See, this is why I love writers conferences. I blogged a couple weeks ago about how I'm not a "people" person and it's an effort to come out of my shell to socialize, but every time I do, its so worth it!
I met a lot of people this weekend, people I have a lot in common with. Went to some great workshops (special note of thanks to Jade Lee, who did a wonderful session) and some agents and editors, one of whom really liked my pitch for Epitaph! So keeping my fingers crossed that she likes my writing as well as my pitch.
Among the people that were there, Simone Elkeles, who recently hit the NYT Best Seller's list. My personal note on Simone - at my very first writers conference, she was the organizer and she held my hand. She got me into a pitch session when someone else chickened out (a priceless experience) and she is one of the nicest people I've ever met. Her success is well deserved and I couldn't be happier for her. At the booksigning, she got as many people at her table as the headliners did. Congratulations, Simone!
And the beauty of these types of conferences is that in addition to the successful authors, you meet the struggling and still learning. It's so much fun to hear their passion and enthusiasm when a group of writers gets together, and to share the journeys we all have in common.
Am I gushing? Then you know I enjoyed the conference. To all the people that put the conference together, kudos on a job well done. And now I have to polish up my submission one more time, make sure I've dotted all my "i"s and crossed all my "t"s so that the editor loves my hard copy as much as she liked talking about it with me.
Anon
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Monday, April 19, 2010
Agents and Editors and pitch sessions
I'm excited. I have a pitch session on Saturday with an editor at a publishing house I'd LOVE to get in with. Granted, these pitch sessions generally don't amount to much, but it is a one-on-one with an insider. Better yet, she respresents my genre! There's a big plus. My last pitch session I met an agent who didn't represent my genre, but she was very gracious and I found the experience to be very positive. I did my homework, I was nervous, but it all went off pretty well. I don't think I'll be as nervous this time, and I will spend some quality time preparing.
This was all sitting on my brain while I was relaxing this weekend (mandatory down time). I flipped channels on the television and came across a movie where a librarian steals a manuscript from a dead author. The manuscript was a thriller, whodoneit murder mystery, and the librarian's secret ambition was to write historical romance. I didn't watch the movie since, after about five or ten minutes, it seemed silly to me, and yet the premise stuck. This is the kind of thing they teach you about at "writing school." Give your protagonist an impossible situation. Her goals are diametrically opposed to the situation she finds herself in. Does she give up her dream of writing historical romance and try to venture into something she knows nothing about - something that she finds ugly and distasteful (thinking up murders)? Naturally, the agent that sold her stolen book had no interest in her historical romances. She was more interested in a follow-on book, a sequel, which the protag was ill-equipped to write. The protag got her foot in the door, which was her goal, but it was the wrong door.
Which brings me to my point: know your genre. Know your audience. Know your stepping stones. While it was nice that I got to pitch an agent previously, she was likely not interested in what I had since that wasn't what she represented. It was good practice for me. She DID recommend me to another agent before it was all said and done (and no, the other agent didn't sign me), so it was not a waste of time. You might think she was just being polite, but there were others that pitched to her that day that she turned down flat or gave suggestions to that they weren't open to. Point number 2: Understand that they know what they're talking about and their suggestions, which might not be in line with your ideas, are meant to help you. If you don't like them, it is your perogative to look elsewhere, but its worth considering - they know the business. The agents and editors aren't there to soothe your ego, they're there to help you take the next step. It's up to you to determine whether or not their suggestions are in line with your goals and NOT TAKE IT PERSONALLY (every author will tell you that you need a thick skin and an open mind to succeed). That being said, I haven't met an agent or editor that was personally snarky or rude. They're always pleasant and polite, but they also recognize when someone ignores their expertise. That's the point they stop offering their assistance, cuz hey, if you know better than they do, more power to you.
So wish me luck. While I don't have inflated hopes, I'm excited to talk to someone who meets my query criteria!
This was all sitting on my brain while I was relaxing this weekend (mandatory down time). I flipped channels on the television and came across a movie where a librarian steals a manuscript from a dead author. The manuscript was a thriller, whodoneit murder mystery, and the librarian's secret ambition was to write historical romance. I didn't watch the movie since, after about five or ten minutes, it seemed silly to me, and yet the premise stuck. This is the kind of thing they teach you about at "writing school." Give your protagonist an impossible situation. Her goals are diametrically opposed to the situation she finds herself in. Does she give up her dream of writing historical romance and try to venture into something she knows nothing about - something that she finds ugly and distasteful (thinking up murders)? Naturally, the agent that sold her stolen book had no interest in her historical romances. She was more interested in a follow-on book, a sequel, which the protag was ill-equipped to write. The protag got her foot in the door, which was her goal, but it was the wrong door.
