***Excerpted from my editing class (Lesson 6: Turn Down the Volume)
Sometimes drama works. And sometimes it’s just loud.
Hyping up the drama in fiction is not the same as creating dramatic conflict or believable tension. The latter is built on successive challenges and obstacles to the character, the former on emotional flash.
Gone are the Hollywood days of a good face slap, when the heroine spits venom at her hero lover and he plants a big kiss on her afterward. Touché, amour!
Nowadays, that’s called abuse and generates restraining orders. Not that a character can’t get so riled they let fists fly.
But consider how cliché and passé such a scene has become. My theory is let the tension drive your readers to want to throw the punch for you. And only let it happen once in a book, after a long-time coming.
Too much gunplay can also numb a reader. Heroes who go around shooting everyone is too Arnold Schwarzenegger for books. In screenwriting, there’s a philosophy that says “when a scene gets boring, throw a gun in the room.” Been there, seen that.
Hollywood has numbed us to the presence of weapons, and writers often use such tricks without believable reasons or intent.
What readers will believe is the emotional buildup and tension that we’ve seen a character endure through constant struggles, receiving blow after blow in life. No person, real or fictional, can “take it” forever. Such a build-up means one thing: a blow-out.
When the character becomes the loaded weapon, then entrance of a gun (or knife, sword, poison, etc.) makes readers tense. By now, they anticipate a showdown.
While we’re on the subject of characters throwing a fit, don’t let them constantly storm off, stomp their feet, scream, hit walls or have full-fledge panic attacks (unless they have condition like clinical anxiety or PTSD).
You’re supposed to put your characters in a pressure cooker, so if they are blowing their top all the time, then the reader has nothing greater to expect. You’ve spent your wad.
Why We Love & Hate Articles
Today in my editing class I was asked why articles (a, an, the, this, that) are weak words since they are so necessary in sentence structure. Great question!
My reply was that in any given situation, you have to make the choice regarding which words are most appropriate and most powerful and best lend themselves to the effect you are trying to create in text.
The issue is that articles are vague. That's what makes them weaker than more specific words.
"A glass" could mean one of many off the shelf and is less specific than "the glass," which presumably is the one glass in a scene, maybe one that was previously identified. Likewise, "his glass" is even more specific. "Joe's glass" even better.
Of course, using "he/his" instead of saying "Joe/Joe's" all the time is also appropriate. Yet I've also seen folks overuse the pronouns. This can be a sign of lazy sentences. And it's not always about substitution, but sometimes the sentences need to be rewritten for more interest.
I had this great mentor, DeWitt H. Scott (Scotty), the head copyeditor for the SF Examiner for 20 years. He also taught at UC Berkeley. Scott taught us to be more critical of weak words , such as articles, instead of always letting them slide by and fill up the page.
We were taught in journalism not to start paragraphs with certain words, articles being high on that list. In "How to Write," Scotty gave this reasoning a funny spin: "When you begin a book, a chapter or a paragraph with 'the' or 'a', it probably will be dull -- or at least the first sentence will be."
Underscoring his point, Scotty assigned point values to words (better than my system in my previous post), so you could add up the value of all your words and see if you had a low score (too many low-value words) or a high score (lots of high-impact verbs and nouns) per page.
When I teach at the University of Washington Extension for the Editing Certificate Program, I tell students the Dick and Jane books are some of the best editing books available. They laugh. I explain: "See Dick run." Verb/noun/verb. So precise. Little else is needed to communicate.
No one's saying you should eliminate ALL articles. Heaven forbid. They are my friends, though I may invite them less readily than their verb and noun cousins.
Again, editing is about the making choices to fit the context of the situation. But better to have the critical eye than not, right?
My reply was that in any given situation, you have to make the choice regarding which words are most appropriate and most powerful and best lend themselves to the effect you are trying to create in text.
The issue is that articles are vague. That's what makes them weaker than more specific words.
"A glass" could mean one of many off the shelf and is less specific than "the glass," which presumably is the one glass in a scene, maybe one that was previously identified. Likewise, "his glass" is even more specific. "Joe's glass" even better.
Of course, using "he/his" instead of saying "Joe/Joe's" all the time is also appropriate. Yet I've also seen folks overuse the pronouns. This can be a sign of lazy sentences. And it's not always about substitution, but sometimes the sentences need to be rewritten for more interest.
