Writing – Lee Child - dubious advice

‘We’re not story showers, we’re story tellers.’

That catchy little snippet comes from the latest issue (November) of Writing Magazine, a quotation from bestselling author Lee Child. According to the article by Tony Rossiter, Child ‘believes that reading is the only essential training for a writer.’ Apparently, Child eschews the ‘show, don’t tell’ principle, adding, ‘There is nothing wrong with just telling the story. So liberate yourself from that rule.’

Who am I to disagree with someone whose books sell in their millions?

However, if this quotation is accurate, then it’s nonsense.

Whether he knows it or not, he ‘shows’ in his writing – through character point of view, description and emotional content.

‘Show’ puts the reader into the scene and into the protagonist’s mind. That, to a large extent, is what makes the Jack Reacher books popular: character. You can’t have ‘character’ without ‘show’.

There is a place for ‘tell’ in narrative – to move the story forward a little faster, to skim over some boring life bits. But if you want reader involvement, you need to ‘show.’

As for reading, I totally agree if you want to be a writer then you must read – ideally, widely, both fiction and non-fiction; a little poetry wouldn’t go amiss, either.

So, if you want to try the hard way to find a publisher, follow his advice... but don't hold your breath.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

 

 

Writing tip - hidden gender/identity

Why do we writers do it? Why tie ourselves in knots to confound the reader? To spring that additional surprise, perhaps, to add that extra frisson of pleasure – or, if it backfires, annoyance.

Popular culture is full of instances where the reader or the audience is led down a particular path only to have the ground pulled away from them.

Here are a few examples (spoiler notice, though I imagine these ‘surprises’ are now well known; if you haven’t seen or read these examples,

Two Mules for Sister Sara
The Sixth Sense
The Murder of Roger Ackroyd
The Watcher
please jump to the next section, Spoiler-clear! Otherwise, read on.

The film Two Mules for Sister Sara has the audience and Clint Eastwood character believing Shirley Maclean is a nun; near the end it’s revealed that she’s actually a soiled dove.

 

Two Mules for Sister Sara - Wikipedia commons

The Sixth Sense convinces the audience that Dr Crowe is a real person until the final revelation when we learn he’s the ghost.

The Murder of Roger Ackroyd by Agatha Christie (1920)

The book ends with an unprecedented plot twist. Poirot exonerates all of the original suspects. He then lays out a completely reasoned case that the murderer is in fact Dr Sheppard, who has not only been Poirot's assistant, but also the story's narrator.
… Reader response to the ending varies from admiration of the unexpected end to a feeling of being cheated. – Wikipedia.

The Watcher by Charles Maclean (1982)
First person narrator finds his wife murdered… and only gradually do we learn that he’s an unreliable narrator and committed the crime…

Spoiler-clear

In a few of my books, I’ve attempted to conceal the identity and or gender of a protagonist from the reader as well as from the other characters in the story. Unlike the above examples, the concealment isn’t always the main point of the tale, merely an added extra.

None of my own examples rely on the unreliable narrator, which is very difficult to pull off, and is used in three of the examples above. However, as I tend to write ‘visually’, where the reader can see characters in their setting, I find it hard to maintain the secret.

If a character is depicted but not the gender, naturally I can’t use ‘he’ or ‘she’ in the narrative. If I use ‘he’ but in fact it’s a ‘she’, I’m cheating. Cheating is somehow worse than misdirection.

You can get round this issue by referring to the individual as ‘the murderer’, which has been done by other authors, or some similar descriptive title. Yet that get-round can become tedious to the reader. Maybe just introduce ‘the murderer’ then show everything from his or her POV, without telling at all? That works, after a fashion.

 
However, if ‘the murderer’ has to interact with other characters, there’s a problem. These other people see ‘the murderer’ as an individual – and if they see ‘the murderer’, then so should the reader, since the book is a film in the reader’s head. Tough one. Some writers simply ignore that aspect. I’ve opted for ‘the murderer’ wearing a disguise – or a mask, even – and being addressed by a title or different name; theatrical, but necessary to preserve the cinematic truth.
 
Naturally, if we’re seeing the scene from another character’s point of view, then they may see her as ‘a man’ when she isn’t. Describing what you (and the reader) see or think you see. That’s probably fair and not quite cheating…
 
So, if you want to conceal the gender or identity of a character, be prepared to go to considerable lengths to make it work. It’s worth it when, finally, a reader comments along the lines, ‘That was a big surprise!’

