I have three works in progress. Three. That's probably two more than I ought to have, accordign to every teacher/parent/manager who's ever told me to focus on one task at a time and finish it. But its way fewer than I would probably have if I gave my fingers free rain to listen to my idea-generator-brain.
I have to have a game plan, even though I don't always follow them. Right now, Leap, my sci-fi, is nearing Draft-1-Completion. The happy couple are even in the getaway spaceship, preparing for blast off. And I'm a little stuck as to how to wrap it up. I think I may have to stop here, and do an editing pass from the beginning. That worked for Chivalrous--I wrote 3 endings before I was satisfied with the final plot. My brain does a lot of its writing and plotting subconsciously, and providing time for it to churn out ideas tends to help a lot.
At the same time, I have beginnings to my romantic suspense, Accomplice, and a contemporary category, The Appearance of Impropriety. I think I'll be working on those next, and letting Leap simmer.
I also entered 4 different MS's in a contest--all 3 in progress, plus Chivalrous. In fact, I entered 4 of the 5 categories that the contest offered (the only thing missing was Historical...maybe next year LOL). I'm expecting good feedback on all 4, Hoping for an honorable mention for at least 1, and secretly wishing to final on any one of the 4. Time will tell.
Then, depending on my contest feedback, and general progress on Leap, I have to decide on the Golden Heart. Chivalrous was entered last year, with a less than stellar finish, but the beginning's MUCH better now. But, if it doesn't read well in this contest, it might go back under my proverbial bed. Leap, well, I just don't know. Again, it might depend on how well it scores in the current contest. And the ms has to be complete. Complete enough to save to a disk for a quick verification, anyway--I am fairly certain most entrants (and finalists) continue to revise long after they send in the entry.
Anyone else? Whatcha working on?
Friday, August 28, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Something to chew on
I can write contemporary romances. And I’ve dreamed up one or two (hundred) historical plots that have not yet made it to (e-)paper. And I’m wrapping up final scenes in a manuscript involving telepathic aliens. I have notes on two more paranormals—one time travel the other more of a wizardry/magic thing.
But I just can’t do vampires. I try. I’ve got a couple of amusing titles in mind, and half an idea for a novella/short story. But I can’t even plot it out without the whole thing looking cheesy in my mind. And I blame Count Chocula and the Count from Sesame Street. Every vampire I try to picture has a purple face, a turn-of-the-century tuxedo and cape, and a hokey eastern European accent. “One, one kiss for the pretty girl, ha ha hah”.
And then there are the werewolves. Can you say doggy style? Is that really attractive? I’m not much of a dog person. Maybe that’s my problem. Had I ever been deeply enthralled with a Doberman or a German Shepherd, maybe I could translate it to romance? But then again, I hope not. Never had those kind of thoughts about my cats either.
Hmmm.
For the record, I have nothing against vampires or werewolves. I just had a silly title pop into my head, and started thinking about the sub-subgenre, and why I’ve never gotten into vampire or werewolf paranormals as a reader. And how I could possibly write one (and why would I want to, except that I liked the goofy title, which I’m not sharing….) But I try to never say never, so no promises. Maybe the next thing I fall in love with will be vampire werewolves.
But I just can’t do vampires. I try. I’ve got a couple of amusing titles in mind, and half an idea for a novella/short story. But I can’t even plot it out without the whole thing looking cheesy in my mind. And I blame Count Chocula and the Count from Sesame Street. Every vampire I try to picture has a purple face, a turn-of-the-century tuxedo and cape, and a hokey eastern European accent. “One, one kiss for the pretty girl, ha ha hah”.
And then there are the werewolves. Can you say doggy style? Is that really attractive? I’m not much of a dog person. Maybe that’s my problem. Had I ever been deeply enthralled with a Doberman or a German Shepherd, maybe I could translate it to romance? But then again, I hope not. Never had those kind of thoughts about my cats either.
Hmmm.
