A Study in Clues: The Layered Story

As a mystery writer, I’m intrigued by the notion of clues.  The old “list of stuff in a scene” or, “what the butler saw” are clue-types I still enjoy. But to be honest, I often miss clues in mysteries, relying on my “gut feeling” to decide who the culprit of the crime is. To me, under the clues, deductive reasoning, observances and other detecting tools of the trade, is the story. And the story is what brings the reader along, even if I know that the person who seems the nicest is likely to be the killer.

M.C. Escher's Three Worlds from WikiArt.org
M.C. Escher's Three Worlds
from WikiArt.org

So, last week I dove into the classic mystery by Wilkie Collins, “The Woman in White.” I hadn’t read it before, and wasn’t expecting much.  After all, it was written in 1859 in the midst of the Victorian era. The sentences are long, the characters seldom get right to the point, and the niceties of the times could make the pace of the story seem beyond quaint, to nerve-wracking slow.  I thought I’d have no problem discovering “who done it” by chapter two. Was I in for an education.

Collins’ language, though typical of the time, engaged me completely.  He breaks all sorts of story rules by today’s standards, yet in doing so, enriches the reading experience completely.

The table of contents gives us seldom used concepts, like Epoch (a period in a person’s life marked by notable events), and a story started by one character and continued by another, based on the events. No mish-mash of multiple witnesses to the same event as we write today, but a continuous story told from the perspective of the best witness for that event. But every witness has a mystery of his or her own to resolve. Each was written in first person, but the personalities and their personal worries were so varied it was easy to keep them straight.

In the first paragraph of the tale, we are engaged with a question put forth in the form of a melodramatic statement: “This is the story of what a Woman’s patience can endure, and what a Man’s resolution can achieve.”  Okay, I’ll bite.

There is no dead body in the first chapter. Or the second. In fact, no one dies for quite a while in this tale. Yet time and again, I was caught up in the tension of what might happen. And when, at last, we get to the death, it seems almost inconsequential to the tale.  This isn’t much for detecting writers of today to pull from.

In fact, it wasn’t until the very end of the tale, that I understood a seldom used, but completely effective form of clue-setting—layering.  With multiple perspectives, we have multiple stories pulled along not just by a theme, but by subplots, each with mysteries of their own.  Why did Sir Percival insist on marrying Laura when she made it plain her heart rested elsewhere?  Who is this enormous Fosco, and how does he maintain that Svengali hold over so many people? Who is this woman in white, and why does she look so much like Laura?

Every page seemed to introduce a new mystery, even as it revealed new evidence of evil intent.  I’m reminded of the old Heinz ketchup commercial: anticipation. Layering.

And, I was truly grateful that not every mystery in the story was closed in the final pages of the book.  Some mysteries were solved early and others late.  The more you read the more you were rewarded in the puzzles and solutions before you.

In a way, The Woman in White reminds me of M.C. Escher’s lithograph of The Three Worlds. When you look at this picture of a pond with a fish in it, you’re tempted to walk by and say “so what?” But then Escher invites you in with the title of his work and you can see so much more because of the subtlety of laying he’s done with the fish in one world, the leaves in another, and the trees in a third world. Woman in White gives us at least that many layers.

So what’s the clue here? How do you plant it in your next story?  Learning to layer here.

How to Spot (& Avoid) “Pay to Play” Publishing Contracts

In recent months, I’ve seen a resurgence of some terrible publishing “offers” that business-savvy authors need to recognize . . . and avoid.

Although these “deals” are legal if an author signs them, every time I see one of these contracts, I'm reminded of my law school contracts professor’s favorite saying: “You can make as good a deal, or AS BAD A DEAL, as you are able.”

And authors who accept these contract offers are making a very bad deal indeed.

Let's take a closer look:

BAD CONTRACT #1: “WE PUBLISH, YOU PAY”

This contract requires the author pay for some or all of the publisher's costs to produce the book. Often, the costs are not listed in detail up front, leaving the author on the hook for undisclosed (and often enormous) sums. When costs are listed, they often exceed the amount the author would have to pay to self-publish the work - meaning the author could hire a professional cover designer, developmental editor and copy editor . . . and still not pay as much these contracts require.

The publisher, not the author, should be responsible for all the publishing costs in a traditional publishing deal.

