Alchemy Ink

Why is shifting point of view (POV) problematic?

/ Melanie Marttila / 2 Comments

For the second time in as many weeks, a writer friend has suggested a post to me. This time, it was about POV. In a short story I recently critiqued, the POV (third person, past tense) shifted from a mother to her daughter. I recommended either sticking with one POV, or marking the change with more than just textual cues.

My writer friend indicated that she had a film background and asked if the omniscient POV wouldn’t allow her to shift her focus between characters in a scene.

What follows is my response.

A wee caveat: this is based on my own craft learning to date. I’m happy to lay the burden of expertise at the feet of others 🙂

 

First, you should check out CS Lakin’s blog: LiveWriteThrive

You may have to go fairly far back in her archives, but she did a series on writing based on film techniques last year. She turned this into a book, Shoot your novel, which you can find on Amazon.

This might appeal to your filmic aesthetic.

Now, having said that, film techniques aren’t the same as POV in writing. Parallels can be drawn, but really, they’re two different things.

POV in writing is about who’s telling the story. Whomever the story belongs to is generally the POV you use.

Why is a shifting POV problematic?
I’ll let you do a little research on this yourself. So many people have written about it. It’s called “head hopping.”

Here’s a starter from our friend Google: https://www.google.com/search?q=head+hopping&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

My recommendations? The Write Practice, Marcy Kennedy (she’s Canadian), the Editor’s Blog (Head-Hopping Gives Readers Whiplash), and The Write Editor (The Difference Between Omniscient POV and Head Hopping). Jami Gold and WriterUnboxed are awesome too.

Go ahead. Check them out. I’ll wait while you scan a few of the articles 🙂

In a visual medium, the POV is omniscient, or at most limited third simulated by a voice over. You can’t really “show” the inner thoughts and feelings of a character on screen. So in film, the POV is the camera’s and by extension, the director, producer, and/or editor may have a hand in influencing the final product.

There is such a thing as an omniscient POV in writing, and it used to be used, but it’s not really popular anymore. Further, it’s hard to do well.

In cinematic terms, omniscient translates to the page as a wide shot, interspersed with close ups on various characters, but it’s all external observation. Visually, you have the zoom or cut to give you a clue as to which character or characters are the focus of the scene.

In writing, you have to do something that simulates the zoom to cue the reader that the focus of the scene is now changing. Otherwise, you could end up confusing your reader (who’s talking now? why do I have to hear from this character? why is this important to the scene/story?).

Readers have changed over the last century. This is primarily due to movies and television (where a complete story is told in 30 minutes, an hour, or two hours), video games (complete action smorgasbord), and the internet (e.g. Twitter: describe your day in 140 characters anyone?). Flash fiction and micro fiction now have journals devoted to them. Books have been written in Tweets.

Readers like shorter forms of fiction because they can read a complete story in a limited period of time (think CommuterLit.com).

If the story isn’t short, then the author must continually hook the reader and keep them interested in the story. Part of this is engaging the reader in the story (what’s at stake?) and the character (why should I care?).

Omniscient POV requires readers to pay attention and do a little more work than they might otherwise be inclined to do. It’s not personal. You don’t stick with any one character long enough for the reader to become invested in that character and you’re observing like a camera, never delving into a character’s thoughts or feelings.

A limited third POV focuses intimately on one character: She ran to his side and thought, Is he dead? Oh, please, no.

Some writers, for example George R. R. Martin in Game of Thrones, shift between characters in the limited third POV, but you will find, generally, that an entire chapter will be from one character’s POV.

If an author changes POV characters in the middle of a chapter, the POV will change when the scene changes (therefore one POV per scene) and there will often be a visual cue such as an extra line between the paragraphs, or a symbol like # or * set off in the middle of its own line. Barbara Kyle, Canadian author of historical thrillers set in the Tudor era, uses this latter technique.

A lot of young adult fiction uses first person POV (I, me, my) because it sinks the reader immediately into the thoughts and feelings of the character. This can either cement the relationship (he’s just like me!) or alienate the reader (why won’t he stop whining?). Most first person narratives stick with one character through the entire story.

Then you have the experimental authors who will mix third and first person POVs. Deborah Harkness does this in A Discovery of Witches. Diana Gabaldon did it first, however, in her Outlander series. The protagonist is written in first person and all other POV characters are written in third.

