Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘critiques’

First Chapters

Posted in writing, tagged , , , , , , on February 15, 2012| Leave a Comment »

There’ no getting around it. The first chapter of a novel is as important to the querying process as the query letter itself and the dreaded synopsis. Some agents ask for a sample along with the query, which is usually the first chapter or some portion of it. (Very few, in my experience, as for more than the first chapter.)

So, along with polishing the query letter to a high sheen (which I’m still working on), and trying to write a good synopsis, I also have to try to polish up that first chapter so it will entice an agent to ask for more. I just finished the polishing edit on this one and I really, really, still love this story. I want to give it its very best chance.

The whole manuscript of SEVEN STARS has been critiqued by seven different critique partners. I’m confident in the story as a whole, but I want a little extra on the first chapter. And I know a lot of other writers are in the same boat. Therefore, what better than to help each other out. With that in mind, I’ve started a First Chapter Challenge on Hatrack River Writers Workshop. We can read and critique each others’ first chapters.

The great thing about a challenge like this 

is that you can learn so much. Not just from the critiques on your chapter, but from what you notice in other people’s chapters that maybe you would never notice in your own. It’s a win/win.

I’m only just a little nervous about the time commitment. In addition to my regular number of critiques, I expect to have three full novels to critique in the next two months. And now I’ve added the first chapter challenge, too. Judging from the number of responses to the challenge in the first day, it’s going to be a popular one. That’s good.

I may be crazy, but I’m looking forward to it. Critiquing is as important a part of growing as a writer as writing and learning to get critiques are.

Read Full Post »

Sequels and Series

Posted in writing, tagged , , , , , , on November 6, 2011| Leave a Comment »

I’m sure I’ve blogged about this before, but it bears repeating. Sequels and series are hard. And since I’m working on BLOOD IS THICKER, which is the first sequel to BLOOD WILL TELL, it’s on my mind right now.

You’d think they’d be easier. You’ve already got the world built. You know the characters inside and out. And that’s exactly the problem.

You know all that stuff. And so do readers of the first book. But a reader who picks up the second or third book cold won’t. I’ve stated before that I have a very strong preference for the books in a series to be able to stand alone. Okay, it might be a better reading experience if you read them in order, but each should be able to stand on its own. I can’t stand series (which shall be nameless) that go on and on and on and . . .  Well, you get the point. If it takes more than three books to get to a resolution, you’d better resolve something in between or you’ll lose me. So, I won’t write that kind of series.

Perhaps more so because I’m not counting on readers to have read the previous book(s), there’s a very delicate balancing act of trying to put in enough world building, at the right time, without boring someone who’s read the first book and already knows all of this. The tried and true learn-as-you-go method of showing the world is a little trickier the second time around.

This is where critiques from readers who haven’t read the first book can be invaluable. Precisely the places where they ask questions or say “Wait. What?” are the places where you need a little more world building. Either right there or even better a little earlier so when they get to that place, they understand what’s going on.

Then there are the characters. In the first book, you can start with one or two and build your cast of characters gradually. In the second book, all these characters have already been established. Once again, you have the balancing act of describing who these characters are to one another without bringing the story to a complete stop.

How difficult this is depends in part on how many characters you have to introduce in the early chapters. In the first sequel I ever wrote (now shelved), I think I had in the neighborhood of a dozen established characters in the same location as my main character when the story started. Way too many to introduce all at once. I won’t make that mistake again (I hope). Of course, that story had too many characters to begin with. BLOOD IS THICKER starts off with just two, fortunately.

At the same time, of course, you don’t want to load the first chapter with so much back story that you drag this story down. That’s what makes it a balancing act. I don’t expect to get it right on the first draft, of course. But it does help to have some readers point out the places where I’ll need to beef up the background in the next go round.

Added to that, I have a theory about sequels, series, and especially about trilogies. (BLOOD WILL TELL, BLOOD IS THICKER, and the as-yet-unamed third sequel will form a series, but not a trilogy. There will be overlapping settings and characters, but not an overarching conflict that ties them together as a unit.)

My theory is this: The second book is almost always the worst. In the first book, you have the joy of discovering this world and these characters. In fantasy, especially, hopefully also a sense of wonder. In the third book, you have the big bang of the trilogy climax. The middle book is, well, the middle. I can think of very few trilogies that avoided the pitfall of the second book.

Yet, that’s what I’m writing now. The second book in a series (not a trilogy).  Wish me luck.

Read Full Post »

The Value of Critiques

Posted in writing, tagged , , , , , on October 16, 2011| Leave a Comment »

I’ve posted about this before, but it really does bear repeating. There is nothing in writing more valuable than beta readers and insightful critiques of your work. You simply cannot, no matter how long you let it rest, ever really see your own story objectively. You need somebody who will read it and be honest with you–brutally honest if necessary. Especially someone who will take the time to really analyze exactly where you’ve gone off into the weeds.

I’m fortunate to belong to two great writers’ forums–Hatrack River Writers Workshop and David Farland’s Writers’ Groups (the Pied Pipers). Links to both forums can be found in the sidebar.

