Are you a writer?

When do you get to call yourself a writer?

Some jobs require a qualification. Noone calls you a lawyer until you pass the appropriate exam. Whether or not you work in a law firm. By the same token, it doesn't matter if you've ever tried a case or not, people will assign you the title once you've got the qualification.

Other job titles are in the doing. Doing a culinary course does not a cook make. But if you work in a kitchen, preparing food, then people will happily assign you the title. No matter how much or how little you did to get to that position.

When do you get to call yourself a writer?

It's certainly not by qualification. If we look at writing certificates alone, many of the industry's biggest names would not make the cut. Is it in doing the job? If so, where's the starting point? Do you get to be a writer because your novel is published? How about when it sells to a publishing house? When you get an agent? When you have a polished manuscript? First draft? When you publish a short story? A single article in a major newspaper? What about self-publishing?

Years ago when my mind was drawn to this paradoxical question, I struggled with it for quite a while. I call myself a writer, but I've never published a novel. I've written a handful of short work which appeared in anthologies or newspapers. Was that enough?

Then I was watching some medical drama and one of the characters provided the definition of pain. "If a patient says they're experiencing pain, then they are." I don't know if that's truly the definition of pain, but it makes sense to me. As far as I know, there's no objective way to measure pain. If you think something is painful, I can't tell you it's not. And that's exactly what it's like being a writer.

It's not about qualifications. For me, it's not even that much about the act of actual writing. Being a writer iss a state of mind. It's seeing things that others don't. Hearing voices. Loving stories. It's in imaginary people being painfully real.

You're a writer because you feel it.

You're a writer because you say you are.

When it rains or Sometimes life throws you a bone

I mentioned before that I hadn't written since June last year.

But recently, Life stepped up to bring back out the writer in me. Mummy turned 60 on Sunday, and they're having a big to-do on Saturday. I can't be there because I have to work. The school year in Japan, and other parts of the Far East, ends in March, so it's Graduation season. And as a teacher, you kind of can't skip Graduation.

For all the misunderstanding that my family and friends can do, everybody knows I'm a writer. And a linguist. You need something written or translated, Claire's your girl. I guess it all started with Granny's funeral. I wrote 2 poems. The funeral home made one into a bookmark, and I read the other at the service. And then, somehow, I got into the dubious business of writing funeral poems...

So my brother asked me to write a poem.

I made him no promises. After all, it's been 9 months since I've written. I mean I was pretty sure I still had IT. I just wasn't sure where IT was. So I sat down with pen and paper. And with my keyboard. A couple of times. Nothing happened.

And then Mummy was all like, "Write me a poem, and I'll make bookmarks for the party."

And I was like, "Ick!" I couldn't guarantee anything. But the thing is, when your mother asks you to do something on her 60th birthday, you pretty much have to try.

I stopped trying to write for a while and just let the ideas float around my mind. Today was the graduation ceremony at Junior High. It was my last graduation as a teacher at that school. I was determined not to cry. So, I pulled out my Italian notebook, and started to scribble to distract myself.

"Mother"

And then it just flowed. I wrote that poem. Then another. Then another.

And then I wrote a super-specific poem. One of my trademarks - a poem that makes everyone in the room go, "Yep, that's that person, all right."

And then, I wrote my very first poem IN JAPANESE.

Seriously, that's how much of a roll I was on. When it rains, it pours.

I'm still up to my ears in Japanese study. And I'm now trying to reclaim my French as well. I want to complete my TEFL, since it's paid-for. And I still have a very full social plate. So it's not like I'm miraculously going to start dedicated every waking minute to the literary craft.

But I'm getting back to being a writer. And I'm beginning to find the balance between that and everything else.

It will only get better from here.

One thing

One of the reasons I used to be so good about this blog is because I WAS a writer. I don't mean that I'm not a writer now. I'm pretty sure I will always be a writer. But back then, I defined myself as a writer. Being a writer was the essence of my very soul. Or something like that.

So it's not hard to imagine, when you place that much importance on something, that it's easy to focus completely on it. I wrote a lot. Blogged a lot. Tweeted a lot. Made lots of writer friends. It was great.

But it's not all I am.

Even longer than I've defined myself as a writer, I've been calling myself a linguist. In university I double majored in French and Spanish. At my university, all Faculty of Humanities students had to take at least basic foreign language courses. Bi- and tri-linguists were nothing impressive. But in the regular world, people are really impressed with speaking multiple languages. Even moreso now I've clawed my way up to 5 languages.

But I couldn't be a linguist and a writer too. Ironically, it's a problem that drives me crazy about Japan. I always say that in Japan, you are only allowed One Thing. Like me reggae-crew friends. Their cars are decorated in reggae colours, they always play reggae CDs, they pretty much only go to reggae events. Life = Reggae.

That's not me.

All my life I've been interested in many things. And all my life, I've tried to tame that in favour of the old prevailing school of thought. You know, the one where you pick something, master it, spend 33 1/3 years doing it and then retire and spend your days cruising Alaska.

For years I fought to pick one thing. And then I did. I was a writer. I was lining all my little duckies up for my great writing future. Until I decided to stay in Japan. Which, in my books, meant being fluent in Japanese. Which, at my level (of Japanese ability and obsessiveness), meant 6-8 hours of study at least 5 days a week. In addition to all that periferal stuff, like work. There wasn't any room for writing. I was a linguist. I WAS A LINGUIST.

After almost a year of burying myself in foreign languages, my writer soul is beginning to surface. And I'm beginning to understand that I don't need to be one thing. I can be a linguist and a writer. And any number of other things I choose to be. Sure, I don't want to go off the deep end and dilute my efforts so much that I don't make any progress in any of my endeavours. And for now, I'm still concentrating more on the linguistic side than the writing side. But I'm still determined to write again.

Forgive me. It's all new. I struggle a lot with not fitting the mold. And now, I'm trying to accept that I won't ever. It means that this blog may won't be the same as it's been before. And right now, I can't say exactly what it will be. Or what my writing future holds.

But this I know for sure:

I am not one thing.

I can't write

I haven't written since the SCBWI Tokyo Writers' Intensive Retreat in June, I think. As I dip my toes back into the writing world (on this blog, and eventually on Twitter), I find myself thinking about why that is...

VOLITION

Right this moment, there is something more important to me than writing. Something that takes up the time and the brain-power that I normally would happily let writing have. That something is the fight to stay in Japan. I mentioned in my last post that my contract will end soon, and that I have to find something else to move onto. I also mentioned that I'm doing everything in my power to be prepared for any opportunity that may pass my way.

That everything includes learning Japanese. Not that I wasn't learning Japanese before... But my spoken Japanese, while understandable, is not Business-level Japanese, rendering it utterly useless in my job search. That means I have 7 months to get fluent. On top of which, Japanese uses the Chinese characters called kanji, of which there are literally THOUSANDS. The joyo kanji (Daily Use Kanji) is a list of 2136 characters. I'm currently working on learning them so that I can be on par with my the competition. So between grammar and kanji, every ounce of spare time I have goes into Japanese study.

But Claire, surely you could afford to sacrifice a few minutes a day to pursue something you love and want to make a life of.

No. Not really. Yes, I want to be a writer. But I also want to be in Japan. Being a writer doesn't have an expiry date on it - which is probably why so many potential novelists talk about 'one day.'  Being in Japan does. Unless I find a job. Which, in my mind, revolves around being prepared. Which, in turn, equates to spending ever spare moment studying. 

ABILITY

I make the choice to spend every spare moment studying. But, here's a little secret. When you study hard-core for 6 to 7 hours most days (in between work and maintaining a house and a pretty active social life), your brain has zero desire to be engaged in non-study hours. I can't create when I'm working this hard.