Hardly anyone can write well in the second person POV (you look in the closet and find a boy huddling in the corner). It has been done, but it requires a deft hand and mind. If any form is going to use second person POV, it’s likely a short, flash, or micro fiction story.

This gets even more complicated when you add tenses to your POV. Past and present are the usual choices. I can’t think of a novel written in the future tense in any POV. Again shorter forms may take the pressure of future tense but it feels awkward to read no matter what.

For short fiction, I’d recommend figuring out whose story you’re telling and sticking with that character throughout. If you lose the reader, they’ll put your story down.

If that reader is an editor or a contest judge, your chances of publication may be shot.

I’m just saying 🙂

 

Was this post helpful to anyone else? Please let me know in the comments. Also, as I mentioned last week, if you have any burning writing questions, I’ll be happy to do my best to answer them. Or refer you to the experts who answer them better than I ever could 😀

And that’s a wrap for this weekend!

Muse-inks

Thoughty Thursday: Things that made me go hmmmm on the interwebz, Jan 4-10, 2015

/ Melanie Marttila

Another small package of good things for you.

The haunting world of 19th century asylums. Abandoned places are so inspirational. Brainpickings.

A couple purchased an abandoned 1700s French chateau and took pictures of what they found. Wimp.com

Do the spiral and cup carvings have something to do with astrology? Irish Central.

Check out these pictures of the 2015 ice and snow festival in Harbin, China. The Atlantic.

Scientific American delves into the reasons why we’re so intrigued by zombies.

After years of podcasting, Neil deGrasse Tyson is getting his own late night talk show. (YAY!) The Verge.

CNN presents a cool kind of horse racing.

A picture of another winter horse race shared by a friend. Panoramio.

When I was a kid, this was entertainment:

 

The Thin White Dude has always been a fashion icon. Esquire.

Get thoughty with it!

See you on the weekend 🙂

Thoughty Thursday

Tipsday: Writerly Goodness found on the interwebz, Jan 4-10, 2015

/ Melanie Marttila

Good things come in little packages?

Publishers Weekly: The print book is making a comeback.

Why the self-published ebook is no longer the new query. Anne R. Allen.

K.M. Weiland’s most common writing mistakes series, part 37: Unnecessary filler.

In Katie’s Wednesday vlog, she talks about the one rule about backstory that matters.

Roz Morris and Peter Snell co-host “So you want to be a writer?” on Surrey Hills Radio. Listen to them all!

Canadian authors share their New Year’s resolutions. Canada Writes – CBC.

The 50 most anticipated books of the first half of 2015. The Globe and Mail.

David Bowie answers the Proust Questionnaire. Brainpickings.

Access Hollywood asks Sam Heughan and Catriona Balfe about the second half of Outlander, season one.

Check out these cool maps of fictional places from BookRiot.

Can we answer my first question, “yes”?

See you on Thoughty Thursday!

Tipsday

Passive voice avoidance strategies

/ Melanie Marttila / 4 Comments

A friend asked me if I had any posts about passive voice. Realizing that I didn’t, I answered her question and then put the post on my task list.

Interestingly enough, a day later, I was reading Victoria Mixon’s The Art & Craft of Fiction (yes, I read the second one first—sue me, or rather, don’t) and she wrote about the very topic 🙂

Before we get going, I just want to say that I meant to have this post up yesterday, but life intervened. A visit from some friends from out of town necessitated the cleaning of the house and shovelling of the drive. A sick mother required groceries. Not wanting to cook after cleaning, Phil and I went out to supper. And so the day disappeared. I got most of the post written yesterday, but not all of it.

Today, I need to get this post up, compile my curation posts for the week, and then I have to work some on the course I’m going to be facilitating at the beginning of February, return to revising IoS, and write a few more words in Marushka.

Nothing like having ambitious plans for what should be a day of rest 😉

Let’s start with passive sentence structure

Think of a relatively simple sentence.

The dog licked my ice cream.

Most likely, you thought of a sentence with a straightforward structure, as I did: Subject (noun) and predicate (verb and possibly object, or receiver of the action depicted by the verb).

Here is the same sentence written with a passive structure:

My ice cream was licked by the dog.

See what I did there?

