The art of war... I mean, critique groups

Hello readers, remember me? I have a blog... I used to post regularly, make fun of myself, and talk about strange things like raisins, brown M&M's, and pizza popsicles.

No, I haven't moved again, joined a cult which professes the evilness of the internet, or sewn my eyelids together,* thus making it impossible to use a computer.

I've just been emotionally bankrupt (which means no energy/creativity for writing) and hiding from the world.


BUT, as part of this most recent move, I tried out a new local writing group on Thursday.

And, since then, I've been thinking a lot about writing groups, CP's, beta-readers, etc.

See... I love talking about writing, analyzing writing, deconstructing writing... and all those other good things about having a community of writing buddies to talk to.

But some things really suck.

Connecting with good writing buddies (IRL) is hard.


When I was freshly new at exchanging work with other writers**, I was freaking terrified. I figured everyone knew better than I did, everyone else had more experience, more knowledge, and more natural talent. Who was I to say anything bad about something they wrote?

I figured the best thing to do was shut up and listen.

Then, after a while, I grew a little more confident. I started thinking, "hey, even though I mostly suck, some of what I'm writing seems to be okay!" ...and then I started noticing things that maybe could be improved in other writer's work. And actually voicing those thoughts.

Scary, yeah.

...and the reactions were really interesting.

Some people completely ignored my comments, talked down to me/dismissed me***, or got mad. Very few people actually said thank you, or recognized (in any small way) how much time and effort I had put into reading their work.

And sometimes that made me angry.

But, I'm not gonna lie, I wasn't the best partner either. I was a master of, "what I was trying to do..." and "what I really meant was..." (translation: I obviously suck at getting to/making my point).

Totally newbie errors, right?

I swear I've improved!

Now, I love(d?) my local writing group in Victoria. They really helped me grow/develop as a writer. I wouldn't be where I am today without their great comments, both ruthless and comical, and they also introduced me to many genres I don't normally read, and generally expanded my view of the whole reading/writing world.

BUT, I've also tried out some other writing groups, as well as exchanged work with many, many people online.

I've made some amazing buddies, been awed by other people's great writing, and had some wonderful conversations/connections, though that's pretty much only been with online exchanges.

So far, the in-person-writing-groups have been single-visits because I would not consider them 'a good fit'.

Translation:

1) writers who seem to get off on tearing apart everyone else's stories, then actually yell (no exaggeration) when you point out errors in their own

2) writers who don't read in the genre they write in, so while they tell you they're writing MG, it actually comes off as adult fiction, 'cause there are very few 12 year olds who commonly use the word 'serendipitous' when describing a situation.

3) writers who tell their story (essentially) in point form

4) writers so busy being literary that they forget to actually tell a story

5) writers who are so concerned with being grammatical perfect, that they want to edit out every scrap of voice within your story, and theirs is about as interesting as reading the content label of a cereal box.

6) writers who say they're serious, but it's painfully obvious they haven't even done the most basic of research****

7) writers who say nothing other than, "that's really good", and who only want to hear the same thing about their own work.


Now, not all of those are things worth leaving a group for, since some are just newbie errors, which everyone is guilty of at some point, but a few of them are worth stepping back and saying, "no, this is not a good fit."

In the last few days of thinking about this, the conclusion I've come to is:

Writing groups work best when you're all at a similar level.

I don't mean writing level (but that helps), I mean level-of-seriousness. If half the members are simply writing as a hobby and don't really care about editing/improving/perfecting their work... then it's a waste of time for those who are serious. If some writers aren't even going to do a basic edit of their work, so when they hand it over you're tripping over obvious grammar mistakes (like half a sentence missing), then it's going to be frustrating for those who work hard to give the cleanest version possible for critique. If some members only want to hear, "this is awesome!" and who only say the same thing in return, then it's a waste of time for those who genuinely want to find mistakes and improve. Similarly, if some writers only care about tearing down the work of other members, it's not only a waste of time for everyone involved, it's destructive.


Almost everything else in a group is workable.


You work in different genres? No problem, it's all about crafting an interesting, comprehensive story!

You're of different ages/genders/religions/cultures? Awesome! Different perspectives!

You live on different sides of the globe? That's what the internet/email is for!

Like I've said before, I've really enjoyed most of the people I've swapped with online. It's unfortunate that finding compatible people in real life is so much harder... but I guess there's a way smaller pool of people to pull from when you're limited by geography.


I was replying to an email today from a writer buddy who lives on the east coast, and she said something that also made me think about CP', and this bit doesn't matter if it's IRL or online.


She said she sometimes feels useless when she doesn't have very many comments to make.

She's not the only one I've heard voice this perspective, it's just this example is the freshest in my brain.

Now, let me tell you, she just critiqued the newly re-tailored first chapter of 'The Rules of Riding Shotgun', despite her insanely busy schedule/life.

She made six comments in the chapter, which is about 2,100 words long, then a summary paragraph at the end.

Three of those comments corrected word usages, not in a, "you're stupid!" kind of way, but in a fully/easily comprehensive, useful manner*****, and each time, she didn't say, "fix this, you are doing it wrong". Instead, she offered the solution she thought would work best, then said (essentially), "you decide if that's right for you/your story/your character".

Two comments were straight-up compliments.

The last (well, actually the first) was a free-form-thought on how she processed the "Rules", which now are at the very beginning of the story. Which was exceedingly helpful, and also made me giddy with joy since by the end of the "thought", she nailed what I was trying to do with the format.

So, out of those 6 comments, 3 were helpful, and 3 made me feel good about what I had written, but they weren't in a "this is awesome!" patronizing sort of way.

The summary paragraph was equally split into thoughtful/helpful comments, and praise of things that I had done right. She also commented on personal preferences (thing she didn't like), but it was obvious she had gone back and re-read at least once to confirm her position.


Now, compliments generally make me suspicious.

I don't like them, because I don't trust them. I either think:

a) I'm being lied to
b) the reader didn't actually bother taking this seriously/reading critically.


But, there is a happy medium between 'problem-writer-#1' and 'problem-writer-#7'.

Compliments that show the reader is being genuine, has actually read the work properly, and isn't saying it just to be nice.

And that's exactly the kind of writing buddy she is.


Yes, having CP's/beta-readers point out errors is a wonderful thing, because how else do you make your writing stronger?

But hearing what you do well is, I think, the only way to truly gain confidence as a writer and develop your own style/voice.

And I think it's under-appeciated as well. I know I err on the side of not stressing the parts I liked in other writer's work. It's something I'm actively trying to improve upon, but I am wired-up to look for mistakes... heck, I've been neurotically seeking out errors in my own writing since I was 7 so others wouldn't suspect there was something 'wrong' with me.


Do you think her comments are useless?

I sure as hell don't!

SO, I really don't think the number of comments matters. As long as the other person took your writing seriously and put some thought into what they do/do not comment on, then it's all valuable :)

More doesn't always mean better.


How about everyone else? What are the best & worst writer-buddy exchanges that you've experienced? Do you have a list of criteria (mental, or written) that you adhere to when starting a relationship with a new/potential CP? What are the qualities you admire most in a CP/beta-reader?


...and sorry, I really should have split this post up into at least 2 separate ones... I didn't mean for it to get so freaking long :p



* Ewww, right? Yah, well, I'm pretty tired right now.
** mostly online at first, but later with a local writing group
*** my favourite was when someone told me I wasn't the target audience for her work because it was "for people who like to think", so it didn't matter if I "didn't understand her writing". FYI, we don't exchange work anymore.
****hello, word-count anyone? Should picture books meant for a 5-year-old be 1000+ words?
***** and seriously, teaching grammar to a dyslexic person is like trying to teach a hippo to dance. This girl has mad skillz... and yes, I'm aware I am the hippo in that example.

