Thanks for stopping by So You Wanna Be Published. I'm thrilled you're here. You can subscribe to this blog by filling in your email address on the right hand side where the Feedblitz button is. Feel free to pass this blog off to your friends who are pursuing publication. If you'd like to write an amazing query letter, click here for a free Query tutorial. If you'd like to hone your skills at nonfiction proposal writing, click here to purchase it. Looking for something specific? Look under Articles on this Site for the subjects covered.
Today’s Pitch to Me is brought to you by Leslie Wilson—editor, humor author and speaker—one of the mentors at The Writing Spa.
Jennifer Smidt has left a new comment
i am...Meets I AM WHO I AM
I (as well as most other women, I believe) have spent my life defined and distracted by how I complete the statement, "i am...". Depending on my mood or circumstance, I am a failure, a success, a good wife, a bad mom, a dirty little girl, a redeemed daughter of the Father. These statements become identity markers that hold more power in our lives than the ways that God identifies us.
As well as laying out how we define ourselves, I will delve into God's self-proclaimed identity and where His character intersects our lives. Our self-absorbed, independant definitions of who we are can be redeemed and redefined to make much of God's glory in us and through us. With personal stories of redemption woven throughout, I desire to inspire women to truly believe and practically live out the most important Truth of our lives, "I am in Christ."
Hi Jennifer, You set forth a strong theme—being defined and distracted by who you think you are. Don't let your opening sentence weigh it down with excess verbiage. Simplify it. One example: “Like most women, I . . . . “ You might change “defined” to “classified,” which connotes specific categories we can all identify with.
While I like the notion of comparing God’s character to our own, I’m afraid it may diminish your main focus, who am I in Christ. Why not pitch that for a second book? You list your audience as women—a tad broad (no pun intended). You’re better off specifying moms, or women who work outside the home, or Christian women. Doing that will also help hone the angle, the slant of your project.
Finally, a couple of nitpicky notes:
I'd use “a filthy vessel” instead of “a dirty little girl.” The latter just conjures up too many secular issues.
Independent has an “e” in the last syllable, not an “a.” Sadly, there’s no spell check on blogger.
BTW, you’re a solid writer. Keep it up! And thanks for letting me analyze your pitch.
D'Ann Mateer, a mentor at The Writing Spa, will be providing this critique.
To this day, no one knows where it came from. Does it grow naturally? Is it some
kind of plant that made an evolutionary leap? Many believe that maybe it was a
government project that went horribly wrong. The effects on our society have been fast, incredibly strong, and massively dangerous. The really weird thing is that the government and the news media deny its existence. While, those that it has affected have changed so dramatically as to be almost unrecognizable to those who have not been affected. Oh, they look the same, but their attitudes and actions are so radically different that it’s difficult to believe that they are the same person at all.
Schools, libraries, government buildings, businesses, colleges and universities,
even some formally strong, faith-filled churches are covered with vines and vines of the stuff. Yet, some people refuse to see it at all. Those that do, make out that it’s not what it appears to be. Many of us know differently.
Comments and deletions in red. Additions in green. Weak verbs in blue. Adverbs in purple.
To this day, no one knows where it came from. This sentence is in past tense: "came" Does it grow naturally? This sentence is in present tense: "does" Is it some
kind of plant that made an evolutionary leap? Present tense. Many believe that maybe it was a
government project that wentgone horribly wrong. Past tense. Decide which you are going to use and remain consistent throughout. If this is an ongoing "it," which from reading further, I think that is what you are implying, then probably present tense is the best choice. So while you could argue that the first sentence could be in either past or present tense, the fourth sentence should be: Many believe it IS a government project (etc). The Its effects on our society have been fast, incrediblystrong, and massively dangerous. The really weird thing is that the government and the news media deny its existence,. Wwhile, those that it has affected have changed so dramatically as to be almost unrecognizable to those who have not been affected. Oh, they look the same, but their attitudes and actions are so radically different that it’s difficult to believe that they are the same person people at all.
Schools, libraries, government buildings, businesses, colleges and universities,
even some formally(I think you meant "formerly", but that is still an adverb) strong, faith-filled churches are covered with vines and vines of the stuff. Yet, some people refuse to see it at all. Those that do, make out claim that it’s not what it appears to be. Many of us know differently.
