But they have a copy editor?

Grammar is one of the most important tools any writer can have in their writer's toolbox. Actually, I should say a knowledge of good grammar. Remember, it is the grammar, the knowledge of spelling, punctuation, sentence construction and the like that controls what and how we read your stories. In the end, it doesn't matter how well developed your story is, if the grammar is detracting from the story, you will not make a sale.

Now, I should say that many agents, and even editors might night have a 100% grasp on all elements of grammar. In other words, they might miss those dangling participles, but they do have enough knowledge to see if a writer is missing the point. I for one can also tell if the only knowledge of grammar is that which comes from the use of a grammar and spell checker.

Let me say, that there is nothing wrong with either of these computer tools. Both have their benefits, if (A) the writer knows how to use each properly; and (B) if the writer has set the computer properly to cause both of the checkers to work correctly.

"What is that you say, they don't work correctly?" That's right. You have to understand how each works, and actually set each to do what you want them to do. This is especially true with the grammar checker. For most computers, the grammar checker isn't checking for all of the items that could potentially create problems. The default setting is pretty basic.

Along the same lines, the grammar checkers only state if there is a potential problem. It is your job to check and see if that is really the case. When writing fiction, this can be a serious problem considering your characters may speak in fragments or broken grammar. Still if the narratives and the other major elements of your story have problems, this is a sign to the editor and agent that you might not be fully ready for publishing.

I should also add that when I see poor grammar, or a lack of structural knowledge from a writer in the query letter or the packaging of the material sent to me, I have pretty much already decided that I won't sign that person. First impressions mean a lot and the issue with grammar and spelling is a huge red flag.

Sure, the publishers have copy editors but they are not there to fix the mistakes that you as a writer should have known and understood.

So, what is the best solution? If you are a writer that finds grammar and spelling to be difficult, it is time to start learning. This may include taking classes at the local college. I know that many of the community colleges offer basic grammar classes. Audit the class. Take it for a credit/no credit option. If course work is not your "cup of tea" then find a resource that would help. Personally, the best source I have found is A Writer's Reference by Diana Hacker. It is published by Bedford/St. Martins and I haven't found a question that can not be answered by this book. I know many look at this and say it doesn't deal with fiction, but I have to break it to you, there isn't much of a difference. I'm not talking about creating the story, I am talking about the basic rules of grammar that do not vary from one genre to the next.

I'll also throw this offer in. If you are a writing chapter and interested in a full day grammar workshop, I could put something together for you. Just let me know.

Now, go out their and get gooder with your speling.

On Self Publishing

At the request of a follower of the blog, I thought I would throw my 2 cents worth in on this.

Self publishing is always an option for writers, but I think for many, they fully don't understand all of the aspects of self-publishing as well as the pros and cons of this approach.

First of all, with self-publishing, it is entirely up to you as an author to work through the project. This includes not only the editing (although some places will provide some feedback) but marketing of the book. This, in no way means you will make more money because you don't have to pay someone. In fact, it often means a lot of extra work for you that you didn't know you would have to do.

Secondly, many authors believe that if they are self published this moves them further up the "food chain of publishing." In reality, it does nothing to move you and actually, in some cases, becomes a negative for you. If, for example, someone comes to me procaliming all of these books they have written, I do check to see where the books were produced. Many times I find people who are self published and the books have already been submitted to many editors and agents with a ton of rejections before they dove for that option.

Next, many authors will use the self publishing as a way to produce something that is far from ready for the market. In other words, the document is something that just will not sell (for whatever reason). Putting it with a self-published group doesn't suddenly make the story marketable.

Now, on the other side, the self-published market is great if you just want to see your book in a well formatted project. Sometimes, you simply want to produce a document that you are proud of. Nothing wrong with this approach.

The thing with self-publishing is:

a) you will not make more money than if you go through a publisher (without a heck of a lot of work and a very serious market for your book).

b) it does not make you a more marketable author when pushing other books.

c) it is a lot more work than you would imagine.

Still, it is an option.

Publishers are getting pickier

We've all seen this lately. Publishers such as Houghton Mifflin are tightening their belts and getting ready for a long tough hall. So, what does this mean for you as a writer?

I know I have said this in the past, but I think it is even truer now. Your stories have to be amazing. They have to be unique. They have to stand out. They have to me marketable.

It isn't a matter of finding someone that is simply a great storyteller any more. Heck, we have a ton of those people out there and single handedly, they are carrying the publishing market on their shoulders. Too often I hear editors say a writer is very good and very similar to another writer, but they already have that person. On one side, this is a great compliment, but you can see their point.

Even if you are writing for the category market, the stories have to be unique. Even the traditional heroes and heroines are not enough to make that sale. The common line we are hearing coming from editors now is that we have already seen that type of hero and heroine doing that type of thing. Find a way to tweak that hero and heroine a bit and give us something new.