Which brings me to my point: know your genre. Know your audience. Know your stepping stones. While it was nice that I got to pitch an agent previously, she was likely not interested in what I had since that wasn't what she represented. It was good practice for me. She DID recommend me to another agent before it was all said and done (and no, the other agent didn't sign me), so it was not a waste of time. You might think she was just being polite, but there were others that pitched to her that day that she turned down flat or gave suggestions to that they weren't open to. Point number 2: Understand that they know what they're talking about and their suggestions, which might not be in line with your ideas, are meant to help you. If you don't like them, it is your perogative to look elsewhere, but its worth considering - they know the business. The agents and editors aren't there to soothe your ego, they're there to help you take the next step. It's up to you to determine whether or not their suggestions are in line with your goals and NOT TAKE IT PERSONALLY (every author will tell you that you need a thick skin and an open mind to succeed). That being said, I haven't met an agent or editor that was personally snarky or rude. They're always pleasant and polite, but they also recognize when someone ignores their expertise. That's the point they stop offering their assistance, cuz hey, if you know better than they do, more power to you.
So wish me luck. While I don't have inflated hopes, I'm excited to talk to someone who meets my query criteria!
Monday, April 12, 2010
Once upon a time . . .
We've been planning vacation time. It's still a ways off in the future (and if you watched Andy Rooney on 60 Minutes last night, he'd be spanking my hand for making time move to fast by planning too far into the future), but as I look at the things I want to do, the places I want to go, the things I want to see, I find myself inspired. Places inspire me. Settings. We're going to Bryce Canyon. I've never been to Bryce Canyon, but my DH, the amateur photographer, has been looking at photo ops, and has he found some beauties! "Come, look at this," he calls me from his cave. I look over his shoulder and I see, with my imagination's eye, something magical. Turns out Bryce Canyon has a unique landscape (okay, I knew that much) but the photographs capture something else. Credit good photography or credit my wild imagination, but a story started in that moment.
The author part of me started making notes - mental notes at first - and then yesterday I did some additional research while I had some down time. I had visions of the Wicked Witch from the Wizard of Oz popping out of the scenery (Hoodoos are prone to dissolving in water). I had visions of fairy queens and princesses emerging from the "Fairy Chimneys." Well you get the idea. Much more, but until I can put it into a story, I think I'll spare you my wild imaginings. My dilemma? Ok, since these are Fairy Chimneys, does it become a Fairy Tale? Does it venture into the fantasy genre? (Sorry, I don't feel adequate to that task). I'm good with paranormal - that's my leaning - but how far out of paranormal will a fairy chimney take me? These are all rhetorical questions, really, but it does make you stop and appreciate Aesop and the Brothers Grimm. The possibilities for my fertile imagination are endless, but I'll stick with what I know.
I have my summer project!
Friday, April 2, 2010
Writing Instructions
I got my latest writing magazine in the mail this week and now that deadline is over (picture squished animals in the middle of the road and that's about how I feel post-March 31), I actually took a few minutes to flip through it. And then, once my brain re-engaged with life, I actually read some of the articles.
One of the interesting viewpoints was "what kind of writer are you?" which analyzes similarly to a personality profile. Get ready, I'm going to editorialize here.
Articles for writers are written by writers who are trying to earn some money while they're waiting for their books to sell or as a marketing technique to get you to recognize their name and read their books. Nothing wrong with it, but at the end of the day, these articles boil down to one person's opinion. Often they are dry, which makes me less inclined to read their prose. Every now and then you come across someone whose personality shines through in their articles (case in point: J.A. Konrath). But I digress. Back to my point - one person's opinion.
An important thing to note is that all writers are not created equal. The "rules" of writing are a standard that most should follow and particularly for novice writers, they need to follow the rules until they learn when it's okay to break them. An example here is Nora Roberts. The Rule is stay in one point of view per section. Nora is a terrible head-hopper, and yet she is wildly popular. So the novice writer says "if Nora can do it, so can I." But Nora has something they don't: experience and knowledge. My point here is that novice writers should stick to the rules. Again, I'm digressing from my point (call it battle fatigue).
Back to the article I read. Even when I don't agree with the author, there's usually something you can come away with. I enjoyed this particular piece because it identifies how you write. It tells you to stay true to what you write, but it also tells you to know enough about how you DON'T write to incorporate some of the other personalities into for a more well-rounded story. (Not sure I'm making sense here - checking head for fever . . .) Let me see if I can elaborate.
I fall into what she classified as "Type C" writer. Vivid imagination, alternate reality, I can see it all in my head but I can't always get it onto paper. I have another buddy who is a "Type A," which is defined as more clinical - to the point, but lacking depth of emotion. Then there's the "Type B" that is all romantic interludes. The author goes on to point out that there are rules for how many interludes you can get away with in your novel and those folks either have to write erotica or find balance in the A's and C's.
My friend who is a Class A writer throws in some of those Class B scenes according to the "rules." Obligatory, she calls it. I disagree. I'm all for a good sex scene now and then, but there are some stories that just don't need them. Dan Brown, for instance, writes excellent Class A books without having the hero jump into bed with the beautiful young heroine. The attraction is there and clearly presented, but our hero has more important things on his mind. To my point - Sex scenes are NOT obligatory. If they advance the plot, well and good.