There are some legitimate "hybrid presses" that share the publishing costs with the author (and generally pay MUCH higher royalties--at least 50% of gross income--to offset those shared expenses). However, the legitimate ones are vastly outnumbered by the ones who simply want to make a buck off an unsuspecting author's dreams--so always have a hybrid-style contract reviewed by a publishing lawyer who works for YOU before you sign.

Beware: sometimes “pay to play” terms also lurk in the royalty language. A contract which pays royalties on “net receipts” and defines “net” as “amounts received by the publisher less the costs of editing and publishing the Work or less the Publisher’s actual costs to publish and sell the Work” is requiring the author to pay for the publisher’s costs. This doesn’t require payment out of pocket, but it’s still an inappropriate "pay to play" arrangement. 

Any time a "traditional" publisher tries to shift the costs of publishing the Work to the author—either up front or in the royalty share—the publisher is altering the traditional model and asking the author to take on an unfair share of the risk.

Legitimate hybrid publishers are always up front about the nature of the arrangement and the fact that the author isn’t being offered a “traditional deal.” Anyone who tries to tell you that the “author pays” model is a “typical New York contract” or a “traditional publishing opportunity” is trying to take advantage of your ignorance.

BAD CONTRACT #2: “WE PUBLISH, YOU BUY”

A publishing contract should never require the author to purchase copies of the finished book. Most publishing contracts permit the author to purchase finished copies, usually at a significant discount from the cover price. Some contracts restrict what the author can do with those discount copies (for example, some contracts prohibit their re-sale). However, traditional publishing contracts don’t ever require the author to purchase books from the publisher at any price.

One publishing “offer” I see a lot requires the author to purchase several thousand copies of the book and to pay the publisher for them in advance. The author must pay the publisher tens of thousands of dollars up front, but give the publisher full control over cover art, editing, and the content of the finished work. Don't do this. Ever.

Do the math: if the author buys five thousand copies of the finished work from the publisher at $16.95 apiece, how many copies does the publisher have to sell someone else to make a profit? The answer, of course, is NONE—and these publishers often make no effort to sell their books to anyone other than the authors.

NEVER sign a contract which requires a mandatory purchase of the work. Legitimate publishers just don’t work that way.

BAD CONTRACT #3: MANDATORY PAID MARKETING & "AUTHOR TRAINING" 

A few publishers offer unsuspecting authors a “traditional publishing deal” – where the publisher pays publishing costs and industry-standard royalties on sales – paired with a “mandatory marketing and author training contract” that requires the author to pay the publisher (or an affiliated marketing agency) thousands of dollars for marketing and "author training" services.

This is not a traditional publishing deal, and it’s not a good deal, either.

Once again, the author pays thousands of dollars out of pocket in return for unspecified "marketing" and "training." Even if services are specified, they usually include only things the publisher (or its “marketing arm”) can do in-house, like writing press releases, promotional Facebook posts, and other things authors can easily do themselves. Here, too, the publisher doesn’t need to sell any books to make a profit, and authors usually end up paying far more than the value of what they receive. 

Fortunately, authors can avoid bad contracts like these by following a few simple guidelines:

1.  Never sign a "traditional" contract that requires you to pay the publisher money (for publishing costs or royalties). 

2.  Never sign a contract that lets the publisher recoup its publishing costs before calculating your royalty share.

3. Never sign any contract without having it reviewed by an agent or a publishing attorney.

4. If you suspect your publishing deal isn't fair, or if something seems "not right"--be willing to walk away. 

Save your money and your work--because having no publishing deal at all is always better than having a deal you regret.

Starting at Word One…

Every writer has to begin at the beginning.

I know this sounds like a cliche, but it's not. Think about it. Every. Writer. Dickens, Tolkien, Charlotte Bronte, Stephen King, Nora Roberts - even Mr. Shakespeare himself. All of them were at one point unskilled, unknown, and unpublished. I'm willing to bet that at some point in their lives, each one of these well known authors felt like what they were writing was going nowhere.

Sometimes, the beginning feels like the void before creation, or the Big Bang, or however the universe came into being. The prospect of creating something in the middle of that vast emptiness is mind boggling. Add in the extra dimension of trying to publish whatever we manage to create and knowing we'll need to fight to bring it to the attention of readers and it's a wonder every single one of us isn't rocking in a corner somewhere, clad in a straightjacket and gibbering at the moon.

