There Goes Spring Break...

It was glorious: A week away from lecturing. On the downside of that, I had marking up to my eyeballs, but at least I could do it my jammies. But, now, the glory that was Spring Break is over. Back to the grind, now. Day started off by email, and now I am finishing up my lectures for the week.

sigh.

In other news, I got my edits for Textbook Romance in my email over the weekend. They don't look impossible, though there were cuts (not unusual) and character issues (difficult, but I'm sure I can swing them), and many general questions - one that, like usual, was a big "Oh man, how did I miss that?" moment for me. That happens every time - editors are keen eyes!

I have three weeks to finish them, so I'll be buckled down on those for a while.

I'm still working, slowly but surely, on the WIP. I still have to talk about this on the blog, I know. It's still "Top Secret" until I am sure I'm going to stick with it. I'm a little shy about revealing the details. In time, though, I will surely share.

Well, off to brew some coffee and then back to work.

Have a great week, all!

More Edits, Edits, Edits

Just in case you're curious about what I'm up to, I've been editing.

For the most part, my editing process is now better than is was when I first started out, so that's good.

My typing and editing with an eye to eventual formatting needs is leaps and bounds beyond what it used to be. I could always handle using indent instead of tab, but I never used to think of checking for format frags, needless extra spaces, and so forth. This came with blogging experience with html and compose views, I think, along with some helpful info from my publishers.

In terms of basic writing, I seem to have improved, as well. I don't head hop any more, and my tenses/POVs are a lot less amateur than they were when I started out. I am no longer putting descriptors on every bloody verb and noun, and I've stopped mentioning the characters' eye colour over and over. Oh, and I no longer have them saying each other's names more than absolutely necessary (though I still find speaking the lover's name during romantic moments quite touching). I have really put the boots to the passive voice problem I used to have, thank heavens. I am clearing up my lack of contractions issue, as well as my love of formalities. I rarely get reminded to show instead of tell. I put in much more dialogue than in my early works, and I've become much more comfortable with leaving off the speech tags and being fine just saying "said" when that's what's needed.

Finally, on the topic of dialogue, I now no longer put a comma after speech when the following line is not a said thing (i.e., "Hi." He unwrapped his gum. As opposed to: "Hi," he unwrapped his gum. You can see that the latter makes little sense.)

As far as story stuff goes, I am a bit more able to deal with logistic issues. For instance, since joining Rebel Ink, I no longer whine about figuring out how to include condoms realistically in my erotica (as this appears to be their policy). Now, I am able to handle the issue as a matter of course fairly well, I think.

These are all great signs of progress! I can feel my style and general habits changing from amateur hobbyist to real writer, which is encouraging for me. I am now doing (or not doing) these things habitually in the first draft, which makes the editing process easier for us all.

Nevertheless, there are a few repeated weaknesses that I'm having trouble defeating. (sigh.) Commas, for example, continue to be an addiction to me, and I find not every editor likes my conversational dialogue style. That's fine. I'm never so attached to my style that I stall or refuse when an editor shoots me down. I can continue to work on my voice the way I want to, and some day it may be strong enough (combined with an editor who likes it) to take it's own lead. Otherwise, there wasn't a lot by way of huge issues - the experiment I was trying of dropping the reader right in the middle of an erotic scene kind of floundered, but I think I solved that one by moving a paragraph and massaging the scene a bit. We shall see when the next round of feedback comes in.

In this MS, I also found a preposterous modifying clause that made no sense, which is not something I usually foul up. In any case, I found it and fixed it. whew! This is why you guys never get to see the first draft!

Thank heavens for editors! Every editor (and betareader and reviewer) I have worked with or encountered has taught me a lot along the way and contributed to this more professional writing right from the get-go, so I thank them all!

In the end, this past week, I managed to turn in the edits on the Halloween story, Like Magic, a couple days ahead of my estimate, just in case I have a few more rounds left to go before the Oct 3 release goal. I suspect I will have the edits for the Thanksgiving installment, Charity, quite soon. (I also hope to have the cover to show you shortly, as well!)