For the record, I have nothing against vampires or werewolves. I just had a silly title pop into my head, and started thinking about the sub-subgenre, and why I’ve never gotten into vampire or werewolf paranormals as a reader. And how I could possibly write one (and why would I want to, except that I liked the goofy title, which I’m not sharing….) But I try to never say never, so no promises. Maybe the next thing I fall in love with will be vampire werewolves.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Peer Reviews
I have a like/hate relationship with critiques. I can’t say love/hate. I’m not sure I’ll ever love a critique. I might love the final product, though.
The whole concept of critiques is basically the same as the peer review process that software engineers use. At work, when I write code, it gets looked at by 1-4 other people on the same team. Not by managers--we are not students turning in our papers for a grade by the teacher. But by peers. In peer reviews at work, I get a variety of types of comments, depending on the specific people reviewing the code.
Some people get very caught up in what we call "coding standards". These are things like how we name variables, where blocks of comments go (comments are human-readable notes that explain the program code, but don't actually affect what the program does). In writing, this would be the spelling and grammar. I've noticed that the people who are excellent at checking this kind of detail frequently get so caught up in a typo in a comment that they couldn't tell you whether the program will actually work or not.
Do we need them in our peer reviews? Absolutely. The same goes for our writing. If there are so many spelling and grammar mistakes that they get in the way of the story, then the writing is not the best it can be.
At work, there are some reviewers who wouldn't know, much less care, whether your strings variable names start with str or sz or abcdef. They follow the code. They can read what is happening, and tell, without even running the app, whether the code will work or will throw up big ugly error messages and bring down your entire computer. For writing, these people are like beta readers. They can digest an entire story and tell you that the hero is too much of a jerk, or that your villain is too flat. They know when the romance has your toes curling, or your stomach curdling. But they might not have noticed that you have twice as many commas as any sane writer, and that you spell "heroine" "heroin" nine times out of ten.
Do we need them in our peer reviews? Absolutely. The same goes for our writing. We need someone who can see the big picture and tell us whether our puzzle pieces will fit together into a cohesive whole.
And then there are the "I Know Better" folks. You know the ones--they don't like something because they would have written it differently. In code, they would write a "for" loop instead of a "while" loop, and will insist to their dying day that the "for" is best, regardless of whether the "while" loop worked correctly and efficiently and ended up with the same result. They just think that their way is better.
In writing, these are the contest judges who re-write half of your manuscript in the margins. They insist on "rules" being followed that don't work for your manuscript. They don't like your setting (even though its integral to the plot), think your alpha-hero should be beta, and want to see more sex in your inspirational.
Do we need them in our peer reviews? Well, this one gets tricky. At work, these people are frequently the team leader, or the chief architect for a project. In this case, their word is the final word. If they say, and insist, that you use for loops instead of while loops, then sometimes you say "Yes, sir" and just do it, no matter how aggravating. In my opinion, a good team lead or architect will either 1) recognize the value of an alternate solution or 2) Explain very clearly and non-condescendingly where the weaknesses are in your work and why they feel that their own idea is better. But I've met many who do neither of these things.
Do we need them in our writing? Heck, no. Most of the time. When you are writing, you are the team lead. You are the chief architect. It is your name that will show up on the cover, so you call the shots. There is a caveat here: If you are getting this kind of advice from someone who is published in the sub-genre that you are working in, then don't discard their advice out of hand. Keep it. File it away. And come back to it later, when the pain and annoyance isn't quite so fresh. There might be some nuggets of truth or help hidden in there. If not, keep on ignoring.
At work, as in writing, we need a mix of people to help us critique our work. And it might change depending on where the writing is. If you've written a fast draft, or just an outline, then you're going to want to listen closely to those big-picture folks. If your story is nearly carved in stone, then you want that close-read by the grammar guru to really polish things up. And most critique partners will fall somewhere between the two extremes.
I am lucky right now that I have a good small critique group with a mix of folks. We're at different stages in our writing--from contracted to working on the first draft of the first book. We write in different genres--historical, contemporary, light and dark paranormal, suspense. We write at different speeds. But we all have something different to bring to the table.
So, even though I cringe every time I send out a few pages, and hold my breath waiting for the critiques to come in, I know I'm getting valuable feedback.