A passive sentence switches the positions of the subject and object in the sentence and so the verb also has to change, generally, we have a “to be” verb and by. That’s how you recognize passive sentence structure: “to be” plus by.

Now, you may be thinking: I don’t write like that. I don’t try to write that way. Is this really an issue?

Well, some people want to sound more educated and awkward sentence structure sounds smart. Counterintuitive, but it’s kind of what we’ve been taught.

Academic texts and books from past centuries tend to use English that is a little different from what we speak and write commonly today. It sounds strange, awkward, but these writers are held up as authorities, paragons, or otherwise people-who-know-how-to-write.

So we learn (unconsciously) that strange or awkward means better. That’s where the tendency to passive structure can come from.

Also, in the work world, business writing may utilize passive structure to avoid sounding accusatory, or to distance the writer from an unpopular policy that the writer may not agree with but must nonetheless enforce.

You have to be critical about your thought process around phrasing. Both academic texts and classic literature are written in the way they are because they are serving a specific purpose, or because language changes over time. Business writing is all about rhetoric, purpose, and audience.

Using passive structure may have been acceptable at the time a particular book was written, and it may be required in academic or business contexts. It’s not wrong. It’s just not something you should do in the short story or novel you write today.

In fiction, you want to effectively simulate the way people speak.

An extension of passive structure included in “passive voice”

Passive structure is more clearly displayed in a sentence that has a predicate including an object. That’s where you see the “to be” plus by tell.

What if you don’t have an object in your sentence?

The dog ran.

Passive version:

The dog was running.

This is where you get the prohibition against “to be” verbs or progressive verb forms (-ing verbs) in general.

If you excise all “to be” verbs from your writing, you will find that you have a HUGE problem. Sometimes you need to use them.

With regard to progressive verb forms, don’t use them if a simpler version of the sentence can be written instead.

Zero words

Also roped into passive voice by some editors are words like “only” or “just,” or phrases like “began to,” “started to,” or “tried to.”

In general, “only” and “just” are called zero words. They can be removed from the sentence without changing the meaning of the sentence from which they’ve been removed. Try a simple Find exercise to remove these words from your text. It will be rare that you absolutely must have either of those two words.

The other group of phrases are symptoms of what I like to call the Yoda fallacy. In The Empire Strikes Back, Yoda says to Luke, “Do, or do not. There is no try.”

Like “just” and “only”, “tried to,” “started to,” or “began to” can often, though not all the time, be removed without changing the essential meaning of your sentence.

These words sap the energy from your sentences.

Other verb forms and contractions

If you write a passage describing past events, a flashback, chunk of backstory, or to convey essential events that don’t need the full scene treatment, you have to use the pluperfect verb form.

I had run.

Like the deadly “to be” verbs, the “had” of the pluperfect is vilified. Some people will tell you to eliminate every last one of them.

The thing is, they do serve a purpose, that of indicating that the events you write about using that verb form occurred in the past. This is especially important if you write in the past tense to begin with.

The solution? Contract those pluperfect hads.

I’d run.

It makes the “had” fade into the background. It sounds more natural when read silently in the head, too.

The same thing applies to the conditional verb forms.

Thus, “I would run” becomes “I’d run,” and “I would have run” becomes “I’d have run.”

People speak in contractions. It’s how we roll.

Basically, you squish more zero words out of your sentences.

What it comes down to

  • If you stick to a simple sentence structure where the subject comes first and is closely followed by its verb, you’ll be in good shape.
  • Avoid progressive verb forms (“to be” plus –ing).
  • Delete zero words.
  • Do or do not. There is no try (begin, or start).
  • Contract what makes sense to contract.

When editing, if you read your text out loud, you’ll be able to hear all of the above, potentially pacifying problems.

I really enjoyed writing this post. If you have any questions you’d like answered, please let me know. I’ll be happy to answer in post form 🙂

Have a good “end” everybody. Most of the weekend has already passed 😦

See you on Tipsday!

Muse-inks

Thoughty Thursday: Things that made me go hmmmm on the interwebz, Dec 28, 2014-Jan 3, 2015

/ Melanie Marttila / 2 Comments

Peg Fitzpatrick shares Elizabeth Gilbert’s Happiness Jar project. Write the happiest moment of your day down and put it in the jar. It’s as simple as that.

The seven habits of happy people that they never talk about. Mind Body Green.

The age of loneliness is killing us. The Guardian.

