An Indie Success Story: Donna Fasano

Donna Fasano And Her Publishing Journey

Donna Fasano wrote for a traditional publisher for nearly 20 years and published 32 romance novels that sold over 3.5 million copies worldwide.

3.5 million!

Do you know how much her royalty was? 2% to 6%! Still, Donna was able to put her kids through college and do nifty things like take vacations. And, besides, when Donna started writing there was no alternative to traditional publishing. Now, of course, there is.

Once Donna realized what self-publishing could do for her she wrote to her publisher and got the rights back to 10 of her books.

Since then Donna has sold ... wait for it ... 120,000 copies of those previously out-of-print books! I hope Donna doesn't mind but I did some quick calculations. If she sold each book for, say, $3.00 and received a royalty of around 70% she would receive well over $200,000!

No wonder publishers don't want to give authors their rights back!

Reversion Of Rights: How To Get Your Rights Back

It can be brutally difficult to get your rights back. Often the publishing contract is unclear regarding what needs to be done and publishers drag their feet at every step of the process hoping you'll give up. (see: Doing What's Right: How To Get The Rights To Your Books Reverted)

Donna Fasano went to a lawyer for help, David P. Vandagriff of The Passive Voice Blog. In her superlative blog post Donna steps you through what she did and sings David's praises. Her article is well worth reading, even if you've never traditionally published: Going Indie: from OOP to self-pub bestseller.

Thanks to Passive Guy for posting a link to Donna's article.

Other articles you might like:

- David Mamet On How To Write A Great Story
- How To Earn A Living As A Self-Published Writer
- Third Person Omniscient, Third Person Limited or First Person. Which Point of View Is Right For You?

Photo credit: "Mystical station" by Jsome1 under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

Third Person Omniscient, Third Person Limited or First Person. Which Point of View Is Right For You?

In a recent post Nathan Bransford talked turkey about Point of View.

First Person

In the first person perspective everything that happens in your story is told through your narrator's perspective. For example:

"Ouch! That hurt," I yelled. Jan glanced back and grinned.
"Oh, I'm sorry, was that your foot?" she said.
I glared at Jan's back as she peddled off into the distance, laughing maniacally. She would pay. Oh, yes, she would pay.

Nathan Bransford says this of it:

The really compelling first person narrators are the ones where a unique character is giving you their take on something that is happening, and yet it's clear to the reader that it's not the whole story. You're getting a biased look at the world, which is central to the appeal of the first person narrative. [1]

For example, in Jim Butcher's Dresden Files series each story is told by Harry Dresden, Chicago's only consulting wizard. As a result, the books are infused with his personality. A very good thing! But the reader doesn't know whatever Harry doesn't know and sometimes that's quite a lot; enough, certainly, to keep the story interesting.

Nathan Bransford suggests that if you use the first person prspective that you make your character likeable. Or at least likable enough to pass the "stuck in an elevator" test. He writes:

Would you want to be stuck in a room with this person for six hours? Would you want to listen to this person give a speech for six hours? If the answer is no, then you might want to reconsider. [1]

Third Person: Limited Versus Omniscient

In the third person perspective, limited, you are, as the name implies, limited to one person's point of view while in the omniscient mode you can peek into the minds of all your characters and report what you find. While the latter is VERY convenient it's not as personal.

Here's an example of third person limited:

"Ouch! That hurt," Karen yelled. Jan glanced back and grinned.
"Oh, I'm sorry, was that your foot?"
Karen glared at Jan's back as she peddled off into the distance, laughing maniacally. Karen decided that Jan would pay for defiling the pristine newness of her sneakers.

It's not quite as personal because you're not hearing Karen's thoughts first hand, you're being told them by someone else.

In third person omniscient you can dip inside the head of anyone in the scene.

The Choice: Do You Want To Head-Jump?

Nathan Bransford writes that the decision whether to use third person limited or third person omniscient comes down to whether you want to head-jump. He writes:

Third person limited is, well, limited. The perspective is exclusively grounded to one character, unless you cheat a little. This means that you have all of the constraints of first person (all the reader sees is what the protagonist sees), but with just a tad more freedom. The reader will wonder a bit more precisely what that character is thinking and there's a bit more of an objective sensibility.

One of the classic third person limited narratives is the Harry Potter series, and Rowling strays from Harry's perspective in only a tiny few rare instances. She therefore had to bend over backwards to filter everything the reader needed to know about that world through Harry's view. If Harry can't see it? It doesn't happen for the reader.

I would wager my sorting hat that things like the invisibility cloak and the pensieve were extremely inventive ways around the narrative challenges posed by third person limited. There is no "offstage" for the reader to witness something that Harry can't see, so instead he has to be present to see he shouldn't  (invisibility cloak) and witnessing historical events for himself (pensieve).

Third person omniscient is, ostensibly, a bit more freeing, because you aren't limited to a single character's perspective. However, it's also very difficult because for a reader it's very disorienting to head-jump. If you're inside one character's head and then jump to the next character's head and then another, it's very difficult for the reader to place themselves in a scene. They just have whiplash. [1]

He ends by saying:

That's the key: Whatever perspective you choose, it has to be grounded. The reader has to know where they are in relation to the action so they can get their bearings and lose themselves in the story.

Nathan Bransford's entire post is well worth reading--heck, all his posts are!: Third Person Omniscient vs. Third Person Limited.

Other articles you might like:

- David Mamet On How To Write A Great Story
- How To Earn A Living As A Self-Published Writer
- Using Pinch Points To Increase Narrative Drive

Referenced articles:
1) First Person vs. Third Person, Nathan Bransford

Photo credit: "Writing" by ^ Missi ^ under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

David Mamet On How To Write A Great Story

David Mamet sent a memo to the writers of The Unit in which he tells them how to craft a dramatic story, one which will keep an audience's attention riveted.

I've included Mr. Mamet's original memo at the end of this article (it's from: David Mamet's Master Class Memo to the Writers of The Unit), but I've summarized his points.

What Is Drama?

Drama is:

The quest of the hero to overcome those things which prevent him from achieving a specific, acute, goal.

The hero must have a simple, straightforward, pressing need which impels him or her to show up in the scene.

Every scene must be dramatic. It must start because the hero has a problem and it must culminate with the hero finding him or herself either thwarted or educated that another way exists.

