Is it just me, or does NO ONE know how to use the language anymore?
Facebook is rife with memes talking about all the misuses of things like THEY'RE, THEIR, and THERE. Not to mention all the funny poems about how English spelling versus pronunciation is inconsistent, to say the least. :-)
But there's one usage I haven't seen much said about: POUR versus PORE.
Probably for good reason...because NO ONE seems to know how to use the words right.
Quick reference guide:
Unless you've got a pitcher tipped, a container ready to be emptied, or a bucket of sand that needs to be added to a castle, you're not POURING over a document. You're PORING over it.
Yes, there's a difference. And yes, it does matter.
Next time I see a published book with the heroine "pouring" over a book, a document, a letter, or other thing she's obviously reading and examining, I'm going to quote the dang thing on Facebook, identify the ignorant author, and ask which liquid or solid her character dumped on her reading material.
This is why you need editors who actually understand the English language, people.
Unfortunately, most of you who DO need this won't ever read this post.
(sigh.)
Thoughts?
Janny
Saturday, May 28, 2016
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
The First Toe-Dip in the Lake...
...was, indeed, as cold as I expected.
But I suspect future dips will start to feel REALLY good when it gets hot outside!
In the meantime, here's the view from my office window:
But I suspect future dips will start to feel REALLY good when it gets hot outside!
In the meantime, here's the view from my office window:
Yeah, I'm a brat. :-)
More to come,
Janny
Janny
Monday, May 23, 2016
A Pitching Parable
Here it is, Saturday morning, when someone comes on Facebook talking about Kensington's Lyrical Press line looking for thrillers and suspense. (!) Naturally, with CALLIE'S ANGEL sitting right there on my computer ready to find a home, I jump all over this.
Which then begins an interesting comedy of errors.
1. It seems the author who recommended her editor also admits her editor has moved from New York to Seattle. Which means that her editor is now a freelancer. Or something like it.
2. Of course, that also means her editor's not listed with the "normal" editors on the Kensington page anymore...
3. ...except that--wait, wait!--she actually IS on one of their pages as an assistant editor...
4. Which sets up an interesting dilemma when Author Who Is Ready To Pounce On This attempts to send an e-mail to said editor, and it bounces back.
5. The editor the aforementioned recommending author is NOW with (having been moved along in the process), however, is still WITH the company.
6. So Pouncing Author says, "I'm going for it"....
7. ...only to forget to take the OTHER editor's name out of the salutation on the e-mail. So I've got a "Dear Ms. F" when I'm actually pitching "Dear Mr. S."
8....prompting said Pouncing Author to follow up immediately with a short e-mail note saying, "I really do know what I'm doing, honest."
9. Which should be a cautionary tale to all of you out there: if you're going to recommend someone pitch your editor, GIVE HER E-MAIL ADDRESS in your post. Don't say, "PM me for the e-mail address," and then fail to answer the PM. If it's NOT okay with your editor to do this without asking her, don't talk about the recommendation until you've got that okay. If you get flooded with PMs asking for that editor's e-mail address, answer them. Yes, ALL of them. You asked people to contact you, after all. Don't leave them hanging afterward.
10. With the actual e-mail address of this apparently now freelance editor, I could have saved myself a whole lot of grief, including saving myself looking like an idiot to an actual editor at a place that claims to want books like I write.
11. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could wonder if this author deliberately set people up to fail, masking it as enthusiasm and "spreading good news." But...no. I really am not. A conspiracy theorist. Much. Well, okay, hardly ever.
I'm going to go change my aluminum-foil hat now. And hope that "Mr. S" has a sense of humor.
(sigh)
Janny
Which then begins an interesting comedy of errors.
1. It seems the author who recommended her editor also admits her editor has moved from New York to Seattle. Which means that her editor is now a freelancer. Or something like it.
2. Of course, that also means her editor's not listed with the "normal" editors on the Kensington page anymore...
3. ...except that--wait, wait!--she actually IS on one of their pages as an assistant editor...
4. Which sets up an interesting dilemma when Author Who Is Ready To Pounce On This attempts to send an e-mail to said editor, and it bounces back.
5. The editor the aforementioned recommending author is NOW with (having been moved along in the process), however, is still WITH the company.
6. So Pouncing Author says, "I'm going for it"....
7. ...only to forget to take the OTHER editor's name out of the salutation on the e-mail. So I've got a "Dear Ms. F" when I'm actually pitching "Dear Mr. S."
8....prompting said Pouncing Author to follow up immediately with a short e-mail note saying, "I really do know what I'm doing, honest."
9. Which should be a cautionary tale to all of you out there: if you're going to recommend someone pitch your editor, GIVE HER E-MAIL ADDRESS in your post. Don't say, "PM me for the e-mail address," and then fail to answer the PM. If it's NOT okay with your editor to do this without asking her, don't talk about the recommendation until you've got that okay. If you get flooded with PMs asking for that editor's e-mail address, answer them. Yes, ALL of them. You asked people to contact you, after all. Don't leave them hanging afterward.
10. With the actual e-mail address of this apparently now freelance editor, I could have saved myself a whole lot of grief, including saving myself looking like an idiot to an actual editor at a place that claims to want books like I write.
11. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I could wonder if this author deliberately set people up to fail, masking it as enthusiasm and "spreading good news." But...no. I really am not. A conspiracy theorist. Much. Well, okay, hardly ever.
I'm going to go change my aluminum-foil hat now. And hope that "Mr. S" has a sense of humor.
(sigh)
Janny
Monday, April 18, 2016
"Try to Leave Out the Parts People Skip."
The above is a quote from mystery writer Elmore Leonard, one I always got a kick out of. How do you know which parts people are going to skip?
Well, I've gotten a partial answer on it.
I'm presently editing a nice book from a client about athletes, some of whom are from ages long past; setting the background for these people does entail a bit of history. However, I've discovered there's a certain amount of history that lends itself well to background...and a certain amount more that glazes me over.
And I like history. So that should tell you something.
What it tells me is that there are parts that should be edited out--the parts people will "skip over." I've never seen something illustrate this idea quite so clearly, and I know my author will have the final say on what stays and what goes...but it's still interesting to encounter, first-hand, an actual piece of manuscript that "shows" you rather than "telling" you, in a manner of speaking.
The trick, however, still is trying to get rid of this stuff before it's written and has to be edited out!
If I have any insights on what that might look like, you'll hear it here first.
Trust me.
In the meantime...keep calm and write your a** off! Because you can't have something to edit until something is there on the page, or screen, in the first place.
Capisce?
Onward!
Janny
Well, I've gotten a partial answer on it.
I'm presently editing a nice book from a client about athletes, some of whom are from ages long past; setting the background for these people does entail a bit of history. However, I've discovered there's a certain amount of history that lends itself well to background...and a certain amount more that glazes me over.
And I like history. So that should tell you something.
What it tells me is that there are parts that should be edited out--the parts people will "skip over." I've never seen something illustrate this idea quite so clearly, and I know my author will have the final say on what stays and what goes...but it's still interesting to encounter, first-hand, an actual piece of manuscript that "shows" you rather than "telling" you, in a manner of speaking.
The trick, however, still is trying to get rid of this stuff before it's written and has to be edited out!
If I have any insights on what that might look like, you'll hear it here first.
Trust me.
In the meantime...keep calm and write your a** off! Because you can't have something to edit until something is there on the page, or screen, in the first place.
Capisce?
Onward!
Janny
Sunday, March 20, 2016
...And the Tweaks Continue
...Have sent CALLIE'S ANGEL out to both my critique partner and a beta reader.
Now the nervewracking part begins. Or at least the FIRST nervewracking part.
You know. The one BEFORE you send it out to the Gatekeepers.
I've already gone from, "Man, this is a great story" to "Who in hell is going to want to read this?"
Writers will recognize this syndrome instantly. And they will also recognize how fast it happens. (!)
Usually, if the writer has done her job somewhat right...she'll swing back toward "Man, this is a great story" again. At least she can get as far as, "OK, not bad. Maybe even good."
Then the comments will come back, and she'll need chocolate.
Hopefully, that will coincide with when the CWC can actually HAVE chocolate again...AFTER Lent is over.
One more week...(ayeeee)
Thoughts?
Janny
Now the nervewracking part begins. Or at least the FIRST nervewracking part.
You know. The one BEFORE you send it out to the Gatekeepers.
I've already gone from, "Man, this is a great story" to "Who in hell is going to want to read this?"
Writers will recognize this syndrome instantly. And they will also recognize how fast it happens. (!)
Usually, if the writer has done her job somewhat right...she'll swing back toward "Man, this is a great story" again. At least she can get as far as, "OK, not bad. Maybe even good."
Then the comments will come back, and she'll need chocolate.
Hopefully, that will coincide with when the CWC can actually HAVE chocolate again...AFTER Lent is over.
One more week...(ayeeee)
Thoughts?
Janny
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
Callie's Angel...Almost Ready to Fly!
Well, the graphic on the side may have been a little "off"...in that CALLIE'S ANGEL, my first new work in YEARS, may not come in at the original projected word count of 90K. (!) It's at 79,770 or so right now, pending revisions--but the first draft is DONE. THE END has been typed, which means first draft is now on the screen, ready for tweaking.
The hard part now is sitting back and NOT being in a hurry to get it submitted anywhere, because there will be changes that an author only discerns and is able to make AFTER the initial smoke clears and you get a better idea what you've created, where it's lacking, or where it needs cutting down.
