Wednesday, April 13, 2011
A New Post for Technorati
This post is simply a post that allows me to insert the code FJ76YD7DV8YR into my blog so that Technorati will allow me to claim my blog.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Vanity, thy name is Self-publishing
A couple of years ago, I pulled my boss aside and told her that we were on the cusp of a revolution. She gave me a funny look, but was intrigued. I told her that we had all of the tools in place to convert college textbooks into an electronic format. This would allow us to store the books in a virtual warehouse, pull 100% of the profit and take control of every aspect of text book publishing for the university I work at. Her response was that it would still be a lot of work and that the key component would be the issue of editing, especially in an academic setting.
A year later, I was sitting with my writing/reading group and I blurted, "You know, as authors, we really have all of the control we need to self-publish and sell our books digitally." My statement was met with raised eyebrows and a succinct discussion, the gist of which was, "Most authors don't want that responsibility. They don't want to do it themselves."
I would propose that as time goes on, authors will be required to do more and more in terms of marketing themselves and their work. In fact, when I've had requests for manuscripts from agents, they have generally asked, "Do you have a Web site or can you create a site? Do you blog? How much can you market yourself? Etc."
At this point, you're probably asking, "What's your point, Neal?"
My point is that authors can't just sit back and be authors anymore. In this economic environment, the more you know about marketing yourself over the Web, the better off you'll be. I think that the days of an author simply writing a book and the publisher promoting that book are over, if they ever really existed at all.
But I'm actually going to take things further. My background is in digital media - I have a Master's Degree in Visual Communications with an emphasis in digital media. What does this mean? It means that I know most of what a person can know about building Web sites, digital documents, graphic design, design software, typography, etc. I also have quite a bit of experience in writing and editing, believe it or not. The thing is, I don't believe that I'm unique. I've seen too many creative people with the ability to cross-over to other areas. I've seen musicians transition into fine art. I've seen actors become good musicians and vice-versa. This leads me to believe that writers, as creatives, can cross-over into publishing, especially digital publishing.
The best thing about this is that the conditions have never been better for authors to self-publish in the digital domain. There are plenty of free tools provided by sites like Amazon and Smashwords that allow authors to put together e-books. Why bother submitting to agents or publishers and waiting on the rejection slip?
Some might say that the stigma of self-publishing is reason enough. Two-years ago, I might have agreed with that. I might have snickered at a local author who told me she or he had been published only to find out that this person had actually gone to a vanity press. I might have snubbed my nose at the idea. The climate is different, now. Big time authors like Stephen King were experimenting with self-publishing digital copies of their work. The Plant is one example of King's work that came out digitally in installments for .99 ea via his Web site and PayPal if I remember right. Christopher Paolini (Eregon) is another example of being self-published. Paolini's first 10k were sold as self-published work before a publishing house approached him and said, "Hey, we want to give you money!" Recent examples are Amanda Hocking (who friended me on goodreads.com :), J.A. Konrath and Seth Godin.
Please understand, these authors are very good writers and at this point, they really are the exception. However, I think that as time goes on, we'll see more and more of this.
Personally, I think the economy has caused a lot of publishers and agents to concentrate solely on looking for that next best-seller and only that next best-seller. If there ever was a chance for an author to be represented by an agent or published simply because the story was good and the writing was good, I think it's gone right now. Money is what makes the publishing industry go around and it always will be. If an agent or publisher doesn't think a book is going to be a NY Times Bestseller, it has very little chance of getting published. Because of this environment, there is no reason we shouldn't be self-publishing our work digitally.
Despite this power and the excitement that I have about this new frontier, I do have some caveats. First of all, the work has to be excellent, well-edited and ready-to-go. Secondly, you have to be willing to market yourself. You have to blog, you have to get the word out via Twitter and your own Web site. There is no getting around the work that you'll have to do. I never said it was easy. In short, you have to be the hardest worker, the best writer, best editor and you have to self-promote the hell out of yourself.
Secondly, you have to question yourself over and over as to whether or not it's the right choice for you. Is the work really good enough? Take the time to find out. Send out parts of it to people that you trust to give you an honest assessment. Get people to read it first then get constructive feedback. Test it out on sites like authonomy.com where people can read parts of your book and provide feedback and rate it by shelving it or backing it.