I'm a bit confused since the "it" is not named. Are you really talking about a plant or using that as a metaphor for something else? I assume this is non-fiction, but some of the language feels very formal ("the effects on our society") while other parts feel almost slang ("the stuff"). Make sure your language is consistent and is appropriate for your audience. Also, notice the blue and purple sprinkled throughout this one short paragraph. Work to eliminate your weak verbs and your adverbs. One way would be to paint us a picture of the "vines and vines" that overgrow the institutions. Or tell a story of a plant starting small then growing to overwhelm something else. Take the ideas you are trying to set up in this paragraph and see if you can show them in a stronger way, a way that grabs the reader and pulls him in. You obviously have something to say, some information to get across to your reader, so make your audience want to read on by a compelling opening, not just a cryptic one. You can do it! Get creative!
This begins a five part musing by editor Andy Meisenheimer on dialog. This can be applied to you whether you write fiction or nonfiction.
The most important thing to know about dialogue is that it isn’t real.
Dialogue is representative of actual spoken words.
Dialogue takes out the fillers, the mistakes, and the circularity of real speech. The um’s and ah’s and pauses and you-knows and I-just-think-that’s of regular speech. It leaves out the mistakes and stumbling of the everyday speaker as they search for words and try to communicate effectively. It leaves out “yeah?” and “really?” and “mm-hm” that the listening party uses to encourage the speaker. And it avoids the common repetition that we engage in during regular speech.
Try this sometime—listen to a conversation at the table next to you at the food court at the mall or a coffee shop. Chances are you’ll notice all three of these things; and chances are you’ll find that conversation very enlightening on the human condition—how we talk, and why we say what we say. And you’ll learn there that fillers, mistakes, and circularity aren’t to be completely avoided during dialogue. They are tools to be used at certain times. But if they were as prevalent in fiction as in real life, your reader would get weary.
I found this principle illustrated once at a writer’s conference, where I took part in an editor’s panel two hours in a row. The same panel, same questions, but different audience. The first time I got to answer a question, I went round and around, discovering my own answer to the question by processing some things out loud. “Well, I think, you know, and if you this, then I’d that, etc.” The second time around, I realized there was only one thing to say—one bottom line. One sentence that captured my opinion. And that’s what I said. One controlled sentence that communicated everything—and more, because of what it left out—that my earlier rambling answer said.
You don’t want to give your characters brilliant laconic lines every single moment as if they’ve had hours to think about what they’re going to say—but you don’t need to have them ramble and rant until they find that one elusive concise answer.
I read a fascinating article in the November 2004 issue of Vanity Fair. I've been a fan of U2's music since the days when I wore an 80's asymmetrical haircut (think Flock of Seagulls meets Duran Duran--only for girls). As I read the words of band members, I was struck at the similarities between making amazing music and crafting amazing prose. Consider these nuggets:
"Cliches are killing music. In our music and our lifestyle, we're trying to avoid cliches." (Bono) The true mark of breath-taking art is its absence of cliches. Lisa has a funny post about movie cliches--those occurrences or words we expect to hear in movies. That's the monotony of cliche--the absolute opposite of creativity and ingenuity. I am a cliche-buster in my line of work. I try not to have eyes that lock, strands of hair being brushed back, sunsets that blaze, lower lips that quiver, speech that is halted. I hate saying something everyone has already said. That's why I love U2. They say things like "where the streets have no name," "see the Bedouin fires at night," "I can't live with or without you." It's beauty. It's poetry. It takes time and a commitment to freshness. We'd do well to emulate that.
"Our goal is to write the perfect album. Every time we go into the studio we hope we'll get closer to that. But I very much doubt we'll ever attain that goal of perfection. It's like Mount Everest. That must be a terribly depressing place; you've spent all your time preparing to get there, and when you get there all you can do is walk down again." (Edge) I don't want to settle in my writing. I want to always improve. I want my life to be marked by a commitment to lifelong learning. So, like Edge, I will endeavor to always improve upon my last successes, my last pieces of art. But, as in this quote, writers must also understand that "getting published" or creating perfect art is a short-lived climax. The truth is we may reach a pinnacle, only to have to walk down again. I'm reminded here of Jesus telling folks to take the last seat at the banquet, to be willing to be lowly. We may scale peaks, but we must just as willingly trudge through dark valleys in our writing careers.