Still, it's a hoot and a half to have something, finally, ALL NEW in the hopper, just ready to be polished into pristine shape and sent out there, hopefully to snag a contract with some kind of REAL money attached to it.
I, like all writers, live in perpetual hope.
More to come!
Thoughts?
Janny
The hard part now is sitting back and NOT being in a hurry to get it submitted anywhere, because there will be changes that an author only discerns and is able to make AFTER the initial smoke clears and you get a better idea what you've created, where it's lacking, or where it needs cutting down.
Still, it's a hoot and a half to have something, finally, ALL NEW in the hopper, just ready to be polished into pristine shape and sent out there, hopefully to snag a contract with some kind of REAL money attached to it.
I, like all writers, live in perpetual hope.
More to come!
Thoughts?
Janny
Monday, March 14, 2016
....And No One Can Write Romantic Comedy, Either.
I know that writing "funny" is anything but easy. I've done it at times, but being a full-time comedic writer? That's a grind and a half for many reasons. So I "get" that people may not know how to write comedy that's truly laugh-out-loud funny.
But when you're writing rom-com, there's still a romance to consider, too. And the writers I've encountered over the past several days--with a few notable exceptions that can be counted on the fingers of one hand--can't do that, either.
What is it about romance now that eludes so many writers?
Don't get me wrong: it's not like I'm encountering sex scene after sex scene masquerading as "romance." (You only get that nonsense in places like RWA. And, yes, you can quote me on that.) I'm talking about a romantic deficit that seems to think that one kiss is a relationship...or one flirtation...or one bickering "conflict."
In other words, yeah, I'm seeing a lot of beginner mistakes in these stories.
But it's kind of sad that they're not the same kind of beginner mistakes that I, and so many of my now-published colleagues, made in our early attempts to write love stories, either.
We tended to err on the side of "they're getting along way too famously way too fast."
Now, I'm seeing "romances" that deal with relationships that are toxic...
...that are decaying right there on the page...
...or that don't have a spark of excitement ANYWHERE. Not even erotic excitement. Which also isn't "romance," but at least is something a writer can work with as a jumping-off point.
In other words, if the state of romantic fiction is reflected by the entries I've been reading over the past few days...we need help.
I got to the point where I started muttering, "People, people, people. For heaven's sake. Turn on the Hallmark Channel once in a awhile, will you?"
Hey, it may not be highbrow...but at least it's got the emotion in the right places.
It's a start.
In the meantime, there are contest entrants out there who are gonna get their hearts broken by this particular judge--but that, unfortunately, can't be helped.
If you don't WRITE what the category is about, I'm not going to pretend you DID.
I did give extensive feedback on most of these stories. Which'll probably put them at least a leg ahead in the game when they go onto paper the next time.
I hope!
In the meantime, I can only prescribe rom-com movies. Enough of those, and you'll internalize the genre, and maybe next time...you'll actually write it.
Thoughts?
Janny
But when you're writing rom-com, there's still a romance to consider, too. And the writers I've encountered over the past several days--with a few notable exceptions that can be counted on the fingers of one hand--can't do that, either.
What is it about romance now that eludes so many writers?
Don't get me wrong: it's not like I'm encountering sex scene after sex scene masquerading as "romance." (You only get that nonsense in places like RWA. And, yes, you can quote me on that.) I'm talking about a romantic deficit that seems to think that one kiss is a relationship...or one flirtation...or one bickering "conflict."
In other words, yeah, I'm seeing a lot of beginner mistakes in these stories.
But it's kind of sad that they're not the same kind of beginner mistakes that I, and so many of my now-published colleagues, made in our early attempts to write love stories, either.
We tended to err on the side of "they're getting along way too famously way too fast."
Now, I'm seeing "romances" that deal with relationships that are toxic...
...that are decaying right there on the page...
...or that don't have a spark of excitement ANYWHERE. Not even erotic excitement. Which also isn't "romance," but at least is something a writer can work with as a jumping-off point.
In other words, if the state of romantic fiction is reflected by the entries I've been reading over the past few days...we need help.
I got to the point where I started muttering, "People, people, people. For heaven's sake. Turn on the Hallmark Channel once in a awhile, will you?"
Hey, it may not be highbrow...but at least it's got the emotion in the right places.
It's a start.
In the meantime, there are contest entrants out there who are gonna get their hearts broken by this particular judge--but that, unfortunately, can't be helped.
If you don't WRITE what the category is about, I'm not going to pretend you DID.
I did give extensive feedback on most of these stories. Which'll probably put them at least a leg ahead in the game when they go onto paper the next time.
I hope!
In the meantime, I can only prescribe rom-com movies. Enough of those, and you'll internalize the genre, and maybe next time...you'll actually write it.
Thoughts?
Janny
Tuesday, March 01, 2016
"Alright" Is Not A Word. No. Really. It Isn't.
Judging a creative writing contest...and wondering how it is that so many people really, really, REALLY don't know how to use English. No, I'm not talking esoteric words here, either. I'm talking the non-word "alright." Which is not correct. Has never been correct. And, frankly, which I've seen so many times already today that my teeth are already on edge.
So please...save my dental work. Use a dictionary. Use a Grammarian. Use something that lets you know what ARE, and ARE NOT, real English words.
And if you have a dictionary that says "alright" is an ALL RIGHT alternative usage...burn it.
You'll be doing us all a favor.
More from your happy happy happy judge, anon.
Thoughts?
Janny
So please...save my dental work. Use a dictionary. Use a Grammarian. Use something that lets you know what ARE, and ARE NOT, real English words.
And if you have a dictionary that says "alright" is an ALL RIGHT alternative usage...burn it.
You'll be doing us all a favor.
More from your happy happy happy judge, anon.
Thoughts?
Janny
Friday, December 04, 2015
A Little Advent Meditation...
I love Christmas. When it's actually Christmas.
I do not love Christmas for Labor Day, Halloween, or even, yes, Thanksgiving.
I think it's ironic that some of the very same "wise voices" who tell us how fast time is flying are also in the forefront of the cultural trends that rush everything ahead of its proper timetable.
There's an inherent contradiction here.
But, hey, that's the extent of my profundity for a Friday afternoon.
What I really mean to say is...
I LOVE CHRISTMAS.
No, I don't believe that Christmas is only for children. If you truly think that, you've missed the whole point.
No, I don't believe that if you're all alone, there's "no point" to Christmas decorating, preparing a nice meal, or other special traditions. Again, if you truly think that, you've missed the whole point; it's the birthday of the One who came for Every Single One of Us. Think about that long enough, and a little birthday cake will be worth firing up the oven for.
No, I don't believe that whether someone says "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays" has a thing to do with how good a Christian they are...or how good of a Christian they expect ME to be. And I don't take offense at either one. After all, it's also the season of Hanukkah, and soon will be the season of New Year's Day. Holidays are holidays, folks. They're worth smiling about.
And no, I don't believe that the best gifts in life are the ones money can't buy. Not always. Money can buy some pretty valuable things. Food. Water. Clothing. Shelter. Medicine. Protection from harm. And, yes, just plain enjoyment.
(Which there's nothing wrong with, by the way. Just so's we're clear.)
So the next time someone start waxing sanctimonious about how meaningless Christmas is...for one reason or another...
...or how you "shouldn't" want things you DO want under the tree...
...or how it's "just not worth it" to fuss for any of this holiday stuff because it's all "out of control"...
Remember, the One whose birthday we look forward to thought it was worth a lot of fuss to give us a special present.
Enjoy the gifts you have to the fullest, and give the gifts you can with all the joy and enthusiasm you want to expend...
And you'll never have to ask, "What Would Jesus Do?"
Ever. Again.
Christmas tells it all.
Thoughts?
Janny
I do not love Christmas for Labor Day, Halloween, or even, yes, Thanksgiving.
I think it's ironic that some of the very same "wise voices" who tell us how fast time is flying are also in the forefront of the cultural trends that rush everything ahead of its proper timetable.
There's an inherent contradiction here.
But, hey, that's the extent of my profundity for a Friday afternoon.
What I really mean to say is...
I LOVE CHRISTMAS.
No, I don't believe that Christmas is only for children. If you truly think that, you've missed the whole point.
No, I don't believe that if you're all alone, there's "no point" to Christmas decorating, preparing a nice meal, or other special traditions. Again, if you truly think that, you've missed the whole point; it's the birthday of the One who came for Every Single One of Us. Think about that long enough, and a little birthday cake will be worth firing up the oven for.
No, I don't believe that whether someone says "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Holidays" has a thing to do with how good a Christian they are...or how good of a Christian they expect ME to be. And I don't take offense at either one. After all, it's also the season of Hanukkah, and soon will be the season of New Year's Day. Holidays are holidays, folks. They're worth smiling about.
And no, I don't believe that the best gifts in life are the ones money can't buy. Not always. Money can buy some pretty valuable things. Food. Water. Clothing. Shelter. Medicine. Protection from harm. And, yes, just plain enjoyment.
(Which there's nothing wrong with, by the way. Just so's we're clear.)
So the next time someone start waxing sanctimonious about how meaningless Christmas is...for one reason or another...
...or how you "shouldn't" want things you DO want under the tree...
...or how it's "just not worth it" to fuss for any of this holiday stuff because it's all "out of control"...
