I wrote
my first novel, WAKE, in the first half of 2010 and edited it over the next few
months. This is after having a skilled person look over it and give me
feedback. At that stage I thought I had done a pretty good job, so off it went
to publishers and literary agents.
Then the
rejections came.
I did get
a favourable response from a publisher in NYC but then never heard back from
them.
Did I
follow it up? No I didn't.
Why?
Because I then found a publisher that looked through my work and found that I
needed to make a lot of changes.
I
suddenly found that I didn't know what I was doing. It's crazy. How can a
writer be so bad at editing? That's what was going through my mind.
After a
few months study and writing and reading, I improved. But not long after I
found that I had slumped again and had to go back to the drawing board.
It seemed
that when I was concentrating on one aspect of editing I was forgetting about
the rest. For me it was like juggling while driving a car with a double clutch.
After you
manage to edit so well that your work comes alive, then you have to make sure what
you're writing fits into the category you are trying to write for. This part is
tricky and not necessarily required, but it will make it easier for you to
break into the market.
I
discovered that my words were too big for the general public, that I had too
many similes and metaphors and that my writing may have been a little too
descriptive/flowery. I have therefore had to dumb down my work to
make sure the general public will understand what I write and also not find it
slow.
It
reminds me of old detective shows. 'Just the facts, Mam.' That’s what I have
been told is required for genre/popular fiction.
I recently
sent off another chapter to the publisher and made the required alterations, as
mentioned above. It will be interesting to see what she thinks.
On a side
note, I have read many books that do not adhere to these 'rules', but they have
been published and some made into movies. It makes me wonder if these rules
were created by publishers for publishers, not readers. Maybe they
created theses rules so it was easier for them to categorise our books/stories?
Hmm, I wonder.
Maybe
they just like making rules?
Have you
read The Road by Cormac McCarthy, or No
Country for Old Men? They are written so differently to all the rules taught to
me that it's like I'm reading something that came from another planet. But
they’re great stories.
Lastly, I
don't understand why publishers have such a big thing against 'ly' adverbs.
It's weird. I never noticed 'quickly', 'slowly', 'crazily', etc before I was
told not to use them. They say it’s lazy writing, I disagree. I still cut them
because when I edit I have to stick to the rules, mostly, but I don't like it.
I
actually never noticed these 'ly' adverbs before. But now that I know about
them and have been told that they are evil, I see them everywhere. It's
actually annoying that I was told about them. Let the ‘ly’ adverbs go back to
being part of the story rather than sticking out like weeds.
It's like
when you're told about weeds and how they’re taking over your lawn. Before I
was told they were weeds I just thought dandelions were part of the lawn, not
evil things that need to be pulled or poisoned. True story. Hey, I was only
young. It was all grass as far as I was concerned.
Maybe
it's just me?
At any
rate, happy writing.
I'll be
interested to see if I change my ways once I have been accepted into the world
of published writers.