The hero's need is what the scene is about. It is the hero's attempt to get this need met which will lead, at the end of the scene, to failure or to a third way. It is this failure (or change of direction) that will propel us into the next scene.

The Job Of The Dramatist

The job of the dramatist is to make the audience wonder what happens next. It is not to look at past action and explain what just happened nor is it to suggest what will happen next.

The Anatomy Of A Great Scene

If you can answer all three questions, below, then your scene is dramatic. If you can't, you're just giving your reader information.

1) Who wants what?
2) What happens if they don't get it?
3) What now?

If you can't say "Yes!" to both of the following, that scene is either superfluous or incorrectly written:

1) The scene advances the plot.
2) The scene is dramatic. That is, in it the hero has a pressing need which impels him to show up in the scene and, at the end, the hero is either thwarted in his goal OR finds that another way exists to achieve it.

If a scene is superfluous, throw it out. If it's incorrectly written, rewrite it.

Signs That Your Script Is In Trouble

- Your script is in trouble if it has two characters talking about a third character not present.

- Your script is in trouble if it has one character saying to another, "As you know ..."

I think things might be slightly different when we talk about writing as opposed to screenwriting since screenwriting is a VISUAL medium. There you really can show not tell. Also you can easily cut away and show an event happening that no character is seeing, but this is more difficult to do when writing a story.

Kill Your Darlings

I'd like to end with a quotation, one that I believe applies to both story writing and screenwriting:

This is a new skill. No one does it naturally. You can train yourselves to do it, but you need to start.

I close with this one thought: look at the scene and ask yourself "Is it dramatic? Is it essential? Does it advance the plot?"

Answer truthfully.

If the answer is "No" write it again or throw it out. 

Great advice regardless of medium.

Best of luck with your writing today. I'm just over 14,000 words for NaNoWriMo.

Other articles you might like:
- How To Earn A Living As A Self-Published Writer
- Using Pinch Points To Increase Narrative Drive
- Chuck Wendig And The Battle Song Of The Storyteller
- How To Write 10,000 Words A Day

Photo credit: "Strong Revolutionary Lift" by JD Hancock under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

#  #  #

 David Mamet's Memo To The Writers Of The Unit:

TO THE WRITERS OF THE UNIT

GREETINGS.

AS WE LEARN HOW TO WRITE THIS SHOW, A RECURRING PROBLEM BECOMES CLEAR.

THE PROBLEM IS THIS: TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN DRAMA AND NON-DRAMA. LET ME BREAK-IT-DOWN-NOW.

EVERYONE IN CREATION IS SCREAMING AT US TO MAKE THE SHOW CLEAR. WE ARE TASKED WITH, IT SEEMS, CRAMMING A SHITLOAD OF INFORMATION INTO A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.

OUR FRIENDS. THE PENGUINS, THINK THAT WE, THEREFORE, ARE EMPLOYED TO COMMUNICATE INFORMATION -- AND, SO, AT TIMES, IT SEEMS TO US.

BUT NOTE:THE AUDIENCE WILL NOT TUNE IN TO WATCH INFORMATION. YOU WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T. NO ONE WOULD OR WILL. THE AUDIENCE WILL ONLY TUNE IN AND STAY TUNED TO WATCH DRAMA.

QUESTION:WHAT IS DRAMA? DRAMA, AGAIN, IS THE QUEST OF THE HERO TO OVERCOME THOSE THINGS WHICH PREVENT HIM FROM ACHIEVING A SPECIFIC, ACUTE GOAL.

SO: WE, THE WRITERS, MUST ASK OURSELVES OF EVERY SCENE THESE THREE QUESTIONS.

1) WHO WANTS WHAT?

2) WHAT HAPPENS IF HER DON'T GET IT?

3) WHY NOW?

THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS ARE LITMUS PAPER. APPLY THEM, AND THEIR ANSWER WILL TELL YOU IF THE SCENE IS DRAMATIC OR NOT.

IF THE SCENE IS NOT DRAMATICALLY WRITTEN, IT WILL NOT BE DRAMATICALLY ACTED.

THERE IS NO MAGIC FAIRY DUST WHICH WILL MAKE A BORING, USELESS, REDUNDANT, OR MERELY INFORMATIVE SCENE AFTER IT LEAVES YOUR TYPEWRITER. YOU THE WRITERS, ARE IN CHARGE OF MAKING SURE EVERY SCENE IS DRAMATIC.

THIS MEANS ALL THE "LITTLE" EXPOSITIONAL SCENES OF TWO PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD. THIS BUSHWAH (AND WE ALL TEND TO WRITE IT ON THE FIRST DRAFT) IS LESS THAN USELESS, SHOULD IT FINALLY, GOD FORBID, GET FILMED.

IF THE SCENE BORES YOU WHEN YOU READ IT, REST ASSURED IT WILL BORE THE ACTORS, AND WILL, THEN, BORE THE AUDIENCE, AND WE'RE ALL GOING TO BE BACK IN THE BREADLINE.

SOMEONE HAS TO MAKE THE SCENE DRAMATIC. IT IS NOT THE ACTORS JOB (THE ACTORS JOB IS TO BE TRUTHFUL). IT IS NOT THE DIRECTORS JOB. HIS OR HER JOB IS TO FILM IT STRAIGHTFORWARDLY AND REMIND THE ACTORS TO TALK FAST. IT IS YOUR JOB.

EVERY SCENE MUST BE DRAMATIC. THAT MEANS: THE MAIN CHARACTER MUST HAVE A SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD, PRESSING NEED WHICH IMPELS HIM OR HER TO SHOW UP IN THE SCENE.

THIS NEED IS WHY THEY CAME. IT IS WHAT THE SCENE IS ABOUT. THEIR ATTEMPT TO GET THIS NEED MET WILL LEAD, AT THE END OF THE SCENE,TO FAILURE - THIS IS HOW THE SCENE IS OVER. IT, THIS FAILURE, WILL, THEN, OF NECESSITY, PROPEL US INTO THE NEXT SCENE.

ALL THESE ATTEMPTS, TAKEN TOGETHER, WILL, OVER THE COURSE OF THE EPISODE, CONSTITUTE THE PLOT.

ANY SCENE, THUS, WHICH DOES NOT BOTH ADVANCE THE PLOT, AND STANDALONE (THAT IS, DRAMATICALLY, BY ITSELF, ON ITS OWN MERITS) IS EITHER SUPERFLUOUS, OR INCORRECTLY WRITTEN.