I had this great mentor, DeWitt H. Scott (Scotty), the head copyeditor for the SF Examiner for 20 years. He also taught at UC Berkeley. Scott taught us to be more critical of weak words , such as articles, instead of always letting them slide by and fill up the page.
We were taught in journalism not to start paragraphs with certain words, articles being high on that list. In "How to Write," Scotty gave this reasoning a funny spin: "When you begin a book, a chapter or a paragraph with 'the' or 'a', it probably will be dull -- or at least the first sentence will be."
Underscoring his point, Scotty assigned point values to words (better than my system in my previous post), so you could add up the value of all your words and see if you had a low score (too many low-value words) or a high score (lots of high-impact verbs and nouns) per page.
When I teach at the University of Washington Extension for the Editing Certificate Program, I tell students the Dick and Jane books are some of the best editing books available. They laugh. I explain: "See Dick run." Verb/noun/verb. So precise. Little else is needed to communicate.
No one's saying you should eliminate ALL articles. Heaven forbid. They are my friends, though I may invite them less readily than their verb and noun cousins.
Again, editing is about the making choices to fit the context of the situation. But better to have the critical eye than not, right?
Enter Late, Leave Early
NOTE: Excerpted from my SENSATIONAL SCENES class, May 14-27, 2012 via Savvy Authors (reg/info at http://www.savvyauthors.com/vb/showevent.php?eventid=1375)...
Writers tend to include a lot of preamble to their stories. It’s like listening to a speaker “ahem” a lot before they start their speech, or like, “before I start my story, let me tell you about why this story is happening and why this character is so special...” Do this, and you are wasting the reader’s time. Readers will put the book down. This includes the agent and editor, who are your first readers.
Of the many techniques I learned from studying film and scriptwriting, my favorite is “enter late, leave early.” This means your scene is really just a middle slice out of a sequence of events (i.e. it does not contain all the events).
Let's consider a suspense genre book with a crime scene for an example...
Entering late means you jump into the middle of the action, leaving obvious elements, such as how people drove to the crime scene, for the reader to self-diagnose. At the other end of the scene, you leave before the characters dissolve their action/interaction and preferably on a high note, or ‘aha’ moment.
Another way to look at it is this: don’t show the hero waking up, brushing his teeth, getting dressed, locking the door, getting into his car, then driving to the murder scene, parking, spotting his partner, and asking if there’s coffee... Just let the detective be there already, in the middle of the most important dialogue about the crime scene. That is entering late (the action is already in progress).
Likewise, don’t show him getting back into his car and driving home. Just stop the dialogue when his partner points him toward the victim to be questioned. Then show the detective turning to see his wife. That is leaving early (the action will continue without us), so the reader gets a “whoa, what happens next” moment.
With the advent of Hollywood, the Internet, and multi-media sources of storytelling, readers are more sophisticated than ever. They are also more impatient. They want to jump into the middle of the mayhem. So get them there faster.
FURTHER READING / RECOMMENDATIONS
“Sol Stein on Writing” by Sol Stein.
Writers tend to include a lot of preamble to their stories. It’s like listening to a speaker “ahem” a lot before they start their speech, or like, “before I start my story, let me tell you about why this story is happening and why this character is so special...” Do this, and you are wasting the reader’s time. Readers will put the book down. This includes the agent and editor, who are your first readers.
Of the many techniques I learned from studying film and scriptwriting, my favorite is “enter late, leave early.” This means your scene is really just a middle slice out of a sequence of events (i.e. it does not contain all the events).
Let's consider a suspense genre book with a crime scene for an example...
Entering late means you jump into the middle of the action, leaving obvious elements, such as how people drove to the crime scene, for the reader to self-diagnose. At the other end of the scene, you leave before the characters dissolve their action/interaction and preferably on a high note, or ‘aha’ moment.
Another way to look at it is this: don’t show the hero waking up, brushing his teeth, getting dressed, locking the door, getting into his car, then driving to the murder scene, parking, spotting his partner, and asking if there’s coffee... Just let the detective be there already, in the middle of the most important dialogue about the crime scene. That is entering late (the action is already in progress).
