Tag Archives: creative writing

The Em Dash— #amwriting

I often turn to Connie J. Jasperson for good common sense about writing, in this case an issue that looks as if it ought to be simple, yet plagues many of us. I also note the use of an em dash to indicate interrupted dialogue–another use that can be overdone! (em dash intended). Thanks, Connie!

conniejjasperson's avatarLife in the Realm of Fantasy

Over the years, I have seen many books written by wonderful authors who overuse em or en dashes.

I also tend to do that in blogging and in Facebook posts, and my first drafts can be peppered with them. Em dashes are a kind of author’s crutch because it is easy to rely on them.

Trust me, readers find it distracting to see an em dash in every paragraph. Some editors don’t want to see one on every page. Their point of view is that the em dash is like any other repetitive word in a manuscript. As a tool, it’s useful as a way to emphasize certain ideas, and can also be used to good effect in the place of a semicolon. In my opinion, the em dash should be used sparingly to be most effective.

So, what is the difference between the hyphen and the em dash? Aren’t…

View original post 846 more words

3 Comments

Filed under correct grammar for writers of fiction, Editing your novel, grammar rules for writers, Learning to write, punctuation for writers of novels, self editing for fiction writers, style for writers

3 Apostrophe Rules You Need!

One of those dastardly little conundrums of self-editing is the apostrophe.

The five basic comma rules

Our writing center at the institution where I taught had a handout titled “Rogue Apostrophes,” in recognition of the way these nasty squiggles had a way of popping up here and there in student papers, wherever the mood seemed to strike them.

””””””’ !

As with many punctuation marks, misplaced apostrophes don’t always get in the way of a reader’s understanding. But they can. When readers encounter something that looks as if it was a possessive but turns out not to be, they’ll mentally backtrack to clear up the confusion. Sometimes the reader doesn’t even notice the glitch in his or her attention, but it’s there all the same.

And even the slightest glitch in attention means that the reader has been kicked out of your story, even if just for a moment. Not good.

There are only three things you need to know about apostrophes, one easy rule and two with some complications that you can learn to handle.

Do you need the Oxford Comma?

Rule 1 (the easy one): NEVER USE AN APOSTROPHE TO FORM A PLURAL.

Not even when it looks as if an apostrophe might be helpful, as in numerals and letters. This rule reflects the most recent style preferences, so if you learned differently, it’s time to change.

Not “I earned A’s in my math classes.”

But “I earned As in my math classes.”

Not “My scores were all 2’s.”

But “My scores were all 2s.”

Not “I learned my ABC’s”

But “I learned my ABCs.”

Trickiest: In family names

Not “My cousins, the Simpson’s, are coming to dinner.”

But “My cousins, the Simpsons, are coming to dinner.”

Just apply this rule ACROSS THE BOARD.

More comma rules

Rule 2: USE APOSTROPHES TO FORM POSSESSIVES.

When something belongs to something else, that’s the time for an apostrophe.

“I used Jane’s cookie recipe today.”

“The house’s paint job needed touching up.”

Two situations can give you fits:

A) PLURAL possessives—where does that darn squiggle go?

Here’s a rule of thumb that will help you: FORM THE PLURAL FIRST, THEN ADD THE APOSTROPHE.

“I like the trees’ colors in fall.”

Family names are the worst!

The plural of the family name Simpson is Simpsons.

The plural possessive (something belongs to the entire family named Simpson) is Simpsons’ (Not Simpson’s—that’s Mr. or possibly Ms. Simpson, by him- or herself).*

So: “The Simpsons’ new car is really expensive.”

“We went over to the Simpsons’ yesterday” (“house” is understood).

And:

“The families’ main concern was the change in their insurance premiums.”

Most annoying are family names that sound as if the possessive is built into the plural. For example:

The plural of “Wilkes” as a family name is “Wilkeses,” so if you want to talk about something that belongs to the entire Wilkes family, it’s “the Wilkeses’ house.”

Aggravating but true!

The position of the apostrophe is sometimes the only way you can tell whether you have a singular or plural owner:

“The girl’s dresses filled the closet” vs. “The girls’ dresses filled the closet.”

REMEMBER: FORM THE PLURAL FIRST.

B) Hidden possessives—you really need an apostrophe for that?

Yep. Think of it this way:

A wait of four days is something created by those four days, so in a logical sense, the wait belongs to the days.

So: “We had a four days’ wait.”

Remember: Form the plural first, where appropriate.

So: “It was a long day’s wait.”