YES BUT YES BUT YES BUT, YOU SAY: WHAT ABOUT THE NECESSITY OF WRITING IN ALL THAT "INFORMATION?"

AND I RESPOND "FIGURE IT OUT" ANY DICKHEAD WITH A BLUESUIT CAN BE (AND IS) TAUGHT TO SAY "MAKE IT CLEARER", AND "I WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT HIM".

WHEN YOU'VE MADE IT SO CLEAR THAT EVEN THIS BLUESUITED PENGUIN IS HAPPY, BOTH YOU AND HE OR SHE WILL BE OUT OF A JOB.

THE JOB OF THE DRAMATIST IS TO MAKE THE AUDIENCE WONDER WHAT HAPPENS NEXT. NOT TO EXPLAIN TO THEM WHAT JUST HAPPENED, OR TO*SUGGEST* TO THEM WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.

ANY DICKHEAD, AS ABOVE, CAN WRITE, "BUT, JIM, IF WE DON'T ASSASSINATE THE PRIME MINISTER IN THE NEXT SCENE, ALL EUROPE WILL BE ENGULFED IN FLAME"

WE ARE NOT GETTING PAID TO REALIZE THAT THE AUDIENCE NEEDS THIS INFORMATION TO UNDERSTAND THE NEXT SCENE, BUT TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WRITE THE SCENE BEFORE US SUCH THAT THE AUDIENCE WILL BE INTERESTED IN WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.

YES BUT, YES BUT YES BUT YOU REITERATE.

AND I RESPOND FIGURE IT OUT.

HOW DOES ONE STRIKE THE BALANCE BETWEEN WITHHOLDING AND VOUCHSAFING INFORMATION? THAT IS THE ESSENTIAL TASK OF THE DRAMATIST. AND THE ABILITY TO DO THAT IS WHAT SEPARATES YOU FROM THE LESSER SPECIES IN THEIR BLUE SUITS.

FIGURE IT OUT.

START, EVERY TIME, WITH THIS INVIOLABLE RULE: THE SCENE MUST BE DRAMATIC. it must start because the hero HAS A PROBLEM, AND IT MUST CULMINATE WITH THE HERO FINDING HIM OR HERSELF EITHER THWARTED OR EDUCATED THAT ANOTHER WAY EXISTS.

LOOK AT YOUR LOG LINES. ANY LOGLINE READING "BOB AND SUE DISCUSS..." IS NOT DESCRIBING A DRAMATIC SCENE.

PLEASE NOTE THAT OUR OUTLINES ARE, GENERALLY, SPECTACULAR. THE DRAMA FLOWS OUT BETWEEN THE OUTLINE AND THE FIRST DRAFT.

THINK LIKE A FILMMAKER RATHER THAN A FUNCTIONARY, BECAUSE, IN TRUTH, YOU ARE MAKING THE FILM. WHAT YOU WRITE, THEY WILL SHOOT.

HERE ARE THE DANGER SIGNALS. ANY TIME TWO CHARACTERS ARE TALKING ABOUT A THIRD, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.

ANY TIME ANY CHARACTER IS SAYING TO ANOTHER "AS YOU KNOW", THAT IS, TELLING ANOTHER CHARACTER WHAT YOU, THE WRITER, NEED THE AUDIENCE TO KNOW, THE SCENE IS A CROCK OF SHIT.

DO NOT WRITE A CROCK OF SHIT. WRITE A RIPPING THREE, FOUR, SEVEN MINUTE SCENE WHICH MOVES THE STORY ALONG, AND YOU CAN, VERY SOON, BUY A HOUSE IN BEL AIR AND HIRE SOMEONE TO LIVE THERE FOR YOU.

REMEMBER YOU ARE WRITING FOR A VISUAL MEDIUM. MOST TELEVISION WRITING, OURS INCLUDED, SOUNDS LIKE RADIO. THE CAMERA CAN DO THE EXPLAINING FOR YOU. LET IT. WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERS DOING -*LITERALLY*. WHAT ARE THEY HANDLING, WHAT ARE THEY READING. WHAT ARE THEY WATCHING ON TELEVISION, WHAT ARE THEY SEEING.

IF YOU PRETEND THE CHARACTERS CANT SPEAK, AND WRITE A SILENT MOVIE, YOU WILL BE WRITING GREAT DRAMA.

IF YOU DEPRIVE YOURSELF OF THE CRUTCH OF NARRATION, EXPOSITION,INDEED, OF SPEECH. YOU WILL BE FORGED TO WORK IN A NEW MEDIUM - TELLING THE STORY IN PICTURES (ALSO KNOWN AS SCREENWRITING)

THIS IS A NEW SKILL. NO ONE DOES IT NATURALLY. YOU CAN TRAIN YOURSELVES TO DO IT, BUT YOU NEED TO START.

I CLOSE WITH THE ONE THOUGHT: LOOK AT THE SCENE AND ASK YOURSELF "IS IT DRAMATIC? IS IT ESSENTIAL? DOES IT ADVANCE THE PLOT?

ANSWER TRUTHFULLY.

IF THE ANSWER IS "NO" WRITE IT AGAIN OR THROW IT OUT. IF YOU'VE GOT ANY QUESTIONS, CALL ME UP.

LOVE, DAVE MAMET

SANTA MONICA 19 OCTO 05

(IT IS NOT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW THE ANSWERS, BUT IT IS YOUR, AND MY, RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW AND TO ASK THE RIGHT Questions OVER AND OVER. UNTIL IT BECOMES SECOND NATURE. I BELIEVE THEY ARE LISTED ABOVE.)

How To Earn A Living As A Self-Published Writer

I believe the key to earning a living as a self-published writer is two-fold: write short and write series.

1) Write short

It used to be that particular genres, such as crime fiction or paranormal romance, had to be a certain length.

My first paranormal romance was about 72,000 words because I had been told by the editor she expected all submissions to be between 70,000 and 75,000 words. Other genres have other requirements but, at that time, 70,000 words was considered on the short side for a novel.

With the growing popularity of lower priced ebooks readers have become more accommodating of shorter novels and don't mind paying a few dollars for a 30k, 40k or 50k word novel or novella. In fact, some readers prefer shorter stories.

