How to disguise exposition

Every few months, I get invited to do a talk followed by a Q&A with a UK-based writers' group, so what follows are my notes that I've massaged into something of use for my readers. The main focus on this talk, was how to disguise exposition.

What is exposition? 

Any moment the story is paused so that a history lesson is given in some shape or form, it's a stage where you need to be very careful. It slows down your pace, and if there's too much of it, readers might put the book down. Remember also that we're living in an age where there are maximum distractions all around us all the time.

The big problem: 
I've lost count of how many first chapters I've read that had entire pages of back-story about a kingdom or a world. These days with Amazon's 'look inside' function, if you're not hooking readers from the start, Houston, we have a problem. Or I think of the SF writer I edited many years ago who had five pages of exposition discussing how the fusion drive on his space ship works. My eyes glazed over after the second paragraph, and I found myself skimming until he got back to the story. And of course there are the many times I've encountered chunks of info-dump right in the middle of an action-packed scene that threw me right out of the story.

My solutions:
So, how do you convey the vital information? 

1. Keep it relevant. Feed small snippets of info-bites in WHEN the details are important. Keep it short, for example, if there is a river that is prone to flooding, only bring this up when a character is about to cross the river. It's on a 'need to know' basis for your character and, by default, your readers. 
   
   
2. Dialogue is a great place, but be aware of falling into the trap of 'as you know, Bob' type dialogue that is clearly wedged in for readers' benefit. If it's information two characters both know, then find better ways to rehash it – perhaps characters have differing opinions that amount to an argument. And hey presto! You have not only a great opportunity for characterisation, but also for throwing in a bit of back story without making it yawn-worthy. Of course a prime example is when one character is a bit clueless, and the other is filling them in with something they don't already know. 
   
   
3. Nesting narratives. Sometimes we can have a story within a story – so look at how a classic children's fairy tale is told, there's a beat and a rhythm to the telling. Look at what sort of imagery you can use, how you can make the language beautiful – especially consider the African narrative tradition where a 'telly' way of sharing a story actually does work quite well. Do yourself a favour and go see how masters such as Sir Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman handle exposition. They make it feel effortless.
   
   
4. Show from context. If you want to show that a country has been suffering a great war, perhaps consider a chapter that starts with a character in a conflict area. Allow the contextual information, for instance, lack of supplies, bad weather, leaders who are out of touch with the common soldier, create a strong impression of what is happening. Turn it into a easter egg hunt of sorts. What sort of clues can you drop into your story that will gradually build up layers of meaning? You want to show that a building has suffered in a long-ago war? Maybe the bullet holes are still there, but they're furred with lichen and moss – this tells us the conflict happened a long time ago and no one's bothered to fix it.

Show, don't tell...
You've probably gone cross-eyed from having heard this, but there's some truth to it. Create a vivid setting, and readers will learn from what you feed them as things progress. Look at Bilbo in the Shire, as an example. Or Luke Skywalker the farm boy embarking on his journey. The world gradually unfolds and the writer creates a mystery that keeps dragging readers forward. Resist the temptation to throw everything and the kitchen sink at readers right at the start!

Your character...
Your characters will have opinions – not always the correct ones, but even two characters disagreeing on the same topic will not only give you good information about the characters, but will also show you more about the world. Two things happen – you build the world, but you also gain the opportunity to develop your characters. Think about why a story featuring a clueless character (farm boy, small children climbing into a wardrobe, a hobbit embarking on an adventure with a band of thieving dwarves) – we learn about the world through their fresh eyes. But even a character who is jaded, who has seen it all, can have Opinions that will also paint a better picture.

Choose the right events! 
Find events that are happening that are great opportunities to illustrate the mechanics of your world. There's a war brewing? What started the war? Was it a piece of land? Introduce a mystery that needs to be unpicked. 

Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope. 

Show the characters gathering more information as their adventure progresses – you don't need to reveal everything in one fell swoop.

Offer contextual clues
Don't explain why people would have to be at a destination at a particular time. Just show them arriving, infer that this is something they do often – perhaps because they've got stuff stored there. Paint a vivid picture with your environment and your characters. Once again, don't explain. Show from how people interact with each other and their environment. 

For instance, instead of going on about the racism in a particular city, perhaps show a horrible man spitting at a beggar woman who belongs to a different culture. This tells us a lot not only about cultural tensions, but also long-standing issues. 

You want to show how healthcare in a community works? Have a scene that makes sense within the story where a character gets hurt while problem solving, and has to go to see a healer or doctor. 

A very fine line exists between too much and too little. And it takes a while to figure out the balance. Not all exposition is bad, IOW. But by the same measure you mustn't give it the steering wheel, so to speak.

If I have to think of novels that I struggled with, Frank Herbert's Dune springs immediately to mind. I stop/started it three times before I finally pushed through and finished. Herbert wades through so much internal monologues, back story – and the real problem is that even if you're going to write exposition, you need to be able to evoke images, tell a story that moves from A to Z. 

Another one that grated my gears was Laurell K Hamilton's habit of describing a laundry list of everything from the hair down to the shoes. Every. Time. A new character comes onto a page. It becomes so obvious after about a few chapters that I eye-rolled so much, and if it weren't for the fact that I was writing the review for the papers, I probably would have stoped reading after the first three chapters.

Handling exposition in your writing is very much a case of practise and awareness. Fellow author David Miles mentioned a great exercise where he advises writers to delete all the parts with exposition in an excerpt to see how it reads, then only to reinsert the bits of exposition needed to motivate what's being said. This is a good practice. Don't be afraid to cut words. You can always put them back later, where they offer better context. Or you could shape them so that they're more fascinating to read.

If in doubt, spend time reading attentively, and see how the classic authors out there handle exposition, then experiment with your own writing. 

On collaboration, and writing in mammoths – with Toby Bennett

Toby and I didn't quite have our book launch in Cape Town like we planned, due to The Thing I Don't Really Want to Mention, and neither of us were up to setting up webinar or something equally sophisticated. So we had a chat via Google Docs, in which we discuss how we've been collaborating on our new novel together. 

Nerine Dorman: Wow, so I believe the world wasn’t quite ready for us this year, was it, eh? Just when things were starting to get interesting, we end up in virtual house arrest. But silver linings, eh? We finished writing a novel together. And in about six months as well.

Toby Bennett: The world has never been ready, and when the device is finally finished they shall all quake before… oh… oh right, you’re talking about the book… Yes, the one solace I have is that I am able to use this time in lock down to polish The Serpent’s Quest… Before turning it over to your red pen for a final pruning – it may have bloomed a bit during my audio review, but I am having a whale of a time which is preferable to wailing all the time I suppose…

So yeah book one all but in the bag and two more to go – the dreaded obligation of a trilogy – still it is nice to be able to share the responsibility with someone… A bit like having a gym partner to spot you I guess. Yes we can have war mammoths AND terror birds! Feel that burn!

ND: Creating this world together feels almost like having part of the benefits of running a roleplaying game without having to roll any dice. To a large degree I think what’s helped us with this story is that we were able to merge our crazy ideas seamlessly. I mean, the novel sounds kinda crazy when summed up as 'ancient Egyptian elves meet Vikings on horseback with a side order of ancient Chthonic beings'.

Despite the initial plans, the writing didn’t quite pan out quite the way I expected, and it’s different with every writing partnership I’ve encountered. Back when I wrote with Carrie Clevenger, we used to swap chapter points of view. And what we’ve got going here is closer to what I know that Alex Latimer and Diane Awerbuck have when they wrote South and i as Frank Owen.

You and I have worked closely on laying down the foundations, but you’ve been an absolute machine knocking out the words while I’ve kinda gone in afterwards pruning, snipping, adding a bit here and there, writing a few key scenes. In a way I feel kinda guilty, but we’ve each played to our strengths in this – so it’s a win-win.

TB: Well that’s the thing, no writer is flawless at every aspect of the craft, and it’s very easy to get bogged down in a single perspective. Collaboration frees us from an individual viewpoint and allows us to offer an amalgamation of the very best each of us has to offer. Though on a side note this does require the skill of unfettering one's ego and asking “what would be best for the story?” It’s not something I would ever recommend any writer do until they are relatively comfortable with their own voice and have developed enough professional objectivity to let go while still caring.

