An aspiring author asks for advice

[Silentknight]

I wasn't sure whether this should go here or in the Community section, but it's something I've been meaning to ask of the members here at JREF for quite some time now.

As I may have mentioned at one point, I consider myself an aspiring author. Creative writing has long been a hobby of mine, and I have no shortage of ideas to work with, so I'm interested in writing a novel. The problem is that I have zero experience as a professional writer, and haven't the slightest clue how to go about getting something published. I'm asking for advice, any kind of advice, that might help me realize this goal.

My main anxiety is that my dream of becoming a writer is an unrealistic, even delusional one. I'm very quick to criticize my own ideas, to the point where I'm not sure they're really as good as they sound. I've already run them by several acquaintances of mine who are majoring in Creative Writing, and they've repeatedly assured me that my ideas have potential, only I'm not so sure of this myself. I've been so riddled with self-doubt that I've killed numerous ideas of my own in the past, and that's not something I want to have happen this time.

Without revealing too much at this point, the story I have planned is a comedy with philosophical themes, set in the modern fantasy genre. I already have 99% of the characters, concepts, and plot mapped out. I just don't know if I can make it all work.

I suppose what I need is all the feedback I can get, and any advice you can offer. I know there are several professional writers on JREF, and plenty more members who are well-read or just happen to like writing. If you have advice on sentence structure and word usage, I'll take that. If you have advice on specific genres and the dynamics they involve, I'll take that. Character development, ditto. If you have advice on narration, mood, tone, delivery, etc. I'll take that. If you have advice on overused clichés, stale themes, or any kinds of common mistakes to avoid, I'll take that.

With 600+ posts as of today, you should have some idea of what my writing looks like, or at least a reasonable facsimile. I've been nominated for TLA at least once a month since I joined in December, but have never made the finals, not that this fact necessarily has any significance. I wish there were something I could post to give you an example of my writing, but the closest thing I can come up with that would be appropriate is the MSTing, which can be found at the link in my sig. (Yes, we're working on Part V, and no it's not done yet.)

[athon]

I'm sure many people can offer you some small tips on what to do in specific situations, but to be honest there's no central tried and true approach.

First thing to consider is this; a lot of being successful in getting published is down to pure luck.

Second thing is this; luck is the bastard child of opportunity and fortune.

Third thing is this; Opportunity can't be created, but the more one looks the more it can be found.

Fourth thing is this; Looking for opportunity is the most soul-sucking, demoralising thing you could ever hope to do. You'll see others succeed with utter rubbish, have your manuscript rejected more times than you'll care to remember and will feel like you're a single pebble on a wide beach screaming to be noticed that you're a little more brown than the next brown pebble.

My only suggestion is therefore this; if you are a writer, then write. Not just what you're good at, but write stuff you suck at as well. Write articles and send them to whoever will take it. Forget dignity and waiting for the big chance to roll by - give your soul away for free and even offer to stick another fifty into the devil's back pocket as he drives away with it.

Oh, and give up calling yourself an aspiring author. Bollocks to that. You're a writer. Sure, it'd be nice to have a book out there (we'd all like that), but the problem is it feels like until you've got a novel on a shelf at Borders, you've failed. Call yourself a writer, and every time you finish a story or an article, you feel like you've succeeded at something.

Good luck, in any case.

Athon

[ZouPrime]

SilentKnight: Stop thinking about characters and plots and details like this, and just write.

Yes, details. I mean it. Writing is a trade like anything else. You need to do it to become good at it.

Take one of your idea and write about it. Don't try to go for the homerun on your first try, it's not realistic and you'll get discouraged. Try to write a novella of a few dozen pages, it's a much more interesting goal and you'll be able to get a workable result relatively quickly. A small project brought to fruition is more rewarding than a large project you'll end up quitting on. Only after some experience will it matter to worry about sentence structure and the like. Those are the last details a professional would iron on, not something that is useful to start up and get a hang on how to put words on paper.

And don't forget to read. Read "On writing" by Stephen King, it's part biography and part tutorial on how to become a writer, you're going to like it. King recommend 4 hours of writing and 4 hours of reading per day; for most of us these figures are realistic but this is what a professional should be aiming for.

When I was 18 I wrote a science fiction novel of 90k words. It took me a year, working sporadically. The result was atrocious, full of clichés and completely unpublishable. But doing it, I learned a great deal about myself and what it really takes to write a real book. If I attempt to write again, I'll be much more prepared and will know what to expect. You need to do the same thing. Stop thinking and just write. Close this browser, open Word and start up.

[Silentknight]

SilentKnight: Stop thinking about characters and plots and details like this, and just write.

Yes, details. I mean it. Writing is a trade like anything else. You need to do it to become good at it.
I fully understand what you're saying, but this probably isn't the most appropriate advice for me at the moment, given that I'm at the particular stage where I do feel it's best to iron out the details. I don't mean to sound unappreciative over this one particular piece of advice, but I guess what I mean to say is that I've already heard this before and taken it to heart. Thanks anyway.
Take one of your idea and write about it. Don't try to go for the homerun on your first try, it's not realistic and you'll get discouraged. Try to write a novella of a few dozen pages, it's a much more interesting goal and you'll be able to get a workable result relatively quickly. A small project brought to fruition is more rewarding than a large project you'll end up quitting on. Only after some experience will it matter to worry about sentence structure and the like. Those are the last details a professional would iron on, not something that is useful to start up and get a hang on how to put words on paper.
What I meant was that this is the first time I've ever attempted something as sizeable as a novel. I can do short stories and essays already (at least I think so) therefore I was more interested in help on something longer and more in-depth.
And don't forget to read. Read "On writing" by Stephen King, it's part biography and part tutorial on how to become a writer, you're going to like it. King recommend 4 hours of writing and 4 hours of reading per day; for most of us these figures are realistic but this is what a professional should be aiming for.
I'll have to remember to check that out. It sounds like it might be exactly what I'm looking for at this time.
When I was 18 I wrote a science fiction novel of 90k words. It took me a year, working sporadically. The result was atrocious, full of clichés and completely unpublishable. But doing it, I learned a great deal about myself and what it really takes to write a real book. If I attempt to write again, I'll be much more prepared and will know what to expect.
A lot of my older ideas turned out that way too. :D
You need to do the same thing. Stop thinking and just write. Close this browser, open Word and start up.
Again, I fully understand what you're saying. I need to stop stressing out and just let the words flow. However I'm always going to be a little wary whenever someone tells me to "stop thinking." :rolleyes: All kidding aside though, one of the major themes of the story is skepticism, and I would not have come up with the idea without thoroughly contemplating the ideas I'm working with. Whenever I stop thinking, I tend to make stupid little mistakes, and these mistakes pile up.

I guess what I meant to say is that I know what I want to do and how I'm going to do it; it's just that I lack the confidence to go full steam ahead with it (and have been struggling with bouts of depression lately). This is why I could use advice on all the intricate little details that I mentioned before. I'm one of those people who is actually able to focus on something more intently the more I analyze it.

So I do want technical advice, and I do want to know what kinds of mistakes to avoid. If you're concerned that I won't be able to file this appropriately, don't worry about it. Like I said, I'll take all the feedback I can get.