At the end of a day's study, I curl up with my DVD player, pop in the Japanese remake of Ikemen Desu Ne, and watch a few episodes. Even that is study, but at least it's passive, and way more enjoyable Sometimes I read Harry Potter. In Japanese. Or hang out with friends. Mostly Japanese, of course. But. nothing that involves my brain.

It might be different if the activity I was putting my all into was purely physical. But it's not, and when I close the textbook, my brain does that automatic log-off thing like your bank's website when you leave it open too long.

In fact, pushing myself to study so hard, means that Japanese has taken over many of the places where creativity would normally be. No more hilarious situations or quirky characters. I dream about kanji!

I don't mind it that much though. I know it's not forever. I'll be back to the creative world come August. After I secure this one goal, I'll get back to working on that other one that's taking a back seat for now.

Until then, I can't write.

Why I Write: Questions

I have to re-read MARCELO IN THE REAL WORLD by Francisco X Stork for a retreat assignment. (Happy, happy, it was one of the best things I read last year.) Near the end of the book, Marcelo has a conversation with the rabbi, and it got me to wondering if Francisco X Stork believes the things the rabbi says. Which turned into wondering what people would think I believe if they read my WIP. It's about censorship, and while the MC goes hardline against it, I do support some censorship. For example movie ratings are a form of censorship that I, and many others, support.

And then I thought about critiques I've seen of YA authors in the past years. Sometimes critics do equate a person's fiction with their beliefs. But I don't always believe the conclusions my characters draw. In fact, as I've mentioned, my opinion is middle-of-the-road and I would make a wet sock of a character.

I came to realise during this line of thinking, that sometimes, I don't write because I have an answer, but because I have a question. My last WIP deals with what it's like being friends with a bi-polar person (for real, not the Hollywood/Charlie Sheen version). It doesn't present every possible thing that could go wrong, or right, for that matter. But it opens the door to questions. What are bi-polar people like? What's it like having one close? What's going through their minds?

I'm wishy-washy. I am not resolute about many things. And my work is a way for me to explore all those questions that I have. Questions about parts of me. About my beliefs. About the thins that happen to those around me. About things I see on the news. Many people often have hardline beliefs that they've been brought up with or taught by society or read somewhere and adopted. I hope that my work can open these questions for those people - the type of people who didn't even realise there was a question.

I can't remember every mentioning it before, and last night when I thought it, it felt new. So here's one more reason why I write: because I have more questions than answers.

Commit

I'm currently reading The Eight Characters of Comedy by Scott Sedita. It's really a guide for actors on playing sitcom characters, but it's quite useful for comedy writers as well. Sedita mentions four "Cs." Commit is one of them. Actors have to commit to the role they're playing.

What's that mean? It's not about showing up early, and doing your research, and understanding the character, although you should do all those things as well. It's about to committing to being the character. Look at the GOLDEN GIRLS.



Rose is a complete idiot. Dorothy is sarcastic. Blanche is a manaholic. Sophia is mean. They all commit to that characterisation. When Rose says something idiotic, she can't act like it's idiotic. She has to be perfectly serious. She has to think it makes sense. If she knows she's an idiot, then it's not funny any more. Ditto, the others. Dorothy has to look at the others like she really believes she's better than their company. Blanche has to behave like sex is number 1 (and 2, 3,4 and 5) on her list. And Sophia has to act like she doesn't give a damn about anybody else or their feelings. The have to grab on to the role, commit and not let go, not even for a second.

As I read, it occured to me that this is something I've been struggling with in my latest MS. The main character is supposed have a certain set of characteristics. She's supposed to be logical to the point that sometimes people think she's heartless. But she's not heartless. Deep down she feels just like the rest of us, maybe more. And I keep trying to highlight this with scenes that negate the characteristics I'm supposed to be establishing. Instead of seeming like X with a sprinkling of Y, she's coming across as rapid oscillation between the two. A wishy-washy version of what's supposed to be a really in-control character.

And it's because I don't commit.

But when you write you have to. You have to commit to the characters being who they are, even if they're bad, or not like you, or there's more below the surface. You have to commit to the plot, even if (and especially when) harsh things happen. You have to commit to the voice and the tone and the message and the setting.

That's not to say that there won't be little parts that are "out of character." It's just that if you want to go out of character, you have to establish the character first.

When's the last time you wrote?

Some writers swear by writing every day. The venerable Stephen King, for example.Other writers, countless others, worry about how long it's been since they last wrote a word. I think, before considering either of these cases, we need to look at what exactly writing is, and what our writing processes are like.

Writing is, at it's most obvious, stringing words together, and recording them somehow - pen and paper; keyboard and hard drive, etc. But I don't think that's all writing is.

Plan
Some people are true pantsers. They have an idea and sit down and start telling that story, just like that. For the majority of us, that's not the case. Many writers are plotters. They produce plot arcs and character arcs before they start to write the story. They write down all the characters' motivations and conflicts and setbacks. They know the high point of the action, and all the complications that will pop up.

Some of us lean towards pantsing, but we still have to do a bit of development before the words start to flow. Maybe a character sheet, a general idea of the plot. Me, I'm most comfortable thinking it through. I get to know my characters in my head, and have a vague idea of the story line. I think a story through for months, or even years. Sometimes I write other stories while I'm thinking. But even if I'm not physically getting words out on paper, planning is writing, whatever route you take.

Research
 If your book stars a chef at an Italian restaurant, and you go out once a week, and try a different dish, that's research. If you take a class in Italian cooking, that's research. If you read Italian cookbooks or look up recipes online, that's research.

Reading books by others in and outside of your genre, can also serve to get the creative juices flowing, as well as keep a writer au fait with what's out there. It's all research.

Edit
After you've planned what you're doing to some extent, you'll probably write the book. To the non-industry ear, the word 'write' sounds like it's all about adding new words. But according to E.B. White, "The best writing is rewriting." The editing stage also counts, despite the fact that it may not push your word tally forward.

Once again, process comes into play. Most authors let a book rest a bit, so they come at it with fresh eyes. After that, the paths diverge again. Some authors, sit down with a printed copy of the manuscript, and use a complicated set of hieroglyphics to show where the plot drags and what should be switched around. Some did a lot of mini-edits while they wrote, so at this point they check for consistency and dive into smaller edits. So far, my editing process seems to consist of re-reading, and then doing nothing while the book re-arranges itself in my head. (NB, I still have not completed an edit. )

It's all writing
I personally, can't write every day, in any form. Heck the only thing I'm sure I've done every day of my life, or even of the last year, is breathe. I know that we can be hard on ourselves when we haven't written in a while. But, if thinking it through and character charts and re-reading all count as writing, then you're probably not doing too bad.

Don't stress yourself if you find that you haven't put words on paper for a whole week, or month, or a few months. Writing is comprised of many different stages. If one isn't working for you write now, dive into another. Having trouble drafting? Then daydream. Not feeling very creative? Edit. None of the productive side going your way? Read. The only thing you need to be careful of is not to get stuck in the same stage, or avoid any one stage. (Having four complete 1st drafts and no complete 2nd drafts, I know a thing or two about this.)

If you can, write - in any form- every day. If you can't, just don't stay away too long.

When's the last time you wrote?

Juunin Toiro

Here in Japan, there's a saying 十人十色 (juunin, toiro) - ten men, ten colours. Ten people will act in ten different ways.

But there are a few- as there always are- in the writer community who believe that their way is the only way. Not just for them but for everybody. You absolute HAVE to plot your novel. You CAN'T plot your novel or it will be stilted. You MUST write every day, no matter what. You SHOULDN'T write if you really don't feel up to it.

For me, there are few rules that can be applied universally in writing. But recently, I've been thinking about one...