Of course when there is synergy one can never be sure if it is a question of great minds think alike or fools never differ but there has to be a shared vision and an understanding that the work is paramount. Which I think we’ve managed.

For all the potential pitfalls, collaboration is a rare treat. I’ve done it twice now and found it to be professionally and personally rewarding. Writing is often a solitary activity and I think that writing with someone is as close as we come to the enjoyment of musicians jamming together. There’s a bit of extra effort in being mindful of the other person, but the joy of being able to share the process is thoroughly exhilarating. You often find yourself going to some unexpected places and stretching further than you might have on your own.

ND: What I’ve appreciated this far is having someone else to bounce ideas off of – someone who’s as invested in the story as I am. There are moments when I’m writing solo that I encounter tangles that often take weeks if not months to figure out, like how I hit a brick wall with my novel The Company of Birds. My editor at the time could tell me that something wasn’t working, but it wasn’t her place to tell me what I had to do to fix it.

A friend of mine who was co-writing a novel with her daughter would often go on long walks with her, and by the time they got home, would have hashed out the sticky plot points that had been bugging them. Likewise, how our video calls end up spawning mammoths and weird curve balls that I’d never have considered.

It’s like a game of tag, with each writer picking up where the other left off and running with the idea until it blooms monstrous fruit. But as you point out, it’s also about being mindful, and knowing when to step back or step in.

One of the big concerns that I do think a lot of authors have is unevenness in tone, especially if each writer has a particular style. I’d say that you and I are not that vastly different from each other. I also feel that you have a particular knack of looking into a scene and digging just that little bit deeper in terms of motivations, as well as the to-ing and fro-ing of dialogue.

TB: You are far too kind, but I’m a writer so I will take ANY validation! Tone is certainly an issue, but one that I think can be resolved by having each writer review the work. Right now, I am doing an audio read through The Serpent’s Quest and you’d be amazed how many things I am catching – little inconsistencies in tone and story from both of us that seem more stark now that the first book is real and the shape of things better set (We recently started focusing on the northern continent of our world and those changes are having little effect on details in The Serpent’s Quest).

Once I have finished the audio review you’ll get the chance to go through it, which means the tone and language in each scene should be nicely sanded down so no one can see the seams…

I don’t think I can overstate the usefulness of having another brain helping you spark on a story. The big bad in book two got a whole lot nastier and more credible to me when you mentioned a parallel with Alexander the Great – I’d always know there was a schism between our main character, Kelbrin, and his traitorous protege, Dugan, but I suddenly saw how the cracks in their relationship might have developed as Dugan took on the ways of the Abrassian necromancers that Kelbrin had helped him overthrow (many Greeks murmured that Alexander was changed after his conquest of Persia).

It’s the little details that fill out a story and add richness – so two heads really are better than one. I guess what anyone contemplating this kind of project would be interested in is process. The first and most obvious requirement is good communication (stay in touch and share those documents!). I’m typically more comfortable with letting a story unravel as it occurs to me, but in this case the work requires us to be quite specific about where the story will go.

With collaboration one needs a well established framework, preferably with set scenes and events that can be assigned to each writer. Naturally nothing is carved in stone, and the narrative can evolve, but I’d say it’s worth taking the time to get the scaffolding in place.

As I mentioned, new details are already coming up as book two starts to solidify, but we basically know the entire arc of our story and have mapped out the big events already. I’m thinking that will pay off and let us work together better. Know who handles what, and of course the double review process allows each of us to shape every scene to the shared vision we laid out. Oh, also, in case anyone doesn’t know this one, always have a shared map and glossary for reference.

ND: Having that bigger-picture view most certainly helps. I don’t know why the Alexander the Great thing only occurred to me much later. So many villains are hampered by the ‘let’s be evil for evil’s sake’ so I feel it’s absolutely vital that we give Dugan sufficient motivation for doing what it is he’s doing. If we look at all the great empires of the past, in many cases each emperor had their motivations.

For some it was simply a need to expand borders to reclaim previously lost territory – an act within itself that can lead to further expansion once the machinery goes into action. In other cases, for instance the Scramble for Africa, we can see it as a sort of arms race and a quest for raw materials. For instance, the British Empire annexing the Cape Colony from the Dutch to also keep it out of the hands of the French. Dugan starts out, I believe, with the earnest desire to rid his world of the corruption posed by a powerful, corrupt city-state, but good intentions are not necessary enough to keep one from being corrupted in turn.

As authors, we can take lessons from historical events. In terms of collaborating, I’m really appreciating the fact that we can hammer out these details together. It also helps that as individuals, we share a lot of common ground in terms of our personal philosophical world views – so we riff off each other quite a bit. And the best part is that now when I dive in for formal edits, so much of the structural work has been done. We’re playing off of each other’s strengths, which I think will give us a massive advantage by the time we start querying.

TB: Ah, querying, when we find out if the gatekeepers see what we see… joy! Win or lose at that particular game I’m proud of the work we’re doing. I’m not sure what the literary world is going to look like post Covid-19. It wasn’t exactly going gangbusters to start with, but I think that just about the most exciting thing that any of us can do is share our dreams – it’s the reason any writer puts ink on paper (or pixel on screen). Surely the natural progression of that need to reach others must be mingling visions with someone who can dream with you.

I don’t mean to wax too poetic, but there are times when I think the ivory walls of the skull may be the true prison for all of us, the impulses we get from the outside, the only antidote to crippling solipsism… but that may just be a moth of lockdown talking. In either case I look forward to continuing Hetephes and Kelbrin’s journey and I hope that others are keen to come along for the ride. I mean come on, war, betrayal, intrigue and mad gods who wouldn’t want to be a part of that?

Certainly it’s a good idea for anyone who wants to take the plunge with us to take a deep breath now because I have every intention of letting up till we reach a gasping, bloody conclusion! WAR MAMMOTHS, HO!

ND: Don’t forget the dragons.

* * *

Pick up Toby Bennett’s fantasy novel The Music Box, or Nerine Dorman’s science fiction novel Sing down the Stars.

Self-editing tips for authors

While not everyone will be able to afford the services of an editor, I firmly believe authors can get into the habit of good self-editing to catch many of their gremlins. Believe me, there’s nothing that gives me the conniptions as much when I hear some writer talk about how they’re going to release their novel or novella a mere week after they’ve typed “the end” on the first draft.

I don’t think I need to go into any great detail as to why that’s a bad idea. (In any case, that’s a post for another day.)

Anyhoo, here are my favourite, top five tips for better self-editing that I’ve gathered over the past few years. Use these, don’t use these.

1) Sleep on it. This is self-explanatory. Don’t dash off a submission the moment you’ve finished writing it. Yeah, yeah, I get it, your hairy little palms are all clammy and you can’t wait for someone to verify your brilliance the instant you unleash this little beast into the wooly wilds. But seriously. Don’t. Close the document. Step away from your machine. Go walk the dog. Hang upside down from your balcony. Do something that’s NOT writing. Come back tomorrow. Or a week from now, and then look at the document again. You’ll have fresh eyeballs. You’ll see all sorts of weirdness you didn’t imagine you could ever have hacked up.

2) A different view. Change the font. Save this as a PDF. Make the type bigger, with larger spacing. You’d be amazed how many errors jump out when you do so. Now, look for any places where you’ve repeated words. Read with the view of finding any sentences that are too long. Spelling that looks off. Defamiliarisation is the key here. If you make the text look different from that doc you were working off, you’ll have a better chance to catch anything odd. Watch out for words that end with ‘-ly’ – do you really need so many instances of “really”, “actually”, “finally”. Are you starting sentences with filler words like “He saw”, “She thought”? Did you just write “their” instead of “there”? Can you tell the difference between “its” and “it’s”?

3) Learn to love the sound of your own voice. Seriously, read the story or sections out loud to yourself. This is a great way to find clunky constructions … or even sentences that are way too long. [A hint, if you find yourself gasping for breath, you probably need to have ended that sentence a bit sooner.] Also, typos you missed earlier may jump out at you at this point. Dropped words too … you might gloss over them otherwise, but you’ll most certainly hear them when you read out loud.