Likewise, don’t show him getting back into his car and driving home. Just stop the dialogue when his partner points him toward the victim to be questioned. Then show the detective turning to see his wife. That is leaving early (the action will continue without us), so the reader gets a “whoa, what happens next” moment.
With the advent of Hollywood, the Internet, and multi-media sources of storytelling, readers are more sophisticated than ever. They are also more impatient. They want to jump into the middle of the mayhem. So get them there faster.
FURTHER READING / RECOMMENDATIONS
“Sol Stein on Writing” by Sol Stein.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell
No, that’s not exactly what we’re talking about today. We’re talking about questions in a manuscript (lines literally ending in “?”) that slow pacing. Yes, questions slow down reading.
So here's my message to writers: stop asking.
Did you already know this? (Sorry, had to do it.) Questions cause readers to stall. It’s a natural response by the brain to switch gears when we are asked a question and start searching for an answer. The computer inside your noggin translates the question then flips through relevant files, even when there isn’t really a need to answer the question. Unfortunately, this brings the story to a halt, however brief.
Many genre writers, especially romance and thriller/suspense writers I’ve been reading lately, use questions in the course of their story in 2 places: dialogue and narrative.
BETTER TO SHOW THAN ASK IN NARRATIVE
When questions are used in the narrative (even if it's internal dialogue), they can help relay the characters confusion or the necessary motivation/conflict that is driving the character and/or situation.
For example (this is made up, of course): “....his chest armor was bulletproof, so which would I go for, the blade to the throat, or a club to the head?”
Silly, I know, but useful in exemplifying where one could simply show the scene playing out without all the internal squabble. When you truly put a reader in the scene, embed them in the action and in the throes of danger, and then just show the reader their options (blade or club)...they will be asking the question for the character. That’s the difference between showing and telling.
But let’s say that we must keep this internal squabbling for clarity. Then state it, don’t ask it: “.......his chest armor was bulletproof, so only two options remained: a blade to the throat, or a club to the head.” This keeps the story moving forward.
Don’t believe that questions stop a story? Here’s another example... You’re reading a story about a young boy. He gets on his bike and rolls down the driveway, turns into a lane, and races toward a stop sign. Which way will he turn? Worse, will he stop? And did dad fix his brakes?
The minute the questions began, the bike stopped moving. Often writers believe it creates more suspense or tension, but only rarely is this effective or necessary. There are other, better ways to achieve tension. Have him daydreaming. Show another vehicle approaching the intersection. The driver spills coffee. Then we will be asking the questions for the writer. That's what you want: the reader to ask the questions, not the manuscript.
FEWER QUESTIONS IN DIALOGUE MEANS LESS PROMPTING
The other place writers shouldn’t use so many questions is in dialogue.
When characters ask each other too many questions, it sounds like the writer is using the characters to prompt for storyline. “So, Barney, how did you become purple? Well, Ed, let me explain it to you...”
New Rule: don't let the reader see the seams of your novel.
I’m reading a thriller where the detectives are asking repeated questions. The constant questions make me feel like I’m reading a job application more than a thriller. First of all, most humans don’t work this way. Secondly, I don’t get much of a sense of these characters because they sound like mindless automatons. People typically remark/comment more than they ask/question. And detectives often bait their subjects without asking direct questions. This is more interesting, more suspenseful.
And remember this: asking is weak energy, whether it’s in narrative or dialogue. So if you have an alpha character, only have them ask questions when they are revealing their weakness or vulnerability. Then a question can be wildly effective.
So hunt and destroy, dear writers. Search for every “?” in your manuscript and see if you can change it into a statement or action. It’s a challenge, but typically a productive one.
So here's my message to writers: stop asking.
Did you already know this? (Sorry, had to do it.) Questions cause readers to stall. It’s a natural response by the brain to switch gears when we are asked a question and start searching for an answer. The computer inside your noggin translates the question then flips through relevant files, even when there isn’t really a need to answer the question. Unfortunately, this brings the story to a halt, however brief.
Many genre writers, especially romance and thriller/suspense writers I’ve been reading lately, use questions in the course of their story in 2 places: dialogue and narrative.
BETTER TO SHOW THAN ASK IN NARRATIVE
When questions are used in the narrative (even if it's internal dialogue), they can help relay the characters confusion or the necessary motivation/conflict that is driving the character and/or situation.