Somewhere along the line, every writer you've ever heard of caught a lucky break. But here's the thing--in order to catch that lucky break, they had to be ready. Which means they wrote things without knowing whether those things would ever be read. They practiced. They persevered. In a sense, they made their own luck.

Perhaps you have heard of a little book called The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? The author, Douglas Adams, didn't actually set out to write a book. He wrote a screen play. And this is what he had to say about the night it first aired:

"The first episode went out on BBC Radio 4 at 10:30 P.M. on Wednesday, March 8, 1978, in a huge blaze of no publicity at all. Bats heard it. The odd dog barked.

After a couple of weeks a letter or two trickled in." ~Douglas Adams

Douglas freaking Adams, you guys. Words he wrote, characters he created, are now catch phrases that are part of casual conversation. There is even a Towel Day every year. And yet, he too experienced that terrible silence so many of us fear when we're launching a book.

Stephen King threw Carrie into the trash can. His wife pulled it out and talked him into submitting it.

You get the picture. If you feel like you're spinning your wheels with your writing and going nowhere, write anyway. If you're in the desert of bleakness at the middle of a novel and have lost all hope of ever writing anything good, write anyway.

Writers are not good judges of their own work. You never know when your lucky break will come, or which book you've written might suddenly strike a chord with readers and take you to the top of a list.

Write even if none of these things happen, if you never catch a lucky break.

Write because you're a writer, damn it, and that's what you were put into this world to do.

 

Congratulations to Mark Stevens WOTY and Lisa Manifold IWOTY

Selected from a list of accomplished finalists, Mark Stevens is the new Rocky Mountain Fiction Writers Writer of the Year and Lisa Manifold is the first ever RMFW Independent Writer of the Year.

Writer of the Year Finalists
Carol Berg
Christine Goff
Mark Stevens

Independent Writer of the Year Finalists
Sue Duff
Nathan Lowell
Lisa Manifold

Join the full panel of finalists and winners at the WOTY & IWOTY Discussion Panel Hosted by Susan Spann
Thursday, August 18, 2016 7-9 pm
Tattered Cover, 2526 East Colfax Avenue Denver, CO 80206

Easy Editing Trick

I think for new writers, especially those that have just completed their first book, one of the most daunting challenges facing them can be the revision process. I remember after I completed my first novel I had two very distinct emotions.

Tremendous joy, "I completed my first book!"

And utter dread, "How on earth am I ever going to shape these 100,000 words into not only a readable but enjoyable story?"

Now, as I work on the edits for my fifth novel, I can say that my entire process for approaching a work of fiction has completely changed over the last fourteen years. From the onset I approach a story differently, there's more intention, more planning, more careful consideration about where my story is going and who I want my characters to be--how I want them to change. That's not to say that there isn't a tremendous amount of discovery that also happens while I'm crafting, but I have definitely turned into a plotter. Every writer is different, this is absolutely true, but for me planning the book out before I even get started has proved enormously valuable when it comes time to tackle the big picture revision once I’m finished.

However, there is one thing about my writing process that has never changed—a pesky problem that no amount of planning and plotting can solve. When I’m writing that first draft, the highly detailed portions of my brain seem to be taking a backseat. What do I mean by this? I've discovered that, when it comes to writing fiction, there's two parts of my brain. One side is creating story and imagining scenes as I'm writing them. It feels slightly like not being completely present in the here and now. It is a very similar experience to what happens when I read other people's books or when I watch a movie. I am seeing the action happen, I am sharing the dialogue in my head. I am imagining the setting my characters are in and I am I'm transcribing that world for the reader.

The other side of my brain, barely awake when imagining the story, is in charge of sentence and word level mistakes. This is probably different for everyone, but when I'm in the story mode my brain simply doesn’t recognize details like the difference between there, their, and they’re.

So over the last fourteen years I have taught myself to produce a more manageable end product by planning first off, but I've also developed a few tricks to help me catch some of my most obvious and repeated word and sentence level mistakes.