4) Print it out. Yep. Kill some trees. Take a red pen or even any other kind of coloured pen or pencil, and scribble on the document to your heart’s content. Colour code your comments. I use this method to proof my printed layouts before I set up my print files for CreateSpace. You’ll find loads of gremlins this way. [Hint, you can use this method while busy with early structural edits too.]

5) Learn from past mistakes. This should be a no-brainer, but you’d be surprised how many authors have the incredibly bad habit of saying, “Ah, the editor will fix it” and they make the same bloody mistakes over and over again. If your editor points out that you have a habit of constructing sentences with misplaced modifiers, figure out the root of this bad habit and fix it. Too many filter words? Start viewing those constructions as if they were radioactive. So, what I’m saying is, know your bad habits and rein them in. Put them in a box, seal it, and set it on fire. Make an effort. Your editor will thank you (and be less homicidal). And so will your readers.

PS, I know I said I’d only have 5 tips, but I’d like to point out these great resources online for days when you can’t figure out your effect from your affect: Grammar Girl and Grammarist. I refer to these sites OFTEN, and I’m not ashamed to admit it.

To query or not to query...

At some point of an author's life, they might decide to query a literary agent. For those of you who're currently asking, "Pray tell, what is this literary agent thing, and why do I need it?" I'm going to go through the basics of the querying process that I've been following for the past ... well. A while. I had a literary agent once, but we weren't a right fit, and to be honest, a literary agent is only really going to be useful to you if you're writing fiction that has commercial value. To be honest, no agent is better than a bad agent, so here I am...

So, why am I still querying literary agents? Essentially, literary agents are your friends when it comes to getting your manuscript in front of the editors at the big publishing houses. Also, if you're currently an indie author who's been approached by one of the bigger publishing houses, it's a good idea to get yourself a literary agent. These rare beasts will be able to help you negotiate better terms on your contract. Also, they Know People. And hopefully the Right People.

If you're content to carve out a career as an indie author, chances are good you'll probably not need an agent, but for those of us who're aiming at a hybrid career,  having an agent when you eventually reach the stage of needing one, is a good thing.

So the next question: When do I know that I'm ready to query? Most importantly, you'll have a complete manuscript. Finish your novel. Aim for a sweet spot of around 75k to 100k for adult fiction. Please, for the love of dog, don't be the kind of author who dashes off a first draft and starts querying immediately. Especially if you're still new in this game. No novel is perfect. Take time to edit your manuscript. Get your betas to go through it. Revise it again. Revise, revise, revise, until you are so sick of the thing and want to burn it with fire. 

I've heard horror stories of authors who started querying their manuscript when it was not finished, only to have an agent request a full submission when only the first 10k words had been written. You really don't need to do that to yourself. Make sure that your novel is the best it can be before you start querying. And don't rush it.

What next? Write a query letter. It's as simple as that. To break a query letter down to its basics, you're going to say three things: what your project is, a (brief) summary (about 2 paragraphs) and then your writing credits. An agent (or their assistant) will scan through the queries. Remember they get hundreds of queries a day sometimes. You have, probably literally) about 15 to 30 seconds (if that) to tell them exactly who you are, what you want, and what you have to offer. You need to make that query letter count. My advice: keep it simple. Don't be cute. Don't try to make out that you're the next Stephen King or JK Rowling. Agents and their assistants have seen *everything*. Trust me on this. They're sick of authors who think they're trying to be witty or clever. They see it Every. Day.

I always send folks scurrying off to Query Shark. Hell, whenever I'm about to write a query letter, I still go get ideas there.

Now, what the hell do I send a literary agent? Once I'm done writing my query letter, I save it as a .txt file. This is so that when I copy/paste it into my email, it doesn't have any weird formatting. (Just something I find useful over the years.) I also prepare a longer synopsis of about 2 pages that I save as a .doc, and then the first three chapters and/or first 50 pages as a .doc. Most of the time agents won't ask that you send attachments, and that you paste your query letter, synopsis and sample text in the body of the email. Increasingly, of late, I've seen them use online forms (which is also super convenient, but then they do request that you attach the .doc files as required). Lastly, I also create a one-sentence description or, as they call it, an elevator pitch, for the novel.  I also try to keep in the back of my mind which existing novels are similar to mine and who the targeted readership is. Some agents request this sort of information.

I can sense the next question. Where the hell do I find a literary agent? My two go-to sites are Publisher's Marketplace and Query Tracker. Both sites are super easy to use, and convenient because you can tailor make your searches according to your chosen genre.

How do I choose an agent? This should be a no-brainer since it makes sense that you choose an agent who already sells in your chosen market. What I do is once I've narrowed down which agencies handle SFF, I take a gander at their recent sales and releases. If I see their tendency is more towards literary or children's fiction, then I think twice about submitting. If I see that they sell mostly to only one or two digital publishers that accept unsolicited queries, I smell a rat. And I most certainly don't submit. Mostly, I pick agents who have sales with the big publishers I usually can't query unless they have an open submissions period. If, by any chance, an agent gets back to me with an offer, I go do my homework, usually by searching the Absolute Write forums. Believe it or not, writers talk, and if they have shitty experiences with agents, they'll be quite vocal about it. So, do your homework. Take time to evaluate each agent. Read their profile info on their personal sites to make sure that you're as good a match as you can imagine.

Which brings me to the submission guidelines.  Each agent will have a preferred method for you to query. Some only want a query letter. Some want your first 5, 10 or even 50 pages of the manuscript. Some accept attachments. Others don't. Which means you DON'T send out an impersonal, blanket bcc email to a hundred agents simultaneously. Don't be that special douchenozzle.

It goes without saying too that you need to keep track of your queries. Some folks use Query Tracker. I just make a spreadsheet that I colour code as I go along. It's generally not a done thing to blanket query all the agents at one agency. So make sure that you pick the best fit and only the right fight for you, so that you don't accidentally query simultaneously. I do a query a day for the duration of my querying process. That's 5-10 minutes out of my day where I check out the agents' website, craft my individualised email and then send. And I fill out my spreadsheet as I go along (and that has helped me in the past when I nearly did send queries to two agents at the same agency). Most agents know that you're going to be querying more than one agency at a time, but the common courtesy is that as soon as you've had a request for a partial or full submission, to let anyone else know who may have a full or partial submission. 

Also, I tend to make about 50-100 queries per project. Yes. That many. About half of these will be polite form rejections. I might get three or four requests for partial submissions (agents wanting to see the first 50 pages). I may even have one or two requests for a full submission. Many agents simply don't respond.

Loads of agents say "if you haven't heard back from us in a month, then consider it a no". It's nothing personal. Move on. Ditto for those wonderful form rejections that go along the lines of "this project isn't right for me" or "this project isn't the right fit" or whatever. IT'S NOTHING PERSONAL. Move on. Grow rhino skin. Don't phone them. Don't pester them. 

Granted, if you have a request for a full, and the agent has been sitting for six months, and circumstances have changed (you may wish to self-publish or have had an offer from a publisher) then of course, do the agent the courtesy of following up. But if your manuscript vanishes into a long, sticky silence, don't let it get to you. This entire industry is all about hurry up and wait.

And lastly, keep writing, revising, querying, submitting. Realise that these stories about "JK Rowling got rejected seven times" are fairytales. Authors who make it big are the exception, not the rule. For most of us, it's a long, hard (and unglamorous) slog. You need to channel your inner rhino, and weather the sting of rejections with a super thick skin. I promise you, if you work hard, develop your talent, improve your writing, and persevere, you will see a steady growth. Don't measure yourself according to other writers. They're not you, and their career path is vastly different from yours. Concentrate on being the best you can be.

And good luck! 

Need someone to tell you whether your novel sucks donkey bollocks? I offer an assessment service that has helped many authors over the past few years. See my rates page.

Writers' Life: Six Things I Need to Tell You Today

A post I saw on a writers' group this week sparked off a bit of a fat Facebook rant yesterday. I may have upset some people. I'm not apologising either, because these things need to be said. There's a lot of pressure on writers to make a living these days, to work the algorithms with Amazon, Google, whatever. I lurk about a number of writers' groups online, and I hear wonderful stories about some authors who're absolutely creaming it self-publishing. Bully for them. By equal measure, I see many more authors (the vast majority, in fact) who simply cannot fathom why their books aren't moving. Many become heartsick about their careers. Some even give up.

