One edit down, on to the next

Yesterday, I finished my revision of The Christmas Tree Farm Murders and sent it off to be critted. I started working on the revision outline April 7, so that's just under a month. Not bad.

I'm going to be starting the revision of Witchy Woman next, and I thought I'd talk a little about my editing process here. I started off with Holly Lisle's articles on One-Pass Manuscript Revision and How to Revise a Novel. These are essentially the same process, just written up slightly differently.

Now, I knew I couldn't use her process as written -- as I mentioned in Making the writing pay, I feel the need to see the big picture first before I jump into cutting and making notes about adding scenes. So I added an extra pass through to create a revision outline and remind what the book as a whole looked like before I made any decisions. I actually got so caught up in the prose that I wound up stopping the outline to just read, then had to go back and page through again to create the outline. This turned out to work very well, since I could make notes on my index cards about upcoming scenes that I wanted to tie things to, or note that some scenes might work better pushed together.

Once I had my outline (a series of index cards, one scene per card), I went through and adjusted them all, removing the second POV, noting which scenes should be rewritten to the primary POV, tracing clues and planting new ones -- generally, making certain the continuity worked. I also noted dates and times to make sure the timeline worked.

Then I went through the hard copy and edited. Lots and lots of red ink all over the pages. Deletions, changes, additions. New pages written on the back of old ones. That took about a week.

Next up, the type-in. I'm odd -- I type in from back to front. This serves two purposes: the manuscript hasn't been repaginated by changes earlier in the manuscript, so the hard copy pages correspond to what's in front of me on the screen; and focusing on the sentences and paragraphs out of context gives me a separate proofreading check where I'm not seeing words because I expect them to be there.

I typed in the last four chapters and realized I was going to need another pass. I had entirely too many body language tics of the "she smiled," "she shrugged," and "he nodded" variety, and I needed to take those out and add in more actual characterization and setting description.

Thus, when I finished the type-in, I started through again, this time front to back, making those sorts of changes as I went -- and noting on my outline specific changes that would have to be propagated through later chapters.

Turns out, though, I wasn't quite done when I sent it off for crit. I'd left a wishy-washy sentence highlighted that I meant to come back to and fix. I sent e-mail about this and chalked it up as learning experience: Don't skip the final read-through before sending a manuscript to agents or editors.

That's the process as I just went through it. I'm hoping to streamline it for this next project -- sort of. You see, WW has about half the word count it needs, so I know I'm going to be layering in story-line and sub-plot.

The anticipated process:

• read through the manuscript


• create outline of current state


• work through world-building and necessary plot expansions


• update revision outline


• hard copy edit (get rid of tics and add description at this stage!)


• type in edits


• have Word read manuscript to me while I follow along to make sure all edits complete

I'm hoping to get through the read-through this week, and begin the rest next week. This time, I'm estimating closer to two months than one, but we'll see.

Where I stand

At the end of last month, I mentioned all that I had on my plate.

I already said that I didn't get anywhere with the Nocturne Bites pitch contest. Fortunately, I can still send in the full Bite per their normal submission guidelines.

Monday, I sent off my entry for the Knight Agency's Book in a Nutshell competition. Since then, I've finished my hard copy edits of The Christmas Tree Farm Murders and started typing them in. I'll probably have to do another clean-up pass after it's all in, but it should be fairly solid by the end of the month.

I did get a phone interview for the blog gig I applied for, but they decided my experience and skills didn't match their needs.

Looking ahead to May, I'm planning to finish up the edits on my Bite and get it sent off, work on a few short stories (maybe do Forward Motion's Story-a-Day!), and then work on two different outlines: the revision outline for Pepper (my NaNo 2007 story) and the writing outline for Ivory & Bone, which has been calling to me. I'm thinking that, even if I take more time with Pepper than I did the Christmas Trees, I can have her finished and ready to go to critters before we head out on our family vacation this summer -- and then maybe I'll work on Ivory & Bone longhand while we're on vacation. All plans, of course, are subject to change at any time.

By the way, in my New Year post, I listed getting two novels edited, submitting a novelette, and reoutlining my 2007 NaNo (plus a couple of other things) as my goals for this year. Editing The Christmas Tree Farm Murders puts me halfway to that first one, submitting the Nocturne Bite will get me the next one, and 2007 NaNo outline is up next, so I'm doing fairly well at sticking to my goals for the year. Yay, me! How are you doing, one-third of the way through the year?