Remember, the One whose birthday we look forward to thought it was worth a lot of fuss to give us a special present.
Enjoy the gifts you have to the fullest, and give the gifts you can with all the joy and enthusiasm you want to expend...
And you'll never have to ask, "What Would Jesus Do?"
Ever. Again.
Christmas tells it all.
Thoughts?
Janny
Monday, January 20, 2014
I Have a BAAAAAD Attitude. Just Sayin'.
How do I know this?
Because certain things in this life, I have NO patience with or for anymore.
It can't be because I'm getting old, either, because I had NO patience with those things from the time I was much younger. I'm just more vocal about expressing that impatience now.
One of these things?
Job ads on freelance boards that stretch into 4 or 5 separate sections. Not only do you write a cover letter, but you then answer things like "What part of this job appeals to you the most?" (Note: you haven't done the job yet, so answering that truthfully is next to impossible.) Or, one of my favorites, "Would you be willing to spend time in further education and learning to advance in this job?" (Short answer: No. Why? Do I not appear to be smart enough to you through the lens of your computer?)
Now, please understand: If someone's interviewing me for a $100K job doing complex analysis, statistics, or supervising a global work force over multiple time zones, languages, and agendas, then, yes...I anticipate there'll be a bit of learning I'll be doing over time. But these jobs asking for five-part analysis are not $100K positions (trust me on this). Most of them are little more than "Can you write my book for me?" Which, as we know, is Not A Highly Paid Way To Make A Living In The First Place. :-) To expect that person to invest heavily in some idea of "extended education" (which is usually not considered paid time, either)? Ummmm...no.
Yeah. I know. Grumpy Cat's got nothin' on me.
You get that way when you know what you're doing but are constantly confronted with people who want you to prove it through innocuous question-and-answer sessions that sound like the first day of first grade. Besides the hundreds of hours on already-completed jobs, the dozens of 5-star testimonials from happy clients, and the sheer intelligence of your proposal up-front...they want more.
Please stop doing this, folks. The pro you want working for you doesn't have time for this nonsense, which means the people who'll bother with it...are the people who are left.
I doubt that's what you REALLY want.
But then, again, I could be wrong. I do have a baaaad attitude, after all. :-)
Thoughts?
Janny
Because certain things in this life, I have NO patience with or for anymore.
It can't be because I'm getting old, either, because I had NO patience with those things from the time I was much younger. I'm just more vocal about expressing that impatience now.
One of these things?
Job ads on freelance boards that stretch into 4 or 5 separate sections. Not only do you write a cover letter, but you then answer things like "What part of this job appeals to you the most?" (Note: you haven't done the job yet, so answering that truthfully is next to impossible.) Or, one of my favorites, "Would you be willing to spend time in further education and learning to advance in this job?" (Short answer: No. Why? Do I not appear to be smart enough to you through the lens of your computer?)
Now, please understand: If someone's interviewing me for a $100K job doing complex analysis, statistics, or supervising a global work force over multiple time zones, languages, and agendas, then, yes...I anticipate there'll be a bit of learning I'll be doing over time. But these jobs asking for five-part analysis are not $100K positions (trust me on this). Most of them are little more than "Can you write my book for me?" Which, as we know, is Not A Highly Paid Way To Make A Living In The First Place. :-) To expect that person to invest heavily in some idea of "extended education" (which is usually not considered paid time, either)? Ummmm...no.
Yeah. I know. Grumpy Cat's got nothin' on me.
You get that way when you know what you're doing but are constantly confronted with people who want you to prove it through innocuous question-and-answer sessions that sound like the first day of first grade. Besides the hundreds of hours on already-completed jobs, the dozens of 5-star testimonials from happy clients, and the sheer intelligence of your proposal up-front...they want more.
Please stop doing this, folks. The pro you want working for you doesn't have time for this nonsense, which means the people who'll bother with it...are the people who are left.
I doubt that's what you REALLY want.
But then, again, I could be wrong. I do have a baaaad attitude, after all. :-)
Thoughts?
Janny
Sunday, January 19, 2014
"What We Have Heayah..."*
...it never ceases to amaze me. And this crosses ALL status lines, all rank and file, all levels of proficiency, and all age groups.
Why is it when I very clearly state "the first two pages" of something, people will send me something that's 20 pages long and say, "Oh, just pick the two pages you think will show your editing style the best"?
Is there something alien and undecipherable about the phrase the first two pages?
Is is that you don't trust your own work to be good from the get-go...or you don't trust ME to be able to tell from those first two pages how things are going to go?
If you don't trust that the first two pages of your work are that good...work on them until they are.
If you don't trust that I can tell enough from the first two pages...read some more of this blog. I suspect it will give you all the confidence you need that I know what I'm about.
But it is a never-ending frustration to someone to ask for something so simple and have it turn into anything but what they asked for. If this was one of those "tests" in which you don't get any farther than the first instruction if you fail that part, guess what? You'll have failed already. And no, I'm not being needlessly pedantic. If an editor tells you she wants 2 pages, and you give her 20, what do you think she's going to do with that work?
If you're really trying to give me reasons to say "No," one has to wonder why you're approaching me in the first place. Do you honestly think I won't notice?
There's a reason I'm called "the pickiest of the picky," you know. :-)
'nuff said.
(sheesh.)
Janny
*(if you're of a certain generation, you'll be able to complete the legendary phrase above. If not, put a question in the comments, and I'll be glad to elaborate. )
Why is it when I very clearly state "the first two pages" of something, people will send me something that's 20 pages long and say, "Oh, just pick the two pages you think will show your editing style the best"?
Is there something alien and undecipherable about the phrase the first two pages?
Is is that you don't trust your own work to be good from the get-go...or you don't trust ME to be able to tell from those first two pages how things are going to go?
If you don't trust that the first two pages of your work are that good...work on them until they are.
If you don't trust that I can tell enough from the first two pages...read some more of this blog. I suspect it will give you all the confidence you need that I know what I'm about.
But it is a never-ending frustration to someone to ask for something so simple and have it turn into anything but what they asked for. If this was one of those "tests" in which you don't get any farther than the first instruction if you fail that part, guess what? You'll have failed already. And no, I'm not being needlessly pedantic. If an editor tells you she wants 2 pages, and you give her 20, what do you think she's going to do with that work?
If you're really trying to give me reasons to say "No," one has to wonder why you're approaching me in the first place. Do you honestly think I won't notice?
There's a reason I'm called "the pickiest of the picky," you know. :-)
'nuff said.
(sheesh.)
Janny
*(if you're of a certain generation, you'll be able to complete the legendary phrase above. If not, put a question in the comments, and I'll be glad to elaborate. )
Saturday, January 18, 2014
No Longer A Spring Chicken...If That Matters
...which leads, of course, to the question, "Where in the world did that phrase come from?"
Well, according to a bulletin board on phrases.org/uk, here's the scoop:
"We find the expression 'now past a chicken,' meaning 'no longer young,' recorded as early as 1711 by Steele in 'The Spectator': 'You ought to consider you are now past a chicken; this Humour, which was well enough in a Girl, is insufferable in one of your Motherly Character.' 'No spring chicken,' an exaggeration of the phrase, is first recorded in America in 1906." From "Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins" by Robert Hendrickson (Facts on File, New York, 1997).
So those of us who are of a "motherly character," I guess, aren't technically supposed to be as silly as those who've just come out of the shell. So to speak.
Yeah, like THAT's gonna happen.
May all your chickens be in a row today! (And yes, I know, that's mixing metaphors...and poultry. Which is a poultry thing to do, especially for an incorrigible punster.)
A little fun for a Saturday morning...
Janny
Image: free digital photos.net, suwatpo.
Well, according to a bulletin board on phrases.org/uk, here's the scoop:
"We find the expression 'now past a chicken,' meaning 'no longer young,' recorded as early as 1711 by Steele in 'The Spectator': 'You ought to consider you are now past a chicken; this Humour, which was well enough in a Girl, is insufferable in one of your Motherly Character.' 'No spring chicken,' an exaggeration of the phrase, is first recorded in America in 1906." From "Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins" by Robert Hendrickson (Facts on File, New York, 1997).
So those of us who are of a "motherly character," I guess, aren't technically supposed to be as silly as those who've just come out of the shell. So to speak.
Yeah, like THAT's gonna happen.
A little fun for a Saturday morning...
Janny
Image: free digital photos.net, suwatpo.
Thursday, January 16, 2014
Potpourri of Persnicketiness
OK, I had the unforeseen--well, okay, it was sort of foreseen--meeting with my manager online, and was told I needed to use "communication skilles" for some of my work. Yep. I know I shouldn't make fun of that phrase...the guy is truly trying to learn written English. But when I saw that in the conversation, I pretty much saw red. And things didn't get much better from there.
The good news is, though, that Stylish Eve decided they're going to stay in operation through January, even though the owners/managers are all in exams (!) this month and wanted to take time off. Apparently, it hadn't dawned on them yet that people actually depended on the regular income we were all making from the site...
...and as I write this, the half of the gutter that's LEFT on our house is rattling in the wind. Half of it has already come down. This from a landlord who absolutely, positively FORBIDS tenants to touch a thing without prior authorization. So the house is falling down around us, it's not our fault, and the landlord is (I kid you not) in St. Croix until Sunday. His sons, who are supposed to help out in his absence, have been nowhere to be seen.