I don't have a silver bullet for you, sorry. But after more than a decade in this business, I am going to offer you some advice that will give you a little perspective, and perhaps even a glimmer of hope.

Burnout is a thing
There is so much pressure to succeed, that I've seen people push themselves to the point where they have nervous breakdowns. Darlin', I was there. I ended up pushing myself to the point where I had a grand mal seizure. Scrambled brains FTW, along with a drinking problem. I ended up in hospital with liver failure due to an adverse reaction I had to anti-convulsants. I used to work a day job in newspaper publishing, then follow up at night as a freelance fiction editor while still trying to write a book a month. I nearly died. Like ferealzies. For many months after my recovery, I could barely write, and this is after I pushed myself to put out 100k words a month. It's not sustainable. You can damage yourself. You can rob yourself of the love of writing. Repeat after me: YOU ARE NOT A MACHINE.

This is not a horse race
So, you see Bob Penworthy gloating over the 7k words he writes every day. Wow. That means he can write a novel in two weeks. AMAZING. But. BUT. You are not Bob. You are not in a race to see who can poop out X amount of words that are somehow going to make you this absolutely brillo writer who's going to be the next Stephen King. Something I say often to writers: It's quality, not quantity. You are not trying to "beat" someone else's career. Let's be realistic here (and yes, I'm going to say something that's going to sound super depressing). Thousands of books are published DAILY. Yours is but a drop in the bucket. Also, with all the books that are remaining in circulation thanks to digital publishing and print-on-demand, titles are not going out of print. That means the bucket is getting bigger and bigger EVERY DAY. Chances of your discoverability grow slimmer EVERY DAY. You're only going to make yourself sick with despair trying to stay ahead of the tide. ENJOY THE PROCESS OF WRITING.

And repeat after me: THIS IS NOT A HORSE RACE.

Pace yourself with achievable goals
Staying along the lines of burnout, and the fact that this is not a race, find daily writing goals that are achievable. Stop worrying about Bob and his 7k words. What can you write that won't make you feel as if you don't have a life. Because, guess what, if you're like most of us who have primary careers that bring in the bread and butter, plus children and other responsibilities, you don't have a helluva lot of time for writing. So set yourself goals that you can keep up in the long term.

Yes, there will be times when you have a deadline – I recently had three months in which to outline, write and revise a 100k-word novel for an open-door submissions period. Guess what? I managed to do so without killing myself by *planning* ahead. I found a rhythm that worked for me, and I also had time to watch films, TV series, hang out with friends, walk the dogs. And do my day job.

Set yourself targets. For some, it may be writing three or four 15-minute writing sprints a day. You'd be amazed by how many words you can manage in 15 unbroken minutes where you're ignoring social media and other distractions. For others, it's that golden hour before work. Or a lunch hour. Or an hour after dinner. Something I found worked for me while I was writing my big novel last year was the Pomodoro Technique. But sometimes also just setting myself a target of writing three, 1k-word sprints throughout the day. But mix and match. Some days you might be absolutely exhausted. Then write a minimum of three pages. And go to fucking bed. Get some rest. This is not a horse race. You might find that you'll catch up the day after. Currently, if I'm up to it, I only write two pages a day. This is because I'm busy with the production of a novella that's releasing at the end of the month. I'm going easy on myself because I want to enjoy the process of writing.

Every writer is different
Stop paying attention to Bob Penworthy. Perhaps he's vomiting out fast-paced thrillers, and he's in his zone. And hells, it might even be working for him. But maybe you want to write a novel set during WWII, and you need time to research, take time to develop your characters and setting. Or you fancy you're the next GRRM. I don't know. Every writer is different. (I was going to say something about precious snowflakes but that term's been so tainted over the years that it doesn't even have the meaning I'd have intended for it.) Your career is YOURS. Your books are YOURS. Sure, so Betty Whiplash writes super BDSM erotica involving werespiders. Bully for her. She brings out a book every three months. But maybe she's got a husband who supports her, so she has time to do so. Or Joe Coffeepot is retired, and he's writing his military adventures. He has the resources to do so, so when he brings out his books, his entire situation has been different, and maybe he's had money to throw at an editor that you didn't have. Every book is different, will have a readership uniquely its own. Find your tribe. Build your own support network, and stop worrying about what Bob Penworthy is doing. It might work for him, but it might not necessarily be right for your career. This is not a zero sum game. Just because Bob's earning a triple-digit figure each month from Amazon doesn't mean he's robbing you. So be happy for him if his pooped-out novels are selling, but don't break your neck trying to emulate him if it's going to lead to you ending up in hospital.

Set aside dedicated time
Don't quit your day job just yet. And don't allow your writing to jeopardise your day job either. (Been there, done that, and had the disciplinary hearing to prove it.) I hear all sorts of stories about writers who take their writing to the office, and some even write those 7k words a day AT WORK. Sure, if you've got absolutely no other work, that's fine. But if you're finding creative ways to hide that Word or Scrivener files behind Excel spreadsheets every time your boss walks past, honey you have a problem. Ask yourself this: How focused are you on your actual writing if you're trying to divide your attention between working out a budget or doing a report ... and getting into a writing zone? This goes back to my earlier pointer of setting yourself achievable goals, and being focused on your writing. I can write fast, like the best of them. Hells, I can poop out 2k words in an hour if I'm in the zone. So if you're pooping out 7k words a day at the office, let's be realistic ... you're spending maybe half your work day on your own personal writing ... and either you're neglecting your day job or, even worse, you're being unfair to colleagues (and employers) who have to pick up your slack. Don't be a douchebag.

For sure, maybe write during lunch. Or if you *honestly* don't have other work. But don't put your ability to keep a roof over your head (and by default have a space for your writing) by taking the piss at the office.

Good books take time
This should be a no-brainer. Digital publishing has made it SUPER easy to put out books. Hells, it's ridiculously simple these days to publish a book. But ... NO book is ready to be published after you've typed 'the end' on the first draft. Allow your book to lie fallow for a while in your hard drive. Give it one or two editing passes BEFORE you send it on to your beta readers. Maybe even give it a three-month break before you start serious structural edits. If you can afford an editor, that's absolutely brilliant. Don't be afraid to take all the time you need to unpick the threads and revise. A savvy writer will have more than one manuscript at various stages of development, so that they perhaps have one first draft they're crafting, a book mellowing on a hard drive, a book with betas... a book they're outlining... One that's out on the query mill if you're busy looking for literary agents.  Some books take years before they're ready. It's easy to poop out a book, but to truly craft a story, where you've been able to take a step back to look at it with fresh eyes, to be unafraid to make necessary changes ... now that takes time. And sometimes time means all the difference between a hastily cobbled-together document riddled with sub-par syntax and typos, vs a polished masterwork you can be proud of for years to come.

Don't be THAT AUTHOR (or rather, GUESS WHAT? NO ONE CARES).

I find myself going round in circles so often with the whole "how to self promo" thing for authors. Plainly put, no one truly knows what works. Some claim a Facebook advertisement garners results. Some say it won't. Some authors don't do a single stitch of advertising, and their books fly off the virtual shelves. Other authors spend hundreds of dollars each month on ads, blog tours and whatnot, and perhaps don't even see a blip on the radar when it comes to sales.

THERE IS NO WAY TO PREDICT WHAT WILL WORK.

A few authors I know have gained success bundling their books or novellas and pooling their resources (and in that way, they've gained a modicum of success on bestseller lists). This is all fine and dandy, but it just highlights the fact that the market at present is saturated with new releases every day. With the prevalence of permafree copies, 99c specials, giveaways, I can tell you I have more books on my Kindle app than I can hope to read in four years. And that's not even talking about what I've got squirrelled away on my Kobo and iBooks apps.

After the initial boom in ebooks and small presses, we're now entering an age of overabundance. Readers have more choice than ever before, and it's becoming increasingly difficult for authors to make their voices heard (and sell books).

I'm going to put my cards on the table. I'm *lucky* if I sell one or two copies of one of my dozen or so titles each month. Granted, I don't write in a popular genre like romance, and my career so far has genre hopped a bit, and also I haven't been arsed to release any new novel-length works during the past few years.

