ON WRITING: Nothing is "Caused". It Should Just Happen

Okay, pet peeve time.

There's a book in my library that is a great little historical romance, generally well-written and compelling.

However, it is peppered with the characters (and inanimate objects around them) being "caused" to do things.

EXAMPLES:

""Indeed," he said, giving the seat a push, causing it to sway gently back and forth."

"...the fellow looked a little familiar, causing him to wonder if perhaps they had met before..."

Seems harmless, I know, but can I plead with you, dear author friend, to avoid this phrasing at all costs? Not only is it "wordy" (requiring more words than necessary), but it's also passive. It separates the reader from the action by describing what's happening, rather than showing it.

The above examples could easily be wittled down:

""Indeed," he said, pushing the seat. It swayed gently."

"...the fellow looked familiar. Had they met before?"

This isn't the only kind of phrasing with these issues, but it's one that I find particularly irritating, so it's the one I'm highlighting for you today.

Working on this has reminded me that it's almost time to take my final manuscript through the last stages of self-editing (to make sure it's as tight and free of over-used phrases as possible). So over the next few weeks I'm reprising the self-editing series. Tune in for more tips and tricks on tightening your manuscript!

Your Turn: Is there a phrase or word that irritates you when you read it? What is it? How would you fix it?

 

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?

How Do You Know When Your Book is Cooked (The Revival)

A funny thing happened here on my blog:  I was wrong.

Now, now, before you go gettin' all quivery...

Last year, after an extensive round of edits with my agent that whipped my manuscript into the best shape it had been at that point (and during which time several editors asked to read it *gulp*) I wrote a post on how to know if your book is cooked.

Except, the problem was, my book wasn't.  So editors who were 'very excited about the premise', turned it down. 

It just wasn't ready.

(If you want to see why I'm eating humble-pie, check out this post, then come back here.  I'll wait....)

*Facepalm*

Now, from what I gather, I'm not the first author to have experienced this.  But it taught me something really important:

I'll probably never be finished until the book is on the shelf.  (And, based on listening to a bunch of published authors out there, I'll probably wish I could change it later).

BUT that's kind of the beauty of this industry.  We're always growing, always improving, always learning new skills (or should be). 

I think the question you, me and everyone else who's writing should ask is: Have I got the right recipe?  Whether the next step is revision, querying agents, submission to editors or self-publishing - your book might be as "cooked" as you're capable of getting it right now.  If you find yourself reading through, changing sentences, then reading through and changing them back... you've probably reached your limit. 

So, what next?  How do you know it's ready to move along?

- Find a critique group (especially with someone more experienced than yourself) and listen to what they have to say, even if it hurts.

- Read a Really Good Fiction Craft Book.

- Put the manuscript aside for a couple of months and write something else, then come back to read with fresh eyes.

- Read another Really Good Fiction Craft Book.

- *CAUTION: USE WITH CARE*: Approach any professional contacts you might have and ask their advice.

The point is, even published authors haven't 'finished' a book until it's been through several rounds of editing.  We-The-Aspiring's can't really expect to reach that level without professional help.  The trick is to recognize when you've taken it as far as you can for now, then employ one of these techniques (or any others you can come up with).  And the key to making any of these actually useful is a willingness to consider criticism as a springboard for improvement, rather than a failure of epic proportions.

Your Turn: Is your manuscript ready to move on?  What helped you feel confident of that?
Tweet

Word Zits

So... I've finally finished manuscript revisions in preparation to send to Awesome Agent.  (She'll determine if it's ready to go to Editors.  More on that another day).

Shining the spotlight on Word-Acne

The thing that surprised me in this (hopefully) final revision was how many of those blasted extraneous words were still pushing to the surface.  Their pustule-heads are painful even when I can't see the bump.

Know what I mean?

This revision has been six months in the making.  After feedback from prospective editors, I had a lot of work to do.  And I did it.  The world building, plot and character developments are nailed.  The writing is the best I can do.  This final, final review was all about the detail. I wasn't changing scenes, modifying plots or adding storylines.  I was just sitting at my keyboard hitting CTRL + F over and over and over again.

And what did I find? 

Word Acne.

The face of my manuscript looked like something out of a Clean & Clear ad.

After two years (almost to the day) of countless revisions, a full editorial from my agent, seek-and-destroy missions and various other forms of treatment, I was still breaking out.  To the tune of 2% of my already-borderline wordcount.

TWO FREAKIN' PERCENT.

Why is that surprising?  Well, if you check out the Self-Editing Series I started last year, you'll find out I've been eradicating extra words for a long time.  And yet... *insert self-loathing here*.

So below, my friends, are my very own word-zits.  Some of them we covered in the Self-Editing Series, some we didn't. 

Maybe your idiom-eruptions are different.  But on the pizza-face of my manuscript, these words / phrases push to the surface again and again and again - usually proving to be as worthless as those blackhead remover t-zone stickies they sold me when I was twenty. 

Many of these verbal pimples could be deleted from my manuscript without changing a single surrounding word.  Some were just the oily residue raising a flag for the painful discharge lurking underneath.  Either way, doing a seek and destroy on these words dropped my wordcount by 2%.

Read that last sentence again, then read this list and figure out if you have similar manuscript blackheads:

PHRASES

Usually began with 'he', 'she', 'I', or a character name, followed by:

- swallowed
- sighed
- frowned
- breathed
- stared
- gaped
- tensed
- froze
- realized

In most cases, the action wasn't necessary because the emotion or reaction had already been demonstrated or could be indicated via dialogue.  In many cases the phrase or sentence could be deleted because it was coupled with another, more interesting action or reaction.


SINGLE WORDS

- all
- just
- actually
- really
- suddenly
- even
...Were often used to unnecessarily emphasize or nuance a sentence and could be deleted outright. 

- almost
- seemed / seemed to
...Should be used sparingly, and only for their true meanings - not to give the reader an impression of a false-start, or desire.  In fiction terms, things either happen or they don't.  The hero didn't 'almost touch' the heroine.  No.  He raised his hand, then thought better of it and dropped it again. 


- toward(s)
...Frequently cropped up after verbs.  The thing is, when one of my characters gets out of his seat and walks - immediately followed by dialogue with the protagonist - it's unnecessary for her to say he walked 'towards me'.  That part is implied. 

- myself
...Often indicated a wordy sentence.  For example, the very wordy: "Was she just being nice so she could trap me into getting myself caught out?", became: "Was she just being nice so she could trap me?"

So there you are.  Nineteen words that, when sought out, helped me eradicate 2% of my manuscript without losing a single nuance or expression.  In fact, cutting out all those words has made the manuscript better.  We'll see if Awesome Agent agrees.

Your Turn:  What do your word zits look like?