Clean draft, clean attitude

'Brake Fluid' was the cleanest first draft I've ever written, which is strange, since it's also the most complicated story I've ever written.

And I admit I have conflicted feelings about that.

Go ahead and roll your eyes... 'cause you know what I'm going to talk about, right?

Well, you're only partially correct.

Yeah, I've talked before about how, since I'm dyslexic, I expect there to be problems with my writing. I expect things not to make sense, for description to be convoluted, for not enough of what's in my head to end up on the page.

I expect my first drafts (and even second or third drafts) will get shredded up by my CP's.

...and that's why my writing is getting better. 'Cause my CP's don't cut me any slack. Which is why they are good CP's.

A while back, someone who knows me well sent me a link about compliments. And along with trying to write a cleaner first-draft, I've also been trying to change my attitude, to take a compliment without assuming there's another shoe waiting to drop.

I've always loved writing, but there was always that voice in the back of my head saying, "not enough..."


While I've never explicitly stated it before, I've put a huge concentrated effort into not only becoming a better story teller, but becoming a better first-drafter. I pay very close attention to the things I'm bad at, the things I constantly err in (like, in BF, mixing up 'truck' and 'trunk' about 85% of the time, or in the case of writing this blog post, 'except' and 'expect').

...and this is the first time I feel that my efforts have paid off.

As I work through my edits on 'BF', I keep asking myself, why is this so easy? Why aren't there any huge problems that need to be re-written? Why do I feel like I'm being lazy or have been let off the hook in some way...?

And strangely enough... I'm trusting that my CP's caught everything major. That I won't be blindsided with something later on.

What is this strange feeling... is this confidence?

Honestly, I have no idea, but it feels damn good.

When I wrote that previous post (about the compliments link), I said I was searching for some kind of solid validation that my hard work is moving me forward, that it's getting results and my effort is not being wasted. And while I still haven't received any outward validation, somehow, I'm not worried, I'm not beating myself up, I'm not desperately analyzing every comment a CP sent me, looking for the hidden criticism.

I think I deserve to laugh at myself.

Did it really take me this long to figure out that validation has to start in my own brain?

Giving it away

I don't watch the evening news (too depressing), but I do love watching The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.

On June 26th, Stephen Colbert interviewed Richard Ford, whose new book is called 'Canada'.

Link to the episode is here, unfortunately, the feed is not available to Canadians, and I don't know about the rest of the world, although obviously if you have a VPN service running, you can watch it anywhere.

The book 'Canada' starts out:

"First, I’ll tell about the robbery our parents committed. Then the murders, which happened later."


...and Colbert's comment really hit me. He said (paraphrasing) "Why should I read the book now? You've given away the entire plot in the first two lines."

Ford's answer was something along the lines of, "Well, I hope you'll be anticipating those events and read on to find out what happens."

The reason this comment hit me is because 'Brake Fluid' is remarkably similar. On the first page you know Jackson's dead in the trunk and before the end of chapter one, you know there was a party six months earlier where Jackson hit Triss and she stabbed him with a butter knife. You also know that party is the reason Jackson's now dead, and that he died a couple of days before the story actually starts.

That means, in the first chapter, you know how the two past nights ended, and you can assume the ending of what's happening in the present... since the MC & Triss are trying to get rid of the body.

So... have I given it all away?

Well, I don't like to think so. This is my first time writing a murder-mystery-ish type story, but murder mysteries always start out with a dead body, and you read on to figure out who did it.

'Brake Fluid' is a little different in that all the characters involved know who did it, but the reader doesn't.

All three timelines (the party six month ago, the night Jackson died, and the present where they're trying to get rid of the corpse) play out in bite-sized chunks.

And I wonder, is that anticipation enough that someone will want to keep reading?

Let's just take one, small aspect of the story. Triss stabbing Jackson with the butter-knife.

I chose a butter-knife because it's a funny/memorable enough item that the reader won't forget the stabbing is coming*. Sure, it happens at the end of the party, so they have to wait for it, but they know it's coming even while everything else is going on, and they don't know the exact circumstances of when/why it happened.

The first time the reader actually sees the knife is midway through Chapter 13, but the actual stabbing doesn't happen until Chapter 16. The butter knife is mentioned several times in between, but that's it. It's there, hanging around, just waiting to be used.

As I'm working on my first editing run on this story, the question of anticipation is something that weighs heavily on my mind. Will it encourage the readers to eat up the story faster, or will it get annoying, like I'm deliberately dangling a carrot out of reach?

And I supposed I won't have any clear answers until I get comments back from my writing group/online CP's.

Have you ever written a story where the anticipation of the event is more important than the event itself? How do you know when 'enough is enough'?


* I've even seriously though of re-working the title to include 'butter knife'. The closest I've come to a substitute I like is, 'Butter Knives, Brake Fluid & Body Bags', but I think it's too much of a mouthful. The rhythm isn't as nice as 'Brake Fluid, Blood & Body Bags'. What do you guys think? Even in the title, I'm pretty much giving it all away ;)

Nearly there...

I'm about.... 500-800 words away from finishing my first draft of 'Brake Fluid'.

I'm rushing 'cause I've got a funeral to go to today in less than 1 1/2 hours and I still need to eat lunch and get ready.

...but I'm almost done :)

Favourite gross-out line of the day?

The trunk smells like... well, I can see why Eric thought a cat got cooked on the engine.

Favourite subtexty-description of the day?

Back in the trees, the chill wind has died down, as if the storm that almost-was is now rethinking where it wants to fall.

But unlike the rain, my mind is set. I’m going to do what I need to do. No more wussing out.

My word-count at this moment is 43,243. Low, but I know there's a lot of things that need clarifying during the editing process. I'm betting the first draft will come in very close to 44,000 words and with editing, I'm guess-timating it'll end up around 55,000 total.

I've already got a small mental list of consistency issues too... like changing all the mentions of Cherry Coke to Wild Cherry Pepsi, having Triss smoke throughout the entire story, Jackson's deck of cards needs to be shown earlier, and I have to weave more music stuff in places where I simply skipped over it to get to the next scene.

...and also I have to make sure the MC isn't strongly skewed towards either gender.

I also have a... quite disgusting *reference* question I need to ask a member of my writing group who, even if he doesn't directly have the answer, knows someone who will.

alcar...I'm lookin' at you ;)

How about you guys? Are you close to making your end-of-the-month-goals?

How about everyone doing NaNo June Camp?

Okay, time to shove something edible down my throat and get changed.

...there's been way too many funerals this past year...

Comparison

Do you compare your writing to others, both published and unpublished?

I think it's impossible to not compare, at least at some level.

But is comparing a bad thing or a good thing?

I know there are a number of bad reasons to compare... like, it can discourage you about your own writing, or it can frustrate you to see a book in print that (comparatively) isn't all that well written.

Also, it's not like comparing an apple to an apple, there's no way to find a story where every aspect can directly be compared to your own.

If you take the bad comparisons too far, I think a writer's own voice can become stunted if they try to emulate another writer's work that they consider *better* than their own. Or, they will become bitter about the entire process/business and quit writing.

But what are the good aspects of comparing one's literary work to others?

I think it's the only true way to determine where your limits are.