So much for that one

The short list for the Nocturne Bites pitch contest was chosen early -- 7 names rather than the 5 stated (of 60 total) -- and my pseudonym isn't on the list. I'll still finish my edits and send it off for standard submission, but I am disappointed. I thought I had a decent shot.

Ah, well.

Making the writing pay

Three weeks since I last posted? My only excuse is being busy with the paying work. Well, and with actual writing that I hope to get published.

Specifically, I've been working on putting a blurb together for the Nocturne Bites pitch contest. I wrote a story targeted toward this line last year, and one of my goals for this year is to edit it and get it submitted, so this pitch contest is the perfect goad to get me moving. I've been alternating work on polishing the two-paragraph blurb with editing the actual manuscript. I want it ready to go if I'm picked -- and if I'm not, I send it in as slush.

I've also been looking at the Knight Agency's Book in a Nutshell Competition. Back in February, I printed out my mystery, The Christmas Tree Farm Murders and started putting together a revision outline of it, preparatory to doing a modified version of Holly Lisle's one-pass revision (modified because I do the read-through and outline before making any of the decisions she talks about concerning whether the scenes are doing what they're supposed to; I have to have the big picture before me to make those calls). Now my plan is to send off my Nocturne Bites pitch and then focus on this, getting it into shape by the end of April. Again, if I'm not chosen, it's not the end of the world -- I'll send it off for crit and work on my query and synopsis, then go on to the traditional submission to agents.

Yesterday, I added even more to my plate -- I submitted an application for a paying blog gig. They may well look at my blogs and say, "She doesn't seem to stay focused and consistent, so we don't want to use her." I hope they don't. If I'm offered a position, that's paying work -- and as I've said before, I give paying work priority. If that means sitting down and writing a blog post first thing every weekday, then I'll do that. I'll also try to get back to blogging more regularly here -- but I'll focus first on fiction.

I have one of those minds always fascinated by the new and shiny. I want to take on new projects because they're different. For a bit, I was considering trying to do a podcast. I was going to try to account in advance for my tendency to get busy by having a half dozen episodes recorded before ever going live, and I only wanted to publish once every couple of weeks, maybe even only once a month. I had a title and a premise ("The Many Voices of Erin" all about trying to write and get published in multiple genres). However, I have decided both that I don't have time for this sort of project and that it will not advance my career materially enough to be worth the effort. It won't pay, and it probably won't convince anyone -- agent or editors or readers -- to buy more of my work. So I've discarded that idea.

I am moving forward, trying to make choices to get my writing out there, to get paid for it, to get read. Updates to follow.

Best podcasts for writers, part 5: The Writing Cast

Today, I'm reviewing The Writing Cast, by Ivy Reisner. I've only listened to about eight episodes because that's all that iTunes has. It's possible to click on the archived months on the blog, select which entry you're interested in, and then listen to the MP3, but frankly, that's more work than I want to go through. (I tried clicking on the "Writing Podcast" category, but it left some out -- for example, the episode on writing humor.)

The podcast comes out twice a month, so it's easy to keep up with.

The format of the shows is pretty simple: Ivy provides a writing resource, talks about specific writing-related issues (for example, in February, she had one episode dealing with sentence structure and how to vary it), mentions other news that may be of interest (such as a new anthology or software that she's been trying out), and gives a writing prompt.

She's pointed to a few tools I want to check out, such as Changing Minds. Her discussion of haiku and renga was also very interesting.

The latest episode is for February 27, on conflict of interest. I'm curious to see what's up next. Since it does appear somewhat sporadic (twice a month, but not following any obvious pattern), it will probably never be my favorite podcast, but it's definitely worth a listen.

The day job, or why I haven't been around

Two posts from me in one day! What next?

This one is mostly just a "this is why I'm not around as much." It's the day job. Now, listening to Mur Lafferty in ISBW, at one point she said that if she wants to be making her living 10 years down the road by writing fiction, she needs to make time to write it now, to make that a priority. I can see her point.

However, my mom raised me practical. First, I have to pay today's bills before I worry about how I'm going to be doing that a decade from now. And if I'm pushing myself -- staying up until 2 a.m., getting up at 5 a.m., and considering all-nighters -- trying to get those bills paid, I'm not going to take extra time to write. I've been exhausted, and anything I wrote would have been crap.