For example (this is made up, of course): “....his chest armor was bulletproof, so which would I go for, the blade to the throat, or a club to the head?”
Silly, I know, but useful in exemplifying where one could simply show the scene playing out without all the internal squabble. When you truly put a reader in the scene, embed them in the action and in the throes of danger, and then just show the reader their options (blade or club)...they will be asking the question for the character. That’s the difference between showing and telling.
But let’s say that we must keep this internal squabbling for clarity. Then state it, don’t ask it: “.......his chest armor was bulletproof, so only two options remained: a blade to the throat, or a club to the head.” This keeps the story moving forward.
Don’t believe that questions stop a story? Here’s another example... You’re reading a story about a young boy. He gets on his bike and rolls down the driveway, turns into a lane, and races toward a stop sign. Which way will he turn? Worse, will he stop? And did dad fix his brakes?
The minute the questions began, the bike stopped moving. Often writers believe it creates more suspense or tension, but only rarely is this effective or necessary. There are other, better ways to achieve tension. Have him daydreaming. Show another vehicle approaching the intersection. The driver spills coffee. Then we will be asking the questions for the writer. That's what you want: the reader to ask the questions, not the manuscript.
FEWER QUESTIONS IN DIALOGUE MEANS LESS PROMPTING
The other place writers shouldn’t use so many questions is in dialogue.
When characters ask each other too many questions, it sounds like the writer is using the characters to prompt for storyline. “So, Barney, how did you become purple? Well, Ed, let me explain it to you...”
New Rule: don't let the reader see the seams of your novel.
I’m reading a thriller where the detectives are asking repeated questions. The constant questions make me feel like I’m reading a job application more than a thriller. First of all, most humans don’t work this way. Secondly, I don’t get much of a sense of these characters because they sound like mindless automatons. People typically remark/comment more than they ask/question. And detectives often bait their subjects without asking direct questions. This is more interesting, more suspenseful.
And remember this: asking is weak energy, whether it’s in narrative or dialogue. So if you have an alpha character, only have them ask questions when they are revealing their weakness or vulnerability. Then a question can be wildly effective.
So hunt and destroy, dear writers. Search for every “?” in your manuscript and see if you can change it into a statement or action. It’s a challenge, but typically a productive one.
Killing Writers Block Before It Kills You
My cousin, Nikolus, who’s in Scotland earning a Masters in poetry, asked me what technique I used for overcoming writers block. “Which type?” I replied.
Since there’s no ONE cause, there’s no ONE answer. As I told Nikie (he'll always be little Nickie to me), I need to know the cause to know the cure. Here are the top 3 types I’ve coached clients on overcoming...see if they sound familiar.
1. CAUSE: Burn Out. You’re exhausted by either working too many hours, straining over a creative project too long, stress in your personal life or just tired of life in general. Thus, your brain has shut down all auxiliary functions beyond survival: no creativity allowed!
CURE: Rest, Rejuvenation and Invisibility. How to achieve this varies per individual, your preferences, your time. Your wallet! Sleep is number one for healing. Spending time being still with nature is another. You have my permission to have NO AGENDA. None. Say no to friends, to appointments, to taking on more responsibilities. Try this for one week. Learn to be invisible to anyone non-critical who wants your time and energy. Save it for yourself.
2. CAUSE: Creative Stewing. You’ve decided on a project or a direction, and now the creative parts of your brain are mulling over the possibilities. This happens periodically during a creative project, as we cycle through chunks of creative inspiration. It often occurs during editing, when you’re trying to assess root problems and best solutions. You can’t *yet see the answers, because your brain hasn’t *yet discovered them.
CURE: Step Away from the Knife. No more slicing and dicing. Your creativity has become a dangerous weapon and you could do harm (to yourself, the work, and maybe to others getting in your way). Better to walk away from the project altogether. Distract yourself with other creative (like music or movies), physical (like gardening or exercising), or mental (like reading a science book) ventures. By expanding your awareness and experience in other areas, you will unconsciously expand your creative ingredients.
3. CAUSE: Creative Paralysis. You’ve worked a piece to death. You have energy and drive and ambition, but absolutely no idea what to do. Stumped, dumfounded, stuck, lost... are common terms to describe how you feel.
