Friend or Foe?

One of the things we were asked in editing today was, Should editing be a collaborative process or not?

Collaborative editing allows the work to be edited by a group of people simultaneously, then having a feedback and discussion session with the writer on points they have picked up. This is the point of the group I belong to.

Editing my stuff -

I like to get different peoples viewpoints on my work. My editing group tells me what they feel works and what doesn't. It’s sometimes hard to listen to people pulling my words apart, but it is better in the long run to know something isn't working than to carry on regardless and waste months writing a novel no one will want to read because the tone is wrong, or there are mistakes with continuity. Never mind the grammar!  

Editors need to have good attention to detail, and be able to spot mistakes in the story. A number of people reading that story are able to pick up far more that the individual writer. I have found with my own writing that I am often too close to the story to notice many stand out errors. Even with my editor’s ‘hat’ on, there are still things I miss.

Whilst the others are reading the story it is uncomfortable but I have grown to trust their judgements, and they have picked up some humongous mistakes that I've made.

And editing isn't just about the mistakes that I've made, editors also pick up on the good things that I've written, and they are very encouraging and supportive.

There is a danger that the group of editors can become complacent with my work

Editing other peoples stuff –

I used to find editing other peoples work quite difficult, especially if it was a piece that I didn't like, but I now realise how useful it is to the writer, and I really don’t mind any more.  What I try to look for are the positives as well as the ways the work can be improved. When the author addresses the criticism I find that I get a lot out of it, I have gained a better understanding of the way people think, and the way they view things.

After all I am writing to be read, and so are the rest. 

The last editing session : (

Today was our final editing session, so I couldn't give up this chance to have one more piece of work scrutinised by the group.

I submitted the opening piece of my novella.  It is quite an atmospheric piece, about a young girl, who has gone to a deserted cove in the middle of the night to kill herself, but before she actually takes her life she finds an injured seal.

As I was reading the passage out loud I realised that I had used the work instinctively twice in as many sentences. I had broken the cardinal rule, that before I submit anything I need to read it out loud.

The feedback I received was that I had captured the atmosphere really well, the editors knew why my protagonist was at the cove.

Prior to my piece we had been editing a piece about a dog. Everyone assumed that the animal on the beach was a dog! I need to make it clearer that the animal is actually a seal, which is easy to rectify as I could mention that when he looks at her she realises it is a baby seal. Another thing that was brought up was the fact that she has to move him, which would be very difficult if he was full grown.

I also recognised that I really need to do some more research, when asked if there was a chance that my protagonist could be bitten by the seal I really didn't know.

It was pointed out that I write about water quite a bit, and was it significant. I can't say that it is. My husband is from Scarborough and we tend to spend a lot of time up there. I love the sea and my dream is to have a little house near the beach, so maybe it is just my unconscious longing to be back there.

I did receive some lovely feedback, especially from my tutor who picked out a passage he liked.

As I reached the top I took a deep breath. I knew now why the cove was deserted, the state of the path was keeping people away; the state of the path would keep you safe.

According to my tutor it has nice rhythm, but it is a paradox, the path is dangerous. It is nicely compressed in atmosphere, tone and mood.

I have found that editing is all about taking the good points with the bad, there may be things that have to be put right with my writing, but there are times when you know that something works, and it doesn't hurt to have your opinion reiterated.

As a writer I feel it is better to work with the editor. I am able to discuss the points I disagree with, after all none of us feel comfortable about getting rid of our little darlings. Editors see my work from a different viewpoint, and by working with them, hopefully I will end up with an acceptance letter from an agent.

Ey up me duck!

This week I sent part of my novel in to be edited. What was picked up was the improvement in my dialogue.

The novel is a gritty police procedural, which is set on a fictional estate in Nottingham. In the piece the characters speak in colloquial vernacular, (slang).

Having been born and raised in Nottingham, I find writing in local dialect very easy. My characters speak in my mother tongue, the hardest part of the writing is how to spell the words, I know the sounds but not the spellings. I found a great guide in the Left Lion magazine. http://www.leftlion.co.uk/articles.cfm/title/aah-ter-talk-notts/id/2965

I must admit that a lot of my characters swear. This is because I believe that dialogue should sound authentic. The way a character speaks should be appropriate to that character. My novel is about drug dealers, readers wouldn’t believe a drug dealer who said ‘Oh dear,’ they expect such rough and ready characters to use bad language.