I still believe that standard publishing houses are necessary. They have the clout and the money to get your book out in a printed format, which a lot of people, myself included, still love. I still think that it's a wonderfully humbling exercise and experience to send your query letters out to agents and get rejected. It sharpens your skills and makes you a better writer.
The tools that we have available level the playing field in the digital arena. The difference will be that the quality of players will not be level and it's up to you to do the training and hard work necessary to be the best.
That's all for now.
A year later, I was sitting with my writing/reading group and I blurted, "You know, as authors, we really have all of the control we need to self-publish and sell our books digitally." My statement was met with raised eyebrows and a succinct discussion, the gist of which was, "Most authors don't want that responsibility. They don't want to do it themselves."
I would propose that as time goes on, authors will be required to do more and more in terms of marketing themselves and their work. In fact, when I've had requests for manuscripts from agents, they have generally asked, "Do you have a Web site or can you create a site? Do you blog? How much can you market yourself? Etc."
At this point, you're probably asking, "What's your point, Neal?"
My point is that authors can't just sit back and be authors anymore. In this economic environment, the more you know about marketing yourself over the Web, the better off you'll be. I think that the days of an author simply writing a book and the publisher promoting that book are over, if they ever really existed at all.
But I'm actually going to take things further. My background is in digital media - I have a Master's Degree in Visual Communications with an emphasis in digital media. What does this mean? It means that I know most of what a person can know about building Web sites, digital documents, graphic design, design software, typography, etc. I also have quite a bit of experience in writing and editing, believe it or not. The thing is, I don't believe that I'm unique. I've seen too many creative people with the ability to cross-over to other areas. I've seen musicians transition into fine art. I've seen actors become good musicians and vice-versa. This leads me to believe that writers, as creatives, can cross-over into publishing, especially digital publishing.
The best thing about this is that the conditions have never been better for authors to self-publish in the digital domain. There are plenty of free tools provided by sites like Amazon and Smashwords that allow authors to put together e-books. Why bother submitting to agents or publishers and waiting on the rejection slip?
Some might say that the stigma of self-publishing is reason enough. Two-years ago, I might have agreed with that. I might have snickered at a local author who told me she or he had been published only to find out that this person had actually gone to a vanity press. I might have snubbed my nose at the idea. The climate is different, now. Big time authors like Stephen King were experimenting with self-publishing digital copies of their work. The Plant is one example of King's work that came out digitally in installments for .99 ea via his Web site and PayPal if I remember right. Christopher Paolini (Eregon) is another example of being self-published. Paolini's first 10k were sold as self-published work before a publishing house approached him and said, "Hey, we want to give you money!" Recent examples are Amanda Hocking (who friended me on goodreads.com :), J.A. Konrath and Seth Godin.
Please understand, these authors are very good writers and at this point, they really are the exception. However, I think that as time goes on, we'll see more and more of this.
Personally, I think the economy has caused a lot of publishers and agents to concentrate solely on looking for that next best-seller and only that next best-seller. If there ever was a chance for an author to be represented by an agent or published simply because the story was good and the writing was good, I think it's gone right now. Money is what makes the publishing industry go around and it always will be. If an agent or publisher doesn't think a book is going to be a NY Times Bestseller, it has very little chance of getting published. Because of this environment, there is no reason we shouldn't be self-publishing our work digitally.
Despite this power and the excitement that I have about this new frontier, I do have some caveats. First of all, the work has to be excellent, well-edited and ready-to-go. Secondly, you have to be willing to market yourself. You have to blog, you have to get the word out via Twitter and your own Web site. There is no getting around the work that you'll have to do. I never said it was easy. In short, you have to be the hardest worker, the best writer, best editor and you have to self-promote the hell out of yourself.
Secondly, you have to question yourself over and over as to whether or not it's the right choice for you. Is the work really good enough? Take the time to find out. Send out parts of it to people that you trust to give you an honest assessment. Get people to read it first then get constructive feedback. Test it out on sites like authonomy.com where people can read parts of your book and provide feedback and rate it by shelving it or backing it.