"Rock and rollers generally do their best work in their first 10 years and then they break up like the Beatles. Or they repeat themselves ad infinitum and just bore everyone to death." (Bono). Here are Bono's twin diatribes: not finishing well and the pitfalls of branding. The key to good writing is a long-term engagement--a desire to hone craft as long as God supplies the mind. The key to fresh creativity is not to "bore everyone to death" with 25 different takes on one exhausted topic. I'm stepping on people's toes here, but I personally don't want to write about the same thing FOREVER! That will stifle my writer's breath! It's a sin to bore a reader! Worse yet, it's a sin to bore myself while I'm writing ad nauseum about the same old thing.
"What's wrong with wanting to be a big commercial band and also an art project? The notions that you can't do that are retarded. If you are a writer and you write a book that captures the public's imagination and it becomes a best-seller, does that take away from the book you wrote?" (Bono) My guess is that Deborah will stand up and cheer at this! Ambition isn't evil. The thirst for power may be. Very few books make it on that elusive best-seller list, but that doesn't mean the ones that do are less artistic. We writers need to write such compelling prose that "captures the public's imagination." If you've read what I've written before, you'll understand that I believe everything is filtered through the sovereign hands of God. He may just choose to use our words on a big scale. If so, it's for His renown anyway.
"Great hangs back until very good gets tired." (Bono) This is a convicting one. Sometimes it's so much easier to settle for very good writing while great writing is knocking at the door of your office. Push through. Wait for great. Aspire for great. Be great.
U2 has longevity. They continue to produce passionate music. I understand some may not appreciate their melodies and others may not appreciate Bono's profanities, but as artists, I hope we can glean from those who take their craft seriously. We write our prose for an Audience of One, for His smile. Does He not deserve our very best?
Q: What is your most effective online tool for marketing?
A:I social network a lot. And that works very well, particularly twitter. I blog, do facebook, and comment on other people’s blogs. But so far, the most effective sales tool I’ve used is my monthly ezine Inside reNEWal. I get more response, more sales, more interest from that small database than any other method. Why?
My readers trust me to deliver the kind of newsletter that changes their perspective or their lives. (I give them newsletters they want to pass off to their friends. It’s not a me-fest.)
Occasionally, I’ll send little notes about a product I have or a book launch. I don’t overdo this. But when I do, I get a lot of response.
I add to my list slowly, either through folks signing up on my website, or sign ups at speaking engagements.
I don’t s*pam.
So although email may be an imperfect method of marketing, I’m finding it to be the most successful thing I do.
Don't Try to Convert Me! A gentle guide to Jewish evangelism
“You're saying that the Nazi prison guard who converted to Christianity goes to heaven, and the innocent Jews he murdered went to hell?” “The New Testament Bible is anti-Semitic, and fuels a long, deadly history of persecution against Jews as 'Christ-killers.'” “If Jesus is the Messiah, why didn't he bring world peace?” How would you answer these typical objections that Jewish people give to the gospel? Don't Try to Convert Me! seeks to equip Christians with a heart for Jewish evangelism with ready answers.
Using easy to understand and easy to remember layman's terms, in a conversational style, I will answer the most common Jewish objections to Jesus from a Biblical and historical perspective. I'll also show the reader why most Jews resist the gospel, how we know that God still lovingly draws His chosen people, and why the usual approach to Jewish evangelism is ineffectual. To conclude, I will present testimonies from Jews of differing backgrounds who share the reasons that they chose to follow Jesus, and show that the common threads that convinced them were given in the Bible all along.
Of the five elements necessary for a strong pitch, you’ve hit it out of the park with four! I put “questionable” for your angle simply because you haven’t shown us—or, in this case, the editor or agent you absolutely must impress—why you are the ideal person to write this book. Tell us that and you’re golden. Have you developed a seminar you present to churches? Have you blogged? Written articles? Of all the writers in all the gin joints in all the world, what uniquely qualifies you to write about this subject?
This critique is by D'Ann Mateer, a fiction mentor at The Writing Spa.
From Jan Cline:
Sarah’s thin cloak barely protected her slim body from the bitter wind. If only she had pockets or a muff to warm her hands, which were growing stiff from the cold. She stood on the stoop of the train station watching travelers come and go. Thunder rumbled in the distance. As the noise grew louder she detected the smell of hot metal, and realized it wasn’t thunder, but the steam engine rolling closer to the station.
An elderly couple shuffled out of the depot office and stood next to her to wait for the train to come to a halt. Soft grey hair framed the woman’s face and a pretty blue cloak hung on her small shoulders. She looked over at Sarah and smiled, wrinkles creasing around her dull green eyes. She resisted the urge to take the gnarled hand of the old woman. Instead she imagined herself their granddaughter, ready to go off on a long adventure with grandparents who adored her. To someplace warm and safe, somewhere to belong, and someone to belong to.