WikiHow explains how to recognize a psychopath.

Back in September, just before DevLearn, Twist recorded a conversation with Neil deGrasse Tyson about science literacy and the future of work. Awesome stuff.

The eight books Neil believes everyone should read to understand the thinking that has historically driven western culture. Brainpickings.

Moar Neil, this time from the Business Insider: Why role models are overrated. It starts a playlist, but they’re all interesting videos . . .

<script height=”489px” width=”869px” src=”http://player.ooyala.com/iframe.js#pbid=6e12e8b3387a44daacfb73afba25a76e&ec=htdmxhcjqAOEwxNpr-FROB9dclEGM8OZ”></script&gt;

 

This article by Keith E. Stanovich for The Scientific American made me think about thinking. Metathinking? Anyway, it’s about dysrational thought and intelligence.

Thought we were more enlightened than this? I did too. Excellent reality check and novel fodder. i09.

Ten comics intended to shut down terrible arguments (but that might really only inflame the situation—please use with caution). i09.

These ten Futurama jokes will make you smarter. i09.

Another study confirms that ereaders disturb proper sleep patterns leading to various health complications. If you read anything before sleeping, make it a paper book. NPR.

The science of sleep: dreaming, depression, and how REM sleep regulates negative emotions. Brainpickings.

Why is NASA looking at your Christmas lights from space? Futurity.

We didn’t get to see this, but apparently there was a comet that could be seen with the naked (or binoculared) eye on New Year’s. The Christian Science Monitor.

There’s this star and it’s headed straight for our solar system. IFLS.

The Large Hadron Collider is coming back online at double the power to track down that tricky Higgs Boson and solve more of the mysteries of the universe. The Independent.

Archaeologists have unearthed a 6000 year old mega-temple built by a matriarchal society. World.Mic

These photographs of ancient trees are absolutely fabulous. BoredPanda.

Here are the top five National Geographic videos of 2014. Varied topics, but all fascinating.

People buy the strangest things. The Examiner.

An old-timey cover of Stay with me by Christina Gatti:

 

This guy casts his boxer puppy as Indiana Bones. Too kawaii for words. i09.

That’s your thoughty for the week.

See you Saturday!

Thoughty Thursday

Tipsday: Writerly Goodness found on the interwebz, Dec 28, 2014-Jan 3, 2015

/ Melanie Marttila / 2 Comments

K.M. Weiland’s last post and podcast of 2014! The difference between your story’s hook and your story’s heart.

Chuck Wendig’s 2015 publishing wishlist.

Here’s a podcast you may want to check out: Coode Street. The episode I’m sharing features Robert J. Sawyer and Peter Halasz having a heated, but friendly, discussion about Canadian Science Fiction.

The best science fiction and fantasy books of 2014. i09.

Brandon Sanderson explains why superheroes are so hard to get right. i09.

Western fairy tales given a Korean makeover. i09.

Arthur Kade interviews Sam Heughan and Catriona Balfe from last summer (in case you needed a little droughtlander viewing).

 

Neil Gaiman’s eight rules of writing on Brainpickings.

Margaret Atwood’s timeless advice for writers. The Huffington Post.

Our poet laureate is putting poetry on our transit 🙂 The Northern Life.

Opportunities for writers in January and February 2015. Aerogramme Writers’ Studio.

19 short story competitions from same.

Enjoy!

Tipsday

Thoughty Thursday: Things that made me go hmmmm on the interwebz, Dec 21-27, 2014

/ Melanie Marttila

Sixteen tips for dealing with seasonal affective disorder (SAD). The Toast.

Anna Maria Tremonti of CBC’s The Current interviews psychologist Brian Little about personality types.

The elusive art of inner wholeness. Parker Palmer on Brainpickings.

Wendell Barry on solitude and why pride and despair are the two great enemies of creativity. Brainpickings.

The power of applied physics. i09.

Crows understand analogies. So much for calling someone a bird brain 😉 IFLS.

How to find faster than light particles. IFLS.

Say hello to our new galactic neighbour. IFLS.

The dominant life form in the cosmos is probably superintelligent robots. Really? Motherboard.

American management explained. Tickld.

25 of the most creative sculptures you’ll ever see. EarthPorm.com

25 wild parenting moments from EarthPorm.com.