Onward I plod. It's all coming along. I'm not fresh-writing as much as I would like, but am managing to do a little. I still hope to have the new paranormal in draft by Oct 1-ish. I've done a lot of guest blogging and interviews over the past week, and kept up with the day job, etc. However, the last couple of days, mostly, I've been trying to make this book ready to go live, but I should be able to do it on time.

So, that's what I've been up to. Hiding in my editing cave and burning holes through my gut with editing-strength coffee.

How's by you?

Summer Wrap-Up: Updates/Forecast on the WIPs

It's been a productive summer, spent editing and writing.

The first month or so was spent re-writing my NaNo 2011 novel, Textbook Romance, with the help of five wonderful betareaders. Then, I spent some time re-editing Unwrapping Scrooge for a Christmas print anthology. Goose and V-Day were re-vamped and released by Rebel Ink.

I did  flurry of new writing in August. The Halloween short, Like Magic, was written, read by a couple sweet people, and submitted to RIP for my holiday shorts series. It's with the editors now. I also managed to finish the Thanksgiving installment, and got it in only a day late. (They were nice to me about that.) The Thanksgiving one, Charity, is a nice, sexy cowboy one; I hope you'll all like it. It started out with another plot, but I had to shelf that beginning and start over with something lighter and more doable in under 15k.

Now, I've outlined and started the New Years one (Bubbly) - this one is a whole lot hotter than the other episodes. It's about a divorced socialite and successful designer who ducks her own New Years party to give life and love another whirl with "the hired help." Just right for a sparkly, fantastic New Years Eve romp!


Textbook Romance is now off to two companies, and I'm submitting it to a third in mid-September or so (staggered according to their response times). I keep revamping the sub letters/synopsis as I go, and tweaking the manuscript. My fingers remain ever-crossed. As always, I'll keep you updated.

The past couple of days have been spent blogging like mad to keep up with all the guest posts and interviews I promised to do over the summer. It doesn't seem like much work when you say yes at the time, but if you let them pile up... Oy!

So, what's next? After Bubbly is submitted for editing at RIP (aiming for September 15, if possible), I'm on to my planned paranormal/shifter dark erotica short/novella, which doesn't have a name yet (though I do have a publisher in mind!). Then, I'll finish the romantic-fantasy novella I started writing back in June but had to put away for other obligations. That one involves an "angel" figure, and has been named After Life. (I have a publisher in mind for that one, as well.) So, that all will likely take me up to nearly-NaNo time! After NaNo, I have plenty more planned - just today, I added a Mountie romance! But, for now, let's just say I'll be busy for a while.

It's insane how fast the year is flying by. This year, so far I've celebrated the release of three books (two of them twice), and am looking forward to at least four more. I got some very nice reviews. I've sold a few, promoted some, and generally kept busy. I am very much looking forward to having more contracts, new covers and releases to share with you throughout the end of 2011 and well into 2012.

If you want to see my complete WIP list, you can find it here.

And, that's a little update on where things are. I'll be in touch as things develop, I'm sure. :)

Very, Really, Actually

I use these words way too often, and end up doing an editing sweep especially for them. I don't know how or when they became habit, but I'm hypersensitive to them now, and they bug the hell out of me. Wasn't it Mark Twain who said to insert the word "damn" every time you are tempted to say "very"? "Then your editor will delete them, and your writing will be just as it should be," I think the rest goes. Really.

So, what are your no-no words?

Pleading Busy

No theme this week, folks, though I will be popping in here a few times, I'm sure. I just spent a fairly grueling weekend refining the new novel, doing a close line read for Draft 3. Sent it to some readers, and am hoping Draft 4 will be the submission draft! Now, I have a ton of real life work, a couple stories to finish writing, and more edits to do for the re-release of Good for the Goose. *sigh* It never ends!

(Also, I have to hurry today so I can play hooky tomorrow and see the new Harry Potter! I really shouldn't - I should work - but, dangit, I deserve a break. Right?)

So, I beg your forgiveness for spotty blogging over the next little while. Rest assured that it's in the interest of producing more/better writing in the long run!

In the meantime, I've been interviewed by Andy Rane, so you can get your Anne Holly fix there, if you'd like.

And, for some writing craft tips, you can see what constitutes "rookie mistakes" according to the self-declared pope of writers town. Or some of these other articles on the dos and don'ts of writing/publishing/etc.

Have a great week!