Comments and deletions in red. Additions in green. Weak verbs in blue.
Sarah’s thin cloak barely (this adverb is ok, but can you make the sense stronger by beginning with the wind, which is active, rather than the cloak, which is passive? Something along the lines of: The bitter wind poked holes in Sarah's thin cloak. Do you see how that makes a stronger picture and eliminates the adverb as well?)protected her slim body from the bitter wind. If only she had pockets or a muff to warm her hands, which were growing stiff (you can eliminate "were growing" by saying "stiffened") from the cold. She stood on the stoop of the train station watching travelers come and go. Thunder rumbled in the distance. As the noise grew louder she detected the smell of hot metal, and realized itthe sound wasn’t(This "was" is fine, but I noted it just the same.) thunder, but the steam engine rolling closer to the station.
An elderly couple shuffled out of the depot office and stood next to her,to waiting for the train to come to a halt. (The change here simply eliminates one of the four "tos" in this sentence. You might want to rework it further to see if you can eliminate at least one more.) Soft grey hair framed the woman’s face and a pretty blue cloak hung on her small shoulders. She looked over at Sarah and smiled, wrinkles creasing around her dull green eyes. She(the last pronoun in the previous sentence--"her"--refers to the older woman, so this one needs to restate Sarah so we know who is referred to.) Sarah resisted the urge to take the woman's gnarled hand.of the old woman. Instead she imagined herself their granddaughter, ready to go off on a long adventure with grandparents who adored her. To someplace warm and safe, somewhere she to belonged, and someone toshe belonged to.
Good setting of the stage and the scene and use of strong, showing verbs. Most of my comments just tighten the writing a bit.
This is part two in Andy Meisenheimer's seven part series, this time on voice. For more information about Andy, see his bio below.
Voice is often seen as this unassailable, instinctual, born-with-it kind of thing. You can't touch voice, we say. Leave that alone, it's my voice. And even sometimes say in the face of improving our craft or even our art: but wait, that's my voice. The problem with all of this is that voice is the result of the conglomeration of all sorts of things; grammar, technique, spelling, language, mechanics, craft, and art. And as such it is not sacred. Poor grammar, or melodramatic speeches, or awkward metaphors can be a part of an author's voice, and should still be critiqued and unlearned.
We would all be better off if we understood voice as a carefully orchestrated part of the craft; if writers were encouraged to experiment with voice, to build a repertoire of voices, to recognize that their voice is a mishmash of their literary influences, and to wield voice skillfully. Voice is learned; the ability to artfully utilize voice can be learned or instinctual.
It's like personality--your personality makes you who you are, but you can still overcome your faults without losing your identity.
That said, there’s nothing more compelling when it comes to voice than someone who is comfortable and confident in their own voice. So when it comes down to it, whatever you decide to do, believe in yourself. If you want to sign off every email with “ska-boom” instead of “thanks” then do it.
Andrew Meisenheimer is a freelance editor, mentor, blogger, tweeter, and most anything else other than a private accordion instructor—let’s leave that to the professionals. He was most recently an acquisitions editor at Zondervan, and has worked with many talented authors including Rob Stennett, Mike Snyder, Noel Hynd, Mary DeMuth, Ed Dobson, Bryan Davis, Tony Woodlief, Karen Spears Zacharias, Chad Gibbs, Jon Acuff, and Ace Collins. You can find him—or a least a stylized picture of him—at andymeisenheimer.com. You can find him—yes, this time the real him—at home with his wife and preschool son near Grand Rapids, Michigan; but please don’t try to find him there unless he’s expecting you, because if he’s not, that’s kind of weird.
I wrote about response time over at The Master's Artist today. I'd love for you to chime in there about your own experience of waiting. You can read the post here.
Cynthia Ruchti, president of the American Christian Fiction Writers, recently responded to a writer who wrote: "I know writing is all about the passion, the love of the craft. I'm just not feeling it right now."
Pick a theory, any theory. Sounds like a magician's trick, but it fits this strange, mysterious, wonderful thing called writing too.
Theory One: It's all about the passion, the love of the craft. That's sometimes true, and true for some people. If a person has the freedom to write just for the love of writing (that usually means pre-contract), infatuation with words and stories send tsunamis of endorphins that keep the writer on a perpetual high.