Looking back at Christmas with a couple of videos.

The Pogues:

 

And your Christmas kawaii:

 

It may be January first, but Janus looks back as well as forwards 😉

Have a great rest of the week, y’all!

Thoughty Thursday

Tipsday: Writerly Goodness found on the interwebz, Dec 21-27, 2014

/ Melanie Marttila / 2 Comments

K.M. Weiland offers beta readers a guide.

Sarah Lovett of DIY MFA shares the reasons why you need to start a writers’ group or critique circle.

What traditional publishing learned in 2014. Kristine Kathryn Rusch.

Town hall debate: what every literary writer needs to know about the digital disruption. Hosted by Porter Anderson and featuring (among others) Jane Friedman. The focus may be on literary writers, but this is informative for all writers. Vimeo.

Steven Pinker, author of Sense of Style: The thinking person’s guide to writing in the 21st century, interviewed by the CBC’s Anna Maria Tremonti.

Steven Pressfield on his “overnight” success.

Giving yourself the gift of writing, by Barbara O’Neal.

Madeline L’Engle on creativity, hope, getting unstuck, and how studying science enriches art. Brainpickings.

This kid’s theory about The Princess Bride is AWESOME!

The ancient origins of modern science fiction tropes. Blastr.

Words that used to be considered poor English that are now accepted. Gives you a little perspective on your current grammar bug-a-boos, doesn’t it? Mental Floss.

Hope you have fun tomorrow night!

Tipsday

How to get published

/ Melanie Marttila / 2 Comments

Once again, here’s some November catch up displaced by other priorities.

On November 6th and 7th, I travelled down to Humber College in Etobicoke (Toronto) to attend the How to get published workshop Hosted by Cythia Good and Jennifer Murray.

Humber Shcool For Writers Lakeshore Campus

About the presenters: Cynthia Good is the former president and publisher of Penguin Canada and current director of Humber’s Creative Book Publishing program. Jennifer Murray is the former director of marketing at Penguin and vice-president, marketing at Kids Can Press.

As with any of my transcribed sessions, discretion is advised. I fully acknowledge my humanity and there may be errors. If you see any, please be kind enough to let me know so I can make corrections, post-hasty.

 

You can’t make a living creative writing alone. (Mel’s note: It is possible to make a living writing, even in Canada. I know several people who do it, but it usually involves a fair amount of risk that most of us are not prepared to take. Do not lose heart if it is your goal to quit your day job. You just have to plan carefully and understand what level of risk you are comfortable with. As ever, do your research. /end rant)

It’s a brave new publishing world since the advent of digital publishing.

Publishing used to be a paternal system. Now it’s more like a partnership. Much more business and marketing knowledge is required of the average writer.

There have been a few big sea changes in the publishing world.

Two years ago Random House and Penguin merged (Mel’s note: officially, it’s Penguin Random House, or P/RH, but I still like Random Penguin). It’s a 51% to 49% balance of the controlling interest in the company and a shift from primarily German to primarily English oversight.

More recently, HarperCollins (HC) announced that it would be shutting down its Canadian distribution centre. This will mean the layoff of 120 people including the former president of sales, distribution, and administrative finance.

What does this mean for HC? They bought Harlequin last year. Another merger of sorts.

Another recent bit of news is that the government has disallowed new foreign publishers to set up operations in Canada. This is affecting Simon & Schuster (S&S) and their imprints, resulting in the departure of several key employees.

A Canadian publishing company that started up eight months ago may not be able to make it in this increasingly hostile publishing environment.

Will we see a HC and S&S merger?

The thing about mergers is that in order to support their infrastructure, publishers depend on authors whose sales will finance that support. Midlist authors are being dropped. Fewer chances are being taken on new authors.

These authors are going to small and boutique Canadian publishing houses.

In Canada, a bestseller is about 5,000 copies. Really, if you take into consideration returns, the print run should be anywhere from 7,500 to 10,000 copies and at least 5,000 of those must sell. 5,000 is the break-even point.

Why go for a traditional deal?

If you write non-fiction, there’s still money for public speaking. Though marketing and promotional budgets are disappearing, there is still some money to be had.

Traditional publishers are also branching out into digital. Hazlitt is an online magazine put out by RH.