I've  done and won Nanowrimo every year since 2008. I owe a lot to Nano. I completed my 1st first draft in Nano. And my 2nd. And my 3rd. And I'm hoping to complete my 4th by the middle of next week. In addition to which, I "became a writer" because of Nano. I've always written, and I've always had the "I may write a novel some day" spirit. But only after Nano, did I make the decision that I was going to produce books.

Also, I kind of owe this blog to nano. It was during Nano that someone pointed me to Nathan Bransford's blog. That lead me to Natalie and Marsha. And as I ran around the blogosphere commenting and interacting, I felt like I needed a space of my own. At the time, I had a Japan blog, a philosophy blog and a weight loss blog, but I needed a space where my writer friends would want to come. And so Points of Claire-ification happened.

Even though I love Nano, some time after last Nano, I realised that if I was to be a serious writer, I couldn't very well turn out first drafts only in November. So I made a couple (unsuccessful) attempts at novelling early this year. I'm working on it. Add to that the fact that Nano is only for first drafts. I mean there is an Edit month as well, but I believe that's in December, when I'm out of energy from Nano, and trying to sew back together my shambles of a social life. Plus editing productivity is a lot harder to measure.

And every year, Nano gets worse for me. My first year, I wrote pretty consistently clocking the required 1667 words almost every day. The second year, I took a week hiatus, and had to play catchup. Last year I wrote 30,000 words in the final week. This year's Nano has been painful. I started the book I planned to write, an tsunami-earthquake YA, and I just couldn't get it to stick. Then I started another novel, about a girl hell-bent on losing her virginity, and that wasn't working either. Finally, I started the novel I'm working on now- possibly around a week late. Once again, it's the final week, and I've got 30,000 words to go.

Thinking about how much Nano has done for me, and how well it used to work, I wonder how some writers can swear one path is the best for everyone. I'm just one writer, and the path that used to be perfect for me, is now barely semi-okay.

There are very few universal rules in writing, but one of them is this:

Take the path that works for you.

And, if that path stops working, find a new one.

十人十色

You already know - Plot - A la Mary Kole

Last Monday, I mentioned the Mary Kole Agent Day event that I attended in Tokyo (Yokohoma, Kanagawa if we're being technical). I also mentioned 5 things I learned. Today, I'm talking about thing 2: You probably already know the answer to your question. And there will be follow-up posts on this as well.

I'm not going to get into much about what Ms Kole said in my one-on-one critique. Something about that doesn't feel quite kosher. But there is one thing she said that I feel I can share.

I went into the critique excited. I couldn't wait to find out what THE Mary Kole thought about my work. But then she made a comment and I had to restrain myself from laughing. Not because I thought she was wrong. Or because I'd finally snapped. Because I've got that very same critique at SCBWI creative exchanges. And I make that same critique of my work myself. In fact, I make it so often, that some of you may know my fatal flaw without having ever seen my work. And I don't suppose THE Mary Kole would be worth her sauce if she couldn't pick up on what everybody and their dog has already noticed.

My characters are real. My voice is well-defined (and occasionally overbearing). But even a team made up of Sherlock Holmes, the KGB, the CIA, Angela Landsbury, Scooby Doo, Miss Marple and Encyclopedia Brown couldn't find my plot. Yes, it's that bad.

(My words, not hers, or my SCBWI colleagues'.) 

As she spoke, I just nodded, because I was being a good little critiquee. But I couldn't help thinking, "I came here for this?" Here was this incredible opportunity to present my work and hear from the other side of the desk. One of my critique partners just signed with her agent through a face to face event. And I don't delude myself that I'm anywhere near query stage. You guys know that. It's just that this was a massive opportunity. And I wasted it.

The lesson to be learnt here is that if we sit and contemplate, we may already know where our issues lie.  It would profit us more to fix the things we can fix on our own and to ask for help when neccesary. In critiquing, and of course in life, we should be presenting our best wherever possible. Putting forward a product that in our mind has no flaws.

There's a central tenet of learning (both knowledge and skill acquisition) that many people forget or ignore:

The student has to play an active role. 

We have to take ourselves to a certain level before the teacher/expert/sempai can take us any further.

I know what is wrong with my stories. I know that I need to find a way to fix it. I am going to my best to get that sorted out before I move forward. Anything else is a waste of time. Opportunities are all around, and I don't want to keep throwing them out the window.

Do you know what's wrong in your writing? Have you tried to fix it? Are you past the point that you can do it on your own? Have you tried peer or professional critiquing?

*Sempai is a Japanese word, meaning senior, literally ahead of colleage(s)

Getting it out of my system

Entertainers are sorta notorious for being moody, and being a little crazy, and saying things they maybe shouldn't. But the more I hang around the industry, the more I realise that authors have an eternal gag order. It's more of an issue after publication, but it's still a factor before you even query.

Recently, I've seen a few authors come out of the literary closet on how hard it was/is to query/go on submission/wait for their pub date/be mid list, etc. And I sympathised. Then I thought: Some day, that might just be me.

So I've decided to write letters to myself. Because, as we say in Barbados, I don't like to hide my mouth. And because I'm strong, but I'm a sensitive artistic soul as well. And it's probably going to hurt when I get there. And I probably won't be able to talk about it. But if I've got these letters here, then I can always come back here and know I've declared my hand for the world to see.

DEAR QUERY TRENCHES ME,

That story rocks. I know you've polished and polished it til it sparkled like a merpire. You read and re-read 'til you mixed up your imaginary scenes with your real life. You've passed it around for critique and taken it with a grain of salt, and made the novel the absolute best-est you have in you.

I know it's hard to wait until some agent deigns to look at you. Even though you know that they are just regular people who bleed red and read even more than you do, it's hard not to feel like they've got all the power. Not to feel like you're nothing. Not to feel like you're worthless. Not to feel like you'll never take the next step.

You will.

You're awesome!

DEAR SUBMISSION ME,
And you thought grabbing an agent's attention was hard. The channel just gets narrower and narrower every step of the way. Sigh. And you know editors are busy, but, seriously, why is this taking so long? And don't they know you're dieing inside? Your agent loves my book. You know it's good. Maybe you're crazy. Maybe you both are. Because editors know their stuff and if noone wants it, it's pretty bad.

I know you want to curl up and crawl under a rock, but don't forget this industry is slower than chilled molasses. The wheels may be turning, even if not at the pace you want them to. And even if they're not, even if this one won't be the one that you get to claim "real writerhood" with, this isn't a board game. If you mess up on one turn, you don't have to wait until all the other players get their turn, 'til you can go again.

Take a break. Do something you love. And work on the next project. You may need it. Because the other option is giving up. And that's not really an option.

Not for awesome people like you, anyways.

DEAR WAITING FOR PUBLICATION DATE ME,
They told you that time travel was impossible. They said time couldn't move backwards. They were wrong. Because no matter how long you wait, your pub date isn't here. It's been forever since you got THE CALL. And since the bloodbath that was edits.

Still, nothing.

Time is scientific. Every second the same length. Perception on the other hand is eviller than Cruella DeVille. Perception makes you swear that the clock ticks backwards, but it doesn't. And soon there will be shiny ARCs with covers and you can take pictures doing ridiculous things with your new almost-baby. And then there will buzz at conferences and on whatever new forum of social interaction is the new Geocities. And then your book will burst forth into literature-dom!

Yay YOU! You are still awesome.

DEAR THIS IS NOT THE WAY THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE ME:
Having a good head on your shoulders means nothing. You know. You know that 1 in a million- literally- gets to be the next Rowling or Meyer or King. 1 in a million gets to have every literate person in the world know their name. 1 in a million gets to buy a mansion in The Heights or The Hills.

You were kind of hoping that one would be you.

It isn't.

You've know the odds were against it all along, but you still hoped. You still dreamed. It's okay. It's your job to dream. It's not exactly like you hoped it would be. Maybe you don't have millions flocking to your website. Or lining up at midnight for your releases. Or dressing in costume for your films - which were never even optioned.