I still believe that standard publishing houses are necessary. They have the clout and the money to get your book out in a printed format, which a lot of people, myself included, still love. I still think that it's a wonderfully humbling exercise and experience to send your query letters out to agents and get rejected. It sharpens your skills and makes you a better writer.
The tools that we have available level the playing field in the digital arena. The difference will be that the quality of players will not be level and it's up to you to do the training and hard work necessary to be the best.
That's all for now.
Monday, April 11, 2011
The Pesky Comma, Balanced Independent Clauses and "And"
I’m a firm believer that commas spend most of their time trying to get in the way of my writing. Of course, there are times when commas are necessary, but I believe that it’s important to use them as sparingly as possible. If they detract from the writing then they need to be stricken from the page. My biggest pet peeve is the comma placed before the coordinating conjunction “and.” More specifically, when the word "and" is joining two independent clauses that are fairly balanced.
Remember conjunctions? “Conjunction, junction, what’s your function?” “Hookin’ up words and phrases and clauses.”
Conjunction Junction, What's your function?
To be honest, I learned everything I needed to know about grammar from Schoolhouse Rock. I also learned the basics of government, but that’s a different post.
Anyway, I digress. The conjunction junction that we’re talking about is the use of a comma before the word "and" when we’re hookin’ up two independent clauses.
Here’s an example: John loved to play the bass guitar, and he always played at night.
Both “John loved to play the bass guitar” and “He always played at night” are independent clauses with relative balance on either side of the word "and." Because they are related, I decided that a compound sentence would be more appropriate than two that were separate. Here’s where I start having an issue with things. In my opinion, the word "and" is enough to separate the two clauses. There is no need for a comma to add complexity, pause or even confusion.
Some people might think that I’m aspiring to be some e.e. Cummings or Cormac McCarthy, but truly, I’m not. I don’t believe in destroying all punctuation just for the sake of destroying it. My point is that I believe the coordinating conjunction is enough in a situation where you have two balanced independent clauses and the word “and.” The comma isn’t necessary.
And yes, I know my loving muse will disagree. She's my AP Style girl, you know.
Just a rant.
That’s all for now.
Remember conjunctions? “Conjunction, junction, what’s your function?” “Hookin’ up words and phrases and clauses.”
Conjunction Junction, What's your function?
To be honest, I learned everything I needed to know about grammar from Schoolhouse Rock. I also learned the basics of government, but that’s a different post.
Anyway, I digress. The conjunction junction that we’re talking about is the use of a comma before the word "and" when we’re hookin’ up two independent clauses.
Here’s an example: John loved to play the bass guitar, and he always played at night.
Both “John loved to play the bass guitar” and “He always played at night” are independent clauses with relative balance on either side of the word "and." Because they are related, I decided that a compound sentence would be more appropriate than two that were separate. Here’s where I start having an issue with things. In my opinion, the word "and" is enough to separate the two clauses. There is no need for a comma to add complexity, pause or even confusion.
Some people might think that I’m aspiring to be some e.e. Cummings or Cormac McCarthy, but truly, I’m not. I don’t believe in destroying all punctuation just for the sake of destroying it. My point is that I believe the coordinating conjunction is enough in a situation where you have two balanced independent clauses and the word “and.” The comma isn’t necessary.
And yes, I know my loving muse will disagree. She's my AP Style girl, you know.
Just a rant.
That’s all for now.
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Writing Tools Part 5: Real Tools for Real Writers
I thought maybe Part 4 was going to be the final post about the tools of the writing craft. Last night, though, after I had gone to bed and was hovering in that spot between waking and sleeping, I thought, By Jove, I've not told them about the bloody physical tools involved in writing! Sometimes I think with a bad British accent, especially when I'm half asleep. So, without further pontification on my part, here are some physical tools that could or should be in your arsenal.
Quill Pen and Parchment: Okay, maybe not, but pen and page are probably two of the most important tools you can have in your physical toolbox. In most cases, writers never stop thinking (Unless, of course, you're Dan Brown, and you never think nor do you do good research if you research at all). Because of this, you need to have something handy to write down the thoughts you have. You never know when that best-seller idea might strike. In fact, if you're a glutton for punishment or wildly wealthy with time on your hands, you could write an entire manuscript using a pen and paper. I recently read Under the Dome by Stephen King. In his notes at the end of the book, King comments that he wrote the entire first draft of Under the Dome using a pen and paper. This is no small feat considering the word count of this book is over 330,000. Of course, I could be wrong about that. It might have been Duma Key, which I had read just previous to Under the Dome. Either way, it's pretty amazing.