Betareaders are the Alpha and Omega of Publishing

I wonder if the Big Writers still use betareaders? You know, I bet they do, even if it's their husband, or aunt Tilly, or another writer buddy. But, one thing for sure, when you are an indie and/or impoverished writer, betareaders are not only your best friend - they are essential to your livelihood in publishing.

So, what is a betareader? Even if you have never heard of a betareader, or possibly a "test reader" or "test audience," dollars to donuts you've benefited from one if you have ever read a book.

A betareader is one of the first people a writer gets to read their draft, after they are semi-okay with it themselves. These test readers have a tough job, because it's not just reading - it's critiquing, giving feedback, answering/asking questions about the work, finding plot holes, exposing bad writing, pointing out flaws, and occasionally giving emergency mental health counseling to authors at the point of jumping out windows trying to weed these issues out. It's a big job, and one that is very rarely compensated enough.

Some betareaders are just voracious readers. Some are writers, within and without the same genre as the book. Some are editors or proofers for their day job (though that is a different stage than betareading). Some are pros, and most are volunteers.

The important thing is that they represent the readers who will eventually (one hopes) plunk down hard earned cash for the book that the writer ultimately produces.

Thus, betareaders do three major tasks: (1) They help the writer produce a much, much, much better draft for submission (which, obviously, makes for a better book altogether). (2) Their feedback helps the writer become a better writer over time, by helping them identify weak spots when writing the next one and hone editing/revision skills. (3) They help protect future readers from frustrations - inadvertently paying for a book with errors, confusing motivations, plot inconsistencies, inaccuracies, obnoxious writing habits, etc.

If you let your betareaders be free and frank with you, and you listen to them well, they tell you if what you have produced is worth the confidence a reader places in you when they exchange their money for your book. Or, they will help you find a way to get the book into that exalted state.

In essence, with the much-toted decline of "traditional publishers" and the rise of "indie authors" (which is not a subject I will touch here with a ten foot pole), betareaders are an increasingly crucial part of the restructured "gate keepers" of literature. Certainly, those of us (still?) publishing with actual companies will have editors and line readers, and any indie author dedicated to producing quality work will hire an independent editor/proofer, but these people do not replace the betareader.

The betareaders, the acquisition editors, the substance editor(s), the line readers and the proofers all do separate, though essential, work, just as none of them can replace the writer's own editing phases and vice versa. Besides, without honest and alert betareaders, chances are the book won't ever make it past the acquisitions editors to the contract/editing/proofing phases, anyway.

On top of this, betareaders are usually a different thing from critters, as well - "critters" (AKA "critique circles") being your fellow writers who only read/hear bits and pieces as you write for critique purposes, in exchange for critiques of their own work. This is also a valuable asset, but no replacement for a total betareading experience, though your betareading pool can include some critters. Is this making any sense?

So, to break this down - the writer produces a draft (or drafts of chapters, though I usually wait until the whole thing at once), and edits, sometimes with the help of critters along the way. When he or she simply can't look at it any more, it goes off to the betareaders. They (I try to go for three) read it. Their focus will depend on their interests and personalities - some will look at the writing mechanics more than the plot, while others like to think about the characters or the bigger picture. It's great to have a mixture of all these. When they are finished reading it, they will send you their Notes, and, if you are lucky, will let you pelt them with questions about the book. The writer will then crawl back to their revisions cave and try to fix the flaws picked out like magic by the intrepid betareaders. Then, depending on how severe the problems were, the book might be sent back to betareading again - either with the same readers or fresh ones. Then the writer does those revisions, and then usually will do another editing phase him/herself, and maybe set it aside for a bit, and do another one. Then the book goes through acquisition editing, which (with luck) results in a contract offer. Then it goes through substantive editing, line editing, and proofing, resulting in many more revision rounds. Then, if the writer is anal, they might get one more betareading in on the galley before they sign off, just to catch anything floating around in the book, and do one more read through themselves.

And, voila! Then you have a book ready for the market - and the resulting customer and professional reviewers. But, by the time you get their feedback it is often too late. The problems they find can certainly help for your next book, but you had better make sure you had solid betareaders and editors to make it as good as possible before it reaches the live audience.