Any mention of time used to modify (in front of) another noun should have this tricky apostrophe: weeks, years, months, centuries, etc.

Do you need the Oxford Comma?

Rule 3: APOSTROPHES INDICATE CONTRACTIONS—where a letter has been left out.

Most of these are straightforward, still so natural to us that we won’t mess them up often. I almost never see “cant” for “can’t” or “doesnt” for “doesn’t”—and I really have to discipline my word-processor if I want to deliberately make that mistake.

Two cases, though, tie us into knots:

A) Its vs. It’s

You’ve run into this one, I bet.

It’s maddening because “its” is a possessive and therefore, by Rule 2 above, should have an apostrophe. But it’s a special form of possessive, a possessive pronoun, like “her” or “their” or “his”: her dog, his cat, their pet lion, its paws.

So, as the sentences above illustrate, the ONLY TIME “it” and “s” get an apostrophe is when they form the contractions for “it is” or “it has.”

“It’s about time you got home.”

“It’s been a long time since you left.”

To be honest, this messy little exception gives so many people trouble that, if I were you and I had trouble remembering, I’d feel no shame in simply looking it up.

B) Let’s vs. Lets

This contraction may be in the process of disappearing. I admit to missing it from time to time, in writing I’m critiquing and even in my own. Still, “let’s” is a contraction for “let us,” so it’s legally entitled to an apostrophe.

These rules cover almost every situation you’re likely to find yourself in if you’re writing in Standard Written English (which is what editors, agents, publishers, and most readers expect). If you encounter something that doesn’t seem to fit, you can always search the web until you find a helpful rule.

It’s worth noting, too, that publications almost always specify a “style sheet” such as AP or Chicago Manual of Style, or provide their own. If you’re submitting to particular magazine, do what they say, regardless of “the rules.”

*One minor point I left out above so as not to add confusion: Current style specifies that possessives of PROPER NAMES take not just an apostrophe, but an apostrophe-s.

Not: “That is James’ car”

But: “That is James’s car”

The five basic comma rules

Here’s a quick quiz you can try!

1) There were two Angela’s/Angelas in my high-school class.

2) We went to the Smiths’/Smith’s party last night.

3) The cat licked it’s/its fur constantly.

4) My friend made a lot of money during the late 1990’s/1990s.

5) I felt as if I’d put in a lifetimes/lifetime’s work.

Trick question:

6) Be sure to pick up the dog’s/dogs’ toys.

CONTACT ME AND I’LL EMAIL YOU THE ANSWERS IF YOU WANT!

23 Comments

Filed under correct grammar for writers of fiction, Editing your novel, grammar rules for writers, punctuation for writers of novels, self editing for fiction writers

“The Book Designer” Gives Us Valuable Definitions: Copyright and License

What do copyright and license mean?

Contributing writer David Kudler explains the basic terms copyright and license that many new authors may find confusing. (Joel Friedlander’s The Book Designer is a go-to site for a lot of extremely useful information about the publishing business. Check it out!)

Leave a comment

Filed under Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing, business of writing, Copyright for writers, indie publishing, Money issues for writers, Publishing, publishing contracts, reversion of rights clauses, Self-publishing

Myths and Truths about Traditional Publishing—What It Was Like for Me.

Old Open Bible

I came across this post via Chris the Story Reading Ape (a crucial source for publishing tips and news). Steven Spatz, president of BookBaby.com, a book packager for independent publishers, lays out “Six Myths (and a Few Facts) about Traditional Publishing.

Just to be clear, “traditional publishing” means having your book produced by an established, for-profit publishing company that will pay you an advance, provide you with an editor and a publicity department, physically manufacture your book—including the cover and format—and, ideally, get it to sell.

In contrast, independent or self-publishing means writing a book and getting it edited, producing a formatted copy with a cover, uploading it as an ebook to an ebook vendor like Amazon or Smashwords or as a “real” book like a paperback or hardcover to a company that “packages” it for you and that may supply some editing, cover production, and marketing, depending on what you pay for.

Whew.

When I contemplated this post, I didn’t know those definitions could be so hard.

Bottom line: A traditional publisher PAYS YOU and does it all (or much of it) for you. As an indie publisher, you either do it all yourself, possibly for free, or pay for certain services you don’t feel you can do well.

grunge paper texture, vintage background

With that out of the way, the very first comment on Mr. Spatz’s article pointed out that BookBaby specialized in packaging books for “indie publishing,” and is therefore biased against traditional publishing.