Theory Two: It's all about the deadlines.
The farther a writer travels into the publishing journey, the more love of the craft is tempered by responsibility. It's still there, but accompanied every step not by the sound of a heartbeat but the tick of a clock.
Theory Three: It's all about obedience and commitment.
As in marriage, feelings come and go. Devotion and commitment hold us to the task. An author lays fingers to the keyboard whether emotionally full or emotionally empty. That's where miracles happen. God responds to our obedience and commitment by restoring the feelings we thought were dead.
Theory Four: It's all about writing *anyway*.
No one will ever buy this dribble. *Write anyway.*
Even I don't like the story anymore. *Write anyway.*
Laundry looks mighty tempting right now. *Write anyway.*
I've been writing a very long time with no visible success. *Write anyway.*
It's natural to write when we feel it. What a sweet victory (and testament to God's power at work within us) when we write when we don't feel it!
How remarkable is it to be faithful when the words come easily? When your mate is adorable? When your boss just gave you a raise?
How *divine *to be faithful when your mate did something unkind and the boss doesn't appreciate you and the words come hard! Now, that's remarkable.
Pressing on, Cynthia Ruchti *They Almost Always Come Home*, Abingdon Press, May 2010 www.cynthiaruchti.com
"Samuel said, 'Why then did you not obey the voice of the Lord, but rushed upon the spoil and did what was evil in the sight of the Lord?'
Then Saul said to Samuel, 'I did obey the voice of the Lord, and went on the mission on which the Lord sent me . . . " (1 Samuel 15: 19-20).
I read this passage with holy trepidation. What if I am Saul? What if I value the spoils more than the Lord? What if I chase after that which satisfies in the moment and miss obeying the voice of the Lord. As a writer, there are many times I face temptation. Times when I could write a certain book I know would sell (but wouldn't be "me"). Or times I could take a writing job for the prestige. Or times I simply manage my own career, taking jobs without first listening to the voice of God.
And, like Saul, I can be self-deceived. I can think, Hey, I'm writing Christian books, so I am on the mission on which the Lord sent me. And yet, I can be just as deceived in that thinking as Saul was when he didn't fully obey God's instructions during war time.
The voice of the Lord should be my strong tower. It should lead me. Guide me. And, truly, I want to heed it. But as I progress in my "career," the stress of it all caves around me. The voices out there holler, drowning out God's clear guidance.
And I reach for that which will temporarily satisfy.
Lord, I pray You'd make me a David writer. One who fails, yes, but then runs full speed into Your arms, to hear Your voice. I don't want to listen to the clamoring noise around me. I don't want to take on projects out of greed, or fear, or pride. I want to hear Your voice, to value it above my own ambitions. Teach me humility, Jesus. I lay my career in Your capable hands right now. Take me. Take my words. Do with them what You will.
Today’s Pitch to Me is brought to you by Leslie Wilson, editor and nonfiction author, one of the mentors at The Writing Spa.
LS has left a new comment.
The LifeTopics Handbook: 10 Keys for Guiding Kids to Face and Embrace Life
After almost 20 years of motherhood, I’ve concluded that there are a lot of lousy parenting messages out there – coming from schools, the government, television, movies, talk shows, other parents, and sadly, even the church. I believe God intended for parents, even Christian parents, to invest much more thought and energy on their kids than we do – not just drive them places and exhaust them with activities to keep them “out of trouble,” without really getting to know them deeply as individuals and guide them as they make choices. God calls us to a much higher level of involvement with our children than we may think, and once we’ve produced them we’re committed to that calling – and accountable to Him for it – like it or not.
There are many important “life topics” on which we as parents must guide our kids. Guide means we “superintend the training of” our kids – which implies face time, thought-provoking discussions, and struggling together through issues – not simply allowing those at our school, church or practice field to do that work for us. The LifeTopics Handbook steps you through 10 key areas that will help you, the parent, grow solid kids who are prepared for adulthood, knowing who they are, what they believe and why they believe it – and ready to “face and embrace” life. Life topics include Spirituality: Raising Kids with Depth in a Spiritually Shallow World; Character: Raising Kids with Moral Fiber in a Superficial World; Responsibility: Raising Kids who Follow-Through in an Unreliable World; Service: Raising Caring Kids in a Selfish World; World Affairs: Raising Informed Kids in a Sound Bite World; Finances: Raising Debt-Free Kids in a Materialistic World; and more.
