Back to the future

As is traditional I'll start with a look back at the last 12 months to see how I did. In December 2007 I set myself some big objectives for 2008 which included writing at least nine stories, making a pro-sale and joining the Codex Writing Group.

How did I fare?

I managed to write six in total and had two others almost finished by the end of the year - so I almost hit that target but not quite. And it is actual rather than almost that matters so I was way off. Given the lack of output I didn't make a pro-sale either. I got close. I've had nice rejection letters from some of the finest genre publications. Many, many times I've got the 'good, but not for us' letter or e-mail back with a rejection. It's rejectomancy to read too much into that but I'm looking for crumbs here so I'll take that as progress. No pro-sale meant no joining the Codex Group either.

On the upside I did have two stories published in 2008. One of which I'm getting paid for. And that is progress. In each of the three previous years I've only had one published. Both were accepted much faster when they were taken on too. That's definitely progress. I managed to put out the same number of stories despite only writing until August when work went crazy and the writing stopped.

I long ago realised that if I do anything well, it's start. And so last year proved. Though seven months of start is a sign of a certain amount of dedication.

Turning to this year. What can I do? I guess re-iterate my goals for last year. Try to write a story a month but do at least nine. Make a pro-sale. Join Codex. And I'll add another one. Don't quit.

See you in 12 months for the reckoning.

Back to basics

I know I'm coming late to this but Lynne Truss's book "Eats Shoots and Leaves" is an absolute delight. I mentioned before that one reviewer made me feel giddy when I realised what a difference correct punctuation made to one passage but the feeling was short lived and has only been repeated as I read Ms Truss's book. Not only is it full of rules for the correct use of punctuation but it makes it clear what all the various marks are supposed to do.

One of the most striking sentences in the book is the description of punctuation as: "a courtesy designed to help readers to understand a story without stumbling." I had a real "man with the teeth opening the door" moment (Thanks, Ken) when I read that. Later in the book she talks about the feelings that good punctuation is supposed to provoke in the reader and I had another of those moments. I can now see how useful it can be in writing; how it can make improve what is said; how it can help. (Look at that - two semi-colons in a sentence. Astonishing.)

I suspect Ms Truss must be close in age to myself as she speaks of going through school and never having had any of the punctuation explained to her. Like me. She declares herself a stranger to subordinate clauses. Like me. But I guess that is grammar rather than punctuation but at least now I know the difference.

I suspect I'll have to re-read it to get the full benefit, and maybe copy out the rules, but I feel encouraged by how straight-forward she makes it seem. Doubtless it is not quite as clear-cut as she suggests but at least the basics are a bit clearer now.

Understanding Mildred

I think I've already written about my affection for Of Human Bondage by WS Maugham - now I come to think of it I don't think there is any other book, apart from LOTR, that I've re-read so many times. Pride and Prejudice? Tess? HMS Surprise? Hmm. Not sure.

Anyway I recently re-read it and it confirmed all my best hopes like it always does. What makes it a great book is that every time I read it I discover something new in it. For a long time I've admired its control of character, use of language and how it engenders sympathy for Philip. Although giving him a club foot and making him an orphan looks a bit obvious even to a newbie such as myself.

Anyhoo, this time around it struck me that what gives the book its power is that some of the incidents in it are so well tied to the stage in Philip's life at which they occur. Mildred's destruction of all Philip's property has to happen because in doing that she severs his link with his past - which she represents. By destroying his possessions she forces him to start anew and launches him on that track. After this incident Philips' life slowly, with one major downturn, starts to pick up. He becomes reconciled to who he is and starts to swim well in the stream of life.

For a long time though I just did not get why she did it apart from it being one with her narrow, vindictive character. Which is another reason why its a great book. Not only do the incidents underscore the broader story of Philips journey through life they are also utterly in tune with the characters of the people carrying them out. I'm not sure how many times I've read OHB but I'm betting that 2008 was by no means the last.

And we're back

August 13th. Ooof. I'll blame crazy times at work for the hiatus. I don't propose to bore anyone with the details instead I'll bore allcomers with more entries. Don't say you weren't warned.

Standard operating procedure

An observation. Another - related to the first. A moment to ponder and give me time to think while I write. A hyperlink. Two. A question about what it means. Is it good? or bad? Perhaps it is both.

Anecdotes to explore what this means. One of them might be quite funny. Or self-deprecating. Oh, other people have gone through this.

Emotion creeps in. Pathos. An attempt to lighten the mood with a pun. A hint of bitterness and regret. A rant that almost breaks out in flaming rage. Hulk smash! Realism drags the post back to saner waters with the rider than I wonder if I'm cut out for this. How many rejections? State how much it matters to me. Again. Verbal teeth are gritted. Fuck it, I'll do it anyway. A witty sign off.

The Whine List

I've become a fan of Mur Lafferty's podcast "I Should Be Writing" which is a great source of encouragement for writers labouring in the wilderness - that would be me. It's good to hear about the experiences of someone going through the same hassles I am and Mur has lots of level-headed advice about the trade.

But in this podcast she said something that experience tells me is not true. Writers, she said, should try to get better at what they do because the better the story they write the more chance there is that someone will want to publish it.

I've no quibble with the assertion that writers should study their craft and hone their abilities but, I've got to say, that will have almost no effect on the saleability of a story.

I'm driven to say that because of a comment that turned up in a recent rejection - yet another which was of the "almost but not quite" species. The comment was that the whole picking of which stories to publish was such a subjective business.

Until I read that I'd harboured the fantastical notion that an editor presented with ten stories for five slots would pick the five best - by which I mean the most technically adept, the best written. But I have been foolish and deluded. Editors pick what they like to read. By which I mean crap gets published all the time.

It strikes me that it would be perfectly possible to go through an entire writing career turning out technically flawless stories but never getting anything published because no editor liked any of them quite enough. Tobias Buckell said he got rejected 500 times before he started to make it. I hope it does not take me that long. I've just hit 100 rejections after three years. So to hit 500 I'll have to do this for another 12 years.

The days after I realised all this have been dark - I've really considered giving up. Especially when I worked out that since I've supposedly been getting better at writing the ratio of acceptances to rejections has got a lot worse. Significantly so.

I've said before that my motivation hinges on whether I get a good response to what I put out and at the moment I'm not. Now though I realise that the only person I need to please is myself. I feel quite liberated and what I write has changed a lot. Getting published is a bonus that luck has a lot to do with. And I have to believe in luck. How else, to paraphrase Cocteau, how can I explain the success of my rivals?

The rules for the game

In no particular order...
Be specific - sardines being grilled is better than fish being cooked.
Use active and direct verbs - he walked rather than he was walking.
Avoid abstractions - such as horrible, violent, frustration.
Make every scene and sentence count.
Use the minimum amount of magic/hi-tech to get things moving.
Adverbs - Gah, away with them.
Reveal character by action. Put characters in situations that force a response.
Do not hide information. A surprise works better if no-one suspects it is coming.
Experts plan to the end.
Dialogue - Do not let it meander. Conversations are great ways to show character and attitude.
Elaboration of motive - a character's actions should reveal more about them, what they are doing and why they are doing it.
Write for yourself and no-one else.
Writers write - try to make progress every day.
Keep an ideas notebook with you at all times.