[athon]

Well, if it's practical details you're after, the most important one is to make contacts. Lots of them. Enter competitions, find small magazines, newsletters etc., join writing groups, and get your name heard. Be a pest and send your stuff to whoever will pay attention to it. Forget the big projects and focus on small articles, microfiction and short stories. Networking is essential for any artist.

Athon

[Chaos]

You might find help in this place: www.fmwriters.com (http://www.fmwriters.com)

It might even be that you encounter someone from this forum who also posts there... ;)

[ZouPrime]

SK: Sorry if my previous post sounded grumpy, it was late and habs had just lost their playoff so... Anyway... really check out King's "On writing", it's not a bible on how to become a writer or anything like that, but reading you I have a feeling you'll enjoy it.

[CFLarsen]

Screw writing classes. They only teach you how to write like everyone else: Which means your writing becomes bland and uninteresting. People want to read something they haven't read before.

Unless you want to become the next Barbara Cartland... :)

[Sottisier]

Like athon says, networking is crucial. Investigate the small-press scene, submit some short stories to likely-looking 'zines; good editors will usually give you some feedback on unsuccessful submissions. I used to run a (very) small-press SF/fantasy 'zine and I still feel a little proud that one of my regular authors went on to become a successful author in the YA field (PM me for details if you want to know more, kind of embarrassed to name names in public :) ).

[gumboot]

Write, write, write and write.

That's the only advice I can give.

There's no point trying to lock down the plot and character of your story before you've written it because it will change as you go, especially over the course of a novel. For me, second draft is the first time I really write the story.

[Finnegan]

Rewrite, and then think for a while before rewriting again. Style has become imperative in literature, and publishers will look for cliched prose. PG Wodehouse used to stick pages around his room, and move them up the wall with every rewrite, while it took Nabakov "a month of work" to write a single sentence.


Be sure to pursue an agent before approaching a publisher. Unsolicited manuscripts, sadly, are not considered anymore.


Good luck!

[Silentknight]

To everyone who responded, thanks for the advice. I guess the most important thing I can take out of this right now is that I should focus on getting the actual writing down. After all, there's no point in obsessing over minute details or stressing out over finding a publisher if there's nothing written yet. I should probably spend less time on here then, since while it does count as reading time on topics that are relevant to what I'm writing about, JREF is fairly time consuming regardless.

Also, I realized I probably shouldn't worry too much about getting my writing recognized. The sad truth I've come to realize is that any idiot can get a book published on anything. After all, a relative of mine got two books published on Anthroposophy, focusing on the afterlife and reincarnation beliefs (they were really really stupid). My father got a technical journal published before I was even born, but I don't know the details. I have some ideas of where to start looking if I want to make connections, but there's a time for that, and it's not something I need distracting me right now.


By the way though, I know this might just sound like I'm trying to plug my own writing (or my half of it at any rate) and it's probably not the best example, but what do you think of our MSTing of Loose Change?

[NobbyNobbs]

I, too, have called myself an "aspiring writer", although perhaps "perspiring writer" would be more accurate.

The best piece of advice (which I have yet to follow, but I will, I will) is, I think, from Ray Bradbury. He said something along the lines of, "Write something every single day for a year. Then look at what you've written and you'll find some good stuff. Because nobody, but nobody, can write 365 pieces of crap in a row."

[athon]

I remembered one more bit of advice I've found useful over the past years - learn cliche. I disagree with what Claus says above about writing classes; they are damn useful. Only an idiot would ignore them. The biggest lessons you can take away from them is knowing what styles are out there and what formulae have been found to work.

People avoid cliches because they are overused, however cliches are often useful. Knowing cliche phrases, plots, twists and characters will help you create expectations in the reader. They make great shortcuts when you can't afford devoting a wordcount to explaining something, and they are a fantastic way of creating a headspace for your reader where you can manipulate their anticipations. For example, why create a culture of underground mining humanoids when the word 'dwarf' covers it all? Sure it's a cliche, but it does the job. It's even better when your dwarf expresses a desire to sail across the ocean at some point. The cliche is challenged without you needing to say much at all.

Writing classes will give you a chance to interact with others and learn what these expectations are. They'll also mean the difference between you being the cliche's dom or sub ;).

Athon

[CFLarsen]

I remembered one more bit of advice I've found useful over the past years - learn cliche. I disagree with what Claus says above about writing classes; they are damn useful. Only an idiot would ignore them. The biggest lessons you can take away from them is knowing what styles are out there and what formulae have been found to work.

Hence my reference to Cartland. If you want to write books that have been written before many, many times, go right ahead. Take all the writing classes you want. Use every cliche in the book. Use other people's "formulae".

But think about which books really have made an impact. They didn't follow formulae, they broke new ground.

Also, consider your competition. Why would a publisher choose your book over the hundreds he receives daily, if you write like them?

Sure, great books are not always gobbled up by publishers right away. But what is your goal? If you want to be published for the sake of being published, write like a hack and take your chances. If you want to reach people with what you say, you got to put in a lot more than that.

Originality on every level. Not just what you write, but also how you write. Don't join the swill of writers who write the exact same way because that's how they were told they should write.

People avoid cliches because they are overused, however cliches are often useful. Knowing cliche phrases, plots, twists and characters will help you create expectations in the reader. They make great shortcuts when you can't afford devoting a wordcount to explaining something, and they are a fantastic way of creating a headspace for your reader where you can manipulate their anticipations. For example, why create a culture of underground mining humanoids when the word 'dwarf' covers it all? Sure it's a cliche, but it does the job. It's even better when your dwarf expresses a desire to sail across the ocean at some point. The cliche is challenged without you needing to say much at all.

Really?

Did Tolkien just write "dwarf"? No, he created their whole world, filled with poetry, philosophy, history and even language.

Did Rowland just write "wizard"? No, she created a whole world full of wizards, not merely with their own field of knowledge, and not merely wizards dogmatically on either the Good Side or the Dark Side.

If you want to write books that people enjoy, you have to go that extra mile, to capture your readers.

Writing classes will give you a chance to interact with others and learn what these expectations are. They'll also mean the difference between you being the cliche's dom or sub ;).

I'll give you this much: Writing classes are only good for one thing: Learning how not to write.

[athon]

Hence my reference to Cartland. If you want to write books that have been written before many, many times, go right ahead. Take all the writing classes you want. Use every cliche in the book. Use other people's "formulae".

Um, actually, yeah. That's how writing fiction works. You have to know your market and know it well. Using formulae well is what sells a book.

Then again, it depends on what I mean by 'sells', doesn't it. :)

But think about which books really have made an impact. They didn't follow formulae, they broke new ground.

Really? While I have no doubt we could both come up with examples of books which did well in spite of not following a formula and using cliche, I can also come up with books which sold well which barely strayed from the formula.

So, how do you suppose you might be able to back up your claim there, sunshine? Or are you going to whip out the classic 'it's just my opinion' line and hide in it?

Also, consider your competition. Why would a publisher choose your book over the hundreds he receives daily, if you write like them?

Because it uses the formula well, that's why. Rarely does a publisher ever put forward a cold manuscript. They are typically solicited in some way. Even if it is cold, they tend to stick with what they know sells.