Writing tip - It’s too short!

10 ways to add more words without simply padding.

Recently, a correspondent wrote to me expressing concern over the fact that she had finished her book: it was aimed at a particular publisher but it was too short. This is not unusual; a number of publishers stipulate a minimum word-count. The old adage that a story is as long as it takes cuts no ice where minimum and maximum word-counts are concerned.

However, no reader wants to wade through prose that’s there for no good reason, words that do not serve the story.

So how can you actually add words without resorting to padding? Well, you could try one or more of the following suggestions:

1)      Have you got a sub-plot? Most novels are sustained by the presence of one or more sub-plots. These can involve minor characters or the protagonist’s circle of loved ones. The sub-plot has to move forward too, however, and may even heighten the conflict for the protagonist. If you haven’t done so, think about injecting a sub-plot.

2)      Is the sub-plot adequate? So you’ve got a sub-plot (or more), but are they doing enough? Does the sub-plot have the same depth of emotion and intensity as the main plot? Is it raising the suspense or threat to the protagonist? Add more depth, maybe.

3)      Characters’ descriptions. Some writers – and readers – are happy to go with minimal or no character description. Yet description helps create character. The way they look, the clothes they wear tell us something about them. And description helps the reader get immersed in the story, ‘seeing’ the images better. This doesn’t mean you have to opt for a shopping list, showing what the protagonist and others are wearing, though that can work from a certain character viewpoint (say, an observant detective). Clothes, complexion and eyes – all add colour in the mind’s eye of the reader.

4)      Emotional responses. Our characters are all emotional creatures; they respond to what happens to them: or should. Too often I’ve read an early manuscript that throws many an obstacle at the protagonist and all he or she does is ‘sigh’. Emotional responses involve an internal and an external physical manifestation, whether that’s the empty feeling in a stomach or the sweat of palms.

5)      Scene descriptions. If any kind of interaction between characters is involved in a particular scene, then the reader should have a mental image of that place – be it a room, a railway carriage or a stagecoach. Have you done enough scene description? Can the reader ‘see’ where the characters are in relation to each other? This is particularly important in fight scenes.

6)      The senses. We all know we should use all our senses when characters experience their world. But do we? Have your characters done so? Besides adding depth, using the senses adds another layer of believability, and further involves the reader.

7)      Dramatic scenes. I’ve come across more than a few scenes that lend themselves to dramatic interpretation, but they’re over before they’ve begun. Of course you can’t describe every scene in a dramatic context. But where two characters conflict verbally or physically, then ensure that you’ve gleaned all you can from this – the protagonist’s emotional responses, any additional conflict that arises from counter-arguments or blows, and so on.

 

8)      Show, not tell. There are times when the story needs to move forward faster, usually past those boring bits, but don’t ignore the fact that by showing the reader how your protagonist feels in any given situation involves the reader more than simply telling what the character feels. Dig into your character’s emotional responses to the events they encounter.

9)      Enliven the flab. There may be some flab that’s necessary to describe what’s going on. Bring these sections to life with metaphor, improved choice of words, and perhaps by personalising the description from a character’s point of view.

10)  Examine the ending. In many instances, the endings can be rushed. You’ve got to the end and you want to be finished with the story. Don’t rush it – but don’t linger longer than necessary. But ensure that you’ve employed all the above ploys in the ending; in other words, be certain that you haven’t skimped.

All of the above suggestions will increase the word-count. But these extra words have to work too. The writing has to remain tight, where every word counts – towards a story of clarity, where character and scene live for the reader.

That’s the long and short of it.

Book editing

 

I’ve been editing other people’s writing for over 30 years. It has helped me self-edit my own work too. This is a very brief overview of the editing process, as I apply it. As with writers, there are no two editors who work in exactly the same manner. Yet, we all strive to help the author to improve his or her work.

There are a great many self-published books available these days and, sadly, it’s obvious that they haven’t been edited, which often means that a good story is diminished.

Authors definitely benefit by stepping back from their work and appraising it with fresh eyes; the final author edit (self-edit) is vital. The temptation is there, but I’d advise never to send off a book unless this final read-through has been done with a critical eye. I’ve seen and rejected manuscripts where it was obvious that the author hadn’t re-read his work but simply finished it and sent it off.

Still, as a book editor (as opposed to a commissioning editor), I looked at work that had been accepted.

Obviously, a book editor is there to spot the inconsistent, the illogical and the plain wrong items which the author couldn’t identify because she was too close to the work. (That important step back didn’t occur, perhaps?)

