When To Delete {Editing Tips}

 

All I can say is: be ruthless when it comes to anything that’s — clunky (awkward), redundant, superfluous, extraneous, clichéd, telling, overdone…

When it comes to having a nice fluidity to your narrative you have to ensure you remove things that simply don’t need to be there, simple! Take them out and if it still works then you are on the right track. Some writers think they have to say it in unique and interesting ways. While, to some extent, that might be true it can, if you work too hard, really feel forced. Then it simply doesn’t work! I have seen some wonderful metaphors and similes lost in a crowd of metaphors and similes! The trick is to use such devices sparingly and in just the right place. This gives them power. Got it?

 

Here are just a few things to ponder… I will talk about filler and the things you can lose from the actual story tomorrow!

• Description — this is important for allowing the reader to really ‘see inside the moment’, to visualise it as you intended them to, but they don’t need every single detail drawn in for them — just enough and perhaps more importantly to create the right mood, or tone, perhaps, even, to create the right sense of danger if you are leading them to the edge of a cliff face, for example. Sparing, yet vivid wins the day! So it really does come down to how you use your words and which ones. And if in a moment of great tension then whatever you do don’t stop to admire the view, make the description an active part of the movement itself. Look at how other writers do it!

……………………………………………………………………………….

• Look at things like attributions; the ‘he said/she said’ in dialogue. You will find that a lot of the time you can remove these as long as you can stay with the flow of the conversation. Better to show some body language so we know who said it. And don’t write  ‘they paused’ — create the pause with an action! None of us stop and pause, well not really! Lose adverbs that are redundant if we can see how something is done or said. Lose different words for said when said is just fine (I have talked about this before!) Punchy and sharp!

……………………………………………………………………………….

• Lose clichés as these are considered to be lazy prose! The tears streamed down the face… ugh! How about she dabbed her cheeks or some other more interesting way to show she was crying!

……………………………………………………………………………….

• Telling tags: These tell why something is done or said when it’s usually obvious! She stopped the man to ask the time because she was worried she was late. Telling! If we see her rush and ask the time as she rushes we can see it, it’s shown! See what I mean?

……………………………………………………………………………….

• Lose ‘that’ and ‘very’ and ‘just’: a lot of the time … see some of my deliberate crossings out. Also see the use of italics when I think the word is more functional so I left it in…  The way that he said it made her smile; he was just so angry (more active?); she was very jealous (though better to show this through actions… right?) Also think about some of the adverbs we overuse! Like ‘suddenly‘… So often there is no other way to interpret the action so lose it and just show the action!

……………………………………………………………………………….

• Pleonasms: nodding the head; shrugging the shoulders; thinking in the mind… Where else? Get the idea?!!!

……………………………………………………………………………….

The message here is very simple: if you can lose it, lose it. That way the writing becomes sharper! 🙂 Only repeat expressions or use words that are less functional in a sentence when part of character voice and there is a difference as I will show you later in the week!

Happy Tuesdaying!

 

 

Self Editing: Eveything you need to know

I had planned a post at some point similar to this, but when I read the talented Sharon Zink’s page I decided to share it.

Sharon is an amazing writer and I have had her on my blog. She also does the same job as me in that she offers manuscript appraisals; the same level of detail.

So I decided to share this link because it really is a masterclass in writing and everything on here is exactly the kind of thing I say to clients all the time when I assess their manuscripts…

Take heed fellow scribes!

I am now about to write the homecoming chapter on Pelicans… this is exciting, it’s the final chapter when we reveal the last of the missing pieces… and it’s raining so I am loving the sounds of rain on the roof as I write! The morning goes pitter patter… ❤

Have a wonderful day everyone!

http://sharonzink.com/writing-tips/all-first-drafts-are-sht-so-heres-a-masterclass-on-self-editing/

 

Voice

Just a really quick post this morning about voice. Some of us think of voice as our own voice as a writer and that is indeed true. This is part of style — how we narrate, the type of words we use etc. but I like to think of the other voice and that’s character.

While there are still some who favour the all-seeing omniscient narrator who is, in essence, you sitting on the outside reporting on all, contemporary literature tends to favour the character viewpoint narrator.

When I was writing lots more short stories, one of the ways I experimented was in finding different voices. Even in a novel that uses multiple narrators; and even in third-person, you still wants to create distinct and individual voices for each narrator. Remember that voice is how that character viewpoint is heard: in thoughts, feelings, reactions as well as dialogue. It is how you connect to your reader.

Think about Alan Bennett’s Talking Heads if you want to think about character voice. While your own authorial voice is in there in how you create the magic; it’s the characters we hear, not you!

That is all. Have a wonderful Wednesday!

 

Friday’s Editing Tips [Formatting]

While formatting will be changed for Kindle and the like, it is good practice to get into a submission-ready standardised way of formatting your work as you write. Then change fonts and spacing if required by whoever you are submitting it to but generally most follow the same basic guidelines.