CURE: Walk Out. Get up, turn off the computer, or set aside the pen/pencil, and aim for the door. Apply the cure for Creative Stewing. At the same, seek outside input, such as colleagues, critiques, friends. Children. Yes, you heard me. Ever hear that expression “out of the mouths of babes?” Well, kids have unique perspectives and creative impulses that adults have beaten out of themselves while growing up. Animals and nature are also good for shifting your brain back into a creative gear. My favorite prescription for this one: go to the ocean. Water is both healing and relaxing, and it has a way of flooding the energy of the universe into your soul with each wave.
And here's my bonus type of writers block....
4. CAUSE: Not Knowing What to Write.
CURE: Take my writing class. Yes, shameless promotion. So flog me.
Since there’s no ONE cause, there’s no ONE answer. As I told Nikie (he'll always be little Nickie to me), I need to know the cause to know the cure. Here are the top 3 types I’ve coached clients on overcoming...see if they sound familiar.
1. CAUSE: Burn Out. You’re exhausted by either working too many hours, straining over a creative project too long, stress in your personal life or just tired of life in general. Thus, your brain has shut down all auxiliary functions beyond survival: no creativity allowed!
CURE: Rest, Rejuvenation and Invisibility. How to achieve this varies per individual, your preferences, your time. Your wallet! Sleep is number one for healing. Spending time being still with nature is another. You have my permission to have NO AGENDA. None. Say no to friends, to appointments, to taking on more responsibilities. Try this for one week. Learn to be invisible to anyone non-critical who wants your time and energy. Save it for yourself.
2. CAUSE: Creative Stewing. You’ve decided on a project or a direction, and now the creative parts of your brain are mulling over the possibilities. This happens periodically during a creative project, as we cycle through chunks of creative inspiration. It often occurs during editing, when you’re trying to assess root problems and best solutions. You can’t *yet see the answers, because your brain hasn’t *yet discovered them.
CURE: Step Away from the Knife. No more slicing and dicing. Your creativity has become a dangerous weapon and you could do harm (to yourself, the work, and maybe to others getting in your way). Better to walk away from the project altogether. Distract yourself with other creative (like music or movies), physical (like gardening or exercising), or mental (like reading a science book) ventures. By expanding your awareness and experience in other areas, you will unconsciously expand your creative ingredients.
3. CAUSE: Creative Paralysis. You’ve worked a piece to death. You have energy and drive and ambition, but absolutely no idea what to do. Stumped, dumfounded, stuck, lost... are common terms to describe how you feel.
CURE: Walk Out. Get up, turn off the computer, or set aside the pen/pencil, and aim for the door. Apply the cure for Creative Stewing. At the same, seek outside input, such as colleagues, critiques, friends. Children. Yes, you heard me. Ever hear that expression “out of the mouths of babes?” Well, kids have unique perspectives and creative impulses that adults have beaten out of themselves while growing up. Animals and nature are also good for shifting your brain back into a creative gear. My favorite prescription for this one: go to the ocean. Water is both healing and relaxing, and it has a way of flooding the energy of the universe into your soul with each wave.
And here's my bonus type of writers block....
4. CAUSE: Not Knowing What to Write.
CURE: Take my writing class. Yes, shameless promotion. So flog me.
Illegal Stacking Ahead
Writers, stop stacking!!
You know what I’m talking about – those long strings of useless words that bring readers to a halt. It’s like a ten-car pile-up of Minis on the freeway, when you could use a semi-truck verb or noun to push through the sentence.
Need an example?
“Quickly, she took it from him, so it ripped.”
Yes, the adverb and verb choices are icky, and the sentence is stunted by commas during an action moment. Editors call this lazy writing (if not untalented).
But I’m pointing to another culprit that editors and writers often miss: the stacking: “...it from him, so it...” Not only does stacking tell me it’s not a mature piece, it makes me grind my teeth.
Consider this rewrite: “Trish snatched the envelope from Joe, ripping it.” You could even replace “it” with “the linen,” depending on the surrounding material. Or add more details for greater involvement and intensity: “Trish snatched the envelope from Joe, ripping the white linen to expose a black .9mm Glock.”
Here’s an especially heinous one:
“She went away more often than she needed to, so she would not be there if he came.”