But you know what you do have? A byline. Your name. On the cover of a book. Shouting for all the world to hear.

I DID THIS.

You're still awesome.

With Love,
Claire Dawn

Do you believe in ghosts?

Recently, I read an article somewhere (possibly on Writers' Digest) about ghostwriting. It got me to thinking about whether or not I would.

WHO'S DA GHOST?

In short, ghostwriting is writing, then giving someone else the byline for your work. Some ghost-writers are recognised as co-authors. Some are not recognised at all, and legally bound not to tell anyone they had any contact with the book.

WHERE'S DA GHOST?

Ghostwriting is most common in non-fiction. Justin Bieber doesn't have the time (and probably not the skills) to write his auto-biography, so if he chose to produce one, he'd probably pay a ghostwriter to do it for him.

Another area that popular for ghostwriting is series, especially the children's series where a book is produced every few months. There is no way 1 writer could turn out a book every 2 months. And if there was, it could not make it through the editorial process that quickly.

You'll also sometimes see ghostwritten where an author has died mid-book or mid-series.

HOW'S DA GHOST?
There are a few things you need to become a ghostwriter.

A portfolio- You have to prove you can write before you even start the job.

Writing skills- More so than writing under your own name, you need to be on top of spelling and grammar. If you have to turn in the work to the client before an agent/editor and you've mispelled 3 words on the first page, he's not going to be thrilled.

Flexibility- Since you're writing to a client's specification, you need to able to adjust yourself to their demands.

Research skills: In non-fiction, especially memoir, ghostwriting will involve listening to the client, and trying to get them to tell you the best parts of their story. You may also be called upon to supplement what your client says with information you have to look up yourself.

Ability to meet deadlines: Theoretically, you should already be cultivating this as a writer. It's even more important when you ghostwrite, because it's not your name on the line.

WHY DA GHOST?
- Ghostwriting pays more steadily (and more, in general) than being a mid-list author. Generally, however, it pays a flat fee.

- Ghostwriting is good practice. Ghostwriters write fairly consistently, so if they're ever inspired to use their own name, they've already put in a lot of work.

- Ghostwriters don't come up with their own ideas. If you have issues coming up with or evaluating ideas, writing someone else's story can take away the pressure.

- If you don't care about the fame and the name, and just want to know your book is out there.

TO GHOST OR NOT TO GHOST?
While I would love to be employed to write a book in one of my favourite series, I'm not sure I could ghostwrite. I don't want to lose my creative freedom, and even though I'm not in it for the fame, I can't imagine my name not being attached to my book.

Would you ghostwrite?

Talent plus Skill

From dictionary.com

Talent:
–noun
1.
a special natural ability or aptitude: a talent for drawing.

Skill:
–noun
1.
the ability, coming from one's knowledge, practice, aptitude, etc., to do something well: Carpentry was one of his many skills.

THE DIFFERENCE
The essential difference between a talent and a skill is whether it comes naturally or whether you built it from scratch. Some people will argue that arts are talents and sciences are skill. But I beg to differ.

Some people can instinctively hear a song, pick up an instrument they've never played, poke/strum/bang out a few notes, and then they're playing like Alicia Keys. Others practice an instrument forever and play beautifully, but are never able to play by ear or compose. People in the first instance have a talent for music, people in the second instance have a particular instrument as a skill.

The same thing happens on the flip side. Science is often a skill, with hours, days, years, of filling your brain with knowledge. But inventors and cutting-edge researchers need an innate ability to see and understand connections. You know the type: that dude in your Physics class who'd just read a theory in the book, and get it. That's not skill, that's talent.

TALENT & WRITING

In my very, very, very humble opinion, every writer has talent- whether they've published 9,000 epics or they're writing their first sentence. Writers all have a natural curiosity- a yearning to answer what if? This curiosity facilitates an ability to naturally see possibilities. Through this, writers can become philosophers, or combine the concrete and the imagined.

Want scientific proof? On the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (an indicator based on inborn preferences), the N (intuitive) represents only about 30% of the US population, while it's counterpart S (sensing) makes up about 70%. That's apparent from the fact that the majority of society tends to be quite happy with facts and concrete stuff. Intuitives prefer theories, abstracts, and getting creative. Yet, even though the N's are a tiny minority, the overwhelming majority of actors, writers, and other creatives are iNtuitive. Creatives are therefore, almost by definition, people who have always been able to see possibilities.

Other talents that a writer may have:
A knack for the right words.
A knack for telling stories.
An understanding of grammar.

And on the technical elements side, a writer may be talented when it comes to:
World-building
Characterisation
Plot
Story structure
Organisation
Voice

PROS & CONS

The pros of having writing talent are obvious.

Things come easy to you.
You work faster.
You don't have to correct as much.

Cons are a little harder to think of, but they certainly exist.

Relying on talent robs you of opportunity to improve. Talent can and should be honed.
The temptation to lean towards the elements you're good at, and ignore the ones that don't come easily.


SKILLS & WRITING

Writing is not just about talent. There are many non-creative skills that writers need to develop. Writers need to work on discipline- dragging themselves to the keyboard when [insert anything other than writing here]. Writers need to stay organised- not neccessarily with colour-coded charts (so not happening), but they need to develop a system for their work. More and more, writers need to be professional- not that we didn't always, but everything is so much more public now, and one unprofessional mishap, could mean the death (or maiming) of a career. These are not necessarily talents that many writers are born with, but they are definitely skills to cultivate.

There are also creative skills that writers need to work on. As I said, I believe the only universal talent of writers is the way they see the world. Apart from that, some writers have certain talents, and others have different ones.

For example, I'm told I'm great at voice and good at character. But all the things under the "possible talents" list are required for writers. For me, that means that if they're not talents, I need to develop them as skills. Noone's ever said it, but I know I suck at plot. So it's something I have to work at, and study.

PROS & CONS

Skills have their perks too!

Work on a skill long enough and it can become second nature. Noone's born with a talent for walking. (Granted, some of us (points at self), still fall over for no particular reason.)
A well-developed skill can look better than an un-honed talent. We all know someone with a natural affinity for something, who ended up going nowhere. Talent isn't the only factor.

But of course there is a downside.

You can work on a skill forever, it will never look as good as a well-honed talent. I could go to a million vocal lessons, I will never be able to move in Mariah/Beyonce/Madonna/Rihanna's circles.

THE EQUATION

People are always going on about Talent vs. Skill. I think that's the wrong equation. A year ago, I wrote a formula for success, and I still stand by it.

Success = Talent + Effort + Luck

I'm substituting "skill" for effort, because really most of the stuff you work on are skills, to arrive at a new and improved formula:

Success = Talent + Skill + Luck

(The inclusion of luck might be a tad depressing, but think of it this way. If success is a constant, then the bigger the value of talent and skill, the less luck is involved.)

It's not a matter of talent vs skill. Since no writer is an island, it's all about talent plus skill!

CAN IT BE TAUGHT?
I've seen arguments for and against whether you can teach writing. My position? You can teach skills, you can't teach talent. If your plot is derivative, you can be taught how to fix that (or so I pray-lol). If your characters are flat, there are lessons for that. There are even workshops out there that help you find and cultivate your voice.

The more talents on the "possibles" list you possess, the easier the writing road is likely to be for you (unless you fall into the trap of ignoring your weak areas). But if you really want to be a writer, you can learn all of those things. It will be a long and difficult road, but I believe it can be done.

The only that absolutely can't be taught is the writer's way of looking at the world. Believe me, I've tried time and again to explain the way I see things to people. Some don't undertand how 1 + 1 would make 11. Some can't can't see why it should. But if you're actively trying to be a writer (for any reason other than the million dollar checks and the fame - snicker) then you've probably already got a writer's mind.

