C h a z z W r i t e s . c o m

See all my books at AllThatChazz.com.

09/09/2010 • 8:02 AM 0

Do you have a question for me about writing or editing?

(Mr. Director! Cue the happy music!)

Email me at:

Also, at the bottom right of this screen is an email subscription box. Please take a moment to key in your email address. You’ll get my blog posts by email and never miss another scintillating post. I don’t share email lists with anyone and I won’t sell them to anyone. Thanks!

Now, to clear your palate of my lonely plea for human contact in the outside world, below you’ll find meaty links on the subject of the slush pile.

(Cue the ominous music.)

Pubmission Launches an Online Submission Tool for Writers and Publishers (prweb.com)
The democratization of slush (salon.com)
A Few Thoughts (lilithsaintcrow.com)
The Future of Publishing (advancedfictionwriting.com)
‘Slush Pile’: Where Did The Phrase Come From? (huffingtonpost.com)

Filed under: Editors, Publicity & Promotion, publishing, Writers, writing tips, Business, email subscriptions, Novel, publishing, Slush pile, writing, writing question, writing questions and answers

09/03/2010 • 8:10 AM 1

Proofreading Symbols

To find more proofreading symbols click here.

Proofread Your Way To Error-Free Blog Posts (bloggingtips.com)

Filed under: Editors, manuscript evaluation, writing tips, manuscript evaluation, manuscript revision, proofreading, proofreading marks

09/02/2010 • 8:19 AM 3

Writers: Rejection does not build character

Image via Wikipedia

Some say rejection is part of “paying your dues” in the writing business. That’s over-analysis. Rejection is just someone saying no. When your query is rejected, do not read too much into it.

Rejection is not useful on its own. It doesn’t thicken your skin for when you become a “real” writer. After you are published, you will get angry with critical reviews just as you are angry with rejections now. And why not? Your book is your child and an extension of you. If you are bent toward getting pissed off, you still will be. Rejection is not part of your training. Writing is your training. Learning your craft is a different proposition from receiving a form rejection slip.

Rejection can be useful if you get specific feedback on why your story was rejected. Standard reply forms that say “not for us” tell you nothing except you must resubmit elsewhere. A manuscript evaluation (whether done by an editor you pay–ahem, like me) or by the people you submit to, can be useful. However, even then, it may be a question of taste in some regard. Agents and editors do sometimes take the time to tell you what they found wrong with a near miss. (Even if you disagree with their feedback, send a thank you note.)

Understand this:

1. An agent or editor may give you a critique, but after you “fix” it, they are under no obligation to accept the manuscript. Many writers report great frustration over doing what they were told (perhaps even compromising their vision for the faint hope of publication) and still find themselves on the wrong side of the gate. No with details is still no. Doing everything you are told without running it through the filter of your own sensibility is no guarantee you’re on the right track. It also leaves you spineless and soulless.

2. Publishers, editors and agents are extremely busy people. (Sometimes they wear that like a badge that they feel makes them special. However, I don’t know anybody who is at all cool who isn’t extremely busy, do you?) The point is, no one owes you a critique unless you paid them for said critique (ahem–like me.) Agents and editors typically say yes or no (mostly no.) They aren’t in the business of teaching you the craft. If they do send you a personal rejection and not a form rejection, it does mean you’re making progress. Handwritten notes of encouragement can make your day even though it’s a rejection doused with a little sweet perfume.

3. If you send out a bunch of manuscripts and you receive no personal rejections, it means you have to tweak your manuscript or revisit your target selection process or both. Only you can decide how many rejections you suffer before you undertake further revision. Some say don’t tweak after you’re dome with revisions because by the time you’re finsally finsihed with revisions, you should be a little sick of it and ready to send your baby off to college. Fresh enthusiasm is what the new baby is for. Even as you edit the last book, your fickle nature should be pulling you toward the next book’s greatness.

4. The rejection might not be about you. There are many variables that go into editorial decisions. Maybe the subject matter or execution is too foreign to the publisher or too much like one of the books they already have which failed. Maybe the editor loved it but it got shot down for budgetary reasons. Don’t get hung up on each rejection. Resubmit and move on to people who get you as quickly as possible.

5. Don’t worry about rejection. It will occur. Expect it. It’s more important to do the writing and trust that good things are coming. Optimists are the only ones who succeed in this business. Pessimists, realists and the meek have the good sense not to try. They never succeed at much, but they’re cozy. Writers aren’t cozy with their place in the world. If they were, they wouldn’t be writers.

6. Once you are published, you’ll realize the journey was more important than the destination. It’s the writing that matters, which is good because you’ll spend much more time writing than you will receiving prizes and getting drunk on fancy publicity junkets.

BONUS:

When I was a kid, seeing my name in the paper was a big deal. By the time I was seventeen I had a regular byline in my local newspaper. By the time I was twenty, there was still a small thrill to see my byline on the front page of a provincial and city newspaper. My back page column in a magazine tickles. Recognition is still cool, but it’s not the same thrill and if a byline is all you write for, that’s not enough gas for the trip.

The thrill is in the writing. The fun was finding just the right turn of phrase. It was always really about the writing. It always should be.

Rejection Logic (teachstreet.com)
Q&A Interview with novelist James King (“Bill Warrington’s Last Chance”) (gointothestory.com)
How to Get Published: Take the Leap of Faith (blogher.com)
Finding The Perfect Title For Your Novel (advancedfictionwriting.com)

Filed under: agents, Editors, manuscript evaluation, Rant, Rejection, writing tips, editing, learning from rejection, Manuscript, publication, publishing, rejection, writer, Writers Resources

08/31/2010 • 8:09 AM 0

Agents and (Non)Acquiring Editors: A Word on Gatekeeper’s Remorse (Some don’t have any!)

J. K. Rowling, after receiving an honorary deg...

Image via Wikipedia

When a book is a great success, the rumors eventually emerge. JK Rowling was rejected six times. Meyer of Twilight fame? Fifteen times. All authors have stories of deals that almost went through. Many tell stories of cruel writing groups, insensitive english professors or critics that were hypercritical. When one writer triumphs and rises above these obstacles, all us of share a little of that. In German, it’s called Schadenfreude. In English it’s called “Nyaa-nyaa, nya-nya-naaaaaah!”

Editors who reject books that go on to great success interest me. First question: Do they still have their jobs? Answer: Yes, of course they do.

In Hollywood, you fail up. (Getting any movie made is such an accomplishment, you can have a string of failures and be a working director like M. Night Shyamalan.) If the rumoured stats are trues (85%-95% of books not earning their advances) publishing surely has the highest tolerance for failure of any industry. There is no product research. “Product research is the first print run,” as they say. (Due to technology and Seth Godin forces, that’s changing. That’s another post.)

Agents who pass up gold and editors who turn their noses up at diamonds answer predictably: “It’s a subjective business.” Yes. It is.

Second Question: “But if these people are the experts who are supposed to know better, why do so many of their books tank?” Should we put so much stock in the opinion of people who are so often wrong? Dick Cheney doesn’t get to make credible predictions on foreign policy anymore. Why are we held in such thrall by agents and editors who have similar track records?

The other common reply is, “I can’t represent it if I don’t love it.”

I call bullshit. I’ve slogged through the slush pile. I worked as a sales rep for several publishing companies. I represented, and sold, many books I never even got to read. (There were too many–especially when I worked at Cannon Books which listed hundreds and hundreds of books each year.) I even sold some books I actively loathed.

The key question is not, “Do I love it?”

The key questions are, “Can I sell it? Will lots of other people love it?”

The idea that you can’t represent something unless you “love” it can set a ridiculously high bar for manuscript acceptance. You’ve read lots of books you liked and were glad to have read. How many were so good you really “loved” them? No wonder it’s so hard to get an agent if love is the accepted standard. (Love is not a standard criterion in business practice. You may think art is exempt from standard business practice. That’s one of the reasons this industry is in so much trouble. Artists worry their art is compromised, but without the business side? No art.)

