The Paragraph Doctor – 0004

The primary issues: Wordy Structure, Fractured Logic, Awkward Flow, Weak



I've listed below an actual paragraph from a novel one of my clients is writing. I've changed the names of the characters to protect further the confidence of my client and his/her piece. I've placed the problem text in bold red font.


AUTHOR'S ORIGINAL
          In March, she gave us another assignment, and once again I was compelled to include something about my former friend and idol. Different stages of my life, with different outcomes that affected me—the only question was with which piece to include her.

EDITORIAL ALTERNATIVE
          In March, another assignment—different stages of my life, with different outcomes that affected me—again compelled me to include something about my former friend and idol. The only question was where to include her.

ISSUE #1: REMEMBER ONE OF OUR HIGH COMMANDMENTS: MAKE EVERY WORD COUNT
          You don’t see it here, but the previous paragraph speaks of the assignments a teacher is giving throughout a course. Thus, the author needn't tell us that "she gave us" another assignment. We know where the assignment came from.

ISSUE #2: PASSIVE VOICE (VIA WEAK "STATE-OF-BEING" VERB)
          My alternative eliminates the weak state-of-being verb used in the Passive Voice construction, "I was compelled." Remember our watchwords: KEEP IT STRONG AND DIRECT.

ISSUE #3: FRACTURED LOGIC
          The author should have placed the two pieces of the assignment—"different stages of my life, with different outcomes that affected me"—precisely where she speaks of that assignment. By placing them later, she forces the reader to go back and make sense of them. Even if the reader only has to skip back a couple of lines, it's a problem.

ISSUE #4: AWKWARD PHRASING
          The final segment was, while technically proper, awkward—just doesn’t roll off the tongue. Sometimes—many times—it’s best to keep things simple. Note that I left the weak state-of-being verb in place, which I'm loathe to do. I did so because… well, sometimes it's best to keep things simple. Like all "rules" of writing, this is not a 100%-er. I could have rephrased the segment, stretched myself a bit, but simple works here.


'Til next time, and as always, remember:
To write well, you must work hard. To succeed in this tough gig, you mustn't be lazy.

The Paragraph Doctor – 0003

The primary issues: Indirect Structure, Weak Verbs, Show vs. Tell



I've listed below an actual paragraph from a novel one of my clients is writing. I've changed the names of the characters to protect further the confidence of my client and his/her piece. I've placed the problem text in bold red font.

AUTHOR'S ORIGINAL
          In the mid-morning, he groaned and awoke. All-around a fog hung. Slowly it dissolved as he blinked sleep from his red swollen eyes. In every bone and muscle, he hurt, his jaw ached, his head throbbed and across his cheek, he felt the sting of torn skin. He clenched his teeth and made a painful fist of swollen fingers. His nails, smashed and blackened reminded him of falling rock. It would have been easy to remain beside the fire, resting, but he had a goal, and he had a somber thought.

EDITORIAL ALTERNATIVE
          He awoke at mid-morning, and groaned. A blanket of fog dissolved to a gray wisp as he blinked sleep from his red, swollen eyes. Every muscle burned, his jaw ached, his head throbbed, and torn skin stung his cheek. He clenched his teeth and made a painful fist of swollen fingers, nails blackened and smashed like falling rock. Oh, to remain beside the fire, resting, but his goal awaited him. This forced a somber thought.

ISSUE #1: LET THE HORSE LEAD THE CART (USUALLY)
          I'll say it again. Please make these your watchwords: KEEP IT STRONG AND DIRECT.

ISSUE #2: POOR STRUCTURE, WEAK ADVERB, IMPROPER PUNCTUATION
          I think my alternative lays out the issues well, but one special point: slowly. Yuck! In a long line of horrible, lazy adverbs, this is one of the worst.

ISSUE #3: LET THE HORSE LEAD THE CART (USUALLY), SHOW VERSUS TELL
          Once again, the author has placed the cart before the horse. You may do this, of course—it is allowed. However, do it only to mix the rhythm of the prose on rare occasions, or to provide special emphasis to a specific (usually closing) segment of the sentence. Most of the time, you'll want to let the horse do the pulling. SECOND ISSUE: he felt. This is classic TELLING. Just SHOW us.