If you're writing in a vacuum, you'll have no sense whether what you're working on is good, bad, overwritten, sparse, poorly paced, etc. You'll never know where your strengths and weaknesses lie.

Comparing is the only true way to better understand your own writing, and (hopefully), set the baseline from which to lay out new goals, figure out where you can improve, and not just take your strengths for granted.

What do I mean by that last bit?

Well, I think it's part of giving back, especially in the online community and within your own writing groups.

Understanding your own strengths is a great way to help others when they are weak in those areas. If queries come really easily to you, it's a wonderful thing to be able to lend a hand to someone who tears out their hair, but you won't be any help at all if you don't understand why you can write good queries.

We learn best from each other, and I think that's an awesome thing.

Analyzing your strengths is just as important as analyzing your weaknesses. And any strength can still be improved upon.



Personally, I know I compare my writing to my writing group/CP's more than I compare to published work. I think this is because I know them, I know their processes, and I can often recognize the intention/force that drives their storytelling.

With a published author, I get none of that behind-the-scenes information.

One big thing I totally envy about the other members of my writing group is they always seem to have so much more plot than I do! (yes, BOTH of you...)

As a pantser, one worry that always hangs close is that I'm going to run out of plot. Somehow, things always seem to work out in the end, but when I've written to the point where I don't know anything else... oh yeah, that's when the voice of doubt starts whispering...

Like right now... as I'm trying to write the night that Jackson died... and have gotten as far as Triss & the MC walking in the door. I (obviously) know how it ends... but my word count is just under 40,000 words at this point. Even if that night takes 10,000 words to tell, that's still a very slim story.

So yes, right now I'm comparing, envying, analyzing my weaknesses, and striving to improve.

Oh! And I've just started to train my body to run in the Vibram five-fingers! This is exciting 'cause, as a teenager, I was told by a very famous sports doctor* that I was not allowed to run, ever (or use a bicycle) because I have zero cartilage in my knees.

BUT, the Vibrams? So far, I can run/jog/walk my dog for an hour without being crippled in pain afterwards, so, YEAH!

...my stamina sucks though :p


*He took care of professional athletes, including a couple of the Vancouver Canucks... don't ask me how in the world I ended up getting to see a specialist of that caliber... I think my family doctor must have had good blackmail on the guy ;)

Characteristics of *Character*

On Saturday, I had the pleasure of meeting up with my local writing group for the first time in... months, I think.

...And, amid the sporadic bursts of actual writing and chatting about random things, we touched a bit on why we like to write.

For me, it's always about *character*.

What is it about some characters that feel real, where others feel like cardboard clones?

And I don't have a good answer for that. No one does, I think, 'cause it's subjective. Even if two people like the same story with the same character, I'd be willing to bet money that, even if they connected to the same character, both readers would connect in different ways.

I connect to every character I write. Even if I disagree with their thoughts, emotions, needs, desires, etc... I still connect. I understand them.

Even awful characters like Jackson.

...despite the fact that no one is sad about his death (and rightly so), I still get him. I understand that sense of entitlement that drives his decisions.

The trick now, is honing my writing in such a way that readers understand it... and by that, I don't mean I necessarily want readers to empathize with him, 'cause even I'm glad he's dead. I suppose what I mean is that I want the complexity of his character to be evident. For him to feel *real*.

...and sometimes, it's really fun to read about a truly irredeemable character.

Have you ever heard of/watched a tv show called 'It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia'?

The people who developed the show essentially wanted to explore all the horrible things people joke about doing (or secretly want to do)... and make a tv show about characters doing these things.

Here's a description from wikipedia of the main characters:

They are often dishonest, petty, egotistical, selfish, greedy, unethical, lazy, manipulative, deceitful, hypocritical, self-centered, vain, disloyal, unremorseful, hasty, overly competitive, immature, vengeful, and arrogant. Episodes usually find them hatching elaborate schemes, conspiring against one another and others for personal gain, vengeance, or simply for the entertainment of watching one another's downfall. They inflict physical and psychological pain. They regularly use blackmail to manipulate one another and others outside of the group.

Their unity is not solid; any of them would quickly dump the others for quick profit or personal gain regardless of the consequences. Almost everything they do results in competition among themselves and a considerable amount of the show's dialogue revolves around the characters arguing or yelling over one another. Despite their lack of worldly success, the Gang generally maintain high opinions of themselves and display an often obsessive interest in their own reputations and public images. Despite this high sense of self worth, the Gang often have little sense of shame when attempting to get what they want and will often engage in activities which others would find humiliating, disgusting, or even preposterous, such as smoking crack cocaine in order to qualify for welfare, seducing a priest, or hiding naked inside a leather couch in order to spy on someone.

Yes, this show goes way over the top in believability, but the characters... oh, even though they're all so horrible, you get them. It's like every horrible person you've ever met in real life, all rolled up into 5 main characters. They feel real, you're happy when they get what's coming to them, and you love watching them self-destruct/fail.

Bad things happening to bad people.

Let me clearly state that I have never been tempted to write a 'Mary Sue character', essentially a literary version of myself in which to explore every wish I could ever hope for.

...there's a very good reason for this.

I am not all that interested in myself.

Really, whenever I have read a book where a character is similar to myself... I either get bored or irritated. Usually the latter.

The best part of writing (and reading) is the ability to explore a character who is NOT me. Who likes things I do not, who makes assumptions I would not make, who chooses paths I would most certainly avoid. 

This is probably part of the reason I prefer to write male characters -> because I'm female .

I'm sure this can be considered a form of escapism, but instead of wanting to escape into a fantastical world of amazing things... I just want to escape into someone else's head for a while. And not be me. Even when they are horrible characters.

...which is probably why I'm doing this whole writing thing in the first place...

And if I want to escape, it's got to be believable, which is why it all comes back to characters.

Whenever I encounter a character that feels like a cardboard clone, I wonder how real that character was to the author. Did they have a visual image? Could they hear the tone of the voice clearly? See the body language/mannerisms/ticks? Was the failure to connect just a disconnect between me (the reader), or was it a failure of the author in their ability to transmit essential character-building-information?

Do you think about why you connect with certain characters over others? Do you find they are similar to yourself, or not? What about the ones you write compared to the ones you connect to when you read? How clearly can you imagine the characters you connect with versus the ones that feel like cardboard?

Miss Snark's Secret Agent

No, it's not me this time, since I've been pulling ivy and drawing hippos instead of writing, but one of my long-time writing buddies has an entry in the latest Miss Snark's First Victim Secret Agent Contest.

...and I already know she's going to kill me for pointing you there...

BUT, even though her story isn't in a genre I would normally read, I do love this story and have been pestering harassing threatening encouraging her to finish it so I can read the final version.

I love my writing group

The local writing group I'm a part of always tends to fall away during NaNo and we try to get it going again in the new year.

As a change of pace, this year we met at a cafe instead of someone's house and tried doing a write-in for the first time. I wrote this scene January 7th in downtown Victoria in an unheated cafe (where our fingers were locking up from the cold) tossing back hot tea and coffee and catching up on all we'd missed over the previous couple of months.

It was awesome.

It was also when my main character finally got a name... 'cause I literally couldn't finish writing the sentence until there was a name. It was also the moment I realized what awful thing Issabel had done to land them all in trouble in the first place, and when I first noticed there was a romantic relationship hovering threateningly in the distance...