Sure, great books are not always gobbled up by publishers right away. But what is your goal? If you want to be published for the sake of being published, write like a hack and take your chances. If you want to reach people with what you say, you got to put in a lot more than that.

It depends. A good writer can use formula and cliche well to say what they want. A poor writer will arrogantly believe they are onto a winner with a startling new idea.

Originality on every level. Not just what you write, but also how you write. Don't join the swill of writers who write the exact same way because that's how they were told they should write.

Meanwhile, others are getting published while you're congratulating yourself on your own unique, clever style.

Did Tolkien just write "dwarf"? No, he created their whole world, filled with poetry, philosophy, history and even language.

Haha. You're a fool, Claus. Tolkien's work was based on his literature studies on Saxon and Nordic mythology. The appeal was in his borrowing of the old Saxon epic formula and using it well. Even then, its appeal was hardly overnight. To suggest Tolkien used no formula or cliche is about as wrong as it comes.

Did Rowland just write "wizard"? No, she created a whole world full of wizards, not merely with their own field of knowledge, and not merely wizards dogmatically on either the Good Side or the Dark Side.

Wow. Just...wow. Are you suggesting that Rowland didn't rely on a formula and cliche to write Harry Potter? Seriously?

You just can't stay away from a fight, can you? Even if you know nothing about a field, you have to pretend.

If you want to write books that people enjoy, you have to go that extra mile, to capture your readers.

Sure, you have to have something unique in there. But without knowing how to manipulate and apply a formula, or use cliche, all the unique plot, characters and themes in the world won't help you.

I don't suppose you're speaking from any writing experience at all, now are you Claus? ;)

I'll give you this much: Writing classes are only good for one thing: Learning how not to write.

How many writing classes have you attended, Claus?

Athon

[timhau]

But think about which books really have made an impact. They didn't follow formulae, they broke new ground.

Yeah. And for every ground-breaking book that made an impact, there are a couple of thousand bitter unpublished writers who have a back-breaking number of rejection slips for their ground-breaking manuscripts.

And as far as writing classes go, no, they don't teach you to write like everyone else. What they often try to teach you is to write like everyone else who got published. That may not be where you want to end up when you retire, but it is a good starting point.

[CFLarsen]

Um, actually, yeah. That's how writing fiction works. You have to know your market and know it well. Using formulae well is what sells a book.

If you want to feed the world with more Cartland Swill, sure. Is that really what the world needs? Is that really what you want?

Then again, it depends on what I mean by 'sells', doesn't it. :)

Take your petty personal attacks elsewhere.

Really? While I have no doubt we could both come up with examples of books which did well in spite of not following a formula and using cliche, I can also come up with books which sold well which barely strayed from the formula.

So, how do you suppose you might be able to back up your claim there, sunshine? Or are you going to whip out the classic 'it's just my opinion' line and hide in it?

We can't even disagree on how to write, without you resorting to snide remarks.

Phooey.

Because it uses the formula well, that's why. Rarely does a publisher ever put forward a cold manuscript. They are typically solicited in some way. Even if it is cold, they tend to stick with what they know sells.

Yes, they do. And that's why we have an ocean of poorly written books out there, gobbled up by an uncritical audience. Because they don't know any better.

It depends. A good writer can use formula and cliche well to say what they want. A poor writer will arrogantly believe they are onto a winner with a startling new idea.

Quite possibly. The question is, how do you, or the readers, tell the difference, if all they get is swill?

Meanwhile, others are getting published while you're congratulating yourself on your own unique, clever style.

Yes, they are. Like I said, if being published is your goal, write swill and take your chances.

Haha. You're a fool, Claus. Tolkien's work was based on his literature studies on Saxon and Nordic mythology. The appeal was in his borrowing of the old Saxon epic formula and using it well. Even then, its appeal was hardly overnight. To suggest Tolkien used no formula or cliche is about as wrong as it comes.

Who is the fool here? Tolkien didn't write swill from a formula, he took something and made it entirely new. He did not just write "dwarf" and stop there.

And what if it didn't catch on immediatedly? Is great literature always accepted right away? Of course it isn't.

Wow. Just...wow. Are you suggesting that Rowland didn't rely on a formula and cliche to write Harry Potter? Seriously?

You just can't stay away from a fight, can you? Even if you know nothing about a field, you have to pretend.

The only one I see desiring a fight here is you. I have not attacked you in any way, shape or form. Focus on the argument, not the arguer.

Sure, you have to have something unique in there. But without knowing how to manipulate and apply a formula, or use cliche, all the unique plot, characters and themes in the world won't help you.

I don't suppose you're speaking from any writing experience at all, now are you Claus? ;)

Yes, I am. You know that. And then, there's a lot you don't - but will.

How many writing classes have you attended, Claus?

I have attended some. I also talk to a number of authors, both in Denmark and abroad, and I have learned a great deal from them. What separates them - or, rather, their work - is that they do not write from a formula. They write what they know, from the heart, without focusing on formulae.

Yeah. And for every ground-breaking book that made an impact, there are a couple of thousand bitter unpublished writers who have a back-breaking number of rejection slips for their ground-breaking manuscripts.

And as far as writing classes go, no, they don't teach you to write like everyone else. What they often try to teach you is to write like everyone else who got published. That may not be where you want to end up when you retire, but it is a good starting point.

Again, if being published is your goal, go right ahead.

[timhau]

Again, if being published is your goal, go right ahead.

I can't understand how not being published could be any aspiring writer's goal. They can (and should) have goals above and beyond that, but being published should be the first -- if you don't reach that one, the others matter little. Unless you really want to be Kafka v.2, and have someone find your ground-breaking works from your desk drawer after you're dead and, against your expressed wishes, make you famous posthumously.

[quarky]

Oddly enough, I've been published many times... mostly non-fiction.
I got started by writing to every magazine I could get my hands on; focusing on small pieces that were specificly for reader participation. My first score was for True Magazine.
They had a small column called "Let me tell you about my pet". The magazine was awful. I made up some nonsense about a pet I never had. They sent me a check for $50 and I was on cloud nine. Suddenly, it all seemed possible, even though I felt somewhat whoreish.

I kept doing similar crap,and got a bag of rejection slips; lots of small checks, and eventually, a book contract.

This was more than 3 decades ago, and I'm not sure it would have worked today. Its so much more competitive now. You'd have to be crazy to try.

If you're a writer, you will write. In some sense, being published shouldn't be the main goal. Constant rejection can be depressing; whereas simply writing because you must isn't so bad.

[aggle-rithm]

Read lots of Dan Brown. Then write something totally different from that.

[athon]

If you want to feed the world with more Cartland Swill, sure. Is that really what the world needs? Is that really what you want?

So knowing how to use a formula effectively is now 'swill'? Knowing what a cliche is and how to use it effectively is always associated with pulp fiction trash? Right. Well, I guess this does come down to opinion. But seeing as what I know about writing and writers totally contradicts this, I can only assume once again you're making this up as you go along.

We can't even disagree on how to write, without you resorting to snide remarks.

Yeah, yeah, have a whinge Claus. Mind you, you once again didn't respond to the point I made.