Now, I understand being slammed with work. Trust me. I do. However, I don't neglect MY home when I'm doing a lot of writing, nor do I neglect my paying clients when I need to stop and do "house stuff." So why is it OK to have a house falling down around tenants?
Yeah. I'm in a *mood* today. :-P
More later,
Janny
The good news is, though, that Stylish Eve decided they're going to stay in operation through January, even though the owners/managers are all in exams (!) this month and wanted to take time off. Apparently, it hadn't dawned on them yet that people actually depended on the regular income we were all making from the site...
...and as I write this, the half of the gutter that's LEFT on our house is rattling in the wind. Half of it has already come down. This from a landlord who absolutely, positively FORBIDS tenants to touch a thing without prior authorization. So the house is falling down around us, it's not our fault, and the landlord is (I kid you not) in St. Croix until Sunday. His sons, who are supposed to help out in his absence, have been nowhere to be seen.
Now, I understand being slammed with work. Trust me. I do. However, I don't neglect MY home when I'm doing a lot of writing, nor do I neglect my paying clients when I need to stop and do "house stuff." So why is it OK to have a house falling down around tenants?
Yeah. I'm in a *mood* today. :-P
More later,
Janny
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Slugville Sunday
This weekend, I have been a slug.
Well, okay...mostly today I have been a slug.
Only it's a different kind of slug, and a much better kind, than I might have been.
Most of the time if I think of being a slug, I think of those days when you lie around, don't do much of anything except go to church if it's a Sunday, call for pizza, watch reality TV or a bunch of ball games, sit outside by the fire pit, or a combination of all of these.
You know. Slugville.
Slugville can include a nap, but I give a wide allowance for naps--in my experience, when I nap, I need a nap, and it has nothing to do with being a slug. :-)
But the kind of Slugville I did today was crawling inside my Writing Den and coming out only when I had to.
Was commentator at 8 AM Mass, delivered my baked goods to Open Door, and then went into the Writing Cave for a couple of hours.
I came out to make spaghetti for lunch, cleaned up the kitchen, and spent a little while with the hub before he went to work...but even then, between times with him, I was slugging it out in the office again.
Once he left for work, I started a load of laundry, then went back to Slugville and stayed there a looooong time.
What was I doing?
Writing.
Sounds obvious, doesn't it? But it hasn't been easy.
I've had to re-learn how to spend hours just...writing.
Not surfing around on the Net, although I did my share of that, too.
Not playing on Facebook, although I did check in regularly.
But most of the time, I was writing.
First, I did some work on one freelance assignment. Knocked out one story out of twelve I've got to work on this week.
Then, I did some more work on Callie.
Then, I had a break--something to eat and an episode of Sue Thomas, F.B. Eye.
(The DVR is my Friend.)
Then, I got an invitation to "interview" for another writing gig on oDesk, took a look at it, told the client what I could do, got hired, and knocked out that assignment this evening...
...around writing more on Callie.
And now, it's 11 PM, and what am I still doing?
Writing.
If I didn't have to sleep eventually, I feel like I could just bounce from one Word document to another and keep it up all night.
I can't do that. I'm not a night person.
But the muse has finally decided that, yes, it's time to Write All Day Long.
There's only one problem with this variety of Slugville, and that's that I get No Exercise.
(other than running up and down stairs to feed cats, change out laundry loads, or the like.)
So I need to remember to get up and do some exercise tomorrow.
Because I fully intend, having moved into Slugville, to stay there awhile.
In between, of course, things like Choral Union...
...getting stuff weeded out around the house in preparation for moving...
...and tending to Life Intrusions of other kinds.
But it's been a grand day in Slugville.
This is the kind of writing day in which one can go for 10 hours, give or take some breaks, and not feel tired.
One keeps feeling like, "Hey, maybe I can do a couple more paragraphs on _____."
One does have to stop eventually.
But while one is slugging along, one doesn't feel like one has to stop...ever.
And that, my friends, is a very nice feeling indeed.
Slug it out this week!
Janny
Well, okay...mostly today I have been a slug.
Only it's a different kind of slug, and a much better kind, than I might have been.
Most of the time if I think of being a slug, I think of those days when you lie around, don't do much of anything except go to church if it's a Sunday, call for pizza, watch reality TV or a bunch of ball games, sit outside by the fire pit, or a combination of all of these.
You know. Slugville.
Slugville can include a nap, but I give a wide allowance for naps--in my experience, when I nap, I need a nap, and it has nothing to do with being a slug. :-)
But the kind of Slugville I did today was crawling inside my Writing Den and coming out only when I had to.
Was commentator at 8 AM Mass, delivered my baked goods to Open Door, and then went into the Writing Cave for a couple of hours.
I came out to make spaghetti for lunch, cleaned up the kitchen, and spent a little while with the hub before he went to work...but even then, between times with him, I was slugging it out in the office again.
Once he left for work, I started a load of laundry, then went back to Slugville and stayed there a looooong time.
What was I doing?
Writing.
Sounds obvious, doesn't it? But it hasn't been easy.
I've had to re-learn how to spend hours just...writing.
Not surfing around on the Net, although I did my share of that, too.
Not playing on Facebook, although I did check in regularly.
But most of the time, I was writing.
First, I did some work on one freelance assignment. Knocked out one story out of twelve I've got to work on this week.
Then, I did some more work on Callie.
Then, I had a break--something to eat and an episode of Sue Thomas, F.B. Eye.
(The DVR is my Friend.)
Then, I got an invitation to "interview" for another writing gig on oDesk, took a look at it, told the client what I could do, got hired, and knocked out that assignment this evening...
...around writing more on Callie.
And now, it's 11 PM, and what am I still doing?
Writing.
If I didn't have to sleep eventually, I feel like I could just bounce from one Word document to another and keep it up all night.
I can't do that. I'm not a night person.
But the muse has finally decided that, yes, it's time to Write All Day Long.
There's only one problem with this variety of Slugville, and that's that I get No Exercise.
(other than running up and down stairs to feed cats, change out laundry loads, or the like.)
So I need to remember to get up and do some exercise tomorrow.
Because I fully intend, having moved into Slugville, to stay there awhile.
In between, of course, things like Choral Union...
...getting stuff weeded out around the house in preparation for moving...
...and tending to Life Intrusions of other kinds.
But it's been a grand day in Slugville.
This is the kind of writing day in which one can go for 10 hours, give or take some breaks, and not feel tired.
One keeps feeling like, "Hey, maybe I can do a couple more paragraphs on _____."
One does have to stop eventually.
But while one is slugging along, one doesn't feel like one has to stop...ever.
And that, my friends, is a very nice feeling indeed.
Slug it out this week!
Janny
Friday, February 08, 2013
What's the Hurry?...Part Two
Last time we talked (and talked and talked and talked--hey, I've already told you it takes me 10,000 words to say "hello") about hurrying work to publication before it's ready. About what makes us want to do that silly thing. And a little bit about how not to do that silly thing.
This time around, we're going to talk about developing patience.
Right now.
(Sorry, I couldn't resist.) (Ahem.)
Developing enough patience to hold onto a work until it's truly ready to go out into the big bad world by itself isn't an easy thing. We've all been stung by the impulse to send something out too soon: we burst through to the end of a manuscript, we're exhilarated, and we craft a query letter and stick that puppy in an envelope...
...only to discover a few hours later that we left a massively unfinished sentence unfinished because we were going to "get to it later"...
...or we called a character by the wrong name on p. 212...
...or there's a big ol' embarrassing bunch of telling rather than showing that we could have done much better on the next draft...
...or sometimes something even more egregious.
Now, to a non-writer, some of this stuff may sound silly. Who cares if you mistakenly called your character by the wrong name three-quarters of a way through a manuscript? Or who cares if you've got telling rather than showing? Well, for one person, an editor cares. If you've sent something out to an editor too soon, you've given her an easy reason to say "no." And that's one thing you definitely don't want to do.
But what about readers? If you're going direct to reader, can't some of this stuff be overlooked? Aren't readers willing to cut you more slack than one of those hated stuffy ol' gatekeepers?
Well, maybe. But why take the chance? Odds are that even non-writers will notice an unfinished sentence. Most of the time, even non-writers will notice a character being called by the wrong name--if for no other reason than that it stops them for a moment and makes them think, "Wait a minute. Isn't that so-and-so?" The unfinished sentence will stop them the same way.
That's precisely what you don't want to do to a reader. Every time a reader stops, she loses contact and identification with your characters for just that split second. Every time she stops because of something you did...you've stuck your figurative foot out and tripped her. Too many stumbles, and that reader won't want to stick around in your story--it's starting to leave bruises.
Which is why just about when most of us think we're "done" with a given book is actually the point at which the real work starts. That's when we do our editing. Our fierce quizzing of every little detail in the book to make sure it's right and it belongs. Our ruthless "murdering of the darlings" that most of the time is necessary, but that cannot--and may never--occur if we've published the material too soon.
Yes, some books can be freely revised and "tweaked" even after publication date. Some platforms allow for it, even make it easy. This is great for those cases where books are letter-perfect when they leave your keyboard and have Gremlins attack in the meantime. In those cases, tweaking is not only OK but the only fair way to make sure your work is shown in its best light.
Any other time, however, it's a crutch. And if you're a writer worth your salt, you don't want to hobble through your career on crutches. That's where patience can be a miracle cure.
So how do you practice patience in your writing work?