WILL SMITH
Also check out this awesome vid by an awesome actor. There's a bit in there on talent and skill, but it's just generally motivational, especially for creatives.

Intertwined Plots

Hi lovelies!

If you've been trying to comment on the last couple days posts unsuccessfully, it's because Blogger's been having a conniption. I've temporarily solved the problem, by changing to a Pop-up comment box instead of an embedded one.

And speaking of Blogger and conniptions, anyone else have issues with their Twitter buttons on their blogs?

Today, I'm going to feature intertwined plots.

To my mind, a story has intertwined plots when two or more plots:

are of equal/similar importance or take up equal/similar space in the story

are not entirely independent but drive one another

Plots are of equal/similar importance or take up equal/similar space

A couple years back, ensemble casts (large casts with no 'main' character) came back into style. You can see ensemble casts in tv shows like FRIENDS and in movies like LOVE ACTUALLY, VALENTINE'S DAY and CRASH. Since each character has his/her own life, issues, triumphs, etc, ensemble casts almost automatically give rise to intertwined plots.

Take the movie VALENTINE'S DAY- 19 characters show us what love us in their own different way. Every couple/character has a similar chunk of time in the spotlight. We don't spend half hour with the teen sweethearts and five minutes with the old, married couple.

On the flip, plots may not take up a similar amount of space or time, but are just as important. A few weeks ago I gave away a copy of THE SUMMER BEFORE BOYS. One of my favourite things was the intertwined plot. The "main" plot focuses on how a boy changes the relationship between two best friends. But there are also interwoven chapters about war, and women in war, because Julia's mother is in Iraq. Even though it's not the focus of the story, you can bet that this is every bit as important to Julia as what is going on in the here and now.

The same is true of the movie INCEPTION. It's an action movie and the majority of time is spent in the action plot, building a dream sequence that the team can infiltrate and acheive their goal. But even though it doesn't take centre-stage, Cobb's personal plot - he wants to get home to his children- is just as important.

Plots are not entirely independent but drive one another.

This is the case in CRASH. At first the characters are all seperate and distinct, and so are their individual plot lines, but eventually one character's actions lead to consequences for another character, and the effect keeps rolling towards disaster.

How intertwined plots differ from subplots

A subplot is a secondary or tertiary plot which doesn't (usually) have a major effect on the main plot. In TWILIGHT, it doesn't really matter whether Jessica dates Mike, Eric or Ben, Bella wil remain bewitched by Edward.

A subplot doesn't take up much time/space and happens largely in the background.

A subplot (usually) doesn't drive the main plot.

How does it work?

There is one main thing an intertwined plot needs: a point of connection.

In all of the cases I can think of this point of connection is one of two things: a character or a concept.

In SUMMER BEFORE BOYS Julia has two major things going on in her life. She meets a boy and her mother is in Iraq with the National Guard. These two things are both huge for Julia- she's never noticed a boy before, and there exists a real possibility that she may never say her mother again.

Intertwined plots linked around a concept seem to be more common in film and tv- maybe because of the large number of characters.

CRASH focuses on racism.
LOVE ACTUALLY and VALENTINE'S DAY both focus on love.
FRIENDS (surprise, surprise) focuses on friendship.

What they offer

Intertwined plots go deep.

Plots built around a concept offer a chance to see that concept from many points of view. In CRASH we see different ways in which people can be affected by racism: affluent black people, black people with power over white people, latino people, white people who want to do the right thing, middle Eastern people... An author/screenwriter could have zeroed in on anyone of these tales for a single portrait of what racism means. The difference between a single story and an intertwined plot based on a concept is like the difference between a lecture and a panel discussion.

Plots built around a character offer a chance to get deeper into that character. Characters, like real people, have a lot going on. Writers choose which parts of a character's life they will show to the audience. The advantage of the main-plot/sub-plot structure is that the audience gets more connected to a single issue.But issues don't line themselves up to happen one at a time. Life doesn't wait til you've finished struggle with your female issues to throw race issues at you. For this reason intertwined plots centred on a character can feel more real.

Why do intertwined plots work?

Clearly, I love me a good intertwined plot. But why? More to love.

In the stories built around a concept, you get to see five or ten points of view for the price (and effort) of one. And because there's so much going on, you get to picks the parts you love/agree with, and if there are parts that don't float your boat, they don't take up enough of the pie to make you walk away from the story as a whole. There's more chance that there will be a character who you strongly identify with or can understand. Added bonus: you learn from the characters you don't identify as well with until it's time for your faves to show up again.

In stories built around a character, you can feel lukewarm about one plot, and be pulled in by the other. Or your feelings about one may cause you to be more interested in the other.

Why they fail

I think that intertwined plots are very difficult to do well. This comes partly from one horrible and one passable attempt at writing them. And partly from seeing the result of an almost well-done intertwined plot.

When the focus is on concept, there are multiple main characters. Each of those characters has to be 3-D. They each need lives, problems, aspirations. If it's easy to fail with 3 or 4 secondary characters, it must be a million times easier to fail with 10 main characters.

When the focus is on character, there lies a danger in not developing one (or more)of the plots as well.

In either case, if the point of connection seems too tenuous, then it will feel like the story just runs in a bunch of different directions.

Take VALENTINE'S DAY, the biggest all-star cast in recent history that I can think of, and yet it didn't do that well. It's a movie about Valentine's Day, but the characters had very little connection to one another. So it ended up being like a guy standing outside a grocery store asking random people to tell him about love.

Anyone else out there totally beswotted with intertwined plots?

Query first

The scariest word in the un-published author's vocabulary? Query. Today I wanted to show you a few ways in which you can refine this savage beast. And even make it work for you.

Welcome to the Query First Theory.

I know I'm not the first person to say it, but there's a benefit to writing the query before you write the novel. Especially for pantsers like me.

KEEPING THE STORY ON TRACK

Many of us pantser-types resist having an outline or a synopsis before-hand because we feel that the level of detail will sap out all the creative juices. A query, on the other hand, is not really about details. It's more about generating interest in the concept behind the story.

By writing a query first, you can check back in periodically on ensure that the manuscript is staying in tune with the big picture. It helps keep your story about dealing with grief not turn into a story about auditioning for a reality tv show. (Fellow pantsers, you know this happens.)

CAPTURING THE VOICE

Writing your query before the first draft can be a way to discover voice, especially in YA. Consider this example from the back cover of Twilight:

About three things I was absolutely positive.
First, Edward was a vampire.
Second, there was part of him — and I didn’t know how potent that part might be — that thirsted for my blood.
And third, I was unconditionally and irrevocably in love with him.

I think this captures Bella's voice perfectly. It also fulfills the first requirement of directing the story- every part of the first book of the Twilight saga is concerned with the fact that Edward is a vampire, that he must resist the urge to have Bella a la Cullen, and that Bella is totally hooked.

Also, consider this excerpt from Karsten Knight's query for WILDEFIRE:

Ashline Wilde never received an instruction manual on how to be a 16-year-old Polynesian volcano goddess. If she had, it might have contained helpful warnings such as:

Dreaming about your (thankfully) mortal boyfriend may cause your bed to spontaneously combust
Oven mitts should be worn at all times during heavy make-out sessions

Wildefire hasn't been released yet, but the voice- even moreso than the story- makes it a must-read for me.

TIME IS ON YOUR SIDE

Much of the query-writing pressure is actually time pressure. You write a book, you want to get it out there, but you have to stop and boil down it's essence in a witty way. ARGH!

Writing a query beforehand means you can come back to it periodically through the whole process- first drafting, second-drafting, critiquing, editing, etc. It means you can tweak the query if you need to change your story. You've got months to find the perfect words to show your story. And when your manuscript is ready to go, your query's already chomping at the bit.

Any other reasons to write the query first?