Here are some tips from a handout I like to share:

A Few Simple Tips For Formatting

 

Always check the guidelines for submission with the publisher or agent. Likewise, always check the rules and the submission guidelines when submitting to a competition or anthology. They will have their own in-house styles and rules. However as a rule of thumb the most preferred formatting is:

• Times New Roman (Ariel sometimes)
• 12 point
• Double Spaced (remove extra space between paragraphs)
• Double speech marks – although some prefer single (some even say if they want straight or curly!)

(Just make sure you are consistent.)

• Rugged right (justified leaves gaps in the text) and editors usually prefer this as it appears too uniform otherwise. This is using the ‘align left’ tab not the ‘justify’ tab.

 

Paragraphs

The default tabs in Word are usually fine (sometimes they might ask for certain indents but not usually), set for double spacing (sometimes 1.5) and click box – don’t add extra space between paragraphs for the whole document. Start the piece or a new section to the far left, then indent for new paragraphs. Look at books as this will give you the idea:

e.g.

And so it began.

It was the summer of 1974…

 

Use an indent for a new paragraph or speaker (also includes reaction by a speaker so the reader can easily follow the conversation).

If you change scene, extra line space – no indent.

For a large time gap or point of view change also consider using asterisks for a larger scene break.

 

… She never stayed to hear his reaction. She couldn’t watch the man she loved just walk away. Not today. Not ever.

***

Peter drank. Perhaps not always the best answer but today Peter drank to forget.

 

Here we changed point of view. The formatting tells the editor/reader the switch in point of view was intentional. Again look at the way books do it and be consistent in your text. You will find your own style.

 

Dialogue

Always indent when a new person speaks unless it’s after action:

Peter stood and looked along the line of bushes. “What the hell was that?” he said.

Avoid hanging saids like:

Peter stood and looked along the line of bushes. He said,

“What the hell was that?”

(Move it up onto the same line.)

Again look at books. If you’re given another character’s reaction to what a speaker says start like a new paragraph.

e.g.

“It looks nothing like an alien or a lion,” said Joe blushing.

Peter dug his hands into his pockets and shook his head at Joe.

 

Thoughts are sometimes also expressed like dialogue. This is completely unnecessary for a single viewpoint character narrator when it’s clear it’s all his thoughts (so you can also lose expressions like he thought.) But excursions in a third person narrative to direct first person thoughts or with an omniscient third person narrator it is preferable to use italics. These make it clear it’s thoughts and differentiate from dialogue.

e.g.

He heard it again. Only this time followed by a shrill sound, like a bird maybe. It put him in mind of a parrot screeching but longer notes, more persistent. Whatever it was it wasn’t going away – (all character thought)

It’s going to get me – (switch to first person direct thought).

Rather than:

He heard it again. Only this time followed by a shrill sound. “Maybe it’s a bird,” he thought. “Maybe like a parrot but more persistent.” He stood back. “Whatever it was,” he thought, “it wasn’t going away. It’s going to get me.”

 

If you get into the habit of using the correct formatting it makes it easier when you submit and it also tells the editor you do know about writing – it’s far more professional. It also shows them you know how to follow rules which is essential if they decide to publish you. It’s surprising how many writers don’t read. Read as much as can not only do you then pick up the right way to format but you also see what works best.

 

Also make sure you use things like hyphens (-) to connect words and en dashes (–) to separate clauses and em dashes (—) for interruptions

Also for ellipses do not use three or more full stops control-alt-period (…) not (…).

 

Make sure you follow the guidelines, so if it says no identifying marks, remove your name from headers and footers. If it asks for page numbers at the bottom, insert them in the footer. If it asks for Ariel font, no indents (The Costa Prize does this!) and saved as a PDF, then do exactly as it asks.

 

Make sure you follow the rules of competitions: themes, word counts, previous submissions etc.

 

Have a great weekend everyone!

What an editor does …

I love getting up close and personal to other people’s writing — but what I love the most is seeing how suggestions and comments are put into practice and when the final version comes back it is so much better. I feel then that my role is justified.

New writers often ask  what to expect from an editor. Do they change your work? What if you don’t agree? Can you keep it your way?

In simple terms, an editor doesn’t just change your work and write a whole other story the way they’d do it! If they do — sack them! They do offer constructive and useful comments. I would change grammar errors where there is a hard and fast rule ,and I would remove run-on or words I feel are redundant but ONLY in track changes so the author can reverse the change if they disagree. And occasionally, if I think it’s the best way to show it, I will change a sentence to demonstrate  a point — see how this sharpens it, for example — a more hands on approach if I think the writer needs that and more often for a critique than a copy-edit. I tend to favour making suggestions — this is overwritten, consider sharpening — and I might suggest what could be better but leave it to them.