I try to keep my dialogue short. People don’t usually speak in long sentences, so why would my characters. What people usually do is add a few ums and urrghs to their conversations, but writing dialogue the way people literally speak would quickly become irritating to the person reading it, so I tend to leave out the awkward pauses, and write my dialogue as realistically as possible, without making my characters irksome.

I have stopped using so many dialogue tags, (he said, she said). Since I’ve learnt about beats I find my dialogue sounds a lot more realistic with some action interspersed between speakers.

One of the things I was commended on was that none of my characters call another character ‘Duck’. A lot of people associate Nottingham people with the word duck. Saying ey up me duck instead of hello, and calling people duck, which is, according to the Left Lion, a term of endearment. I only call people duck when I’m in a different Town or City, then I tend to broaden my accent.  I know very few Nottingham people who use it, (although they do say ey up), so I didn’t want my characters to use it. According to my editing class, to use the term would have been lazy as it’s stereotypical Nottingham talk.

Although my dialogue is getting a lot better, it’s still not perfect. One of the things I was picked up on was question marks. I had left the question mark off a piece of speech, because although it was a question, the character already knew what the answer was going to be, so she was really being sarcastic. This lead to a discussion on when is a question not a question. Apparently they don’t use question marks in Italy. A lot of the editors thought that I was wrong to leave off the question mark, and in the end I agreed with them. I have to consider the rule of the genre, and whether the readers would expect it. I think they would.

 

To script, or not to script

Today we edited some scripts, which led to the question ‘What do we want in a good screenplay?’

Does it need a good narrative. What about dialogue, or settings? And in what way does a script differ from a short story or a novel.

Well the first thing to say is that writing a script is a totally different way of writing to a novel. Scriptwriting is more about description. Painting a picture with your pen (or computer). The characters don’t have to be described in any great detail. The script must be really engaging, after all it is there to impress the producer/director and/or the person holding the purse strings.

The scriptwriter is creating a quick visual shorthand for the actors and director, and they need to remember that the first draft has no intrinsic value because scripts can, and do change right up until the last scene has been shot. A script is a collaborative process, and the end product may bare very little resemblance to the original script.  

The short story/novel, doesn’t change too much from the original work.

I put a couple of questions to one of the best screenwriters I know, and certainly a name to look out for in the future - TIM SHELLEY

ME: How much dialogue should a script contain?

TIM: It's a tough question, and one that I don't think has a straight answer. It all depends on the script you're writing. A soap opera script will have tons of dialogue, whereas an action thriller could predominantly focus on the scene description/action elements. It really comes down to knowing the genre, the story you're telling, and the market you are trying to hit with your script.

It's the same with screenwriting rules. They are intended as a baseline, because so often new writers fail to really study their intended audience and analyse the scripts that have been picked up by the networks. But as with all rules, they can be broken. As long as it works. Whether it works or not though is entirely subjective.

ME: How would you describe the difference between novel writing and scriptwriting? TIM: I'd say novels and screenplays share a grounding at a story structure level. What separates them are the tools at the writer's disposal. In a novel, a writer has almost complete freedom over the way their final piece is portrayed. What tense they use etc...   A screenwriter, unless they are also the director/show runner, generally has very little input towards the final work, and has to follow the conventions established by Hollywood and other networks. They have to write in present tense, and adhere to screenplay format. If they don't, producers won't read past page 5. Similar to what an author deals with when approaching an agent/publisher. They expect the manuscript to be formatted correctly. Failing to do so just comes across as lazy to those who have to sift through material on a daily basis. Then you also have to contend with the limitations of writing for the screen. It's a visual medium so you can't go into character thoughts very easily, yet you still need to give an audience a way into the character's psyche. Obviously there are ways around these limitations, such as using subtext laden dialogue and character descriptors, etc... It all comes down to weighing up how much you should show, what you know needs to be on screen, and laying out the blueprint for a film/show so that a director can go out and shoot it with the final image already in their heads. Thanks Tim, Great answers.

 

Finally: 5 things to remember when writing a script:

1. Do your homework.

2. Don’t make assumptions about what your readers know.

3. A script can contain a lot of set ups, but remember if you set something up,     you have to revisit it.

4. Make it engaging.

5. Remember, you don’t put camera angles in.

Hope you've found this post informative.