CORE ISSUE:

Writers, particularly those yet-to-be published, are expected to have a thick skin.

That is useful, though any really successful author will tell you the harsh critics hurt just as much as ever. They feel the pain, but aren’t supposed to complain.

Some editors and agents

(PLEASE NOTE: NOT ALL EDITORS AND AGENTS!)

act as if their mistakes aren’t mistakes.

Therefore, their mistakes will be repeated.

When ego gets in a writer’s way, he or she can’t learn and improve. That same principle should apply to gatekeepers. However, when gatekeepers make mistakes, some seem to say, “Not my fault. That’s just the way it is. I didn’t love it enough.” I say, “The new economy is making million-dollar companies, often out of billion-dollar companies. The coffee’s brewing and it’s a quarter past Massive Industry Fail. Wake up! And open up!”

When you see an agent blog wherein the agent rips new queries, keep in mind that of all the many queries they analyse, they may accept only a handful (some perhaps two a year…or less.) Also, don’t work with snarky people because mean people suck and eventually they’ll be mean to you.

This post was critical, not snarky. If I were snarky, I would have named names.

As literary world’s floodgates open, who must wade through the slush? Yes, us (guardian.co.uk)
The Rebirth of Seth Godin and Death of Traditional Publishing: How Authors Really Make Money (fourhourworkweek.com)
How to Get Published, Part 8: No Agent? Other Paths to Publication (blogher.com)
Boyd Morrison: To Self-Publish or Not to Self-Publish (huffingtonpost.com)
Revolution (darcknyt.wordpress.com)
Authors using Internet to get their books out (sfgate.com)
So, why do authors need publishers, then? (ireaderreview.com)

Filed under: agents, Editors, manuscript evaluation, publishing, Rant, Rejection, Writers, agents, book, editors, future of publishing, J. K. Rowling, publishing, rant, rejection, self-publishing, seth godin, writer

08/27/2010 • 8:08 AM 0

What got done this week

Hey folks! For a change, a little about me, me, me.

In addition to editing my novel (Romeo, Juliet & Jerome) I completed an editing/ghostwriting job for a client. The fellow wanted his content punched up for a magazine article which will publicize his business and connect him to new customers. His allotted word count limit was 3,000 words. He submitted 1,000 words to me. This could have been a problem, but I came up with another 500 words after the edit/ghost job. We solved the rest of the shortfall with photos so everybody’s happy.

I also finished a preliminary edit on a memoir this week. Great life stories are so humbling.

I joined Goodlife Fitness and now I’m exercising every day. If you’re a writer, please do the same. Nobody talks about this much, but as a writer, you’re sedentary. You spend hours sitting still. This wasn’t healthy when it was TV and it’s not any more healthy now. Writers need to get out the door, hit a gym, go for a run or at least a brisk walk. Counteract the damage to your body that writing demands. We are human. We aren’t supposed to stay still as long as we do. In the near future, I expect to be in great shape. (Okay, really good shape.)

Happy Friday! More links are coming later today as I scan the publishing blogs for you, you , you.

Filed under: Editors, getting it done, This Week's Missions, What about Chazz?, editing, editing jobs, mission accomplished, this week's missions

07/20/2010 • 4:58 PM 0

Vampires, What’s Hot & What Editors Want

Last year the word was, “We’re burnt out on vampires and werewolves! No more! No more!” New York editors say that every second year. Some even go so far as to pronounce the genre dead (despite Salem’s Lot, Anne Rice, Buffy, Team Edward etc.,…) You shouldn’t have believed those pleas from treacherous agents and editors.

Get this: Vampires do not die. Get it? They just don’t.