By marking your MS and highlighting the weaknesses it really is the best and fastest way to identify weaknesses in style, plot, narrative etc. I had read a great many books on writing but just reading that you need to show not tell and even with examples you can not always see how that applies to your own writing. So you have to let an editor into that personal creative space.

There are various tell-tale signs of the new writer, and we all do this  when we start to write — head hopping mid scene (often because the writer hasn’t even thought about it), telling rather than showing, overwriting using ‘awkward’ or ‘clunky’ phrasing, adding too much back-story and lifting the reader out of the story, overly long descriptive passages that slow the story, too many adverbs especially after dialogue (it’s telling), telling what’s already shown and use of other forms of repetition to drum home a point (tell the reader only once) and using as any different words for said as they can find!

Now these will all be ironed out as you learn and get feedback and new writers who invest in a professional critique will most certainly find this is a short cut to identifying key weaknesses so by the time they start sending work out it’s good.

If it’s good enough to be accepted or publication another editor will be appointed and you need to trust their judgement.

In my opinion there is no room for divas! Luckily for me this is incredibly rare and by this point the writers know the importance of the editorial process and have long since shed their tiara and  learned to take constructive criticism. They will already know that a good editor or critiquer  is worth their weight in gold. Because, and this is very  much my philosophy,  a critique, a copy-edit, even a proof read is a teaching aid and if you get a good editor you will learn. It’s still you writing it — but an editor makes it stronger — and we all need that guidance. At the end of the day it’s about making your writing as good as it can be. And this should be the goal of the writer and the editor and it has to be the goal of the publisher as he needs to sell the book!

So can you argue with the editor? Insist on not changing things? Of course you can — it’s only one opinion but it has to be remembered it’s a professional and experienced opinion (or it should be if you pay for it) and so you need to think carefully about the advice. But if you did something a certain way for good reason and make a good argument an editor will listen to you and wants you to be happy too.

As someone who has straddled both sides of the proverbial fence, even when I wasn’t so sure there was something wrong with something my editor had questioned —  I looked at it very closely and nearly always made some kind of change to remove any trace of ambiguity. I trusted her and she did make great suggestions.

Don’t be a diva!

Have a great weekend all — out shopping for a new tiara!

Style versus Voice in Writing

Today when I looked at the flashing cursor I reached for one of my many writing books for inspiration and flicked the pages imagining some invisible person said: STOP.

The book I picked up was: Larry Brooks  Story Engineering Mastering the 6 Core Competencies of Successful Writing. I STOPPED on page 221.

Two expressions  that jumped out at me were writing style and writing voice — both of these often get confused and I do discuss them separately when I critique work professionally. Even when I Googled it the two words are used interchangeably. I guess it’s down to pedantics.

I  see the Writing Style  as separate from Voice. 

Writing style, Brooks claims, in akin to the literary uniform that you — the writer– dons. It’s how you compose your narratives: long or short sentences. laden with similes and metaphors or simple sentences, poetic or more direct, descriptive or not — and so on.

I would also suggest that you could extend this to encompass how you build those sentences into creating your structures, hence how you move your plots: i.e. use  of flashbacks, exposition, where you switch narrators as you follow your story arc to its resolution and denouement.  So in other words what devices you use in your story telling to tell your story effectively. For the purposes of critique, I tend to talk about use of phrasing, clunky words, overuse of adverbs, dialogue, description, even formatting (if they do it wrong for dialogue for example) here, as well as how they use flashback, back story — all of these general overall points under the heading style, looking for the things they commonly get wrong or don’t do as well. 

I tend to look at structure more in my discussion of plot but in reality it’s all part of  overall style.

Voice on the other hand is how  the story is told and you might think that also includes the things talked about above. And again it’s down to pedantics, labels. But I prefer to discuss voice with viewpoint. It’s WHO YOU HEAR. In the modern age where we shift away from the more old-fashioned, more prone to ‘telling’  voice of the omniscient narrator, the focus is a lot more on character viewpoint narrators. While it is your voice strictly speaking talking for your characters — it’s their voice we  hear.  So again, voice is who  the reader hears. So it could be you as the omniscient all-seeing narrator but more than likely it’s a character or in multiple viewpoint novels a succession of characters (but no head-hopping mid scene — new character narrators for chapter or  if needed scene but clearly formatted!). And as I have said before, even in a third person where we imagine it’s let’s say the author telling the reader Flo’s story — she thought —  the closer you get to her, the more intimate the connection and in essence it’s not really the author we hear — it’s Flo. We hear her dialect, her way of rambling in her own head i.e.  it’s her jumbled thoughts we’re privy to, no one else’s!  People struggle with that claiming the third person who’s narrating is you the author watching her and listening to her thoughts and therefore you organising those thoughts and translating them for the reader.  So your voice not theirs? Again partly true but have a look at how closely a Stephen King third person character is to first person? How invisible is the third person so all we really hear is the character? So you wouldn’t have the character even in third person say how they’ve gone pale or look tired unless they’re seeing themselves.  That’s what I’m talking about!