ISSUE #4: MAKE EVERY WORD COUNT, SHOW VERSUS TELL
          These are the two highest commandments of effective writing. The author violates both in this segment.

ISSUE #5: WEAK VERBS
          Nothing will leave a reader flatter, thinking blah-blah-blah, more than weak, inactive, verbs. CULPRIT: had. It's best to reserve "had" for Past Perfect Tense, and resist the temptation to use it as a primary verb in most instances. It's just plain dull. Stretch yourself. Earn your readers.

'Til next time, and as always, remember:
To write well, you must work hard. To succeed in this tough gig, you mustn't be lazy.

Calling All Writers....

Does good and proper writing even matter anymore?



I've posted an article on the question of writing well at the following site:

Just Wondering….


Please check it out, and remember:
To write well, you must work hard. To succeed in this tough gig, you mustn't be lazy.

Letter to a Client

The Editing Process, the Revision Process, and the Final Editing Process


Many have asked about my focus as editor, so I thought it might be helpful to share a letter I recently sent to one of my clients (name withheld). While the issues I address with [client] are specific to [client's] piece, much of what I say is universal, and helps to explain my editorial approach.


Dear [client],

I wanted to mention a few things as I prepare to finish the edit of your "First Draft."

First, regarding your comment:
"WITHOUT YOU, THIS STORY might never have been told. The writing group helps me a lot, but you're the one who has made the writers in this group think I am a good writer. I told them that without you, I would not have had a chance."

Thank you for that, [client], but I imagine you may be feeling a bit frustrated by the long process. What you must know is that this is all... well, part of the process.

Anytime I start a project with a client, the first question I ask myself is this: How much work does the prose need? In other words, how much time needs to go into fixing basic spelling and grammar, structure, and the writing fundamentals? If the answer is, "A lot," that changes—or I should say directs—my editorial focus. To be a writer, you must first know how to write.

Sound silly? It's not. There's a whole world full of storytellers, but there are precious few writers.

The second question is simple: Has the author completed the novel? If the answer is, "Yes," then we can focus a lot of energy on fixing story elements (plot, characterization, setting, etc.) as we go. However, if the answer is, "No," then it is dangerous to do so—at least, to do so too much. Why? Too many writers bog themselves down in an attempt to make their first 5, 6, 10 or 15 chapters PERFECT before moving on. Far too often, writers get angry, frustrated and depressed about their lack of real forward progress, and... well, they often set it aside and never FINISH the novel.

I did not want to risk that happening with you. Thus, because the answer to the first question above was, "A lot," and the answer to the second question was, "No," I let some issues related to those elements wait. The time to address them is in the rewriting/revision process, where you're now focused.

Your writing fundamentals needed... er... um... well, a whole lot of work. I don't think you're finished with that process yet, but that's okay—I don't think I'm finished with that process either. Writers seldom finish the process. It's an ongoing, evolutionary one as we attempt to first find our voice, and then to refine it. You've made real progress on that front. In the beginning, I couldn't get through one of your sentences without fixing something—often the entire sentence. Now, the fixes are much less involved, often minor (such as simple punctuation), and less frequent. You have a ways to go, but you're on track.

That means you can now focus, in the revision process, on the essential story elements, and not bog yourself down with matters of prose. As I like to say, "We can now see the forest through the trees." However, please be vigilant to maintain the level and efficacy of your prose as you make revisions.

Also, as you move forward, ask yourself the tough question about each and every character you introduce: Do I really need this NEW character, or can I use an existing one, or even vague references such as "many women" or "one of the elders," etc, in lieu of extremely minor characters that I introduce and use only once or twice?

In my opinion, you can cut at least 2-3 of your current minor characters, and probably more. The fewer character names readers have to remember, especially when those names are so lengthy and unusual (non-traditional) for most readers, the less likely readers are to get lost in the middle of your story because they can't keep track of who is who.

Finally, remember that the heart of any story has many chambers. Key among those is CONFLICT. Without conflict, there is no tension, no suspense, no need of resolution. Without conflict, there is no STORY. You must develop that conflict and bring it into your story early and often. You hint at it throughout, but you never really bring it to the surface. Your characters are charming and engaging, the true strength of your story (I'm speaking now as a reader, not your editor). You've brought an entire culture to life through those characters, and I've developed a real attachment to many of them. I care for them. Now, give me a reason to be concerned/excited/frightened/proud/happy/alarmed for them. Give me CONFLICT, which will raise my emotional involvement. Then, of course, you must give me RESOLUTION—a satisfying ending.