Yup. Total pantser. The words just showed up on the page and I went, "Oh wow, really? That's what happened?" Before I wrote the scene, I didn't know what Issa did or why... and even when I finished, I knew why she did it... I just couldn't understand why what she did will get her what she wants. Which is the reason this scene ends the way it does. See, I'm not actually trying to hold back information and throw cryptic lines out there to entice the reader further... most of the time, it's just the fact that I have no idea what happens next.

I was joking with one of my CP's that it's like someone has handed me a single sock and said, "work out how the mate for this will save the world." So, here I am with a sock in my hand, I know the purpose is to save the world, I just have no idea how to connect the two things.

Ah, pantsing... always an adventure :) Somewhere deep in the folds of my brain, I know where this is going... my conscious mind just hasn't been filled in yet ;) It's on a needs-to-know basis.

Anyway, this scene means a lot to me, short as it is ;) As you can see, meeting for about 4 hours didn't do much for my word-count, but we had a lot of fun together, and I was able to bounce my thoughts of that dreaded romantic relationship against some friends who, certainly did roll their eyes, but listened and earnestly gave me their opinions.

The only change that has been made to this scene is part about Mica, the dog. Originally he had gone with them to cut the herd and wandered off after that, but after writing a few more scenes, I realized that wouldn't have been possible, so had to go back to this scene, and to 2 scenes previous to throw in a mention that he wasn't around.

Last scene was here.

Rolling over and playing dead

No person is good at everything and it's natural to get frustrated when it feels like you're spinning your wheels while someone else is zooming ahead at Mach 7.

And boy, have I had my moments of wheel-spinning...

Last week when I posted a first-draft scene from Project #5, two commenters (sue & Yvie) were awesome and nailed me on a line that, (as Yvie brilliantly noted):

"I think I like the components of it, but something else about it is catching me."


The line in question was:

When he didn’t come, we set off alone under a sky bright with star trails.

Lines like this frustrate me because the components that make up the description are correct, the image in my mind of what I want to convey is incredibly sharp, yet the execution is flawed in a way where it's not an easy fix.

One of the major problems I have, both in reading and writing, is how my brain scrambles words up in strange ways. That scrambling is also the reason I nearly failed math and French in high-school.

It's a dyslexic thing, I totally get that.

And often this works incredibly well 'cause the way I describe something can be unusual and vivid. Description is actually one of the things I am pretty confident about, probably because I hold so much information in my head in a visual way. For example, math/numbers work like Lego in my mind, unique physical items that snap together to create something larger. They are tangible, not abstract. This is awesome when you're working with lower math... terrible when you start getting into calculus/algebra.

Writing is like very much like playing Tetris. Words have all kinds of shapes. When they are fit together properly, they create solid lines, when put together poorly, they leave ugly gaps. When I write, I pay close attention to how the words look on the page and, with a single glance (too quick to read content), I can usually tell if something is well written or not.

Being dyslexic has its advantages. I have way better spacial skills that most people. I can usually replicate something (like an action or a series of instructions) that I have only seen once. I can also take things apart mentally and put them back together in a different, more efficient way.

It's why I don't outline or make lists. I've trained my brain to remember things differently than *normal*. But ask me to tell you my phone number... and I'm going to have to pull out my phone and double check the sequence. And yes, this is embarrassing every time.

Sometimes I get so frustrated at my own shortcomings that I just want to roll over onto my back and play dead until someone pats me on the head and gives me a cookie.

...a sky bright with star trails. I know exactly what this looks like, but there's a glitch in my attempt to translate that image into a single, precise line of description.

Yes, I am confident in my ability to write description, but it's also the area which needs the most scrutiny and I rely heavily on my CP's because to my eyes, that line looks 100% correct.

Perhaps it's like being colour-blind. If your eye can't distinguish red from green, you're going to have to rely on someone else to tell you when your pants don't match your shirt.

So thank you, sue, Yvie, my long-suffering CP's (you know who you are) and everyone else who is nice enough to point out when my sentences look like red polka-dots mashed together with green plaid.

Now I need a cookie :)

Gruelling marathon, short distant sprint, or capture-the-flag in the dark?

Show of hands:

Which sounds the most fun?

Anyway you look at it, writing is a long-haul, from the first moment of story-conception, through the long hours of typing, the cringing, self-torture of proof-reading your first-draft, that first stage of editing, the handing it to CP's to slash apart your pretty bows and neat plot-points.

...then more editing, and if you're lucky, you round the track and hit the gravel trail of querying which is another trek in itself... and let's not even talk about all the stages necessary to get from agent to shelf.

But you also get those nice, short sprints, right? Where your lungs are burning, but you can see the goal line of a finished scene before you, or hitting a daily/weekly word-count high.

Sure, it's a lot of hard business and serious work and sacrifices, like sleep, and family, and uhm, actual human interactions...

I think we should all have more fun, though.

I don't know if you guys are like me, but I think I have a pretty good idea about what my writing weaknesses and strengths are.

I'm not saying I'm 100% right... but I think I know. I have some awareness about what I struggle with and what flows with not a lot of effort. And the parts that come naturally, well, you start to get a kind of confidence from that. The weaknesses, you kinda laugh and push them a little off to the side so they won't be staring at you quite so directly.

Well, I do.

And the main reason I do push them out-of-sight-out-of-mind is 'cause they're not fun.

But there's probably something interesting about them, if I looked hard enough, from a different angle, or maybe trying to turn off all the lights and attempting to build a helicopter out of Lego in the pitch dark... oh wait... straying off topic...

Okay, the Lego helicopter came up 'cause my little nephew always says, 'Build me this!' And I go, 'I don't wanna!'

Real mature, I know, but he's only 4.5, so what can you do?

Building helicopters are boring. I'll do it to please him, but I build 'em fast and really don't care when he smashes it to bits three seconds later. I rush and have little-to-no emotional investment in whether it lives or dies. Like writing a scene simply to transition to a better scene that I actually want to write. It's never going to be good if I'm just trying to get it over with.

So, what do you do to make writing more fun for yourself?

I put in a lot of small details that make me laugh. Like the reason behind Simon's name and then challenging myself to never use the phrase, 'Simon said'. In one of my stories, there's a stuffed cow named Melvastyke (pronounced mel-vah-steek). The same stuffed cow that still sits on my bed (husband permitting, well, tolerating) that I've had since I was thirteen. I throw in prime numbers and perfect numbers, I make vague references to weird math-things, like phi, the number by which you calculate a spiral. In Project #5, I plan to sneak in a sort-of-mention of Schrodinger's Cat.

Sometimes I simply designate one sense per character. That character's descriptions/experiences will only ever use that one sense. I do this with colours, too, or images/associations.

There are an obscene number of sly references to my cat...*

And I'm trying to think up the oddest combinations of food for Triss to eat.

Having these things keeps the story fun for me, no matter how many times I go through and re-write, cut, change, etc.

My writing group (unknowingly) are also part of my game. When they make suggestions or ask questions, I remember those things. I read through the text and go, "oh, I purposefully used the word 'rend' here, 'cause of J's last story" and, "here's the part where L smacked me over the head 'cause I was being an idiot. Then she told me how to fix the problem and totally saved me."

I can read a line and recall who patiently re-wrote it on the page so I finally understood what an umbrella pronoun is, or which muddied-description became clear after all the baggage was stripped away.

And it becomes a game of capture-the-flag because every word, every phrase, every sentence has a history, a memory and often a reason to laugh.

Sometimes all you need for a little staying power is making a game. Who says you can't hide a few flags in your work? If that'll motivate you to keep going, to keep it fresh and fun and excited as you work through the text over and over and over again, then do it!