So for the purposes of a critique I would look at how the character narrates, quirks, odd phrases, first or third person, tense, their body language even — and this is why I tend to discuss with viewpoint.

So in a nutshell I would say Voice is how the character speaks (through you) and style is the technical stuff in terms of what words you choose and how you structure that.

It might be a game of labels, but so long as the author takes on board what works in their own writing and is receptive to improving weaknesses and working on both their style and their voice then that’s what matters.

I’ve found the more I read and the more I experiment with voice and technique my own distinctive signature style of writing and the voices I use, develop. After all, we are all unique — aren’t we?

Or are we?

More musings on all things writerly tomorrow. Got any nagging questions? Anything you want me to discuss — just ask away! I like a challenge — to stretch my writing muscle!

Happy Thursday!

Saying too much …

Getting a first draft down is a voyage of discovery. You are learning about your characters and their desires and conflicts as they steer you through the course of their journeys. And so there is a tendency to tell too much, to use too much back story (or exposition) and what you do is not only pause the action, but you lose any intrigue.

When we first meet someone they don’t tend to tell you their whole life story in the first five minutes (well most don’t!). We learn, we make preliminary judgements (often wrong) and we start to work them out. And that’s what you want to do in your writing. Show the reader enough and then build on that slowly. It’s much more enjoyable for the reader that way. And when you do reveal something put as much of it in the subtext as you can, shown through their actions and words, rather than tell us Mr Graham was a quiet sort; probably because his first wife never let him get a word in but now he’s remarried to a quieter woman he seems to be coming out of his shell.  All of this can be shown and woven like an invisible thread through the story.

A lot of the saying too much comes in early drafts and that’s okay if it’s your way of finding your way, getting acquainted with your character. Later you need to take it out and only show what’s needed when it’s needed (and if the above detail about Mr Graham is completely irrelevant because he’s the butcher who we only meet in the story once then not at all!). When you know the characters inside out, that is often enough to allow you to subtly write only the key features that makes a character seem real without the extraneous detail — as I always say if it doesn’t reveal character, move plot or at some level explore theme — lose it! But knowing all the background is still important to allow you to create real characters. Even Mr Graham with his two-minute cameo when the protagonist goes in to buy meat for her boyfriend (even though she’s veggie and has been since she saw a chicken beheaded on the farm she visited one summer with a friend because their family were big on farms and after the son died by choking on a peanut the family really needed a holiday and since it was her best friend whose brother choked on said peanut she wanted to be supportive but has never eaten meat since she saw that headless chicken) PAUSE for breath, where was I? Oh yeah even if Mr Graham only has a cameo you can still splash him with enough colour to  make him seem real without ANY of his back story unless you want to foreground something needed for plot. Got that? Glad someone has! And while my little back story excursion there isn’t as bad as some I see — trust me I do see them!

So get it down in a first draft if you have to, but then lose it.

The more experienced a writer you become, the less you will do this, even in a first draft.

When I see it, okay not as bad as my example, but when I do, it says amateur. Now that’s fine when I am mentoring or critiquing for a client because that’s the point, I’m teaching and learning at the same time (it’s two-way) — but when I see it in submitted work when I have my publisher hat on, I know this writer needs to work more on developing their craft.

It’s okay — we are all somewhere along that learning line. But get it right when you submit if you are hoping to be accepted for publication, that’s all I’m saying.

Right, back to my new short story …

Have a great day all. Still working on some more In The Spotlights for the Autumn … so watch this space. I also saw some more potential covers for the novel yesterday, one I LOVE in particular — all I will say is it’s very bold. Watch this space as I will reveal it here first.

And the same with characters …

Pleonasms …

No they’re not some kind of intergalactic creature off Dr Who (although that might be SO cool), nor is that gunge  the oozes in the wake of ghostly apparitions the GhostBusters seek.

And no I haven’t misspelled neoplasms which is something altogether different.

Pleonasms are in essence superfluous words or phrases like — thinking in the mind, seeing with the eyes — a common one I just removed about 5 of in the final copy-edit of my novel — nodding the head. See how thinking, seeing, nodding, unless you are one of those intergalactic creatures from Dr Who with anatomical anomalies, can not be effected by any other part of the body and so become redundant, or pleonasms.

Pay attention to this, they might ask a question about it on The Chase: Is a pleonasm: A. A cancerous growth of cells. B. Slimy exudate secreted by ghostly apparitions or C. A superfluous of redundant phrase in literature.

Well they could!