Then you'll have a great novel.

You've nailed Setting and Characterization. And I mean NAILED. Your characters are fantastic! And I can see their setting as though I'm right there with them. Strong stuff! Now, you must fix the one critical element still lacking: Plot. Yep, that's a biggy, but don’t get discouraged. That's why we revise, and revise, and revise some more. That's the process.

ONE WARNING: Do not lose your characters underneath the emerging plot. One does not replace the other; the two must work together.

Thanks,
Dave

The Paragraph Doctor – 0002

The primary issues: Past Perfect Tense, Comma Use, Wordiness


I've listed below an actual paragraph from a novel one of my clients is writing. I've changed the names of the characters to protect further the confidence of my client and his/her piece. I've placed the problem text in bold red font.

AUTHOR'S ORIGINAL
Yellow Flower Bloom was the first to look up from her cooking. Her man told her through Eagle they were coming back with hairy faced men and their women who were of the Peoples, but she did not expect to see what she did. So many walked her way! The horses they rode out with carried packs and one carried a smiling Blue Water Friend who held a baby in each arm.

EDITORIAL ALTERNATIVE
Yellow Flower Bloom was the first to look up from her cooking. Her man had told her—through Eagle—they were coming back with hairy-faced men and their women, who were of the Peoples, but she had not expected this. So many! The horses they'd ridden out with carried packs, and one carried a smiling Blue Water Friend, who held a baby in each arm.


ISSUE #1: IMPROPER TENSE
When writing of "the past within the past"—in other words, of an earlier action in a Past Tense narrative—always use the Past Perfect Tense.

ISSUE #2: DASHES TO OFFSET A PARENTHETIC ASIDE (ABRUPT, OR EMPHASIZED)
In this case of Native American spiritual beliefs, the fact that Yellow Flower Bloom learned this information through a Spirit Guide requires some emphasis, and dashes accomplish that well.

ISSUE #3: COMPOUND ADJECTIVE
I have discovered, in my editing pursuits, that most writers are lacking in their understanding of compound adjectives—or compound nouns and verbs, for that matter—which require hyphens. "Hairy-faced" is such a compound adjective.

ISSUE #4: COMMA REQUIRED
The phrase "who were of the Peoples" is a parenthetic, non-restrictive clause, and thus requires commas both before and after.

ISSUE #5: IMPROPER TENSE
Once again, the Past Perfect Tense is required: "had not expected" versus "did not expect."

ISSUE #6: WORDINESS
That segment can use a lot of tightening. Compare my alternative to the original. Did I lose anything? Any impact? Any clarity? No, and I eliminated 7 words from that 10-word segment. Remember this high commandment of effective writing: Make every word count.

ISSUE #5: IMPROPER TENSE
Once again, the Past Perfect Tense is required: "they'd ridden" versus "they rode."

ISSUE #8: COMMA REQUIRED
The first comma in that sentence, after "packs," is required to separate the Independent Clause. The second comma, after "Blue Water Friend," is required to separate the Non-Restrictive Clause.


'Til next time, and as always, remember:
To write well, you must work hard. To succeed in this tough gig, you mustn't be lazy.

The Paragraph Doctor – 0001

The primary issues: Repetition, Wordiness, Reader Commands

          I've listed below an actual paragraph from a novel one of my clients is writing. I've changed the names of the characters to protect further the confidence of my client and his/her piece. I've placed the problem text in bold red font.

AUTHOR'S ORIGINAL
          Jomo rubbed his thumb over his pointer finger. The High Wizard had given him explicit instructions not to discuss the prophecy’s elements with Ambolok before their arrival at Tower Bluff, but if the man gave up before their arrival, they’d have no options at all. Ambolok craved purpose and understanding. Every man, woman, and child strove towards something to make their lives better, be it through a force of ethics or that of corruption. When a man lost purpose he lost will to survive. Infuse him with purpose, give him a target to seek and conquer, and he became a driven animal.