We're important because you are

Every so often someone will start up on how useless YA writing is, or how YA/Children's authors write in their fields because they're not good enough for adult literature. Then there's a spate of articles popping up around the web in defence of YA, MG and picture books. All supported with valid arguments of why what we do is valuable.

But there is one argument I've never seen:

We're important because you are.

Our Western society values a university education. We've come to realise that it is possible to acheive great success without a degree- as proven by billionaire dropouts like Microsoft's Bill Gates, Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, TV mogul Ted Turner, toy tycoon Ty Warner and even drug lord, Pablo Escobar. That doesn't mean we're not still grateful for the leg-up it can give in today's world.

But if a university education is important, then a high school education is important. You could be the most brilliant person in the world, Cambridge is not going to let you in with just primary level education. And could you imagine turning up at their gates, trying to argue your case never having taken an exam in your life? "I swear Mr. Vice-Chancellor, Sir, I'm smart. Never mind I've never had any schooling whatsoever." Let me know when he stops laughing.

That's not to say that primary and secondary level education don't have their own merits. But we could argue forever on what they are. What I don't think is debateable however, is that if an end has merit, and that end can be reached only or mostly through a specific path, then the path must have merit too.

This is how I feel about the arguments which try to extol adult fiction but put down children's literature and it's writers.

How many readers do you know that never read as a child or a teen, and suddenly woke up as a 20 year-old with a hankering for Hemingway? That's not to say it doesn't happen. But it's rare.



Most adult readers were read to as toddlers. They graduated to reading whatever early reader books were available at the time, and as teens they moved into books about romance or foreign worlds or magic or everyday people with extraordinary obstacles.

And then they graduate to the "worthy" adult books.


When you consider how many other ways there are to entertain yourself on your own these days- with the internet to be surfed and the PlayStation to be conquered, it's kind of miraculous that we're able to convince anyone to pick up a book. And when you factor in how many things have been added to our plates as adults, it's not hard to imagine that someone who didn't make time for books as a child won't bother to make time for them as an adult.

A love of these...


...leads to a love of these.

(Look at me being all multicultural with my 6-country, trilingual bookstack. Btw, do all French books write the spines backwards- reading down when the book is standing up?)


If adult books are important, then childrens books are important. If we stopped writing tomorrow, and children could no longer found things geared toward them and opted never to read, then the publishing industry would be done in about 50 years.

Not diminished. Just done.

And where would adult literature stand then?

I thought so. Say thank you.

Agent Charming

Finding the perfect agent is like a fairy tale. When it all comes together it's a beautiful, magical, mythical thing.

1. Take Your Time.

I read somewhere that publishing's motto should be "hurry up and wait". That's true of a lot of parts of publishing, but there are lots of times we can make it better. Look at Snow White. From the minute we meet her, she's waiting for her Prince to come. But she's not just sitting there. Even when she runs away, she occupies her days taking care of the dwarves.

At no point does she stop everything to go look for her prince.

Writing a novel, and editing it, and having it critiqued, and editing it again... it's a long process. Yet people find themselves waiting until after they've constructed their query to look up agents. They you race through the process because it's holding you up.

No matter what stage of the writing process you're at, start your search now and you give it the chance to be organic. You don't have to stop everything to go look for an agent. You can come across agents and make a note of matches instead of spending hours combing books, forums, and websites.

2. Search, search, search.

Of course there is the possibility that the names of 5 to 10 perfect agents won't just fall into your lap, no matter how much time you give it.

Time to go Aladdin- a la Walt Disney. Princess Jasmine has to be married, and to a Prince. The Sultan uses all his resources and leaves no stone unturned in the search for the perfect suitor.

There are lots of places to find agent names and genres.

Online
There's the Publisher's Marketplace listings, which you can browse for free.
Or you can find agent lists on forums like Absolute Write or Writer's Digest community.
There are also genre-specific communities that can help you find agents. In the YA world, there's YALITCHAT- which, like Publisher's Marketplace, has a free level and a paid level.
SCBWI, once again in the children's community, also has discussion on agents, but in the members-only area.


In print
Check out the (insert year) (insert field) market series.
I haven't really looked at any of the other series out there, but I find it hard to imagine anyone else could be more comprehensive. They range from general writing to novel/short story to children's to songwriting. They're also available from Book Depository- which means free shipping for us not in the U.S. Except Pakistan. Condolences :(
If you're looking to publish in the UK market, you may want to have a book tailor-made for you. The Writers' & Artists' Yearbook is just what the doctor ordered. I own a copy of the Children Writer's edition. It has wonderful lists of agents, and informative articles from the big fish of British publishing- Roald Dahl and J.K. Rowling, to name a couple. I recommend that if you're looking at the UK market you definitely pick up a yearbook. The UK market isn't as online as the US market. And there are entire agencies thta you just won't find online.
(Insert year) Guide to Literary Agents is just what the name says. It offers advice, explanations and listings of both American and foreign agents.

In person
I'm a people person. I'd probably do a better job of talking myself into a 3-book deal than writing/querying myself into one. Conferences, workshops, regional writing group meet-ups are great places to meet agents. And having a chance to interact with them and ask questions can make it feel less like they're are some holier-than-thou ruler-of-the-universe and more like a business partner.

3. If the shoe fits.

It's tempting to think that because an agent reps your genre, they're a match for you. That is not necessarily the case. Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter are both fantasy, but they're wildly different.

Of course, Cinderella will help us with this one. Prince Charming had her shoe, and knew that when it fit, that was the lady he was looking for. Did other people get their foot in the shoe? Yes. In almost every variation of the tale, someone manages to squish their hoof in there. But it's never a good fit. Realisitically speaking, there'd probably be more than one woman in a whole kingdom who could fit the shoe. But that doesn't mean Prince Charming should marry anybody in possession of a foot.

A while back the venerable Nathan Bransford spoke about spaghetti agents- agents who sign anything with a modicum of potential and then throw all the MSs at editors and see what sticks.

I don't want to be a spaghetti querier- querying every single agent who reps my genre, in the hope that one sticks.

So how do you find the girl from the ball?

This is where time comes in. Anytime you come across a book in your genre that makes your skin crawl, make a note of the agent. An agent usually only works with what they LOVE! So if they loved it, and it makes you want to gouge your eyes out, then you maybe have different tastes.

On the flip, if you absolutely LOVE LOVE LOVED a book, make a note of that agent too.

Making an agent list ahead of time gives you the opportunity to check out books that an agent has repped if you hadn't previously read any of them.

Also, lurk around the bloggosphere. You'll pick up little tidbits from agented writers about their agents style. Of course, they'll be more professional than to air their qualms on the internet, but you can find out whether an agent is editorial or not, what their process is like, and whether they'll call to wish your dog happy birthday.

I'm not saying you need an agent who remembers your dog's birthday. But if that's what floats your boat, the best way to find out is from their clients.

4. Is it the real thing?

In Studio Ghibli's Princess Mononoke, the humans disguise themselves in the skins of the dead boars in order to attack. When you mistake foe for friend, the effect can be devastating.

Real agents want you to succeed. Your success pays their mortgage. But there are oodles of fake agents out there who just want your money and care nothing about your success.

Always check it out if an agent asks you for money. I do know of a few agents - all the ones I can think of offhand are UK-based- who offer paid critiques completely seperate of their agenting business.

Check the Association of Authors' Representatives. As far as I know this is completely foolproof, BUT they require an agent to have been agenting for 18 months. New agents fall by the wayside. (Being included in any of the resources in the search section is also a validation.)

Look for connections to a reputable agency. If other agents in the same agency have AAR certification, the agency and therefore all it's agents are legit. There are certain big name agencies that have been around forever and also pretty much guarantee legitimacy: Curtis Brown (US/UK) and Conville and Walsh (UK) for example.