Laptop/Computer/Typewriter: After pen and paper, some type of instrument that you can use to write out your manuscript is necessary. In most cases, today, this will be a computer of some type. I use a MacBook Pro laptop with Microsoft Word as my weapon of choice. Whatever you use, the most important aspect of writing is that you place your fingers on the keyboard and begin.
Thesaurus: You may be one of those people that stores words and their synonyms and antonyms in your brain and you may never need a thesaurus. My mind doesn't work like that, so I do. When it comes to thesauri, Roget's Thesaurus is probably the standard. My personal favorite, and the one I use the most, is the Dictionary/Thesaurus software that came with my MacBook. When I'm revising, I pop it open and it sits there on my desktop, ready for use. My main goal is to replace weak nouns or verbs or nouns/verbs that I've tried to strengthen with adjectives or adverbs. I simply type in the word that I need a synonym for and it shows me lots of options.
Pocket Recorder: This tool isn't really a necessity, but it's a viable replacement for the pad and paper as long as the batteries aren't dead and you haven't lost it.
A Quiet Time and Place to Work: When you write, it's generally a good idea to do it in a place where you can have absolute focus. Out in a room where there's tons of activity, television or kids running around, is a horrible place to write. There have been so many times where interruptions have completely obliterated my train of thought and I've had to sit for ten minutes and refocus on what I was trying to write. There is an exception to this. When I'm writing my initial draft, I enjoy having my ipod on and music playing. Sometimes it even seems to help me with what I'm writing. On a personal level, though, I have a harder time concentrating when I'm reading and revising if I have my headphones in. In order to eliminate this distraction, but still enjoy music, I flip the switch on the radio. For whatever reason, having the radio on in the back ground is much less distracting than having earbuds in listening to music.
The second part of this tool is time. If you are to write consistently, you must set aside a time when you are going to write. Never setting a time or writing at different times can be devastating because you may never actually find the time. However, if you've stated to yourself and your loved ones, "5am to 7am every day of the week is my time to write." You'll write. Writing truly is work and as such, you have to schedule it as if it were a job. The difference is that you get to dictate exactly what the job will entail.
My writing time is from about 10pm until I get too tired to write. This works for me because I can sit in bed with my wife laying beside me and work in the solitude of a house that is as quiet as a church on a Monday.
Library/Internet: As someone who has dabbled in Historical Fiction, I know that it's extremely important to have research resources. The library, in my mind, is one of the best resources available. If you have access to a university library, that's even better. I look at the Internet (specifically the World Wide Web) as a secondary resource because you really have to vet what you find. Wikipedia is great, but there have been times where it's dead wrong. One recent "for instance" was when the page about the University of Texas Longhorn's basketball arena was changed to show that it was owned by Kansas State University. Obviously, the practical joke was hilarious, but for anyone using that page as a research tool, they may have been mislead, because in truth, K-State really does own UT basketball! ;)
Your Brain: This is probably the most important tool. Without it, you really have no need for the other tools. Your brain is what processes all of the information you take in and allows you to use that information in your writing.
Well, hopefully, this about covers the basic tools that you need for writing.
That's all for now.
Quill Pen and Parchment: Okay, maybe not, but pen and page are probably two of the most important tools you can have in your physical toolbox. In most cases, writers never stop thinking (Unless, of course, you're Dan Brown, and you never think nor do you do good research if you research at all). Because of this, you need to have something handy to write down the thoughts you have. You never know when that best-seller idea might strike. In fact, if you're a glutton for punishment or wildly wealthy with time on your hands, you could write an entire manuscript using a pen and paper. I recently read Under the Dome by Stephen King. In his notes at the end of the book, King comments that he wrote the entire first draft of Under the Dome using a pen and paper. This is no small feat considering the word count of this book is over 330,000. Of course, I could be wrong about that. It might have been Duma Key, which I had read just previous to Under the Dome. Either way, it's pretty amazing.
