Was dealing with an author the other day who had some talent, but IMO, needed a lot more work before her WIP was ready. She raved about how much she liked to read, how she'd read everything she could get her hands on in X genre.
Generally, if you're an author, reading is good advice. I don't like to read all that much. I know, I know . . . I'm passionate about it, but I read way too much crap to be enthusiastic about it anymore.
My advice on reading: yes, do read, read A LOT. READ ALL KINDS OF THINGS. Read Internet articles that make you cringe of the grammar. Read novels in hard cover, read paperbacks about Star Trek, read stuff written by high school students and adults who write like high school students but think they're going to be on the best sellers list, read cookbooks and style manuals and how-to books. READ EVERYTHING.
But very few people are successfully self-taught. Reading only what you like and only in a specific genre will not educate you. It will teach you certain flaws are acceptable. When an author uses . . . that it is OK. No, it's OK about two times. When I see a manuscript peppered with ellipses, I know automatically what genres the author is restricting themselves to, there's about three that do it.
My advice on being a good writer:
1. Join a writing group, a good one. One where the other authors are honest, professional, positive and preferably at the same writing level as you. Hearing how other authors talk and what their experiences are will be an eye-opener for a novice. Getting an honest critique will be incredibly helpful if the author allows themselves to be open to comments. When joining a writing group, beware of toxic critiques, author bashing, and on the opposite end, people who say only great things. You are not J.K. Rowling. And even J.K. Rowling has a flaw or two in her work.
2. Read articles about writing and the publishing industry. Read self-help books about how to write better. Do the exercises suggested in these books. Follow the tips.
3. Learn how to edit your work. Keep a list of flaws. Mine include dialogue-heavy scenes (I studied acting, seriously, for a year), evil words (yeah, write with them, do whatever you need to get it down on paper or computer, etc., then get rid of it), passive voice. See my first blog for the mistakes I see most frequently when I edit other people's work.
4. Go to writing conventions. Like joining a writing group, being around other authors is insightful and motivating. Meeting professionals offers great opportunities. And hearing other authors and professionals is incredibly educational.
5. Take a writing course. Hell yes, learn HOW to write. Even better, take an English class and learn how to use correct grammar. Other coursew that are helpful to writers: acting courses (I can rave about what acting has taught me about writing and will in the future), psychology courses, anthropology and sociology courses, history. You get the gist, write . . . er . . . right?
5. And read some more.
Friday, January 31, 2014
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Dialogue
I admit it, I actually like editing. Most writers don't. I'm savage like that. I love nothing more than sitting in front of a computer with a mug of tea (preferably Earl Grey, reasonably warm) and sifting through a piece of art that needs fine tuned. What happens more often if my dog is bugging me to go out, at least two cats are fighting over my lap and the manuscript I'm reading causes me brain damage from the number of times I slap myself on the forehead.
My latest head slapper is dialogue-heavy writing. This is actually really hard to pull off. I know this. I'm a victim of it. When I see an author writing dialogue-heavy work, it signals to me two things: The author watches too much TV and the author is doing an end-run around the showing vs. telling thing. Dialogue-heavy authors often defend this style by saying, "I'm showing what the characters are saying."
Unless the character has an impressive voice (which is hard to hear when you're READING), dialogue is just another way of telling what is going on.
Number one thing to beware of with dialogue: "Hi, Sue." "Hi, Larry." "How you doin'?" "Oh, I'm fine." "What are you having for lunch?" Brings to mind the James Earl Jones and Malcolm McDowell commercials about texting. My husband hates them. Me, they're a glimpse into the horror story of what I do for . . . I'm not living off of the editing. And I can't really call it fun . . . I'm more of a masochist than I thought . . .
I'm amazed at how many of the authors I've worked with seriously have dialogue scenes with the server at a bar or restaurant as if what is being eaten matters to the story. Don't get me wrong, I love to eat. If what's being eaten matters to the story, save me from a mundane scene where the character talks to a waiter, waitress, bartender, etc., and actually describes how luscious the triple-decker chocolate lava cake is, the smoothness of the ooze inside, the bitter stab of the chocolate, the rescue of the sweet powdered sugar . . . Show me, show me, show me!!!! Just as bad, "Hey, Jim! Nice to see ya'!" Nope, dialogue needs to punch and move forward. Stay away from mundane how-do-you-dos.
Number two thing I hate about dialogue-heavy writing: No tags.
Number three thing, which goes along with number two: No tags doesn't mean use 'he interjected,' 'she reasoned,' 'he inquired.' These kinds of tags are distracting. When using dialogue, it absolutely has to punch. If you're character says, "I'll kill you!" Then it's followed with 'he reasoned,' you're going to distract the reader. First of all, he didn't reason that he was going to kill someone. Killing someone is almost certainly irrational. (If it's not irrational, you'd better prove it--via SHOWING ME!) Everyone who knows me knows I have an evil word list, so what I'm about to say is counter-intuitive. You really can say 'he said,' 'she said.' Like have and hold, said can be used almost as much as you want. It won't take away from the dialogue. When tagging, stick with actions, said or occasionally a descriptive verb of how the character is saying whatever.