Who are my betareaders? I have some very lovely volunteers. For the new book, I have Beth, a writer and reader; Amanda, an artist and essayist; and Trishy, a reader and grammar hound. They do wonderful work, and I appreciate them so very much. It's best to have a pool of betareaders so as to not exhaust the good will of your favourites (I am always taking "applications," by the way), but when you find a solid betareader, they are worth their weight in gold.

This is my ode to the betareaders. If you are an author, you likely already knew how valuable they are. If you are a reader, or not yet published, I hope you take a moment while enjoying a good book to offer a little silent thanks to these folks. They are a foundational part of making every novel its best, and a line of defense against bad writing.

Hats off to the betareaders!

Editing Demon #1: Show, don't Tell!

This week, I have been doing a confessional postmortem in the wake of my editing and re-writing battle to smooth out my NaNo novel for the betareaders. On Monday, I looked at "passive voice," which I am wrestling down, and on Wednesday, I looked at "head hopping," which I have made good progress with.

Today, in the final installment, we have perhaps one of the hardest editing shore - "telling instead of showing."

What is it? To be honest, I am still unclear what this little accusation means. I know it is a dreadful habit, but as much as I have read about it, it's all still very fuzzy for me. I know the clinical definition usually describes a bad writing habit in which the writer announces actions or states, without making the reader feel/see them for themselves. However, in general, it is something that I can only really understand when I see it.

So, an example: If I told you "She was very hungry," that wouldn't be as evocative as saying, "Her stomach groaned in protest after missing lunch." The first, while clear, concise and true, is not as descriptive as the second. Yet, the second allows the reader to know what is going on without the author stepping in and telling them what s/he wants them to see.

Another example: "His cat is very smart." This is quite bland, lacks evidence, and represents the author's voice telling the reader something s/he believes, rather than describing things that would allow the reader to draw the required conclusion. In short, it tells rather than shows. Instead, try this: "His cat does his taxes and runs a small online yarn supply store in his spare time."

As you can see, the first sentence there tells you something, but the second one gives you information that would certainly allow you to draw the same conclusion, but for yourself. This is preferable for obvious reasons - especially since the second sentence is a lot more interesting than the first.

I am pleased that this is not a problem my editors have called me on a lot in the past. Naturally, it has come up a few times, but I wouldn't call it a chronic concern (I hope!). Still, I am paranoid about it, though, because it is not something I mentally screen for by nature. It is an easy error to make when you are the author and you know what the reader is meant to get from every bit of text. It is also easy to tell instead of show when you are trying to avoid overly purple prose.

You see, the main is issue is that "showing" instead of "telling" constantly would conflict with one of the major commandments of clear writing: Say as much as possible with as few words as needed. Showing is not as efficient as telling, that is for sure, so you are left with the need to balance the need to show and the need to keep your writing clean and well-groomed. Therefore, the dreaded "show, don't tell!" remark is a giant pain in the butt if you are worried about "omit needless words" comment.

The Scylla and Charybdis of writing fiction, if you will.

***

There are exemptions to the rule, naturally, and places where telling is preferable to showing. Showing everything, all the time, in a story would not be a good idea, since this would lead to a gargantuan manuscript, as well as a book that leaves both you and the reader exhausted. Further, the most practical use of telling over showing is when you want to skip a passage of time to get to a more crucial scene. Not every detail is essential to the story's meaning or to the reader's experience. Those unessential bits are where merely telling is useful, so you can move along to the important parts.

However, this should be done consciously and directly. Accidental telling where showing would be better needs to be in control, and slips need to be pointed out by a qualified editor of fiction.

I have no quick fixes for this pitfall, really. It is something that can only be really helped in your training and practice. It can be fixed in editing, by re-reading and re-writing lines until they as descriptive as you need, as well as concise as possible. However, I think the best way to remedy the tendency to tell instead of show is to practice your writing and be mindful of what you are doing, the entire time you are writing: can what you are saying be better shown than told? Sadly, that is not a quick fix.

But there are "tricks" that you can use to make your writing show instead of tell. The first is to use figurative and illustrative examples, instead of direct assertions. For example, instead of "Jim was attracted to Steve," you can say, "Whenever he was around Steve, Jim's heart would race." The reader can draw the conclusion of attraction from that, I should think. The second trick would be to put things in evocative dialogue instead of in declarative lines. Finally, the most common rule-of-thumb in editing is to be on the lookout for "was" and "is" - these are often markers of sentences that tell instead of show. However, even these are not hard rules, and nothing can replace a careful reading.

