Self-Editing #6 - Clean Up Crew: Punctuation

Imagine how embarrassed I was to find out I have bad grammar and punctuation?!


I never studied English after high school, so maybe I can blame that. Or maybe it's because I'm an American who grew up in New Zealand: I read books written in both American and British English (and yes, the spelling, grammar and some punctuation are different).

But I've been writing for business for over ten years. And I'm good at it. It's just that fiction has its own rules and I didn't know a lot of them. And after doing a little research I've discovered I'm not alone.

So... I've accumulated some information and quotes from other sources for you to double check against your usage (NOTE: These are all in the American standard. If you're writing in the Queen's English, please double check):

DIALOGUE DO'S

When a character says something, the words are enclosed in quotes with a period at the end:

“Hi. It’s good to see you.”

When you attribute the speech, the final sentence of the dialogue ends in a comma:

“Hi. It’s good to see you,” Carl said.

EXCEPT when the attribution isn’t direct:

“Hi. It’s good to see you.” Carl smiled and held out his hand.

(If you aren’t sure, the litmus test is: can the attribution stand alone as a sentence? If so, the speech should end in a period).

In dialogue, when a character’s name is used, there is always a comma preceding.

“What’s your problem, Frank?”

OR

“I told you, Frank, I’m not going to do that.”

When a character’s dialogue extends beyond one paragraph, the first paragraph(s) are open ended. Only the final paragraph has end-quotes. 

     “Yadda yadda yadda. Blah, blah blah blah. Yadda, yadda. Yadda yadda yadda. Blah, blah blah blah. Yadda, yadda.
     “Blah blah blah blah, yadda. Yadda blah, yaddah. Blah blah blah blah, yadda. Yadda blah, yaddah. Blah blah blah blah, yadda. Yadda blah, yaddah.
     “Yadda blah, yadda yadda. Blah. Yaddah.”

In broken dialogue only capitalize a new quote after a period.

“Hey there,” said Carl, “it’s good to see you."

OR

“Hey there,” said Carl. “I didn't expect to see you here.”


GENERAL GRAMMAR AND SPELLING DO'S

Its, your and their are possessive (i.e. owned or held by the person they refer to).

It’s, you’re and they’re are contractions (i.e. two words condensed into one: It is, you are and they are)

Titles like ‘Dad’ and ‘Uncle’ are capitalized when used in place of the name, not when speaking in the possessive:

CORRECT: Dad told me he never kissed anyone before Mom.

Or

CORRECT: My dad told me he never kissed anyone before my mom.

(Again the litmus test is, could "Dad" or "Mom" or "Grandpa" be replaced with a name without changing anything else? If so, it should be capitalized).

OTHER PUNCTUATION DO'S

The correct use of a dash in manuscript format is to use the dash twice.

Carl took me to his car -- the ‘little’ SUV, not the truck -- and opened the door for me.

(NOTE: MS Word and others not specifically designed for writers may automatically condense the dashes into one. Try changing your 'autocorrect' settings.)

The semicolon is a continuation: It must be followed by a complete sentence. It is NOT for use in a side thought – something that breaks a sentence – where you should use a dash.

These are some of the most common punctuation issues I've had or come across. For more extensive lists and detailed analysis, check out Natalie Fischer's Cheat-Sheet post.

Your Turn: Are there particular grammar, punctuation or spelling questions you have? Note them in the comments and I'll see what I can do. (Or, if you have tips on common problems, please share!)

Self-Editing #5 - Mining Your Manuscript for Modifiers

Source

Today I’m assuming you've read the previous self-editing tips - especially tip #4. If you aren't sure what modifiers and adverbs are, and how they affect your writing, read that post first. We’ll wait…

All set? Great!

Strap in. Gird your loins. Grit your teeth and [Insert other resolute attitude here] because... we're attacking the REAL modifiers today. That's right, ALL the dreaded 'ly' words.

Here's a small sample from my first manuscript:

"No," he said softly.

The barista smiled politely.

He watched the light innocently blinking on and off.

I had no idea how he'd moved so quickly.**

Etc, etc, etc...

