The First Three Chapters

Twitter has once again spawned a discussion subject in my brain. Thanks, twitter. Really. I should be working on other things right about now!

Joking aside, this is something that writers of all calibers should pay attention to.

Your first three chapters are very important. They will be what gets the interest of an agent or a publisher. It will be what hooks your reader into the story. Everyone knows that a story needs a strong foundation to stand upon. This is often done within the first three chapters. In fact, if you haven't built into your real story within the first three chapters, well, there is probably something very wrong. Even if your plot doesn't directly tie in with the climax or conclusion, it should somehow lead your character towards it.

Even if it is a swift kick in the butt to leave their door and go do something with themselves.

I feel that this is a generally accepted concept. However, I am going to take the mold and I am going to go smash it into a wall over there.

Do not polish your first three chapters and neglect the rest of your novel. The first three chapters are important. There is absolutely no denying it. You cannot have a great piece of fiction without a strong start.

You cannot have a great piece of fiction without a strong finish.

I like to call the syndrome, "Great opening and then came the can o' crap!" Crap is generally viewed as a negative thing. Because really, poop is gross. Toilet humor can be funny, but unless your book is about toilets or somehow features poop, you do not want this to be a descriptive term of your story.

I have read many manuscripts during the course of editing and critiquing that have really gripping starts and then they turn to crap. The polished, flowery language that worked so well in the first few chapters turns into a tired, lame horse that can't quite manage to climb the hill. The disappointment factor is typically so great that I have to step away from the computer so that my line edits are constructive rather than mean.

Those of you who have endured my critiques are probably aware of how bluntly honest I try to be. I firmly believe that you can learn the art of writing by doing a *lot* of critiquing. I certainly learned how to improve my craft this way.

This is advice, do as you wish with it. But, if you spend the same amount of time polishing your first three chapters as you do the entire novel, chances are that you will have a novel really worth something at the end of the day.

Also... just because you have polished your first three chapters, do not send them out immediately until your entire novel is done. This is just.... ugh. Don't do it. You never know when an agent or publisher will get back to you. You need to be able to send it out the next day if you get a reply asking for the complete manuscript.

True story: A friend of mine got a reply from Tor asking for the complete manuscript. She IMs me in a complete panic. She has not edited her novel.

Some 8 hours later I returned a line edit so she could panic through her corrections. It was perhaps the worst evening of my life.

I did it because she is my friend, but you should never put yourself into this situation. You want to be a responsive writer who is prepared. If they want the manuscript? It better be ready, printed, sitting on your desk in a nicely wrapped package and ready to send out the following morning. You don't necessary need to overnight the manuscript unless there are circumstances where they ask for it by a certain date. If it is by email, you should just have it ready for emailing.

There is nothing wrong with doing a one last reading before you send, but you should not be needing to do any significant edits. When you send your proposal or query, your novel should be ready from start to finish.

Your new editor or agent may suggest changes, but you should be sending them something that you feel is up to the publication standards of your genre.

On Characters

There was an interesting discussion on twitter that I would like to bring to your attention. In its most basic form, the discussion was on whether or not stories with a second-chance theme should always result in a happy ending for the character in question. This spawned some discussion on how some individuals hated how a character had to die anyway even if they found redemption.

In turn evolved into a discussion on the question of whether or not writers who coddled their main characters told as powerful of a story as they could.

No. No. No.

The character you love to write and protect is the character many readers may very well end up hating to read about. Strife and conflict are often the heart of the story. In the real world we often do not like to experience these things. They hurt us and make us suffer.

When I read I find myself drawn to the character who struggles and persevere. I am even more enthralled when a character struggles and fails to persevere. When I read, I wish to submerge into a story where the odds are defied even if success is not automatic. It makes the ending all the sweeter.

You damage your story when you protect your main character. Don't do it. Let your character fall. Let your character suffer.

If your character would die in the natural flow of the story, let them go. If you need to get a box of tissues and bawl your eyes out do so. But let them go and allow your story to thrive.

It is very easy to fall into the trap of becoming attached to the character. This is not necessarily a bad thing. However, you should fall into the trap of loving the story. A good character does not make a story. A loved character does not make a story. A good story makes a good character. The advice of character-driven stories is a good one to follow. However, character-driven does not mean spoiled rotten. It really does not mean pamper them.