They’re also getting into providing author services. Author Portal, through RH again, is much like Kobo Writing Life and offers similar metrics. Penguin bought Author Solutions (Mel’s note: BOO!) because selling author services ala carte is more lucrative.

Marketshare by format (Canada)

  • 18% ebook (24% in the US)
  • 58% paperback
  • 24% hardcover

Booknet keeps the statistics and only publishers and booksellers have access to that.

Ebooks have hit a plateau and are expected to hold. Pricing is not expected to hold, however.

Scribd, through HC, is billed as the Netflix for books. Amazon also offers a subscription-based service (Kindle Unlimited) whereby you can loan unlimited material.

In general, Amazon sells ebooks at a low price. Print prices are also falling.

Publishers in Canada can’t compete and can’t survive without government grants.

Three years back, in the battle between what was then the Big 6 and Amazon resulted in an Amazon win.

In part, it comes down to discoverability. How do readers find their books?

The traditional path between author and reader: author -> agent -> publisher -> distributor -> bookseller -> reader.

Now authors can go directly to the reader.

There are also book apps. Apps based on popular books. No one is making money on boo apps yet.

E.L. James’s success led to trends in erotica. Young adult and new adult are still strong categories.

Wattpad is a Canadian company and you can post your novels on there, chapter by chapter, for free. You can get great reader feedback that way. There are no stats currently on how releasing material on Wattpad may affect sales of ebooks or print books later on.

Of the Big 5 publishers, Canadian authors have access to three:

  • P/RH – both still take submissions seperately for the main publisher and all imprints. RH has Vintage, DoubleDay, Knopf, McClelland and Stewart, Tundra, etc. Penguin’s imprints include Viking, Allan Lane, Hamish-Hamilton. Collectively, they publish 100-150 books annually.
  • HarperCollins, which has recently acquired Harlequin.
  • Simon & Schuster, though they are, as mentioned, in the midst of transition.

There’s also Scholastic. They’re US-based, but Canadian authors can access them.

Small or independent publishers

  • Dundurn in Hamilton. Their focus in on history. They are in growth mode.
  • ECW publishes everything.
  • ChiZine is a niche publisher of horror.
  • Bundoran and Edge Science Fiction and Fantasy.

Micropublishers, or boutique publishers

  • Biblioasis
  • Gaspereau
  • Freehand
  • Goose Lane
  • Pedlar Press
  • Bookthing
  • Tightrope
  • Insomniac
  • Mansfield
  • Groundwood
  • Pyjama Press
  • Second Story

How do you choose?

If you aim for a big publisher, you will usually get a better deal.

With smaller houses, you get more attention and they will take more risks on new authors. Smaller presses are more agile and have specialties.

Editors

It’s a matter of match-making. The editor needs to make money for their publisher. They have a lot to read and a lot of work to do for their current clients.

Make sure your first page is memorable.

A well-written book with excellent sales can make an editor’s career. They receive bonuses based on sales, awards, and word-of-mouth (reviews). They usually have “stables” of writers.

They curate their authors’ best work.

Agents

Do you need one? For the big publishers, yes. The best way to get an agent is to get a publisher (ironic, isn’t it?).

You can approach editors directly. They’re always looking for new authors.

Think about why you want an agent. They can offer:

  • Emotional support
  • Editorial support
  • Career counselling
  • Access to big publishers
  • The ability to negotiate a good deal
  • Contract review
  • Interpretation of your royalty statements
  • The ability to negotiate for marketing budget or cover input
  • Advice on next books

For all this (sometimes more, sometimes less) they get 15% of every sale. Foreign rights, television, movies, audio, etc. (all subrights) generally demand 20%.

Agencies:

  • Westwood Creative Artists
  • Cooke Agency
  • Transatlantic Literary (primarily children’s)
  • Anne McDermid
  • Helen Heller (commercial)
  • Rights Factory (experimental/literary)
  • Rick Broadhead (practical/non-fiction)
  • PS Literary
  • Beverley Slopen

Always check the agency’s submission guidelines.

Other resources that might give you additional information on agents are the Association of Canadian Publishers and the Writers’ Union of Canada.

Make sure that your manuscript (ms) is complete and polished. N.B. Non-fiction should be queried with a proposal.

Why might you not want an agent?