You know them, and [possibly] love them. [Probably] too much. If these puppies have a strangle-hold on your manuscript, you're [really] in trouble. So put your preconceptions aside and go for the ride:

Modifiers pop up in a multitude of environments - and some are [really] necessary. But most [actually] aren't.

The problem is, taking a single sentence out of context and removing the modifier appears to achieve little. Yes, you dropped your wordcount by one... but didn't you just lose a nuance? How are readers supposed to find depth in your work if everything is written [starkly]. Isn't that boring?

Answer: No. Go pick up your favorite [traditionally] published book and read the first five pages. Count how many adverbs appear. My bet is you won't even need the fingers on one hand.

A story is made rich and deep by the skillful weaving of plotlines and character development, not modifiers. Don't get me wrong, your descriptors (which will include adverbs) are critical at times. But what a reader wants is to fall into your world. Their brain wants to forget they're reading and [just] move through the story. The more words required to paint the picture, the harder that is to maintain.

So, here's your assignment today: Take one chapter of your WIP and paste it into a new document. Do a Ctrl + F search on 'ly'. Wherever the word isn't [absolutely, unequivocally] necessary, delete it. Wherever the word is necessary, take another look at the sentence. You have two options:

OPTION 1: Could it be pared down by making the verb / descriptor itself more active? For example:

"How are readers supposed to find depth in your work if everything is written starkly." becomes "How are readers supposed to find depth in your work if the writing is stark?"

If you're willing to put the work in to cutting [all] the fat in your manuscript, your story will thank you. And so will your future agent / editor / reader.

OPTION 2: Can, or should, the adverb be replaced with action? In Techniques of the Selling Writer, Dwight V. Swain says:

Wherever practical, substitute action for the adverb.

“Angrily, she turned on him”? Or, “Her face stiffened, and her hands clenched to small, white-knuckled fists”?

“Wearily, he sat down”? Or, “With a heavy sigh, he slumped into a chair and let his head loll back, eyes closed”?

Vividness outranks brevity.

At least, sometimes.

(Note: Mr. Swain begins his instruction with an acknowledgement that the examples are at times wordy or over-simplified, but he’s done this purposefully to make the picture clearer).

I’ll be the first to recognize this kind of work is time-consuming, and in some cases will absorb some wordcount. But I’ve yet to see advice from an editor or agent that didn’t suggest polishing a manuscript to the very best of our abilities. And I know from personal experience, these kinds of efforts are rewarding. When your book turns out sharper and more engaging, you’ll be glad you took the time. Promise!

Your Turn: Are there a lot of 'ly' words in your manuscript? Are you having trouble identifying how to rephrase a sentence to streamline it? Jump into the comments here and give us an example or two. Maybe we can help!

**This is the only example where the adverb is necessary. And the sentence would be tighter if 'quickly' were replaced by 'fast'.

What Are You Reading Right Now?

I'm headed off on vacation next week (though I'll be continuing the self-editing series while I'm gone) and I haev some book vouchers so I'm thinking it's time to pick up a couple Something News to read while I'm gone.

So what are you reading? What would you recommend?

I tend to stick pretty close to the YA frame since that's what I write, but I will take a stab at anything if it looks good. Here are some of my favorites...

Favorite books I've read in the last year:

- Delirium, by Lauren Oliver (YA Dystopian)
- So Shelly, by Ty Roth (YA Contemporary)
- The Help, by Kathryn Stockett (Historical)
- The Pact, by Jodi Picoult (YA / Adult Contemporary)
- Divergent, by Veronica Roth (YA Dystopian)




Favorite books I've read ever:

- Playing the Jack, by Mary Brown (Historical)
- Watership Down, by Richard Adams (Fantasy)
- Speak, by Laurie Halse-Anderson (YA Contemporary)
- Eye of the World, by Robert Jordan (High Fantasy)
- Twilight (YA Urban Fantasy)
- The Time Traveller's Wife (Adult Urban Fantasy)


Your Turn: What are your favorites from the last year / all time? If you had to choose one, what would you recommend? What should I READ?