As evidence of this trend, I give you these posts penned by authors writing in very different fields:
- Ian McEwan Believes The Novella Is The Perfect Form Of Prose Fiction
- Shorter Novels in the Digital Age?
- Indie Epublished Authors: Build Your Backlist Quicker with Shorter-Length Novels

2) Write Series

Not too long ago Melinda DuChamp, a writer with over 50 published books to her credit (although under other names), wrote a guest post for Joe Konrath's blog at his request. Melinda disclosed she had made $15,000 in one month from her first independently published book, 50 Shades of Alice in Wonderland, an erotic novel.

I mention Melinda's success NOT to suggest we all become erotic novelists but because she came up with a business idea I thought was brilliant.

5 trilogies + 5 omnibus editions = 20 books

Imagine you write a trilogy and that each of the three books is about 30,000 words long. You then bundle each of these books into an omnibus edition and sell that. You'll have written three novels--well, novellas--but have four items to sell (the three books plus the bundle of the three books).

For only 90,000 words you'll have a trilogy and four books to sell!

Let's take this a step further. If you wrote four more trilogies you would have a total of 20 books, and book bundles, for sale. That's 20 books for the work of 15.

How quickly could this be done? If you wrote 2,500 words per day you'd be able to write 15 novellas (450,000 words) in 6 months!

Amazon's KDP Select Program: With 20 books for sale one could always be free

Here's a twist: If you offered your 20 books for sale on Amazon and enrolled them in the KDP Select program, you'd always be able to offer one book for free!

I hesitate to recommend enrolling your books in Amazon's KDP Program because whenever exclusivity is required many other issues have to be considered. That said, it's something to think about over the short term, especially if no one knows your name and you want a lot of exposure in a short amount of time.

Other articles you might like:

- NaNoWriMo: A Survival Guide
- Using Pinch Points To Increase Narrative Drive
- NaNoWriMo: How To Reach Your Daily Wordcount
- How To Write 10,000 Words A Day

Photo credit: "Psalm 103 texture" by Rachel Shirey under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

Using Pinch Points To Increase Narrative Drive

Think of what a story would be without structure. Many of us don't have to imagine it, we have those stories buried under our beds!

Structure helps move a story along, it lends novels that most mysterious of things: narrative drive. The I-can't-put-it-down quality that keeps sane people up way past their bedtime.

Structure also helps writers when we have that feeling: Gee, shouldn't something be happening about now? But what? Following a structure, or even reading about it, can generate ideas.

The Purpose Of Writing/Storytelling

Screenwriters talk about structure more than novel writers, so I've been studying screenwriting. Not with the intention to write a script--novels are challenging enough!--but to learn about different story structures.

Whether we're talking about writing a novel, short story or a screenplay, it's the same basic idea: We're telling a story to an audience. We are entertainers seeking to wow the crowd.

One concept I discovered recently, that of the Pinch or Pinch Point, is another tool a writer can stow away in her toolbox just in case she needs it. And, during NaNoWriMo, who knows what will come in handy before the month is through.

Pinch Points

A pinch point is a reminder. It's a reminder of who the antagonist is and what is at stake. Further, this reminder isn't filtered by the hero's experience. In other words, it's not just how the hero sees the antagonist, or antagonistic force, this is how they are. Here we see their true nature. (Story Structure Series: #9 – Pinch Points, Larry Brooks)

The Structure Of Your Story: How To Use Pinch Points

There are two pinch points--sometimes just called "pinches"--in a novel or screenplay. Assuming a three act structure, the first pinch comes halfway through the first part of the 2nd act (3/8 mark) and the second pinch comes halfway through the second part of the 2nd act (5/8 mark).

Clear as mud? Here's a drawing:

First Pinch Point:

The first pinch point reminds us of the central conflict of the story.

Second Pinch Point: 

The second pinch point, like the first, reminds the audience of the central conflict of the story, but it also is linked to the first (Wikipedia, Screenwriting). It shows the audience the threat (whatever it is that still stands in the way of the hero achieving his goal). The pinch point scene lays out what the hero has yet to conquer/overcome/accomplish. (“The Help” – Isolating and Understanding the First “Pinch Point”, Larry Brooks)

My background isn't in screenwriting but, to me, pinch points seem a lot like sequels. Not exactly like a sequel, though, because sequels come after the scene, after the action. Perhaps a pinch is like a scene+sequel. You show your audience the antagonist in all their unadulterated glory (or horribleness) and then you see the aftermath, the personal consequences for the hero, the goals he has still accomplish and why he must accomplish them.

Examples of Pinch Points

First Pinch Point 

[I]n Star Wars, Pinch 1 is the Stormtroopers attacking the Millennium Falcon in Mos Eisley, reminding us the Empire is after the stolen plans to the Death Star R2-D2 is carrying and Luke and Ben Kenobi are trying to get to the Rebel Alliance (the main conflict). (Screenwriting, Wikipedia)

Second Pinch Point

In Star Wars, Pinch 2 is the Stormtroopers attacking them as they rescue the Princess in the Death Star. Both scenes remind us of the Empire's opposition, and using the Stormtrooper attack motif unifies both Pinches. (Screenwriting, Wikipedia)

So, in Star Wars, the pinch points remind us that the Big Bad is the Emperor. Further, the pinch points are related--the second one calls back to the first--through the use of Stormtroopers.

Even if we end up not using them, the concept of pinch points can help remind us that we shouldn't lose sight of the antagonist in the story. Sometimes this is a danger when the antagonist works behind the scenes, through his or her minions, and receives little "on stage" time.

# # #

If you're doing NaNoWriMo this year, best of luck! How's it going? It's been tough for me. Life has a way of intruding on my writing time. But that's okay! I'm at approximately 12,075 words, hopefully I'll have over 14,000 by the end of the day.

Go NaNo-ers! :-)

Other articles you might like:

- More Writing Advice From Jim Butcher
- How To Get Your Readers To Identify With Your Main Character
- Chuck Wendig And The Battle Song Of The Storyteller

Resources:
- Syd Field's Podcasts (Syd Field was the first person to publish a book on modern screenwriting)
- StoryFix (Run by Larry Brooks)

Photo credit: "Ice Storm" by JD Hancock under Creative Commons 2.0.

The Random House & Penguin Merger: Good For Indie Authors?

Here's a headline for you: After Penguin and Random House merge into Penguin Random House they will have created "the biggest publisher in the world' [1].