Arrggh! That’s not writing. That’s talking. Don’t write the way you speak, unless of course you are writing dialogue that MUST be colloquial sounding. (Even then I caution you to tighten sentences and use dialogue space carefully.)
Still don’t see it? Look at the sentence written this way: “Pronoun / Weak Verb / Preposition / Adverb / Conjunction / Pronoun / Weak Verb / Preposition / Conjunction / Pronoun / Weak Verb (would not be) / Article / Conjunction / Pronoun / Weak Verb.”
Considering the lack of solid verbs or nouns, I wouldn’t even count this as a sentence. Just another stack of cardboard boxes ready to tilt and fall.
Still don’t understand?
Let’s backtrack. Despite being a democratic nation, we are classist in our language. There are high-value and low-value words. Below is a point-value system for words. Consider using this when you analyze your sentences / writing, so you can add up the numbers and let math tell you where to focus your editing efforts. Higher point sentences will more likely be packed with action and details (and hopefully still make sense and have good flow and pacing).
Verbs = 10
Proper Nouns (name of person or place) = 9
Regular nouns (ball, toothbrush) = 8
Weak Verbs (To Be / Will / Come / Go / May / Might / Could / Should) = 7
Pronouns = 6
Adverbs = 5
Adjectives = 4
Articles = 3
Conjunctions = 2
Prepositions = 1
The reason Verbs get the highest score is that the mind reads them easier and faster. It’s primal. “Run” makes our mind envision running (especially when there's a bear growling). Nouns are next. "Fire" makes us want to run, because we envision getting our "Victoria Secrets" burned off. Proper nouns, even better: “Joe” evokes more personality than “that guy” and, if the writer has written the character well, triggers an emotional response (positive for protagonists and negative for antagonists).
My point is this: when editing your work, look for strings of Articles, Prepositions, Conjunctions, and Pronouns. Search for the ones you use most and notice how often you string them together or add them to a weak verb, such as the "to be" verb variations (was/were/is/are). Three or more indicates editing is necessary. Don't stop using these words altogether, just minimize their appearances and groupings. They have their place, but not at top billing.
My trespasses in this area vary per manuscript, but for romantic suspense I search for my most likely culprits: so, and, but, toward, back, up, down, in, out, if, then, than. When I’m writing historical, I tend toward these: but, rather, very, toward, un/likely, certainly, awfully, backwards, upwards, downwards, alike, besides, fore, aft.
You can do a separate search for weak verbs: is, are, were, will, may, might, could, should, would....etc. and see how you combine these with weak words. Such as "It's not as if he were there." Ick.
For those who like a challenge, try rewriting that heinous sentence above, or just share with us the words you commonly use that get you all stacked up with no place to go...Otherwise, go forth and edit!
You know what I’m talking about – those long strings of useless words that bring readers to a halt. It’s like a ten-car pile-up of Minis on the freeway, when you could use a semi-truck verb or noun to push through the sentence.
Need an example?
“Quickly, she took it from him, so it ripped.”
Yes, the adverb and verb choices are icky, and the sentence is stunted by commas during an action moment. Editors call this lazy writing (if not untalented).
But I’m pointing to another culprit that editors and writers often miss: the stacking: “...it from him, so it...” Not only does stacking tell me it’s not a mature piece, it makes me grind my teeth.
Consider this rewrite: “Trish snatched the envelope from Joe, ripping it.” You could even replace “it” with “the linen,” depending on the surrounding material. Or add more details for greater involvement and intensity: “Trish snatched the envelope from Joe, ripping the white linen to expose a black .9mm Glock.”
Here’s an especially heinous one:
“She went away more often than she needed to, so she would not be there if he came.”
Arrggh! That’s not writing. That’s talking. Don’t write the way you speak, unless of course you are writing dialogue that MUST be colloquial sounding. (Even then I caution you to tighten sentences and use dialogue space carefully.)
Still don’t see it? Look at the sentence written this way: “Pronoun / Weak Verb / Preposition / Adverb / Conjunction / Pronoun / Weak Verb / Preposition / Conjunction / Pronoun / Weak Verb (would not be) / Article / Conjunction / Pronoun / Weak Verb.”
Considering the lack of solid verbs or nouns, I wouldn’t even count this as a sentence. Just another stack of cardboard boxes ready to tilt and fall.
Still don’t understand?