Self-Editing #4 - Choose Your Modifiers Carefully

Modifiers are words that modify other words. In other words, they make your words more complicated.

Word up?!

Today we're mainly addressing adverbs - words which modify a verb. They usually (but not always) end in 'ly'.

I learned the hard way that professionals see frequent use of adverbs as a mark of amateurish writing. Whether you like it or not, these words make your manuscript stand out for all the wrong reasons.

We'll attack modifiers in two steps. Today is the easier and more straightforward Unnecessary Modifiers Frequently Used (aka Another Seek & Destroy Mission). These are the words we probably don't need. Then in the next post, we’ll talk about those modifiers which should be replaced by action.

Step one of eradicating unnecessary modifiers (which are only a writer's friend when used with skill and dexterity... not impunity) is identifying common or invisible words you use too much. For me the following are the priority contenders:

Actually
Really
Only
Just

These words crop up in my writing constantly - and can usually be deleted without any negative impact on the sentence. In fact, in every case where they can be cut out, the words flow more smoothly and the writing is more engaging without them. For example:

"I'd never really seen this side of him before." becomes "I'd never seen this side of him before."

"His eyes had just fallen on Dani again." becomes "His eyes fell on Dani again." [NB - We lost a 'had' there too!]

But those aren't the only modifiers creeping up behind and jumping into my sentences. Lesser, but perhaps even more insidious are:

Hardly
Simply
Clearly

"I could hardly wait." becomes "I couldn't wait."

""I know," he said simply." becomes ""I know," he said."

"Mr. Jamieson was clearly losing his touch." becomes "Mr. Jamieson was losing his touch."

I've said it before and you'll hear it again: These look like tiny changes, hardly worth the effort. But when you multiply each by dozens of occurences in a single manuscript, you find an overall lightening of the text. Your book reads more easily, more clearly, and more simply...

So here's your mission: Use this list (along with any words that come up in the comments) to do another seek and destroy. Then hang-ten for the next post because that's when the real work starts.

Good luck!

PS - You probably noticed I italicized all the modifiers in this post. Were they all necessary? No. But lots of them were. You're going to have to make a judgement call during this mission. Just sayin'.

Next Post: When action should replace adverb.

Your Turn: What modifiers crop up in your writing too often? (I’ll add them to the list).

Bringing the Backlist Back

We all know there's a lot of change in the publishing industry right now. Personally I love when I see authors stepping into the new arenas. Here are a couple who have, with the help of their literary agency, brought previously out-of-print books back into availability:

- Deborah Camp (Contemporary and Old West Historical romances)


- Dan Streib (Thrillers)

They've got the agency behind them, along with standard amazon channels, etc.
 
So tell me what you think - are we going to see more of these kinds of endeavors in the future? Would you go this route with any out of print (or unpublished) works? Does knowing these titles were out of print affect your interest in them?
 
It's a bold new world out there. What do you think about it?
 
See you Monday with more self-editing tips.

Self Editing - Seek & Destroy Word List #3

To aid you in further Seek & Destroy exploits, the following is a list of words over-used by me and some of my lovely, gorgeous, sophisticated followers. Check out your manuscript to see if you're an over-user too (the first step to solving the problem is admitting that you have one). Or read below the list for some help on how to determine your words de jour.

Do you have any to add to the list? (Seriously, do you? I'll add them)

Always
'And so,'
Because
Just
Realize / realized / realizing
Soon
Then
There
Try
Turned (i.e. "I turned to find...")
Very

If you're not sure which words you're prone to overusing, you can use software like a wordcloud, or this manuscript analyzer (which claims to use your own computer for the processing, ergo your words aren't transmitted anywhere).

But if you've been writing more than one book, don't be fooled:

In my first I manuscript overused several character actions (shrugging, nodding, winking and such). In my current in-revision manuscript, I'm giving too many stomach / gut reaction references. My WIP is heavy on the shivering, trembling, shaking and so forth.

All that to say: Even if you've looked at previous manuscripts and eradicated overuse, don't just assume you'll have the same word hiccups in a new work. By all means, find and replace words you know you're prone to using. But also check each new manuscript for new offenders.