Please feel free to post a comment, or follow my blog by leaving your email address in the box provided - That way you'll be notified of all new posts 

Don't tell me the moon is shining

Probably the most famous quote about show and tell ever:

 

"Don't tell me the moon is shining; show me

the glint of light on broken glass"

          -  Anton Chekov

 

 

One of the most consistent criticisms I’ve received during our editing sessions is that I often tell my readers what is going on, instead of showing them. I am trying very hard to eradicate this flaw, but still rogue sentences keep cropping up.

This led me to think about show and tell, what is the difference? And does it really matter?

Showing is active: Diane’s lip trembled. Showing allows the reader to feel the experiences and emotions of the character by expressing them in a physical way. Showing involves using the five senses, taste, touch, feel, hear, and see, as well as thought patterns and emotions.

Telling is passive: Diane was scared. Telling is giving the reader the information they need to know what is going on in the story, and where the story is up to. Too much telling can really slow a story down. Readers will feel removed from the story.

 

This is a typical example of telling, not showing:

Living on a cul-de-sac seriously prohibits your privacy, and pretty soon it seemed that the whole of the street was in my living room, fussing around me.

The narrator of the story was in the middle of labour, the ambulance had been diverted, and her neighbours had come over to help.

 

This is the same example only this time it’s showing:

Me lying prone on the couch with my skirt pulled up to my neck was probably not what Carol and Irene expected to see, when they walked in carrying towels and bowls.

The difference between showing and telling is important. Not all writing has to be showing, most writing is about telling the story, but showing is an important tool to use to give my readers a greater insight into the subtleties of a character.

 

Five things I've learnt about show and tell:

1. There is nothing wrong with telling a story, but I must be careful not to narrate every piece. Readers want to feel involved. By showing what is happening, and letting them experience it, will engage my readers much more.

2. Too much 'telling' will turn my story into a summary.

3. When reading my prose I need to ask myself: am I allowing my readers to get a sense of the action, or am I just telling them what is happening? Do the readers know how my character is feeling, or am I just telling them? Are my characters telling the reader what they are doing? Is there a way I can show any of this?

4. Showing is important, but it is just as important for my readers to know what’s going on in the story, so I need to be able to tell them.

5. For an engaging story it is important to get the mix right.

 

 



 

 

What's in a name?

A writer friend of mine asked us to edit a piece of prose she had written. Her characters were all of Indian descent, but she had taken the conscious decision to anglicise their names so that her intended audience, UK readers, could pronounce them, and therefore relate to them more. This got me thinking about names, are they that important? Should we have to panda to the whims of the few who find pronunciation difficult? What makes us choose our characters names.

I once sent in a chapter of my book to an editing group. I had a problem with one of my characters. I mentioned that the reason I wasn't 'getting Dana,' was because I had changed her name. When I first wrote the piece she was called Sharon. Crime writer Sharon Bolton wrote under the name of S. J. Bolton because she felt stigmatised by her name, and wondered whether anyone would read a novel by a writer called Sharon. Sharon was a stereotype for a working class woman, she decided to end the prejudice and now calls herself Sharon Bolton. I read this and decided that if I kept the name Sharon I was perpetuating the prejudice. However, I wasn't getting a clear picture of the character with her new name. So are the names we chose for our characters significant to how we, the writer, perceives them?

I have a picture in my head of my characters, I temporarily lost that picture when I changed the name of my character, but I made a conscious decision not to change it back, and now I can’t see the character with any other name but Dana. I have come to realise that names are very important.

I feel that It is essential that we give characters suitable names. An upper class woman wouldn't be called Gladys, and a working class woman wouldn't be called Phyllida. The same is true with male names, Sid is typically a working class name, whereas Rupert is definitely upper class.

Names fall out of fashion, popular names change with each generation. These days it is more common to call a young girl Lacie, or Gemma than Doreen or Edna. An old man is more likely to be called Cyril or Herbert, than Kyle or Dylan.

I feel that readers have certain expectations regarding names, I certainly did when I read my friends story. I felt quite disappointed that she had anglicised her characters names. For me it ruined the flow of the story as I had to ask her how they fitted in to the narrative.

I do agree with her that some people will mispronounce names, but I feel that she shouldn't have to choose a name that she thinks a reader will be comfortable with. Readers like to be taken out of their comfort zone. Besides, a lot of people can’t pronounce Dalziel (Dee El), but did that stop Reginald Hill giving that name to his fabulous protagonist.

