I don't think it's a secret to anyone that I've got two different versions of THE LINE floating around several different agencies, awaiting for literary agents to read it for consideration of representation.
I know it's an unwritten rule that a writer should not blog about the submission process while IN the submission process, so I plan of being a bit generic and vague in this post, please forgive me.
For one thing, I'm working on some revisions suggested by one of the agent's who had read it, and I'm learning quite a bit about myself, my process, my likes and dislikes, my weaknesses, and my strengths.
One thing I've noticed about myself is my hatred of conclusions. I recently read THE SHINING by Stephen King, who is a GOD of FICTION, and yet, I still found myself skimming the last fifty pages because I wanted to get to the end and find out what happened. I even knew the ending (!), having read it before as a teenager, and yet I STILL... (flip, flip, flip - backstory, description, don't care, don't care, AH, here we go, something is HAPPENING! Oh goody, dialogue, let's re-start here!). And I do the same thing in my own work. Things near the end happen fast! So fast, that the reader might not even be ready for what comes next.
I HATE slow endings. I hate reading slow endings, but to everyone else in the universe who knows anything about quality work, it's not a slow ending - it's just an ending. I need to stop throwing my issues with "boring" endings into my work, because it's starting to work against me.
Dear Self,
It's not slow, it's just not lightning speed. Deal.
Secondly, internal dialogue. If you read a lot, or are a writer, you know what this is...This is the characters thoughts and feelings that are described on the page. In playwriting, where I first learned my craft, internal dialogue is 99% implied. You read the dialogue, you critique the scene, you break it down, then you figure out what the character REALLY meant when they said, 'yada, yada, yada.' It doesn't work that way in fiction. In fiction, particularly in YA, you have to kind of spell it out because nobody goes back, critiques a scene and then takes the time to interpret what the character is really feeling when they said, 'yada, yada, yada.' They read, and move on. Read, and move on. You kinda have to spoon feed them, giving them just enough without giving them so much that they choke. Make sense? I intellectually know this in my core, but apparently old habits die hard, because nobody else but playwrites read dialogue the same way I do. I just assume everybody gets the implication of the line, but in truth, they don't.
Dear Self,
Spell it out, Anne. Spell it out.
Thirdly, there's world building. Particularly in Fantasy, Sci-Fi or Dystopian, this is critically important. If the reader doesn't understand how the world works, what it looks like, and feels as if they are transported to another world, it's not going to jive, or hold any depth of meaning for the reader. AGAIN - this is a flaw of mine, and I can pinpoint the origin in the same location. Playwriting.
SCENE: Anne's office.
(Messy. Cluttered papers. 3x5 cards on the wall with vague plot points held up with scotch tape. A dying plant.)
In a play, that's it. That's all you get! The rest is for the set designer and art director to fill in the blanks. But nobody is reading a book and analyzing why Anne's plant is dying (ie. she's not good with living things as much as she is with the written word), or why she has vague plot points held up with scotch tape (ie. she's worried about the paint, and finds that too much detail on a 3x5 card is too limiting). The reader just sees the mess and keeps reading, sometimes missing the point of what the setting is, if it's not explained in detail.
My fault again for assuming every reader must be just like me, reading what's in between the lines, when they're not - or the between lines are ones only I can see! And I'm not saying my way is the best way, because obviously, it's not - otherwise I'd be repped by a lit agent already.
Dear Self,
You have to explain why things ARE the way they ARE - other people care about this and are not like you, who would read the first paragraph of description, get bored, and skip over the rest.
Writing, for me, is a constant lesson on how to improve myself and my craft. I'm forever analyzing. Which can obviously, work against me at times. I'm hoping by correcting these particular points some of the agents will take interest in my work.
You know how everyone advises writers to "write for themselves."
Yeah.
That's not exactly working for me. Because apparently, I'm weird.
I know it's an unwritten rule that a writer should not blog about the submission process while IN the submission process, so I plan of being a bit generic and vague in this post, please forgive me.
For one thing, I'm working on some revisions suggested by one of the agent's who had read it, and I'm learning quite a bit about myself, my process, my likes and dislikes, my weaknesses, and my strengths.
One thing I've noticed about myself is my hatred of conclusions. I recently read THE SHINING by Stephen King, who is a GOD of FICTION, and yet, I still found myself skimming the last fifty pages because I wanted to get to the end and find out what happened. I even knew the ending (!), having read it before as a teenager, and yet I STILL... (flip, flip, flip - backstory, description, don't care, don't care, AH, here we go, something is HAPPENING! Oh goody, dialogue, let's re-start here!). And I do the same thing in my own work. Things near the end happen fast! So fast, that the reader might not even be ready for what comes next.
I HATE slow endings. I hate reading slow endings, but to everyone else in the universe who knows anything about quality work, it's not a slow ending - it's just an ending. I need to stop throwing my issues with "boring" endings into my work, because it's starting to work against me.
Dear Self,
It's not slow, it's just not lightning speed. Deal.
Secondly, internal dialogue. If you read a lot, or are a writer, you know what this is...This is the characters thoughts and feelings that are described on the page. In playwriting, where I first learned my craft, internal dialogue is 99% implied. You read the dialogue, you critique the scene, you break it down, then you figure out what the character REALLY meant when they said, 'yada, yada, yada.' It doesn't work that way in fiction. In fiction, particularly in YA, you have to kind of spell it out because nobody goes back, critiques a scene and then takes the time to interpret what the character is really feeling when they said, 'yada, yada, yada.' They read, and move on. Read, and move on. You kinda have to spoon feed them, giving them just enough without giving them so much that they choke. Make sense? I intellectually know this in my core, but apparently old habits die hard, because nobody else but playwrites read dialogue the same way I do. I just assume everybody gets the implication of the line, but in truth, they don't.
Dear Self,
Spell it out, Anne. Spell it out.
Thirdly, there's world building. Particularly in Fantasy, Sci-Fi or Dystopian, this is critically important. If the reader doesn't understand how the world works, what it looks like, and feels as if they are transported to another world, it's not going to jive, or hold any depth of meaning for the reader. AGAIN - this is a flaw of mine, and I can pinpoint the origin in the same location. Playwriting.
SCENE: Anne's office.
(Messy. Cluttered papers. 3x5 cards on the wall with vague plot points held up with scotch tape. A dying plant.)
In a play, that's it. That's all you get! The rest is for the set designer and art director to fill in the blanks. But nobody is reading a book and analyzing why Anne's plant is dying (ie. she's not good with living things as much as she is with the written word), or why she has vague plot points held up with scotch tape (ie. she's worried about the paint, and finds that too much detail on a 3x5 card is too limiting). The reader just sees the mess and keeps reading, sometimes missing the point of what the setting is, if it's not explained in detail.
My fault again for assuming every reader must be just like me, reading what's in between the lines, when they're not - or the between lines are ones only I can see! And I'm not saying my way is the best way, because obviously, it's not - otherwise I'd be repped by a lit agent already.
Dear Self,
You have to explain why things ARE the way they ARE - other people care about this and are not like you, who would read the first paragraph of description, get bored, and skip over the rest.
Writing, for me, is a constant lesson on how to improve myself and my craft. I'm forever analyzing. Which can obviously, work against me at times. I'm hoping by correcting these particular points some of the agents will take interest in my work.
You know how everyone advises writers to "write for themselves."
Yeah.
That's not exactly working for me. Because apparently, I'm weird.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHehe love it, I will have to keep this and look back at it when I'm writing. I always forget that people can't see what's inside my head and that i need to spell it out.
ReplyDeleteYou may be weird, but don't worry, so am i!