When I don't have time for my fiction writing, I sure don't have time to blog. Thus, my absence.

I'm almost finished with this one job, which is why I'm taking a breather. Then I have to dive in and finish the other mondo job. Small stuff lined up after that, nothing too intense. Yes, there will be writing on the horizon! Which is good, as I want to submit to both the PARSEC Science Fiction and Fantasy Short Story Contest and the Destination: Future anthology. Among other, more regular, markets.

One step at a time, though. First, I finish the paying work.

Where's my podcast review?

Lately, I've been trying to catch up on back episodes of several podcasts -- at the top of the list are I Should Be Writing, Tor Podcasting, and Odyssey SF/F Writing Workshop Podcasts. It takes a lot longer to catch up on a podcast than it does to keep up, so it may take another week or so before I get to another review. I did manage to listen to 7 of 19 episodes of the Tor podcast today what with errands and cooking and the like, so it's not hopeless. (On the other hand, I'm only up to episode 44 of 110 numbered episodes -- plus daily experiments, special editions, and video episodes -- of ISBW. That's going to take longer.)

Look for a review post next Tuesday!

Vanishing markets

If you write short fiction in fantasy or science fiction (or both), you should be using Ralan.com to keep track of markets -- what's new, what's changed, and what's closed.

This morning, I got the monthly newsletter and discovered two things: Odyssey Workshop has a LiveJournal blog, and the Year's Best Fantasy and Horror series has been canceled.

I went looking for more info on the YBFH and found Gavin Grant's original post, Ellen Datlow's comments, and Terri Windling's post. Honestly, the canceling of this series of year's best shook me more than the closing of Realms of Fantasy. Not that I was going to appear in either any too soon.

Between these closings and the news that the Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction is going bi-monthly, I'm realizing that short fiction print markets for science fiction and fantasy are dying out. I have no doubt that on-line markets, whether donation or subscription, will remain viable, but especially at the pro level, print is rapidly fading.

So if there is a print magazine that you enjoy -- it doesn't have to be pro -- get a subscription to it, even if you know you will not get around to reading it every time it comes in. If you don't know which magazine you might like, go to a bookstore (or better yet, a con, which will have all sorts of hard-to-find magazines in the dealers' room) and pick up a variety to decide among. I currently subscribe to Weird Tales and Lady Churchill's Rosebud Wristlet. I'll probably add one or two others this year. Ones I'm considering: Fantasy, Interzone, Space & Time, and Talebones.

If you have a favorite print magazine, please let us know in the comments. And if you have some good news or other insights into the short fiction market, chime in with that, too.

breaking the rules

Sorry I haven't been posting much. Twice next week, I promise.

Recently, I've been listening to podiobooks, and I'm really enjoying J. C. Hutchins's 7th Son trilogy. If you haven't heard it, check it out. The first book is scheduled for print release, so if you prefer the printed word, you won't have too long to wait. One of the really cool things about this trilogy is that he starts with eight men all named John Michael Smith. That's right -- he totally shatters the rule about not having characters with similar names by giving them all the same name. They all go by different versions of the name -- John, Jack, Jonathan, Mike, Michael, and so forth -- but the similarity is there, along with the potential for confusion. Hutchins does a very good job of delineating the differences between the men, though, and it makes for a terrific listen.

Another pair of books with similar character names is Marie Brennan's Doppelganger duology. I've only gotten partway through the first book so far, but I have to say that she does an excellent job of distinguishing Mirage from Miryo.

Some readers might have more trouble with these names. Losing such readers is a risk. But these books show that the rule can be broken.

Best podcasts for writers, part 4: The Secrets Podcast for Writers

I apologize for running behind this week; I've been under the weather and working on paying work that never seems to decrease. I'll try to get back on track, but I have family visiting next week, so we'll see.

* * *

A while back, I mentioned the Secrets podcast by Michael A. Stackpole and said that I'd get back to it to do a review. The time has come. This podcast is a companion to his Secrets newsletter, which is $1 an issue for new issues and $2 an issue for back issues. Why back issues should be more expensive when they're all just digital files, I have no clue. I also could find no mention on his Website, Stormwolf.com, of how often the newsletter comes out.

As with other podcasts I've discussed, you can subscribe to the Secrets through iTunes, although many of the earlier episodes don't seem to be available. The episodes I've listened to -- up to the most current one available -- included some general stuff, analyses of how he set things up in a couple of his novels, the "21 days to a novel" series, and his most recent ones ("Series Five") on the effect of changes in technology on publishing.