You said "But think about which books really have made an impact. They didn't follow formulae, they broke new ground."

You claim books which really have made an impact did not follow formulae. Of course, this is another one of your silly, nonsense comments. I can only ask you to explain what you mean by 'impact', and how one can tell if it 'breaks new ground', and you'll spend ten pages avoiding it. So we'll safely tuck that comment away now and assume you're speaking through your butt.

Yes, they do. And that's why we have an ocean of poorly written books out there, gobbled up by an uncritical audience. Because they don't know any better.

Ok, again we can happily see this as your subjective opinion that anything written to a formula is crap. Fair enough. Mind you, you've already suggested Tolkien broke new ground and yet had no formula, which is nonsense. His formula was established in old European poetry such as the Eddas, which is borrowed quite effectively. And as I said, it took some time to establish itself as a genre on account of it being thought of initially as confusing and unrelated to what most people understood. So your opinion has all the weight of a soggy tissue.

Today, gothic fiction such as Austen's works are considered to be marvellous examples of literature by many, however they are as formulaic and cliche as they come. Hence quite a few literary critics would disagree that formula automatically makes something 'drivel'. Different people find different values in different forms of literature. To assume your opinion is worthy enough to tell somebody to 'not take writing classes' and avoid formula and cliches is presuming your view of literature carries weight beyond your anally retentive snobbishness. Which, sadly, it doesn't.

Quite possibly. The question is, how do you, or the readers, tell the difference, if all they get is swill?

Obviously they write and ask you to tell them, since you've got the answers. :rolleyes:

Yes, they are. Like I said, if being published is your goal, write swill and take your chances.

Again, you astound me. Please, tell me, is there a more effective way of reaching a mass audience than being published? Sure, one could run with a vanity press (which tends to only reach a large number of people if a large number of people like it enough to promote it or buy it), or go on the internet (e-books don't sell in the numbers print does).

So, you seem to be saying 'write in a way which people won't want to read it'. Formulae is useful as it forms a bridge between your work and the reader. It uses expectation as a literary tool, without which the reader is alienated and tends to avoid reading on. I know of no decent novel which does not use an established formula, even if they manipulate it to convey what they want to say.

Who is the fool here? Tolkien didn't write swill from a formula, he took something and made it entirely new. He did not just write "dwarf" and stop there.

WTF? Tolkien used a formula, yes or no? I never said 'use formula to write swill'. I said to understand formula so you can manipulate it and use it effectively. Tolkien used a formula. He used a cliche - the proud and noble elves, the subterranean and hard working dwarves, the wise but deadly dragons etc. He combined various cliches of war and formulae from different sources wonderfully to convey his sentiments on the Great War and comment on how he felt about the chaos of battle and the rise of an evil threat.

Tolkien did not create something new from a vacuum, I'm afraid.

Yes, I am. You know that. And then, there's a lot you don't - but will.

Actually, no, this is something new. You write fiction? Seriously? And what the hell does the cryptic 'you will' mean?

I have attended some. I also talk to a number of authors, both in Denmark and abroad, and I have learned a great deal from them. What separates them - or, rather, their work - is that they do not write from a formula. They write what they know, from the heart, without focusing on formulae.

Well, again, what you've experienced and what I've experienced is poles apart. I've long worked with fiction writers from the UK, US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. I've published in books on how to write fiction, attended and presented at workshops and classes. I can't say you're lying, but I can say going on my experience you're speaking nonsense.

Again, if being published is your goal, go right ahead.

This has to be one of the most ridiculous statements on writing I've ever heard.

Athon

[CFLarsen]

I can't understand how not being published could be any aspiring writer's goal. They can (and should) have goals above and beyond that, but being published should be the first -- if you don't reach that one, the others matter little. Unless you really want to be Kafka v.2, and have someone find your ground-breaking works from your desk drawer after you're dead and, against your expressed wishes, make you famous posthumously.

I'm not talking about fame, in this life or the next. I'm talking about writing because you have something on your mind, something you wish to share with others, that might touch them, make them see things differently, make them think, feel, sense.

You don't have to be alive to do that.

Oddly enough, I've been published many times... mostly non-fiction.
I got started by writing to every magazine I could get my hands on; focusing on small pieces that were specificly for reader participation. My first score was for True Magazine.
They had a small column called "Let me tell you about my pet". The magazine was awful. I made up some nonsense about a pet I never had. They sent me a check for $50 and I was on cloud nine. Suddenly, it all seemed possible, even though I felt somewhat whoreish.

I kept doing similar crap,and got a bag of rejection slips; lots of small checks, and eventually, a book contract.

This was more than 3 decades ago, and I'm not sure it would have worked today. Its so much more competitive now. You'd have to be crazy to try.

If you're a writer, you will write. In some sense, being published shouldn't be the main goal. Constant rejection can be depressing; whereas simply writing because you must isn't so bad.

I quite agree. Take one of the most sold authors, Stephen King. He doesn't write because of the money, he never has. Sure, those cheques came in handy in the early days, but he is among those writers who writes because not writing is suicide. Literally suicide. Those who write because they have to write are also those who put their life blood into their writing. You can always tell that kind of writer from those who merely punch out a lot of words, just for the heck of it.

Read lots of Dan Brown. Then write something totally different from that.

Yep. While the da Vinci Code was a good beach novel, it isn't great literature. It certainly isn't great literature because it sells millions.

So knowing how to use a formula effectively is now 'swill'? Knowing what a cliche is and how to use it effectively is always associated with pulp fiction trash? Right. Well, I guess this does come down to opinion. But seeing as what I know about writing and writers totally contradicts this, I can only assume once again you're making this up as you go along.

That's very tellying, Athon. Even though you acknowledge it comes down to opinion, I have to lie because I have a different opinion than you.

Very telling. You simply can't stand to be contradicted. If people do that, they have to make it up as they go along.

Yeah, yeah, have a whinge Claus. Mind you, you once again didn't respond to the point I made.

You said "But think about which books really have made an impact. They didn't follow formulae, they broke new ground."

You claim books which really have made an impact did not follow formulae. Of course, this is another one of your silly, nonsense comments. I can only ask you to explain what you mean by 'impact', and how one can tell if it 'breaks new ground', and you'll spend ten pages avoiding it. So we'll safely tuck that comment away now and assume you're speaking through your butt.

Also, very telling. Instead of debating the pros and cons of following formulae, you simply disregard what I think, with yet another personal attack.

Try to accept that your opinion is not the only valid one. And stop your incessant personal attacks. They only make you seem like a spiteful character out of a cheap romance novel.

Ok, again we can happily see this as your subjective opinion that anything written to a formula is crap. Fair enough. Mind you, you've already suggested Tolkien broke new ground and yet had no formula, which is nonsense.

No, I didn't. I said that he took old ideas and added new twists, gave it new meaning - something that spoke to his readers.

His formula was established in old European poetry such as the Eddas, which is borrowed quite effectively. And as I said, it took some time to establish itself as a genre on account of it being thought of initially as confusing and unrelated to what most people understood. So your opinion has all the weight of a soggy tissue.

Oh, dear. Whatever gave you the idea that I have argued that every author must and should re-invent literature as a genre, with each book they write? You read much too much into what I say.