I just ran across a blog by author/agent Mandy Hubbard that confirms your worst fears about the immortality of the undead. She also drops some science on you about the art that’s coming out and what editors want. Great blog! The magic key to the kingdom right now has the initials MG.*

*BONUS:

I don’t believe in trying to time the market (that goes for the stock market as well as the book market.) However, if you’ve got a manuscript that fits into these trends, you need to send it out again. Keep in mind, what was last year’s laughable proposal might be a hot prospect this year. Keep submitting!

Filed under: agents, blogs & blogging, Editors, publishing, web reviews, Mandy Hubbard, publishing trends, what editors want

07/19/2010 • 1:41 PM 7

How Editing Works

Many publishing companies (as recently discussed) are suffering from a shortage of editing. The vast majority of Print on Demand (POD) books just look awful. It matters. If a book looks bad, you won’t be taken seriously.

I once met an enterprising author selling his books at the mall. He had the right idea in many ways, but as I scanned the page, things went off the rails. The layout was crammed. The print job was spotty. The cover was sub-par. He had become his own publisher, but the product looked shabby. He needed an advisor and an editor to bring the manuscript up past the status of “hobby.”

Manuscripts are full of mistakes. You’re human. It’s normal. When you send your manuscript to a professional editor, there are things we look for. Grammar and spelling? Sure. But it goes beyond spellcheck. What about pacing? Are you writing too little here? Are you overwriting there? Are you explaining too much? Does the sequence of events make sense to anyone but you? Do you have three characters who could be one? Sometimes dialogue needs to be punched up and bad habits of passive voice identified. Niggles emerge through the editing process that need solving.

So what does this mean to you, the writer? Perhaps, most important, know that your best writing is your rewriting. When you type “The End” on your first draft, go ahead and pop your champagne cork. Then get back to work and look for problems. Revise. Get it as clean as you can.

Consider sending it to a professional editor first. It’s hard enough getting your work published. Give your manuscript its best chance.

Next: nope! You’re not done. Your editor will give you a lot of suggestions. You may or may not take all the suggestions, but you will have to go through them. Now you rewrite, correct, juggle, stomp your feet and revise some more.

Done? Not yet. Now you share the manuscript with your chosen readers. I’d suggest three to five proofreaders to catch the last of the typos. You don’t want haters. You want someone who knows that this street doesn’t hook up with that street. You want someone who reads slowly and notices things, like your heroine started out three inches shorter or the villain’s eye color changed to blue and then back to brown. You want helpful, book-loving people.

Get their comments and corrections. Do your final polish as quickly as you can because you’re aging and this process takes a long time. You’ve got to ship it out there in the world. Submit, get rejected and resubmit. Submit simultaneously, five manuscripts at a time at least.

Then, if you’re very lucky, an agent or editor will pick it up and be captivated by your story. If you’re very lucky indeed, they’ll make you an offer for publication* and you’ll get to go through the editing process again (though we hope it will be far less traumatic this time!)

*BONUS TIP:

Don’t get too excited about your advance. For a first novel, the advance is best described as “piddling.”

That cash should all go to the promotion of your book, anyway.

Editing Tips Part 1: Story bible (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: How to tell when your manuscript is ready (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: Five editing tricks and tips (plus editing marks) (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: Use a spill file as you edit (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: How I edit (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)

Filed under: Editors, writing tips, editing, editors, manuscript submission

07/17/2010 • 1:56 PM 1

Why You Need an Editor

I recently attended a publishing conference where someone spoke at length about how bookstore staff identify self-published books by ISBN quirks. I can tell you with certainty, when there is prejudice against self-published books, it’s not because anybody’s eyeing the ISBN. It’s because many—okay, I’ll say it—most self-published books look unprofessional. (And by unprofessional, I mean they look like crap.)

The common complaint about self-published books and ebooks is that they are poorly edited. Characters change names. Spelling and grammar go awry. Narrative threads get lost permanently. Every manuscript has its problems. These problems bother readers. Errors take the reader out of the story and hurt your professional credibility.