MAGE STORM’s history goes something like this:

  1. I wrote it last year (2010) and submitted for readers in the Pied Pipers (a group on David Farland’s Writers’ Groups specializing in YA, especially fantasy YA). I got some good ideas, incorporated them, and started querying. I had a crit partner from over on Hatrack River read through the revised ms.
  2. MAGE STORM has been queried moderately lightly (37 queries). Of those, it’s gotten one request for partial and one request for the full, but neither went any further.
  3. However, the agent who requested the full did give me some feedback. Boiling it down, I decided that the main problem was that the central conflict wasn’t clear enough. (She complained that a certain event hadn’t happened soon enough. But that event was the second try/fail cycle, not the central conflict, and it happened pretty much right on schedule.) Well, partly that was a fault of the query and synopsis, for highlighting the wrong thing. But it was also true that there were things I could do in those first three chapters to really make the central conflict more clear. One way and another, I’ve been working on that since last June.
  4. I went back to my first readers to kick around some ideas and then revised the first three chapters. I submitted them back to the Pied Pipers for critique.
  5. Those revisions weren’t entirely successful. Basically, I’d managed to mess up the progression of Rell’s magic. It should have gotten scarier and scarier in order to propel him into the rest of the story. Instead it had done the reverse and so his decision didn’t make much sense. This, I find, is a pitfall of piecemeal revisions. It’s too easy to lose sight of the bigger picture.
  6. I made an attempt to fix that and asked for critiques over on Hatrack River. This is where having more than one critique group can be invaluable. It’s easier to find fresh readers who have never seen the story before (or never more than the first 13 lines) and can look at it with fresh eyes and no expectations of where the story is going to go from there. (Thirteen lines is all you’re allowed to post on Hatrack River. Anything else is handled through emails.)
  7. Well, I got some good critiques and one really extraordinary one. That one–that’s the one you’re always hoping for–really showed me where the problem was. What I had added that really didn’t need to be there. And where I needed to go to raise the stakes. (Thank you, MattLeo.)
  8. I’ve just submitted that revision back to Pied Pipers to see what they think.
  9. I’ve still got one critique on the whole ms outstanding. We’ll see what that turns up.

The point is, I can’t even begin to express how much stronger the story is for the input of all these wonderful critique partners. Thank you all.

Read Full Post »

The End

Posted in writing, tagged , , , , , on August 21, 2011| 1 Comment »

Gosh, I got so involved in revising the end of SEVEN STARS that I almost forgot to blog. (Well, that, and Mom’s birthday.)

I haven’t quite finished this round, yet. But I’m awfully close. I just might press on and finish it tonight. I’ll still want to do another read-through and I still have a couple of things I want to add or strengthen.

While I made revisions throughout the book, I think the beginning and the end changed the most.

The end is actually changing. But some of how the characters get there is. Some of the way things happened in the earlier drafts didn’t build tension the way it needs to. Plus I seem to have skipped some internal monologue towards the end. Actually, I think I was getting a bit fatigued when I wrote the original ending. But that’s what good critiquers will help you with–and keep you honest about.

I had to write two new fight scenes. Not the easiest thing for me to write, but I hope I’ve done a better job of it. That’s what readers will tell me, though.

I’m still really loving this story.

 

Read Full Post »

Other Things to Enter On-Line

Posted in writing, tagged , , , , , , on April 20, 2011| Leave a Comment »

So here are a couple of other interesting things to enter in the blogosphere:

Workshop Wednesday at Bookends, LLC http://bookendslitagency.blogspot.com/2011/04/workshop-wednesday.html

And First Page Shooter at Confessions from Suite 500

http://confessionsofawanderingheart.blogspot.com/2011/04/first-page-shooter.html

Here’s another at YATopia:

http://yatopia.blogspot.com/2011/04/easter-egg-hunt-with-critique-prizes.html

Read Full Post »

Writing Process, Part Two

Posted in writing, tagged , , , , on February 6, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Well, so now I have a first draft and it’s been allowed to rest for about a month.  Time to start the second draft.

For me, the “second draft” involves multiple passes.

  1. The first thing I do is to read through and take care of the notes I made during the first draft. 
  2. I know I will need to flesh out the villain and side characters.  My first draft is always very centered on the protagonist and other characters don’t get all the attention the deserve in the first round.
  3.  Depending on how fast I was writing the first draft, I may need to add descriptions.
  4. I may also need to expand on the internal monologue and indications of emotion.

The word count often grows by a third during the second draft.

Then it’s time to get some alpha readers. At this point, I’ve written it and read through it at least three times.  I’m much too close to it.  It needs fresh eyes. This also forces me to let it rest again while the readers have it. Time to work on one of those other projects for a while again.

For me, it’s most helpful to get readers who will look at the entire novel as a block at this point. They’re better able to judge pacing, among other things. 

When the comments or critiques come back from the alpha readers, it’s time for the third draft, incorporating revisions based on the readers’ comments. I admit, it’s a little daunting to have more than one set of comments on the entire book at one time. So I tend to break the work up into more manageable chunks, like a chapter at a time. On the plus side, it makes it really obvious if more than one reader highlights the same problem. Then you know you need to fix it. 