According to The Guardian, the reaction to this news has led some folks to despair for the future of traditional publishing. They point to three trends in the book market:

1) Falling book sales

Book sales are the lowest in living memory. "Print sales are falling--down 11% in 2011, the trend continuing in 2012--while bookshops, both specialist and chain, are closing. Borders has gone, Waterstones is in turmoil, and independent booksellers the length and breadth of the country are vanishing. [1]"

2) Self-publishers & Amazon

Self-publishers bypass traditional publishing. With Amazon becoming a publisher in its own right and encouraging authors to not stray beyond the Amazon fold (Amazon KDP Select; True Fans & Select) they hope to increase market share. The more market share Amazon has the less there is for traditional publishing and their profits will continue to fall.

I think the fear is that Amazon will take over the publishing world and then turn into a frankenmoster that looks like a mash-up of the Big Bad from The Ring and Godzilla.

3) The death of reading

Some fear that declining sales of print books will mean people will read less. [1]

Why Indie Authors Are Not At Risk

Yes, traditional book sales are falling

That is, sales of books from traditional publishers through traditional outlets such as brick-and-mortar (or whatever they're constructed from) bookstores.

Is this a bad thing for writers? Well, first, writers are readers so NO, this isn't a good thing. I think that the overwhelming majority of writers love bookstores and take every opportunity to bask in their dusty glow.

Is this a bad thing for independent writers? Not necessarily. It depends quite a lot on whether (3) is true.

There's no such thing as a frankenmoster

People warned that once Walmart crushed all its competition its prices would skyrocket and, since it had crushed all its competition, we wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

That didn't happen.

People warn that once Amazon crushes all its competition it will raise its prices. After all other bookstores are nothing but splinters and digital mist it'll be the only game in town so we'll have no choice but to pay high prices for books or stop reading.

That won't happen.

Why? First, I don't think Amazon is going to be able to crush all its competition. Google Books, Barnes & Noble, Kobo and Smashwords are just a few of Amazon's competitors and I don't see them going away any time soon. And, even if they did, another company would spring up, phoenix-like, from its ashes.

Second, even in the unlikely event that Amazon does crush all its competition this wouldn't be the end for writers or readers. Walmart hasn't raised it's prices to punishing levels and I don't believe Amazon would either.

People are reading more than ever

Folks are consuming more digital content than ever before. People are reading. They're reading blogs, Reddit, digital books. They're watching movies on their smart phones. And we aren't just consuming content, we're creating it too. We blog, we tweet, we use Tumblr and Reddit and Wattpad. And that's for starters!

Far from people reading less we are going through what Amazon calls a Renaissance of reading.

Yes, I'm talking about digital media such as electronic books as opposed to print books, though I believe that print books will always exist.

My Point

My point is that as long as readers exist, as long as folks want to have stories told to them, there will be writers. And screenwriters and playwrights.

And you know what? Folks will always want to have stories told to them. The day that stops is the day we've joined the Dodo in peaceful extinction.

What do you think of the new Putnam & Random House merger? Do you think this just postpones the inevitable or do you think they'll be able to make a go of it? 

Other articles you might like:
- How To Get Your Readers To Identify With Your Main Character
- More Writing Advice From Jim Butcher
- NaNoWriMo: A Survival Guide

Articles referenced in this article:
1) Penguin merger minuses could be pluses for indies, The Guardian.

Photo credit: "Bambi vs. Godzilla (211/365)" by JD Hancock under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

Chuck Wendig And The Battle Song Of The Storyteller

I just watched Joanna Penn's interview with the incomparable Chuck Wendig of Terribleminds.com (Writing Metaphor, Memorable Characters And Horror With Chuck Wendig). Chuck gives some great tips for those of us struggling through NaNoWriMo:

1. Figure out what your character is afraid of and then make them confront their fear.

2. Tips for writing memorable and original characters:
- They have to be active and interesting. They have to do stuff.
- They need to have a Save The Cat moment where the reader gets behind the character. We need to see some of their own ethos in action. That's what drives us to know their story.

If you haven't read Chuck's post Battle Song of the Storyteller I recommend it. Here's a sample:

I am a storyteller and I will finish the tale I am telling.

The gods have chosen me as its speaker.

My story has weight and value. It is worth more than a chest of gold, more than a pair of magic boots, more than a cool laser gun that goes pyoo pyoo pyoo, more than a ride on the back of a surfboard unicorn. My story’s merit cannot be measured. All that matters is that it matters.

That's just the beginning. It's amazing. Bookmark it for those moments when you're feeling discouraged, when you feel you can't possibly finish 50,000 words in a month--I mean, the whole idea is crazy, right? That's when you need to read Chuck's post!

At one point Joanna Penn asked Chuck Wendig what an average writing day was like for him. He replied:

I wake up at 6 in the morning and will write until I am done which generally means 2,000 to 3,000 words a day.

Every once in a while I'll do significantly more than that but I don't force myself to do it, there's no gun to my head. Which would be really weird, if I held a gun to my own head. But ... (laughter)

And then whatever happens in the middle of your day. Lunch. And then I tend to do editing in the afternoon or other administrative stuff like answering email.

On another note, I just read the first bit of Chucks book, Blackbirds. Love it! If you like Terribleminds.com, give it a try. Highly recommended. Though I should mention it's classified as a horror novel. But, hey, you can always sleep with the light on, right? ;)

Good luck fellow NaNoWriMo-ers! I'm at 10,000 words and counting. We can do this thing!!

Other articles you might like:
- How To Get Your Readers To Identify With Your Main Character
- More Writing Advice From Jim Butcher
- Amazon Reviews Are Disappearing
- How To Write 10,000 Words A Day

Photo credit: "Pro Evenflo" by Eneas under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

How To Get Your Readers To Identify With Your Main Character

Some of the best characters aren't likable. For instance Sherlock Holmes, especially as brilliantly depicted by Benedict Cumberbatch. But that's okay. The trick is to get your readers to IDENTIFY with your protagonist. Making him or her likable is only one way to do that.

I hope to convince you of this before I'm through but, first, let's take a step back and ask what the goal of writing/storytelling is.

The Goal Of Every Story: Elicit Emotion In Your Readers

By the way, I'm taking this material from a course Michael Hauge taught with Chistopher Vogler (author of The Writer's Journey) called The Hero's 2 Journeys. Michael believes that the goal of every story is to elicit emotion from our readers. If we've done that then we've written a great story.