Laptop/Computer/Typewriter: After pen and paper, some type of instrument that you can use to write out your manuscript is necessary. In most cases, today, this will be a computer of some type. I use a MacBook Pro laptop with Microsoft Word as my weapon of choice. Whatever you use, the most important aspect of writing is that you place your fingers on the keyboard and begin.
Thesaurus: You may be one of those people that stores words and their synonyms and antonyms in your brain and you may never need a thesaurus. My mind doesn't work like that, so I do. When it comes to thesauri, Roget's Thesaurus is probably the standard. My personal favorite, and the one I use the most, is the Dictionary/Thesaurus software that came with my MacBook. When I'm revising, I pop it open and it sits there on my desktop, ready for use. My main goal is to replace weak nouns or verbs or nouns/verbs that I've tried to strengthen with adjectives or adverbs. I simply type in the word that I need a synonym for and it shows me lots of options.
Pocket Recorder: This tool isn't really a necessity, but it's a viable replacement for the pad and paper as long as the batteries aren't dead and you haven't lost it.
A Quiet Time and Place to Work: When you write, it's generally a good idea to do it in a place where you can have absolute focus. Out in a room where there's tons of activity, television or kids running around, is a horrible place to write. There have been so many times where interruptions have completely obliterated my train of thought and I've had to sit for ten minutes and refocus on what I was trying to write. There is an exception to this. When I'm writing my initial draft, I enjoy having my ipod on and music playing. Sometimes it even seems to help me with what I'm writing. On a personal level, though, I have a harder time concentrating when I'm reading and revising if I have my headphones in. In order to eliminate this distraction, but still enjoy music, I flip the switch on the radio. For whatever reason, having the radio on in the back ground is much less distracting than having earbuds in listening to music.
The second part of this tool is time. If you are to write consistently, you must set aside a time when you are going to write. Never setting a time or writing at different times can be devastating because you may never actually find the time. However, if you've stated to yourself and your loved ones, "5am to 7am every day of the week is my time to write." You'll write. Writing truly is work and as such, you have to schedule it as if it were a job. The difference is that you get to dictate exactly what the job will entail.
My writing time is from about 10pm until I get too tired to write. This works for me because I can sit in bed with my wife laying beside me and work in the solitude of a house that is as quiet as a church on a Monday.
Library/Internet: As someone who has dabbled in Historical Fiction, I know that it's extremely important to have research resources. The library, in my mind, is one of the best resources available. If you have access to a university library, that's even better. I look at the Internet (specifically the World Wide Web) as a secondary resource because you really have to vet what you find. Wikipedia is great, but there have been times where it's dead wrong. One recent "for instance" was when the page about the University of Texas Longhorn's basketball arena was changed to show that it was owned by Kansas State University. Obviously, the practical joke was hilarious, but for anyone using that page as a research tool, they may have been mislead, because in truth, K-State really does own UT basketball! ;)
Your Brain: This is probably the most important tool. Without it, you really have no need for the other tools. Your brain is what processes all of the information you take in and allows you to use that information in your writing.
Well, hopefully, this about covers the basic tools that you need for writing.
That's all for now.
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Writing Tools Part 4: Take it all off... or Show, don't tell
This is part four in a series called "The Writer's Toolbox."
We've looked at grammar and vocabulary in our first post. Our second post treated us to strong verbs and nouns. Finally, our third post covered active and passive voice. Now we're going to talk about showing rather than telling.
Telling the reader what we want them to see might work for our first draft. However, if all we know how to do is tell a story, it's highly unlikely that we'll ever get our prose published. The difference between showing and telling is like a chasm. On one side, you give the reader the information they need. On the other side, you present information within context and allow the reader to paint a more vivid picture.
It's easy to tell. We simply list out one thing after the other, form sentences and paragraphs and call it good. Showing requires an entirely different mindset. Showing requires that we place the reader within our environment and give them the opportunity to see what we're sketching without describing it point A to point B.
Here are two examples:
Jane's skin was wet with sweat. She was forty-five years old and had crimson hair and green eyes. There was no way she'd let these young 20-somethings outdo her. She was 5' 10" and had long legs and she used every inch of them to grip that golden pole. She knew tonight that she would be putting the "X" in exotic dancer.