(Get to the point Debz or this whole post will be pleonastic! (If that’s even the  word!))

I often mark a text with ‘superfluous’ — I don’t tend to use the pleonasm word for fear the client will think the Martians have finally invaded my head. But it is an important concept for us writers to grasp — being spare in language, using just the right word and not repeating, or telling what’s shown all form part of superfluous or redundant phrasing and their removal from text does two things — one, first and foremost, its removal has no impact on the meaning of the sentence and two, fundamental to good writing, it SHARPENS the writing.

So take a look at how many of these you use. I know I do and I try to use a ‘remove superfluous phrasing’ or ‘pleonasm’ edit — although of course if we can think about it as we write we writer sharper!

To return to that ageing chestnut of showing and telling, what I often see is something like this:

He felt really hot. “God I’m boiling,” he said, wiping a handkerchief across his brow. Then slowly he peeled off his jacket, large inkblot stains of sweat clinging to his armpits.

Now at first glance you might think this reads okay and you’ll see just this kind of thing in published texts but what you have is telling the reader ‘He felt hot’, then the character tells the reader and THEN you show it.

So consider  simply: He wiped a handkerchief across his brow. Then slowly he peeled off his jacket, large inkblot stains of sweat clinging to his armpits. 

In other words (and yes I know this imagery is a bit gross but that’s my warped mind I guess!) JUST SHOW IT. Now you’re using ACTION to scene build, and you can now use your dialogue more effectively so it moves plot; something like He looked across at her, watched the way she fumbled with her uncle’s watch; leaned towards him. “Please help me find him,” she said. He wiped a handkerchief across his brow. Then slowly he peeled off his jacket, large inkblot stains of sweat clinging to his armpits. “I’ll try,” he said. “But I can’t make any promises.”

Okay yes this was written totally off the cuff now so no prizes for how it could be better — but see how now all your give your reader is a visual image of a girl asking for help and see him sweating (maybe the room’s hot, maybe he’s nervous, maybe he knows that happened to the uncle) but this is where the reader starts to work and that’s empowering for a reader. But nowhere here did you say he felt hot, he never said it — but we know it because we see it.

See?

So no more seeing with the eyes, thinking in the mind, nodding the head or telling what’s shown!

Today’s challenge — teach someone the word ‘Pleonasm’ who didn’t know what it meant! A random stranger if you dare!

A snatch of beauty by yours truly 

Fiction Clinic … getting up close and personal to a writer’s work …

It’s been a while since we had the clinic so I need to ask people to shout about it more, as I think this exercise is helpful for the writer of the work and those that read it … or that’s certainly the intention.

So this week we have an offering from Susan, a successful short story writer and regularly comments on my Blog. Thanks Susan … and also for allowing your work to be dissected in the public eye. And remember, we all need that other eye to look at our work, and we all make the same kinds of mistakes.

So this is what she submitted:

CHAPTER 1
Magdalene meets Timothy.

From the bushes, Timothy watched the short stocky lady with orange spiky hair. The burns stung his arms through his thin wooly jumper. He’d heard stories of a gypsy witch who lived up on the heath; now he saw for himself. Today was the day he’d run away. Even if he got into trouble, it wouldn’t be as bad as living with the Chorley’s.

The moonlight shone over the smoldering campfire and a barn- owl hooted overhead. Timothy was scared but excited at the same time. She was doing a dance and reciting poetry. The words were muffled, he leaned an inch closer.
“Aarghh, oowwch, help!”
Timothy shouted as he fell headlong into the nettles and brambles.

“What the heck?” Magdalene, startled by Timothy’s ungainly entrance marched across to where he lay buried among the thorny bushes. “You were spying?”
“No, I was just passing, I fell.”
“Just passing through a hedge?”
Timothy lifted his sleeve up to check the scratches. That’s when Magdalene noticed the blotches covering his lower arms.

“What happened to your arm?”
“Nuthink, don’t be nosey, you old witch.” He scrambled to his feet, but they were tangled so badly, he fell back down again.
“You fell through the hedge spying on me. I was doing an important spell. It’s ruined now.”
Timothy kicked at the shrubbery that was entangled around his ankles.
“Magic, do me some magic then, and get rid of two scabby foster parents who treat me like a servant.”

“You could tell me about it?” She gestured for Timothy to come and sit by the fire in her camp.
“Not really. Nobody believes me. They’re the foster parents from hell. They cover it all up, and tell people I’m a boy with special needs, only I’m not.”
Timothy eyed Magdalene with suspicion.
“Come and have some chicken casserole, it’s warmer by the fire. You should clean those cuts. The burns look painful. What happened?”
“I already told you, either him or her, depends what they want me to do. If I don’t do it straight away, or the way they want it doing they stub their cigs on my arms. I‘m not going back there, so don‘t bother trying to talk me into it.”
“No, I won’t.” Magdalene sat on her chair, and lit her white clay pipe. She puffed on the liquorice tobacco in silence.