One of the simplest tricks I have to eradicate an enormous number of errors littering my manuscripts utilizes the word find feature on my word-processing program. All the silly mistakes I make, whether it’s because two words look very much alike, I’m not zeroed in on correct usage in the moment, or I have a bad tendency to overuse particular words and phrases—this feature helps me hunt them down.

Here's my list of my most frequent repeat offenders.

just, through, though, although, thought, there, their, they’re, were, where, an, a, further, farther, awhile, a while, all right, alright, nodded, really, shook, stupid, smug, sighed, laid, lay, lie, suddenly, and people rolling their lips between their teeth

It's likely that your repeat offenders are not the same as mine, our brains function and dysfunction in completely unique and different ways from each other but hopefully this list is one you can use to get started creating your own personalized list of searchable mistakes.

I should also add for new writers, maybe in the throes of tackling their first revision ever, this little trick in no way encapsulates all of the editing and revision that will be required to take your first novel to that next level regardless of whether you’re self-publishing or are submitting it to agents and editors. Searching repeat offender words is simple but it still takes many hours to go through an entire manuscript. It’s not something you're going to be able to crack out in an hour.

And for anyone who may be curious, my other big mistake involves comma use. Sigh. Sadly, I've yet to come up with an easy way to detect and quickly fix all of those—sorry.

In the meantime I suspect my comma problem will continue to help my editor put her children through college.

 

Having. Written. Writing is work.

Writing is work, and usually demands a good amount of self-discipline just to get your butt in the chair and put down words whether you feel like it or not.

Yes, I go through funks. One of the reasons I give seminars on how to get through my panic and work through funks is because I experience them. Like a week ago. I’d been making a reasonable daily wordcount (about which I am obsessive), then outside real life worries mixed with the knowledge I’d have to trash the first chapter of my new manuscript spiraled me down into a funk.

So I asked myself, “What would make you very happy now?” Travel? An air conditioned house, or even an office? A cupcake? (I live too close to a cupcake shop) Comfort food? (I know where all those places that serve what I like best are, too).

However, myself said, “Having written.” That would have made me feel better about my day.

Unfortunately I don’t have any magical writing pens or spells that would transfer ideas from my head onto the computer, wonderfully written and nicely formatted.

It doesn’t work that way. There is no “having written,” unless you actually sit down and do the work.

WRITE!

Like many in PAL and IPAL I am a professional writer. Furthermore, I am single, without any other income. I don’t write, I don’t get paid. It’s a risky business. So I really can’t afford funks or the panic or the self-hate that immobilizes me. I can’t wait upon a muse to waft into my window and fill me with enthusiasm. I can’t wait upon inspiration.

Writing is work. I first discovered this within my first year of seriously writing. After the Colorado Gold conference, I’d joined a critique group, but my technique was so poor that I needed a writing buddy (also a new writer) to meet with and look at my pages before I took them to critique. I’d written a new scene and met with my buddy one Saturday morning at the hideous hour of seven a.m. across town. I knew the scene was good.

She said so, too. But then she said the fatal words, “This is a great scene but it doesn’t belong in the book.” It was extraneous to the story. In fact, it was backstory.

So I sat there, staring down at curdling eggs, at too-early-a-time-of-day-for-me-to-even-be-awake-on-Saturday, looking at pages that had taken me hours to write and polish. That was when I knew writing wasn’t just fun, it was work.

Most of the time, it remains work. Oh, like everyone, I have those days of giddy inspiration, those bursts of fabulous words that flow faster than I can type, but, really, a lot of the time it is plinking one word down at a time. I don’t consider myself a literary writer, one who strings together beautiful phrases. I consider myself a workmanlike writer of good technique who can fashion interesting characters and tell good stories.

I also got my start in publishing when self-publishing wasn’t much of an option, and after I wrote my million words, put in my ten thousand hours to become proficient. Most of the time I can take myself into my office and write, even if I have a little depression or fear. Most of the time I like the process of writing, too, though the story might dribble out word by word.

But I ALWAYS love “having written.” Even if I don’t think the words are great, or am dubious about whether the scene will remain in the manuscript, or if I took a wrong turn. I wrote. I did my job.

May all your writing dreams come true.

But What About Editing?

Even Walt Whitman did him some editing.
Even Walt Whitman did him some editing.