The whole concept of critiques is basically the same as the peer review process that software engineers use. At work, when I write code, it gets looked at by 1-4 other people on the same team. Not by managers--we are not students turning in our papers for a grade by the teacher. But by peers. In peer reviews at work, I get a variety of types of comments, depending on the specific people reviewing the code.
Some people get very caught up in what we call "coding standards". These are things like how we name variables, where blocks of comments go (comments are human-readable notes that explain the program code, but don't actually affect what the program does). In writing, this would be the spelling and grammar. I've noticed that the people who are excellent at checking this kind of detail frequently get so caught up in a typo in a comment that they couldn't tell you whether the program will actually work or not.
Do we need them in our peer reviews? Absolutely. The same goes for our writing. If there are so many spelling and grammar mistakes that they get in the way of the story, then the writing is not the best it can be.
At work, there are some reviewers who wouldn't know, much less care, whether your strings variable names start with str or sz or abcdef. They follow the code. They can read what is happening, and tell, without even running the app, whether the code will work or will throw up big ugly error messages and bring down your entire computer. For writing, these people are like beta readers. They can digest an entire story and tell you that the hero is too much of a jerk, or that your villain is too flat. They know when the romance has your toes curling, or your stomach curdling. But they might not have noticed that you have twice as many commas as any sane writer, and that you spell "heroine" "heroin" nine times out of ten.
Do we need them in our peer reviews? Absolutely. The same goes for our writing. We need someone who can see the big picture and tell us whether our puzzle pieces will fit together into a cohesive whole.
And then there are the "I Know Better" folks. You know the ones--they don't like something because they would have written it differently. In code, they would write a "for" loop instead of a "while" loop, and will insist to their dying day that the "for" is best, regardless of whether the "while" loop worked correctly and efficiently and ended up with the same result. They just think that their way is better.
In writing, these are the contest judges who re-write half of your manuscript in the margins. They insist on "rules" being followed that don't work for your manuscript. They don't like your setting (even though its integral to the plot), think your alpha-hero should be beta, and want to see more sex in your inspirational.
Do we need them in our peer reviews? Well, this one gets tricky. At work, these people are frequently the team leader, or the chief architect for a project. In this case, their word is the final word. If they say, and insist, that you use for loops instead of while loops, then sometimes you say "Yes, sir" and just do it, no matter how aggravating. In my opinion, a good team lead or architect will either 1) recognize the value of an alternate solution or 2) Explain very clearly and non-condescendingly where the weaknesses are in your work and why they feel that their own idea is better. But I've met many who do neither of these things.
Do we need them in our writing? Heck, no. Most of the time. When you are writing, you are the team lead. You are the chief architect. It is your name that will show up on the cover, so you call the shots. There is a caveat here: If you are getting this kind of advice from someone who is published in the sub-genre that you are working in, then don't discard their advice out of hand. Keep it. File it away. And come back to it later, when the pain and annoyance isn't quite so fresh. There might be some nuggets of truth or help hidden in there. If not, keep on ignoring.
At work, as in writing, we need a mix of people to help us critique our work. And it might change depending on where the writing is. If you've written a fast draft, or just an outline, then you're going to want to listen closely to those big-picture folks. If your story is nearly carved in stone, then you want that close-read by the grammar guru to really polish things up. And most critique partners will fall somewhere between the two extremes.
I am lucky right now that I have a good small critique group with a mix of folks. We're at different stages in our writing--from contracted to working on the first draft of the first book. We write in different genres--historical, contemporary, light and dark paranormal, suspense. We write at different speeds. But we all have something different to bring to the table.
So, even though I cringe every time I send out a few pages, and hold my breath waiting for the critiques to come in, I know I'm getting valuable feedback.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Always a day late...
I’ve been a lot quiet over here lately, because of all the chaos. Sometimes I write my way through chaos, and sometimes I have to hunker down and wait for the twister to blow over.
The past two weeks have been the latter. Hiding in the basement, covering my head and neck, away from all windows.
I might have mentioned that I got two requests out of my trip to the RWA national convention—1 from an editor, 1 from an agent. I'm fairly certain that the agent request was standard issue, as she only requested a partial. The editor, on the other hand, seemed fairly interested. It helped that I was pitching something that met their standards to a tee.