A lot of work goes into self-publishing. Not only is the author responsible for content creation, but she takes on the role of publisher too – this means being willing to invest in editing, design, formatting, illustration. This means shelling out money. And it stands to reason that the same amount of effort must go into marketing.

Even traditionally published authors can no longer rely on their publishers to handle their marketing for them. While big-name authors will get marketing budget tossed at them, many new and mid-list authors will need to supplement whatever promo they get from their publisher with efforts of their own.

With so much noise in social media going along the lines of BUY MY BOOK! BUY MY BOOK! actually selling enough copies to make a decent living is becoming more and more difficult. This is the reality of the system. It's no use crying about it.

You, as author, are not special. Don't try to deny it. Unless potential readers are invested in you, they simply don't care. Accept it. Deal with it. Getting bitter and twisted about it won't change that fact. You simply have to ensure that the product (because yes, your special darling *is* a commodity) you put out is the best that it can be.

Work on the premise that no one cares, and you'll save yourself a pile of heartache. Ask yourself why it is that you write. If you're looking to make oodles of money, be prepared for disappointment. Play the long game. No one cares about your awesome YA kick-ass heroine who resembles "XYZ of that popular dystopian setting's heroine". There are hundreds if not thousands of other authors out there who most likely are publishing books that are similar to yours. And also feel as if they are TWU SPESHUL SNOFLAKES.

So, what can you do?

It's about attitude readjustment. You are not going to sell your book on Twitter or Facebook. You may not even sell your book using your newsletter. Word of mouth is best.

I'm going to say it again.

WORD OF MOUTH IS BEST.

And there's nothing *you* personally can do to make it happen.

People must care enough about you to care about your writing. If you're a whiny little sh*t who complains about the fact that you're being discriminated against day and night, that everyone else has it soooo much easier than you and your life is just terrible and one disaster after the other...

Guess what?

NO ONE CARES.

If all you ever post every day are buy links and bits begging people to BUY YOUR BOOKS, guess what? NO ONE CARES.

If you send people who follow you DMs telling them to BUY YOUR BOOKS, guess what? They'll unfollow or, worse, block you. If you constantly self-promote in communities where self-promo is forbidden, guess what? You'll get blocked.

Your shotgun approach to marketing won't sell books. It won't make people care about you, as a person or an author. You'll just have yourself labelled as "that author" and folks will be resistant to picking up copies of your books.

Sending buy links to other authors won't work either. They're in the same boat that you are. You need to reach readers, not authors. If you think getting [insert famous author name here] to share or retweet your buy link will automatically result in fame and fortune, you're sadly mistaken. Readers aren't stupid. If you don't put down what they want to read, they won't pick it up. If you think getting your novel reviewed in the local papers will make a huge difference, nope, nope, nope. You might see a slight bump, but newspapers and magazines get pulped. And, while reviews on vendors' sites like Amazon are gold, and Good reads is pretty fab too, they still won't sell your books.

So, what to do, if as this post suggests, nothing works?

Cultivating your readership is an exercise in patient gardening. Your readers must be so excited about your next book that they share news of an imminent release for you. Hell, they must love you so much that they make and share fan art. Or gush about what they're reading randomly on social media. And there's no easy way to reach this point.

My suggestion is as follows: go see how your favourite top authors handle their social media. One thing you'll notice is that many of them rarely (if ever) share buy links. Instead they talk about the things that are important to them. They share snippets of (curated) personal info. They might post cat photos or pictures of what they're baking. They might talk about the writing process. What books they're reading. Hell, even what they're knitting. What music inspires them. They might offer insights about current affairs (although here be careful that you don't go overboard with politics – this can also be a turn-off).

Don't inundate people with all the terrible things in your life. Remember, NO ONE CARES whether your left testicle is slightly lumpy or that your dog ate an entire block of hash and has now pooped it all over your afghan. Okay, I digress, the last example is actually quite funny, but I hope you get my point that folks don't want to be privy to the unrelenting existential crisis that you've been having for the past three decades. You won't win awards (or sell books) for being a martyr. Find ways to turn your setbacks into opportunities to shine.

(For instance, if I'm feeling blue, I ask my friends to post me pictures that will make me smile and it's so lovely to see engagement that way).

Thing is, it's not wrong, per se, to post buy links from time to time, but it's *how* you do it and with how much regularity this occurs (less is more, IMO). People want to get to know you, the person, and then they'll be more prepared to care about your writing. If they feel that they can relate to you and you're not like those annoying religious fundies who go door to door trying to sell afterlife insurance when all you really want to do is watch telly, then you're on the right track.

But remember this, it's not a case of overnight fame. You're not going to get rich off your debut novel (those stories are the exception, not the rule). Write because you love to. Tell the stories you love AS IF NO ONE CARES. Don't be that author who makes you want to hit the unfriend button.

PS. Use the fact that no one cares as a way to free yourself from the expectations of others. That's what I do, and I can guarantee that instead focusing on making beautiful books that *you* love to read, makes the journey worthwhile. 

INSPIRE! In conversation with Cat Hellisen, author

Cat Hellisen and I go way back, all the way back to Cape Town's Sanctuary nights at the old Purple Turtle during the late 1990s where DJ Reanimator used to spin Bauhaus and Einstuerzende Neubauten ... okay, no, wait, that's ancient prehistory. But it's safe to say we've known each other for years, and Cat's one the people who's helped inspire me to attain the highs (and helped keep me going through the lows) of this thing called SFF publishing.

Not only is she the creator of some of the most profound, nuanced fantasy I've read in recent years, she also possesses a keen understanding of SFF as a genre, and I value her opinion when it comes to our discussions about this industry. If you've yet to check out her novels, go take a gander at her Amazon page. 

So, without further ado, here's a transcript of a little dialogue we had this week, in which we discuss world building, theme and trends in SFF...

ND: Stories and the world around you – I've loved recognising bits of the world I know in your stories (like Pelimburg in your Hobverse) or even the way you've portrayed Joburg in Charm. With your recent move to Scotland, are there parts of your new space that inspire you? That may creep into the story?

CH: I'm very much influenced by my environment (to the point that you can tell which of my books are written in what season) so there are definitely elements that are going to take root in the story soil. The book I'm working on now has a quasi-European setting, so it kinda helps to be in Scotland. Not that the landscape is Scottish particularly, but I know exactly what a jackdaw sounds like now, and elements like that will inform the text. It's also pretty amazing to be in a country where I can go walk around the ruins of castles and forts, where ancient churches are as much a part of the landscape as shopping malls. To be able to get close-up looks at old stone work and so on, or go into the caves where Saint Margaret went to pray - they help with building a mental picture for me as I write.

ND: Do you have any idée fixes? For instance, reading Marguerite Poland’s books, she often brings in the theme of birds that convey a theme. Are there any favourite, small details in real life that have crept into your stories – little Easter eggs as such that people have picked up on? 

CH: I don't know if I'd call them idée fixes, but there are definitely recurring elements from my psychological landscape that litter my writing and I do rather like that. I always think of JG Ballard and his empty swimming pools, or John Irving and his bears. I don't set out to incorporate these motifs, but they're obviously things I fixate on: labyrinths, and the Space Between Worlds (which sometimes doubles as the labyrinth), masks, birds, and water. As far as themes go, I remember someone once telling me that my constant theme is broken boys saving each other, which is a little unfair because my girls are just as broken, but they wear better masks.

ND: We appear to be seeing what appears to be a new wave of readers (and authors) of SFF who're getting into the genre in the wake successes like Twilight, The Hunger Games, Harry Potter, yet when I've spoken to them, very few have heard of classics such as Ursula K LeGuin, CJ Cherryh, Katharine Kerr and others of their ilk. I know this discussion crops up often online on the lists, but if you had to make a checklist of must-read fantasy authors, who would you suggest and why do you think it's so important for others to read outside of their comfort zone?

CH: Read outside your comfort zone because you never know what wonder will strike, what new concept or thought. For fiction, if people are coming from a tradition of Harry Potter, I'd definitely suggest they read Diana Wynne Jones' Chrestomanci series, and le Guin's marvelous Earthsea books. I began my speculative education on my father's library hauls, so I had a grounding in classic SF - in Asimov, Aldiss, Poul Anderson, James Blish, etc, but I veered away from them and toward writers like Tanith Lee, Clive Barker, Octavia Butler, Tim Powers, Gene Wolfe, Poppy Z Brite and Mary Gentle. If they're looking for more modern writers there is a wealth of new and less-new speculative authors - I'd suggest looking at presses like Small Beer, Apex, and Solaris. Weightless Books is an ebook store that stocks a range of good small press work.