Don't think 'he smiled' is an OK tag. It's OK a couple of times. But smiling is not as descriptive as you think. You can use 'he smiled' if it's a trademark action of a particular character, but this has to be developed, that his lips crinkle up into that grin he was so well-known for. I love Ian Somerhalder's smile, but I would rather slit my wrists than write fanfic for TVD and say Damon smiled. Damon leers, Damon lets his smile flow through his body. Every word that drips from his mouth is coated in that Damon humor. If you insist on writing dialogue-heavy work, study great actors, what they're really doing. They're not just smiling or crying. I literally watched Les Mis the movie for the first time on Sunday, January 12, 2014. A novice writer describing "I had a dream" would say "Anne Hathaway cried." Anne Hathaway's performance as Fantine floored me; it's insulting to her performance to leave it at that simple word. When she cried, it was literally as though her face was a piece of leaf gold in a pale rose shade that had been slowly crinkled and wadded up. The tears pushed forward and the subtle tremors became violent shakes as she wailed her misery. OMG!
OK, I'm going to stop now before my husband asks me why I'm gripping me chest.
With dialogue, remember: 1. Keep it short and to the point, only what moves the story forward or shows strong character traits. 2. Tags should be in place one every four lines of dialogue, unless more than two characters are in play. 3. Tags should not detract from the dialogue. It should be 'he said,' 'she said,' or some action or description of the scene, character, etc.
Yep, all that garbage I'm espousing above can be boiled down into three things. If you're writing more dialogue than this, it's because you can see your characters in your head. Remember that your audience cannot. SHOW THEM!
My latest head slapper is dialogue-heavy writing. This is actually really hard to pull off. I know this. I'm a victim of it. When I see an author writing dialogue-heavy work, it signals to me two things: The author watches too much TV and the author is doing an end-run around the showing vs. telling thing. Dialogue-heavy authors often defend this style by saying, "I'm showing what the characters are saying."
Unless the character has an impressive voice (which is hard to hear when you're READING), dialogue is just another way of telling what is going on.
Number one thing to beware of with dialogue: "Hi, Sue." "Hi, Larry." "How you doin'?" "Oh, I'm fine." "What are you having for lunch?" Brings to mind the James Earl Jones and Malcolm McDowell commercials about texting. My husband hates them. Me, they're a glimpse into the horror story of what I do for . . . I'm not living off of the editing. And I can't really call it fun . . . I'm more of a masochist than I thought . . .
I'm amazed at how many of the authors I've worked with seriously have dialogue scenes with the server at a bar or restaurant as if what is being eaten matters to the story. Don't get me wrong, I love to eat. If what's being eaten matters to the story, save me from a mundane scene where the character talks to a waiter, waitress, bartender, etc., and actually describes how luscious the triple-decker chocolate lava cake is, the smoothness of the ooze inside, the bitter stab of the chocolate, the rescue of the sweet powdered sugar . . . Show me, show me, show me!!!! Just as bad, "Hey, Jim! Nice to see ya'!" Nope, dialogue needs to punch and move forward. Stay away from mundane how-do-you-dos.
Number two thing I hate about dialogue-heavy writing: No tags.
Number three thing, which goes along with number two: No tags doesn't mean use 'he interjected,' 'she reasoned,' 'he inquired.' These kinds of tags are distracting. When using dialogue, it absolutely has to punch. If you're character says, "I'll kill you!" Then it's followed with 'he reasoned,' you're going to distract the reader. First of all, he didn't reason that he was going to kill someone. Killing someone is almost certainly irrational. (If it's not irrational, you'd better prove it--via SHOWING ME!) Everyone who knows me knows I have an evil word list, so what I'm about to say is counter-intuitive. You really can say 'he said,' 'she said.' Like have and hold, said can be used almost as much as you want. It won't take away from the dialogue. When tagging, stick with actions, said or occasionally a descriptive verb of how the character is saying whatever.
Don't think 'he smiled' is an OK tag. It's OK a couple of times. But smiling is not as descriptive as you think. You can use 'he smiled' if it's a trademark action of a particular character, but this has to be developed, that his lips crinkle up into that grin he was so well-known for. I love Ian Somerhalder's smile, but I would rather slit my wrists than write fanfic for TVD and say Damon smiled. Damon leers, Damon lets his smile flow through his body. Every word that drips from his mouth is coated in that Damon humor. If you insist on writing dialogue-heavy work, study great actors, what they're really doing. They're not just smiling or crying. I literally watched Les Mis the movie for the first time on Sunday, January 12, 2014. A novice writer describing "I had a dream" would say "Anne Hathaway cried." Anne Hathaway's performance as Fantine floored me; it's insulting to her performance to leave it at that simple word. When she cried, it was literally as though her face was a piece of leaf gold in a pale rose shade that had been slowly crinkled and wadded up. The tears pushed forward and the subtle tremors became violent shakes as she wailed her misery. OMG!
OK, I'm going to stop now before my husband asks me why I'm gripping me chest.
With dialogue, remember: 1. Keep it short and to the point, only what moves the story forward or shows strong character traits. 2. Tags should be in place one every four lines of dialogue, unless more than two characters are in play. 3. Tags should not detract from the dialogue. It should be 'he said,' 'she said,' or some action or description of the scene, character, etc.
Yep, all that garbage I'm espousing above can be boiled down into three things. If you're writing more dialogue than this, it's because you can see your characters in your head. Remember that your audience cannot. SHOW THEM!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)