Magdalene lived in the woods at the top of the heath in the village of Mullsey. She’d used money from the sale of her house to buy a colorful gypsy wagon. It was green, with red and yellow windows.

It hadn’t taken long to find and purchase the wagon. She knew exactly where she wanted to park it. Farmer Harry Denning had taken some convincing, but a few pints in the Flying Horse had sealed the deal. Now he’d got a resident gypsy lady complete with wagon and Brandy Snap the horse as his neighbour.

Lets look at this more closely. The opening does start right in the action with a vivid image of a woman with ‘spikey red hair’ and the sense that Timothy is the watcher. We also learn in the opening paragraph that there’s some kind of mystery, gypsies and that he has run away. So we establish the conflict earlier. and we know what this is going to be about. Good. But this could benefit from some sharpening — especially as this is your hook, and perhaps think of a really intriguing opening line. Have a think on that, one that encompasses the first scene, and the sense of voyeurism. Create  more atmosphere.

At first I wasn’t sure about the line about the burns — but I assume this is deliberately to intrigue? What burns? And there is a sense it might be from the nettles but maybe not … so it is a hook but perhaps later consider having him pull his sleeve down over his arms, or something that signals to the reader this is something more than nettle burns.

Careful with apostrophe ‘Chorley’s’ … Chorleys?

Let’s look at the next paragraph … the scene setting. Good use of fire and moonlight, the owl, you could have added more tension here, where is this place? Can you scene set more as part of the action … but this is the line that lets it down: Timothy was scared but excited at the same time. She was doing a dance and reciting poetry.

Timothy was excited is telling, so try to show him, we have no sense of his age, we assume a child but show how he crouches perhaps, hands bunched, shaking even, breathing hard … create a visual sense of him for the reader that ‘shows’ his fear without telling the reader directly — film it rather than report it. And here we see how it’s easy to confuse with pronouns … you tell us Timothy is scared and then go to she was doing a dance. It might even suggest he is a she. So use this opportunity to show ‘her’ — how is she dancing? ‘Doing a dance’ is very vague and the reader could imagine anything from a river dance to hip hop!  So show it. And rather than say she was reciting poetry, maybe let the reader hear some of what she says?

We have the dialogue next, this can all be on one line …

“Aarghh, oowwch, help!” Timothy shouted as he fell headlong into the nettles and brambles.

Now we have the interaction

“What the heck?” Magdalene, startled by Timothy’s ungainly entrance marched across to where he lay buried among the thorny bushes. “You were spying?”
“No, I was just passing, I fell.”
“Just passing through a hedge?”
Timothy lifted his sleeve up to check the scratches. That’s when Magdalene noticed the blotches covering his lower arms.

Careful with the line Magdalene, startled by Timothy’s ungainly entrance. First of all remember this is in Timothy’s viewpoint as the viewpoint narrator and this sounds like we’ve slipped into her head, same with her seeing his arms — to him she would seem to have noticed the blotches so he reacts? Pulls at his sleeve perhaps? You also you tell the reader she’s startled and since we just saw the action do we need this? Just show her reaction to him, as he sees it. And now we use her name, does he know her name? Remember it’s him narrating? The line that works best for me here is “Just passing through a hedge?” I like the humour of that. And I like the intrigue of the marks on his arm … not just from the nettles.

Take the next section:

“What happened to your arm?”
“Nuthink, don’t be nosey, you old witch.” Good we get his voice here.

He scrambled to his feet, but they were tangled so badly, he fell back down again.  Show this more, how did he fall, how did it feel? As if someone thing clasping onto his ankles?

“You fell through the hedge spying on me. I was doing an important spell. It’s ruined now.”
Timothy kicked at the shrubbery that was entangled around his ankles.  This repeats what we know about his ankles so either lose it to try to show it in a different way.

“Magic, do me some magic then, and get rid of two scabby foster parents who treat me like a servant.” This is intriguing. This is now showing why he ran away.

Moving on …

“You could tell me about it?” She gestured for Timothy to come and sit by the fire in her camp. Show her, how did she? What does the camp look like?
“Not really. Nobody believes me. They’re the foster parents from hell. They cover it all up, and tell people I’m a boy with special needs, only I’m not.”
Timothy eyed Magdalene with suspicion. This is an external expression so it feels like a viewpoint slip, how does he know his look is suspicious? Maybe show more of how he feels?
“Come and have some chicken casserole, it’s warmer by the fire. You should clean those cuts. The burns look painful. What happened?” Good she asked the pertinent question

“I already told you, either him or her, depends what they want me to do. If I don’t do it straight away, or the way they want it doing they stub their cigs on my arms. I‘m not going back there, so don‘t bother trying to talk me into it.” Might he be more reluctant to tell his secret, perhaps we need to see that in his body language?
“No, I won’t.” Magdalene sat on her chair, and lit her white clay pipe. She puffed on the liquorice tobacco in silence. Remember viewpoint — how does he know it’s liquorice?