After the third draft, and while the manuscript is resting once again, I begin preparing to submit. This is when I write and polish the query letter and try to shine up the synopsis. I will look for readers and critiques on both of these, as well.  The query letter is probably the single most revised piece of writing in the whole process.

When I think I have the query letter in pretty good shape, I’ll read through one more time and do a polishing edit. This is the really nitpicky revision, looking at words and sentences rather than at the story itself. 

Depending on how extensive the revisions on the third draft were and how confident I feel, I may look for another reader or two at this point. Since I’m looking for more detailed comments, this reading works well in a chapter exchange format.

Then it’s time to take a deep breath and start submitting.

Read Full Post »

The Sandwich Method

Posted in writing, tagged , , , on December 22, 2010| 4 Comments »

The last post was about the value of harsh critiques. I stand by that.

But, the problem with critiques of all sorts, harsh or not, is that they have to be received to do any good at all. Otherwise, both parties are just wasting their time.  And a truly harsh, if truthful, critique can have the effect of making the recipient shut down or get defensive. That doesn’t help the creative process at all.

One way around this is the sandwich method. Put simply, you start by saying something good about the story. Anything. Anything at all.  There’s bound to be something–a bit a particularly evocative description, one scene that was spot on, the perfect title, good dialog, a unique and interesting premise, whatever.

Then you give the more blunt part of the critique–what didn’t work. For me, at least, it’s always helpful to include as much reasoning behind this as possible. Even examples of ways it could be done differently. These aren’t intended to rewrite the writer’s work, but to provide jumping off places for new inspiration–a kind of slow-motion brainstorming, if you will.

Last, you close again with something that you liked about the piece.

Basically the critiquer is helping to apply the balm to that sting that the critique is going to cause.  And it does often help the critiqued to accept the criticism in the spirit it is offered.

I’ll confess, I probably don’t do this often enough, myself.

Read Full Post »

Harsh Critiques

Posted in writing, tagged , , , , on December 19, 2010| 4 Comments »

They sting, there’s no getting around that. No matter how thick a skin you think you’ve developed. But sometimes a blunt critique is the very best gift you can recieve. Someone who’ll tell you flat out where your story fell down and couldn’t get back up. If nobody tells you, how can you fix it?

This may be particularly true with query letters and synopses. Hopefully, your actual story doesn’t have plot holes you can drive a truck through. If you’ve honed your craft, you should have found most of those yourself. But it’s not so easy when you’re trying to condense all or part of a story you’ve lived with for months into 250 or 1500 words. It can be much too hard to forget all the complexities that lay behind those few sentences that your reader can’t possibly know unless they’ve read the book. Even then, there are likely details you know that never made it onto the page.

That’s where someone who doesn’t know (and hopefully already like) the story is so helpful. They can tell you the impression the couple of paragraphs of your query really give, so you have a chance to go back and refine it before an agent sees it.

So, take a deep breath, rub a little balm on the sting, and sincerely thank the people who will tell you the truth about your writing.

Read Full Post »

Conflicting Critiques

Posted in writing, tagged , , on November 14, 2010| 2 Comments »

The thing about critiques is: No matter how much the reader wants to help you improve your story it is still your story and only you can decide what’s really right for it.

Whenever you get multiple critiques on any work, there’s bound to be some disagreement.  The question then arises, which do you believe?  I’m on the horns of this dilemma in two separate cases. 

On the latest revision short story (yes, I’m withholding the title for a reason), I’ve gotten three critiques so far (and two still out).  One reader thinks it’s good as is, one thinks it needs minor tweaks, and one thinks it needs some major changes to deepen the point of view. 

On my novel, MAGE STORM, I occasionally have a similar issue.  Out of four critiques, there’s one that consistently wants deeper point of view.  In some cases, I agree.  In others, not.  Other issues, often places where the story needs a little more detail or depth to make something work well, most or all of the critiques agree.

On one of my writers’ forums the answer to this situation was put very clearly: The only two times you really must respond to a critique (other than to say thank you), is when three or more people agree or when the critique resonates with you.  I’d add one more: There are certain people to whose critiques, through experience, I’ve learned to give extra credence. 

So, if three people see a problem, it probably really is a problem you should address.  And if a comment feels right to you or, better yet, triggers some new ideas, then that’s pure gold.

Read Full Post »

Swimming in Critiques

Posted in writing, tagged , , , on November 7, 2010| 2 Comments »

An embarassment of riches.

I’m almost finished with the “first” set of revisions to what will be my first Writers of the Future entry, working through five critiques from a specialized critique group.  As soon as I finish that, I’m going to start workng through the four full novel critiques on MAGE STORM.

Meanwhile, I’ve got two full novels to critique for the group that critiqued MAGE STORM (which, so far, is a real pleasure).  I’ve got the first of what should be six stories for the WotF critique group (five second drafts and one late first draft).  And I’ve got to critique another Synopsis Challenge that I started.  One or two others might pop up, but hopefully not until a little later in the month.

Whew! Looks like November is critique month, coming and going. But I learn so much from critiques, both those I receive and those I do.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »