About Writing

[muskrat]

You don't edit your own, do you? I mean, a couple of drafts, sure. But actual editing, the final process, should never be done by an author upon his or her own work. A patient doesn't perform surgery upon him or herself. It hurts too much to cut stuff out. Somebody else has to do it.

That depends on the writer. Or, perhaps, what kind of writing. Take some kind of popular genre fiction, say, oh, crime fiction, or straight forward horror, or western, whatever--crowd pleaser stuff, do ya. Basically, hack work meant for mass consumption, does indeed require the streamlining hand of an editor to make it more palatable (or sellable). Nothing at all wrong with that.

Now take your ARTISTS; your trailblazing geniuses out to create new forms, new ideas, new methods in which to tell different types of stories and books; sometimes such writers should be left alone, and their vision undiluted by the hive mentality of modern publishing. I would list a few examples, but then I'd just get a buncha comments telling me what idiots these writers are, or pointless arguments over what is, or is not, art.

Heck, I dunno. A fella can drive himself insane with these kinda thoughts, heh heh.

 

[Lepplady]

That depends on the writer. Or, perhaps, what kind of writing. Take some kind of popular genre fiction, say, oh, crime fiction, or straight forward horror, or western, whatever--crowd pleaser stuff, do ya. Basically, hack work meant for mass consumption, does indeed require the streamlining hand of an editor to make it more palatable (or sellable). Nothing at all wrong with that.

Now take your ARTISTS; your trailblazing geniuses out to create new forms, new ideas, new methods in which to tell different types of stories and books; sometimes such writers should be left alone, and their vision undiluted by the hive mentality of modern publishing. I would list a few examples, but then I'd just get a buncha comments telling me what idiots these writers are, or pointless arguments over what is, or is not, art.

Heck, I dunno. A fella can drive himself insane with these kinda thoughts, heh heh.

Sure, but even they can miss their own grammar and punctuation errors. The nuts and bolts.

 

[HollyGolightly]

Oh, sure. Mark Twain taught us that we can actually write in dialect. Not to say that we want to try to do exactly what the masters do. If you're writing dialogue of a guy in Minnesota, you don't want to go all caricature and go, "O yah, I'm frum Minnesohhh-tuh." But you do want to have an ear for the tongue, the arrangement of words, the cadence, and find ways to translate that to the black and white of the text.

Not to say I'm a master at it. I'm assuredly not. But to make characters distinct and identifiable, each one needs that one's own voice.

I'm so relieved to hear you say this. I've been carrying around a big bag of guilt since 2001. A friend of a friend asked me to read his then unpublished book - he'd heard I was a discerning reader of varied tastes. He wanted a critique. I found the story engaging but the dialect of the characters drove me nuts. I told him he needed to pull it back some, tone it down, you know... He was so sad and offended and defensive and I felt horrible. I don't critique anymore. I can't stand to hurt feelings. But my point was valid. I wished I had used the word caricature.

 

[muskrat]

Sure, but even they can miss their own grammar and punctuation errors. The nuts and bolts.

Well, sure. But I figure that's more the job of a proofreader, rather than an editor. But don't get me wrong, I believe most writers need their editors.

 

[Lepplady]

Well, sure. But I figure that's more the job of a proofreader, rather than an editor. But don't get me wrong, I believe most writers need their editors.

True dat.

 

[Christine62]

There was a time when I thought my writing was golden as soon as it hit the page. I very rarely rewrote and anyone who had criticism "just didn't get what I am trying to do." I think I was really afraid.

Now I am taking a page from Mr. King's playbook--I read an interview he gave that said he sends his draft to at least 20 trusted friends and family for feedback before he sends to his editor (Is that true?).

Anyway with this humorous personal essay I wrote about camping--I did the same just not 20 people I think it was 2. It was so productive, and helpful I am sending my next piece to at least six or seven readers for feedback. I'm not afraid anymore--I do want to get better.

 

[skimom2]

That depends on the writer. Or, perhaps, what kind of writing. Take some kind of popular genre fiction, say, oh, crime fiction, or straight forward horror, or western, whatever--crowd pleaser stuff, do ya. Basically, hack work meant for mass consumption, does indeed require the streamlining hand of an editor to make it more palatable (or sellable). Nothing at all wrong with that.

Now take your ARTISTS; your trailblazing geniuses out to create new forms, new ideas, new methods in which to tell different types of stories and books; sometimes such writers should be left alone, and their vision undiluted by the hive mentality of modern publishing. I would list a few examples, but then I'd just get a buncha comments telling me what idiots these writers are, or pointless arguments over what is, or is not, art.

Heck, I dunno. A fella can drive himself insane with these kinda thoughts, heh heh.

I disagree. There are copyediting mistakes, sure, but even an artiste can misjudge how well they've clarified a story point, get lost in pointless wandering, and create muddied characters. As a writer and especially as an editor, I've found that every time someone throws "You just don't understand my genius" arguments at me, it really means that they're either lazy writers who want to pass off bad writing as 'style', or someone with so much hubris that they think they aren't capable of making a misstep.

Before you think I'm being holier than thou, let me clarify that I have been there. I've been that head-right-up-the-arse writer who thinks their 'vision' is untouchable. I gave my first editor fits--fought every damn thing she tried to tell me. And then I grew up (and apologized profusely). EVERYONE NEEDS AN OBJECTIVE EYE TO LOOK AT THEIR WORK (if the intent is for others to read the story, and especially if the intent is to publish). EVERYONE. So you listen to your first beta readers, then maybe try out a few editors until you find the one who is simpatico with your intent and vision, but can still look at the work objectively to assure that it is readable. Because writing a book that is unreadable is just literary masturbation (yes, James Joyce, I'm giving you the side-eye- ;D).

 

[Demeter]

A good editor is essential, no doubt about it. I can spot someone else's typos quickly but when it comes to my own work, that's tricky. Typos in books drive me nuts. It's one thing to see it in a blog post but in a book...just no.

It's difficult to find an editor who would see your story like you do. I still remember the Halloween SKMB story back in October - skimom2 edited my part and she did an amazing job, changing things a bit so the narrative ran smoothly without taking anything away from the story.

Offering critique on somebody's story is also tricky - I've been on both sides and learned a lot, most importantly that as a writer you have to accept everybody's opinion but in the end do what it feels right. Of course, if 10 people tell you to change something you wouldn't have thought to change, well...maybe they're on to something.
Another thing is to accept that not everybody will like what you write - at least not as much as you do. A new writer once asked me why I gave his book only 3 stars out of 5 (3 meaning I liked it). It felt a bit strange to try and justify my rating, but then this is yet another experience to learn from. I'm glad I get to learn now, before I send my book out there and not after.

 

[Demeter]

I love what Bukowski said about writing (I just did a copy&paste):

Spoiler: Bukowski quote

if it doesn’t come bursting out of you
in spite of everything,
don’t do it.
unless it comes unasked out of your
heart and your mind and your mouth
and your gut,
don’t do it.
if you have to sit for hours
staring at your computer screen
or hunched over your
typewriter
searching for words,
don’t do it.
if you’re doing it for money or
fame,
don’t do it.
if you’re doing it because you want
women in your bed,
don’t do it.
if you have to sit there and
rewrite it again and again,
don’t do it.
if it’s hard work just thinking about doing it,
don’t do it.
if you’re trying to write like somebody
else,
forget about it.


if you have to wait for it to roar out of
you,
then wait patiently.
if it never does roar out of you,
do something else.

if you first have to read it to your wife
or your girlfriend or your boyfriend
or your parents or to anybody at all,
you’re not ready.

don’t be like so many writers,
don’t be like so many thousands of
people who call themselves writers,
don’t be dull and boring and
pretentious, don’t be consumed with self-
love.
the libraries of the world have
yawned themselves to
sleep
over your kind.
don’t add to that.
don’t do it.
unless it comes out of
your soul like a rocket,
unless being still would
drive you to madness or
suicide or murder,
don’t do it.
unless the sun inside you is
burning your gut,
don’t do it.

when it is truly time,
and if you have been chosen,
it will do it by
itself and it will keep on doing it
until you die or it dies in you.

there is no other way.

and there never was.

 

[Christine62]

Sometimes it doesn't come "roaring out of you" though. Like after my heart surgery I had nothing. Mr. King said for a long time after his accident, it just wasn't there and the wheels were not spinning but he slogged through, slogged through like bicycling through mud and honey.

I think like David Mamet said in Glen Gary Glen Ross Salesman always have to be selling--writers ALWAYS HAVE TO BE WRITING (and reading) whether it feels good bad or ugly, otherwise how is a writer to learn? Can we learn just as much from our bad writing as our good? Oh and by the way I am looking for an editor...so anyone knows of a good one...

 

[muskrat]

I disagree. There are copyediting mistakes, sure, but even an artiste can misjudge how well they've clarified a story point, get lost in pointless wandering, and create muddied characters. As a writer and especially as an editor, I've found that every time someone throws "You just don't understand my genius" arguments at me, it really means that they're either lazy writers who want to pass off bad writing as 'style', or someone with so much hubris that they think they aren't capable of making a misstep.

Before you think I'm being holier than thou, let me clarify that I have been there. I've been that head-right-up-the-arse writer who thinks their 'vision' is untouchable. I gave my first editor fits--fought every damn thing she tried to tell me. And then I grew up (and apologized profusely). EVERYONE NEEDS AN OBJECTIVE EYE TO LOOK AT THEIR WORK (if the intent is for others to read the story, and especially if the intent is to publish). EVERYONE. So you listen to your first beta readers, then maybe try out a few editors until you find the one who is simpatico with your intent and vision, but can still look at the work objectively to assure that it is readable. Because writing a book that is unreadable is just literary masturbation (yes, James Joyce, I'm giving you the side-eye- ;D).

And yet, Joyce has his following. Plenty of cats out there dig his brand of 'literary discharge' (if it do ya). Just because you don't happen to like it doesn't mean a hill o' beans, schweetheart. *wink, heh heh*

I'm not talking about my own stuff here. Hell, I'd love to have a good editor look at my stuff. A 'good' editor, that is. But when they start talking about market trends, sales figures, the 'fiscal' benefits of cutting an 800 page epic down to a 250 page hiccup, or the altering of a work to better suit it for potential Hollywood sales, I sick the hounds on such corporate drones.

Guess what I'm saying is, there are 'good' editors and 'bad' ones (and YOU, madam, I'm sure, fall into the former category.)

Whew! I love these kinda heated, intelligent conversations! Food for the brain, so it is!

 

[Shoesalesman]

Story ideas are everywhere, in all things. Some days, though, I prefer to read than write. Primes the pump for when I'm ready to tickle the keyboard.

 

[skimom2]

And yet, Joyce has his following. Plenty of cats out there dig his brand of 'literary discharge' (if it do ya). Just because you don't happen to like it doesn't mean a hill o' beans, schweetheart. *wink, heh heh*

I'm not talking about my own stuff here. Hell, I'd love to have a good editor look at my stuff. A 'good' editor, that is. But when they start talking about market trends, sales figures, the 'fiscal' benefits of cutting an 800 page epic down to a 250 page hiccup, or the altering of a work to better suit it for potential Hollywood sales, I sick the hounds on such corporate drones.

Guess what I'm saying is, there are 'good' editors and 'bad' ones (and YOU, madam, I'm sure, fall into the former category.)

Whew! I love these kinda heated, intelligent conversations! Food for the brain, so it is!

I was thinking about Finnegan's Wake--there are others of his that I admire

There are surely good and bad editors, no doubt. When you talk about cutting for publishing, however, it's a fact of publishing life (whether the editor is good or bad). There are general guidelines for word counts for different genres, and very few people are first published outside of those guidelines (celebrities and progeny/proteges of established writers excepted). You can self-pub whatever you like, of course, but publishing houses are and always have been out to make money. In the past, there was a slim likelihood that one MIGHT take a chance on an epic from an untried writer, but it's extremely rare now, as profit margins for the houses are slim. It's more likely in the YA market, and for series books.

I know the business part is boring, but it's best to understand how that all works before you get into bed with a publisher.

 

[muskrat]

I was thinking about Finnegan's Wake--there are others of his that I admire

There are surely good and bad editors, no doubt. When you talk about cutting for publishing, however, it's a fact of publishing life (whether the editor is good or bad). There are general guidelines for word counts for different genres, and very few people are first published outside of those guidelines (celebrities and progeny/proteges of established writers excepted). You can self-pub whatever you like, of course, but publishing houses are and always have been out to make money. In the past, there was a slim likelihood that one MIGHT take a chance on an epic from an untried writer, but it's extremely rare now, as profit margins for the houses are slim. It's more likely in the YA market, and for series books.

I know the business part is boring, but it's best to understand how that all works before you get into bed with a publisher.

Oh, I understand all that. Don't mean I gotta like it, though.

Personally, I've never given much a damn if I ever get published or not. Never do it for the money, or fame, or whatever. Do it because I'm compelled. Can't not do it.

Huurrmmmnnn...starting to sound like Rorschach.

 

[skimom2]

Oh, I understand all that. Don't mean I gotta like it, though.

Personally, I've never given much a damn if I ever get published or not. Never do it for the money, or fame, or whatever. Do it because I'm compelled. Can't not do it.

Huurrmmmnnn...starting to sound like Rorschach.

I get that. And that's what I meant when I told chief in the other thread to consider whether publishing is what he wanted to do. It's not for everyone, that's for sure.

My first book was, when finished, about 256K words. The genre in which it was published tops put at about 100K. I went with a small publisher who was willing to take a risk, but still had to cut it to 175K. So I essentially cut more than a third of the book, and that **** me to no end at first. BUT...I can look at it now and recognize that it's a stronger story for having been cut. I tend toward the Dickensian in first drafts, and I had no idea how to re-draft at that time--I'd only written for myself at that point. That particular book was written for fun to share with a group of friends, actually, so it didn't really matter that I'd wandered down some side roads. One friend passed it on to someone who worked for my eventual publisher, and they wanted it for their brand. Extremely unusual, but nice, as I didn't have to shop it around I got a good editor who put up with my crap and eventually helped me cobble together something printable, but if I'd listened to her the first time the finished book would have been stronger. Fact of life.

And if you do it for the money, you're a chump. I read something recently in a trade publication that said that the average published writer last year made around $11K. Keep in mind, that's averaging with powerhouses like Mr. King, so that means a great number of writers aren't making jack after earning out advances. Crazy ****ing world.

 

[Grandpa]

I would love to use a professional editor.

I don't believe people should work for me for free, and I'm already a hypocrite by using beta readers, two of whom actually are real proofreaders, so I'm certainly not going to ask for favors from editors. That leaves spending money, and hiring an editor for my stories is like hiring an photo editor to Photoshop my pictures - it might be the smart thing to do to go professional, but it's just not high enough on my priorities list.

For my first three short titles, I had them proofed and beta-reviewed and then read it again before self-publishing on Kindle Direct. Again, I'm a hypocrite because my Number One Fan is good with Photoshop and wanted to do the covers, and she did great work. My total expenditure: About 20 bucks for stock photos, because I don't steal intellectual property. I've made more than that on the e-book sales. I think.

I've learned that it's entirely possible for e-book publishing to be your career. But you have to take it on as a pretty full-time job, and I already have one of those. So for my Big Story (forget my nifty Less Big Story for now), I'm shopping it to agents. Well, whether your book is platinum or poo, that's about a 1 in 1,000 shot. I'll give it my best try, I really will, but assuming those all come back with form-letter raspberries, I might look into a small publisher. Or maybe talk to Number One Fan about more e-book covers.

 

[Tery]

Grandpa, you might check Pixabay for cover images. They are free and don't need to be credited.

I'm readying the first in my word series. Will be through Kindle Direct, too. Thank goodness for that!

 

[Kurben]

i like to write but i'm terrible weird when it comes to try to get some of it published. that was never the reason it got written. I have several stories that i have never tried to get publish. not because i think they are bad but because it feels strange strange letting pieces of yourself out there. My fave is a story taking place mostly in Crete and Egypt around 1400 bc.

 

[muskrat]

i like to write but i'm terrible weird when it comes to try to get some of it published. that was never the reason it got written. I have several stories that i have never tried to get publish. not because i think they are bad but because it feels strange strange letting pieces of yourself out there. My fave is a story taking place mostly in Crete and Egypt around 1400 bc.

Sounds cool, Kurbdog.

I plan to go the self publishing route eventually. Thats one thing cool about these here interwebs, i wot. Though i havent a care as to fame nor fortune, i would, however, like to have folks read my junk. If fortune should come from it, fine. Fame, though...ech. I cant imagine a worse hell.

 

[Connor B]

I've been trying to build up a body of fiction writing, myself, so that when the day comes for me to allow several pairs of eyes to look over my work, I'll be prepared. The problem I have is that I'm such a perfectionist that I can't get anything done, or even express a story the way I see it in my mind. I've written two skeletons of novels; they are not drafts, but more like glorified summaries of what I wanted to accomplish. Description, dialogue, creating good characters, showing their thoughts... I have so many difficulties. I may be too hard on myself, like a lot of my friends and family members say.

I'd like to consider myself a genre writer. I have no ambitions of setting the literary world ablaze, and to be frank, I find most literary fiction to be dreadfully boring, pretentious, and downright navel-gazing. I want to scare the living daylights out of people. I want them to be glued to the edge of their seats as they flip through the pages. I want to absorb them into a mystery, or a science fiction/fantasy world. I think that genre fiction can have as much emotional resonance and intellectual depth as more high-brow literary fare.