But hiring your own editor is not just mandatory for self-published authors burning to get their ebook out. When the economy went crazy, publishing houses fired much of their editing staff. For instance, I worked for a publisher with several lines of defence: acquiring editors, line editors, copy editors, and three walls of proofreaders. Now? Publishers still have acquiring editors, but they’ve cut back on the rest of the staff drastically. Yes, traditional houses still have editors, but they have far fewer of them. How much time and attention do you think your book will really get? There’s a math question easily solved.

Every publishing outlet, from newspapers to books, has less defence against typos and errors in execution. You see it every day. That’s why more authors—both traditional and non, ebook and pbook, published and non—are hiring editors to help with the heavy lifting. Editors make any book or manuscript better.

Whether yours is a manuscript or any finished book, it needs editing or no one will take you seriously. Consider hiring an editor for your project. A freelance editor’s work will enhance your chances of becoming published and reduce errors in the final product. Once your manuscript is out there to be submitted (or once the book is on the shelves) you can’t pull those errors out.

Your Aunt Betsy will delight in pointing out your every error. And she’ll be pretty damn smug about it.

Filed under: Editors, publishing, self-publishing, writing tips, editing, hiring an editor

06/14/2010 • 11:45 AM 0

How to talk to an Editor (pleasantly)

Rule #1: Most important in this or any business: Be the pleasant solution, not the grumpy problem.

Scenario:

You write a piece for a magazine. They edit it (gently I hope) and before they send it off to the printer, they send you a dummy in the form of a pdf file. Depending on the mag, they may also require a fact check and copies of all your notes etc.,…

Though the editor has gone over the story and it looks like the magazine page, go over it carefully. Ultimately, my name’s on the piece, so I have to be happy with it. However, this is not the time for you to make major changes. It was supposed to be close to perfect when you sent it in. There will be a few notes here and there, sometimes so many you’d think the copy editor went at their keyboard with oven mitts. Usually it’ll be details.

Correct the mistakes. How you talk to the editor is based on what relationship you’ve built up over time. I have an editor I’ve worked with for a few years now and, like many jobs I’ve had, I sometimes suspect I don’t get fired because I amuse them. Be yourself, only better. Don’t assume familiarity too quickly, but build the relationship so you get assignments. Do a great job so you earn the next job, too, of course.

I just got a pdf tonight for a health mag I write for. One of my precious/funny anecdotes had been deleted from the story. I don’t decry the loss because that’s an editorial choice I can live with. The length often gets cut not because of the content but because magazine and newspaper content is just the stuff they’re trying to fit between the ads. (In newspapers, they crassly call it “The News Hole” which also gives you an insight into the perceived value of reporters’ hard work.)

Below is a copy of what I’d consider typical of a reply to an editor (I know really well) with a few things I want changed in the pdf. Sometimes it’s a lot more but this editor edits clean so my suggestions are minor.

See? Freelancing can be fun.

EXAMPLE:

My Queen,

Looks good. Just a couple of quibbles:

1. If you have the space, MSG is another migraine trigger that would be good to mention. Alert the populace!

2. Under For the joy of it, the phrase “hanging around” is used too close together. How about: “As long as we’ve been on the planet…”

3. The paragraph starting “Poke an animal with a stick” appears to have a double indent making it non-uniform and so it is deviant and must be crushed…sorry, my upbringing in a Catholic girl’s school is showing.

Okay, that’s three quibbles, but that’ll do. Any other objection I have is microscopic and really revolves around my sublimated resentments about not yet winning the lottery, not controlling my world and…I’ve said too much…back to writing about the existential horror of it all. Did I mention that we’re all just genetically programmed meat machines awaiting the heat death of the universe? Probably. I put it on outgoing my voice mail message, too.*

Chazz

The Impossible

BONUS:

*I know this editor well and joking around a lot opened the door to writing a couple of humor pieces for the mag, as well. Early on? Much more formal, short, to the point and business-like…because, hey man, whether you like it or not, this is a business.