His earlier ones grated on my nerves quite a bit because he never seemed to acknowledge that his way might not be the One True Way to write. One of his pronouncements that really bothered me was "never edit before you finish writing." I had three problems with this:

1. Some bestselling authors do, in fact, start each day by editing their work from the previous day. Not everyone works the same way.
2. He said that one must write a novel in order to edit a novel. Many fine copyeditors and developmental editors out there have not written a novel but are doing marvelous jobs whipping other peoples' novels into shape. The ability to edit is not contingent upon the ability to write.
3. He gave examples of how he went back and changed a story before he reached the end because "It was finished. It was dead in the water." Then he claimed that that didn't count as editing. Such semantic skullduggery will probably be lost on the neophyte novelist trying to decide whether to go back and change something because he doesn't know how to go forward otherwise or or the budding author who is trying to figure out where she should draw the lines between editing, rewriting, and revision.

(Yes, that particular one stuck in my craw a bit.)

On the other hand, I kept listening because he had some very solid bits in there phrased in ways I hadn't heard them before--for example, saying that if you can get the reader anticipating the future of a character (Will he wind up with the blonde or the brunette? Is somebody going to die this time out? If two characters have mutually exclusive goals, who is going to get their heart's desire?), the reader is emotionally invested and will keep reading. Except I think he said it a lot better than that.

He's also done two in-depth series on his books and why he made the choices he did in writing. He used A Secret Atlas to discuss how openings and world-building work, and he talked about plotting using Star Wars: Rogue Squadron. These sets of episodes make for very concrete discussions because he explains exactly what he was setting out to do, and how he did it. I haven't read A Secret Atlas, although he did say the discussion would make more sense with the book in front of the listener. However, having listened to his explications, I'm intrigued enough with the characters and the world to want to read it now.

His most recent series, on technology, is proving very enlightening. I don't buy his statement that printed books are going to, in general, go the way of the dodo. I personally believe we're moving into a time when a whole range of options for publications, including printed books, will be available for writers and readers -- just as people looking for visual entertainment currently can go to the theater (for a play or a musical), go to the movies, watch TV, watch a video in several different formats, or watch shows and clips on the Internet. However, his podcast does cover interesting ways to take advantage of technology to try to reach readers, and I highly recommend this series of shows if you're looking to market yourself as an author.

To sum up: a lot of his advice sounds as though it's targeted to someone just getting into writing, and if you've been working at it for a while, you, too, may find some of the things he says annoying. Be that as it may, he has a lot of good information in this podcast, and it's worth listening to. Just be aware that it is highly irregular in schedule, as he sees it mainly as a publicity vehicle for the newsletter -- and since he makes it available without charge, it's lowest on his priority list.

Happy New Year!

Around this time of year, many people set writing resolutions and goals for themselves. If you have any you, please share them in the comments.

My goals for the year include getting two novels edited and at least one of them out to agents, submitting one novella and one novelette (different markets), reoutlining my 2007 NaNo so I can work at editing it, and writing a new novel for NaNo in 2009. There's probably some short story work going to happen, but my focus for the year is on the longer works.

What about you?

Gathering of Giveaways

Everybody likes gifts and free stuff, right? So in the spirit of the holidays, I bring you my list of places I look for book giveaways and other neat stuff.

First: sites that give reviews, interviews, and other news, as well as book giveaways.
Fantasy Book Critic

Patrick's Fantasy Hot List

The Book Swede

SciFiChick

Second: author blogs that also do giveaways sometimes.
Paperback Writer (You should be reading this anyway!)

Alison Kent: Blah Blog (Currently running 12 days of Christmas giveaway--hurry! She chooses winners on December 29th.)

Third: Just book giveaways.
Great American Book Giveaway Enter every week!

Access Romance contests (The rest of the site has other stuff, too--blogs, newsletters, reviews. But this page is *just* contests.)

Fourth: Just giveaways.
Giveaway of the Day (Generally Windows software)

If I've missed any of your favorites, be sure to let me know in the comments.

On being a hack

Just a short post today because I was listening to a podcast and heard something that raised my hackles. Or would have, if that weren't a cliche.

The comment in question was that including eye color in fiction makes one a hack.