I also encourage people to read widely on the subjects that fascinate them and go right back to the key works in that field. The more you know about the world and history and politics, the more informed and nuanced your work will be.

ND: What are some of the issues you pick up in contemporary SFF that you suspect are related to the paucity of authors’ source material? For instance I’ve encountered so many writers who’ve been inspired because they’ve read Twilight or The Hunger Games, and that is pretty much the first experience they’ve had with truly reading – and now they want to go out and create. Yet in one case, a lady returned to me saying that when I’d turned her onto reading Wuthering Heights, she’d struggled because of the unfamiliar vocabulary. And her writing showed this paucity that no amount of editing could fix.

CH: It depends what you're reading. Yes, some of the larger houses put out work that is strained by the writer's lack of familiarity with the genre, and these books end up reinventing the wheel, or serving us the same old pap in a plastic bowl, but there is also great stuff coming out, often from smaller presses. As you say though, the great stuff with the better ideas and higher level of writing comes from writers who are readers, and you can spot it instantly in their work. They are the writers who make Classical references that they expect their readers to get without hand-holding, or whose books are a conversation with the stories that have come before. They use language skilfully and play with words in a way a less-well read writer simply can't.

It's become a bit of a cliche to say it, but I believe that you cannot be a decent writer if you are not first and foremost a reader.

ND: Do you think the bigger houses should (or would) look at starting up smaller, boutique imprints or do you think those small presses and co-operatives that are starting up in this literary vacuum are going to fill that need for readers and authors? Considering, especially, the high overheads attached to even bringing out an anthology (there are hidden costs readers generally aren't aware of). What do you see as a possible future for publishing.

CH: I have no idea what the future holds. I'm tentatively going to suggest that it's going to carry on pretty much as-is, with the large presses putting out big names and sure-fire type sellers (celeb bios, On Topic Thrillers, etc) and taking the occasional chance when marketing allows, and the smaller presses will fill the niches with more interesting stuff, and some of those smaller presses are going to become larger and larger and forces to be reckoned with. And so it will go.

I am very excited about the co-operative model because I think this is where the mid-listers are going to congregate. In recent years the concept of the mid-list author who is not a household name, but built up a decent fan base over a collection of novels, and now sells consistently, has all but been eradicated. You either make it big out the box, or you're dumped for the next New Author Who Might Make It Big. Writing generally improves over time, so writers aren't really getting the opportunity anymore to build their audience and develop their voice. And I think that's where co-ops and small presses are going to come in.

ND: One thing that I've always appreciated about your writing is its layering and nuance – how do you approach this?

CH: Thank you kindly! It goes back to the reading non-fiction thing. Being curious about the world you actually live in is a great way to enrich your imaginary worlds. And twitter is not the world. Go walk outside, go explore aimlessly, go to the library and grab a book from the history section that looks interesting. Find out about your family secrets and stitch them into your own stories.

On a writing level, I approach it by revising, revising, revising. I need all that information in my brain to get embroidered into my writing, and that only happens with revision. Layering is one of the most important aspects of revision - going in and reworking the warp and weft, strengthening the story where it needs strengthening, unravelling the bits that are tangled nonsense. To drag this metaphor on to its inevitable conclusion - you don't make story out of just cloth tacked together, you need shape, you need strengthened seams, you need hidden pockets, silk linings, buttons and embroidery.

ND: I’ve always tried to explain to authors that adding layering is about engaging the physical senses – sight, sound, touch, taste, smell – but also about engaging with emotion and intellect. Often writers think it’s fine to have a ‘laundry list’ of descriptions but don’t quite immerse how environment or events relate to the character. How would you suggest they break through this barrier to making their writing flow?

CH: Ah, the laundry list. Description of physicality and mannerisms is not characterisation. If a person had to describe me as only "a loud chubster with dyed red hair, wearing mum-jeans." It might be accurate on some level, but it would tell you nothing about who I am. It would be fine if you were writing me as a once-off character who merely imparts some information to our Intrepid Hero, but if I was a main or secondary character, there needs to be more there to make me a human, to make me a character the reader feels they know.

That means adding dimensions that are more than just surface, superficial description. I talk about interiority - what emotion do they feel, how does it physically affect them, what do they sense. "Get inside their head" is a favourite critique which I think you know I've levelled at more than a few betas. Ask yourself questions about why a character does something in your book - build them a back story. Write it down if necessary. But a real character has a history, and it lies under the surface of everything you write about them, and informs every on-page decision they make.

ND: And for you, if you had to pick some of your all-time favourite characters/characterisation, who is this and why do you think the author nails it in this particular case(s).

CH: Ah wow this is a tough one. So many good works out there, and what's a favourite? My favourites change over time, though there are a few constants. I'm a sucker for a certain character type, I won't pretend otherwise. I love Howl and Sophie from Howl's Moving Castle, Pie'oh'pah from Barker's Imagica, Tenar (and Ged) from The Tombs of Atuan. Actually, Ged is a very good example of a character who grows and changes through the books. In A Wizard of Earthsea, he is cocksure and difficult to like, and power gives him an arrogance that ultimately is his downfall. I like Ged better in Atuan, where he's a little wiser and a little more broken. If you read the Under the Poppy trilogy by Kathe Koja, following her two puppeteers and sometime spies, you get a pretty good idea of the characters I love.

Follow Cat Hellisen on Twitter, support her on Patreon or friend her on Facebook. 

Playing the Long Game #writerslife

A question I sometimes get is, “Oh, wow, you’ve written so many books. You must have made lots of money.”

At which point, I laugh and laugh … and then whimper slightly. Authors are not rich. Those who are, are the exception, not the rule.

Let’s say it again: Rich authors are the exception, not the rule. Now, write that in nice red ink and stick it above your workspace.

Once upon a time, in a galaxy far, far away, I ended up in an email exchange with John Everson. We were both hanging around the same Yahoo list during the mid-2000s, when FB was merely a twinkle in Mark Zuckerberg's eye, and I remember being terribly impressed with the fact that he’d been published and where he was at the start of what appeared to be a promising career. He still warned me that it’s a lot of hard work without any guarantees, and I thought, “Yup, I’m up for this. I’ll make it. I'm awesome. The sun shines out of my arse.”

Yet here I am. I’ve published a bunch of books. None of them are best-sellers, and I make more money editing other people’s work than with my own writing.

But what do we mean by successful author? What do we mean when we say we’ve “made it”?

Good questions.

If you’re doing this under the assumption that you’re going to earn wads of cash, you might do better simply investing in guaranteed schemes or buying property. Publishing novels is a lot like gambling. Actually, who’m I kidding? It is gambling. You simply cannot guarantee whether readers will glomp onto your work. No one could predict that Harry Potter, Twilight or Fifty Shades of Grey, The Hunger Games or even adult colouring books would be the phenomena that they’ve turned out to be. But they are.

Hundreds of authors have tried to follow in these footsteps, to varying degrees of success. And I predict, that by the time the majority of those attempting to ride the coattails of the success stories get their novels out there, the wave will have passed.

(There’s a reason why I don’t write YA dystopias. Though I do admit that the genre itself has been surprisingly resilient despite me watching out for the Next Big Thing to take off.)

If you’re talking about financial success, then you need to write the more popular genres. Which means you’re going to look at erotic romance, crime/mystery, religious/inspirational, and fantasy … with horror lagging behind all of these… And it means you’ll have to immerse yourself in the genre you want to write so that you’re aware of the tropes. Readers are not stupid. They can tell the moment an author’s heart is not in the genre they’re writing and, nope, they’re not going to buy it if your offering is a lukewarm spinoff.

Some of the hardest-working authors I’ve ever met write in the erotic romance genre. These folks write a book every 2-3 months, with 6-8 releases a year in what is a highly competitive market with a huge turnover of newly published works every week. Their readers are voracious, and yet if an author misses a step, their name quickly sinks to the bottom of the pile. The ones who earn six-digit figures put in eight or more hours a day of writing, revising and promotion. It’s a huge industry, and frankly, I have to be honest with myself, I don’t have the stamina for it. I don’t have the love of this particular genre to push myself in this direction. The successful authors treat this with the same seriousness that they do any nine-to-five career. I don’t want this on the off-chance that I might make a financial “success” of it.

