, there are some niche genres which NY publishers will not publish regardless of how good the manuscript is.  The story doesn't fit into their marketing scheme, and that's fine.  I understand that, and I know that being e-published will not get me to the NY Times Bestseller list.  But it will let me tell my story, the way the story should be told without a lot of extraneous elements, and at this point, that is more important to me.  (I'm not talking about writing quality--in my specific case, remember this story netted me an agent--I'm talking about a manuscript without explicit sex and where the explicit sex added nothing to the story--but where the absence made it a "traditional Regency" and therefore unsellable to NY publishers who no longer publish traditional Regencies.)

For those interested in the minutiae, the temporary working title is:  A Smuggled Rose.  It used to be:  Perchance to Dream, but that didn't have anything to do with the story, really, as my editor-to-be astutely pointed out.  If the revisions go well, and the provisional contract turns into a real contract, I will post that success and anything I learn through this process. 

If anyone else has a traditional Regency romance, horror-romance, or any other genre the NY publishing guys won't touch, I highly encourage you to resist turning your work into something it was never meant to be and try an e-publisher.  You might not get rich and famous, or be on the NY Times Bestseller list.  You might not even get bumped up to the next tax bracket, and in fact, you might not make enough to buy that new washer/dryer you need, but at least you will be able to tell your story the way it was meant to be told.

And after all, isn't that the point?