Stupid Act # 3,905

So, in all the things that I learned last year, apparently, I missed out on one important lesson; researching thoroughly before committing myself to a certain course.

 I can probably blame this lapse on any number of things: a momentary brain freeze that stripped me of my good, common sense; or, I really am not as smart as I hope to be; or I just wanted to start out the new year by being a complete fool, just for the helluva of it.  But truly, this lapse resulted from YEARS of frustration with the route to publication, which all writers know has its pitfalls, and is NOT, unlike what some non-writer friends, or family members may think, a route we take because we're bored or until a better direction in life is found.  Writers tread such treacherous routes for many reasons, but the primary reasons are usually because: we love it and we want to be published authors.  But, sometimes we do silly things to achieve this.

I can't be possibly be alone in my stupidity.  Have you ever done something in your quest for publication, which you immediately regretted?  

Lessons Learned

Some of the best gifts I received this year didn't come wrapped up at my birthday or during the holidays.  As another productive writing year draws to an end, I've compiled a list of all the valuable things I learned about writing and publication.  Some, I've known all along and just needed them etched into my brain, and others were like a brilliant light bulb being turned on for the first time.

1. Writing Is The Easy Part.  I never thought I'd say this, especially after agonizing over characters, descriptions, passive voice, dialogue, tension, etc. for so long, but it's absolutely true.  If you have characters and a setting you love and know well, the writing flows freely.  Nothing quite like shutting yourself away for a few hours in a world of your own making.  And after all that, you get the chance to shape your writing into something than someone other than you or a dear, patient friend or family member would find coherent, and actually want to read.

2. No Matter How Many Times You've Edited or Revised, You Will Always Miss Something. Whether it's a missing word, misspelled words, repeated words, or just plainly and simply, the wrong word, when another would be so much better, there's always something that needs just a little tweaking. Accept it, get over it, and fix it, before submitting.

3. Publishing Is The Hard Part.  Getting the story, setting and characters that live only inside your head onto paper or the computer screen is great, but getting agents who believe in you and the story, editors to acquire your work and critics who love the book, too, is even better.  But it's still hard, with smaller advances being offered and publishers hesitant to take on new writers while hoping their current stable of authors keep the revenue flowing, which led me to my next realization.
 
4. Publishing Is A Business.  Don't Take It Personal. Repeat as needed: Publishers are in business to make money.      

5. Writers' Conferences Are Invaluable.  I've enjoyed every conference I've attended, simply because there's no better networking opportunity, with the chance to connect with top agents and editors, and fellow writers, sharing interests and goals.           

6. Friends Are Even More Invaluable, Especially If They're Also Writers.  And if they're writer friends in a critique group, who share your interests and provide comments and feedback you can rely on, WOO!  In the lonely world of writing, a network of support is critical for celebrating successes, easing disappointments, encouraging goals, sustaining your sanity and keeping you grounded.  Or, for when you just want to stop talking about the woes of writing for a while and hang out, have dinner and see a movie, or catch up on all the really important stuff you missed while you were glued to your writing.  So, thank you to all my friends, the writers and non-writers, who've known all my quirks and faults, but still stick by me.  Wishing all of you the best in 2010!

So, what did you learn this year?

Historical Novel Reviews - Upcoming Reviews

The Waiting Game

Last month, in the midst of my job's annual convention madness, I received a request for a full. "Yippee...oh, hell!" So, there was the mad dash to read through the entire manuscript in one weekend, applying everything I've learned in working with a freelance editor. Then finally, I pressed the Send button, which has to be the most thrilling / horrible moment in a writer's life -- all your hopes bubble up from deep inside you, before you experience total nausea and despair, when you realize you left out a key word or line from some chapter.

What follows is the Waiting Game. You wait for the delivery receipt that your mail has reached its intended destination, or the read receipt indicating that someone, hopefully the person you intended, at least clicked on your email. Whether or not it was read, who knows? Then you wait for the allotted time in which you've been told your manuscript will be reviewed; weeks or months invariably. If it's in November or December, you know the holidays are coming, so you should also anticipate that your waiting may be extended another two weeks beyond what you've been told. You're probably looking at a reply sometime in January the following year. The Waiting Game is just not fun.

Every moment you wait, you think of all the reasons the person to whom you sent your manuscript must be wondering, "Why did I bother to request this submission? This isn't what I wanted, at all." You wonder when he or she will get back to you with the awful truth: you suck and you will never publish anything. You go back to the manuscript and realize everything's wrong with it.