That's all from us today. Next post: The Dreaded Modifiers.

Your Turn: Comment with any more words you'd add to the overuse list, or good links / tips for figuring out who your offenders are.

Self-Editing – Seek & Destroy Word List #2

If you're working on ways to tighten your prose without changing the storyline, doing a find and replace on the following words and phrases will help lower your wordcount and streamline your read:

Find and Replace 'was going to' / 'were going to'

This phrase can almost always been replaced with 'would', 'could', 'should' or other single words. As in:

"My new school was going to be scary and awkward."

becomes

"My new school would be scary and awkward."

OR

"Did he think the walls were going to part and reveal the batcave or something?"

becomes

"Did he think the walls would part to reveal the batcave or something?"


Find and Replace (or delete) "seemed" or "as if"

"Seemed" needs other words around it to make sense, stretching your sentences out and lowering tension. Search your manuscript. On the occasions when the nuance it provides isn't important, just delete it.

Example:

"She wasn't strictly coiffed like the others, but she seemed more elegant anyway."

becomes

"She wasn't strictly coiffed like the others, but elegant anyway."

"Seemed" and "As if" are also often used by novice authors to give an impression they want the reader to have, rather than one evident through the plotting / 'showing'.

Example:

"He stared at the broach in my hand, as if it were an object of much greater importance than just a gift from my mother."

These instances will require more work and time. We all need to learn how to layer hints and clues through character action, dialogue and plot, rather than pointing at something and saying "This is important!".

If you master this point, feel free to send me tips!


Find and Replace "almost"

If you're a frequent user of 'almost' I know what you're thinking:

"It's different than stating something outright! Almost means almost!"

That's true. But as a general rule, it's not important to clarify the nuance for your reader. And you’ll end up diluting the impact when a word like ‘almost’ is actually needed. Take a look at these examples from my early draft:

"He pulled his sleeves up almost to his elbows." (Nuance unimportant).

"He was almost certain of that." (Nuance won’t affect plot).

"It almost looked as if it had grown there organically." (Nuance unimportant).

(NB: We're going to talk about the other problems in those sentences in a later post).

"Almost" (or “nearly”) aren’t important when they have no bearing on the forward motion of the story. Strong, active fiction means that in most cases, the character moves forward as if the totality were the case.

Example:

"He was almost certain of that" is an accurate summation of the character’s mindset - but in my manuscript, directly following that statement the character stepped out and acted as if he were sure.

In real life we are rarely 100% certain. Instead, we make choices and act on what we consider to be the best chance. It’s only those moments of real uncertainty that trip us up – when the stakes are high.

If you want to resonate with readers, dial back on general uncertainty by stating your case outright as it will drive the character or plot.

Then, when you hit a moment when a character has a real dilemma and struggles to identify certainty, your “almost” is a tension builder, rather than another extra word lost in the shuffle.


Find and replace (or delete) "began", "started" and similar

Like "almost", "started" or "began" can be necessary, but not nearly as often as you'd think.

"Some weird things started happening to me before she got sick."

becomes

"Some weird things happened to me before she got sick."

Note the change to the end of the verb that follows 'began' or 'started'. As a general rule, "ing" becomes "ed" - the tense has not changed, but the language is active.

All of the above may seem like small changes, but if you're replacing dozens of occurrences in an early draft, it will lower your word count and stop your reader getting bogged down in lengthy sentences. When put together, these kinds of changes make your entire story smoother.

More coming!

Your Turn: What words do you use too much? For instance, I'm forever using "realized" - this character realized, that character realized, everyone realized... yuck! What's your word nemesis?

Self-Editing - Seek & Destroy Word List #1

A little over a year ago I worked through a self-editing list of words, phrases and content, aiming to help streamline a manuscript in the revision phase.

I’m going to reprise the series, add a few more tips, and consolidate others. Please feel free to add anything from your experience, or ask questions in the comments.

My goal is to create a road-map for making all our books better!