Hi, LS, thanks for letting me comment on your pitch! While I like your idea, the title doesn’t pinpoint what you intend to cover. In fact, the main title, The LifeTopics Handbook, could address anything from stages of life to marriage to parenting. Your subtitle gives us a little more insight, but it still doesn’t narrow your readership. Is this book intended for parents of preschoolers, grade schoolers or teens, or all of the above? While you’re obviously a good writer, the topic seems a bit broad, probably because you haven't narrowed your audience enough. Several of the chapters you list could be books in and of themselves. I understand you may want to provide only an overview of these, but beware that a publisher will likely want to go more in-depth on one or two specific subjects. Other than 20 years of parenting experience (and, believe me, I understand exactly how that equips you!!), what qualifies you to write about this subject—to the point that an editor or agent will want to take on your book? Do you blog/write articles/speak about this subject? Finally, and I’m probably being a tad nit-picky here, but you provide too much information here. Save most of this for the book proposal. Keep a pitch to four or five shorter sentences, at most. Pack a punch—communicating the idea, audience, theme, focus, angle—with fewer words.
For those of you interested in having 2 paragraphs (max) critiqued by Writing Spa mentors, please submit them in the comments section. Try to limit your posts to 125 words or less.
This critique is from D'Ann Mateer, a fiction mentor at The Writing Spa.
Karen Schravemade writes:
Mary, thank you for taking the time to help us. Here are the first two paragraphs of my WIP:
Maya walked hand in hand with her dead father beneath a sky so blue she surely could not have dreamed it. With every step her sandals scuffed up red dirt. The dust settled between her toes and beneath the cracked vinyl straps of her shoes. She couldn’t remember what had come before this moment, just that she was here, with her Papa once again, her mind empty of questions and heat shuddering from the ground in waves.
It felt as though they had walked together a long time. The landscape around them seemed alien and yet familiar, like the phantom ache in a long-ago fractured limb. The flat horizon. The shimmering light. The earth an open wound, cauterised by sunlight, with its wens and scars, its mullock heaps and headframes. And yet it was not until they reached the mine entrance that Maya realised where they were and hung back, dragging at her father’s hand.
“Don’t go.”
Comments and deletions in red. Additions in green. Weak verbs in blue.
Maya walked hand in hand with her dead father beneath a sky so blue she surely could not have dreamed it. With every step her sandals scuffed up red dirt. The dust settled between her toes and beneath the cracked vinyl straps of her shoes. She couldn’t remember what had come before this moment, just that she was here, with her Papa once again, her mind empty of questions and heat shuddering from the ground in waves. Very good images. You have set the picture in the reader's mind.
It felt as though they had walked together a long time. The landscape around them seemed alien and yet familiar, like the phantom ache in a long-ago fractured limb. Good. The flat horizon. The shimmering light. The earth an open wound, cauterised by sunlight, with its wens and scars, its mullock heaps and headframes. And yet it was not until they reached the mine entrance that Maya realized where they were. She and hung back, dragging at her father’s hand.
“Don’t go.”
Very intriguing and good tension. Notice the lack of blue, and the one that is there is necessary. I have suggested minor changes: deleting "surely" because we assume it really is a dream by "dead father" and breaking the sentence of the paragraph before the line of dialogue into two. This is important because breaking into two shorter sentences creates a bit more tension in the reader. Good job!
Editor Extraordinaire, Andy Meisenheimer, will be doing a seven part series about the writing craft. You're in for a blessing! Check in on Wednesdays for the kind of advice that will change your prose forever.
Andy was my editor at Zondervan through Daisy Chain, A Slow Burn and Thin Places. He helped me shape those books, deepen them.
With that as backdrop, learn about Opening Scenes:
Opening scenes.
Storytellers have a terrible burden. There’s just so much information to give—names, histories, relationships, emotions, bank records, genetics, ring sizes, hair color—and not enough space to give it in.
The problem is: the audience wants drama, not information. Does anyone remember that the entire first season of “Lost” gave us absolutely nothing? They did a whole season without ever opening the hatch! How did we survive? Because we had drama.
A man goes to confession and says “Forgive me, Father, for I have sinned.” The priest says “So, my friend, have I.”
But, the storyteller says, don’t they need to know that the man’s name is David, that he’s six-two and ruggedly handsome? That he needs forgiveness for the murder of his wife’s ex-husband? That his father missed every single ballgame? That he’s a public defender? That he’s independently wealthy?