One of the first things I learned about Scarlett O'Hara in middle school is that she has green eyes. Am I going to call Margaret Mitchell a hack? Not on your life (another cliché! kill it!).

As with anything, eye color can be over-used. If you find that it's the first thing you turn to when you're writing a character description, maybe you need to think about your technique a little more. But some people do notice eye color, and some people do have noticeable eye color. And that should be reflected in your writing.

I don't think a single thing can make you a hack, not even using -ly adverbs. Elmore Leonard had a character in one of his books where every single dialogue tag had an adverb attached. Perhaps he was being ironic; perhaps it was a joke; perhaps he wanted to see whether anyone would notice. Two things to note: it was ONE character, and it worked.

Making guidelines for yourself is fine. Knowing when to break guidelines others have created is better. However, don't make a guideline for an arbitrary reason and expect everyone else to follow it. They're not hacks just because they don't follow a rule you just made up.

In the comments, list any signs you can think of that point to being a hack. Or tell me what rules you think are applied too broadly and need to be checked.

Elusive allusions

No podcast review today, but I'll post one later this week. Today, I want to talk about using allusions in writing.

I like using allusions -- indirect references to other stories -- to add resonance to my writing. When the reader understands the allusion, depth is added: all the emotional complications from the original story are brought to mind and linked with the current story.

However, that "when" is actually an "if" because the reader may not get what seems to the writer to be the most obvious of references.

Case in point: I was listening to Christmas carols the other day, and "The most wonderful time of the year" came up. A line in there has always bugged me. "There will be scary ghost stories." Why? Ghost stories are for Halloween. I didn't know anyone who sat around telling ghost stories for Christmas. This weekend, however, it finally hit me--Scrooge, with his ghostly visitors in [i]A Christmas Carol.[/i]

In retrospect, that seems obvious, but it took me years to draw the connection. (And it's possible that I'm wrong, that in fact, the song writer was talking about people sitting around talking about ghostly hitchhikers and the like. That's the other side of allusions -- people reading things into your work that you never intended to be there. My friend Margaret refers to this as the "reader 50%.")

Another example: When I was working for a couple of years between college and graduate school, I made an off-the-cuff remark about Daniel in the lion's den. The person I was talking to had never heard of Daniel, never read the Bible, and wouldn't get anything but the broadest references to anything contained therein. "Wrestling with an angel" wouldn't mean any more than the obvious to her, and if she heard a friendship described as being like that of David and Jonathan, she wouldn't know who was being discussed.

Does that mean we shouldn't use allusions?

No. If we have more layers in our mind as we write, some of that may spill onto the page, adding complexity. And even if all of our readers don't get the allusions, those who do will find the story deeper.

What it does mean is that if we rely on an allusion for understanding of the story or explication of plot, we are limiting our audience, which is fine as long as you understand that going in. Of course, this is true of any tool we use as writers -- we need to understand the benefits and drawbacks of the tool and the way we're using it.

How have you used allusions in your writing? Or are there other tools that you have found work great when they work but can't be guaranteed to reach all your readers? Let me know in the comments.

Best podcasts for writers, part 3: Spoken Alexandria Project

The Spoken Alexandria Project, in their own words, "is creating a free Creative Commons library of spoken word recordings, consisting of classics in the public domain and modern works (with permission). AAC, Ogg Vorbis, and MP3 audiobooks available for free download and redistribution."

That means you can listen to everything from Franz Kafka's Metamorphosis to Bulfinch's Mythology to a booklet from the National Institute of Mental Health on Men and Depression. If you want to read more widely but you don't have time (or you don't want to spend a lot of money on audiobooks for your commute), the Spoken Alexandria Project is a good step in that direction.

My favorite work on this podcast (and one I've re-listened to again just this past week) is the six-part series by Tobias Buckell, "Getting Past Joe Blow Neopro." This is his effort to describe what it takes, as a genre writer, to move beyond those few semipro acceptances and become a true professional author. I especially recommend part 6, on planning your career, including the use of visions and milestones. Go check it out. (And hey, if you haven't read at least one of his books yet, do!)