Affiliations with reputable conferences. If they've given a workshop at The Festival of York (UK) or SCBWI Summer Conference (LA), then you know they're legit. The same goes for being members of the large writing/publishing associations: SCBWI, RWA, etc.

Poke around author websites. If J.K. Rowling says on her website that person is her agent, then they're legit.

If you haven't encountered them in anywhere you'd stake your MS on, check them out on Preditors and Editors.

Good luck finding your happily ever after!

First draft journey

In this week's giveaway, I asked about your creative paradigm. Since we're on the subject I thought I'd tell you a little about mine.

SPARK
The first thing that happens is that something comes to me, knocks on the door of my imagination and has a hissy fit in a high pitched voice:

"We wants to be writed. Now. Last week."

I'm not the type that has to go looking for ideas. In fact, I have a word document (Novel Concepts) that is pretty much all titles and/or 2 or 3 line summaries of ideas.

BRAINSTORMING
I'm not a plotter, but I'm not as hardcore a pantser as I could be.I think of my paradigm of an asymptote- I'll probably continue to get closer and closer to how plotters function, but I'll never really be a plotter.

In my brainstorming stage, I roll over the characters and plot in my mind. One of the things I hear about my writing is that my characters feel real. I think it's because they live in my head so long before I write anything. They're like my friends because I know them. (Sadly the brainstorming thing doesn't seem to have much of an effect on plot. I'm working on it.)

READY. SET. GO.
I've completed 3 manuscripts. They've all been for nanowrimo. Seems I can't write a novel unless I go out in a blaze of guns and glory. The process of actually getting my story down on paper (or on hard drive, really) is all about flying through it as fast as life (and my fingers) will allow.

So that's my first draft journey. The things that come out well in my first draft are voice (I get lots of compliments on it) and character. According to both critiquers and my own opinion, the thing I need to work on most is plot. I think I only do settings well when I make them up. My hooks aren't all that hooky. And I'm working on making my theme's less like Slughorn's memories (screamy and overpowering).

Btw, I've started on the earthquake novel. Cranked out 3,000 words yesterday and it's barely 2 hours in!

Rhyme to write by

Don't forget to enter to win a copy of MATCHED by Allie Condie.

You remember that old wedding rhyme?

Something old,
Something new,
Something borrowed,
Something blue.

Well, apparently I'm in a poetic mood. Because I wrote 2 poems yesterday and, as I walking to school, another came to me. It's like the wedding rhyme, only it doesn't forecast a good marriage, but a good book. Here are the ingredients:

Something tiny,
Something huge,
Someone to feel,
Something to do.

Something Tiny

Your book is one of millions, but what makes a book stand out from the madding crowd? Details. A little over a year ago,(REALLY??? Have I been blogging that long?) I posted about the devil in the details. In that post, I talked about how people compared Avatar (the one with blue people, not the one with the benders of different elements) to Pocahontas and Fern Gully. They said it was the same story. But that's not true. There are people who love Avatar and aren't Pocahontas or Fern Gully fans. And vice versa.

Every story has been told before. What can you do to make your story stand out? Can you bring some innovation to the way it's told? (Whatever your feeling about Avatar, it brought advances in on-screen visuals.) Will you offer a new twist to an eternal plot? A new setting? A wildly different character?

Yesterday (or today, depending on where you are in the world) was Valentine's Day. I saw a lot of people on my facebook quarreling about it. Why should we get all up in arms, doing special things for one day, when we don't do anything else all year? It's easy to get caught up in the monumental, but don't forget, it's the little things that matter.

Something Huge

How can you need something tiny, but still need something huge?

Those little things that you tell the story with- they need to fit into a bigger framework. Because the big picture is where people connect with one another. For example, I like quirky books, and I like books that make me think (not at the expense of story), and I like books that make me warm and fuzzy. Now you may like your books dark; or with racing plots; or featuring ruthless, rugged heros. I like YA. Maybe you like sci-fi. But what brings us together is the love of books.

Let's take Twilight as an example. There are lots of little things that aren't my cup of tea in that book. Bella is a bit of a twat, to be quite blunt. And the writing itself is not the most graceful ever. But I love Twilight. And so do millions of others. Why? Prince Charming. Guy appears and whisks girl who was never going to get involved with anyone else off in a typhoon of pure love? Yup, that's as Prince Charming as it comes. We can talk about being practical women of the 21st century until the cows come home. There's still a little piece of most of us that yearns for the 'perfect' love.


A good book taps into one of these overarching ideas. Here are a few more big name examples, accompanied by the big picture idea I see in them:
Harry Potter - good vs evil
The Hunger Games - man vs the establishment
The Duff - self esteem
To Kill a Mockingbird - injustice
Th1rteen R3asons Why - death

Someone to Feel

Books and stories have moved from their earlier purpose of educating to entertaining. In order to entertain, they have to connect. They do that through the people in the story.

I'd like to point out that I said 'feel', not 'love'. Sometimes, you read a book, and you just despise someone. Draco Malfoy, for example - even moreso since the movies.

Also, these days, the people in books need to feel real. If they're not, we won't be drawn into loving or hating them, or pretending that Peeta just kissed us instead of Katniss.

Something to Do

Right-o, now we've got the little things, the big picture, and the people. But we can't just sitting around all day watching Disney movies. (Even if that would be awesome! Curled up against Wesley Rush-from The Duff- swoon!) Now we need to do something.

What we do depends on the type of book. In a murder mystery, we look for clues, and solve the case. In a thriller, or suspense, we might get stalked. Or do some stalking. (Us writer-bloggers are well practised in that art. lol.) In a romance, we'll fall head over heals in love.

At the outset it would seem impossible to mess this part up. But it's the hardest part for me. You see, it's quite possible to spend the entire time doing things, and still have nothing happen. It's like how you realise another year has come and gone and you haven't crossed anything off your list. It's not that you haven't done anything all year. You got out of bed, and showered, and ate, and went to the bathroom- at a bare minimum. But you've done nothing to advance your life.

This is true of books too. What is going on in the book, must advance towards the ultimate end. Would you read a murder-mystery where the detective spent the entire book eating, drinking and making merry and then the criminal turned himself in at the end, out of sheer boredom?

Probably not.

All together now

As I wrote this post, I purposefully avoided calling any of the parts by their technical names, but I'm sure you knew what they were.

Something tiny (hook)
Something huge (theme)
Someone to feel (characters)
Something to do (plot)

Together, I think these make up the list of things a book can do to sell itself. (There are two other major elements of a book. style/voice and setting, but I don't think they can sell a book on their own. You can't pick up on voice until you read the book, since cover copy isn't written by the book's author. And setting only sells a book when it's part of the hook, think Hogwarts.)

Did you find the rhyme useful? Do you agree/disagree? Which of these are you strong/weak on? Which of these, in the absence of recs from friends/bloggers, will make you pick up a book? And which makes you love a book?

How to Review a Book

I don't profess to be an expert on reviewing- or for that matter, anything to do with the publishing or blogging world, but yesterday's post got me to thinking about reviews and I thought I'd offer up some advice.

DEFINE YOUR MISSION
Figure out why you're offering reviews. The Bookanistas, a group of writer-bloggers proclaim that they're only reviewing books they love, so you can expect that every review will be a gush. Are you reviewing to spread the love for lesser-known books? Or to offer your readers options in book purchases? Or promote books you believe in?

Depending on what you decide, it may influence how you review.

Also, think about ways to make your reviews unique. There are certain books I see reviewed almost every month. If you're going to review a book, bring something to the table- either something new, or something only you can offer.

NEGATIVE REVIEWS

If you read a lot, you'll eventually come across a book that either does absolutely nothing for you or that you flat-out hate. As a writer/blogger, you'll have two choices when that happens:

SAY AND DO NOTHING
Pretend like you didn't read the book. Mention it to noone. Better yet, pretend the book doesn't exist.