*No, I'm not a crazy cat-lady, despite the evidence...

Great post on crit groups

I love feedback on my writing, like, to a near masochistic degree, so I'm all about writing groups, crit groups, CP's, beta-readers, all that good stuff. Call it what you want, if you can get an objective eye to look over your writing and honestly tell you what they thought (good or bad), that's an awesome thing.

But I'm also pretty quick to warn others that finding good people can be difficult, so be smart and be selective.

Janice Hardy (if you're not following her blog yet, you really should) did a great guest post today on some of the problems you can run into. No, this article isn't fanning the flame of negativity, she's really giving a lot of things to watch for so you can possibly know how to avoid/handle them if you ever get into that situation.

I've personally seen all these, both in real-life meetings, and in online relationships.

...and I know when I started getting my writing critiqued, my personal 'worst' was telling others, not necessarily that they were wrong, but I would try to point out why something was the way it was.* This could have been handled differently (and I think I'm better now), but I think each of the problems are also things that change as the writers grow together as long as there is trust and honesty between them.

I'm really big on asking questions. If someone finds a problem, and I don't really understand why it's a problem or how I can fix it, I ask. Sometimes it does feel like I'm asking a stupid question when it's clearly obvious to the other person what the problem/solution is, but I don't see a reason to feel embarrassed about doing that because I genuinely want to improve my writing. Feeling silly in that moment is a lot better than going away not understanding what the problem is... 'cause then you'll never fix it.

...and if I've learned anything about writers, we love to talk about writing as much (if not more) than we like to actually read/write, so someone asking us to explain further our opinion of something, well, you might as well just wrap that up in a bow, 'cause it's so much fun to analyze characters/plots/etc.

We are all monkeys madly typing away on our keyboards, hoping our next line is Shakespeare instead of nonsense, but it might not be us, it might be the monkey sitting right beside us. We're not in competition with one another, we're a group who are like-minded, goal-oriented, and perhaps just a little crazy, so I think it's great to help each other out and genuinely be happy for the monkeys who succeed one step before us. Between our own nonsense and their lines of Shakespeare, we can each improve and grow.


*this is primarily because I'm prone to over-thinking, even down to the exact words used within a sentence and what double meanings they could possibly have.

Protecting what you love

No, this isn't a campaign against the (brilliant) advice to kill your darlings...

I think, especially for writers who have never had their work torn apart by CP's or beta-readers, this topic is important.

There's a difference between killing your darlings and killing what you love about your story. A 'darling' is when you love a specific string of words on the page. What 'you love about your story' is the heart of it, why you wrote it, the *idea* behind it, the parts that get your excited/passionate about the story and the characters.

I've written about my thoughts on beta-reading before.

The key point of that post was to suggest that beta-readers keep three things in mind:

1) what they, as a reader, want
2) what the author wants
3) what the story wants

...and this is especially true if you, as a beta-reader, are suggesting significant changes, or, as a writer, your CP or beta-reader has suggested big changes.

Let's use my own writing as an example. Project #1, which no one (other than my writing group) is familiar with.

It's on hold for the moment because my group suggested I re-write the entire first 1/3 of the story. Well, they were more detailed than that... essentially, there were a number of problems:

- I was *telling* them at the beginning that Jess behaves like 'A', but on the page, she was behaving like 'B' the entire time (so, no transition)
- Because of this, it made no logical sense for Jess to bring Roan into the group
- Jess also had little-to-no power within the group dynamic (which contradicted some plot points)
- So it made much more sense for a different character, Ray, to bring Roan in
- But Ray's backstory/etc would then need to change, and that would change later plot points as well as other character dynamics... which then snowballed...

...and that's why it's been set aside for now :)

When you actually get down to it, probably about 1/2 the story will have to be re-written. But that's what the story wants. I, the writer, didn't necessarily want it... and my writing group disagreed strongly (with each other) how to handle the problems they uncovered... one suggested I keep the plot as-is, but re-write/re-imagine Jess so she was 'B' the entire time. That was what she, as a reader, wanted. And though that would have worked and could have been what the story wanted, it wasn't what I, the writer, wanted.

Jess's transformation from 'A' to 'B' was one of the major things I loved about the story, and I was (am?) willing to re-write half the book to make that happen.

Jess's character arc through the story is not a 'darling'. It's at the heart of what's important. I may love a lot of the scenes with her in them, but I'm willing to dump/delete/re-write them without a second-thought. Even huge parts of the plot can be discarded/changed because staying true to the characters is far more important to me.

As a writer, and as a beta-reader, you must be aware of the story's *heart*.

As a beta-reader, you may uncover a huge problem, but be careful how to point it out and suggest solutions. If you don't understand the *heart* of the story, ask questions. Don't assume you know the writer's intention because, without meaning to, you might destroy what they love about their story or make them feel it is not worth pursuing/re-writing. That's not your judgement to make.

As a writer, think about what you are willing to change, but more importantly, think about what you're not willing to change. Usually the *heart* of the story is emotional and has to do with how you perceive a character, or a certain relationship between two (or more) characters. If your CP or beta-reader tells you it's not working, don't shut them down, and don't just rewrite it like they suggest. Talk to them. Tell them your intention and find out what actually worked and what didn't.

As a writer, the entire story is in your head, but a lot of it may not have made it onto the page. Often, it's what you didn't write that's the problem.

Don't get attached to your words and dig your heels in. It's far more important to get attached to the *heart* of the story, for that is what readers will remember, not a clever turn-of-phrase on page 187.

Stupid raisins...

...stay out of my cookies

Okay, not only do I want this t-shirt, (from Threadless) but it reminds me of a sentiment I get every time I receive beta-reader feedback* on my work...

I hate raisins. Not only do they taste awful, they're depressing. Grapes that have wasted, shrivelled and dried up. I can't even appreciate a good port or sherry 'cause of the unpleasant-raisin-like-flavor, or the homemade bread pudding my British grandmother makes every Christmas.

There's nothing like biting into a freshly baked chocolate chip cookie, shuddering and going, 'blargh', and wanting to spit it out 'cause you realize too late that it's full of raisins. And the worst part is, I know if I'd spent a moment longer looking at it, I probably wouldn't have taken that first disgusting bite.

It's the same sort of feeling I get when my beloved writing group or beta-readers hand back a chapter of new writing and the comments are things where I go, 'Blargh, I should have caught that!'

I feel like I've not only wasted their time, but mine as well... 'cause if I'd held onto it just a little longer, read through it maybe once or twice more, I would have fixed those suspiciously ugly shrivelled, taste-bud-wrenching little bits. Then they would have concentrated more on the aspects I couldn't have found on my own.

Truly, I believe having other writers (and later when it's more polished, readers) look at my work is invaluable.

But be careful of sending work off too soon... If you haven't done at least one edit on your own and cleaned up all those small, annoying errors like obvious grammar/wording problems, awkward sentences, disappearing characters, talking heads and white rooms, then not only are you making the job much more difficult for your readers, you're not going to get very effective comments. Little stuff like that you can clean up on your own with a little hard work and a willingness to search them out.

Writing partners and beta-readers are critical in finding the big things you don't see 'cause you're just way too close to the story.

Project #1? Yup it was a mess. Still a mess. But my writing group nailed me on a few giant problems I couldn't even see...

If they were battling with tons of little problems, they probably wouldn't have found those big problems, or would have given up and written me off**. Most likely they would not have agreed to read more of my work in the future.