Today, gothic fiction such as Austen's works are considered to be marvellous examples of literature by many, however they are as formulaic and cliche as they come. Hence quite a few literary critics would disagree that formula automatically makes something 'drivel'. Different people find different values in different forms of literature. To assume your opinion is worthy enough to tell somebody to 'not take writing classes' and avoid formula and cliches is presuming your view of literature carries weight beyond your anally retentive snobbishness. Which, sadly, it doesn't.

I'm surprised you bring up Jane Austen, because she, if any, is counterpoint to what you argue. In her own times, she didn't reach a wider audience, and was seen positively only by a small elite:

During her lifetime, Austen's works brought her little fame and only a few positive reviews. Through the mid-nineteenth century, her novels were admired only by a literary elite. However, the publication of her nephew's A Memoir of the Life of Jane Austen, in 1870, introduced her life and works to a wider public. By the 1940s, Austen was firmly ensconced in academia as a "great English writer", and the second half of the twentieth century saw a proliferation of Austen scholarship that explored many aspects of her novels: artistic, ideological, and historical. Currently, Austen's works are among the most studied and debated oeuvres in the field of academic literary criticism.[citation needed] In popular culture, a Janeite fan culture has developed, centred on Austen's life, her works, and the various film and television adaptations of them.
Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Austen)

If Jane Austen wrote cliche, why do her novels stand out among those of her contemporaries? Why didn't she achieve fame in her own time?

Obviously they write and ask you to tell them, since you've got the answers. :rolleyes:

Why is it that you got opinions, while I must have the answers?

Stop this cheap tactic. It's a cliche.

Again, you astound me. Please, tell me, is there a more effective way of reaching a mass audience than being published? Sure, one could run with a vanity press (which tends to only reach a large number of people if a large number of people like it enough to promote it or buy it), or go on the internet (e-books don't sell in the numbers print does).

You truly are a child of your times. You immediatedly see "great literature" as being equivalent to "reach a mass audience". Your own example, Jane Austen, clearly wasn't.

So, you seem to be saying 'write in a way which people won't want to read it'.

No, I don't. I am saying "write in a way which gives people something new, something they haven't seen before, something that makes them think".

Now that you know you are wrong, will that in any way change the way you think of what I have said?

Formulae is useful as it forms a bridge between your work and the reader. It uses expectation as a literary tool, without which the reader is alienated and tends to avoid reading on. I know of no decent novel which does not use an established formula, even if they manipulate it to convey what they want to say.

That's precisely my point, dear Athon: When writing great literature, formulae aren't used to capture the audience (except in Cartland World). They are used to surprise the audience: Whenever the audience expects something to happen, the author changes the expected into something unexpected.

WTF? Tolkien used a formula, yes or no? I never said 'use formula to write swill'. I said to understand formula so you can manipulate it and use it effectively. Tolkien used a formula. He used a cliche - the proud and noble elves, the subterranean and hard working dwarves, the wise but deadly dragons etc. He combined various cliches of war and formulae from different sources wonderfully to convey his sentiments on the Great War and comment on how he felt about the chaos of battle and the rise of an evil threat.

I am referring to what you said earlier:

For example, why create a culture of underground mining humanoids when the word 'dwarf' covers it all?

Tolkien didn't just write "dwarf" and let it be at that.

Tolkien did not create something new from a vacuum, I'm afraid.

Nobody said otherwise.

Actually, no, this is something new. You write fiction? Seriously?

I was talking about you knowing that I have writing experience.

And what the hell does the cryptic 'you will' mean?

You will see.

Well, again, what you've experienced and what I've experienced is poles apart. I've long worked with fiction writers from the UK, US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. I've published in books on how to write fiction, attended and presented at workshops and classes. I can't say you're lying, but I can say going on my experience you're speaking nonsense.

Actually, you did say I was lying. But, whatever.

This has to be one of the most ridiculous statements on writing I've ever heard.

When taken out of its context, it can seem that way. But what is your goal, as a writer? To get published, for the sake of being published?

Ask your writing buddies that. See if they are writers or whores.

[Foolmewunz]

Oh, Kryst!

There are writing classes that focus on the practical/commercial side, and then there are writing classes that challenge you to learn to be a writer. Why lump them all together? Saul Bellow taught writing at The New School! University of Iowa? Those aren't How to Get Your Crap Published courses!

[Phil]

Well, I haven't read all the exchanges between Claus and Athon. But I think I've been on this forum long enough to know how they're getting on anyway. I suspect Athon has given some good advice about writing and Claus is being as contrary as ever. Am I close?

At any rate, I will just add to what others have said. Do take classes, if you can. Do read as much as you can. Learn everything you possibly can about writing. And write.

Write every day. Write something; anything. Write everything that crosses your mind, if you can. Write down every peculiar thought you have, if it's not inconvenient to do so. Play with the words. Play with words in other situations, whether on a forum or while chatting with your buds. Listen to music and read poetry. Notice how the singer or poet uses the language. Look for the things that inspire you. This is going to be how you find your voice. And developing a unique voice is a big step in getting noticed.

And don't worry about your approach to your novel. Novels are difficult things to write, and everyone goes about it differently. I've written several, and each one came to life in a different manner than the others. If you need everything for this particular project mapped out before you start, then do it that way. If you feel like you want to build and mold as you go, do it that way. Just remember, it's a creative piece, so if one method of writing isn't working, you have the option to change. Find the method you are most comfortable with, the method that brings out the best for that project, and go with it.

Get into a writer's group, if you don't already belong to one. Have other people read your stuff and critique it, thoroughly. To me, this step is the most valuable. As writers, we tend to have rose-colored glasses on for our own writing. It often takes other talented people to point out flaws in our work that we would not otherwise see. And I've never come away from a good critique of my work feeling the material wasn't better for it.

As for getting published, heed well the stories of head-high piles of rejection slips. It's going to happen. You're going to be rejected many many times. It's a rite of passage among writers. The good news is, you'll develop a thick skin, and after a while it won't bother you at all.

Secure representation, if you can. Not easy to do, I know, but the Internet is a fabulous tool. It's also a fabulous medium for self-publishing. If you can't find an agent or sell a book to a publishing house, there are several sites on the web where you can self-publish, and the books are printed on an on-demand basis. You won't have any money behind you for marketing and mass print runs, but with a little elbow grease, you can get your work into circulation.

And don't forget to recognize me in the Acknowledgments section.

[Foolmewunz]

Well, I haven't read all the exchanges between Claus and Athon. But I think...... <snip>

(lotsa good stuff)



Yeah, that's what I meant to say.

[fuelair]

Screw writing classes. They only teach you how to write like everyone else: Which means your writing becomes bland and uninteresting. People want to read something they haven't read before.

Unless you want to become the next Barbara Cartland... :)Joan Collins, 99% of the authors of vampire romance novels (a thing for which Anne Rice may not be forgiven - though she didn't start the genre, just led the way to it), etc.:):jaw-dropp

[CFLarsen]

Joan Collins, 99% of the authors of vampire romance novels (a thing for which Anne Rice may not be forgiven - though she didn't start the genre, just led the way to it), etc.:):jaw-dropp

Ayup. Getting published isn't a goal unto itself.