1. Let it settle. We hinted at this earlier, and we've also mentioned it in other blog posts over the years. Typing "The End," in this case, is only the beginning. It's the signal for you to put your feet up, put the work aside, and give it time away from your eyes. How long? Long enough so that when you come back to it, you aren't too close to it. A week's too short in most cases; some writers I've read recommend six months. I'm somewhere in the middle. I think somewhere between three and six weeks is about ideal. They say we need three weeks of practicing a new behavior before it becomes a habit; three weeks, then, may be what your "system" needs to "clear out" the work in its present form so you can look at it fresh. The longer you can wait past three weeks, I believe, the better off your work will be in the end. And if you can do that six-months thing...you don't need this post. You're already patient!
2. Refill the well. Some folks will tell you to start another work right away, and there was a time when I would have been right on board that bus with them. I'll give you this much: if you've got another idea that's been pounding at the bars wanting to get out while you finished this one...you can certainly sketch out some new material. But if I were you, I'd resist the urge to immediately start plunging whole-hog into a "new" work. You need time to catch your creative breath, time to let new ideas percolate, and time enough away from the old writing routine, voice, characters, and other elements so that your "new" work actually sounds new--and not like Son Of Work You've Just Finished. We've all seen writers who have a "new" book that was clearly started when they were still enmeshed in the old one. The book might be good, but the odds are it'll be better if it's got its own space and time.
3. Have faith. This is actually the crux of the matter--the ability to rise above the vaguely (or not-so-vaguely) hysterical advice out there about "getting your name out." Yes, you want your work to become known; yes, you want to make money as an author, and to do that, people have to know you exist. But quantity at the expense of quality isn't an attribute most of us want attached to our names--and a writing career that starts out great and only gets better is worth the wait. Waiting, however, takes a degree of trust. It takes a degree--actually a whole bunch of degrees--of faith. And it takes enough humility and balance to understand that your opportunity will come along without your having to hurry it.
Let me say that again, because it flies in the face of so much propaganda--and, let's face it, real-life experience. The essence of the patience you need not to "go off half-cocked" with work that's half-ready is trusting that opportunities are like buses: there's always another one coming. :-)
Interestingly enough, in our present publishing climate, that's more true than it's ever been. In the days of having to submit stuff by paper, wait six months to a year to two years to hear anything back, and then do the whole process over again with every rejection, the idea that "my opportunity is just around the corner" could sometimes sound Pollyanna-ish, if not deluded. Time spent waiting didn't feel like productive time, and if you weren't careful, it wasn't. But now, with subsidy publishing, small presses, direct-to-reader, and all the permutations of the more "traditional" publishing model that are out there...you can pretty much bank on the fact that when your book is ready, you'll be able to publish it--one way or another. You're not going to "lose your chance" forever if you don't hurry, or if you don't supply a market with X number of books in six months, or if you don't Get That Sequel Out Yesterday. Your readers will wait for quality; the market will reward quality, especially if you've given it to them from the very beginning and continue to do so.
But you cannot hope to provide consistent high quality without taking a decent amount of time over the product in the first place. Cutting corners, deciding you need to "show" the industry what "real writing" is, or any of the other chip-on-shoulder or hurry-the-bus-is-leaving behaviors in which you might be tempted to indulge aren't going to get you where you want to go. They're like the get-rich-quick schemes that are all over the place; you might have a flash of what you think is brilliance, even temporary success...but then it'll dry up as fast as it came in the first place. And if I know you as an author, that's not what you want. Flashes in the pan, apply elsewhere. Most of us want better than that.
So don't go there. Don't fall for the pressure, don't believe the hype and/or disaster scenarios, and above all...don't make yourself susceptible to "hurry sickness." Better one book a year that's so over-the-top great you can hardly believe you wrote it yourself, than six mediocre or "good enough" products. Your brand is important; take the time, challenge yourself, and have the faith to make those products great, one at a time, with all the time they deserve.
There really, truly, is no hurry. Take your time, and you'll actually move toward your goals much more smoothly in the long run. And...you'll enjoy the trip!
Thoughts?
Janny
This time around, we're going to talk about developing patience.
Right now.
(Sorry, I couldn't resist.) (Ahem.)
Developing enough patience to hold onto a work until it's truly ready to go out into the big bad world by itself isn't an easy thing. We've all been stung by the impulse to send something out too soon: we burst through to the end of a manuscript, we're exhilarated, and we craft a query letter and stick that puppy in an envelope...
...only to discover a few hours later that we left a massively unfinished sentence unfinished because we were going to "get to it later"...
...or we called a character by the wrong name on p. 212...
...or there's a big ol' embarrassing bunch of telling rather than showing that we could have done much better on the next draft...
...or sometimes something even more egregious.
Now, to a non-writer, some of this stuff may sound silly. Who cares if you mistakenly called your character by the wrong name three-quarters of a way through a manuscript? Or who cares if you've got telling rather than showing? Well, for one person, an editor cares. If you've sent something out to an editor too soon, you've given her an easy reason to say "no." And that's one thing you definitely don't want to do.
But what about readers? If you're going direct to reader, can't some of this stuff be overlooked? Aren't readers willing to cut you more slack than one of those hated stuffy ol' gatekeepers?
Well, maybe. But why take the chance? Odds are that even non-writers will notice an unfinished sentence. Most of the time, even non-writers will notice a character being called by the wrong name--if for no other reason than that it stops them for a moment and makes them think, "Wait a minute. Isn't that so-and-so?" The unfinished sentence will stop them the same way.
That's precisely what you don't want to do to a reader. Every time a reader stops, she loses contact and identification with your characters for just that split second. Every time she stops because of something you did...you've stuck your figurative foot out and tripped her. Too many stumbles, and that reader won't want to stick around in your story--it's starting to leave bruises.
Which is why just about when most of us think we're "done" with a given book is actually the point at which the real work starts. That's when we do our editing. Our fierce quizzing of every little detail in the book to make sure it's right and it belongs. Our ruthless "murdering of the darlings" that most of the time is necessary, but that cannot--and may never--occur if we've published the material too soon.
Yes, some books can be freely revised and "tweaked" even after publication date. Some platforms allow for it, even make it easy. This is great for those cases where books are letter-perfect when they leave your keyboard and have Gremlins attack in the meantime. In those cases, tweaking is not only OK but the only fair way to make sure your work is shown in its best light.
Any other time, however, it's a crutch. And if you're a writer worth your salt, you don't want to hobble through your career on crutches. That's where patience can be a miracle cure.
So how do you practice patience in your writing work?
1. Let it settle. We hinted at this earlier, and we've also mentioned it in other blog posts over the years. Typing "The End," in this case, is only the beginning. It's the signal for you to put your feet up, put the work aside, and give it time away from your eyes. How long? Long enough so that when you come back to it, you aren't too close to it. A week's too short in most cases; some writers I've read recommend six months. I'm somewhere in the middle. I think somewhere between three and six weeks is about ideal. They say we need three weeks of practicing a new behavior before it becomes a habit; three weeks, then, may be what your "system" needs to "clear out" the work in its present form so you can look at it fresh. The longer you can wait past three weeks, I believe, the better off your work will be in the end. And if you can do that six-months thing...you don't need this post. You're already patient!
2. Refill the well. Some folks will tell you to start another work right away, and there was a time when I would have been right on board that bus with them. I'll give you this much: if you've got another idea that's been pounding at the bars wanting to get out while you finished this one...you can certainly sketch out some new material. But if I were you, I'd resist the urge to immediately start plunging whole-hog into a "new" work. You need time to catch your creative breath, time to let new ideas percolate, and time enough away from the old writing routine, voice, characters, and other elements so that your "new" work actually sounds new--and not like Son Of Work You've Just Finished. We've all seen writers who have a "new" book that was clearly started when they were still enmeshed in the old one. The book might be good, but the odds are it'll be better if it's got its own space and time.
3. Have faith. This is actually the crux of the matter--the ability to rise above the vaguely (or not-so-vaguely) hysterical advice out there about "getting your name out." Yes, you want your work to become known; yes, you want to make money as an author, and to do that, people have to know you exist. But quantity at the expense of quality isn't an attribute most of us want attached to our names--and a writing career that starts out great and only gets better is worth the wait. Waiting, however, takes a degree of trust. It takes a degree--actually a whole bunch of degrees--of faith. And it takes enough humility and balance to understand that your opportunity will come along without your having to hurry it.
Let me say that again, because it flies in the face of so much propaganda--and, let's face it, real-life experience. The essence of the patience you need not to "go off half-cocked" with work that's half-ready is trusting that opportunities are like buses: there's always another one coming. :-)
Interestingly enough, in our present publishing climate, that's more true than it's ever been. In the days of having to submit stuff by paper, wait six months to a year to two years to hear anything back, and then do the whole process over again with every rejection, the idea that "my opportunity is just around the corner" could sometimes sound Pollyanna-ish, if not deluded. Time spent waiting didn't feel like productive time, and if you weren't careful, it wasn't. But now, with subsidy publishing, small presses, direct-to-reader, and all the permutations of the more "traditional" publishing model that are out there...you can pretty much bank on the fact that when your book is ready, you'll be able to publish it--one way or another. You're not going to "lose your chance" forever if you don't hurry, or if you don't supply a market with X number of books in six months, or if you don't Get That Sequel Out Yesterday. Your readers will wait for quality; the market will reward quality, especially if you've given it to them from the very beginning and continue to do so.