Remember: Showing instead of telling is the best way to show people you are a good writer, as opposed to just telling them you are. If your writing draws them in, they will know you are a good writer without needing to be told. We can all agree, this is a much more convincing way for them to learn of your talent.

***

And there you have some of the phases that I go through in editing. It may not make for thrilling reading, but I feel better having itemized my tasks. I am hopeful that this new novel will be my best yet, as long as I badger myself into editing carefully and ruthlessly. And this is a task well served by making a clear list of problems in my head as I enter the post-betareading revision, in preparation for submission of the manuscript.

Writing is a craft, and one is always able to improve and hone. Writing is only improved through extensive reading and writing, accompanied by useful discussion of the craft itself. Visualization and honest assessment is crucial to this progress.

I don't know if this little series has helped you at all, but it has me. Thanks!

Editing Demon #2: "Head Hopping"

This is the second of my series of three deep-dark-confessions about my editing weaknesses. These are the major issues that I am always working on throughout every story, and for which I have to make specific editing rounds. The theme this week is editing, because I just spent two weeks in editing/re-writing Hades with ye old NaNo manuscript, which is now off to the initial betareaders (see more about betareaders here next week).

The second is a tendency to "head hop."

Definition: "Head Hopping" is a term used by book folk, editors, writers and reviewers to refer to unexplained and confusing shifts in POV during a scene. I.e., chapter starts in the hero's POV and slips into heroine's POV without a section break, and back again. This also includes "vanity/expressions perspective" (where the character that is serving as our eyes inexplicably knows what s/he is looking like at that moment, or unrealistically thinks of their nose as "cute" or similar).

The Problem: If a scene is in one character's POV, the reader should see everything as that character sees it - what s/he knows, sees, feels, etc. If POV slips happen too erratically, it can make the writing seem disjointed and hard to follow. The events and timing seems jumbled. And, worse, it leads to authorial interference, and can take the reader out of the story and make them feel disconnected from the scene.

The Allure: Both characters have so many thoughts and feelings, and head hoping allows you to describe both characters from the outside and give internal dialogue for each, i.e. "what they really mean when they said such-n-such aloud." Besides, I'm the author - I know what they are all thinking!

The Fix: This was a problem that was really big in my first couple of manuscripts, because I didn't realize it was a problem. In old romances, they head hopped all the time, and those were the stories I cut my teeth on. Nowadays, though, it is passe, and my editors have been good at spotting it and teaching me not to do it. Now, I include the planned POV for each scene in the outline for each chapter, so I know which character will be my eyes. This has helped eliminate the good majority of my head hopping. Other than that, a very thorough read-through is the best way to clip out the bits that escape through the outline.

***

Need an illustrative example?

Head Hopping Passage (pre-editing):

Once, the pair even literally ran into each other at the mailboxes, when she came barging into the small space as he turned to stride out. Neither had noticed each other until their torsos had collided. Instinctively, he brought his glove-clad hands up to her fleece-covered arms to steady her, and she noticed again the attractive scent of sandalwood. He detected the slight tinge of cinnamon on her breath as she puffed in surprise, and for a moment all thought fled from his brain as he stared into wide, hazel eyes, fringed with impossibly dark lashes.

He couldn't remember the last time his mind was completely blank while working on a book, but at that moment, he would have been hard pressed to recall his own name.

"Steady on," he murmured, realizing he should say something.

"Hi," she breathed, simply, and, almost reluctantly, made to move past him.

Her flat mate Colby, in their infrequent discussions of the other inmates of the building, had dismissed Kale McKinnon as "weird and old," but right then Molly saw him as nothing like old or weird. True, he had some eccentric qualities, but at that moment, his oddities were more intriguing than anything else. And no one who felt so firm and vital could be considered old. Her heartbeat, at least, rapped out a tattoo that told her she was in the presence of vibrant maleness, a feeling to which she was not normally prone.

"Hi again," he said, softly, taking unfamiliar pleasure in her pretty blush.