Jane sweltered under the harsh lights of the stage. She had forty-five years of experience in this world and she knew for damn sure that she wouldn't allow those 20-somethings to show her up. She wrapped 36-inches of leg around the golden pole and flipped her crimson hair from her eyes. Every inch of her 5' 10" frame, from her green eyes to her tippy-toes, was ready to show the world why there was an "X" in exotic dancer.
Both of these paragraphs give us the same information, however, the first paragraph tells us about Jane. The second paragraph shows us. By showing our reader the information, we allow them to have the opportunity to paint a picture of Jane in their minds.
While I realize this may not be the perfect example of showing and not telling, I think it's still pretty easy to see the differences. If you find yourself caught up in the moment and you're giving your reader detail after detail after detail, simply take a break and think about the context in which you want your character to be viewed.
If you can do this, you'll be worlds away from other authors.
That's all for now.
We've looked at grammar and vocabulary in our first post. Our second post treated us to strong verbs and nouns. Finally, our third post covered active and passive voice. Now we're going to talk about showing rather than telling.
Telling the reader what we want them to see might work for our first draft. However, if all we know how to do is tell a story, it's highly unlikely that we'll ever get our prose published. The difference between showing and telling is like a chasm. On one side, you give the reader the information they need. On the other side, you present information within context and allow the reader to paint a more vivid picture.
It's easy to tell. We simply list out one thing after the other, form sentences and paragraphs and call it good. Showing requires an entirely different mindset. Showing requires that we place the reader within our environment and give them the opportunity to see what we're sketching without describing it point A to point B.
Here are two examples:
Jane's skin was wet with sweat. She was forty-five years old and had crimson hair and green eyes. There was no way she'd let these young 20-somethings outdo her. She was 5' 10" and had long legs and she used every inch of them to grip that golden pole. She knew tonight that she would be putting the "X" in exotic dancer.
Jane sweltered under the harsh lights of the stage. She had forty-five years of experience in this world and she knew for damn sure that she wouldn't allow those 20-somethings to show her up. She wrapped 36-inches of leg around the golden pole and flipped her crimson hair from her eyes. Every inch of her 5' 10" frame, from her green eyes to her tippy-toes, was ready to show the world why there was an "X" in exotic dancer.
Both of these paragraphs give us the same information, however, the first paragraph tells us about Jane. The second paragraph shows us. By showing our reader the information, we allow them to have the opportunity to paint a picture of Jane in their minds.
While I realize this may not be the perfect example of showing and not telling, I think it's still pretty easy to see the differences. If you find yourself caught up in the moment and you're giving your reader detail after detail after detail, simply take a break and think about the context in which you want your character to be viewed.
If you can do this, you'll be worlds away from other authors.
That's all for now.
First Seven Chapters of 13th Summer now available...
The first seven chapters of 13th Summer are now available at:
http://www.authonomy.com/books/32797/13th-summer/
You may have to register to view the chapters, but it's a painless process.
If you believe this middle grade/YA novel would be a good candidate for publishing, please comment below.
If you are a publisher or agent who wishes to review the entire manuscript, please contact me at nwollenberg (at) cox (dot) net.
Thanks!
That's all for now.
http://www.authonomy.com/books/32797/13th-summer/
You may have to register to view the chapters, but it's a painless process.
If you believe this middle grade/YA novel would be a good candidate for publishing, please comment below.
If you are a publisher or agent who wishes to review the entire manuscript, please contact me at nwollenberg (at) cox (dot) net.
Thanks!
That's all for now.
Friday, April 8, 2011
Writing Tools Part 3: Let's Get Physical... errr... Active, I Mean.
Passive Versus Active Voice
Remember back in my previous post when I wrote about revisions? This post has a very close relationship to that one. We're talking about tools that we, as writers, have in our toolboxes. We've talked about eloquent vocabulary, high-end grammar skills and strong verbs and nouns. Now we're going to talk about active and passive voice, which is directly related to strong verbs and nouns.