But you cannot hope to provide consistent high quality without taking a decent amount of time over the product in the first place. Cutting corners, deciding you need to "show" the industry what "real writing" is, or any of the other chip-on-shoulder or hurry-the-bus-is-leaving behaviors in which you might be tempted to indulge aren't going to get you where you want to go. They're like the get-rich-quick schemes that are all over the place; you might have a flash of what you think is brilliance, even temporary success...but then it'll dry up as fast as it came in the first place. And if I know you as an author, that's not what you want. Flashes in the pan, apply elsewhere. Most of us want better than that.
So don't go there. Don't fall for the pressure, don't believe the hype and/or disaster scenarios, and above all...don't make yourself susceptible to "hurry sickness." Better one book a year that's so over-the-top great you can hardly believe you wrote it yourself, than six mediocre or "good enough" products. Your brand is important; take the time, challenge yourself, and have the faith to make those products great, one at a time, with all the time they deserve.
There really, truly, is no hurry. Take your time, and you'll actually move toward your goals much more smoothly in the long run. And...you'll enjoy the trip!
Thoughts?
Janny
Friday, January 25, 2013
What's the Hurry?...Part One
Was just thinking a tad more about the self-publishing arena, in light of recent posts and arguments in which I've been embroiled. Don't worry...I'm not beating that comatose horse anymore. :-) A peripheral side to the subject, however, does lend itself to a question I've often found myself asking of writers around me.
I'll share some thoughts on that in Part Two.
What's the hurry?
There seems to be a perception out there that we need to Get Published As Quickly And Often As Possible To Prove Our Value Or Worth Or...Something...As Writers. And yes, I've capped all those words for a reason. (There's always a reason.) It's because important things are always capped, doncha know. And I honestly think that this underlying assumption/operating principle/belief/perception is believed to be so Important (!!) that it leads to the situation I was decrying so much earlier--which is people publishing their stories or books, basically, before they're really ready.
In other words, rushing material into the marketplace the minute it's "done"--when taking a little more time and patience would have helped it get "done" better.
Where does this hurry come from?
I once heard a motivational tape that talked about "hurry sickness," the translation of what was supposedly a Japanese term for the way Americans rush about so quickly trying to multitask and the like. Putting aside whether or not the Japanese have any room to talk when it comes to work habits or ethics (pot, meet kettle), the term has become an apt way to describe the frantic way many people work. Unfortunately, that frantic attitude has even seeped into the arts...and it shows up in artists trying to spring themselves upon the public when they're not quite "there" yet.
Now, before anyone gets their shorts in a knot again about any perceived "slight" you could draw from the above, let me say one crucial thing: an artist generally knows, in his/her heart of hearts, when the work "ain't quite there."
Ignace Paderewski, a famed concert pianist of an earlier era, is supposed to have said, "If I don't practice one day, I know it; if I don't practice for two days, the critics know it; and if I don't practice for three days, the public knows it." Most of us, of course, would deny being able to tell if a brilliant pianist simply "hadn't practiced" for three days...but the point is well taken that most of us know, in that still small place within, when we're "not quite there."
This instinct is different from the nagging feeling that one isn't doing good work, that one isn't really talented, et al. Those feelings stem from fear, and they are inaccurate the majority of the time. The sense I'm talking about isn't negative, in that it's not self-deprecation or self-doubt. If anything, it's the opposite of that; it's a genuine humility that recognizes both our strengths and our present weaknesses. And it's darn near infallible, if we listen to it.
Problem is, a lot gets in the way of that listening.
Most of what gets in the way is well-meaning: encouragement from critique partners, family, friends, or writers' groups--or even a "public" who may read a bit of what we do and think it's just the "bee's knees." One the other hand, the other side of what gets in the way, ironically, is that earlier nagging feeling that we're just not very good, what we're doing isn't very good, or we don't really have much talent. Both of these sources of "input" can drown out our inner voice--and the results manifest themselves in two opposite scenarios. In one, the author never lets her work out for anyone to see it because it's never "good enough yet." In the other, she puts it out there too soon, because "it's better than a lot of other stuff out there."
But "better than a lot of other stuff out there" isn't the reason to put your stuff in the marketplace. Why not?
First off, because that's a purely subjective--and, let's face it, hopeful--assessment of where you are rather than a clear and rational one. It may well be true, but it's just as likely to be only half-true, or only true in certain aspects and genres...or out-and-out false.
Second--and this is more important--because comparing your work to anyone else's out there, for better or worse, is not a good measurement of whether it's ready to go out of your hands yet.
There's a huge difference between being just "better than other stuff" and being "the best you can physically do at this point in time." If you've ever experienced the latter, you know this is true. If you haven't...you may be part of the problem rather than part of the solution. But fortunately, the solution is simple.
Listen.
Yes, listen to your crit partners. Listen to editors who read your work. Listen to contest judges. Listen to your friends and family babbling about how good you are. Listen to all of it...and then get quiet and let it percolate. Or, as I'm fond of saying, mull a bit.
And then a bit more.
And then even more.
And then see if you can go a little deeper, make it a little sharper, and make it go where it maybe never went before--maybe where you're not sure even you know how to go yet.
But don't stop at "as good as what's out there."
Don't even stop at "better than what's out there."
Make it so good it makes your blood surge and your heart sing.
You know the difference. Or you will know soon, once you start practicing that deep listening that is the only true judge of when something's really ready...versus when you've decided it "should be" ready or is "good enough."
Because "good enough"...never really is.
You know that, in your heart of hearts.
But it takes patience to deliberately let the work develop to its full potential before you turn it loose.
How do we learn that patience?
I'll share some thoughts on that in Part Two.
Stay tuned!
Janny
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
A Few More "Gatekeeper" Notes...
...and a caveat.
First of all, let me say the reference to people not liking what I've said of late has, predictably enough, hinged around this "gatekeeper" discussion.
No surprise there.
Nowadays, the "gatekeepers are evil" sentiment is considered to be inviolable. If you express a liking for "the way things used to be," you're painted as a dinosaur, an advocate of "cultural policing," a snob who simply wants things your way, and/or a "wannabe" slamming those out there creative enough to go the self-publishing route.
Notice that in my original post, I did nothing of the kind of any of those things. I stated that in my opinion, we already had had a pretty good system of "sorting" out those works that were ready for public consumption from those that weren't. I added that the people who worked on that side of the desk weren't ogres, mindless drones, or people who hated creativity or innovation; they, just as the authors they unfortunately had to reject, were doing the best they could at the jobs they were hired to do. And I simply put forth that in my experience, as a result of many books not having "gatekeepers" to point out flaws and/or send them back for more work, the market has been flooded with dreck.
I actually took special and particular pains to say I was not badmouthing self-published authors or small presses in general. Heck, I'm with small presses. Am I gonna be stupid enough to badmouth the route I've taken myself?
Yet at least two self-pubbed authors decided I was bashing their work and their enterprises--never mind that I hadn't said anything of the kind--and had all kinds of hurt feelings and/or snark that they then unleashed on me.
I also took pains to mention that the books I was criticizing were in my "inferior" list not because I "didn't think they were good enough for me" (!) or that "I should decide what quality is" (!!) but because they had flaws. As in errors. As in bad grammar, poor structure, word misuses, incoherencies, or other stuff that made me mutter a lot as I tried to read them. Those things have nothing to do with what I personally think of anything. Those things are basic English language writing skills. They're able to be objectively decided. And it's not just "my opinion" that those are important. I'd wager that any writer who was so quick to lambaste me for saying these things out loud would be put off the same way I've been by some of this stuff.
That's probably the saddest part of all of this: that people riding the horses in the crusade against anyone being able to tell you your work may not be ready...didn't bother to ever ask me more about what I'd read that had struck me that way.
They didn't bother to ask me if I've ever had to write a rejection letter, or if it bothered me to do so. (I have, and yes, it does.)
They didn't bother to ask me how much of this kind of work I've encountered, and if there seemed to be a bigger proportion of it coming across the figurative transom. (The answers are "a lot," and "yes.")
They didn't empathize one iota with the frustration that's clear from every single line of that original post. They apparently didn't read the line that said, "I hate saying this. I really hate saying this."
They simply decided I was disrespecting them, and proceeded to rant on me accordingly. Which does present the question of who actually was disrespecting whom.
Finally, the caveat. If you've lasted this long in this post without seeing red and crossing me off every single friend list you have, you probably know what's coming and are fine with it. :-)
The caveat is about my tone. Oh, I got a lot of reprimands about that.
From people who don't believe in gatekeepers.
From people who don't believe in "cultural policing."
From people who don't know me personally--at least two of whom came to my blog already "loaded for bear" because they didn't like something else I'd said in a comment section somewhere else--and yet proceeded to assume they had the right to scold me.
To which I can only say, once again, "Who's disrespecting whom here?"
I put up a post out of frustration, dismay, and not a little grief.
It wasn't read that way.
At all.
But, hey, if you find yourself offended by a cynical, harsh, or perhaps a bit snarky tone on things that are written from frustration, dismay, and not a little grief--if you truly think that someone, on her own blog, needs to worry about whether she's "polite" enough in those circumstances...?
Feel free to go elsewhere for sugarcoating.
I'm just not wired that way, and it ain't gonna be here.
Godspeed.