Of course that something new has to be marketable. I find a lot of submissions coming across my desk that are truly unique. Will they sell? I doubt it. The problem is the story was too unique and with the market the way it is, we just can't take a chance on something that strange.

But what is my recommendation for you new authors?



Keep writing.



But, keep watching what is going on out there and find those new twists and turns to the stories you are working on. You may end up with 5, 10 and maybe even 15 books finished before one is picked up, but keep writing and keep sending in those projects. Like the economic market out there, I am confident that things will change. Not sure in what direction right now. Not sure when, but it will change.

Find the Easy Solution

I know I have said there are no quick solutions in publishing, but when it comes to writing, there are, in fact, many times when the quickest solution in editing will be the best. What I am referring to here would be those times when you are still writing your story, or might be in the first round of edits and find a huge roadblock. this is one of those times when you say, "How in the $^$^%$^&%%#%%^ no I get out of this?"

What happens most of the time is the author will make a change and then spend the next HUGE block of time dealing with all of the trickle down problems that happened because of that change. You fix one thing and then the next piece of the puzzle falls apart. In the end, you have nearly re-written the story (which in some cases is the best solution) or you end up with the same problem just in another portion of the story.

The easier solution is to stop and think. I know, thinking at a moment of crisis is nearly impossible but it is crucial. Think about the problem you have in the story and then look across the big picture of the story and find the actual underlying problem. In other words, what you may be looking at is only a symptom of something else in the story.

Let me explain. I was editing someone's partial and it was taking forever to get through the darn thing. Every page had huge problems in terms of the structure, plot, characterization and so forth. What I later found was that every time I would make a change, about a page or two later, it sounded like I was contradicting myself on the comments. By page 10 or so, the story was going in too many different directions.

I couldn't continue so I stopped.

After taking a look at it, I realized that the entire problem didn't stem from the small points in the story, it was the entire premise of the story. In no way would this situation have occurred and the characters in the story were fighting against something that was unreasonable to ask of them.

The solution? Tweak the premise of the story. Make the premise something that would actually be believable through some shifts in what the characters did, and voila!, all of the issues in the story that had once been a problem became an asset to the story.

I did the same thing yesterday when I was working with one of my client's manuscripts. (I should note this was the idea behind yesterday's post). She felt her story was going no where and she would have to start inserting scenes. She was already 1/2-3/4 of the say to her word count and was concerned about going over. The solution was the changing of narration to dialogue. Suddenly we had action and movement. Easy fix.

So instead of fighting the story, really examine and find the single small tweak it would take to fix the problem. You might find this is easier than you think.

Introspection?

Introspection is key to getting the reader involved with the characters in your story. Unfortunatley, I see too often writers that just mishandle the concept of introspection and then fall into the trap of "showing and not telling." Not only is this a weak approach that distances the characters from the reader, it slows the pace of the story immensely.

As you know, introspection is that look into the minds of the characters to really give us a chance to understand their personal goals and motives. These are, in many cases, the thoughts that are kept hidden from the other characters in the story to create more conflict later on. These are also, the thoughts that give us an idea of the personality of the characters. In my humble opinion, it is this element that is the most important and provides you as a writer the chance to create a fully three dimensional character.

Unfortunately, for many writers, introspection is executed poorly by many writers. Generally, I see authors spend countless paragraphs unloading information on the reader through narration. Although this works sometimes, it is generally like sucking the air out of the room. Just when you get the pace of the story going, you slow it down with the thoughts running through the characters head.

At the same time, many of these thoughts are all surface level issues. Many deal with the physical descriptions of the character, or simply as an information dump with backstory about why the character is acting that way.

So how do we change that? Actually the solution is very easy and one that will provide you some additional word count to use for more plot development later on in the story.

USE ACTION TAGS Right now what many authors use is the he said, she said thing. Instead, use an action tag that shows movement for the character that would also have an emotional movement to it as well. "I hate you," Bob yelled throwing the chair across the room. You can use longer phrases as well. This was the best I can do with a single cup of coffee but you get the idea.

REPLACE NARRATIVE WITH DIALOGUE Go back through your manuscript and find those long paragraphs where you describe what the characters are doing. Instead of telling us what they talked about, have them talk. Not only will this pick up the speed, it will give the reader a chance to see two sides of the character. The first is what they openly say to the other person, the second is what they think inside but are unwilling to share.

I also see this happen when a writer just skips the scene altogether. In other words, the writer says: "So, let's go in here for dinner." She smiled knowing this would be a great chance to get to know each other, and besides, she was starving. At this point the writer will generally skip to after the dinner. Dinner was wonderful and now they were driving home. Arrggghhhh!!! What happened to the dinner? What happened to what we can learn about the two?

Go back and play around with this. You will be amazed at the depth you can create in your stories.