EDITORIAL ALTERNATIVE
         Jomo rubbed his thumb over his index finger. The High Wizard had given him explicit instructions not to discuss the prophecy’s elements with Ambolok until they reached Tower Bluff, but if the man gave up before their arrival, they’d have no options at all. Ambolok craved purpose and understanding. Every man, woman and child strove towards something to make their lives better, whether driven by ethics or corruption. When a man lost purpose, he lost will to survive. Infused with purpose, given a target to seek and conquer, he became a driven animal.

ISSUE #1: WORD CHOICE
          It's a simple thing, and it would be acceptable for the author to leave the description of "pointer finger." However, many readers will find that awkward, and would be more comfortable with the more common "index finger." As writers, we often try to mix up our prose to keep it fresh and unique, but we occasionally outsmart ourselves in the process. Sometimes, simple is best. Remember who your customer is—the reader—and don't overdo it.

ISSUE #2: REPETITION
          The phrase "before their arrival" appears twice within a 15-word segment. Repetition this close will jump out at the reader, so the author must rephrase to eliminate the rapid repetition.

ISSUE #3: UNNECESSARY PAUSE (COMMA)
          Does the author need that comma after "woman?" Read the sentence aloud. Did you naturally pause at that point, or did you want to zip right through it? I'm betting on the latter.

ISSUE #4: WORDINESS
          That segment—"be it through a force of ethics or that of corruption"—is a violation of one of the high commandments of effective writing: Make every word count.

ISSUE #5: COMMA REQUIRED
          This is the opposite of Issue #3 above. Read it aloud. Do you want to pause after the transitional introduction, "When a man lost purpose?" Yep.

ISSUE #6: COMMANDING THE READER
          Beware falling into the trap of speaking directly to the reader—of falling into a second-person narrative in the middle of a first- or third-person story. Rephrase to remain consistent.

'Til next time, and as always, remember:
To write well, you must work hard. To succeed in this tough gig, you mustn't be lazy.

I'm Coming Back

I'll be returning in earnest on Monday, 5-31-10, when I'll begin re-posting at this blog.

The posts will be shorter, more pointed, and probably more diverse than before.

Visit me then, and thanks for sticking around through my hiatus.

Re-Thinking the Blog

I've been re-thinking this blog, as what I've been doing is a lot of work on a per-entry basis, and seems to be garnering little in the way of excitement, appreciation, disgust -- any kind of response at all.

Indeed, I need a little break from writing anyways, to refresh my attitude, my outlook, my creativity.  I'll continue to edit for my clients, but aside from that, I'm going to enjoy a short hiatus.

I'll be back in the near future, properly refreshed, with a new, much more casual approach to this blog.

Don't give up on it yet, but don't expect to see anything until April.

Thanks.

Back After a "Sick" Break

After a couple of weeks of battling two separate bugs, I'm back in the saddle.

I'm sorry about not posting anything the last couple of weeks, but this has been the worst sick season I've had in many years.  Enough on that.

I've been keeping up with a number of agent blogs and similar industry blogs recently, trying to discover that ONE secret for a query letter that will make agents say, "Send me the manuscript."

As part of that search, I encountered this gem at the GUIDE TO LITERARY AGENTS EDITOR"S BLOG: Successful Queries: Agent Jeff Kleinman and 'The Art of Racing in the Rain.'

It's always worthwhile, I think, to see a specific example of what worked for an agent (I should say for the author).  However, a particular line from Jeff Kleinman struck the cynic in me:

"…we agents tend to be like sheep—what one doesn’t like, the rest of us are wary of, too (or, conversely, what one likes, we all like).

Hmm… what a refreshing admission.  Has anyone besides me thought this lately: "I should drop my current genre and write a YA novel, which is what 99.93695487635624% of agents appear to want these days?"

Baaaaaaaaaaa....

Nah, I guess I'll stick with the psychological thriller.  Surely, somewhere out there, adults are still reading books.

I know, I know… I'm ranting again.  Take a deep breath, Diamond.  There, I'm ready to get back on track.

Query Letter and Synopsis

These are my two newest expletives: Query Letter, Synopsis.

For some time now, I've felt that my novel manuscript, revised/edited/polished about 30 times, is ready for prime time.  Trusted sources who've read it agree.  Just one problem: I haven't been able to get an agent to read it.  Clearly, my query letter and synopsis have not been sufficient to the cause.  I've tried about a dozen different versions.  Never mind.  Back to the drawing board.