I submitted partials to both (I had forgotten to check whether the editor wanted the full) on July 26th, and proceeded to check my email daily thereafter. Not just any email--this particular address had only been used to send two messages ever, so there would be nothing there except for a reply to my submissions. It was silly and driving me nuts, so I gave it a rest for almost a week.
Of course, the editor had emailed me, a WEEK earlier, requesting the full. "As soon as possible". That sent me into full-fledged panic mode and I spent a frantic week (probably 20 hours or so, working around the day job and evening classes and oh, yeah, kids) polishing the manuscript and emailed it last Friday, August 14th.
I check my email again today (the 19th), and find a nice note, dated yesterday, from the editor thanking me for the submission. But she's leaving the company, effective yesterday. She's passing my manuscript on to colleagues.
I didn't even read the message early enough for a polite, "Thanks and good luck" kind of reply. And my hopes, which were artificially inflated by that "asap" wording, have just hit the slush pile.
I can hope that this is really the eye of the storm, but I'm thinking that I'm back to the calm.
Oh well. I have some contest entries to polish, and some Aliens to blast into space. And someday, that storm will be back.
The past two weeks have been the latter. Hiding in the basement, covering my head and neck, away from all windows.
I might have mentioned that I got two requests out of my trip to the RWA national convention—1 from an editor, 1 from an agent. I'm fairly certain that the agent request was standard issue, as she only requested a partial. The editor, on the other hand, seemed fairly interested. It helped that I was pitching something that met their standards to a tee.
I submitted partials to both (I had forgotten to check whether the editor wanted the full) on July 26th, and proceeded to check my email daily thereafter. Not just any email--this particular address had only been used to send two messages ever, so there would be nothing there except for a reply to my submissions. It was silly and driving me nuts, so I gave it a rest for almost a week.
Of course, the editor had emailed me, a WEEK earlier, requesting the full. "As soon as possible". That sent me into full-fledged panic mode and I spent a frantic week (probably 20 hours or so, working around the day job and evening classes and oh, yeah, kids) polishing the manuscript and emailed it last Friday, August 14th.
I check my email again today (the 19th), and find a nice note, dated yesterday, from the editor thanking me for the submission. But she's leaving the company, effective yesterday. She's passing my manuscript on to colleagues.
I didn't even read the message early enough for a polite, "Thanks and good luck" kind of reply. And my hopes, which were artificially inflated by that "asap" wording, have just hit the slush pile.
I can hope that this is really the eye of the storm, but I'm thinking that I'm back to the calm.
Oh well. I have some contest entries to polish, and some Aliens to blast into space. And someday, that storm will be back.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Word Counts can be deceiving
About two week ago, I updated the word count on my Sci Fi WIP. 78k and change. Using Open Office on my netbook. But then, I moved my files back to my laptop, updated a few chapters where I had critique notes, and ran another wordcount. 73k and change. Had I really lost 5,000 words? I removed a prologue that I'm going to save for a sequel, but it was not a 5,000 word prologue.
I don't believe that Word counts words the same way Open Office does.
In other words, never trust a wordcount. Open Office thinks I'm back to 78k and change, up about 3,000 words from my post-prologue edit.
I have been aiming for 90k for a long time, and now I'm wondering if I'll hit 85000. I'm in the wind down. More like the wind up for the big plot high point--the part where things explode all over the place. Yes its sci fi, but no, I'm not blowing up a planet. Just a ship or two, I think. I think much of emotional/relationship tension has peaked. Now I just have to get everyone off Earth and on their way elsewhere.
The end is in sight. And then the real editing begins.
I don't believe that Word counts words the same way Open Office does.
In other words, never trust a wordcount. Open Office thinks I'm back to 78k and change, up about 3,000 words from my post-prologue edit.
I have been aiming for 90k for a long time, and now I'm wondering if I'll hit 85000. I'm in the wind down. More like the wind up for the big plot high point--the part where things explode all over the place. Yes its sci fi, but no, I'm not blowing up a planet. Just a ship or two, I think. I think much of emotional/relationship tension has peaked. Now I just have to get everyone off Earth and on their way elsewhere.
The end is in sight. And then the real editing begins.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)