It means make them the driving forces in your story. But your story is something much bigger than any one character.

When you select your main character, you need to pick the character that is in the thick of things. Don't pick the one you like the best if they are only casually observing the entire book. Do not pick the character that has nothing to do with the conflict. Do not pick the character that does not suffer or struggle for the sake of the story. If you make this error, it is your reader who suffers.

While you may write for your personal enjoyment you should never forget the presence of the reader. While you may give birth to the story, it is the reader that breathes life into it.

It is your main characters which are the vessel for your story's existence. If you think you are clever by having a main character who does nothing at all, chances are the story will suffer for it. It may not happen every time. A talented author -might- be able to break the rules in this regard.

But there are very few observing characters with the charm and inherent ability to be in the right place at the right time as one Watson crafted so diligently by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. There are few authors so blessed in their craft to pull off this tricky skill with success.

There are few readers with the patience to deal with the failures of this type of story.

People do not read out of necessity. They read out of desire to do so. (We will leave school assignments out of this for now. Most people do not go to the bookstore and buy fiction novels for school assignments.)

So where does this leave you?

Here are a few tips for selecting your main character. Answer yes/no to these questions. If the majority of the answers are 'yes', your character is a good candidate to be a main character:

1: Is your character always in the thick of things?
2: Is your character critical to the resolution of the conflict?
3: Does your character cause conflict?
4: Is your character present in the majority of the story?
5: Does your character survive through 3/4ths of the novel?
6: Is the character a 'round' character?*
7: Has your character suffered?
8: Does your character have a likable personality?
9: Does your character have a background and history?
10: Do you care about the character?

* A round character is a well-developed character that defies the stereotypes. A flat character is your cookie-cutter character that serves a purpose and that is that. The stable boy that you see for ten pages is typically a flat character. Frodo from Lord of the Rings would classify as round. 'That Admiral' Lord Vader suffocates at random for getting mouthy would classify as flat.

Of course you do not need to answer 'yes' to every question, but it is a very good idea if almost all of them are yes. These are qualities that tend to make a strong character. Let us take a good look at a well-loved favorite: Harry Potter.

I am strongly confident that Harry would get a ringing 'yes' to all of the above questions. He suffered. He persevered. He was easy to like. (Sure, he whined... but he was still easy to like.) He was written in such a way that I felt it was obvious that Rowling enjoyed writing this character. He was *always* there, always in the thick of things. He caused as many problems as he resolved.

Almost every character that I truly love gets a ringing endorsement on all of these things. The stories that these characters are in are only made that much better for the presence of these characters.

In the previous post I discussed character detailing. In this one, I want you to consider the heart and the soul of the character and not just where they have been.

There is a proverb: What does not kill you makes you stronger.

Let your character be a 'living' example of this. And when they die, let them leave a lasting impression.

That is the least you can do for the people who will read your story. After all, as a writer, it is the reader that you wish to entertain.

I hope this makes you ask a few questions about your characters and their purpose in your stories.

Suspending Disbelief

While all types of fiction require that the author make their works believable, science fiction and fantasy share the need to actively suspend disbelief. Because of the very nature of these genres, failure to meet this lofty goal can result in unpleasant consequences. The worst of these being that the person reading your work is disappointed or dislikes your book.

If you are interested in selling your book to a publisher make note of this. If you cannot suspend disbelief for the average reader, potential agents and publishing houses are going to send you a rejection. If you are fortunate it will be a form rejection.

When I write a novel I try to focus on several things:

1: Making my storyline feasible within the rules of my world and society.
2: Make my characters as ‘real’ of people as I can.
3: I try to steal my character’s shoes.

But what does this mean?

1: Making my storyline feasible within the rules of my world and society.
Whenever I write a novel I set rules on the societies, the functions of magic or the processes of science that will take place. My science fiction piece has a planet with two suns. It is questionable, at the very best, that such a planet can exist.
In order to suspend disbelief I found one simple solution: the planet cannot exist for a long period of time.