I've been researching, reading, studying, researching some more, and I've reached an important conclusion: An author must have more than one (or two or three or ten) version of the query letter (ditto all these points for the separate synopsis).

It has become painfully clear that one agent's query masterpiece is another agent's uninspiring fodder for the form rejection parade—or for the "do not respond (and probably delete)" electronic file (hard copies to the trash bin).

I've now visited more literary agent websites than I care to consider, and read more blogs and articles than I can keep up with.  I've seen examples of "great" query letters that left me scratching my head and saying, "Geez, that's about as exciting as milktoast."  I've also seen writers' frustrated online posts of query letters, for which they couldn’t get a positive response, and thought, "Damn, that sounds like something I'd like to read."

Then, of course, I've read an agency blog indicating that writer's must provide "this or that" in a query letter, only to find another agency blog that said not to include that very information.

In the end, it's simple: this business is extraordinarily, unbelievably, incomprehensibly, maddeningly (enough adverbs?) subjective.  Ask any 10 literary agents for an example of the perfect query letter, and you’re bound to get at least 7 different responses.  Don’t believe me?  Just check out their sites and blogs.  Of course, they'll often end with that caveat: "Well, there's no one way to write a query letter."  Sure.  That's helpful.

In fact, there IS only one way to write a query letter, and that's their way.  Thus, my advice to you is simple: If you can find an example of what that particular agent considers a good query letter, model yours on that example.  Yes, that means that for every agent you query, you will have a different, highly customized query letter.  100 agents = 100 versions of your query letter (or something close).

Perhaps I'm a little slow to this conclusion, and some of you long ago discovered this truth.  Perhaps I'm way off, and the query letters I've been using (at least as of late) have been perfectly fine.  After all, form rejections (assuming I get a response at all) tell me nothing.  Was my query letter insufficient?  Was the synopsis unsatisfactory or uninspiring?  Was my lack of publishing credentials the issue?  Were my few sample pages the problem?  Were ALL of those perfectly acceptable, just not a good fit for that particular agent?  How can I know?

Yeah… exactly.

It's a mad, mad, mad world of publishing out there.  To crack that nut, you must be prepared to weed through the morass and play the numbers game (those of you in sales know of what I speak).  You must treat every single agent as though she's the only agent in the world.  You must take away from your writing time and get about the business end of the game, through hours and hours and hours and hours of research, followed by hours and hours of refining your query letter and synopsis.

You must create a unique, customized query letter and synopsis for every agent you query.  Some of the changes may be subtle; nonetheless, as the Nike folks say, "Just do it."  One word might make all the difference.

What's that, you don't like it?  It shouldn't be this difficult?  Tough.  Just do it.

Or go back to your job and forget about this crazy notion of being an author.

Before you decide, keep in mind Shakespeare's most eloquent urging (from Julius Caesar):

"There is a tide in the affairs of men, which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; omitted, and all the voyage of their lives is bound in shallows and miseries."

Fear not the flood; just start swimming—really, really, really hard.  Don't bind yourself in misery.

'Til next time, and as always, remember:

To write well, you must work hard.  To succeed in this tough gig, you mustn't be lazy.

More on Dialogue in Your Story

Revealed - 12 Important Points of Dialogue

In the above linked article, author A.J. Barnett provides a kind of beginner's overview of how and why to effectively utilize dialogue in your story.  It's a nice addition to my recent articles on the use of action leads and inserts in lieu of awkward dialogue tags.

If dialogue is a sticking point for you, read the article.

As to his claim that "Up to 50% of your novel could be dialogue," I would highlight the words "up to."  Some genres require more dialogue than others, just as some genres require more setting (historical fiction, science fiction and fantasy, for example).  If you're unsure of whether you use enough dialogue in your piece, seek feedback from trusted sources, not the least of which is your editor.  (What, you thought I wouldn't throw that in?)

Enjoy, and as always, remember this:

To write well, you must work hard.  To succeed in this tough gig, you mustn't be lazy.

RECOMMENDED BOOK ON THE SUBJECT:

The Book of Dialogue - Lewis Turco