Pros and Cons of Automated Editing—a Discussion of AutoCrit

In the continuing saga of preparing a book for Kindle Scout, let’s talk about editing for self-publishing. This could also apply to editing for submissions, since you need to have your book in squeaky-clean shape before you start submitting to publishers (I know a good number of people who don’t believe this, but that’s for another post…).

If you’re like me, the idea of getting a book in solid shape for self-pub is a bit intimidating. I edit for other people on the side, but I have very little faith in myself to find my own mistakes. I know my manuscripts generally go to the editor far cleaner than many of the manuscripts I edit for other publishers, but there are still mistakes—typos, weirdness generated by Dragon Dictate when I use it, and of course the dreaded continuity issues.

Ideally, before you self-pub a book, you should send it to a professional editor. This can get pricey, though—I’m not sure I could afford myself as an editor right now, and my rates are really low. Nathan Lowell beat me to the punch in talking about using beta readers to crowdsource your editing in his article Bootstrap Your Book. The methods he discusses here are very useful and effective. If you’re lucky, you maybe have a proofer or editor on your list from a publisher you’ve worked with before who might be willing to give your manuscript a gander for a low cost. My group of proofers includes a fellow author I’ve edited for years as well as a proofer/editor from one of my publishers. It pays to make friends in this industry… Bartering can work, too—if you feel confident about your abilities to find typos or point out continuity issues, work out a trade with another author. Or offer large quantities of chocolate.

In any case, since Nathan covered the bases of crowdsourced editing, I’m going to talk about another low-cost approach—automated editing. Wait, wait—don’t run off. I have Important Things to Say.

I’m sure you’ve heard of Grammarly, which is a site where you can upload your manuscript and have it spit out a number of different grammar issues regarding your manuscript. I haven’t used this site, but I’ve used AutoCrit, which I believe is similar. I’m going to discuss my experiences, what automated editing can and can’t do, how it’s helped me, and why it might be worth looking into.

I stumbled across AutoCrit by accident. I’d gotten a sponsored email from Writer’s Digest with a free offer for a short video course on creating dialogue. I have a tendency to grab and hoard free things (SHINY! SHINY! FREE!), so I grabbed the course. I didn’t notice at the time, but it was from the AutoCrit website. They started sending me emails offering me a GREAT DEAL on a year-long membership to their site. After deleting several of these, I finally thought okay, wait. I’ve got a manuscript I need to get cleaned up. Let’s go sign up for the 7-day free trial and see what this puppy can do.

So I did that. I then uploaded Call Me Zhenya—all 93,000 words—onto the site and let AutoCrit do its magic. It generated about ten reports, which I then downloaded and looked over.

There are, of course, limits to what this kind of editor can do. It’s best to ignore a lot of the advice it produces, much like it’s best to ignore most of the green squiggly lines MS Word automatically generates to tell you you’ve committed a grammar infraction.

HOWEVER.

The reports I got from AutoCrit found a good number of things I had obviously missed on the forty quadrillion editing runs I’d done on my own. The report on “ly” adverbs was particularly enlightening (My name is Katriena and I am an adverb-aholic). It also found some typos I’d missed and put my horrible word repetition habit into stark relief. (Seriously? 1600 repetitions of “quietly?” Good grief, woman!)

I wasn’t quite as on board with the reports that supposedly showed me show vs. tell writing. The parameters they used didn’t seem realistic to me, as they were mostly keyed to certain verb tenses. The passive verbs report seemed equally arbitrary. I do, however, feel like the time I spent going through the reports and sifting out repeated words, typos, and adverbs was well spent. I also took the plunge and bought the discounted year’s subscription. It seemed like a reasonable price, though I probably would have balked at a full-price subscription.

Overall, I thought it proved to be a good addition to my self-pub repertoire, since it found a good many things a proofreader would have marked up. That means I can send a much cleaner version to the actual humans who read the story later, and that can only be a good thing.

For those who might be curious, the reports AutoCrit provides are:

  • Adverbs in Dialogue Tags
  • Adverbs Overall
  • Clichés
  • Generic Descriptions
  • Passive Verbs
  • Redundancies
  • Sentence Starters
  • Show vs. Tell Indicators
  • Unnecessary Filler Words

You can run these one at a time or all in one fell swoop. You can also decide whether to get a high-level report or a detailed report that shows you exactly where all the noted transgressions are located in the manuscript. This can be in a list form, or highlighted on a copy of your manuscript. You can upload a few pages, a chapter, or the whole manuscript for evaluation.