 Magdalene lived in the woods at the top of the heath in the village of Mullsey. She’d used money from the sale of her house to buy a colorful gypsy wagon. It was green, with red and yellow windows.  have we changed viewpoint?

It hadn’t taken long to find and purchase the wagon. She knew exactly where she wanted to park it. Farmer Harry Denning had taken some convincing, but a few pints in the Flying Horse had sealed the deal. Now he’d got a resident gypsy lady complete with wagon and Brandy Snap the horse as his neighbour.

 This last part lifts the reader right out of the action at the point the boy reveals his secret. This is one of the problems of how you use back story or exposition. This detail would be better drip fed into the action. Do we need to know all of this?

Okay so it looks like I have really teased this apart and some of my suggestions might be me making you think, question, you might not agree with them all. But see how you need to really make the opening sharp, avoid telling, create more of a sense of place, show me her through her actions so I get a better sense of her. And make sure you are clear who is telling the story. We tend to avoid the omniscient narrator and focus action through the mind of a viewpoint character as this engages the most. So is this Timothy telling the story of her. See how we head hop in the scene and you really want to avoid that. And be careful with how you use back story. If Timothy is more reluctant to reveal this secret about his abuse, shown through his body language, it will make it more of a secret. he tells her very quickly. And since you tell us he is scared of her, what motivates this action to confide so willingly?

Now it might seem as if I am being really strict here — no, I see what you want this scene to do and there is a big premise for the story that will follow, but you can do a lot more with it by thinking about some of these questions …

I hope this has helped and I hope it’s raised some points that might be relevant to all of you.

Do be brave and send something for next month. I think keeping it at one is better so if I get a few I will choose one …

What do you mean I need to lose the commas?!!

The clinic reopens on Friday April 26th

How brave are you?

It can be anon if you prefer!

HAPPY EASTER ONE AND ALL!

I WILL RETURN WITH IN THE SPOTLIGHT WITH THE FAMOUS ALAN GIBBONS ON TUESDAY!

“Let us talk all about the art of talking!” he retorted forcibly

Grrr… I hope you think the title is bad. You should do. By the end of the post you will if you don’t.

 

Although I do sometimes cover old ground, I thought I would talk about talking, or get some dialogue going about dialogue — yes that old chestnut.

It seems to me people either write dialogue very well, or they do it very badly — but often think they do it well because they think it sounds natural. But it comes down to what they think makes ‘natural’ dialogue. If they think that means ‘realistic’ that explains why they’re probably getting it wrong.  And many think dialogue is the device you use to show not tell.  It can be one of them, it isn’t the main one. This usually happens when writers haven’t quite grasped the concept of showing yet.

I know most of you will know this, but always worth reminding ourselves.

In real life we waste a lot of energy and breath talking (those that know me, of course know I am nothing like this … hmm …. okay I take the prize for Miss Chatterbox, hand up!) — we repeat ourselves, we fabricate, we embellish, we talk about all kinds of nonsenses that have nothing to do with what we’re really saying. Some of us digress at great tangents before getting to the point (if there is one) … we fill it with what we call ‘business’ the hello, how are you, do you still take sugar: the polite chit-chat that has become second nature to many — the obligatory ‘how are you’s and a lot of the time only half-listening to the responses. You all know what I mean. Oh and we like to moan and gossip. If we were undernourished and needed to conserve as much energy as possible (here speaketh the ecologist in me — yes I do have an MSc in it — even if I don’t use it these days) — we look at concepts like ‘optimal foraging’ that shows an animal assesses the amount of energy needed to invest in an action against the rewards. You don’t expend 1000 calories travelling 100 miles for a small meal worm (think blue tit here) when the meal worm is only 500 calories. In a nutshell that’s it — the bird makes sure it ‘forages optimally’ to SURVIVE.

Why am I waffling about this (yes that’s what we do — we waffle! See what I did there?) … but actually with good reason: to make a point, even if it is convoluted. Don’t do that in fictional dialogue. It has to be functional. But in real life small energies go into talking and we are not in a daily balance where every calorie counts (thankfully) so we can expend as much energy as possible, hence we waffle. Or that’s my excuse! Give me a Mars bar though just to make sure!

Now I have used expressions like waffle, moan, ‘business’, repeating, embellishing for good reason too. It’s the way we speak and you want to tease out and use these observations as devices to make your dialogue realistic. Let me say that again, for emphasis: you want to tease out and use these observations as devices to make your dialogue realistic. Let’s use another narrative device for emphasis — saying something three times (not twice, in writing we like three): you want to tease out and use these observations as devices to make your dialogue realistic.