I believe that an editor can be of great help if he or she reads widely, not simply in a narrow genre; indeed reading a variety of non-fiction subjects too. It is a truism that is often ignored, but all writers should read - and analyse books. Naturally, the majority should write within the genre with which they’re familiar. True, accomplished authors are able to switch genres with ease. I need to know enough about any given subject to ask questions that a book’s potential readership might ask. Though in truth, perhaps the author should have asked these questions at the writing stage, that step back viewpoint again. Still, an editor can’t take it for granted that the author has “got it right”, so there’s a need to check that the author’s research is accurate.

The editor’s credo is “Do no harm” – harm is done by altering the author’s style or the meaning of the prose.

Unlike short story writers, there’s a tendency to be verbose where novels are concerned. Often, the same thing is said or described in more than one way. Editors should emphasise economy of words: the writer saying as much as she can with as few words as possible. (Did you notice that I said the same thing twice in the previous sentence?) That makes the editor’s – and ultimately the reader’s life easier.

Writers should always strive for clarity of understanding. And of course it is the editor’s job to ensure that this is the case. If the editor doesn’t comprehend the context, the visuals or the internal logic, then it’s highly likely the reader won’t either.

 
Good writers appreciate intelligent editing; bad writers don’t like being edited.
 
There are bad editors around, too, naturally. This is the real world, after all.
 
An editor must fight the impulse to over-edit or rewrite. There’s nothing more dispiriting for a writer to find that the prose has been ripped to shreds, apparently without due explanation. However, showing respect to a difficult author can be a problem too. Authors can be demanding or even exasperating, rejecting out of hand even the smallest proposed changes. There is no such thing as precious prose. Balance and compromise are necessary at times.
 
I tended to begin a working relationship by proposing changes – usually in red on the electronic copy: spelling, punctuation and grammar corrections. In addition:
 
Offering alternative words;

highlighting duplication of a word or phrase, sometimes due to the “echo effect”;

pointing out the generalisations (specifics are needed, not generalisations);

identifying clichés, mixed metaphors and so on.

Spotting anachronisms, anomalies and logic lapses (we’re all prone to these in some measure).

Making suggestions to improve the drama in a particular scene. 

Pointing out any excess of “tell” over “show.”

Promoting the writer’s visual sense (sketches of scenes can help here).

 
All of the above list can be tackled in large measure by the author stepping back and doing that final self-edit. Still, the book editor is the last resort, where it is hoped the stumbles are identified and corrected. (Nobody’s perfect, however, so inevitably some annoying gremlins still do get past all those critical eyes!)

As can be seen from this brief glimpse, editing is perseverance – refine, suggest and advise.

In the final analysis, the editor must appreciate that it is the author’s book.

 

***
Please note that I am not currently seeking editing work.
I would recommend my guide below (but I would, wouldn't I?)
 

Please see Chapter 14 – Self-edit in Write a Western in 30 Days for details about what to look for when doing that final self-edit.

The e-book version can be purchased from Amazon.com here

and from Amazon.co.uk here

It is also available at other outlets, both e-book and paperback

Editing tips - Don’t tell me and then show me

The adage for a public speaker is ‘I’ll tell you what I’m going to say, then I’ll say it, and then I’ll tell you what I’ve said.’ Fine, that kind of repetition is to register the salient facts with the audience.

Some writers tend to follow this adage, and I feel they’re doing themselves a disservice. They tell us what is about to happen, then show us. In fact, any dramatic effect has been lost.

Any number of books can be used to make this point – including my own, I’m sure. Anyway, take, for example, this excerpt from Lonesome Dove. I’m only using this book as I’ve just read it, and it’s well worth reading. (I’ve removed the character name, so as not to spoil it for any subsequent reader).

'He found them an hour later, already stiff in death. He had raced as fast as he could over the rough country, not wanting to take the time to follow the river itself but too unsure of his position to go very far from it. From time to time he stopped, listening for shots, but the dark plains were quiet and peaceful, though it was on them that he had just seen the most violent and terrible things he had ever witnessed in his life…

(three paragraphs later…) He could see the three forms on the ground as if asleep…'

So there’s half a page of dramatic, suspenseful writing, but it’s wasted because we already know the outcome. There’s probably a name for this literary device that anticipates and waters down the dramatic scene. I’d much rather delete that first sentence and show the reader through the character’s eyes and emotions how he came upon the three ‘stiff in death’.