The following words can often be deleted with little or no change to the surrounding material. Observe:

Seek and Destroy "that"

Yes, you heard me. Obviously there are ways and times the word "that" is crucial to correct grammar. But those moments are rarer than you might expect.

Exercise: Take 4000 words of your WIP and paste it into a new document. Do a word count and write it down. Do an automatic Find and Replace in which you replace 'that' with nothing. Now read the chapter. The only place 'that' should be re-inserted, are the sentences which no longer make sense. Now do another word count.

TIP: Do this exercise on a portion of the manuscript you haven’t read for a few weeks. That way you’re not anticipating what the sentence will say.


Seek and Destroy "had"

(NOTE: We've had some great advice from editors / writers in the comments on this post about specific grammatical rules regarding the use of 'had'. Check those out before embarking on your Seek & Destroy for this word as there are occasions where it needs to be included).

Again, there will be moments when the word 'had' is critical. But since this word automatically places whatever it references into the past tense, it makes present action passive.

Here’s an example from a traditionally published book I read recently (I’ve changed the character names because I don’t want to point fingers):

“Harren had died during that fateful night, so long ago. The night when Peter had first killed a man, the night Peter had first lost control of himself in battle. Harren didn’t owe Peter anything, but he had saved Peter on several occasions – in fact, Peter realized that Harren’s intervention had helped to keep him from losing himself...”

Now, if I remove some of the "had"s (and one "that") the paragraph reads:

“Harren had died during that fateful night, so long ago. The night when Peter first killed a man, the night Peter first lost control of himself in battle. Harren didn’t owe Peter anything, but he saved Peter on several occasions – in fact, Peter realized Harren’s intervention had helped to keep him from losing himself...”

The paragraph is only four words shorter, but can you see how it reads with a great deal more immediacy?


Seek and Destroy "was"

I've left this one to last because when you search your manuscript for 'was', prepare to be there for a while. And each replace will be a little more involved. In most cases you won't be able to simply delete 'was' because you'll have to change the tense of words around it. But the seemingly endless task is worth it.

In most cases, the change is simple: "I was leaning on the windowsill." becomes "I leaned on the windowsill." Or, "I was faced by a horde of Horse Lords." becomes "I faced a horde of Horse Lords."

Sometimes the changes will be more complex - especially when there are several 'was' in quick succession. Observe this example from an early draft of my first manuscript in which the protagonist describes the school uniform she's being forced to wear:

"I was wearing plain black, lace-up leather shoes over dark nylons. The skirt was a dark green and navy plaid shot through with tiny stripes of red and white. My blouse was white and a dark blue, v-neck cashmere sweater topped the lot."

...becomes...

"I wore plain black, lace-up leather shoes over dark nylons, a dark green and navy plaid skirt shot through with tiny stripes of red and white, and a white blouse. A dark blue, v-neck sweater topped the lot."

(NOTE: I'd actually change that paragraph significantly now, but that's a self-editing tip for later).

I know this sounds involved, and when you take each example on its own, it seems like little difference. but when you make these changes throughout an 80,000 word manuscript, you'll drop hundreds (maybe thousands) of words. The overall impression will be tighter and stronger.

I think that’s enough for one post. I’ll be continuing the self-editing series over the next few weeks and have a lot more words and phrases to help you streamline your novel.

Your Turn: Any questions? Feel free to tweet or email me any words or phrases you'd like to see included in the series.

Is Your Story a Rolling Stone, or a Stagnant Pond?

You know those moments in a book when you want to skim? When your interest is waning so you're flipping down the page, looking for the 'good stuff'?

Do you know how to keep those out of your writing?

I mentioned in my last post that I was disappointed with some of the writing in a book I've been reading over vacation. Well, if nothing else, I can thank the author for giving me a lightbulb moment:

You see, I know I'm a wordy writer. I rely heavily on critique partners to help me identify when my typing fingers outsprint my storytelling. It's taken two and half years of intentional effort and help from professionals to learn to write 'tight' - and I'm still prone to languishing on the page. But even now that I've learned to seek and destroy all those extra words, to eschew modifiers, and avoid repetition - you know, when you say the same thing more than once - I'm still wordy.