In a golden cradle situation, where the planet is trapped just at the brink of the two battling suns, my characters fight for their survival by seeking a way to get away from their planet. Before either one of the suns exert dominance over the globe and it is destroyed out of that golden cradle zone where life can exist.
Weather patterns change as the planet is pulled towards the more dominant sun, and the sun that is being overwhelmed is being pulled with it. The one sun is dying a slow death, and the other will be consumed in the last moments of its sister’s destruction.

Especially as the villain accelerates the process.

By admitting how infeasible the concept is, it is possible for the reader to temporarily suspend disbelief and accept that this situation could – in the light of advanced science – be feasible.

In science fiction, suspending disbelief is even more important. A reader approaching a fantasy book wants to explore new worlds where things that cannot happen do happen. Science fiction fans want to imagine that something might – somehow – happen and want to see just how the author believes it can be so. Obviously there are some genres of science fiction that share the easily suspended belief of a fantasy book, but there are more genres that require a steady foundation and reasonable suspensions of belief.

2: Make my characters as ‘real’ of people as I can.

When I read a book, I want a character I can relate to on some level or another. Because of this, I try to make my characters as real as possible. I believe this is a key part of writing a good book. This is just my opinion, however.

Finally, 3: I try to steal my character’s shoes.

What the…?

I’m sure the shoes of these poor characters are not that comfortable. In fact, I like reading about characters that have to struggle and fail before they succeed. However, there is one thing I remind myself when I think of my characters’ shoes. If I am going to steal their shoes to walk around with, I want to be as far away from them as possible when they find out. This way, I have their shoes and I am really far away from them when they try to kick my butt.

No matter how you look at it, it often becomes a notable point that characters in science fiction and fantasy novels are really, really made of awesome sauce and could kick my butt in a street fight. I mean, really. Would you want to be caught with the shoes of a character that can shoot lightning beams out of their…
I’m sure you get the idea.

Writing is not an art where you can write about characters without leaving some sort of trace of yourself in them. It happens whether or not you are aware of it. This is due to the simple fact that when you write, you are drawing on your own skills, your own experiences and your own perceptions of how a society should be within your world. Some writers ‘get into the heads of their characters’ while others state they do not.

In either case you will often leave something of yourself behind. It is this link that will allow your reader to see glimmers of things that they can relate to with your characters. It is also this relation that will help you suspend disbelief.
I am not suggesting that you make every character a cookie cutter form of yourself. However, you need to somehow ensure that there is enough of a ‘human’ side to your characters – especially the protagonists – which they can believe in what these characters are doing.

The further outside of the realms of normality you stray the more important that this becomes.

Read your own writing and ask yourself one little question: If I had not been the one to write this, would I believe it?

Sometimes looking over your own works with a grain of salt and a lot of scepticism can help.

Good luck, writer. This is a long and difficult journey.

Handwriting versus Keyboarding

Hey -- sorry for such the long delay in making any posts. Things have been busy.

Today, I am going to throw to the table the classic argument of which is better: Handwriting versus Keyboarding. By Keyboarding, I mean typing your story directly to the computer.

This is not as easy of a subject as it sounds. There are lots of arguments for both. In fact, there is no one right way to do it. This is completely subjective.

This level of subjectiveness is what makes this a *fun* topic of discussion. What do *you* do?

I do both. It depends what mood I am in when I start a project. This is the key point: What mood I am in when I *start* a project. I think a very costly mistake is trying to do both at once. I write completely differently on notebook paper when I do to the computer. I don't know what it is about notebook paper, but I write to the plot, plot bunnies abound, and I usually tell an entertaining, if not horribly written story.

That said, once I go to the computer, I often end up with a better product at the end of the day. I lose the tendency to edit while I am writing, so every word I add is being directly productive.

This is just me, of course.

Here is a very small list of pros and cons for handwriting -- specific to me:

Pros:
Inability to edit
Inability to see word count
Pure story-telling
PENS.

Cons:
Inability to see word count
Aching Wrists and Hands
Need paper + Pen. Lots of pens, and lots of paper.

I really like pens. No, seriously. I love pens. You want a friend for life? Give me a pen. Costco sells pens in bulk. My husband tries very hard to avoid that section of the store.