[Ixion]

Joan Collins, 99% of the authors of vampire romance novels (a thing for which Anne Rice may not be forgiven - though she didn't start the genre, just led the way to it), etc.:):jaw-dropp

Anne Rice has decided she will never write another book about vampires or witches or any of that woo, and has decided instead to focus on writing about Christianity, declaring herself a born-again Catholic. Maybe she is just bitter that her birth name was Howard instead of Anne.

[Piscivore]

Ayup. Getting published isn't a goal unto itself.

You mean to say not all authors intend to sell their work?

[slingblade]

Be sure to pursue an agent before approaching a publisher. Unsolicited manuscripts, sadly, are not considered anymore.

No, but with the improvements in desktop publishing, the vanity press has changed from something only the pathetic and desperate would do, to a viable alternative and a vehicle for at least getting your name out there. It's something to consider, anyway.


Good luck!

Ditto! :D

[Gurdur]

Sounds like a good idea to me. Just do it, and stop worrying in advance -- fretting over things is only destructive. Full speed ahead and damn the torpedos!

Also: stroll down to your local library, and see if they can arrange an "inter-library loan" so you can read the following books without cost:

About Writing: Seven Essays, Four Letters, And Five Interviews, by Samuel R. Delany

The Writer's Handbook (Writer's Handbooks (MacMillan)), by Barry Turner

Writers' And Artists' Yearbook 2005, by Maeve Binchy

[AStone]

I'll give you this much: Writing classes are only good for one thing: Learning how not to write.


Agreed.

[Piscivore]

I'll give you this much: Writing classes are only good for one thing: Learning how not to write.

In the same respect that medical school is only good for learning how not to kill someone.

[Silentknight]

Guys, please don't start a flamewar here. It's possible to disagree without mounting personal attacks, and I'd much rather judge a person's advice on its own merit, not on how aggressively it is presented.
I remembered one more bit of advice I've found useful over the past years - learn cliche. I disagree with what Claus says above about writing classes; they are damn useful. Only an idiot would ignore them. The biggest lessons you can take away from them is knowing what styles are out there and what formulae have been found to work.

People avoid cliches because they are overused, however cliches are often useful. Knowing cliche phrases, plots, twists and characters will help you create expectations in the reader. They make great shortcuts when you can't afford devoting a wordcount to explaining something, and they are a fantastic way of creating a headspace for your reader where you can manipulate their anticipations. For example, why create a culture of underground mining humanoids when the word 'dwarf' covers it all? Sure it's a cliche, but it does the job. It's even better when your dwarf expresses a desire to sail across the ocean at some point. The cliche is challenged without you needing to say much at all.

Writing classes will give you a chance to interact with others and learn what these expectations are. They'll also mean the difference between you being the cliche's dom or sub ;).

Athon
Thanks, that's kind of what I had in mind when I asked about avoiding cliches. Ironically enough though, I may end up having to look for writing courses that focus on the commercial side of things, rather than the technical, since that's the area of knowledge in which I'm lacking.

Read lots of Dan Brown. Then write something totally different from that.
Heh, beat you to it. I've read all of his books so far, I've heard the criticisms of his writing, and I've formed my own conclusions about them. I agree with his overall message, but I don't really like the way he presented his points of view, especially the part where the characters sit down and present a lecture on pseudo-history for up to an hour, all the while the police and a psycho killer are chasing them. :rolleyes:

Sounds like a good idea to me. Just do it, and stop worrying in advance -- fretting over things is only destructive. Full speed ahead and damn the torpedos!

Also: stroll down to your local library, and see if they can arrange an "inter-library loan" so you can read the following books without cost:

About Writing: Seven Essays, Four Letters, And Five Interviews, by Samuel R. Delany

The Writer's Handbook (Writer's Handbooks (MacMillan)), by Barry Turner

Writers' And Artists' Yearbook 2005, by Maeve Binchy
My library system already has a cooperative loan system, and I can request a book from anywhere in the county. I'll keep those titles in mind.

[Silentknight]

At any rate, I will just add to what others have said. Do take classes, if you can. Do read as much as you can. Learn everything you possibly can about writing. And write.

Write every day. Write something; anything. Write everything that crosses your mind, if you can. Write down every peculiar thought you have, if it's not inconvenient to do so. Play with the words. Play with words in other situations, whether on a forum or while chatting with your buds. Listen to music and read poetry. Notice how the singer or poet uses the language. Look for the things that inspire you. This is going to be how you find your voice. And developing a unique voice is a big step in getting noticed.
Will do. I try to look for inspiration in everything, even in things that are very badly written, because I find bad movies / books a great source of humor. I'm still up in the air over what specific courses to take at the moment though.
And don't worry about your approach to your novel. Novels are difficult things to write, and everyone goes about it differently. I've written several, and each one came to life in a different manner than the others. If you need everything for this particular project mapped out before you start, then do it that way. If you feel like you want to build and mold as you go, do it that way. Just remember, it's a creative piece, so if one method of writing isn't working, you have the option to change. Find the method you are most comfortable with, the method that brings out the best for that project, and go with it.
I know. I have come up with methods that work for me, but I'm also trying to remain flexible. I usually prefer a heavy outlining phase, which is the stage I'm at currently, before I do my first draft.
Get into a writer's group, if you don't already belong to one. Have other people read your stuff and critique it, thoroughly. To me, this step is the most valuable. As writers, we tend to have rose-colored glasses on for our own writing. It often takes other talented people to point out flaws in our work that we would not otherwise see. And I've never come away from a good critique of my work feeling the material wasn't better for it.
I already have people who will read my stuff and critique it, though I've found I'm actually my own worst critic. This has lead me to kill several of my own ideas in the past, not that they were all good mind you. But having others proofread for me is something I definitely intend to do.
As for getting published, heed well the stories of head-high piles of rejection slips. It's going to happen. You're going to be rejected many many times. It's a rite of passage among writers. The good news is, you'll develop a thick skin, and after a while it won't bother you at all.
I expected as much. My material is probably going to be seen as controversial regardless, and I suppose being rejected is better than having nothing or never trying in the first place.
Secure representation, if you can. Not easy to do, I know, but the Internet is a fabulous tool. It's also a fabulous medium for self-publishing. If you can't find an agent or sell a book to a publishing house, there are several sites on the web where you can self-publish, and the books are printed on an on-demand basis. You won't have any money behind you for marketing and mass print runs, but with a little elbow grease, you can get your work into circulation.

And don't forget to recognize me in the Acknowledgments section.
Thanks.

[Chaos]

Ayup. Getting published isn't a goal unto itself.

It helps pay the bills, though - not an unimportant aspect when one is considering a writing life.

[fuelair]

Agreed.

Though the Clarion (SF) writers workshops certainly turned out some good writing and some good writers!!:)

[Gurdur]

It helps pay the bills, though - not an unimportant aspect when one is considering a writing life.

No, it doesn't -- not at all usually, at any rate.

Returns on books being published are usually very small, comparatively speaking, and most authors usually find that if all work is reckoned on an hourly basis, then they could have made more money working at a badly-paid job at 7/11.

I once heard Colin Smythe, a man very well versed in publishing, and now Terry Pratchett's agent, say that anyone who wants to go in for writing for the money shouldn't, and will not be a successful writer either. He was of the opinion that only writers who just want to write, and not for any real reward, are successful.

The only ways you will really make money from writing are:

1) get a literary grant from your government to help you write a book
2) write a best-seller, and make your publisher believe you might have a second book in you.

Most people never manage (2), and pretty all much writers who go into it for the theoretical money simply give up at some point and stop writing.

[quarky]

No, it doesn't -- not at all usually, at any rate.

Returns on books being published are usually very small, comparatively speaking, and most authors usually find that if all work is reckoned on an hourly basis, then they could have made more money working at a badly-paid job at 7/11.

I once heard Colin Smythe, a man very well versed in publishing, and now Terry Pratchett's agent, say that anyone who wants to go in for writing for the money shouldn't, and will not be a successful writer either. He was of the opinion that only writers who just want to write, and not for any real reward, are successful.

The only ways you will really make money from writing are:

1) get a literary grant from your government to help you write a book
2) write a best-seller, and make your publisher believe you might have a second book in you.

Most people never manage (2), and pretty all much writers who go into it for the theoretical money simply give up at some point and stop writing.



Solid point there, as per writing's perks. The average salary of a professional writer sucks. Most probably have "day-jobs". Probably analogous to making it in the music world. Sure, occasionly some half-ass talent makes zillions...but the world would be a better place if they hadn't tried so hard.

Idea driven art is my favorite; commercial driven art is my least favorite.
So, for me, writing needs to be powered by a feeling that you have something worth expressing.
(Although, in my own case, I was looking for a way to make some money without having to drive to the sawmill.)

I will send you 1000 dollars if you give up your desire to be a writer, right now. Don't be a chump; take the money.

(PM me for details)

[quarky]

No, it doesn't -- not at all usually, at any rate.

Returns on books being published are usually very small, comparatively speaking, and most authors usually find that if all work is reckoned on an hourly basis, then they could have made more money working at a badly-paid job at 7/11.

I once heard Colin Smythe, a man very well versed in publishing, and now Terry Pratchett's agent, say that anyone who wants to go in for writing for the money shouldn't, and will not be a successful writer either. He was of the opinion that only writers who just want to write, and not for any real reward, are successful.

The only ways you will really make money from writing are:

1) get a literary grant from your government to help you write a book
2) write a best-seller, and make your publisher believe you might have a second book in you.

Most people never manage (2), and pretty all much writers who go into it for the theoretical money simply give up at some point and stop writing.



Solid point there, as per writing's perks. The average salary of a professional writer sucks. Most probably have "day-jobs". Probably analogous to making it in the music world. Sure, occasionly some half-ass talent makes zillions...but the world would be a better place if they hadn't tried so hard.

Idea driven art is my favorite; commercial driven art is my least favorite.
So, for me, writing needs to be powered by a feeling that you have something worth expressing.
(Although, in my own case, I was looking for a way to make some money without having to drive to the sawmill.)

I will send you 1000 dollars if you give up your desire to be a writer, right now. Don't be a chump; take the money.

(PM me for details)

[NobbyNobbs]

No, it doesn't -- not at all usually, at any rate.

Returns on books being published are usually very small, comparatively speaking, and most authors usually find that if all work is reckoned on an hourly basis, then they could have made more money working at a badly-paid job at 7/11.

I once heard Colin Smythe, a man very well versed in publishing, and now Terry Pratchett's agent, say that anyone who wants to go in for writing for the money shouldn't, and will not be a successful writer either. He was of the opinion that only writers who just want to write, and not for any real reward, are successful.
.

If that's the case, I don't know where I stand. See, I want to write. I want to get published. But I don't care whether I make money from it. A $50 check would be fine.

The reason I want to write is that I want to be able to walk into Barnes & Noble someday, look at the shelf, and see my name on it. Then I can say, "See that? I did that."

I don't care if one single copy sells. I just want to see my name on the shelf.

So, according to the above definition, do I have what it takes to be a successful writer?

[quarky]

yes.

you have already accomplished your goal.

(Now copy your post on a piece of paper; stick it into a shelf at Barne's and Noble; go in later and find it. If you really need the 50 bucks for validity, pull a sexual favor on the streets, on your way to the bookstore.)

[athon]

No, it doesn't -- not at all usually, at any rate.

Returns on books being published are usually very small, comparatively speaking, and most authors usually find that if all work is reckoned on an hourly basis, then they could have made more money working at a badly-paid job at 7/11.

I once heard Colin Smythe, a man very well versed in publishing, and now Terry Pratchett's agent, say that anyone who wants to go in for writing for the money shouldn't, and will not be a successful writer either. He was of the opinion that only writers who just want to write, and not for any real reward, are successful.

The only ways you will really make money from writing are:

1) get a literary grant from your government to help you write a book
2) write a best-seller, and make your publisher believe you might have a second book in you.

Most people never manage (2), and pretty all much writers who go into it for the theoretical money simply give up at some point and stop writing.

Seconded. Writing isn't a game for those wanting fame or fortune. However, being published does open the way to new avenues and new media, and to having more people read your stuff, which is the ultimate aim for any writer. As a form of communication, writing's aim is to be read by your target audience. Being published helps achieve this.

Still, I don't mind the occasional royalty check. I use them to help out people who need a small token of financial assistance, or to go out to a nice restaurant once or twice a year. Can't pay rent off it but I can certainly still enjoy it. :)

Athon

[athon]

If that's the case, I don't know where I stand. See, I want to write. I want to get published. But I don't care whether I make money from it. A $50 check would be fine.

The reason I want to write is that I want to be able to walk into Barnes & Noble someday, look at the shelf, and see my name on it. Then I can say, "See that? I did that."

I don't care if one single copy sells. I just want to see my name on the shelf.

So, according to the above definition, do I have what it takes to be a successful writer?

Is that the real reason? Or is it a shorthand explanation for what you really want?

I understand the desire to see your book on a shelf in a bookstore, but for me underneath this wish is really for my work to be somewhere where people can choose to read it and appreciate it. Sure, I could always put it on the internet, but it's a different form of communication which people don't generally use in the same way as they do a novel or short story (hence why e-books aren't as successful).

The real pleasure in getting something published is the knowledge that somebody sees enough merit in your work that they feel people will want to read it. If you have something to say or a story to tell, the trick is having it phrased in a way that people will like to read it and enjoy it while still retaining your style and your message. Not easy to do, but then that's why only something like 0.01% of all manuscripts that go past a publisher's desk end up making it any further.

Athon

[Gurdur]

.... I will send you 1000 dollars if you give up your desire to be a writer, right now. Don't be a chump; take the money.

(PM me for details)

Hey. This offer open to me too?

[quarky]

No way.

(You don't need it)

[Gurdur]

(You don't need it)

Hey. I need it more than you know.

(Considers threatening to try getting a book of sonnets written in Base 2 published)

[Chaos]

No, it doesn't -- not at all usually, at any rate.

Returns on books being published are usually very small, comparatively speaking, and most authors usually find that if all work is reckoned on an hourly basis, then they could have made more money working at a badly-paid job at 7/11.
*snip*

I know all that. But still, getting published earns you one hell of a lot more than not getting published does... which was what Claus apparently does not get.