Let’s backtrack. Despite being a democratic nation, we are classist in our language. There are high-value and low-value words. Below is a point-value system for words. Consider using this when you analyze your sentences / writing, so you can add up the numbers and let math tell you where to focus your editing efforts. Higher point sentences will more likely be packed with action and details (and hopefully still make sense and have good flow and pacing).
Verbs = 10
Proper Nouns (name of person or place) = 9
Regular nouns (ball, toothbrush) = 8
Weak Verbs (To Be / Will / Come / Go / May / Might / Could / Should) = 7
Pronouns = 6
Adverbs = 5
Adjectives = 4
Articles = 3
Conjunctions = 2
Prepositions = 1
The reason Verbs get the highest score is that the mind reads them easier and faster. It’s primal. “Run” makes our mind envision running (especially when there's a bear growling). Nouns are next. "Fire" makes us want to run, because we envision getting our "Victoria Secrets" burned off. Proper nouns, even better: “Joe” evokes more personality than “that guy” and, if the writer has written the character well, triggers an emotional response (positive for protagonists and negative for antagonists).
My point is this: when editing your work, look for strings of Articles, Prepositions, Conjunctions, and Pronouns. Search for the ones you use most and notice how often you string them together or add them to a weak verb, such as the "to be" verb variations (was/were/is/are). Three or more indicates editing is necessary. Don't stop using these words altogether, just minimize their appearances and groupings. They have their place, but not at top billing.
My trespasses in this area vary per manuscript, but for romantic suspense I search for my most likely culprits: so, and, but, toward, back, up, down, in, out, if, then, than. When I’m writing historical, I tend toward these: but, rather, very, toward, un/likely, certainly, awfully, backwards, upwards, downwards, alike, besides, fore, aft.
You can do a separate search for weak verbs: is, are, were, will, may, might, could, should, would....etc. and see how you combine these with weak words. Such as "It's not as if he were there." Ick.
For those who like a challenge, try rewriting that heinous sentence above, or just share with us the words you commonly use that get you all stacked up with no place to go...Otherwise, go forth and edit!
Creating characters who are "real characters"
One of the things that authors love about writing fiction is that it's all made up. We can create really crazy people doing wacky things.
Yet recently I realized some of my characters are more sedate on the page than the "characters" I know in real life. Time to 'up the anty' on my fictional characters, I said to myself.
In fact, when I teach students about Character Development, I ask them to imagine their character from the inside out. Not just how the character looks and dresses and walks, but how they act in any given situation. How smart are they? Yet what are they stupid about? How blind they are to their own flaws? Or how aware and trying to hide them? What are their ticks and tells? When do they show off versus stay quiet.
From now on I'll also ask: what's the craziest thing your hero or heroine has ever done?
Go ahead and ask this question of your characters.
No, not just between the pages of the manuscript when the character's under pressure, but on a normal day. Maybe in the character's past, like when they were in college (we all did wacky things then, right?). Maybe in public or at a family get together. Maybe when they were alone and thought nobody was looking.
Then feel free to post your answers so we can all enjoy the "real characters" you're writing!
Yet recently I realized some of my characters are more sedate on the page than the "characters" I know in real life. Time to 'up the anty' on my fictional characters, I said to myself.
In fact, when I teach students about Character Development, I ask them to imagine their character from the inside out. Not just how the character looks and dresses and walks, but how they act in any given situation. How smart are they? Yet what are they stupid about? How blind they are to their own flaws? Or how aware and trying to hide them? What are their ticks and tells? When do they show off versus stay quiet.
From now on I'll also ask: what's the craziest thing your hero or heroine has ever done?
Go ahead and ask this question of your characters.
No, not just between the pages of the manuscript when the character's under pressure, but on a normal day. Maybe in the character's past, like when they were in college (we all did wacky things then, right?). Maybe in public or at a family get together. Maybe when they were alone and thought nobody was looking.
Then feel free to post your answers so we can all enjoy the "real characters" you're writing!
Re-inventing yourself
Rebooting your career after a long absence is no easy task. The word "depressing" comes to mind.
Two years ago, my 63-year-old mother-in-law moved in with us. We were one year into our marriage. She'd lost everthing: her home, her job, her memory of what she did with all her money or what city she lived in now. She was so skinny, so palid, she looked deathly ill.