And yet ... Work ethic and talent most certainly help, but they’re no guarantee.

If you’re writing because you want people to tell you how amazeballs your stories are, think again. It’s easy to publish a novel these days. But getting people to read your work is difficult. Then getting them to leave reviews or ratings (those all-important algorithms Amazon loves so much before your book starts showing up in any promotion) is even more difficult. It simply doesn’t occur to many readers that they should leave reviews. Or they’re just not in the mood. Or they have better things to do. Your books don’t accimagically sell themselves, and only a select few (or incredibly savvy) ever make it onto the shelves of brick-and-mortar stores.

(Here’s a hint: go look at the SFF section at your local bookshop. Notice something? Yeah, it’s still mostly the same old names we’ve seen there for the past 10-20 years… The Hobbs, the GRRMs, the Tolkiens, the Jordans, the Canavans…)

The likelihood of you getting your small press or self-published book onto the shelves of your local bookstore are slim to none. Most of your sales will be from your ebooks. Which folks will only buy if they happen to stumble onto the book via a review or a mention on social media.

So, why are you writing?

I’ll tell you why I write. Maybe my story will resonate (and I'd love to hear yours – leave a comment below in the comments section). I’m playing the long game. I’ve decided I don’t want to wait until I become famous to write the kinds of books I enjoy reading. Unfortunately, many of my literary heroes are not runaway mainstream successes. By the same measure, the stories I tell are not mainstream. My readership is niche, but I love that niche – of rich, nuanced and slowly unfolding fantasy where there the conflict is often subtle and it’s not immediately possible to tell who’s the antagonist. I look to the writings of Storm Constantine, Neil Gaiman, Robin Hobb, Ursula Le Guin, Poppy Z Brite, CJ Cherryh and numerous others, and I express myself in a synthesis of what I love about their styles. Some of these authors you may have heard of. Others, perhaps not. But whether you have, doesn’t matter to me.

The point is I have stories I want to tell. I am a storyteller.

My rewards are subtle: It’s when one of my literary heroes tells me that she loves my voice. Or when I’ve read at an event, and a young boy walks up to me and tells me that my writing reminds him of Neil Gaiman’s. Or it’s when a reader writes to tell me that I made her forget to milk her goats. Or, it's that flash of inspiration when I pause in what I'm doing to daydream on a new idea then see its potential.

I write my own worlds, but I also write fiction that I cannot sell; my fanfiction often gives me so much pleasure because the response I have from readers is immediate and passionate. And for the same reasons, I read the fics of others, and I experience the same enthusiasm for our favourite worlds.

And my original fiction meets the fanfiction halfway, because I’ve written for existing intellectual properties in an official capacity, and it’s been awesome and financially rewarding.

I will close by sharing also that I’ve learnt to value my writing. I don’t submit to just any market that is out there. I don’t often give away my works for free. I always craft to my utmost ability then submit to the best markets. And, if for whatever reason these works doesn’t sell, I’ll later compile them into an anthology or release via my Patreon page. I aim high, for quality, not quantity.

I don’t make my living writing, though there are some opportunities that do pay well. Life is short, nasty and brutish, and I want to enjoy my writing while I’m alive. It’s not so much a stress of if a story will be published, but rather when, and how. If I value my art, and don’t sell it short, it means that there’s a better chance that others may cherish it too.

Am I a success? If you mean by am I writing the stories that I love reading, then my resounding answer is yes. I am a success.

Bio: After surviving a decade in the trenches of newspaper publishing, where she fought against the abuse of the English language, Nerine Dorman is now a freelance editor and designer who is passionate about words that not only sound good, but look damned good too. She’s also written a few books. You can stalk her on Twitter or, even better, support her authorly aspirations via Patreon. If you’re feeling particularly brave, and would like to inquire about her editing rates, you can email her at nerinedorman@gmail.com 

Dealbreakers: head-hopping

I’ve got a number of deal-breakers for me when I’m reading slush or, when I’m writing my dreaded “dear author” letters for my clients – these issues seem to crop up the most often and make me sigh. A lot. This one’s affectionately called “head hopping”. First-pass edits that I do usually end up with loads of red ink or tabbed comments that state just that. And if you’re currently thinking of disembodied heads bouncing down the road then some of my work here is done.

Before we get into what head-hopping entails, we’re quickly going to look at a story’s point of view. There are some other fancy-pants literary terms for this, but I want to keep things as simple as possible because I don’t want your eyes to glaze over or your brain to implode.

When you write a story, one of the first things you need to decide is who the narrator is. This is the person telling the story.

Your first-person narrator uses the pronoun “I” and writing the story feels like a personal account.

I went down to the harbour, bought some chips, and fed the seagulls. 

What’s lovely about first-person point of view is that it lends the text a sense of immediacy. We’re reliving a series of events through the eyes of an unreliable narrator who a) might be lying to herself about what’s happening or b) simply doesn’t have all the information at hand to make informed decisions.

There’s a degree of uncertainty. Did events really transpire as the person suggests? Think about how you retell some of your misadventures as a teenager compared to how your mom would. Each narrator will add flavour to a story, based on their beliefs and personal biases. (Your mom might say you came home after your 18th birthday looking like the Wreck of the Hesperus, which says quite a bit about your mom – and you.)

Then there’s second-person point of view, where the narrator uses the pronoun “you”, and the story feels as if it addresses the reader.

You went down to the harbour, bought some chips, and fed the seagulls.

See what happens there? You’re the one who’s in the story. You’re the one who’s getting greasy fingers feeding a bunch of squawking birds. This style isn’t very common, and can be quite tricky to execute well. My own opinion is that I’d find reading a novel-length work in this style incredibly tiresome.

Lastly, we have third-person, which would see the point of view a bit more remote.

She went down to the harbour, bought some chips, and fed the seagulls.

Now, we’re reduced to voyeurs, viewing the events as one would watch a movie. Third-person point of view is, at present, the most prevalent style of writing. In fact, I’ve met quite a few readers who balk at reading any other style (missing out on all the lovely first-person narrations out there).

For more funzies, there are basically two ways of treating third-person point of view. One I’m going to tag as deep third-person point of view and the other is omniscient point of view.

Your bog-standard fiction tends to be a deep third-person point of view where you’ll have one character’s point of view in each scene or chapter. This means that although we’re learning why Susie went down to feed the seagulls (she was feeling sad because James left her), we don’t also know what Billy, her stalker, was thinking. In fact, Susie wasn’t even aware that Billy was watching her that day until we see a later chapter where we’re in Billy’s point of view and he’s looking at the photos he took that day.

If we were writing omniscient point of view, and doing it well, we would, perhaps halfway through the scene, swap points of view to Billy, who’s sitting on a boat nearby with his camera. Authors who shift smoothly, would give some sort of transition in their writing, clearly showing how they change in point of view. Think of it like watching a movie, where the camera pans from one face to another. If you have choppy camera work, hopping back and forth between points of view rapidly, the story’s going to suffer.

Now I’m going to be absolutely straight up. Every editor has his or her preferences, and as an editor I absolutely loathe third-person omniscient. [BIG DISCLAIMER: THIS IS MY OPINION – other editors may vary] This is where the author is writing from some sort of god-like perspective, showing readers what multiple characters are thinking in the same scene.

While there is nothing wrong with writing third-person omniscient, it’s also not a convention that is at present popular within the realms of commercial and genre fiction. That’s not to say that third-person omniscient, is wrong, per se, it’s just that there are few authors out there who manage to pull this off with any real flair. At this point, I’ll nod at Sir Terry Pratchett as possibly one of the best examples of this style of writing well done. Go read his Discworld novels to see how this is done.

In the majority of the cases I encounter, writers' attempts at multiple points of view in one scene, often result in a garbled, muddled mess. The actions, dialogue and thoughts of different characters get so hopelessly entangled in one paragraph, I sometimes have to resist the temptation of hurling my coffee mug at my very expensive computer screen – an action I will most certainly regret instantly.