But if any of those things are important, the audience responds, won’t you show them to us in dramatic format? Won’t he eventually get a call from a client? Won’t he go to his mother’s house and find her crying into her drink? Won’t the detective show up at his door with questions? Won’t he have to scrub out blood from his shirt? Won’t some pretty prosecutor turn her affections his way? Won’t he take her sailing? And if you don’t dramatize that information, then is it really essential?
What happens in those two sentences? A man wants something. Something keeps him from getting it. And the reader is hooked. As long as the protagonist wants something, the audience wants to know if he’ll get it. And they do not want to be exposed to the unessential—and that’s the unessential from their viewpoint, not the viewpoint of the storyteller.
Filmmaker David Mamet puts it in a way that I’m constantly quoting and rarely remembering to attribute to him: “How do we keep their attention? Certainly not by giving them more information, but by withholding all information except that, the absence of which, would make the progress of the story incomprehensible.”
This is why the idea that there should be no information or backstory in the first n pages is, as usual, a good idea gone awry. If there is information needed, make sure the reader enters a scene prepared. Dickens taught us early on to let the reader know important information before it’s necessary. “Marley was dead: to begin with.” We have to know Marley was dead as a doornail to begin with, or nothing wonderful can come of the story. (Otherwise, it’s: “Scrooge saw in the knocker Marley’s face, which was strange because Marley was dead as a doornail!”)
So my bottom-line advice is: make each scene, especially the first one, about drama. Instead of the scene being about a voodoo historian who lost her psychotic son to cancer having coffee with an old friend who makes a crack about “nutjobs”, make it a scene about two people having coffee.
Then, when one of them ends up slamming her coffee down on the other’s hand, scalding her flesh, and despite her friend’s screams, whispers unintelligibly, you might have a story. The first setup sounds a bit desperate to get my attention. The second one, I have no idea what the heck is going to happen next. And that, as a reader, is exactly where I want to be.
Andrew Meisenheimer is a freelance editor, mentor, blogger, tweeter, and most anything else other than a private accordion instructor—let’s leave that to the professionals. He was most recently an acquisitions editor at Zondervan, and has worked with many talented authors including Rob Stennett, Mike Snyder, Noel Hynd, Mary DeMuth, Ed Dobson, Bryan Davis, Tony Woodlief, Karen Spears Zacharias, Chad Gibbs, Jon Acuff, and Ace Collins. You can find him—or a least a stylized picture of him—at andymeisenheimer.com. You can find him—yes, this time the real him—at home with his wife and preschool son near Grand Rapids, Michigan; but please don’t try to find him there unless he’s expecting you, because if he’s not, that’s kind of weird.
This post comes from novelist Cara Putnam author of Canteen Dreams (2008 ACFW Book of the Year -- Short Historical) and Sandhill Dreams (2009 ACFW Book of the Year Finalist). Meet her here.
One challenge both published and not-yet-published authors have is how to rein in an idea and turn it into a book. My friend Tricia Goyer posted on twitter last week about the reality that you have to reach a point with your research where you stop and start writing. But knowing when you’ve reached that point is so hard!
Research is often the key to that ah-ha moment. The moment where you realize you have an idea that generates passion and excitement in you as an author. The moment when characters begin to raise their hands and demand to tell their story.
The key is learning how to find that balance. When to keep researching and how to stop.
For my Ohio series for Heartsong Presents I had one idea. An idea that I uncovered in a London museum. The tidbit was enough to be the historical hook for one story, but certainly not enough for three. And three is a requirement So what did I do when my editor asked to see all three ideas?
I hustled over to Google and started entering searches along the lines of World War Two and Ohio. I also hopped over to the historical societies in the cities. And I prayed. It was amazing to watch God lead me to the right sites and the historical hooks. I’d hit the site and soon turn around with a squeal and tell my husband, “can you believe what I just found?!?!?”
I found a top-secret war project hidden in a company in Dayton. I love the idea of spies and secrets, so it was an immediate plot – and that book releases in November. The third idea gave me fits until I remembered that there was the All-American Girls Professional Softball/Baseball League during World War Two and beyond. While there weren’t any Ohio teams, dozens of Ohio girls played in the league. A perfect plot for the heroine I envisioned for the third book. And that story releases in the spring of 2010.
Once you’ve found the hook, you still have to research and eventually stop. Generally, I immerse myself in that particular event. I’ll buy and read books on the subject. Usually, I can find at least one.