  • Control over your career
  • Direct relationship with editor or publisher

A Baker’s Dozen (things to do before you query)

  1. Perfect your manuscript
  2. Get feedback
  3. Attend writers’ workshops and courses
  4. Hire an editor (freelance). N.B. Humber is launching its own Publishing Services.
  5. Submit to journals and magazines
  6. Research and submit to competitions
  7. Attend conferences or conventions
  8. Volunteer for or attend literary festivals like Word on the Street (WotS)
  9. Read
  10. Get to know local bookstores and librarians
  11. Have a presence on the internet
  12. Be prepared to give it away.
  13. Learn everything you can about publishing (Publishers Weekly, Quill & Quire)

Preparing to write your query

Research your comparatives/competition. Market research.

Be professional.

Submit to multiple agencies. Have your A list, your B list, etc. It’s also good to identify what you’re not interested in.

Have a strategy.

Query letters

Start with the story. Make it compelling. Get to the facts (word count, genre, etc.) at the end.

  • Introductory paragraph – if you have met or been referred to the agent. If not, show your research. Why do you think you’ll be a good fit?
  • Pitch/short synopsis – be as interesting as possible. Don’t give away the ending.
  • Comparables – be realistic.
  • Biographical info – keep it relevant.
  • Closing.

Agents will not appreciate it if you do not state the word count, call your book a “fiction novel,” use poor spelling, and/or poor grammar.

Self-publishing

This is not new. Virginia Woolf and Walt Whitman self-published.

Keep in mind that for every Hugh Howey there are thousands of self-published wannabes. Only 400 out of every 1.5 million books published sell more than 100 copies.

Consider your motivation. You may be:

  • An oft-rejected writer (this doesn’t necessarily mean your book is badly written, but consider the possibility)
  • Someone who wants to establish credibility
  • Someone who wants to help others
  • Disappointed with traditional publishing
  • Interested in establishing a legacy

If you self-publish print books, you generally need as many as 2,000 books for distribution.

Advantages

  • Certainty/total control
  • Speed to publishing
  • Increased income

Disadvantages

  • Up-front costs
  • No advances
  • Time consuming
  • Marketing and promotion are entirely on you
  • Distribution
  • Liability
  • Access to prizes and grants

Terry Fallis states he spent $1,400 for editorial review, cover layout and $2,000 for additional editing.

Use Wattpad to get reader feedback.

Use Kickstarter or Indie-go-go to fund your publication.

Check out James Altucher’s blog. Start with this post on Publishing 3.0.

Be prepared to become an authorpreneur.

Consider partner publishing with a company like Iguana Books.

 

As I said at the outset, my notes are not complete. I can’t write down everything said in the course of a day and a half. We also wrote query letters and critiqued them in class, as well as learning how an agent sells your book to a publisher. We also went over non-fiction book proposals, which I chose not to share with you here. There was a lot I couldn’t include.

That was the first day and a half. The last half of the second day was given over to Jennifer Murray to discuss marketing and promotion.

I’m sorry, but I didn’t take notes for the marketing piece.

You’ll have to register for the next session if you want to find out about that 😉 I’d recommend it if you’re in the Toronto area.

And that’s it for Writerly Goodness tonight. Toddling off to Bedfordshire.

Thoughty Thursday: Things that made me go hmmmm on the interwebz, Dec 14-20, 2014

/ Melanie Marttila

It’s Christmas Day . . . whee! I’ll be sharing a great meal with the family. Hope all of you are similarly occupied today.

Creative people are paradoxical. Who knew? 😉 Fast Comapny.

What it means to have the heart of an empath. Sensitive is also one of the defining traits of the introverted, so you may find some enlightenment here. Elephant Journal.

I have this amazing friend (Hi, Dani!) who’s been teaching mindfulness to her class. They made this video:

 

Have a look at the lovely (and detailed) maps being sent back to us from Mars. Wired.

The huge issues science fiction movies conveniently gloss over. Cracked.

How ancient Romans made stronger concrete than we do. Construction companies, take note. i09.

I’m not even sure where to put this . . . The blood-curdling sound of the Aztec whistle. Dangerous Minds.

A creative musician figured out a way to translate the information contained in tree rings into piano notes. The result is amazing. IFLS

This is awesome. How a 3D printer was used to make prosthetics for a dog born with malformed front legs. Fabulous implications for human application, too, don’t you think? IFLS.

See you Saturday!

Thoughty Thursday