If you’re absolutely dead set on writing omniscient point of view, my advice is to consider the idea of establishing the voice of your narrator. Who is telling the story? Develop the author’s character as the teller (think of what makes Roald Dahl so awesome – go read a few of his stories). Think about the fact that the author is presenting him or herself as the storyteller, providing a framework upon which the actions and words of the characters will hang.

The difficulty here is developing individual characters’ personalities to make them stand apart from each other. The other drawback is that because your narrator has godlike powers, you risk falling prey to the temptation of revealing all of the secrets too early, thereby robbing a story of much of its mystery and tension. Alternatively, you’ll withhold key information under the impression that you want to build this tension. (Think of a murder mystery where the murderer is a viewpoint character who conveniently neglects to consider that he or she has done the deed – yes, I’ve read traditionally published books that fall prey to this sin.)

Often, I feel that new new authors write a third-person omniscient point of view because they feel they need to show all the aspects of the story. To them, I say: RESIST THE TEMPTATION. Resist it. You can. I promise you, holding back on secrets is good. It makes giving the big reveal near the end an even better surprise. Readers don’t need to know everything all at once. Feed them morsels so that they’ll keep wanting more. If a character doesn’t know something DON’T mention it. If they do, and it's absolutely vital to the story at that point, find a way to foreshadow in a way that doesn't feel as if you're doing it for the benefit of readers.

I promise you, when there’s a fight scene, you don’t need to show what the hero and villain are thinking at the same time. Pick one. Show how they perceive the other party, how they analyse the situation then aim to survive.

Whatever point of view you write, seat yourself firmly in the head of your chosen character. Or, if you’re an author-narrator, think of the tone of how you show your world. Think of your story in terms of you holding the camera. The moment your camera work requires jagged shifts, realise that this may well disorientate your audience.

Lastly, there are no hard-and-fast rules. But there are conventions, and a savvy author will know when and how to play outside the bounds of these conventions. My advice is to colour inside the lines for a bit first before you’re comfortable to do something a bit more risqué. Like invoking my serious side-eye at your bouncing heads.

Bio: After surviving a decade in the trenches of newspaper publishing, where she fought against the abuse of the English language, Nerine Dorman is now a freelance editor and designer who is passionate about words that not only sound good, but look damned good too. She’s also written a few books. You can stalk her on Twitter or, even better, support her authorly aspirations via Patreon. If you’re feeling particularly brave, and would like to inquire about her editing rates, you can email her at nerinedorman@gmail.com

Dealbreakers: Filtering

I’ve got a number of deal-breakers for me when I’m reading slush or, when I’m writing my dreaded “dear author” letters for my clients – these issues seem to crop up the most often and make me sigh. A lot. First up on my list is filtering. First-pass edits that I do usually end up with loads of red ink or tabbed comments that just state “filtering”. Some of my authors are so allergic to these comments they’ve gone to great lengths to correct their behaviour. This pleases me greatly.

Here’s an example.
She thought that the bird was cute. vs. The bird was cute.

See what happens here? (Okay, granted, this was an extremely simple example.) You’ve just gone and cut out a pile of words.

Your automatic red flag for when you’re busy with your first round of self-edits (and all awesome authors should learn to be awesome self-editors) is to look out for anything that has a personal pronoun or proper noun followed by a verb.

So, these include constructions such as she thought, he felt, I was thinking, Tom heard. Look out for “that” as well. My rule here is if you can read the sentence (and have it make sense) without “that” in it then you can lose the word.

[insert huge big disclaimer here]

That’s not to say that all sentences containing filtering are wrong, per se. But I advise always that less is more when it comes to words that don’t contribute in any meaningful way. Especially if it's a construction you're in the habit of using. We all have quirks. Learn what yours are.

Why is filtering bad? Besides the fact that you’re filling your sentences with words that don’t contribute to the story, the filtering also creates a sense of distance from the meat and bones of your narrative. Think of it as clutter. This is especially a problem if you’re writing a short story that has to conform to a strict word count. By cutting back on filtering, it is possible to give your text more drive and give it a greater sense of immediacy.

Another tip: look out for too many adjectives or adverbs that end with the suffix “-ly”. Chances are good that you don’t need them. Instead of saying that someone cried piteously or was gesticulating furiously, see where you can show a piteous state or the ferocity of their movements. Perhaps a person’s voice trembles when they speak, or their shoulders are hunched. Perhaps their eyes are shining with tears or their movements are sharp. While all pesky adjectives and adverbs ending in “-ly” aren’t necessarily wrong, they’re best described as salt to your text – to be used sparingly lest you spoil the soup.

* * * *

Bio: After surviving a decade in the trenches of newspaper publishing, where she fought against the abuse of the English language, Nerine Dorman is now a freelance editor and designer who is passionate about words that not only sound good, but look damned good too. She’s also written a few books. You can stalk her on Twitter or, even better, support her authorly aspirations via Patreon. If you’re feeling particularly brave, and would like to inquire about her editing rates, you can email her at nerinedorman@gmail.com 

Goodbye, my precioouuusssssss...

Wearing the editor hat doesn’t necessarily guarantee that my writing is perfect once I don the author hat. Granted, I am the first to admit that I am an anally retentive fruitbat have wicked self-editing skills and I catch *most* gremlins. But my writing is filled with unicorns and rainbows *does* need work. Problem is, I’m often so close to my own story that I can’t see the obvious issues with, say, characterisation or pacing.

Case in point…

A few months ago I got a request for a revise and resubmit (R&R) from a prominent publisher of quality LGBT fiction. I read the letter. Saw the editor in question mention that she hated destroying authors hopes on Twitter knew she meant me and that I suck donkey bollocks, then promptly did *absolutely nothing* about the manuscript for half a year.

I went through a whole range of responses, shock, denial, despair… and now, eventually, acceptance. And contemplated throwing myself off the top of the Absa Building in Cape Town's Foreshore.

This week I opened that R&R letter and agreed with absolutely everything that editor said.

I’ve heard some authors whinge and moan about losing their artistic integrity, and that’s all fine and well. Keep your words. Hell, you might just step into Anne Rice’s shoes one day, and that’s absolutely fine. For you. After being convinced that I totally suck donkey bollocks spending time to let that manuscript lie fallow (which I totally advise to any author who’s serious about his or her craft), I’ve got the necessary distance to objectively consider that editor’s opinion.

When I look back at my older writing, it’s not bad. Not by a long shot if I consider some of the documents I’ve encountered in the slush pile. But too many times in the past I’ve suffered because I’ve been precious about my words and unwilling to make drastic changes. If I look at some of the authors who’ve really pushed boundaries, they’re the ones who often revise until they’re ready to jump off a high place. Again and again.




They will cry, and whine, and moan, but they’ll revise. And, guess what? They eventually get those contracts with the publishers of their choice.

Not that I’m slamming self-publishing, but I’d like to point out that when an author publishes his or her own work, there’s a real danger that an author will believe that they poop rainbows will not be hard enough on their own words, that they’ll indulge themselves and turn out a substandard work.

Granted, there’s place under the sun for loads of different novels, be it easy-reading animal stories to fairytale romance or eloquent litfic. Thank fuck it’s not a cookie cutter process. And readers have vastly different tastes.

But there are some stories that can only become better if an author is willing to put the work through the crucible; be honest about why your precious words suck.

This week marks my return to The Jackal, my post-Z m/m thriller. I have thrown away a second draft (yes, this is actually the second R&R for this story) and I’m starting fresh. I am scared and thrilled and dying to get started, and you know what? I’m looking at it this way. None of those 95k-odd words of the second version were wasted, because I’ve laid the groundwork for a compelling setting filled with diverse characters.

And there were some very odd words there.

Except now I can zoom out and focus on how I can make the story and the characterisation so much more powerful. And hey, maybe even play with deepening themes.

So, thank you to the wicked editor out there who wasn’t afraid to tell me where The Jackal is broken. I’m going in with scalpel blades, and even if this ends up being an out-and-out rejection eventually, for whatever reason, I’ll have learnt something from the process and had an amazing time playing in that world.

I am not precious about my words anymore. That is all.

THEN... GOOD NEWS EVERYONE

Dawn's Bright Talons is going to be available in print within the next week or so. If you know not of what I speak, then get your posterior over to the Goodreads page and go have squizz.