So, how do we elicit emotion from our readers? Simple! (Well, that's what Michael says.) Stories only have three main ingredients:

1. A great CHARACTER
2. A passionate DESIRE/A GOAL
3. CONFLICT/ Something that's keeping our character from fulling their desire/obtaining their goal.

So, every story is about:

An emotionally involving CHARACTER who strives to reach a GOAL (/fulfill a desire) against seemingly insurmountable OBSTACLES.

What we're going to talk about now has to do with the first of these three pillars: creating an emotionally involving character.

5 Ways To Create A Character Your Readers Will Identify With

Here's what we want to have happen: We want our readers to empathize with our main character. We want our readers to identify with our protagonist's situation, his feelings and his motives.

Michael Hauge puts it this way:

You want the reader to become a participant in the story through their emotions. (My paraphrase)

Here's how you do that:

1. Make your character sympathetic

In general, people in love are sympathetic. When I see two people walking down the sidewalk with silly grins on their faces holding hands while sneaking furtive love-sick peeks at each other, I can't help but smile.

This doesn't mean either character is likeable taken individually, but the fact that they have someone, that they are in love, helps (most readers) identify with them.

Or you could make your character the victim of an undeserved misfortune. That would also evoke sympathy in most readers.

Also, if a powerful antagonist deprived your character of something they loved--perhaps their spouse or child--this would be a good way to make your character sympathetic and introduce the Big Bad of your story.

Example: Andy (played by Tim Robbins) in The Shawshank Redemption

2. Make your character funny

We like to hang out with people who make us laugh. Why is this? I don't know. Maybe it's because they can say funny things we don't have the courage to.

Example: Beverly Hills Cop

3. Make your character likable

Make your character a kind, good hearted, person. Show that they are liked by the other characters in your story.

This is probably the most common way writers attempt to get their readers to identify with their main character(s) and it works!

Example: Tom Hanks in practically every movie he's been in.

4. Put your character in jeopardy

We identify with people we worry about. Put your character in danger of losing something of vital importance to them.

Example: Pulp Fiction. Butch Coolidge (played by Bruce Willis) and his father's watch.

5. Make your character powerful

Make your character very good at what they do. For instance, make them a superhero or an Indiana Jones type character

Example: Peter Brand (played by Jonah Hill) in Moneyball.

Getting Your Readers To Identify With Your Character: The Secret

Here's the secret to creating a character your readers can identify with:

Employ AT LEAST TWO of the above five elements when you introduce your main character.

For instance in The Firm, when Mitch McDeere (played by Tom Cruise) is first introduced, we learn that he is getting top marks in university despite working as a waiter (sympathetic). We also find out that he and his wife are passionately in love (sympathetic & likable).

#  #  # 

What do you think? Do readers truly need to identify with the main character of a story in order to become emotionally involved?

I'd like to thank John Ward for his post on how to make characters likable.

Other articles you might like:

- More Writing Advice From Jim Butcher
- Amazon Reviews Are Disappearing
- How To Write 10,000 Words A Day

Photo credit: "Victorian Robo Detective and Dr WATTson" by V&A Steamworks under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

More Writing Advice From Jim Butcher

Serack from over at Jim Butcher's Forums emailed me with a couple of great links I'd omitted from my Jim Butcher On Writing compendium post. Thanks Serack!

Jim Butcher's Interview With The Clarion Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers' Workshop

I bring this up because one of the links Sarack shared with me was to an interview conducted by the fine folks over at Clarion Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers' Workshop and is one of the best interviews on the fine art of writing I've read.

This being NaNoWriMo, and this being a blog about (at least in part) how to write well--or at least how to write better--I wanted to post two of Jim Butcher's answers:

The Pen Is Mightier Than The Sword

Do you have a particular method for creating characters? Or do they just spring into your head fully formed and take over from there?

It varies based on the character. Dresden himself was created really, really artificially. When I was putting the character together, I was doing so based on a worksheet in a class I was taking at University of Oklahoma called “Writing the Genre Fiction Novel.” I had been disagreeing with my teacher for a long time about how good books were put together. I’d taken her courses for several years, and finally one semester I just said, “I’m just gonna be your good little writer-zombie, and you’re going to see what terrible things happen.” That was the semester I wrote the first book of the Dresden Files.

Dresden himself was put together from Sherlock Holmes and Gandalf and others; I listed the sort of things that could be expected from Merlin, Gandalf, various wizard figures in various books. I did the same thing with the hard-boiled private-eye recurring characters and tried to draw the traits that I saw most frequently in those characters.

One of the most interesting things I realized along the way: the private eye and the wizard almost always serve the exact same purpose in the story. They’re not so much there to lay into the action scenes left and right; what really makes them vital to the story’s progress is what they can learn, and the kind of places they wind up going, whether they’re going into a metaphorical underworld like the undertown of Chicago’s mob scene, or whether they’re going into the literal underworld like Moria. The wizard/private eye characters go into these dark places to find out what they need to know. Gandalf wasn’t devastating to the Dark Lord because he showed up and beat up his minions. What made him dangerous was that he was riding around to talk to people and researching in all the libraries and finding out that the trinket that his buddy had was the One Ring.

With Harry Dresden being put together from the likes of Sherlock Holmes and Gandalf, how could we not love him? I'm guessing I'm not the only person who wants to take that course, Writing the Genre Fiction Novel!

I had an "ah-ha!" moment when I read Jim Butcher's answer. The hero, even kick-ass heroes like Gandalf and Harry Dresden, take the chances they do, explore the various 'underbellies of society', NOT primarily to get into fights and show everyone how tough they are, they go into these dark, dangerous, places because they need information. They need to find out "what they need to know". That's how, ultimately, the hero gets the upper hand.

Cause And Reaction, Reaction And Response

You wrote four unpublished novels before the first Dresden book, and they’ve remained unpublished. Where do you think those early works went astray?

“Where didn’t they go astray?” is the better question. [...]

[. . . .]

One of the very basic building blocks of writing a good story, an action scene, or a paragraph is you have to show cause and reaction, reaction and response. That’s a kind of a process that doesn’t just exist on a sentence to sentence level and a paragraph to paragraph level, but happens within the greater structure of the story. One of the things that permeates writing completely.