 

And the beat goes on...

During our editing sessions we are asked to send in stories. I sent one of mine. When I wrote the story, (for a writing exercise on another course), we were asked to write entirely in dialogue. I didn’t tell this to the group editing it, and this led, quite naturally, to the subject of beats.

Beats are morsels of action scattered throughout a scene. They help your reader to visualize the dialogue taking place. They can be used link dialogue to settings and characters, for example ‘he threw the glass into the sink’, or, ‘he wiped the smudge of chocolate from her face’. They can affect the pace of the dialogue. Beats can bring dialogue to life.

This is an excerpt of the piece I put in for editing:

‘Please Diane; don’t play games with us, you have to tell us what she said. You want your daughter back don’t you?’

‘Of course I do.’

‘Then tell us Diane.’

‘I can’t.’

‘Why, did she tell you not to talk to us?’

‘No.’

‘Then why Diane, why won’t you divulge anything.’

Do you see how fast that dialogue is taking place, there is no emotion, no sense of place. It’s a bit flat.

 

Here’s the piece again after I added beats:

‘Please Diane; don’t play games with us, you have to tell us what she said. You want your daughter back don’t you?’ the Inspectors voice echoed around the room.

‘Of course I do,’ she patted her eyes with a handkerchief.

‘Then tell us Diane,’ the Inspector shuffled impatiently in her chair, it was three o’clock, two hours had passed already.

‘I can’t,’ Diane’s gaze dropped to the table.

‘Why, did she tell you not to talk to us?’ The Inspector slammed her pencil down on the table.

Diane shot up from her chair, ‘No.’

The Inspector looked up at her, ‘Then why Diane, why won’t you divulge anything.’

Diane's shoulders sagged.

See how much better that sounds. In the second passage you get a sense of the setting, the two women are sitting down. They are in a bare room, hence the echo. There is a build-up of tension, the Inspector is getting irritated, the interview has lasted a long time. Diane is obviously in turmoil. The inspector has sparked a reaction in her, which is why she jumps up from the chair.

5 Things I have learnt about beats:

1. Beats work best when there is a natural pause in the dialogue.     The best way to find a natural pause is by reading work out loud.

2. The longer the beat, the longer the pause.

3. The dialogue still needs to sound authentic, if there are too many beats readers will become irritated, so it is best to try to strike a balance.

4. Readers don’t need every bit of the action described to them in great detail, it is better to let them use their imagination to fill in what you leave out.

5. Beats can help to vary the pace of the dialogue.

I hope you've found this post informative.

Please feel free to post a comment, or follow my blog by leaving your email address in the box provided - That way you'll be notified of all new posts

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Editing out the errors

Progress on my novel was very slow. I admitted to a friend of mine that I was going over the text again and again, until I thought it was perfect. She advised me to stop editing as I wrote, and leave it until I had finished my first draft.

It worked for me, I’ve since finished my first draft, but now comes the tricky bit - editing it!

I’ve found, from editing other peoples work, that editing can be as simple as changing the spelling of a single word, or as massive as looking at what is effective, and what needs reworking.

Two processes are used in editing:

1. Macro Editing:

Is looking at the whole novel, and deciding where the author, (me, in this case), is trying to go. Is the structure right? Are the characters credible? Does the text flow. Does the theme follow the conventions of the genre, to do this you need to know who the audience is. Is the tone right, is the writing consistent?

2. Micro Editing:

Is looking at the text in fine detail. Checking things like punctuation, spelling, and the language used. Looking at the dialogue and imagery. Is there any repetition.

I needed to gain some distance from my work so that I could gain a better perspective, so I printed out what I had written and put it away for a couple of weeks, then I started to look at it. 

I’ve found that reading the piece out loud before I edit gives me an idea of how it flows.

Some suggestions I have been given are: I could also try creating inner censors by imagining my worst enemy or favourite writer reading the piece out. I could also create a conversation with someone about the piece while I’m editing it, or find a reader, or readers to read the unedited piece, the reader could then make suggestions or find errors I have missed. I am going to let friends and some family members read it. I have also been told that editing the piece away from where it was written may give me a different insight on the piece.

Editing the novel may be hard work, but it will be worth it in the end.

 

How have you found the editing process?