Working from home as a freelance writer/editor (my business of ten years) allowed me to watch out for her as we pursued a diagnosis: stroke-based dementia from drug and alcohol abuse. She'd quit drinking, so we got her to quit smoking, too. Still, I couldn't stop resenting that she'd "given" herself an illness that now made my peaceful home into a hell-zone -- an awful perspective I never thought myself capable of, but I've come to discover it's common among caretakers.
By January 2009 it became impossible for me to work and deal with her weekly emotional outbursts of sobbing and yelling, or the biweekly visits to the emergency room for falls and urinary tract infections and pneumonia episodes. My panic attacks woke me from sleep. My heart raced for days on end. I stopped seeing friends, stopped gardening, stopped cooking for fun, stopped feeling anything but dread of her and my own home.
Eventually, the strain on our marriage became unbearable. After 8 years of living together, we were suddenly fighting over dishes, shoes not in the "shoe room", who got to decide the tv show we watched, and why we weren't sleeping in the same room. Something had to give.
To my business I waved bye-bye.
Now my MIL lives in one of the best assisted-care facilities in town and on a government program that will take care of her for the rest of her life. She's happy, well cared for, at peace with her conidition. We're finally free. Sort of.
We're not the same people we were before. We have to rediscover happiness, reninvent ourselves. But I'm rebooting my career in an economy that doesn't play by the old rules. 100 applicants for a tech-editing job I don't even want? No thanks. I can't go backwards.
This time I'm going to get it right because life is short. I'm going to do exactly what I want to do.
So I've polished one of my novels and sent it to an agent. And I'm teaching writing and editing courses monthly. And I'm blogging about misadventures in writing and editing so others can leverage my experience to advance their own careers.
I've never been happier with my career outlook.
And today, when I visit my mother-in-law and give her the $62.50 the government says she's allowed per month, and *again* explain why she can't have more money, I'll be feeling grateful. Grateful that she tore me away from work that numbed me, and grateful that now I can pursue my true calling(s).
That's one Happily Ever After I didn't expect.
Two years ago, my 63-year-old mother-in-law moved in with us. We were one year into our marriage. She'd lost everthing: her home, her job, her memory of what she did with all her money or what city she lived in now. She was so skinny, so palid, she looked deathly ill.
Working from home as a freelance writer/editor (my business of ten years) allowed me to watch out for her as we pursued a diagnosis: stroke-based dementia from drug and alcohol abuse. She'd quit drinking, so we got her to quit smoking, too. Still, I couldn't stop resenting that she'd "given" herself an illness that now made my peaceful home into a hell-zone -- an awful perspective I never thought myself capable of, but I've come to discover it's common among caretakers.
By January 2009 it became impossible for me to work and deal with her weekly emotional outbursts of sobbing and yelling, or the biweekly visits to the emergency room for falls and urinary tract infections and pneumonia episodes. My panic attacks woke me from sleep. My heart raced for days on end. I stopped seeing friends, stopped gardening, stopped cooking for fun, stopped feeling anything but dread of her and my own home.
Eventually, the strain on our marriage became unbearable. After 8 years of living together, we were suddenly fighting over dishes, shoes not in the "shoe room", who got to decide the tv show we watched, and why we weren't sleeping in the same room. Something had to give.
To my business I waved bye-bye.
Now my MIL lives in one of the best assisted-care facilities in town and on a government program that will take care of her for the rest of her life. She's happy, well cared for, at peace with her conidition. We're finally free. Sort of.
We're not the same people we were before. We have to rediscover happiness, reninvent ourselves. But I'm rebooting my career in an economy that doesn't play by the old rules. 100 applicants for a tech-editing job I don't even want? No thanks. I can't go backwards.
This time I'm going to get it right because life is short. I'm going to do exactly what I want to do.
So I've polished one of my novels and sent it to an agent. And I'm teaching writing and editing courses monthly. And I'm blogging about misadventures in writing and editing so others can leverage my experience to advance their own careers.
I've never been happier with my career outlook.
And today, when I visit my mother-in-law and give her the $62.50 the government says she's allowed per month, and *again* explain why she can't have more money, I'll be feeling grateful. Grateful that she tore me away from work that numbed me, and grateful that now I can pursue my true calling(s).
That's one Happily Ever After I didn't expect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)