Janny
First of all, let me say the reference to people not liking what I've said of late has, predictably enough, hinged around this "gatekeeper" discussion.
No surprise there.
Nowadays, the "gatekeepers are evil" sentiment is considered to be inviolable. If you express a liking for "the way things used to be," you're painted as a dinosaur, an advocate of "cultural policing," a snob who simply wants things your way, and/or a "wannabe" slamming those out there creative enough to go the self-publishing route.
Notice that in my original post, I did nothing of the kind of any of those things. I stated that in my opinion, we already had had a pretty good system of "sorting" out those works that were ready for public consumption from those that weren't. I added that the people who worked on that side of the desk weren't ogres, mindless drones, or people who hated creativity or innovation; they, just as the authors they unfortunately had to reject, were doing the best they could at the jobs they were hired to do. And I simply put forth that in my experience, as a result of many books not having "gatekeepers" to point out flaws and/or send them back for more work, the market has been flooded with dreck.
I actually took special and particular pains to say I was not badmouthing self-published authors or small presses in general. Heck, I'm with small presses. Am I gonna be stupid enough to badmouth the route I've taken myself?
Yet at least two self-pubbed authors decided I was bashing their work and their enterprises--never mind that I hadn't said anything of the kind--and had all kinds of hurt feelings and/or snark that they then unleashed on me.
I also took pains to mention that the books I was criticizing were in my "inferior" list not because I "didn't think they were good enough for me" (!) or that "I should decide what quality is" (!!) but because they had flaws. As in errors. As in bad grammar, poor structure, word misuses, incoherencies, or other stuff that made me mutter a lot as I tried to read them. Those things have nothing to do with what I personally think of anything. Those things are basic English language writing skills. They're able to be objectively decided. And it's not just "my opinion" that those are important. I'd wager that any writer who was so quick to lambaste me for saying these things out loud would be put off the same way I've been by some of this stuff.
That's probably the saddest part of all of this: that people riding the horses in the crusade against anyone being able to tell you your work may not be ready...didn't bother to ever ask me more about what I'd read that had struck me that way.
They didn't bother to ask me if I've ever had to write a rejection letter, or if it bothered me to do so. (I have, and yes, it does.)
They didn't bother to ask me how much of this kind of work I've encountered, and if there seemed to be a bigger proportion of it coming across the figurative transom. (The answers are "a lot," and "yes.")
They didn't empathize one iota with the frustration that's clear from every single line of that original post. They apparently didn't read the line that said, "I hate saying this. I really hate saying this."
They simply decided I was disrespecting them, and proceeded to rant on me accordingly. Which does present the question of who actually was disrespecting whom.
Finally, the caveat. If you've lasted this long in this post without seeing red and crossing me off every single friend list you have, you probably know what's coming and are fine with it. :-)
The caveat is about my tone. Oh, I got a lot of reprimands about that.
From people who don't believe in gatekeepers.
From people who don't believe in "cultural policing."
From people who don't know me personally--at least two of whom came to my blog already "loaded for bear" because they didn't like something else I'd said in a comment section somewhere else--and yet proceeded to assume they had the right to scold me.
To which I can only say, once again, "Who's disrespecting whom here?"
I put up a post out of frustration, dismay, and not a little grief.
It wasn't read that way.
At all.
But, hey, if you find yourself offended by a cynical, harsh, or perhaps a bit snarky tone on things that are written from frustration, dismay, and not a little grief--if you truly think that someone, on her own blog, needs to worry about whether she's "polite" enough in those circumstances...?
Feel free to go elsewhere for sugarcoating.
I'm just not wired that way, and it ain't gonna be here.
Godspeed.
Janny
Monday, January 21, 2013
Are You A "Team Player"?
I have a deficiency.
I admit it.
Easy as it seems for other people to do this, apparently, I simply cannot.
I am not a good "team player."
Those of you who know this blog well know this already.
Maybe I should explain what I see as a "team player." What I've seen and heard and experienced at the hands of corporate types who speak in those terms.
What does it mean?
In my experience...
It means you are not a person, but a "resource"--one a company can move around or deploy at its whim and convenience.
It means you embrace an aim of a group you get shoved into without your consent, to make something happen you may or may not even believe is a good idea.
It means you're willing to "go the extra mile"--which generally translates to, "Sales promised something that is humanly impossible, but we have to save their butts by doing it."
It means you move your vacations, your holidays, and your life around, if necessary, so that the "team" meets a goal.
It means you say nothing at all when you see corporate top dogs taking glory for a grand conclusion you and your comrades sweated blood over--or, conversely, take all the blame away from the top dog (even if he or she goofed up) if something goes wrong.
Above all, it means that you think like the group, nod your head over the group conclusions, and keep your mouth shut if you disagree.
Now, to me, the above doesn't describe a human person.
It describes a machine, a robot, or a service animal.
(In fact, that probably does the service animal an injustice.)
Which is why I'm an entrepreneur...and not a "team player."
This kind of admission is anathema.
It brands you as "troublesome," as "difficult," or as "unreliable."
It can, in fact, keep you from getting hired for many of what are considered "good jobs."
And yet, many, many, many of us who bristle at the requirements/expectations above are anything but troublesome, difficult, or unreliable.
Many, many times, we're the ones actually getting the work done--and done well.
Most times, in fact, we're the ones who throw our whole hearts into what we believe in.
We're the ones who "leave it all on the field."
Which means we're the best bet if you truly want to get something of value accomplished...because we will own our own work every single time.
No groups or teams are necessary for us to get stuff done.
We simply roll up our sleeves and do it.
This is why I'm a free agent, and happy to be one.
This is why I'm an entrepreneur.
And this is why if you think beyond the lines and color outside the box...you might discover that I, and many more like me, are precisely the people you'll want on a "team" that's gonna kick ass in meaningful, lasting ways.
Brilliance doesn't come cheap, and it doesn't come boxed.
Especially not in the "good team player" box.
Think about that the next time you need to hire "awesome."
You may not find it in the good, obedient team players.
But you just might find it in snarky, stubbornly independent cusses like me. :-)
Thoughts?
Janny
I admit it.
Easy as it seems for other people to do this, apparently, I simply cannot.
I am not a good "team player."
Those of you who know this blog well know this already.
Maybe I should explain what I see as a "team player." What I've seen and heard and experienced at the hands of corporate types who speak in those terms.
What does it mean?
In my experience...
It means you are not a person, but a "resource"--one a company can move around or deploy at its whim and convenience.
It means you embrace an aim of a group you get shoved into without your consent, to make something happen you may or may not even believe is a good idea.
It means you're willing to "go the extra mile"--which generally translates to, "Sales promised something that is humanly impossible, but we have to save their butts by doing it."
It means you move your vacations, your holidays, and your life around, if necessary, so that the "team" meets a goal.
It means you say nothing at all when you see corporate top dogs taking glory for a grand conclusion you and your comrades sweated blood over--or, conversely, take all the blame away from the top dog (even if he or she goofed up) if something goes wrong.
Above all, it means that you think like the group, nod your head over the group conclusions, and keep your mouth shut if you disagree.
Now, to me, the above doesn't describe a human person.
It describes a machine, a robot, or a service animal.
(In fact, that probably does the service animal an injustice.)
Which is why I'm an entrepreneur...and not a "team player."
This kind of admission is anathema.
It brands you as "troublesome," as "difficult," or as "unreliable."
It can, in fact, keep you from getting hired for many of what are considered "good jobs."
And yet, many, many, many of us who bristle at the requirements/expectations above are anything but troublesome, difficult, or unreliable.
Many, many times, we're the ones actually getting the work done--and done well.
Most times, in fact, we're the ones who throw our whole hearts into what we believe in.
We're the ones who "leave it all on the field."
Which means we're the best bet if you truly want to get something of value accomplished...because we will own our own work every single time.
No groups or teams are necessary for us to get stuff done.
We simply roll up our sleeves and do it.
This is why I'm a free agent, and happy to be one.
This is why I'm an entrepreneur.
And this is why if you think beyond the lines and color outside the box...you might discover that I, and many more like me, are precisely the people you'll want on a "team" that's gonna kick ass in meaningful, lasting ways.
Brilliance doesn't come cheap, and it doesn't come boxed.
Especially not in the "good team player" box.
Think about that the next time you need to hire "awesome."
You may not find it in the good, obedient team players.
But you just might find it in snarky, stubbornly independent cusses like me. :-)
Thoughts?
Janny
Sunday, January 20, 2013
Is It Just Me...?
...or is there a particularly weird form of laziness taking over the online marketplace?
I'm talking about the plethora of so-called "job" ads out there that keep popping up on writers' boards, job sites, etc., that are nothing more than some aspiring "writer" who wants YOU to write his/her book.
Not edit it--although there are a few of those.
Not so much proofread--although, once again, there are a few of those.
No, these ads aren't for writing help. This advertiser comes right out and says, "I need someone to write a novel for me. I've got the idea (or the characters, or a rough plot, or sometimes a little more), I just need someone to put it into words and organize it." (To which some of us are tempted to answer, "Don't we all!" But I digress. :-D)
Yes, ladies and gentlemen...this person doesn't just want someone to rephrase work already done, correct the English, and clean up the structure a little bit. This person wants YOU to write THEIR book for them. For which THEY will get the byline, ALL the credit, and ALL money that may come out of it.