Okay, Spatz may be biased. But as I read, I found myself saying, yeah, yeah, that’s exactly what I found out during my all-too-brief existence as a traditionally published author. Spatz’s observations, in my view, offer a useful “wait-a-minute!” that prospective authors need before they decide how they want to enter the publishing melee.

Note that the experiences I cite here are grounded in my own career: I was traditionally published by three MAJOR houses, St. Martin’s, Bantam/Doubleday, and New American Library. Today’s traditional publishing field is surely more competitive, not less, than in those glory days.

So, with eternal gratitude to Victoria Strauss, read these thoughts as a version of Writer Beware.

Spatz’s Myth 4: Publishing with a Traditional Publisher means your book will show up on bookstore shelves.

This was my first devastating revelation. And my mother’s. We’d walk into a bookstore and she’d gesture at the extravagant front-door displays and demand, “Why don’t they put your books out here?”

Because, I learned, shelf space is a precious, much fought-over commodity. In order to be provided so much as a sliver of space the width of a spine, my books had to have a mega advertising budget behind them. Mega. I had to be Paris Hilton. Or Michelle Obama. Or . . . you know who I mean.

My mass-market paperbacks (these still do exist) did get rack space in drugstores. For about a month.

I can now get my books into independent bookstores by carrying them there and asking for shelf space while presenting a reason why I deserve it. This was as true before indie publishing as it is now. Only it never occurred to me. I didn’t know that was part of my job.book word in letterpress wood type

Myth 3: A traditional publisher will market your book.

This hope meant almost zilch thirty-five years ago. I can’t imagine it means more now.

No one told me that I really needed to get out there and market. They told me, write the next book. At least now they’re honest about this.

Marketing is the hardest thing asked of authors who really would rather be writing the next book (well, hardest after writing the synopsis). Only some of us have marketing in our blood. I found that my houses had standard “marketing” practices that gave the books a chance to take off but didn’t do anything out of the way to grow them wings. A smart author (I was not) would have noticed all the other things that could have been done, and would have done them.

I did do something. For King of the Roses, they asked me for a list of horse-racing celebrities who would endorse the book. I compiled such a list. They wanted to know who on that list I knew whom I could personally ask. Um, no one.

I said, since this book is about the Kentucky Derby, why not run an ad in the Daily Racing Form on Derby Day? Not cost-effective, they said. So I paid for it. Myself. They may have been right. In those days, you couldn’t track clicks to see who responded to what ad.

What a traditional house can do is send your book out to reviewers. They have lists of people who will possibly read your book and write it up in a highly visible place. Much more effective than begging for reader reviews. If the right reviewer—say, at the New York Times—takes a shine to your cover or back-of-book copy, you might really end up on Oprah! (No way of knowing what my brief mention in the prestigious Atlantic Monthly meant to my sales.)

Magic book

Myth 5: Getting picked up by a major house means your writing career is set.

No.

Your career with a traditional publisher will last only as long as you write a) what the publisher thinks will sell; or b) what actually does sell. You want a career in a traditional house, YOU better make sure what you write sells. See Myth 3.

And if what you wrote the first time around doesn’t sell well above average, second chances are hard to come by. More than once agents I’ve approached want sales figures from my previous books. At the very least, they want my platform. How many famous people do I know who will endorse my book?

It takes only one “disappointing” book to end this kind of career. I know.

That doesn’t mean there aren’t ways back into the fold. But they are at least as hard as that first foray, when you stood a chance of being a “discovery” that sent the sales team into raptures. I was there. I know.

Some “truths” from Spatz I can endorse:

**It will take at least a year and probably longer for your traditionally published book to make it into print.

**You have to fight for control over your metadata and cover. If you don’t like cover or the back-cover copy or the book description, you have to assert yourself. I was able to protest the inner jacket flap copy for one of my books and rewrite it. But it was when I saw the back-cover copy of that book that I knew the book was doomed. No blurbs quoting the excellent reviews for my first two books, both in paperback from Bantam. Instead, just an excerpt from the book.

Decent writing, I guess, albeit arguably overwritten. Of course, in Bantam’s defense, in those days, no one could order a mass-market paperback once it was out of print.

**And if your traditionally published book does make it onto bookstore shelves, it will run out its welcome fast. Once it’s last month’s sensation, it’s gone. Maybe you’ll get a paperback deal that may hang onto shelf space in row 6 a little longer. But it if doesn’t sell, bookstores will pull it for this month’s New Thing. People will buy your book from Half-Priced Books or from third-party sellers on Amazon, and you won’t make a cent.