To pass time, you consider drinking yourself into oblivion with punch or eggnog laced with a little something extra, cause after all the holidays are near. You also wonder if it would be best to trash the entire manuscript now, toss the computer out of the window, and just give up writing altogether. Or, you think whether you should just write to the person, apologizing profusely for offering him or her such drivel, vowing that someone, not you, pressed the Send button before you were actually ready to send it off, or swearing that though your full name is on the manuscript, and your last name is part of the header of every page, no, that is most certainly not your work, and must be someone's version of an awful joke.

Email becomes the center of your universe. You're furiously scanning your Blackberry, your PC at home, your workstation, every minute of every hour, just knowing that yes, today, today will be the day when someone emails you about the manuscript you sent off in those long weeks or months. Until then, you just wait some more.

Waiting.  Waiting....

First vs. Third Person

Lately, I've had the pleasure of reading some great historical fiction in first person: Michelle Moran's Cleopatra's Daughter, Anita Davison's latest WIP, The Cherry Garden and now, Brandy Purdy's The Boleyn Wife.  With all this reading comes the inevitable question; what's with the great debate about first versus third person narratives?

Some people LOATHE first person, cannot appreciate it and will not touch it with the proverbial ten foot pole. But there are also others who swear it is the only viewpoint they love, especially when the main character is female. Having written in both third and first person, I understand the pros and cons of each, but I still like first person better.

First person can be stilted or awkward, with a tendency to catalogue every action; e.g. I woke up, I bathed, and I ate my cereal. Or, there are somewhat contrived scenes where the main character is always at the right moment and time whenever a major event happens. And, sometimes, the immediacy of the ever-present "I" is repetitive and a bit claustrophobic. Third person isn't without its perils too. It's easy to blur the line between the characters' thoughts and author exposition - I've always found Little Women difficult when Alcott intrudes into her characters' scenes. Third person is detached, requiring less emotional involvement for the reader than first person. Also, when working with multiple POVs in third person, if characters don't have distinct voices or there's no indication the character POV has changed, the reader quickly gets lost. 

Are there certain stories or genres where first person or third person is more appropriate?

The First Paragraph

Agent Nathan Bransford is hosting the Ultimate First Paragraph Challenge on his blog; entries must be received by Thursday, Oct. 15 4pm Pacific.  I entered my first paragraph of Renegade today after reading some of the early entries when the contest launched two days ago and once again, saw proof of why some struggle to snag an agent - too much competition from so many talented writers.

I've been fortunate to read a lot of good writing lately, the sort of work that hooks you and makes you want to race through the story because you can't wait to find out what happens next.  The common thread in each story has been an excellent opening paragraph; something about the scene, setting or characters just gripped me at the start.  Knowing where to begin a manuscript is key to hooking any reader with your first paragraph.  Sometimes it can be a monumental event in the characters' lives or just something out of the ordinary, but it must be important enough for the reader to care what comes next.  Also, the opening paragraph creates an implicit promise with the reader; the momentum with which the story began is how most expect it will end. 

As a writer or reader, what do you look for in a first paragraph?   

The Anti-Hero

The anti-hero has become my favorite principal character in fiction. I love the men who are less than ideal or picture-perfect, so flawed that at the outset they seem beyond all redemption. It's more accurate to say I start out hating them for the miserable bastards they are but by novel's end, the anti-hero and the writer's skill at character portrayal, have won me over.

Murad Reis, the protagonist in my new WIP, Renegade, is a Dutch privateer turned Barbary corsair who fits the anti-hero description perfectly: A central figure in a work that repels us by his or her actions or morality, yet who is not a villain. The Anti-hero accomplishes a useful purpose or even does heroic deeds. I started researching Murad nearly two years ago, in part because I attended a writers' conference session on pirates. While I prefer the medieval period, the age of piracy and the 17th century also interest me. Murad was born Jan Janszoon and took to the seas as a Dutch privateer. Many years later, Barbary pirates captured him and since they always needed skilled seaman, he joined them. In doing so, he abandoned his wife and small children, preyed upon the ships and lands of many European nations and sold their people into slavery, and in general, seems to have been a mercilessly brutal, calculating, cold-hearted sort of man. Yet, he was welcomed with open arms at the end of his life by his youngest daughter whom he'd abandoned. He's an absolutely perfect historical figure to research and write about because he's conflicted and lacks clear motives or morals.