To put it bluntly, passive voice is for wussies. Passive voice whines on the page and blames everyone else for all of its problems. As a writer, you must destroy passive voice! I'm going to have some examples here in a second, but writing in passive voice pisses me off, so let me take a few deep breaths... there, all better. Okay, here is a passage that uses passive voice and let's add weak nouns and verbs for blandness and some adverbs and adjectives for nausea:
The car was being driven along the road quickly. Loving thoughts of Tom ran through Jane's head as the gravel hit the bottom of her car. The beating of her heart was like the bongos that Tom played in the jazz band. Once she was at Tom's house, her kisses would ignite his passion and their lovemaking would wear them out.
Wow. I'm so thrilled at this point I could vomit. Obviously, this is really crappy writing in the first place, but the passive voice turns it into a mushy bowl of Cream of Wheat.
If we make a few adjustments, though, we can salvage the sentences and maybe make it a bit more exciting.
Gravel tattooed the undercarriage of Jane's Mustang as she raced down the road toward Tom's mobile home. Her mind became a twisted playground of erotica and her heart thumped like Tom's jazz bongos as she contemplated shoving her tongue down his throat. She knew that when she locked lips with him that they would make love through the night and they would be overwhelmed with the exhaustion of lovers.
Meh. The writing still sucks. But at least we gave it some action, right? This is the difference between active and passive voice. In the first example, you have sentences that are like a limp-fish handshake. In the second example, the active voice grabs you by the lapels of your rental tux and shakes you like an overbearing father on prom night.
This is what has to happen with your writing. It's okay to go through and write the first draft and have sentences here and there that are in passive voice. The point of the first draft is to get the story down. Once you start the revision process, though, passive voice has to be flushed down the toilet. This is what it means to twist every sentence until it cries "Uncle!"
I realize this is a short post. I know you've grown accustomed to me rambling on and on, but I'm going to leave it at that and cover the rest of this in part four. Sometimes short and sweet is what makes the grade.
That's all for now.
Remember back in my previous post when I wrote about revisions? This post has a very close relationship to that one. We're talking about tools that we, as writers, have in our toolboxes. We've talked about eloquent vocabulary, high-end grammar skills and strong verbs and nouns. Now we're going to talk about active and passive voice, which is directly related to strong verbs and nouns.
To put it bluntly, passive voice is for wussies. Passive voice whines on the page and blames everyone else for all of its problems. As a writer, you must destroy passive voice! I'm going to have some examples here in a second, but writing in passive voice pisses me off, so let me take a few deep breaths... there, all better. Okay, here is a passage that uses passive voice and let's add weak nouns and verbs for blandness and some adverbs and adjectives for nausea:
The car was being driven along the road quickly. Loving thoughts of Tom ran through Jane's head as the gravel hit the bottom of her car. The beating of her heart was like the bongos that Tom played in the jazz band. Once she was at Tom's house, her kisses would ignite his passion and their lovemaking would wear them out.
Wow. I'm so thrilled at this point I could vomit. Obviously, this is really crappy writing in the first place, but the passive voice turns it into a mushy bowl of Cream of Wheat.
If we make a few adjustments, though, we can salvage the sentences and maybe make it a bit more exciting.
Gravel tattooed the undercarriage of Jane's Mustang as she raced down the road toward Tom's mobile home. Her mind became a twisted playground of erotica and her heart thumped like Tom's jazz bongos as she contemplated shoving her tongue down his throat. She knew that when she locked lips with him that they would make love through the night and they would be overwhelmed with the exhaustion of lovers.
Meh. The writing still sucks. But at least we gave it some action, right? This is the difference between active and passive voice. In the first example, you have sentences that are like a limp-fish handshake. In the second example, the active voice grabs you by the lapels of your rental tux and shakes you like an overbearing father on prom night.
This is what has to happen with your writing. It's okay to go through and write the first draft and have sentences here and there that are in passive voice. The point of the first draft is to get the story down. Once you start the revision process, though, passive voice has to be flushed down the toilet. This is what it means to twist every sentence until it cries "Uncle!"
I realize this is a short post. I know you've grown accustomed to me rambling on and on, but I'm going to leave it at that and cover the rest of this in part four. Sometimes short and sweet is what makes the grade.
That's all for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)