Call me out of touch, but I know what I like to read. Reining back in to the article now. Each personality needs to touch on the others to make the book a better read. Although I can clearly see my convoluted plot lines and trains of thought in my head, without a little Class A balance to my Class C writing, my readers will have no idea what's going on. And THAT is what I got from that article. I can see myself, and I can see my shortcomings as she detailed them. (Good writing!)
So as to writing instructions, and authors sharing all their tips and tricks: at the end of the day, no two authors are created equal. Nora Roberts is allowed to write head-hopping scenes, but the rest of the world is forbidden. Dan Brown can write a plot line that stretches the imagination to its limits, but I guarantee you my critique group would point out immediately that it would be highly unlikely that my hero could solve a puzzle an hour in a foreign country where he doesn't know his way around, let alone the landmarks he has to find there.
It's all in what the editors will tell you - if you have a well written story, the rest will take care of itself. People will overlook the rules you've broken if you can hold them with good writing, and good writing comes with a balance of imagination, attention to everyday details and yes, sometimes, a hot romance scene. It comes from "showing" and not "telling" (the cardinal rule!). Most of all, and this is probably why the article rang with me, is that you have to be true to yourself and not try to write outside of who you are. If you're a Class C writer, embrace that and while you should incorporate the other styles, don't try to BE the other styles.
Yep. I'm on board with that. Half the battle is identifying your style. Once you're there, you know what you have to work on.
One of the interesting viewpoints was "what kind of writer are you?" which analyzes similarly to a personality profile. Get ready, I'm going to editorialize here.
Articles for writers are written by writers who are trying to earn some money while they're waiting for their books to sell or as a marketing technique to get you to recognize their name and read their books. Nothing wrong with it, but at the end of the day, these articles boil down to one person's opinion. Often they are dry, which makes me less inclined to read their prose. Every now and then you come across someone whose personality shines through in their articles (case in point: J.A. Konrath). But I digress. Back to my point - one person's opinion.
An important thing to note is that all writers are not created equal. The "rules" of writing are a standard that most should follow and particularly for novice writers, they need to follow the rules until they learn when it's okay to break them. An example here is Nora Roberts. The Rule is stay in one point of view per section. Nora is a terrible head-hopper, and yet she is wildly popular. So the novice writer says "if Nora can do it, so can I." But Nora has something they don't: experience and knowledge. My point here is that novice writers should stick to the rules. Again, I'm digressing from my point (call it battle fatigue).
Back to the article I read. Even when I don't agree with the author, there's usually something you can come away with. I enjoyed this particular piece because it identifies how you write. It tells you to stay true to what you write, but it also tells you to know enough about how you DON'T write to incorporate some of the other personalities into for a more well-rounded story. (Not sure I'm making sense here - checking head for fever . . .) Let me see if I can elaborate.
I fall into what she classified as "Type C" writer. Vivid imagination, alternate reality, I can see it all in my head but I can't always get it onto paper. I have another buddy who is a "Type A," which is defined as more clinical - to the point, but lacking depth of emotion. Then there's the "Type B" that is all romantic interludes. The author goes on to point out that there are rules for how many interludes you can get away with in your novel and those folks either have to write erotica or find balance in the A's and C's.
My friend who is a Class A writer throws in some of those Class B scenes according to the "rules." Obligatory, she calls it. I disagree. I'm all for a good sex scene now and then, but there are some stories that just don't need them. Dan Brown, for instance, writes excellent Class A books without having the hero jump into bed with the beautiful young heroine. The attraction is there and clearly presented, but our hero has more important things on his mind. To my point - Sex scenes are NOT obligatory. If they advance the plot, well and good.
Call me out of touch, but I know what I like to read. Reining back in to the article now. Each personality needs to touch on the others to make the book a better read. Although I can clearly see my convoluted plot lines and trains of thought in my head, without a little Class A balance to my Class C writing, my readers will have no idea what's going on. And THAT is what I got from that article. I can see myself, and I can see my shortcomings as she detailed them. (Good writing!)
So as to writing instructions, and authors sharing all their tips and tricks: at the end of the day, no two authors are created equal. Nora Roberts is allowed to write head-hopping scenes, but the rest of the world is forbidden. Dan Brown can write a plot line that stretches the imagination to its limits, but I guarantee you my critique group would point out immediately that it would be highly unlikely that my hero could solve a puzzle an hour in a foreign country where he doesn't know his way around, let alone the landmarks he has to find there.
It's all in what the editors will tell you - if you have a well written story, the rest will take care of itself. People will overlook the rules you've broken if you can hold them with good writing, and good writing comes with a balance of imagination, attention to everyday details and yes, sometimes, a hot romance scene. It comes from "showing" and not "telling" (the cardinal rule!). Most of all, and this is probably why the article rang with me, is that you have to be true to yourself and not try to write outside of who you are. If you're a Class C writer, embrace that and while you should incorporate the other styles, don't try to BE the other styles.
Yep. I'm on board with that. Half the battle is identifying your style. Once you're there, you know what you have to work on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)