Don’t have the whole conversation, the ‘business’ — it might sound ‘realistic’ but it is nothing more than filler. There’s a difference between ‘realistic’ and sounding ‘natural.’ You can assume the chit-chat. There are devices for this too — he spoke for twenty minutes about the weather, the price of fish and the rent increases before he looked right at her and said, “I have cancer.”  See what I mean?

But take the oddities and the mannerisms and the way people really speak to add authenticity. Think Fred Elliot “I say, I say …” repetition (if you watch Corrie, when he was on). In fact attention to the small details like repetition so long as the dialogue (like this post) has a point, means the reader knows exactly who’s speaking and you don’t get everyone sounding the same.

This is another point — dialogue that feels ‘perfunctory’ and ‘generic’ is usually because it lacks real function, it is filler (chit-chat) and all speakers sound the same.

“Hi Sophie, how are you?”

“Oh hello Jane, I’m very well thank you.”

“Do you want coffee?”

“No thanks Jane, but a tea would be lovely. Since I got pregnant I can’t drink coffee.”

“Really Sophie. I didn’t even know you were pregnant.”

This feels forced, right? Yes it tells the reader she’s pregnant (which is one of the reasons writers think it’s showing but it’s not — it’s still telling) but it’s wooden. Even the names are boring! The speakers sound the same.

 

So when you write dialogue and I mean good fictional dialogue you need to take the ‘essence’ of the way people really speak but not write it how we really speak. Get it? It’s the essence, the repetition, the slang, even clipped responses like:

“So you’re preggers, Soph?”

“Yeah.”

“Oh.”

This is far more ‘showing’ as we get the reaction in just a few words. We don’t have “Oh Sophie, I am so jealous. Ted and I have been trying for three years” — telling OR Jane looked away. It wasn’t fair, she and Ted had been trying for three years. Also telling. The above shows something in the subtext, but you can weave in the cause of the stunted response (perhaps jealousy) by showing, later. Appointments to IVF clinics on post-its on the fridge. A half-painted nursery … see what I mean. Drop little hints. SHOW don’t TELL!!! Another old chestnut.

Also dialogue is wooden when it lacks body language — we need ACTION and REACTION.

Best way to demonstrate is to see it …

“So you’re preggers, Soph?”

As she spoke Jane wound the curl tighter round her finger.

“Yeah.” Sophie’s eyes drifted to the window, to the half-empty bird feeders. Was she crying?

“Oh.” It was all Jane could muster.

“Still working out what to do,” Sophie said. She seemed to be watching a small blue bird, a tit maybe. It was waiting on the fence.

“I need to fill up the feeders,” Jane said pushing back the chair, its legs scraping the tiles.

 

Look for the subtext in the action and reaction … here we have the chance to add layers. What is subtext exactly?

Saying it without saying it. All showing!

 

Now this was written in all of two minutes and is by no means perfect, but I did throw in a sitting on the fence for the undecided pregnant Sophie … subtext (even if this one is a little clichéd . But see how we need action. Look how far we’ve come from the first dialogue.

Remember all dialogue has to be functional : Move plot, reveal character, explore theme.

Preferable all of the above.

Here are a few other tips for dialogue:

1. Use contractions (no ‘we’re’ not still talking about babies!) I’m not I am. We’re not We are. This can sound mechanical and ‘perfunctory’ unless as I have been writing in my novel a Russian speaking English, then it does sound the way it’s taught as a foreign language. So it does depend on the voice.

2. No need to too many attributions (as in ‘he said’, ‘she said’) so long as we can follow it. And think about using action instead. Jane looked away as she said it… that kind of thing.

3. Avoid too many variants of the word ‘said’ — it needs to be as invisible as possible so the reader just sees what’s said and how it’s said and picks up on the ‘showing’ body language. Retorted, queried, responded, interrupted, proclaimed.  Use these sparingly, because if you use the other devices, they are merely telling and repeating what’s shown. “What time is it?” he enquired. The ‘?’ says it’s an enquiry so use said.

4. The third (for emphasis) old chestnut … adverbs. Adverbs especially after dialogue are lazy and telling! There I said it! “Get down the stairs now you little prick!”   Does it need ‘he shouted angrily’. You decide!

5. Get the punctuation and formatting right. Indent for new speakers, indent for speaker reaction that follows, punctuation inside speech marks … etc  All you have to do is pick up any book to see how it’s done!

For Fiction clinic I want one or two (at most) extracts of dialogue you think might have problems — or you’re not sure about and this Friday I’ll analyse them here! So first two  up to 500 word (can be shorter) extracts by tomorrow — say by 4 pm and I’ll use them.

That’s me done talking — now where’s that Mars bar?

“I know you don’t speak cat. That’s my point you stupid dog!”