Getting to Know You: The RMFW Member Q&A Project #2

The Getting to Know You Project is intended to introduce RMFW members with short responses to three questions, a photo, and a few social media links if available. If you would like to participate in the project for future months, please email Pat Stoltey at blog@rmfw.org

Terri Benson

Website: http://www.terribensonwriter.com/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/terri.benson.104?fref=ts

Terri Benson11. We know the who (that's you), so will you give us the what, why, when, where, and how you write?

I’ve been published in historic romance and have several manuscripts “looking for a home”, and am currently working on a “amateur sleuth” mystery series that I’m really excited about. I love history, so it’s likely that no matter what I write, there will be an historic bent to it. I work full time and have a large yard and serve on a couple boards (including RMFW), so I have to work hard to find time to write. Usually I write in the living room with the laptop and a TV show in the background. I don’t listen to music when I write, but I don’t like it to be too quiet. I’m a binge writer. I can write for 8 hours straight and never even notice I missed a meal or two (but my husband does!).

2. What is one fun thing few RMFW members know about you?

I have a fetish for garden gnomes and other yard art, after owning an “outdoor” store for several years. I love to find little faces peeking out at me from under shrubs or bright blooms, and can’t pass up a weird statue or other item that I think might find a home in my yard.

3. What is your most favorite non-writing activity, the one that gives you the greatest joy?

Camping and hiking with my husband, Rick, and dog, Tank, and any friends or family we can talk into heading out for a weekend. There are so many great places to visit in our neck of the woods. I usually find some time to write if it’s just my husband and I, so that’s a bonus.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Margaret Mizushima

Website and blog: http://margaretmizushima.com/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/margaret.mizushima
Twitter: https://twitter.com/margmizu
Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/8446201.Margaret_Mizushima

Margaret Mizushima1. We know the who (that's you), so will you give us the what, why, when, where, and how you write?

I write the Timber Creek K-9 mystery series which has KILLING TRAIL out now, and STALKING GROUND releases this September. Each morning I tread upstairs to my home office with a cup of herbal tea, and I write for three to four hours. I work at my day job in the same office in the afternoons when I'm brain dead.

2. What is one fun thing few RMFW members know about you?

I'm a cattlewoman. (Is that a fun fact?) I was raised on a cattle ranch and my husband, a veterinarian, and I started our own ranchette with 3 registered Angus cows about twenty years ago. We now have over a hundred head and produce breeding stock for other cattle growers.

3. What is your most favorite non-writing activity, the one that gives you the greatest joy?

I love to hike and try to go into the Colorado high country whenever I can. Since writing has become my main priority, I don't get away as often as I used to, but it's my goal to figure out how to work that habit back into my schedule. It nourishes my soul.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Steven Moores

Website: http://stevenmoores.net/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/steven-moores-ab371118
Steven has a low profile on the web. He collects manual typewriters, somewhere around 25, at last count. He's poised to become a publishing tycoon when civilization collapses and there's no more FaceBook or MyFace or other internet.

2016_Steven Moores1. We know the who (that's you), so will you give us the what, why, when, where, and how you write?

I’ve finished four romance novels, one middle-grade fantasy, and two mysteries. Basically, I write stories that interest me, regardless of the genre. I have a day job, so I write in the mornings and on weekends. Because I have ADD, I find it hard to write in a quiet space. Give me a bus station or a busy coffee shop where I can let the never-ending circus in my mind run free. Needless to say I don’t do a lot of plotting up front. I just watch the scenes unfold in my mind, then I describe them as well as I can in words before I lose them.

2. What is one fun thing few RMFW members know about you?

While I don’t claim to have any such talent what-so-ever, I’m on YouTube a couple of times singing St. James Infirmary with the Mile High Community Band. Actually, I can't say it's me. I’d never have the courage to sing in public. I just channel Louis Armstrong.