There is one benefit to handwriting that is hard to list as a con or pro. It is the primary reason I still use what many view as an archaic form of writing. When I transfer the handwritten work to the computer, I am able to 'see' the story better. I can fix many of the plot holes, add in the descriptions I need, and track the correct character appearances. (As an aside, my characters change their looks 10 or so times each when I handwrite. Absolutely zero attempts at consistency. I will pick their 'true' appearances when I copy the writing to the computer.)

On the other hand, when I try to type directly onto the computer, I tend to develop some bad, lazy habits. This is great for projects like NanoWrimo, where the entire purpose is to write for fun and solely for fun and word count. I find I take a few steps backwards from over analyzing when I write draft onto the computer.

I think the primary source of this is my contract work as a professional writer/editor. When I see text in a word processor, my mind begins to go into editing mode.

After much thought, I realized the only way to solve it for my situation was to cease the word processor.

That said, I have not used many 'writing programs'. I consider trying them, but either they are extremely expensive or I am too lazy to follow their suggested method of doing things. I have always done things in the way that suit me best. For a more coherent example of the differences in the type styles, I will cover my thoughts on my own writing, first on handwriting and then on keyboarding.

Writing Quality - First Draft - Handwriting

Poor quality. I spend little time on spelling, while i make efforts to use somewhat proper grammar, this is secondary to getting the story told. I focus on elements that drive the story. If a description is important, I have a tendency to over-describe it. There is a lot of focus on dialog and basic character actions and interactions.

Writing Quality - First Draft - Keyboarding

Higher quality. I bog down with grammar fixes, spelling and word choice and general flow. I have a secondary focus on description, and I am less likely to include any frivolous conversations between characters. There are less plot-bunnies, but often less plot in the first draft.

Writing Quality - Second Draft - Handwriting

At this point I am copying the draft to the computer via Keyboarding. Draft quality is significantly higher. I refine what is there, kill off the bunnies and groom the ones I wish to keep.

Writing Quality - Second Draft - Keyboarding

Lower quality compared to handwriting. I am just polishing first quality draft. I end up with 'less work' because it is already on the computer, but sacrifice quality in the sense that I did not play as much outside of the box when I originally drafted.

Word Choice - Handwriting

More natural word choices. I am less likely to hit a thesaurus and more likely to just use the first appropriate word that comes to mind.

Word Choice - Keyboarding

Much more likely to use higher level vocabulary since a thesaurus is a click away.

Grammar - Handwriting

First draft grammar is laughable at best. If there is a rule for something, I have likely broken it. However, the benefit to this is learning through experimentation. Since I know sentence structure will likely not remain the same, I feel free to try new things since I know they will be corrected upon transfer to the computer.

Grammar - Keyboarding

Those green squiggles sometimes make me go back, often, and think of better ways to write a sentence. I tend to refine my grammar on the first draft. This is slower to write, but somewhat educational. That said, I don't totally trust those green squiggles. Humans are better at grammar.

Spelling...

*snort* There is no point in this entry. Keyboarding wins.

Editing - Handwriting

I have half pages chunks scribbled out. If I have made a 'this must be gone error', it is immortalized in big scribble marks. This is good for reference later.

Editing - Keyboarding

I do not track my edits on a novel to keep file size down and prevent more sources of potential crashes. I sometimes miss seeing the horrible sections I removed. If I removed a section while handwriting, it was just *that* bad.

Time - Handwriting

Counter to initial thought, I write faster when handwriting in many cases. I won't win a straight word count battle versus my keyboarding skills, but I do not stop and go. I just keep a constant stream of fairly quick writing going on. Because I am not saddled to my computers, I can write in more places conveniently.

Time - Keyboarding

If I am on a roll, I can whip out thousands of words an hour. IF I do not edit, IF I know exactly what I want to do, and IF I can ignore facebook and twitter. That is not often the case.

In a way, it takes longer to deal with handwriting because of the fact I have to copy it to the computer after. However, when I am copying, I am not using facebook, twitter and other distracting websites.

All in all, handwriting wins for when I want to write something seriously. Sigh. Now if only I could convince my husband that yes, I really need the hundreds upon hundreds of pens I want and that he refuses to buy for me...