When a character does something in one book and it has an effect that comes out later, that’s one of the things that creates a greater sense of verisimilitude in your fantasy world. Plus, it’s great to not see characters acting in a vacuum. When they make a choice, it has an effect that comes back to haunt hem later on, and that’s one of those things that lends a greater sense of purpose to your storytelling. The reader goes, “Oh my gosh, this is an actual world,” and now they have to wonder about every choice a character makes and how that will also come into play. [Emphasis mine]

"Cause and reaction, reaction and response." I talked about that in detail in the post:  Making A Scene: Using Conflicts And Setbacks To Create Narrative Drive.

Sequels

One thing I haven't blogged about yet (but should) is sequels. I think the topic deserves a post of it's own, but, briefly, Jim Butcher teaches it's the SEQUEL that that helps endear your characters to your readers. Jim writes:

[Y]ou've got to win them [your readers] over to your character's point of view. You've got to establish some kind of basic emotional connection, an empathy for your character. It needn't be deep seated agreement with everything the character says and does--but they DO need to be able to UNDERSTAND what your character is thinking and feeling, and to understand WHY they are doing whatever (probably outrageous) thing you've got them doing.

Great article! You can read the rest of Jim's advice here: Sequels.

Best of luck with NaNo! :-)

Other articles you might like:
- NaNoWriMo: A Survival Guide
- How To Write 10,000 Words A Day
- Amazon Reviews Are Disappearing

Photo credit: "Arches National Park, Moab Utah" by ianmalcm under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

Amazon Reviews Are Disappearing

I had heard about Amazon reviews mysteriously disappearing before Joe Konrath blogged about it, but Joe laid it out in such a way that there was no mistaking what was happening, especially when writer after writer wrote in confirming their books were losing reviews. But not just that. Reviews they had written were vanishing as well.

[Update Nov 5, 2012: I've included an update at the end of this article. We've figured out at least two things that will cause Amazon to remove a review.]

The Disappearing Reviews

Joe writes:

I've been buried in a book deadline for all of October, and haven't been paying much attention to anything else. When I finally took some time to catch up reading email, I noticed I had many authors (more than twenty) contacting me because their Amazon reviews were disappearing. Some were the ones they wrote. Some were for their books. One author told me that reviews her fans had written--fans that were completely unknown to her--had been deleted.

I took a look at the reviews I'd written, and saw more than fifty of them had been removed, namely reviews I did of my peers. I don't read reviews people give me, but I do keep track of numbers and averages, and I've also lost a fair amount of reviews. (Joe Konrath, Amazon Removes Reviews)

The question is: Why were these reviews deleted?

No one knows.

Amazon's Response

Yes, Amazon customer representatives have sent various replies and these replies have been shared. Here's one, posted by Michelle Gagnon on the Kill Zone blog in the article Et Tu, Amazon?

I'm sorry for any previous concerns regarding your reviews on our site. We do not allow reviews on behalf of a person or company with a financial interest in the product or a directly competing product. This includes authors, artists, publishers, manufacturers, or third-party merchants selling the product.

We have removed your reviews as they are in violation of our guidelines.  We will not be able to go into further detail about our research.

I understand that you are upset, and I regret that we have not been able to address your concerns to your satisfaction. However, we will not be able to offer any additional insight or action on this matter.

One thing I'd like to note, it seems that reviews have been disappearing from traditionally published authors as well as independently published authors.

I don't like writing about the disappearing reviews on Amazon because I like the company. It helps indie authors make a living from their work. That said, this is an issue I think we all need to be aware of.

My feeling is that Amazon needs to tweek whatever software it's using to identify objectionable reviews. Hopefully they'll do this soon and restore the legitimate ones.

I'm interested in hearing from you. Have you lost reviews?

Update Nov 5, 2012: Why Some Amazon Reviews Have Been Removed

I'm not saying this explains the lion's share of the disappearing reviews, but it may help some folks understand what's okay and what isn't when it comes to reviewing.

Amazon Verified Reviews

Amazon verified reviews must be from folks who purchased the books with their own money.

If an author buys an Amazon gift certificate for the price for the price of the book and sends it to someone who then buys their book ... well, that's fine of course. It's a thoughtful gift. The only problem is, if the person likes the book and decides to review it, they can't. Such a review would be against Amazon's guidelines since they were compensated for the review.

In Amazon's eyes it's fine to send a copy of your book to a reviewer (in which case it would NOT be an Amazon verified review) but it's not okay for them to get any sort of gift, monetary or otherwise, for providing the review.

For more on this read: Cheating with supply of review copies - the Amazon Verified Purchase scam.

Reviews From A Competitor

It seems that if you're an author, traditional or indie, who has merged your author's account with your amazon account if you then review the work of another author, your review will likely be removed. It seems that Amazon doesn't want authors reviewing each others work.

I was devastated by this--it seemed very unfair--until someone pointed out that the overwhelming number of reviews didn't come from authors. For more on this see: Amazon Reviewhouhaha.

Further reading on Amazon's disappearing reviews:

- Joe Konrath's article, Amazon Removes Reviews
- Michelle Gagnon's article over at Kill Zone: Et Tu, Amazon?
- (Update [Nov 4]: I just found this article on Salon.com: Authors cannot review authors on Amazon.)
- (Update [Nov 5]: Amazon removes book reviews by fellow authors.)
- (Update [Nov 5]: Amazon Reviewhouhaha.)
- (Update [Nov 5]: Lost some reviews? -- Kindleboard thread.)
I would encourage anyone intersted in researching this matter to read the comments to these articles. Writers have been sharing their experiences as well as links to other resources on the web. - Here's a link to Amazon's General Review Creation Guidelines.

Other articles you might be interested in:

- Does Amazon KDP Select Drive Away True Fans?
- Ian McEwan Believes The Novella Is The Perfect Form Of Prose Fiction
- NaNoWriMo: A Survival Guide

Photo credit: "Three Trees" by PhotoDu.de / CreativeDomainPhotography.com under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

Writing To Music: Knowing Your Characters

A few minutes ago I was chatting with a writer I met on Google+ and the coolest thing happened: she shared a link to a playlist from Grooveshark.

That got me thinking about music and its relation to writing.

Music And The Muse

I know a lot of writers listen to music while they work; Kim Harrison for instance. She writes:

My muse exists in music. Logic maps the story, but music gives it its soul and sends my characters in directions that surprise even me. what I'm left with is an eclectic handful of songs that—in my thoughts—relate to certain scenes or more typically, relationships between characters. Some authors cast their books with popular actors/actresses. I'd rather cast the music as it connects more directly to my creative process. (Kim Harrison, Music)

This is something I want to try doing, choosing songs that relate to aspects of the characters I create, the main ones at least. I find I learn best from other authors, watching how they sculpt their prose, their stories. Why not their character's playlists as well?