So, be kind to your writing partners and beta-readers. Seriously go through your work before sending it off and try to catch every last problem you can. You will be rewarded, not only with a higher level of feedback, but they will usually be willing to help you out in the future as well.

So seek to build lasting relationships. Do all you can to make the job as easy as possible, 'cause then it wouldn't seem like work to them... they'll have fun. 

And ultimately, don't you want readers to enjoy your story?

*By the way, this has nothing to do with a particular beta-reader or even feedback I received on a specific story, this is just a generalized sort of comment...

** yes, pun intended.

Pizza-popsicles and other sticking points

I'm doing another guest post for Wicked & Tricksy, this time on the subject of beta-reading, and boy am I glad I wrote this out last week before I was kicked down by illness.

EDIT: Since the Wicked & Tricksy site is no longer up, here's the complete post:

...yes, I'm going to explain that post title...

When beta-reading, I think my strengths lie in finding the logic problems in the story, from character development, to how a curtain rack would be secured to a wall. Seriously, I get obsessed with weird things and tend to over-think myself into a corner when I'm reading someone else's work.

So, the pizza-popsicle thing?

This term started in my writing group when one member included a time-traveling character obsessed with popsicles. At one point, the character wrapped a piece of pizza around a popsicle and fused it together somehow.

...and as I was reading that line, I got stuck.

...and I couldn't get past it 'cause my mind was churning in circles looking for a logical loop-hole in which it could believe that a frozen popsicle can be fused with a hot piece of pizza while each maintain their hot/cold states.

...and my tiny little brain spun and spun like a hyperactive hamster on a wheel that is somehow beyond the confines/rules of physics...

So a 'pizza-popsicle' refers to anything in a story that yanks you out of the suspension-of-disbelief state. It’s whenever you stop and have to think too much to understand something. It could be anything from wondering how long it takes a grenade to explode after the pin is pulled, to a word used in a line of dialogue that just doesn't feel *right* for the character speaking, so you stop and go back to double-check the dialogue tag. Sometimes you think a character is standing on one side of the room, then in the very next line he/she is suddenly coming through a door on the opposite side. It could be that moment of thinking, 'there's absolutely no reason for that guy to suddenly fall in love with her!'

It doesn't matter how large or small, it just has to disturb the flow of the story and remind you it is a story.

First-draft manuscripts are usually ripe with pizza-popsicles, but that's totally normal. Most of them will be pretty easy to resolve, either by cutting a small piece of information, or giving a bit more information somewhere else to clarify. Sometimes switching a few lines around so 'B' comes before 'A' will fix the problem. Other times it's not as easy to pinpoint or fix... like, if you had to read the same line several times for it to make sense, but you can’t explain why.

The hardest kind of pizza-popsicles are when the pizza-popsicle influences a large plot-point because, each time it's repeated, it'll pull you further and further out of the story and impact your ability to pay attention to things like pacing/etc. Like, one of my biggest sticking points is the *best friend* character who only exists in the story to show the reader that the MC isn’t a friendless-loser... and only pops up to cheer up the MC or be a sounding board when MC + love interest are having problems. After that they conveniently disapear. Whenever this kind of character shows up, I’m constantly asking myself why they are friends, especially if the MC never seems to seek out/help the best friend with anything. Usually the best friend has no plot arc of their own, so that is the actual problem that needs to be solved.

For these big/repetitive pizza-popsicles, I find it's always best to try to address them as soon as they first appear and clearly outline the implications throughout the story.

If you don't know if you have pizza-popsicles in your story, listen when a beta-reader says, 'Why didn't they just...' or 'I didn't understand how...' or asks a direct questions like, 'how long is the timer on a grenade?' That's your clue that they've tripped over a pizza-popsicle.

Even though they seem like small comments, pay close attention. Remember, anytime your reader stops to think, it means they have been jarred out of the flow of your story, which is not what you want to happen. I know it sounds wrong to say it, but you really don’t want your readers thinking while they read... you want them to be so engrossed that they keep turning the pages until the reach the end... and then pester you constantly until they can read your next work.

Have you come across problems like this when beta-reading for someone else? Or, if you’ve received comments back from your beta-reader, do some questions/comments seem unimportant in the great-scheme-of-things? Have you ever considered the larger implication of those kinds of picky questions?

A little bit of insecurity

I sent Project #2 to someone for editing/beta-reading July 27th, and have not yet received comments back... other than confirmation that the person received it.

Last week, I also sent Project #2 to a long-time writing buddy from NaNoWriMo (I use a different moniker on there). I've beta-read her projects many, many times, but this is the first time we're doing a full swap. MS for MS. I've already read two previous versions of the MS she just sent me, though she's never read even close to a full MS-sized piece of my own writing.

And I admit I'm feeling a little bit vulnerable right now.

Now, I'm not saying I don't trust either of the two people I've sent it to... the friend from NaNo, I think I've known for about six years, and having such an established relationship with an online beta-reader is an awesome thing, but it does take different *trust-muscles* than when you hand it over to a writing group you meet with in real life (which I do, and they shredded version 1.0 of Project #2 way back in February).

When you meet and have your work shredded in real life, you have the chance to talk, clear up any misunderstandings that may arise due to the MS itself, or to your CP's impressions/comments on it. Also, when meeting in real life, you have the chance to talk about your story before your partners actually read it... so they go into it with pre-formed ideas of what you were trying to accomplish, backstory that never made it onto the page, or even some of the twists and turns that would surprise an online CP without that prior knowledge.

When working exclusively online with someone, you don't get the benefit of asking them to clarify a comment that sounds completely wrong, or seems overly insulting/harsh. I think most people are aware of this and tend to err on the side of polite/vague when conversing through email. It's harder to feel out someone who asks you to be brutal and honest... so you juggle how brutal and honest to be, and sometimes they get angry and never even respond or thank you for your time and effort. The relationship and boundaries are such so much muddier online...

Now, I like this particular writing friend because she's about as ruthless about honesty as I am. She'll disagree, she'll argue, but she'll never get angry at someone for telling the truth, and I'm the same way. I know she'll point out every last thing she dislikes about my writing, not only the more objective/technical stuff, but her personal thoughts/feelings while reading it. And I appreciate getting that personal/reader reaction.

Whenever I read writing samples on people's sites, I am always honest. If something jumps out at me, good or bad, I'm going to point it out. I'll never post a generic, meaningless comment.

I think this may irritate some people, but I do it anyways, 'cause it's how I show my respect to their writing... by taking it seriously.

When I'm reading *good* writing, I forget that I am reading, which is why I will point anything that jumps out... if it jumps out, usually it's because there's something wrong... like a word repeated too often within a paragraph, an awkward sentence that may sound nice, but doesn't flow properly or has a word or two that feels clunky. I hope other people will be as ruthless with my own writing samples because that's how I'll learn to write better. No one's perfect, especially when evaluating their own writing. I can recognize many problems/habits in my own work, and that's only because someone has taken the time to point them out to me.

But it's still scary to have all your faults laid out in front of you like a collection of dead insects. Even butterflies are pretty gross if you get right down and look at them carefully... especially their mouths... you just don't realize how ugly the problems in your story are until someone sticks them under a microscope and points them out, one by one.

...so, while I am truly looking forward to the masochistic pleasure of having my work shredded by her, I'm also feeling insecure. How bad is the damage? Will she find something that's so huge I can't fix it? Is that the reason I haven't heard back from the person I sent it to on July 27? Did they also find something horrible but are holding back on telling me?