In fact, even if you don't subscribe to this podcast and listen faithfully to everything they produce (and to be honest, although I *am* subscribed, I don't necessarily listen faithfully), you should at the very least download Tobias Buckell's contribution and listen to it. That alone is enough to make this one of the best podcasts for writers. (Though contributions from Kafka, Twain, and Franklin don't hurt.)

characters and motivation

I got a rejection e-mail the other day from Scott Andrews at Beneath Ceaseless Skies for "Falling Knight." A couple of phrases stood out in his comments: "couldn't figure out enough . . . to know why he wanted to" and "made his motives seem hidden to me." I went back to the previous e-mail I'd received from Mr. Andrews (for "Blood Brother"), and found similar ideas: "never got a sense for what Augan's burning goal was" and "wasn't sure what stakes were hanging over his head." Granted, you can draw a straight line between any two points, but his concerns with these stories were consistent enough that before I sent off another one to him (I'd like to send "Maskèd Panama."), I figured it was worth the time to look at characterization and whether motivation came through clearly.

I also spent a lot of time with Bonnie in chat, discussing layers, character depth, and motivation. Then I dug into my shelves of writing books, and I'm rereading all the significant material I found there, beginning with Noah Lukeman's The Plot Thickens--specifically, chapters 2 and 3 ("Characterization: The Inner Life" and "Applied Characterization"). Lots of material to think about there.

I'll admit, though, that part of me was recalcitrant. I was thinking such things as, "Doesn't the fact that he does plot against his leader evidence that he is motivated to do so? Shouldn't we draw conclusions about his motivations from his actions?"

Then last night, waiting for the baby to fall asleep (around 1 a.m., finally), the husband and I were watching Parents on Hulu.com. (Hulu link, IMDB link) And all became clear to me. If you want to watch this movie, be warned, there are spoilers below.

The plot revolves around a family of cannibals--the parents knowingly, the kid just suspecting the truth. But he starts the movie with this utter revulsion to the meat he's being served, with no apparent reason, and he's having nightmares, and he's afraid of his parents . . . and all of that makes sense *after* he discovers it's humans they're eating. But before that? Not so much.

I couldn't see any reason for him not to want to eat what he'd been eating his entire life.

I told the husband that it was amusing that what bugged me about the movie was that I couldn't understand why the kid wouldn't want to be a cannibal. The movie needed a precipitating incident--even if it wasn't clearly shown to the audience so the audience might think the kid was imagining things, with the truth only slowly dawning. Otherwise, the kid's actions make no sense in context.

Which is when I realized that action alone is not sufficient to show motivation.

So now I need to practice actually showing the character motivation. It's not easy. I mean, I could tell the readers, "Oh, Michael is plotting in 'Falling Knight' because he blames his boss for his brother's death." I know that's his rationale. I thought I'd put it in the story. Mr. Andrews didn't think it that clear, however, so it won't hurt me to go back and take another look at it before I send it to another market.

As for the next story I'd like to send him? Yes, it needs another edit pass. Motivation could be sharpened, but there's also a horribly unresolved character arc and a flagrant violation of Sanderson's First Law. But those are things I know how to fix, now that I've seen they are there.

By the way, if you haven't submitted anything yet to Beneath Ceaseless Skies, I highly recommend that you do. He's looking for secondary world fantasy up to 10k, and he gives excellent feedback with his rejections. And read them, too. Excellent stuff!

(cross-posted to my LJ)

Best podcasts for writers, part 2: The Kissy Bits

A terrific podcast if you're writing romance -- or even just have a romance subplot is The Kissy Bits. Sadly, the podcast stopped being updated in 2007. In fact, the last entry is Thursday, February 1, 2007, claiming that the podcast would be back after Chinese New Year. It didn't happen. Although Kiki maintains a WordPress blog, Kiki Fu, she doesn't mention the podcast (at least not in an entry tagged "Kissy Bits") after that date, either. She's obviously quite busy, and her novel Enter the Parrot will be released in June, according to her most recent entry on Kiki Fu.

All of that simply means that this is a podcast it's possible to listen to in its entirety, beginning to end, to learn more about how to write romance. Kiki discusses how to characterize a hero and a heroine, how to write the first kiss, coming up with titles, and all the more prosaic writing topics such as emotional honesty, whether and how to include real people in your writing, making writing resolutions, and dealing with feedback.

She's witty -- her podcast on types of chick lit is very funny, for example -- and she really understands how to communicate emotions.

Listen to the podcasts from #1 to #17. It won't take that long -- a couple of hours a day for a week. Check out her show notes and the links. Then, if you like make a note to pick up her book come June. Or look for her adult romance novels. But definitely listen to the podcast.

Philcon weekend

I know this is early, but today's post is in lieu of a Thursday post for the week.