If possible I do a site visit. Museums are a wonderful resource, and for me there’s always been something important about seeing the setting. That may not be possible for all my books, but I can find videos, guides, etc., that help me understand the flora and fauna, what the weather patterns are like, and the other details that help the setting come to life.
Then it’s time to step back and dream. Invariably, I’ll learn there are more details I need. But if I never start writing, I’ll never have a book. And that is the desired end result.
I met with an agent at ACFW and looking at my first scene he told me to "remove those extraneous tags" within the dialogue before I sent it to him. I thought dialogue should be interspersed with action tags. As I look at my work, I see that the tags I had in that scene were extraneous - meaning they had nothing to do with the action of the characters or moving the story forward or showing story world.
Can you review what action tags within dialogue should look like?
Sure!
A beat is a sentence of action between dialogue. Here's a rudimentary example:
"I told you not to go outside." Olivia stomped her left foot on the hardwood floor as if to punctuate her point.
He crossed his arms across his chest. "Well, then you shouldn't have left the door open as an invitation."
Note there are no "he saids" or "she saids" here. Just a beat of action that shows who the person is who is talking, and perhaps a little action that reveals a little more about the character. What the person who asked the question probably did was insert extraneous beats that:
1. Didn't help with characterization. 2. Didn't further the story.
Sometimes we can become so beat-happy that we insert them everywhere, not thinking about whether they're necessary. Consider my example again:
"I told you not to go outside." Olivia twirled her hair in her fingers, then looked at her fingernails.
He picked at the grout lines near the kitchen sink. "Well, then you shouldn't have left the door open as an invitation."
In everything you write, particularly in fiction, be sure your beats mean something, that they're not just empty filler.
Also to note:
Avoid purple speaker tags. Stay to "he/she said or asked." Don't get fancy with exclaimed, queried, hollered, etc. You can do that once in a while, but it gets ponderous if you try to be clever with every other speaker tag.
Don't use adverbs in your tags. "You are smart," she said convincingly. Try to convey what you mean in action, or take out the adverb and see if it will work without it.
And if you find yourself not capturing dialog well, do what author T. Davis Bunn did. He recorded conversations, then typed them out. This gave him a great handle on the flow of dialog, and he learned how to make it realistic.
God Recapturing the Heart of His Beloved: A Nine Week Study of Ezekiel
Summary: A nine week study through the book of Ezekiel ministering to those who have walked away from God. God is a Holy God and can not allow sin to go unpunished, but God is a God of mercy and compassion. God is calling his beloved people to repentance and to create a new heart and spirit.
God’s judgment often times reflects his grace. Through studying God’s sovereignty we learn God is free to judge and he is free to be gracious. Difficult times come and we often walk away from God, but through studying Israel’s sin, judgment and dismemberment we will see God allowed this time so Israel can experience God’s revival, restoration and infinite grace.
Hi Lori, thanks for letting me comment on your pitch. First, I like your idea and the title. However, it might be better to make it a statement, God Recaptures the Heart of His Beloved. I haven’t personally seen a lot of studies on the book of Ezekiel. My search on Christianbook.com revealed six studies of Ezekiel, compared to 40+ on Philippians. Fewer studies on the same subject can be good or bad. It’s good because it means less depth in the category, therefore, less competition for readership. It’s bad because it may mean publishers don’t see a need for the subject matter. I’m sure you’ve researched these elements though.
I think your chosen theme needs a stronger twist. Can you make a correlation between the ancient book and something more modern (e.g., technology)? If you can more narrowly define your theme, I think that will help you focus the study more clearly. Right now it doesn’t scream, “Study me over all the other available Bible studies!”
Also, you’ve defined your audience as those who’ve walked away from God. Have they already come back? If not, why would they choose to do a Bible study on Ezekiel? You might make this book more relevant to today’s culture—perhaps emphasizing the economy, job loss, moms having to return to work. With this one change, you pinpoint your audience and give yourself a more clearly defined project (theme and angle).
I hope this assessment helps you with your project.
If you're aiming for publication, this blog's for you.
Now that I've walked the publication journey a few years, I often get asked how to get published. It's such a long answer that I decided to start a blog for those who need direction.
My hope is that this blog will be practical. My goal is that any and every question you have about the publication journey will be answered. So keep coming back, and by all means, comment and ask questions. It's my privilege and passion to help you achieve your dream of publication.
Stumble It!