[CFLarsen]

I know all that. But still, getting published earns you one hell of a lot more than not getting published does... which was what Claus apparently does not get.

Yes, I get it. But there is a hell of a difference between getting published because you want people to read what you write, and getting published so you can cover your bills.

If the latter is your goal, go flip burgers at McDonald's. Or collect empty bottles. That is more profitable than writing.

[slingblade]

I probably will never write a book, despite having spent my entire life in preparation for it.

The greatest reason is that I can't be original. Every idea I come up with is either glaringly trite from the off, or I realize someone else has already done it, and far better than I could.

The second greatest is that I can't do endings. I get only so far into a story idea before I realize it has no point, or again, that the point I can find is trite.

I love words, love playing with words, and love to write. But I have no stories to tell.

Sad, really.

[timhau]

I probably will never write a book, despite having spent my entire life in preparation for it.

The greatest reason is that I can't be original. Every idea I come up with is either glaringly trite from the off, or I realize someone else has already done it, and far better than I could.

Frankly, originality is overrated. Most original ideas are crap -- that's why nobody's ever thought of them before. If I had to choose between a book that's original and mediocre and one that's unoriginal but good, I take the good one every time.

Of course, unoriginal and crummy is bad. But original and crummy isn't any better.

[slingblade]

Timhau, thanks. What you say there actually helps. :)

[NobbyNobbs]

Is that the real reason? Or is it a shorthand explanation for what you really want?

I understand the desire to see your book on a shelf in a bookstore, but for me underneath this wish is really for my work to be somewhere where people can choose to read it and appreciate it. Sure, I could always put it on the internet, but it's a different form of communication which people don't generally use in the same way as they do a novel or short story (hence why e-books aren't as successful).

The real pleasure in getting something published is the knowledge that somebody sees enough merit in your work that they feel people will want to read it. If you have something to say or a story to tell, the trick is having it phrased in a way that people will like to read it and enjoy it while still retaining your style and your message. Not easy to do, but then that's why only something like 0.01% of all manuscripts that go past a publisher's desk end up making it any further.

Athon


Actually, yes, what I said really is the reason. If the masses don't like it, that's fine by me. I've always loved books. I read wherever I go. I respect people who write, and think that in general, it's a fine crowd. It's a hell of an accomplishment. If I were Egyptian, I'd have them bury me with books so I have something to read in the afterlife.

So I think that getting published is a pretty big thing, and I think it'd be pretty cool to have done it. I'd be proud of myself. Like, some people might want to climb Mount Everest, or go sky diving, or hike the Appalachian trail. Doesn't matter if anyone knows they did it; they did it because it was a challenge and a goal they set for themselves which, if accomplished, would give them a sense of pride and the ability to say to themselves, "Look what I did!"

For me, getting published is that climb up Mount Everest.

The problem is, although I've bought the parka and climbing rope and hired a guide, I have yet to take more than a couple steps toward the mountain. But it's still a pretty good dream.

[Ichneumonwasp]

I probably will never write a book, despite having spent my entire life in preparation for it.

The greatest reason is that I can't be original. Every idea I come up with is either glaringly trite from the off, or I realize someone else has already done it, and far better than I could.

The second greatest is that I can't do endings. I get only so far into a story idea before I realize it has no point, or again, that the point I can find is trite.

I love words, love playing with words, and love to write. But I have no stories to tell.

Sad, really.


This is probably a crap idea and not particularly original, but one I thought of the other day -- May 5th actually when we went out for Mexican food and started discussing Job (I gave my youngest a copy of Heinlein's book last week and she's been slogging through it).

Has anyone told the story of Job from his wife's perspective? I mean, she suffered every one of the iniquities that hit him, then she had to care for a bitching invalid covered in sores from head to foot while he talked it up with his poker buddies on the ash heap; and then he gets to have more children than he did before, but she must have been too old by then -- so they were someone else's kids. Seems like she got the real shaft to me. I couldn't possibly tell that story being male, but I bet that you could. Brilliantly.

[Piscivore]

Frankly, originality is overrated. Most original ideas are crap -- that's why nobody's ever thought of them before. If I had to choose between a book that's original and mediocre and one that's unoriginal but good, I take the good one every time.

Of course, unoriginal and crummy is bad. But original and crummy isn't any better.

I was just about to type exactly this.

[alfaniner]

...
The reason I want to write is that I want to be able to walk into Barnes & Noble someday, look at the shelf, and see my name on it. Then I can say, "See that? I did that."

I don't care if one single copy sells. I just want to see my name on the shelf.
...

This is the same thing I was thinking when considering becoming a book cover artist. (Seriously.)

Here's an interesting article which covers a lot of the questions.

http://www.scalzi.com/whatever/003089.html

[Senex]

The King book, On Writing is great for motivation. What it takes to be a great writer, and take it from me a wannabe, is discipline. I have no discipline and writing is like any other occupation -- long hours working to improve your craft is only the first requirement. Skill and luck pop up as well.

[HistoryGal]

This has been a very interesting thread to read, so far.

I was first published a week after my 19th birthday, wrote dozens of articles and two non-fiction books by my early 30s, but never made enough money to live on the proceeds. The last few years, I've been writing legal briefs for an attorney who recognized my writing skills. I write, and I get paid for it. It pays some of the bills, but I keep my "day" job as a legal secretary.

Stephen King and I have one thing in common - we were both mentored by Robert Bloch. One of us has been a lot more successful (guess who - no really, you'll never figure it out). I put this person's success to being very talented and very, very disciplined. And having a truly sick imagination. In a good way.

However, Bloch did tell me one thing that has always stuck with me - "An unread manuscript is a non-sequitur." Make of that what you will.

Here's my completely free advice to Silentknight, based upon my own experiences:

The first draft is not really writing - it's just transferring what's in your head into something on paper. Get it done as quickly as you can because the real writing is actually REwriting.

In order to get that first draft down, I like to write late at night when I'm very tired. The self-censor is sleeping then, and can't block me. The words flow more easily when I'm tired.

I rewrite during the day, when I need to be alert and careful.

Don't throw anything away. The lines you have to cut from this story might fit into that other story. Don't be afraid to work on several stories at a time. When you get stuck on one, you can work on one of the others and keep the flow going.

There are no new plots. Just new takes on old plots.

Learn to love rejection and learn to take advice from good editors. Learn to tell a good editor from a bad one.

Books, articles, stories, etc., all work to particular formulas and/or patterns. I mean that in a positive, well organized way. Writing is like music, and each discipline is bound by its rules and structures.

Zouprime's advice to start with a novella first is so good, that I'm going to use it myself, as I want to transition into fiction. I didn't start way back when by writing a non-fiction book. I started writing feature articles and worked my into a book. Zouprime - thanks!

Oh, and Zouprime has done something you and I haven't - started and finished a novel. Whatever Zouprime may think of it, it was completed, and that is something to be proud of.

One last thing - you welcomed advice on structure and word usage. I still use my Strunk & White's "Elements of Style," and I play word games in my head a great deal of the day when I'm otherwise occupied as an amanuensis.

HG