Kim Harrison's Playlist For Rachel Morgan

I want to try out something new. I've put most of the songs Kim listed for Rachel Morgan, the point of view character for her Hollows series, into a playlist over at Grooveshark and shared it. I've never done this before, but you should be able to follow the link, below, and play the list--or any song on the list. Cool, huh?

Kim Harrison's playlist for Rachel Morgan (on Grooveshark)

Here's what Kim had to say about a few of Rachel's songs and how they relate to her character:

The songs I've found that I feel relate to Rachel cover a wonderfully wide span. Fiona Apple's "Criminal" has begun to resonate in me lately. Coldplay's "Lost" seems to fit Rachel pretty wel, too. (I really like this group.) And in regards to her love life, "I'm not Over" by Carolina Liar is a nice fit. "Believe" by The Bravery, has captured my attention in regards to Rachel's latest fix with Al. And since the release of The Outlaw Demon Wails, I can share with you the song "Temptation" by Garbage. But possibly the closest song I've found that fits her future is from NIN, "The Line Begins To Blur." Breaking Benjamin's "Breathe," seems to capture Rachel after Kisten almost perfectly. After seeing the "Lithium" video from Evanescence, I was full of thoughts of Rachel in the Ever-After. (Kim Harrison, Music)

That's just a part of what Kim had to say on the subject. You can read the rest on her website: kimharrison.net/MusicPage.html

Know Thyself Characters

After listening to the songs and reading Kim's remarks about how each song relates to aspects of Rachel's character it strikes me anew how well Kim knows her. She knows Rachel's taste in music and how it maps her moods, who she is.

I think we need to know things like this about our characters if we are to write compelling stories. And I think creating a playlist is a good place to start, but let's not stop there. What are their underwear drawers like? Does your POV character buy frilly confections that cost the moon and shred as soon as you touch them? Does she favor stretchy, comfortable, affordable, cotton? (Gasp! Does she even own underwear?)

It's funny, as writers we're much more focused on knowing our characters, people we invent, than we are ourselves! But, in the end, perhaps that's harder.

Other articles you might like:
- Ian McEwan Believes The Novella Is The Perfect Form Of Prose Fiction
- How To Write 10,000 Words A Day
- NaNoWriMo: A Survival Guide

Photo credit: "It's Fun To Stay At The ..." by JD Hancock under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.

Ian McEwan Believes The Novella Is The Perfect Form Of Prose Fiction

The Novella Is The Perfect Form Of Prose Fiction

Ian McEwan recently wrote a piece for The New Yorker entitled Some Notes On The Novella in which he eloquently and passionately argues that the "novella is the perfect form of prose fiction".

Some might find this surprising. As McEwan himself notes, many view the novella as something lesser. He writes:

When a character in my recent book, “Sweet Tooth,” publishes his short first work of fiction, he finds some critics are suggesting that he has done something unmanly or dishonest. His experience reflects my own. A novella? Perhaps you don’t have the necessary creative juice.

To counter this, McEwan points out that the tradition of writing novellas is "long and glorious" and points to the work of writers such as Thomas Mann, Henry James, Kafka, Joseph Conrad, Albert Camus, Voltaire, Tolstoy, Joyce, Solzhenitsyn, Orwell, Steinbeck and Melville, only to name a few.

Novella's "don’t ramble or preach, they spare us their quintuple subplots and swollen midsections"

What is it about the novella that makes it the perfect form of prose fiction rather than the novel? McEwan writes:

[T]he demands of economy push writers to polish their sentences to precision and clarity, to bring off their effects with unusual intensity, to remain focussed on the point of their creation and drive it forward with functional single-mindedness, and to end it with a mind to its unity. They don’t ramble or preach, they spare us their quintuple subplots and swollen midsections. 

Swollen midsections, indeed. I'm reminded of Jim Butcher's instruction about how to survive what he calls The Great Swampy Middle (I picture it as something like the Fire Swamp in The Princess Bride, the home of the ROUSes--Rodents Of Unusual Size. But I digress.)

Be masters of the form, not slaves to the giant

True, this November we're writing 50,000 words and McEwan defines a novella as being between 20,000 and 40,000 words. Still, McEwan's characterization of the novella is one we're all familiar with--in fact I don't think I've seen a better description of what most writers are trying to do when they craft a story. Certainly I've never read one more concise or eloquent. He continues:

I suspect that many novelists clock up sixty thousand words after a year’s work and believe (wearily, perhaps) that they are only half way there. They are slaves to the giant, instead of masters of the form.

Been there, done that. (When I was reading McEwan's column I actually sprang up from my chair at this point and yelled, "Yes!" ... Or at least I felt like doing it. ;)

McEwan goes on to compare the novella to watching a play or movie and remarks that:

[T]here’s a strong resemblance between the screenplay (twenty odd thousand words) and the novella, both operating within the same useful constraints of economy—space for a subplot (two at a stretch), characters to be established with quick strokes but allowed enough room to live and breathe, and the central idea, even if it is just below the horizon, always exerting its gravitational pull. The analogy with film or theatre is a reminder that there is an element of performance in the novella. We are more strongly aware of the curtain and the stage, of the author as illusionist. The smoke and mirrors, rabbits and hats are more self-consciously applied than in the full-length novel. The novella is the modern and post-modern form par excellence. 

NaNoWriMo and the novella

Perhaps, as we go through NaNoWriMo this November, we should think of ourselves as writing, not novels, but slightly overextended novellas and take McEwan's advice to heart. Rather than aspire to turn our masterpieces into a "rambling, bloated ill-shaven giant", after NaNoWriMo is completed, strip off 10,000 (or so) words and attempt the creation of what could be "the perfect form of prose fiction".

Everyone's gotta have a goal. Right? ;)

Best of luck to my fellow NaNo-ers! Right now my manuscript is at about 2,200 words, I'm hoping to add at least another 2,000 tonight.

Other articles you might like:
- Jim Butcher On Writing
- Making A Scene: Using Conflicts And Setbacks To Create Narrative Drive
- Dialogue: 7 Ways of Adding Variety

Photo credit: "a walk in to the woods" by VinothChandar under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0.