At least with this particular writer friend, I know she'll tell me if she finds anything major... in her email, she actually said, "Since I'm not going to show mercy, I don't expect any mercy on mine."

Do you guys feel insecure when you send off your own work to beta-readers? Do you feel the same for online CP's versus real life CP's? Are there any other things you stress about when sending work to out for people to read/evaluate?

Vampires, zombies and romance, oh my!

I think that my *what the monkey writes* sidebar might rub some people the wrong way...

But y'know, I still don't want to change it because:

a) I don't write about any of those things, nor do I see that changing any time soon.
b) I'm a person who would rather disappoint someone by telling the truth than lie/lead them on.

 (For those interested in personality types, this is spot-on accurate for INTJ.)

Please note that those things are specifically listed under the *what I write* section. It's not *what I don't read* or *what I don't like*.

Just because I don't write about zombies, werewolves, aliens, vampires, etc, doesn't mean I hate those things, or stories that have those kinds of characters. 'Dracula', by Bram Stoker, is one of my all time favourite books and I've probably read it more than 50 times since discovering it at age nine.

The reason I love it so much is because Dracula, in Stoker's tale, is a monster. Seeing him through the other character's eyes, he has no humanity, no sense of morality or empathy. He is a manipulative predator. An animal. There's no way you could possibly confuse him as a human.

I empathize with Susan in this El Goonish Shive comic strip. I just can't connect *monster* with *sexy*.

Perhaps it's because I read Dracula at such an early age, but when creatures that logically should be monsters are portrayed as humans, the whole *suspension of disbelief* thing just doesn't happen 'cause my brain keeps screaming, "That's not right!"

The appeal of monsters is their monstrous, in-human qualities clashing with the sensibilities of humans. If that isn't there, then what's the point in having it be a monster in the first place? If the only differentiating factor is the character shape-shifts, sucks blood, has wings, horns or a third eye, but is otherwise entirely human in thoughts/feelings/psychology, that seems like pretty weak characterization... and if I can't believe the character, I can't get into the story... the same as I can't get into a Mary-Sue-type-character. A psycho who kills women in a dark alley and drains them of blood for fun is more realistic than a vampire who is essentially a human trying to get into their victim's pants (and veins). At least the psycho is a monster who is written as a monster, not as a misunderstood bad-boy suppressing his (thinly veiled sexual) desire.

 A true monster is not sexy. A true monster is terrifying.

Now, while I say all that, I'm not averse to reading stores with these kinds of characters. In fact, every other member of my writers group loves zombies, vampires, and all other kinds of beasties that go thump in the night. I read their drafts, I obsessively get into their characters (like a dog with a ball), and our meetings usually end up being a debate about character motivation, the practicalities, limits and weaknesses of the inhuman critters, right down to asking if vampires could drink coffee by adding a few drops of blood so their bodies wouldn't reject it. Yup, that suggestion of mine made it into version 2.0 of one particular story.

(...and that makes me so happy!!! Squeeeeee! Just as happy as when they give me an awesome suggestion that ends up in a newer version of my stories. I like seeing the fingerprints we make on each other's stories)

I don't think it's a bad thing that I don't normally read/write this kind of subject matter. Because I don't know the usual conventions of the genres, I end up asking (sometimes stupid) questions that my group members might not have thought of... of examining all the daily human rituals and seeing them fresh through the eyes of their in-human characters. Just as they ask me questions I have not thought of. Having different interests and liking different genres is what makes our conversations not only more interesting, but more valuable.

Romance is a similar thing. I don't have a romantic cell in my body. The only reason I know my wedding date is because we have a dvd of our wedding with it clearly printed on the front cover. I'm serious. I don't believe in love at first sight, soul mates, or any of that kind of stuff. I married my husband 'cause he was/is my best friend. We get each other, and that's a rare and amazing thing.

Despite that, I have no problem beta-reading stories where romance is the main focus, but I'm always going to read it through the eyes of a sceptic... looking for clear character motivation, a logical sequence/build-up of events, etc.

Beta-readers are all different and we all bring our own personal tastes into our reading/critique along with our strengths and weaknesses. When it comes to grammar, it's better to ask someone else, but when it comes to logic, plot holes and character motivation/development... that's where I shine, especially if you're asking me to *believe* in something incredible. In fact, it's often those situations where I get the most fired up because I want the writer to convince me, I want to fall prey to their characters, their world and their storyline.

So, just because I don't write about those things, doesn't mean I hate 'em.

It's just that there are other subjects and characters that I want to write more.

Take a breath

My writers group met last night, not to talk about our writing, not to throw around ideas, not to critique first drafts or short stories. We met to have dinner, take a breath, relax and just enjoy each other's company.

In anything you do, you need breaks.

I think with writing, because usually it's a solitary thing, taking a break means going out and enjoying time with friends. See a movie, try a new restaurant. Have coffee. Laugh a lot.

Give yourself that much needed mental break, even when your fingers are itching to get on that keyboard.

What do you do to take a break from writing?

Compliments and Criticisms

Can you think of the best compliment you ever received for your writing? I'm not talking about your best friend, your significant other or your mom telling you that you're going to be a best seller... I'm talking about something that spurned you on to want to write or gave you the sense that you could actually write.

I have a very distinct memory of mine. Well, I have three actually, this was really the second.

I was in high school and it was two days after I had turned in a (required) short story. I was wandering the empty halls when my English teacher stopped me and, for a moment, I thought I was going to get in trouble since I was, so very obviously, skipping one of my classes... just not his.

He had this really weird expression on his face... he didn't say "Hi" or "What class should you be in?" He just looked at me, then out of nowhere, he said, "I don't understand that story you turned in."

...and, being the smart-mouth I was, (and primarily concerned with avoiding trouble for skipping class) I answered back, "Well then you should read it again." And I trounced off as fast as I could without looking like I was running away. After all, I didn't want him cluing in that I probably wasn't supposed to be roaming the empty halls in the middle of the school day.

Doesn't sound much like a compliment, does it? Well, I did get an A+ on that story and until I graduated all my English teachers were overly interested in what I was writing to the point where two of them *borrowed* my Grade 12 Provincial English Exam from the officiating examiner so they could read the essay portion of my exam. I suspect they could have gotten into a LOT of trouble for that... since the Provincial exams are taken very seriously...

(okay, that particular incident was the third compliment. The first I'm still not going to talk about 'cause it's bitterly embarrassing)

The reason I found it to be a compliment is because the professor wasn't a stupid guy. Sure, I may have been a bratty immature teenager, but I respected some of my teachers and this guy was one of them. His comments on the story... I'm not going to share them, but that is one of the few things I have kept from my high school years. Because of his reaction in the hallway and because of what he wrote.

So that's my idea of a compliment. Does that seem a little warped? Strange? Incomprehensible? Sure, I wouldn't disagree on that point. The story was pretty weird, I might add. Enough to get the school councillor calling me into her office at random times for a *friendly chat about anything that was bothering me*, of which I usually spent it sitting silently in full-on sullen-teenage-glory until I was eventually released.

As a general rule, I hate compliments. Especially when it's to do with writing.

So what do I like? I like criticism. My usual tag-line when I e-mail sections to my writing group is, "Shred it!" (figuratively, not literally as that would be counterproductive). I want to know what's wrong. I want everything torn apart into tiny ragged pieces, with nothing spared or left intact. I want ruthlessness. I want the masochistic pleasure in being taken down a peg (or several), of having pointy objects shoved into the softest parts of my writing until it bleeds. I will eternally ask, "but what's wrong with it?" until they're ready to throw me out.