Image of earth planet on hand

A truth of my own: Working with a top editor at a major house doesn’t mean your book will get better.

My editor at St. Martin’s was superb, my editor at Bantam horrible, and my editor at NAL nice but not inspirational. (They are all long gone, so don’t ask.) I learned that, in the end, I alone was responsible for the words that got published under my name.

I regularly depressed people at writing conferences by sharing these experiences.

If I’ve depressed you, at least you are forewarned.

If this sounds as if I am biased in favor of self-publishing, well, to a certain extent yes. I would like to be traditionally published again because a “published” book, however doomed in the market, would give me credentials for speaking and guest-posting. I would also like reviews. And my feeble, newbie marketing efforts are unlikely to earn me what I would make from even the most anemic advance.

What I do like about self-publishing is that my prospects are limited only by my energy and creativity. There is no shelf-life for my books. I can try new marketing techniques indefinitely without knowing that next week, or the week after, my books will show up on that pile labeled “remaindered.” I can even revise and republish. I can be a completely new author, in a completely new genre, as fast as I can write.

When lightning strikes an author!

My final words of “wait-a-minute”:

If you want to submit traditionally, haul out all those grammar books and all those tomes on how to structure a story. Editors and agents do gatekeep based on how much work you’re going to mean for them versus how much you can earn for them. A badly edited, unstructured book means more work for them. A great idea can die because it looks as if it will take too much time to slap into shape. Make their job as easy as you can.

If you want to self-publish, do your due diligence. Book packagers (that includes Kindle Direct Print and Ingram as well as BookBaby, Lulu, etc.) vary widely in quality and cost. Make sure you understand how the self-publishing universe works (it’s all out there online) and don’t pay for anything you can do yourself. You can publish your ebook in an hour at Smashwords or Amazon for free. Your paperback may take a little longer, but you can do it. Don’t pay for anything you can do yourself.

Ask me anything you want about my days as a “published author.” I’ll tell you everything but the names.

 

11 Comments

Filed under Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing, business of writing, indie publishing, King of the Roses, looking for literary editors and publishers, Marketing books, Money issues for writers, Myths and Truths for writers, Publishing, Self-publishing, Writing, writing novels, writing scams

Excellent Explanation of ISBNs, Amazon, and Your Publishing Goals

I’ve included a chapter on ISBNs in my little book on formatting your paperback interior with Adobe InDesign (soon to be republished in an updated version), but this post from AuthorImprints is extremely clear, concise, and helpful. It explains in detail why you need an ISBN for your paperback, but may not want to accept the Kindle Direct Publishing free ISBN. According to the author, David Wogahn, Amazon is using the migration to KDP Print to persuade writers to accept the free ISBN. As his article makes clear, that is a fraught decision we all need to make with our eyes open.

Page 1 of King of the Roses in Adobe InDesign

You CAN format your book!

 

How are you handling ISBNs, and how does your process work for you?

2 Comments

Filed under Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing, business of writing, indie publishing, Myths and Truths for writers, Print on Demand for fiction writers, Publishing, Self-publishing, Writing, writing novels

Speed-Write That Synopsis (or close)

Your book ready to publish--dreamscape!

This article by guest poster Romi Summer on Jami Gold’s site is one of the clearest synopsis-writing templates I’ve seen yet (thanks again to Chris the Story Reading Ape!). I especially like that it’s a primer on story structure as well. I don’t care if you do write Literary Stuff—if you don’t have these elements, you don’t have a story.

Give it a try and tell me what you think!

2 Comments

Filed under Finding literary agents for writers, Plot Development for writers, Writing, writing novels

Useful and Practical Info on the Migration from CreateSpace to KDP

Books flying into reviewers' hands.Courtesy of Indies Unlimited, Melinda Clayton shares her experiences with the changeover from CreateSpace to KDP Print. Straightforward tips that you may find useful. I’m going to tackle this soon. Read the comments; they are helpful as well.

Leave a comment

Filed under Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing, business of writing, indie publishing, Print on Demand for fiction writers, Publishing, Self-publishing, Writing, writing novels

‘Tis the Season for Pet Peeves: How to Make A Family Name Plural.

Here’s the primer. Save those apostrophes for the times you really need one—and that means NOT in plurals!

Check the five basic comma rules

SHOUTING:

NO APOSTROPHE IN THE PLURAL OF YOUR FAMILY NAME—OR YOUR CHARACTER’S FAMILY NAME. APOSTROPHES ARE FOR POSSESSIVES AND CONTRACTIONS. THAT’S IT!