Oh, they'll pay you for the privilege of doing this for them--don't get me wrong. In some cases, as much as $500!
(This space for snorting.)
In return, you will sign away all other rights to the book. You will get neither ghostwriting credit nor royalties, should any show up. And it goes without saying that should you write a truly wonderful book and some publisher actually wants to ante up an advance, you certainly won't get a penny of that, either.
So one has to ask...what are these people thinking?
And what kind of idiot agrees to help them?
As to what they're thinking? They're probably thinking that "it's not that hard to write a book." I've even seen job ads saying as much--"for a professional, this won't be a difficult job at all."
What I've had to tell them is that a professional does that work on his or her own behalf--not for someone who thinks it's an easy job, or who portrays it as such.
(After all, if it's that easy, you can do it yourself...right?)
The second question, unfortunately, is answered by equally clueless "helpers." Because rest assured, someone will take these pseudo-"jobs." That someone may have rotten written English, but they'll be willing to give it a shot. I suppose in those cases, a cynical realist would say, "Hey, there's a sucker born every minute. In this case, we got two for the price of one." And some people--you know who you are--will step forward and have the nerve to call this a win-win: a person who can't write at all gets one who's just starting out in the business and wants to build a "credit," and both of them benefit from an easy transaction.
Only problem with that "win-win" is...it isn't true.
In truth, neither one benefits.
The "author" certainly doesn't. On the surface, yeah, he or she gets a book to brag about. Is it going to be a great book? Two guesses on that one. It may or may not be readable. It probably will make them NO money at all. It's a vanity proposition, plain and simple, that they're getting at far less than a legit money-for-value price.
And the beginning writer who helps them doesn't benefit, either. This is a writing "credit" in the mind of the "hired writer" only. They will receive no actual credit for the work unless the "author" is gracious enough to give it--but they'll sign over all rights to ask for it. They won't be able to even so much as cite it in a portfolio, because it's not their work. It's someone else's.
Now, some of you may be saying, "Well, ghostwriters do that all the time. These people are offering the same thing."
Once again, the only problem with that assertion is...it isn't true.
It is true that a professional "ghostwriter" may or may not get a byline. Gracious co-authors treat you as one and give you one. Or they give you an "as told to" or similar acknowledgment which lets people know that they know that forces other than their own matchless brilliance helped make the book happen. They don't have to, mind you, though many of them do.
But where the similarity ends is when we start talking dollars and cents. For a professional ghostwriter, an author who hires you without giving you "author credit" will make it worth your while by actually paying you for the effort a book takes.
As I told one prospective client soliciting my services this morning, normal ghostwriting fees for writing an entire book start in the five figures. As in, $10,000 and above. And if you're hiring someone with the expertise, experience, and skill level I have--you should expect to pay twice that much as a start. Because what these authors have discovered--and what the fake "job posters" hope you don't know yet--is that writing a book is real work.
It takes time.
It takes effort.
It takes some degree of skill--even for a very borderline book.
Some of you may plead innocence at this point. You claim to only want someone to "help" you with your book by "fleshing out scenes, adding material, cleaning up plot problems," etc. For some reason, when you write out this request, you seem to think (erroneously) that all you're asking for is an "editor."
You're not. You're asking the same thing a ghostwriter "ad" is asking for--you're just not as honest about it. And, more often than not, the money you're offering for that work is an insult even to a beginner, much less a seasoned pro.
Yes, most of us just laugh at these things and ignore them.
But it's disturbing that there are people out there who think these are jobs...
That there are people out there who think these are good opportunities...
And that there are job boards out there that continue to list these as if they're viable.
There is a place to go to have someone write a book for you.
It's called a vanity press.
More and more, vanity presses aren't just places to print up what you've already done; they're places where you can get a package that includes everything from the writing on up.
These are the places where these people need to go.
They won't see any packages available for as low as $500 (or $100, or $50, as I've actually seen in some cases as the "expected budget"), so they'll probably consider them ripoffs.
But maybe, just maybe, they'll also do enough research to realize what they were asking in the first place by pretending to offer a "job" was an even worse ripoff of professional talent and time.
And maybe...just maybe...the job boards will stop taking these fake "job" ads and leave room for real writing jobs instead.
One can hope, right?
As for me, I'm doing my best to enlighten folks like this, one ad and one pitch at a time.
I hope you'll do your part, too.
Thoughts?
Janny
I'm talking about the plethora of so-called "job" ads out there that keep popping up on writers' boards, job sites, etc., that are nothing more than some aspiring "writer" who wants YOU to write his/her book.
Not edit it--although there are a few of those.
Not so much proofread--although, once again, there are a few of those.
No, these ads aren't for writing help. This advertiser comes right out and says, "I need someone to write a novel for me. I've got the idea (or the characters, or a rough plot, or sometimes a little more), I just need someone to put it into words and organize it." (To which some of us are tempted to answer, "Don't we all!" But I digress. :-D)
Yes, ladies and gentlemen...this person doesn't just want someone to rephrase work already done, correct the English, and clean up the structure a little bit. This person wants YOU to write THEIR book for them. For which THEY will get the byline, ALL the credit, and ALL money that may come out of it.
Oh, they'll pay you for the privilege of doing this for them--don't get me wrong. In some cases, as much as $500!
(This space for snorting.)
In return, you will sign away all other rights to the book. You will get neither ghostwriting credit nor royalties, should any show up. And it goes without saying that should you write a truly wonderful book and some publisher actually wants to ante up an advance, you certainly won't get a penny of that, either.
So one has to ask...what are these people thinking?
And what kind of idiot agrees to help them?
As to what they're thinking? They're probably thinking that "it's not that hard to write a book." I've even seen job ads saying as much--"for a professional, this won't be a difficult job at all."
What I've had to tell them is that a professional does that work on his or her own behalf--not for someone who thinks it's an easy job, or who portrays it as such.
(After all, if it's that easy, you can do it yourself...right?)
The second question, unfortunately, is answered by equally clueless "helpers." Because rest assured, someone will take these pseudo-"jobs." That someone may have rotten written English, but they'll be willing to give it a shot. I suppose in those cases, a cynical realist would say, "Hey, there's a sucker born every minute. In this case, we got two for the price of one." And some people--you know who you are--will step forward and have the nerve to call this a win-win: a person who can't write at all gets one who's just starting out in the business and wants to build a "credit," and both of them benefit from an easy transaction.
Only problem with that "win-win" is...it isn't true.
In truth, neither one benefits.
The "author" certainly doesn't. On the surface, yeah, he or she gets a book to brag about. Is it going to be a great book? Two guesses on that one. It may or may not be readable. It probably will make them NO money at all. It's a vanity proposition, plain and simple, that they're getting at far less than a legit money-for-value price.
And the beginning writer who helps them doesn't benefit, either. This is a writing "credit" in the mind of the "hired writer" only. They will receive no actual credit for the work unless the "author" is gracious enough to give it--but they'll sign over all rights to ask for it. They won't be able to even so much as cite it in a portfolio, because it's not their work. It's someone else's.
Now, some of you may be saying, "Well, ghostwriters do that all the time. These people are offering the same thing."
Once again, the only problem with that assertion is...it isn't true.
It is true that a professional "ghostwriter" may or may not get a byline. Gracious co-authors treat you as one and give you one. Or they give you an "as told to" or similar acknowledgment which lets people know that they know that forces other than their own matchless brilliance helped make the book happen. They don't have to, mind you, though many of them do.
But where the similarity ends is when we start talking dollars and cents. For a professional ghostwriter, an author who hires you without giving you "author credit" will make it worth your while by actually paying you for the effort a book takes.
As I told one prospective client soliciting my services this morning, normal ghostwriting fees for writing an entire book start in the five figures. As in, $10,000 and above. And if you're hiring someone with the expertise, experience, and skill level I have--you should expect to pay twice that much as a start. Because what these authors have discovered--and what the fake "job posters" hope you don't know yet--is that writing a book is real work.
It takes time.
It takes effort.
It takes some degree of skill--even for a very borderline book.
Some of you may plead innocence at this point. You claim to only want someone to "help" you with your book by "fleshing out scenes, adding material, cleaning up plot problems," etc. For some reason, when you write out this request, you seem to think (erroneously) that all you're asking for is an "editor."
You're not. You're asking the same thing a ghostwriter "ad" is asking for--you're just not as honest about it. And, more often than not, the money you're offering for that work is an insult even to a beginner, much less a seasoned pro.
Yes, most of us just laugh at these things and ignore them.
But it's disturbing that there are people out there who think these are jobs...
That there are people out there who think these are good opportunities...
And that there are job boards out there that continue to list these as if they're viable.
There is a place to go to have someone write a book for you.
It's called a vanity press.
More and more, vanity presses aren't just places to print up what you've already done; they're places where you can get a package that includes everything from the writing on up.
These are the places where these people need to go.
They won't see any packages available for as low as $500 (or $100, or $50, as I've actually seen in some cases as the "expected budget"), so they'll probably consider them ripoffs.
But maybe, just maybe, they'll also do enough research to realize what they were asking in the first place by pretending to offer a "job" was an even worse ripoff of professional talent and time.
And maybe...just maybe...the job boards will stop taking these fake "job" ads and leave room for real writing jobs instead.
One can hope, right?
As for me, I'm doing my best to enlighten folks like this, one ad and one pitch at a time.
I hope you'll do your part, too.
Thoughts?
Janny
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