Had a good time at the con Saturday. Traffic on I-76 was bad, as usual, so it took longer to get there than Google Maps predicted. I went to the galactic empires talk, which was interesting particularly in its discussion of varying forms of empires and viable interstellar commerce. Other talks I went to included nanomaterials (some food for thought there), science fiction and romance (I came out covered with girl cooties--it didn't help that the moderator kept saying "sci-fi"), how to know when to stop revising (one panelist suggested passes for structure, content, style, and grammar; Lawrence Schoen disagreed), and poked my head into both the funny fantasy discussion (I'm not doing parody, know I'm not, so the discussion wasn't much help) and the LJ meet-up (didn't see any names I recognized).

I also went to Tim Powers' talk. He had a lot of interesting things to say, such as that he doesn't want to be pertinent or topical; he wants to entertain. He also had an amusing anecdote about the Christian neighbors whose Bible he set on fire with a magnifying glass while he was trying to read it.

One cool thing I discovered: Reno is doing a Worldcon bid for 2011. I paid for pre-support and would love it if others would support their bid as well. (www.rcfi.org)

After some deep thought (and encouragement from husband), I went back Sunday.

Started off with Xtreme neurology. They discussed some interesting advances, and I'll have to look up some of the papers. I guess there are some possible advantages to a graduate degree in molecular and cell biology.

I went to two market-related panels: "Meet the editors" and "Editing anthologies." Neil Clarke says that they need more science fiction. Hildy Silverman says Space and Time could use some shorter stories--something to keep in mind if you plan to sub there before next Sunday. Marvin Kaye says that the Sherlock Holmes Magazine can use any kind of crime or puzzle story, especially if it's reader-solvable. Darrell Schweitzer and Gardner Dozois both say if you are putting together a single-author collection, please do the markets that have published you the courtesy of acknowledging them. Also, lousy market for reprint anthologies--no one's buying. Dozois also said he couldn't understand authors or agents who thought that having a story in a year's best anthology diluted the market for the author's collection.

Marvin Kaye also has strong tense preferences. Specifically, he railed against past perfect, which he referred to as the compound past. He said that the magazines are simple past (so probably not a big fan of present tense, either), and the sight of "had" just tells him that the author started the story in the wrong place. I would guess that if a single instance of past perfect were used to show that this is the moment of change that starts the story for the protagonist, it would be acceptable, but I don't know. ("Linda had written to me a dozen times about my father's increasing lack of lucidity before I bowed to the inevitable and made arrangements to go home.") Keep it in mind if submitting to him. And maybe as a general rule, too, about being sure you've started in the right place.

I caught up with Darrell Schweitzer in the dealer room and asked if he ever did anthologies with some stories solicited and some open sub. He said he's still new at the anthologies but would someday like to do an anthology that's all open submissions. He also said that the best way to get solicited to be in an anthology is to get known. For good markets, he suggested Weird Tales, Talenones, Interzone, Paradox, and Space and Time. He told me he'd never heard of Hadley Rille Books, which bummed me out a bit until I remembered Justin's story from a Hadley Rille anthology got tapped for a year's best anthology. It's not an invisible market.

The "Science fiction,religion, and reason" panel was very interesting. Lots of stuff about Jesuits. Tim Powers talked about chimps and sign language--they can lie. Does that mean they sin and should be baptized? Angels and ascended humans came in for some discussion as well, with one panelist commenting that perfection precludes conflict. I have some story seeds and at least one bunny that have to get larger for me to use.

Last panel I went to was on details and series fiction. Very charming and entertaining panelists. Prologues and appendices were discussed, as were things that have to be repeated in every book. Catherine Asaro, for example, has a spaceship drive and a double star planetary system that need to be explained every time, or she will get e-mails of complaint. No one was a big fan of series where the characters don't change.

Let me know if you have questions about specific pamels. I'm definitely looking foward to next year! (Boskone seems bigger, though.)

Pros and NaNos

Professional writers fall into a number of camps regarding NaNoWriMo.

The ones that irritate me (Yes, let's get them out of the way first!) are the ones who sneer and say, "Well, 50,000 isn't really a novel, so these people are just fooling themselves." Why, yes, let's just tell Bruce Coville and Jane Yolen that their books don't count as real because they're too short, shall we? Or the many other fine authors of chapter books and middle-grade books.