I'm in a dilema, at the moment, where I'm looking for that next level of pain. I want a limb hacked off, an organ removed, a good, old-fashioned scalping.

Today I had a very frustrating afternoon where I *tried out* a writing group in a city I don't live in, but visit at least once a month. Don't get me wrong, I love my local group, but none of them write YA and I want good, hard criticism from people who live, eat and breathe the genre. I want my weaknesses pointed out. I want to improve, I want to grow. I am not content with the level I currently write at and my own self-instruction has reached the limits of what is feasible. I need that critical second-eye.

But right now I need a hot bath. To ease the frustration of my afternoon adventure, I walked my dog (who is clearly a trooper) in the pouring rain for an hour until the both of us were soaked clean through.

Marshmallows, fear and popping your query-cherry

Okay, this is too awesome.

I am not yet at the stage where I am querying, but I have sent out one query, so I guess I'm like the kid that licked the marshmallow, but didn't bite it.

In the second week of January, I promised my writing group that I would finish my rough draft (of a 65,000 word story I had, at that time, only written 30,000 words of) and hand it over before I left the country on January 25th. So I got to work. I had about 3 weeks to write 35,000 words.

...and I wrote, a bit. I knew if I was late, my writing group wouldn't care (we're pretty lax about deadlines), and this looseness had slowly worn off on me over the years. I know I can write fast and hard when I need too, I just had to find a way to kick-start myself into *obsessive mode*.

And I found it about a week later when an online writing-buddy asked me to beta-read her submission for ABNA (Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award)...something I'd never heard of. She told me about it and that the deadline was 3 days before my promised deadline to my writing group.

...so, y'know that obsessive part of my personality? Well, I figured holding myself accountable to an even earlier deadline would probably make me write faster.

And it did. I wrote those 35,000 words in 10 days (including 6,500 words on the day the contest opened), gave it a quick grammar check, then submitted it and didn't once look back. I was not going in with any false/elevated expectations. I was handing in a first draft in which I already knew the first two scenes needed a drastic re-write. I didn't care. I had sent myself an insane goal and I had accomplished it (and did manage to make it through the first round in the contest, when the VINE feedback nailed everything I already knew had to be re-written).

While I was half-insane/bleary-eyed at 12:10am on the day the contest opened, I haphazardly e-mailed off a query to an agent.

No, this wasn't an accident. I meant to do this and I even felt a pang of self-loathing when I did indeed receive that rejection e-mail.

When I first found out about the ABNA contest, I didn't immediately leap at it. In fact, I think it was almost a week after hearing about it that I decided to sign up. During that week I kept asking myself why wasn't I leaping at it? I mean, the deadline was only a few days earlier than I had originally planned. I wouldn't be doing more work than I was going to do in the first place. It was a first draft, so I didn't have any *great expectations*, so there was nothing to lose by not proceeding to the next round of the contest... so why not? Why was I hesitating? When I actually thought about it and laid everything out in this way, I realized that if I didn't enter, the only possible reason was that I was being a coward.

I was afraid of submitting and being rejected in some way.

So I submitted.

Then I submitted a query to an agent picked almost at random. Okay, not at random. That person seems really awesome online and I would have been ecstatic to work with them, and even though they rep YA, I think what I write is not exactly what they like... and that's okay, but I still don't recommend this. If I wasn't so caught up in facing my fears, (it's called tunnel-vision. It's the reason I will forget to eat for an entire day or why the dog has learned an intricate and annoying tap-dance to alert me when she needs to go outside), I would have realized the absurdity of doing so. I was wasting someone's time, and I hate wasting people's time. It's rude.

So, yeah, I did wrong, but I don't think of it as burning a bridge and at least I learned from my own mistake and won't repeat it in the future. Silver-lining folks. Even the bad has good.

The point is that I needed to face my fear and get it over with. Next time, when I send it to an agent I truly do want, when I get that rejection, it won't hurt quite so much. When you analyze a situation and the best reason for NOT doing something is fear... that's what I can't stand the most. I can handle a lot of things, but fear of something so silly as another person not liking my writing... all I could do was shake my head and tell myself to grow up and submit (yes that was intentional) :P

So how do you deal with fear?

I am that dog

Yes, that's right.

Everyone has seen that one dog in the park who is chasing a ball or frisbee with such single-minded devotion that you can't help but laugh. Maybe you even feel better about yourself because it reminds you that humans are so much smarter than a silly dog running after a hunk of dirty rubber.

Today, while emailing back and forth with another writer friend, I hit a zen-like state when I realized, and accepted, that I am that dog.

We were talking about a story she is working on and I confessed to her that I was biting my lip to avoid bombarding her with a tidal wave of questions. She laughed and asked why... and then this was my response (edited for length, and yes my grammar is usually that horrible in emails):

YOU know what i'm like... when i get my teeth into something i get so enthusiastic it's like wrestling a bone from the mouth of a starving dog.

so, basically, i don't want to ask something, then ask more and more and more... and you're like, 'stop! i'm not even there yet!!' and get all panicky 'cause i'm asking you about the inner-workings of things that you've just barely scratched the surface of yourself...

'cause i don't know how to stop... now you will forever visualize me as a stupid dog that is so set on chasing a tennis ball that it runs itself to exhaustion... so just be warned that if you throw me a bone, you're going to end up with a lot of slobber on your hands.

So yes, I am that dog...

When I find something interested, I devour it. I tug, tear and shake it until there are pieces everywhere. I want to know everything about how it works, why it works and if there's something I can do to make it even better.

I could run with this and joke about how we humans choose to stay in jobs we hate so we can chase after that next meagre bonus, useless paper award or the promise of two extra vacation days when we hit five years of employment, but to be honest, that would be getting away from the point of writing this blog.

In that eureka-like moment of acceptance, I was stunned by the fact that I don't mind being that dog in the park. In addition, realizing that the off-hand confession to my writer friend was long overdue and probably the most honest thing I've said about myself in years. I think I generally come off as a calm and laid-back kind of person, but when I find something new that I'm interested in, that persona flies far, far away. In the last couple of years, the members of my writing group have seen that side of me, and it's something I've always been a little embarrassed about. Losing my cool in front of others. I try to control myself, to hold back, but it's oh so hard when they hand over a shiny new story. I can't help but just tear into it to find out who the characters are and why they are behaving the way that they do.

But I've been thinking today that maybe it's okay to be that dog. 

As a reader, one indulges in the characters and learns about their motivations and their interests, but that is a passive experience. A writer is on the opposite end of the spectrum, convincing readers of the legitimacy of their characters through the actions and reactions, innate preferences and hypocritical or selfish desires. To be an editor (or a beta reader) is a complicated marriage of the two where you have to weigh what you want as a reader, against what the writer wants, then once again against what the story wants (or demands). 

As someone who loves both reading and writing, I want to show the same respect to my writer friends as I would like them to give me. I want to honestly and enthusiastically support their work without it coming across as either flattery or unjustified criticism. I want to continue to chase that ball or frisbee for as long as they have the energy to throw it.

As a person who wants to grow, I'd like to expand my own little world by seeking out others with enthusiasm for the same kinds of things that interest me and I want to know more about things I have yet to learn about. Hence this blog, my first adventure online.

All that is good, but as for right now, I think I'll start chewing on the bone that my writer friend threw me. I say she's had fair warning that there's going to be slobber.