Molly stood aside and let him pass, and watched as he exited the building. If she were more like Colby, she thought, she would say he had a "great butt," and smiled impishly at the thought. But, no - she was just Molly, and she didn't have those kinds of thoughts about men she barely knew.

Even though it was true.

Same Scene (post-editing):

Once, the pair even literally ran into each other at the mailboxes, when Molly came barging into the small space just as Kale turned to stride out. Neither had noticed each other until their torsos had collided. Instinctively, he brought his glove-clad hands up to her fleece-covered arms to support her. He detected a slight tinge of cinnamon on her breath as she puffed in surprise, and all thoughts fled from his brain as he stared into wide, hazel eyes, fringed with impossibly dark lashes.

He couldn't remember the last time his mind was completely blank while working on a book, but at that moment he would have been hard pressed to recall his own name.

“Steady on,” he murmured, when he realized he should say something.

“Hi,” she breathed, simply and shyly.

“Hi, again,” he said, softly, taking unfamiliar pleasure in her pretty blush, but finally forced himself past her her to the door.

*break*

She stood aside and watched as he exited the building. Her flatmate, Colby, in their infrequent discussions of the other inmates of the building, had dismissed Kale McKinnon as weird and old. However, right then, Molly saw him as nothing like that. True, he had some eccentric qualities, yet to her, his oddities were more intriguing than anything else. And no one who felt so firm and vital could be considered old. Around him, her heart rapped out a tattoo that told her she was in the presence of vibrant maleness—a feeling to which she was not normally prone.

To Molly, he was sexy, if in an unconventional way. If she were more like Colby, she would say he had a great butt. She smiled impishly at the observation. But, no, she was just herself, and she didn't notice those kinds of things about men she barely knew.

Even though it was true.

(Scenes are both from my Christmas romance novella Unwrapping Scrooge, with thanks to my wonderful editors at Decadent.)

When I first made these changes, it seemed clunky to me to separate the two perspectives. But, I was thinking like the author and not considering the reader. Luckily, I trusted my editors!

***

There are always exceptions!

I try to employ my right to artistic licence very sparingly. I like to trust my editors, as they are less attached to the draft than I am. However, one of the little "quirks" I enjoy in my works is a montage scene that is used to build chemistry and intimacy, as if the melding perspectives mirror the growing couplehood. In this brief scene, the passage of time is denoted by overlapping POV, as well.

Example (also from Unwrapping Scrooge):

As the weeks passed, they talked of many things. They chatted about writing and how his work was going, and about her thesis, and about England and Canada. She told him about her mother's breast cancer, and their constant fear of its return until the five-year remission mark passed this winter. He was silent on the subject of family, which spoke volumes to her. And both felt quiet sympathy for the other. They found themselves developing a friendship neither had expected to find. He found her incredibly intelligent, and she discovered his rudeness was not his normal state, but that he was actually quite amusing when he allowed himself to be. And both also found themselves more and more attracted to the other as the days progressed.

Kale was surprised he had ever thought her plain now, and she wondered why Colby wasn’t able to see how fascinating his mouth was. One morning, she found his dressing gown hung on the inside of the bathroom door and had stroked its plush softness, allowing the scent of him to invade her. She enjoyed the tingling restlessness that pooled deep in her belly until she reminded herself that she was acting like a stalker again and hurriedly left the room. He often found his disobedient eyes travelling the length of her, basking in the sight of her lush curves, only to gather up the last ragged remains of his self-control and return to whatever menial task she had set for him.

And in this way they continued, trying to convince themselves there was no harm in a platonic friendship that was destined to go nowhere and be no more consequential than a few weeks of breakfasts. Soon after the New Year, Mrs. McCardle would return, and there would be no pretense left for them to meet, and then, a few months after that, Molly would return across the ocean, and their brief flirtation would be a warm memory, if that.

But for now, both walked around in a fog fueled by fantasy that neither was really willing or able to acknowledge, but which amused Colby and Byron enormously.

This passage is the only intentional violation of the anti-head-hopping convention in the book. It occurs at an "act break" just as their relationship changes direction, and sums up about a month of interaction in a few brief paragraphs. The characters are such opposites, I felt this was a risky move that could pay off by fostering a more realistic sense of growing together.