"Oh, well, I meant novels for adults!" Right. Like the Silhouette Desire imprint (target word count: 50,000-55,000) or Harlequin Blaze (target word count: 55,000-60,000)? Or the many fine novels of yesteryear in their reprint variety, still available because modern readers actually do enjoy short reads sometimes?

But even when these writers qualify their words by saying something like, "In modern science fiction novels, you need a novel of about 100,000 words if you want to be published," they're overlooking the obvious: There is no rule that says a Wrimo has to stop exactly at 50,000 words. Nor will Chris Baty's flying guilt monkeys come steal a Wrimo's keyboard if said writer durst continue writing the same story once December 1 rolls around.

In 2005, Michael Stackpole, in his Secrets podcast (review coming after I've listened to more of them, I promise), talked about NaNoWriMo, and he did make a comment about how 50,000 words wasn't enough for the genres he writes in, but how for someone learning to plot and write, it could be a good exercise. Then he goes on to give specifics on how to plot for that length (including a rule of thumb that I'd never heard -- you need 30,000 words to give a character a complete arc; not sure yet whether I agree with him), seemingly without considering the possibility that his listeners who were interested in NaNoWriMo might either write more than 50,000 words during November or that they might keep going once December rolled around, continuing to write until they had a first draft of a publishable length.

Then there are the pros who basically don't care. They feel it has nothing to do with them, wish those who want to participate the best of luck, and go on about their professional lives as they normally would. This is a classy response.

There are pros who participate every year because it gives them a month they can schedule just to write, all thoughts of editing and other deadlines shoved aside for the nonce -- wild, frenetic writing, thousands upon thousands of words, one or more complete first drafts thrown into the computer in a passionate rush, to be edited to brilliance the following year. Lazette Gifford is one such participant.

Then there is the final category, the one I want to be in -- the pro who is a pro because of NaNoWriMo. These are the people who pour their hearts into their first drafts, edit, polish, submit -- and get published. This year's Wrimo Radio podcast (week one) featured an interview with Lani Diane Rich, whose first NaNovel was also her first published book. She now has eight books in print, three of which began their life for NaNoWriMo.

No, not every novel written during November will achieve this dream. But then, neither will every novel written during the rest of the year, even those written by pro writers who decide to do something outside their comfort zone on spec. Writing takes hard work and editing and more editing and lots more hard work, and the goal of publication isn't always achieved. But people like this give me, and others like me, hope that if we keep working at it -- during November or throughout the year -- we might get there too.

Best podcasts for writers, part 1: Writing Excuses

Welcome to my first podcast review. Once a week, I'll give you the scoop on what I think are some of the best podcasts out there. Some of them will be writing podcasts; others will include fiction (short and long) as well as nonfiction.

First up, I bring you the writing podcast Writing Excuses. This is a group podcast by Brandon Sanderson, Howard Tayler, and Dan Wells. Brian Sanderson is the author of the Mistborn trilogy (of which I have the first one sitting on my hard drive because of Tor.com's giveaway earlier this year) -- among other works -- and is also the author tapped to write the concluding book of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. Howard Tayler makes a full time living from his Webcomic Schlock Mercenary, which I urge everybody to check out. Dan Wells writes horror novels and sold a trilogy to Tor earlier this year. The first book will be titled I Am Not a Serial Killer.

I subscribe to the podcast in iTunes. I haven't listened to this week's episode yet, and there is one earlier episode I haven't listened to because they say it contains spoilers for The Dark Knight (episode 34, "What the Dark Knight Did Right"). The DVD is supposed to come out next month, though, and I'll listen to that episode then.

They discuss a wide range of topics, from plot twists to hating your writing, to submitting to editors, to writing groups. They record podcasts at cons, and have often had guests on the show. I particularly enjoyed the episodes with Phil and Kaja Folio, Lou Anders, and Steve Jackson. One of the strengths of this podcast is that they don't discuss just one medium for story-telling.

The liner notes on the Website are well worth checking out. They include links not only to sites discussed in a particular episode (such as Ralan.com) but also to Sanderson's First Law (on magic systems), as well as a download of Dan's Bunny Book.

If you're looking for a wide range of writing-related topics, covered with good humor, check out this podcast. You can also get their entire first season on CD for $10. It won't take too long to get a feel for the podcast because it's only "Fifteen minutes long, because you’re in a hurry, and we’re not that smart." Except that they are.