Unfortunately, so is the book I'm reading. As as I've mentioned before - finding flaws in someone else's writing can sometimes be the best tool to improve your own. So, based on what I've been reading, here's a few tips I've come up with for keeping the story moving like Mick Jagger:

1. Trust the reader to trust your story.

One of the scenes I read recently that draaaaaged had two royal siblings, walking a palace path to a boat. The POV character was reminded by the setting of several things that had happened in past books. Note: SEVERAL things. Then the brother and sister bantered - a mutual memory bringing them to decide to row across the lake together.

Turns out, the real meat of the scene occurred on the boat and all those words (about 700-1000 of them) had been used to 'realistically' get the characters there.

The problem was, we didn't need to understand why they were on a boat. The author could have placed them there from the very beginning of the scene. I wasn't about to question whether or not it was feasible. And the backstory that was introduced could just as easily been given from the boat.

This feels like a scene version of what many authors do with the beginning of their novels: Pull back just a little too far and offer too much backstory up front, rather than letting those little nuggets of information trickle out as part of the important action.

Don't do it. Put your characters where they need to be, drop in a hint here and there about what their intentions are and let the story do the rest.


2. Don't be afraid to mix scene and sequel

"Scene": The character states an intention, takes steps towards it and is either thwarted, or the action causes unexpected consequences, leading to....

"Sequel": Emotional reaction to what occurred in the scene, rumination / analysis of consequences and identification of new problems, then a decision is made which sparks a new intention. (Hence, sending the character back into 'scene').

Sometimes, consciously or not, authors seem to feel the need to use a single scene to create SCENE and a single scene to depict SEQUEL. When, in actual fact, main characters generally have more than one active intention at any one time. It's more than feasible to combine emotional reaction to a prior scene with forward progress in the next one. In fact, as a reader, I'd say it's encouraged.

Need an example? How about the detective on the case for murder. He's got a lead on a guy who was caught on CCTV just outside the building where the victim was killed. And he's got unidentified DNA from the body.

In a single scene the detective is driving toward the house of the suspect when he gets a call telling him the DNA tests are still preliminary, but one of the possible matches is the detective's brother. This is unexpected and shocking and deposits the detective firmly into the middle of a moral dillemma.

But while the detective is still processing this information, he arrives at the door to the other suspect's apartment.

Now every question he asks, and every answer the suspect gives is going to be viewed with the added filter of the detective's brother potentially being implicated or exonerated, depending on what goes down with this guy. And simultaneously, the detective's feelings about his brother and ethical leanings, will determine how he treats the suspect - and whether, perhaps, his investigation becomes somewhat biased...

Do you see what I mean?

Action and reaction can be combined - and in fact, the scenes generally seem meatier when they are. It won't always be appropriate - but it often will. In short: Don't feel like every important moment has to have it's own bookends.

3. Use critiques to identify how much backstory is actually needed.

You may have noticed in the example I gave for #1, I mentioned that the author used the walk prior to the boat to remind the character of a few incidents and establish the relationship these two characters have.

There were two problems with this:

- Several memories / examples were used to demonstrate a few different facets of the pair's relationship, when I could see a single, well crafted memory successfully offering all the important information and nuance.

- The backstory for these two characters individually is already well established in this book - not to mention the books before that. All the author really needed to do was give these two characters an interaction in the here-and-now that would indicate where their relationship stands NOW. Rather than establishing how they felt about each other in the past...

Backstory should be illuminating - not excavating. Offer as little as is necessary to keep the reader from getting confused. Err on the side of NOT. Let beta readers / critiquers tell you if something isn't clear. Because until the reader knows the character well and is emotionally invested in their journey, they don't really care. And once they do care, they care a lot MORE about what's happening now - and what might happen in the future - than what has already passed.

Dwight V. Swain told me readers don't really care about what they can't change (the past) - except for how it impacts what might still be up for grabs (the future). I think he's right.

Your Turn: Any questions about these tips? Or, what have you observed that could help other writers keep their stories moving instead of stagnating?