3. What is your most favorite non-writing activity, the one that gives you the greatest joy?

I’m learning to play the saxophone and pondering the mysteries of jazz improvisation. I also plink around on the trumpet, ukulele, and guitar. After a long day at the office, playing music changes the brainwaves almost as nicely as a cold beer.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Terry Odell

Website and blog: http://terryodell.com/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/terry.odell?fref=ts
Twitter: https://twitter.com/authorterryo
Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/897369.Terry_Odell

2016_Terry Odell1. We know the who (that's you), so will you give us the what, why, when, where, and how you write?

I write mystery and romantic suspense, but I call them all "Mysteries With Relationships." When I started writing my first book, I thought I was writing a mystery, but my daughters told me it was a romance, which surprised me because I'd never read a romance. I'm a "pantser". I set a minimum word count goal of 1000 words a day. I'm usually able to get there, although I'm often distracted by watching the sunrises and sunsets, birds at the feeder, or the wildlife in the yard.

2. What is one fun thing few RMFW members know about you?

I doubt anyone knows we have a skull collection in our home. I'm not divulging what kind.

3. What is your most favorite non-writing activity, the one that gives you the greatest joy?

If I'm not writing, I'm either reading (I normally have 3 books going at once), or enjoying the outdoors with our shelter dog, Feebie. I also love testing recipes for the What's Cooking Wednesday segments on my blog.

 

Many thanks to Terri, Margaret, Steven, and Terry for volunteering for the Getting to Know You Project. If you'd like to participate in future GTKY posts, please email me at blog@rmfw.org

Even a Monkey Can Write a Bestseller: An Easy Formula

Write Me!
Write Me!

Did that headline get your attention? Did you instant click in to read the rest of the post? Or did you scoff, throwing your hands in the air, saying “there is no formula to a bestseller.”

When I read the PW Weekly article, What Makes a Bestseller? Two SMP Authors Say They Know the Formula. I opted for number 2. Not literary, you weirdo.

Then I read more. Could it be true? It looks like they did the research, reading and studying over 20,000 manuscripts.

The formula (according to the research provided in the PW article):

  • Three acts
  • Everyday language
  • Show don’t tell

I bet you read the above, and thought, like I did, crap. I already know this. It’s the advice of every writing instructor. Of every workshop. Of every writer I know. Find me a writer that doesn’t believe in everyday language, and I’ll show you a reader who fades into obscurity. Sure, the article uses bigger words and is written by people who’ve actually hit the bestseller list by using that formula, but the content is the same.

This is nothing new to us.

So why aren’t I a bestseller?

Because NOT every book can be, whether it follows this formula or not. There is something to be said for luck in our business. It’s who you know, and when. So let me add to this formula, two things. Write more. And know the players. Be they agents, editors, or book reviewers. Know the game as well. Know how to publish.

See you on the bestseller list. Remember who gave you the formula to get there. No, it was me. Not the PW article. Dang it!

Do you have other means of hitting the lists?

Conference Spotlight: Agent & Editor Critique Round Tables

RMFWConference_Chalkboard_RoundTablesThinking about signing up for a critique round table at conference? Act now, because registration is required and registration for those sessions closes this week (July 15).

The critique round table sessions are among the most popular offerings at RMFW Colorado Gold. Three and a half hours in length, the round tables offer you a chance to receive detailed critique on ten pages of your work and allow you the time to give feedback on the work of the other members in your group.

The round tables are a unique opportunity to experience specific critique with other writers as well as an agent or editor.

This year, we have 15 sessions to choose from, monitored by an attending agent or editor. Attendees may sign up for one or two round tables. Sessions are offered Friday morning at 8:00 AM and Friday afternoon at 1:00 PM. The tables are open to 8 critique participants and 2 auditors.

Critique participants: You will submit the first ten pages of your manuscript, plus a one-page synopsis of your story, to be critiqued by the agent/editor of your choice as well as by the other participants at your table.

Critique Auditors will only observe; you will neither submit pages nor offer critiques to participants. This is a great way to see how critique works and be a fly on the wall. Hear other authors' feedback on the submitted work and listen as the attending agent or editor shares their insights.

Once registration closes, participants will receive further instructions from RMFW volunteer, Scott Brendel, who manages all the things with Round Table Critiques, and will provide details on everything, including where and when to submit your pages, which will be due in August.

These sessions are a $40 add on for participants, $15 for auditors. Deadline to register is this Friday, July 15!