BE FAIR AND OBJECTIVE
If you choose to say something about the book, be objective about it. First, state that it wasn't your thing. If there are specific things that drove you not to like it, talk about them. And talk about the things you liked, even if you didn't mesh with the book overall. (I love Larissa's comment on yesterday's blog w.r.t negative reviews.)

For example, these snippets are taken from my review of CATCHER IN THE RYE (CITR).

2nd paragraph: "Personally, I didn't like it...Yet I appreciated it. "

4th paragraph: "What I don't like about the book is the lack of movement."

5th paragraph: "What I do like about the novel is its criticism of humanity."

Even though CITR is my literary arch-nemesis, you can still take something from this review. If you value sociological analysis more than you value a forward-moving plot, you might try the book, despite the fact that I don't like it.

(My review of CITR is on my review blog which is not currently public, since I'm still figuring out the art of reviewing. Hopefully one day, I'll have enough confidence to put my opinions out in the world.)

A caveat however: I'm not sure I'd review a book if I thought the writing sucked. I recognise that saying, "Your writing sucks" makes it personal. While something like, "I didn't like the use of the present tense," seems like an objective stylistic assessment. As a future (see what I did there? lol) published writer, I don't want to say anything which leans more towards a personal attack than a literary critique. And I don't want people hating my book because I said something bad about their book (or their client's book, or their friend's book, etc).

At the end of the day, when a review says "I wasn't a fan," you should still be able to respect the book, and the author. And if my review isn't doing that, then I'm failing somewhere.

FINAL SENTIMENT
When you review a book that didn't tickle your fancy, I think it's great to end with a suggestion of who might enjoy it.

Example:
"While it wasn't my cup of tea, I think readers who enjoy literature strongly tied to science, would thoroughly enjoy this book."

IT WAS JUST SO-SO
I don't mean this in a 'bad' way. The grand majority of life is average. The grand majority of the books you read are somewhere between decent and awesome.

This is probably where the biggest problem lies in the reviewer blogosphere. In an effort not to be negative to our colleagues, we've gone to the other extreme. Remember how I totally fangirled ANNA AND THE FRENCH KISS? That's because I LOVED it. When I posted that review on December 6th, 4 days after the book had been released, I had already read the book 3 times. Not every book can fall into this category.

Like I said, that's not a bad thing. But there is a way to handle the good book that didn't make me contemplate quitting my job so I could spend the rest of my life reading it.

DON'T START WITH A JUDGEMENT.

If you didn't have extreme feelings (love or hate) for the book, then say nothing. The word "average" means that something is as good as most of what surrounds it, better than a few, and worse than few. But "average,"and it's many synonyms have come to have a negative connotation.

So don't say, "This book was average" or "The book was okay" or decent, or so-so, etc.

OVERALL COMMENT

At the beginning of your review, you can give a main concept.

Examples:

[Book] offers a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between a child and his step-father.
[Book] shows how a woman can overcome all obstacles in the name of protecting her secret.
[Book]explores what it's like to be the only person of minority origin within a society.

OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS

The next step you can take is to present an analysis. This is what was bad. This is what was good. And there was anything that rocked your world, say so.

FINAL SENTIMENT
You can put what you came away from the book thinking or feeling.

Example, from review of BEFORE I DIE:

"But even with all that joy, curiosity, new experiences, expect that you will spend the last 20 pages, sobbing your eyes out. "

ROCKIN' STOCKIN'S!

You'd think it would be easy to write a review of something you loved. You'd be wrong. If you ask someone what's great about their Mom/Dad/child/significant other, they might say something like, "She/He is just so awesome!" Now, maybe that means something to the people who know said Mom/Dad/child/significant other, but to anyone else? Nothing.

The point of a review is not just to share your opinion. "It was great," is an opinion, or even a cover blurb. It is not a review. Reviews are meant for someone other than the writer of the review (generally someone who hasn't read the book) to be able to create an opinion. For that, you need analysis.

JUDGEMENT
Where you want to avoid judgement statements for other books, the strongest selling point of a review for a book that you want to marry, is the fact that you loved it that much. (That is, unless you claim to love a book every other day. In which case, people may have stopped listening by now.)

Here's my judgement from ANNA AND THE FRENCH KISS (AATFK).

"I feel like every cliche possible.

"Like the story is so beautiful that I should never write another word because I can't compete.

"Like any words I use to describe it won't be enough."

PICK SPECIFIC POINTS
It's tempting to grab at a whole bunch of straws, but remember when you grab at too many things, you end up empty-handed.

DON'T just say: The setting was fab! And the characters were awesome! And the love interest! Oh, the love interest! You have to read this! Like, yesterday!

So not helping anyone.

Instead, pick a few specific points. And then give a little snippet on why you liked them.

From my review of AATFK:

"And Étienne: Best flawed love interest. He's got imperfect teeth and bites his nails and is too short. Finally a YA Love Interest that isn't so perfect that you feel like your boyfriend needs to be rock-hard and sparkly. Or have a bazillion ab muscles."

This is useful. When you read this, you either say, "No thanks. I like my Prince Charming's tall, dark and handsome," or, "Thank Zeus! It's about daggone time there was a REAL guy in a book!"

FINAL SENTIMENT
Chances are if you loved a book that much, there may have been something that stood out above all else. It's great to end with this.

From my review of THE COLOR PURPLE:
"And that's just how I felt when I finished the book. Like everything is a part of everything else. And the world is big and immense and I'm such a tiny part. Yet I'm everything."

REVIEW QUICK LIST
1. Opening feeling/thought. ( I didn't like/I loved/It was a thought-provoking exhibition of, etc)
2. What you didn't like, WITH SPECIFICS ( I start with the bad, because I like to end on a high.)
3. What you liked, WITH SPECIFICS
4. Final sentiment (It wasn't for me, but ____ might enjoy it/ You might feel this way after reading it/ This author was meant to write this book.)

There you have my (long) thoughts on reviewing. What do you disagree with? What do you agree with? Anything I've left out?

On Subjectivity

I want to thank E.J. for inspiring me to write this, with this wonderful post. And no, it's not wonderful just because he references me.

If you follow any agent blogs- and chances are, if you're following me, that you do- you'll hear them go on about the subjectivity of the business we're trying to make a living in. "It just wasn't for me," is as much of a catchphrase in the publishing realm as "It's not you, it's me" is in the relationship realm.

It's easy to take it personal and get angry. But let's get analytical for a second. There are some classics that everybody swears by. Do you like them all? I make no secret of the fact that I despise CATCHER IN THE RYE. And there are others who swear by it as the quintessential novel of teenagerdom. On the other hand, I love THE COLOR PURPLE. But I'm sure there are those who find the writing simplistic or are disgusted by the story.

And we don't even need to go back to the classics. Ever had a friend recommend a book to you as the greatest thing ever, and you were barely able to struggle through it? (For me, it was THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO.) Or recommend a book to someone only to have them dodge you for months to avoid telling you how much they hated it?

It's called subjectivity. And it doesn't make the books I like any better than the books I don't like. I don't dispute the greatness of CATCHER IN THE RYE. It just wasn't for me. And in our societies, that's a right we revere: the right to choose what we like. Without it, we'd be forced to marry the first suitor that came along. But we don't. And it's not that there's neccesarily anything wrong with the suitors we don't choose. But only one can truly be number 1.

This post is really about reviews. E.J. commented on the fact that almost every review you read on the bloggosphere is about the most amazing book since Moses learned to write. And the fact of the matter is this: every book CAN'T be amazing. If every book was amazing, then amazing would become the new average.

No one's going to fault you for saying a book was good, instead of great. And the people you reccomend to, will come to trust your judgement, if what you say about the book actually turns out to be true.

Swing by tomorrow for "How to Review." Same bat time, same bat channel.