The anti-hero may be the guy that you love to hate but without him, the pages in which he lives would be less memorable. Some of my favorites in literature include Lestat de Lioncourt of the Anne Rice novels and Severus Snape in the Harry Potter series. Who's yours?

What Rules?

In the critique groups I belong to, members constantly talk about the unwritten rules of writing. "Don't start a scene with dialogue." "No head-hopping." "Get rid of passive voice." "Lose the dialogue tags." "No back story in the first few chapters."

I've read at least six bestsellers this year, which break every one of these rules, from established authors and those just beginning their careers.

The latest book I'm reading has at least seven characters, so far, all narrating in first person. When I started submitting Sultana, which was originally four characters in first person, much of the advice I received from the crit group was that a first person story with four main characters was too confusing. Even though I identified each character at the opening of the chapter. So, I was very curious to see how a best-selling author would handle multiple characters in first person. I've found only one character in the novel distinct from the others. Yet, this is a best-selling book.

It seems clear if a writer is clever enough or well-known, he or she can get away with breaking the rules. What does it mean for those of us who are unpublished? Do the rules still apply?

What Motivates You?

Bill O'Hanlon wrapped up the final day of the WD conference with a very appropriate topic; energizing your writing with your skill and perseverance. He and other authors shared their motivational sources and stressed using your emotional states of Blissed, Blessed, Pissed and/ or Dissed in your writing, to keep yourself going even when it gets tough.

Motivation can come from both negative and positive events in your life. Who would guess that a career as a mystery writer would begin for Sue Grafton, while dreaming up imaginative ways of killing or maiming her soon-to-be ex-husband? If you're angry about a particular condition or a crusader who wants to change the world, like Andrew Vachss in his crime fiction, channel your anger into your writing.

What's your motivation?

When Is It Time To Get a Freelance Editor?

At the WD conference on Saturday, three independent editors, Alice Rosengard, Ruth Greenstein and Linda Carbone led a lively session on the freelance editing. I've blogged about this issue in recent weeks and decided to attend the session.

The freelance editors discussed when the need for their services arose, as editorial departments at various publishing houses began to downsize. They also provided several means of locating editors through other writers, Publishers Marketplace, and direct hire. They shared their individual approaches to editing, looking at technical concerns such as POV, sequence of events, character development and veracity; the average costs of such services, the length of time it can take dependent on the quality of the work, and the things a freelance editor cannot guarantee the author, such as a sale.

The topic is of particular interest to me because I've decided to hire a freelance editor, whom I had the pleasure of meeting two years ago at the Historical Novel Society. We've barely started but I'm already impressed by her professionalism and the recommendations I've had from her previous and current clients. What made me decide to do this? As Ruth Greenstein advised attendees today, I've reached a critical point in my manuscript; I've done as much as I possibly can with it. It's gone through a critique group and I've revised and edited until I felt I would go mad. Now, I feel is the time for fresh eyes to spot the difficulties I'm NOT seeing.

I don't know what the result may be, but for a work that is so precious to me, I've often referred to it as my baby, it's worth the investment.

What Kind of Writer Are You?

Jane Friedman, editorial director of Writers' Digest, started her session, Decisions, Decisions: Deciding the Best Publishing Route for You at the conference, with "What Kind of Writer Are You?".

a) The "God" Category
You want to be published by the big six publishers and make millions of dollars. You live and breathe your writing and you may just have the commercial appeal to pull it off. But even though you are the God of Writing, you still need to: promote! promote! promote! (So, apparently even gods have to do some work.)

b) "Growing" Category
People who are starting out and are focused more on the writing and have room to grow in the marketing world. You're on your way (possibly) to acknowledging that rejection is part of the business but you're willing to be persistent.

c) "Authority" Category
Especially for non-fiction writers; you know your audience better than a mainstream publisher or you've created a niche for yourself and you can convert fans of your work into buyers.

I'd define myself as a growing writer, because quite frankly, I'd never consider myself in the "God" category. My critique groups can attest to this, cause I often actually say in my comments to them that I'm not the God of Writing.

I've met enough writers with ego who aim to be Gods and I wish them good luck with it. They have the drive to get there and the single-minded motivation to do it. I had a friend once ask me, if I wasn't aiming for the stars, what would be the point?

While publication is the ultimate goal, if it never happens, I won't stop living. It is one part of my life; a very important part but my success or failure at it doesn't define me.

So, what kind of writer are you?