It is aggressively authorial, and likely isn't to everyone's tastes. For me, however, I like the cozy feeling of montage passages so much that it is worth taking the hit from the editors. That's my treat as a reader of my own work, in a way.

Luckily, this book has still done fairly well with reviewers and readers, despite this indulgence!

***

So, through editing and working on my craft under the watchful eyes of experienced readers/editors, and by paying attention to reviewer reactions, I am in recovery for my head hopping addiction, and have a greater control over my perspective - but it is still something I have to be conscious of.

The point of writing (at least in genre fiction) is to make the book a pleasant experience for the fans of that genre, and to communicate clearly. Being mindful of writing habits that make reading more difficult is an important step towards publishing.

Naturally, different writers and different forms of writing will have different needs and conventions, so YMMV!

***

So, the quick fix list:

1. Recognize the problem and why it is a problem.
2. Outline/plan/consider which character POV will be the eyes for the scene before hand and stick to it as much as possible.
3. Re-read in the draft stage for head hops or vanity adjectives, and clip the slips out.
4. If a passage cannot be merely clipped, move it to a new section (to the correct POV) or make it out right dialogue.
5. If need be, cut the scene into sections with a section break, and tell the same scene from the two different POVs - but this should be used sparingly.
6. Only head hop when you are consciously using your artistic license. Accidental head hopping should be scoured out by a qualified editor and good readers.

***

"So, good luck," he said, thinking she was nuts for all this.
"Thanks," she muttered, knowing he thought she was nuts.

Question for You: What's on your Editing Hit List?

This past week and a bit, I have been slaving away trying to whip my WIP into shape, scouring it for typos and plot holes, strengthening the little threads, and punching up the dialogue. This week, I'm opening up my dirty little editing secrets in a series of three posts exploring my worst weaknesses, but there are other little habits that I also have to watch for: forgetting to use contractions when necessary, using way too many purple adverbs, reusing phrases that I love a bit too much... The list goes on and on.

I think it's useful and important when a writer knows their bad writing habits, especially in editing.

So, today's question: What little foibles are you constantly fixing in your work in post-production or on the look out for during writing? If you are an editor or a reader, which bad habits do you hate most?

Leave a comment, and let me know what you think!

Editing Demon #3: The Passive Voice

This is the first in a series of three posts about my major editing needs - the three bad habits that follow me from WIP to WIP, that I have to consciously read for in editing, and which my editors still inevitably have to smack me for. I am working on them, but bad habits are hard to break - especially when, half the time, you don't realize you are doing them, and your grasp on how/why you are wrong is hazy at best because they feel so natural to you.

The first is the compulsive use of the passive voice/tense.

Definition: When you place the object of an action in a sentence as the subject of the sentence.

The Problem: While passive is not always a grammatical error, it is a less energetic way of phrasing activities - it is also a lot less clear, concise and attractive. It also denotes a lazy writer and a lack of careful authorial attention, which is not a good image to give your readers!

The Allure: Passive sounds so dang fancy! I have a very bad impulse to pretend that I am Jane Austen when I write, which generally leads to an over-abundance of antiquated sentences and convoluted constructions. While Jane Austen was a master of the narrative and characterization, there are much better gurus to look to for grammar and editing inspiration. (I love the passive verb clauses, as you can see in this post.)

The Fix: Round upon round of editing until I weed the little buggers out and clean up all that sloppy, purple prose! With the passive, recognizing I have a problem is half the battle, and nothing can be done but re-reading and tweaking. Sadly, auto-check can't really be relied upon (or, I guess I should say, auto-check is not reliable...?). The only thing to be done is to edit it by hand with an eye towards active rather than passive. sigh.

Still not sure what the problem is?

If you are still confused, I feel your pain. I don't always recognize the passive as problematic, either, when I am reading. It has only been a serious of resounding "No! Bad Writer! Bad!" corrections from editors that has forced me to read specifically for the passive.

Perhaps a common example will help...

The road was crossed by the chicken.

Naturally, we know this sounds weird. We usually say this as "The chicken crossed the road."

Why? Because placing the doer instead of the object of the action in the driver's seat of the sentence is a much more engaging and clean way to say it. Putting the horse in front of the cart, if you will.