Leave a comment

Filed under correct grammar for writers of fiction, Editing your novel, grammar rules for writers, punctuation for writers of novels, self editing for fiction writers, Writing

People! RESEARCH “How to Publish.” It’s Not Hard!

Editing tips for writers

Yet again, on a Facebook page for writers of fiction, someone asked about a clear vanity press scam. Page members quickly jumped in with the appropriate answer for such a query: RUN!

But what amazes me is that I see so many of these kinds of questions. I’m not a particularly patient soul myself, so I had to throttle my immediate response: Don’t you have a computer? Don’t you know how to Google? Shouldn’t basic research be the first step for someone thinking about publishing? Doesn’t it occur to folks that in this day and age, How-To is there for the asking? All you have to do is look.

I consider the answer I composed reasonably tactful (for me):

These days, when we all clearly have access to the Internet, it surprises me that people don’t actively search for information on “how to publish a book.” Of course, a search like that will turn up lots of scams and vanity presses, but it will also turn up many useful sites that offer advice. Everyone who is thinking seriously about publishing should be compiling a personal list of the most helpful FREE sites that lay out the ins and outs of today’s publishing options. A search for “best websites for writers” would yield a ton of these. Yes, you will get some conflicting opinions–some people love Amazon, some hate it–but you’ll begin to get the lay of the land. After a while you begin to get a sense of which bloggers know their business and which don’t. In my earlier comment, I listed Jane Friedman and Victoria Strauss (Writer Beware): invaluable. I also recommend The Book Designer (Joel Friedlander). You can buy books by the carload that will walk you through every step; most are cheap enough as ebooks that you can buy more than one and get a wider set of options. Takes a little time, yes, but not nearly as much time as you have devoted to writing your book, and this basic research will save you many hours by helping you make the best choice for you. Chris the Story Reading Ape also offers regular links to excellent advice. I found these people by Googling, attending conferences, and searching Amazon. Don’t put less energy into this than you would in buying a car!

Okay, I get it that posting questions to Facebook groups is a step in this process. But Facebook friends can’t offer the kind of education we writers need. Learning about style and grammar and showing-not-telling are basic skills, but so are the fundamentals of the business you are thinking of entering. For example, one respondent said she couldn’t afford to self-publish! Facebook friends can’t possibly slap up a full explanation of why this comment is unfounded. They basically have to say, “Go look it up!”

So that’s what I’m saying: Want to be a writer? Go look it up.

Am I completely off base here?

Leave a comment

Filed under Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing, business of writing, ebooks publishing and selling, indie publishing, Money issues for writers, Myths and Truths for writers, Print on Demand for fiction writers, Publishing, publishing contracts, Self-publishing, Writing, writing novels, writing scams

5 Lessons From a Lost Novel – by K.M. Weiland…

This article (via that incredible resource, Chris the Story Reading Ape) rings so true for me. I, too, have “lost novels,” one of which actually got published, to my everlasting regret—even with a supposedly top editor! Just goes to show you (me): it’s YOUR book, and you are the one who either makes it work or not. K. M. Weiland’s focus on story—on structure, on having an arc that provides readers with the narrative pull to keep reading: vital. I’ve written and reblogged about that (just some examples), because I learned the hard way. Take her advice to heart.

Do you have a “lost novel”? What did you take away?

Chris The Story Reading Ape's avatarChris The Story Reading Ape's Blog

on Helping Writers become Authors:

Mistakes are unavoidable. To fear them is to fear life itself. To try to eliminate them is to waste life in a futile struggle against reality itself.

I daresay no one has more opportunities to learn these truths than does a writer.

As writers, our lives are a never-ending litany of mistakes. Certainly mine has been full of mistakes—everything from the opening sentences I wrote for this post, thought better of, and replaced—to literally hundreds of thousands of deleted words I’ve carefully saved from all my rough drafts—to entire story ideas (representing hundreds of hours of dedicated, hopeful work) that have proven themselves unsalvageable and earned a dusty place in a back corner of a closet shelf.

I won’t say I don’t regret these mistakes. I do. I regret the wasted time and effort. I regret the bereavement of loving and nurturing something that never…

View original post 48 more words

Leave a comment

Filed under Editing your novel, Learning to write, Myths and Truths for writers, Plot Development for writers, self editing for fiction writers, What Not To Do in Writing Novels, Writing, writing novels