Another example:

After she was shoved down, Suzy cried.

This sentence fails to tell us who shoved Suzy down, as it is missing the doer. "Tommy shoved Suzy down, making her cry" is better.

Try this one:

These truths are held by us to be self-evident...

That certainly lacks the sparkle of "We hold these truths to be self-evident" doesn't it?

Exceptions to every rule...

Sometimes, the passive is not only perfectly fine, but preferable, making it even harder to edit for them.

For example:

Baby Kate was born at 8pm today!

Clearly, Baby Kate is the star of that sentence, and there is no one else that need be mentioned as important as her. "Dr Phil Winthrop delivered Baby Kate today..." is not only needless but a lot less interesting. Even Dr Winthrop would likely agree that he's much less important than Baby Kate at her own birth.

This is what Strunk and White say:

The need of making a particular word the subject of the sentence will often... determine which voice (active or passive) is to be used.

However, the section on "Use the Active Voice" ends with a typical Strunkian assertion to "omit needless words," reminding us that:

...Brevity is a by-product of vigor.

And so it is.

***

There are many much better explanations and discussions about the passive online, so I won't go on. But, suffice it to say, this is a problem with which I continue to struggle, though I am improving. My early writing would likely make me cringe with all the passives, but I am seeing fewer and fewer of them all the time, except where the sentence demands it. I keep several how-tos bookmarked for easy reference during editing, so I can keep my mind on track.

The quick trick:

1) Re-read with an eye to subjects and objects.

2) Consider the meaning and where the emphasis needs to be.

3) Revise to make sure the correct thing/person is driving the sentence.

4) Repeat again and again until you are sick of the term "passive voice."

Good luck is wished... I mean, I wish you good luck!

Excerpt Sunday: Strings Attached

This Sunday, I've got a re-tread of a bit from my latest release, Strings Attached, which I think I already posted here months ago, before editing.

Please check out the excerpt here, and take a look at the Kindle sample from that page, as well!

Strings Attached is available to reviewers in PDF. Please contact me if interested!

***

Coming up on this blog: A series of posts this week on my three deadliest writing sins, all of which I have been battling feircely as I tackle my current editing round on my newest novel while preparing it for test readers!

Daily Dose of Frustration: Non-"Zany" Need Not Apply

Right now, I looking for a publisher for my new novel - my NaNo story, which is currently in editing and re-writing. I am hoping to submit by the fall, so I'm casting around for the best shot for publishing. I am looking for something mid-class this time - not too small, but not too lofty, either. Some company that sees half decent sales, makes some token effort at marketing and can help me produce a quality book. Not too huge a list of wants.

This week, I came across this lovely little snippet on a submission instructions page of a mid-range ebook pub:

Contemporary Romance: Fun and whimsical, these books should showcase your sense of humor and focus on a modern couple in a zany situation.

"Zany"?

Really?

Zany only, huh?

Damn you Bridget Jones. Damn you.

So, fine. I understand that people like zany. I can appreciate that. I love Bridget Jones, actually. But, honestly, is this the only market out there? Readers only want to read zany romance (if it doesn't involve sulky vampires, that is)?

My NaNo novel is not a zany romance, nor is Strings Attached. Now, this does not mean I am devoid of humour (in fact, my new WIP is a comedy), but these first couple of full lengths are serious contemporary romances. Not quite melodrama, but focusing on honest emotions and mature, realistic people. Not zany people.

(Zany people are, like, girls who wear red dresses a lot, which randomly get blown up by the wind, right, and inexplicably carry bunches of daisies way too often? Zany guys, I can only assume, wear a messenger bag all the time.)

(Yeah, I don't have any of those.)

So, it seems I am simply not zany enough for the category of contemporary romance in today's market.

Perhaps I should see if I can re-write into it a pouty nosferatu as Plan B...

Checking In

Hi folks. Still busy, busy, busy, but with some luck I will have a trailer to show to you soon, as my new Valentine's Day story releases on the 11th! I have finished up the edits on that book, so expect an excerpt or two soon. Also, I have just begun my edits on the full length novel for May, so we should soon see some polished bits from that.

I am over at Lila Munro's blog today, talking about non-traditional leading men, if you want to stop by and say hi!